An Election Reminder
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: .
Age: 37
Posts: 649
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think C1 seems to speak for most of us!
UKIP have some good ideas (and a couple of daft ones) but unfortunately the great unwashed are too thick to understand there are other parties to vote for apart from Labour and Tory. Either that or they just vote for whoever the newspapers tell them to.
Think I shall be staying well away from this leaders' "debate" tonight... load of cack... better things to do with my time than watch three twallys bicker like schoolchildren about the same old mince. Big issues they will no doubt willfully ignore in the "discussion":
Erosion of civil liberties ("green" crap, "anti-terror" laws, various other keek)
Bureaucratic interference/red tape (EU, Councils, Quangos, Think-tanks etc.)
Over-governance (as above)
Being able to fill up your car with fuel without having to re-mortgage the house to be able to to so (£50 to fill a Clio's tank with Unleaded - WTF???
)
Benefit junkies bleeding the country dry
Illegal immigrants bleeding the country dry
Criminals bleeding the country dry
Politicians bleeding the country dry
Corrupt political system that does not involve the public in the running of the country and having a say in decisions that are to be made
Rich buggers shafting the rest of us for their own gain
Aviation being thoroughly shafted, directly or indirectly, by most of the above
Think they all need a bloody good slap. This helps somewhat:- www.slapometer.com
Major change needed I think.
Smithy
UKIP have some good ideas (and a couple of daft ones) but unfortunately the great unwashed are too thick to understand there are other parties to vote for apart from Labour and Tory. Either that or they just vote for whoever the newspapers tell them to.
Think I shall be staying well away from this leaders' "debate" tonight... load of cack... better things to do with my time than watch three twallys bicker like schoolchildren about the same old mince. Big issues they will no doubt willfully ignore in the "discussion":
Erosion of civil liberties ("green" crap, "anti-terror" laws, various other keek)
Bureaucratic interference/red tape (EU, Councils, Quangos, Think-tanks etc.)
Over-governance (as above)
Being able to fill up your car with fuel without having to re-mortgage the house to be able to to so (£50 to fill a Clio's tank with Unleaded - WTF???
)Benefit junkies bleeding the country dry
Illegal immigrants bleeding the country dry
Criminals bleeding the country dry
Politicians bleeding the country dry
Corrupt political system that does not involve the public in the running of the country and having a say in decisions that are to be made
Rich buggers shafting the rest of us for their own gain
Aviation being thoroughly shafted, directly or indirectly, by most of the above
Think they all need a bloody good slap. This helps somewhat:- www.slapometer.com
Major change needed I think.
Smithy
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Surrey
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The chat about plans for private aviation.
Having seen the gossip circulating, I thought I'd better give you a response directly.
I have no intention of taking steps to restrict private flying.
I do think we should be careful about security issues around our smaller ports and airports, but that is just common sense.
I'm afraid this rumour is a case of adding two and two together and ending up with thirty.
Best wishes
Chris Grayling
I have no intention of taking steps to restrict private flying.
I do think we should be careful about security issues around our smaller ports and airports, but that is just common sense.
I'm afraid this rumour is a case of adding two and two together and ending up with thirty.
Best wishes
Chris Grayling
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Guildford, UK
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So then..
Timothy, how did we get from -
"Just a reminder that when I was talking to Chris Grayling, Home Secretary in waiting, a few months ago, he told me that one of the first things he will do when the Tories get in will be to ban aviation (and, IIRC, boating) from any site without proper security."
- to Chris Graylings response above?
Paraphrasing avec artistic license? Given that you were actually talking to him, who misinterpreted?
Actually very interested in this sort of mis-communication, as I think it is the cause of most of the strange and plain wrong rubbish "heard from" politicians...
SHK
"Just a reminder that when I was talking to Chris Grayling, Home Secretary in waiting, a few months ago, he told me that one of the first things he will do when the Tories get in will be to ban aviation (and, IIRC, boating) from any site without proper security."
- to Chris Graylings response above?
Paraphrasing avec artistic license? Given that you were actually talking to him, who misinterpreted?
Actually very interested in this sort of mis-communication, as I think it is the cause of most of the strange and plain wrong rubbish "heard from" politicians...
SHK
Join Date: May 2001
Location: 75N 16E
Age: 54
Posts: 4,729
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I do think we should be careful about security issues around our smaller ports and airports, but that is just common sense.
One thing that has wound me up constantly about Labour is their incessant need to tinker in our daily affairs and liberties. If the Conservatives intend to carry on with this stupidity then I'd be forced to waste my vote with someone else.
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: York
Age: 68
Posts: 250
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It was definitely Chris Grayling. I e mailed him and this is his reply to me.
"Thanks for your email.
I have no intention of taking steps to restrict private flying.
I do think we should be careful about security issues around our smaller ports and airports, but that is just common sense.
I'm afraid this is a case of adding two and two together and ending up with thirty.
Best wishes
Chris Grayling"
"Thanks for your email.
I have no intention of taking steps to restrict private flying.
I do think we should be careful about security issues around our smaller ports and airports, but that is just common sense.
I'm afraid this is a case of adding two and two together and ending up with thirty.
Best wishes
Chris Grayling"
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: .
Age: 37
Posts: 649
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mr. Grayling
Firstly thank you for taking the time to post here to address our concerns. I am sure that even the most skeptical amongst us here would thank you for this.
All of us in the aviation industry, whether private pilots, students or professionals, do take safety and security seriously, and we fully appreciate and understand the problems that exist today.
That said, I would like to point out a number of concerns that currently are either failing to be addressed, or are being simply ignored altogether. I would ask you to please read the points I am going to make and I would appreciate comment.
Firstly, perhaps the reason for the somewhat hostile attitude here is because for a long number of years now, most especially recently, aviation has been regulated by people who have very little (or, in many cases, none at all) knowledge and understanding of aviation itself and the practicalities involved with aviation. The probelm is that decisions are being made with respect to aviation regulation, safety and security by people who have little or no knowledge of what they are dealing with. There is no consultation, only sudden releases saying that "this is what is going to happen, on this date"; no consultation with pilots, engineers, controllers etc., we are merely told that things are happening "this" way, and if we don't like it then tough. The end result is always the same; we are the ones then left to pick up the pieces with the resulting uneducated, disorgnised mess that follows. It costs time, money, and in the end, jobs.
In the past decisions with respect to such matters were made by our own Civil Aviation Authority, however most regulatory matters are now dealt with centrally in Europe by EASA, which most of us get the impression do not have a clue at all about what they are attempting to regulate. The whole situation is a complete mess and yet again we shall suffer from it; time, money and jobs.
Secondly, whilst we agree with you that we should be careful with respect to security issues, again I must urge caution and restraint, because yet again the people who are trusted with the task of making decisions have very little understanding of what they are attempting to regulate. In the case of security this is usually left to the Government, however we only need to see the completely OTT security arrangements at major UK airports to see the effect this has had. Do we really want to see small grass airfields, who up until now have existed quite happily and without any problems, have similar security forced upon them? Will we need full-time security jobsworths and footwear searches for weekend flyers going for an hour-long flight in the local area in a Cessna? Again regulatory authorities seemingly have no understanding of the practicalities involved.
Thirdly, as a final point, the aviation industry is already being put through the wringer on a scale never seen before, save for perhaps the aftermath of 9/11. The recent economical problems combined with high fuel prices, "Green" taxation, Government apathy towards the industry, in addition to the above problems I have listed above of interfering, distrusted, uneducated authorities, are combining to cause much damage to a sucessful and vital industry which employs a lot of people, makes a lot of money for the UK, and serves the vital task of the only high-speed, high-capacity method of transport. Many, many people - some on this very forum - have lost their jobs (and hence throwing their lives into chaos) recently due to the above factors. Some like myself are also trying to break into the industry by turning a rewarding, enjoyable, harmless hobby into a rewarding, important and enjoyable career in order to better ourselves.
The bottom line is, until the Government - both present and future - begins to understand and then address these problems by understanding what it is trying to regulate and entrusting decision-making to the hands of people involved in the industry who understand its workings and practicalities, more mass unemployment will follow, resulting in the destruction of a lucrative industry and severely damaging the UK's ability to conduct business internationally because of the loss of a vital transport system.
The implications run much further than being a mere inconvenience to weekend flyers, it causes damage to the whole industry.
Yours sincerely,
Captain Smithy
A humble young PPL who spends his meagre wages on a harmless hobby he enjoys at the weekends/days off and merely asks for others to understand and respect that and to avoid interfering with it - as I do with others.
Firstly thank you for taking the time to post here to address our concerns. I am sure that even the most skeptical amongst us here would thank you for this.
All of us in the aviation industry, whether private pilots, students or professionals, do take safety and security seriously, and we fully appreciate and understand the problems that exist today.
That said, I would like to point out a number of concerns that currently are either failing to be addressed, or are being simply ignored altogether. I would ask you to please read the points I am going to make and I would appreciate comment.
Firstly, perhaps the reason for the somewhat hostile attitude here is because for a long number of years now, most especially recently, aviation has been regulated by people who have very little (or, in many cases, none at all) knowledge and understanding of aviation itself and the practicalities involved with aviation. The probelm is that decisions are being made with respect to aviation regulation, safety and security by people who have little or no knowledge of what they are dealing with. There is no consultation, only sudden releases saying that "this is what is going to happen, on this date"; no consultation with pilots, engineers, controllers etc., we are merely told that things are happening "this" way, and if we don't like it then tough. The end result is always the same; we are the ones then left to pick up the pieces with the resulting uneducated, disorgnised mess that follows. It costs time, money, and in the end, jobs.
In the past decisions with respect to such matters were made by our own Civil Aviation Authority, however most regulatory matters are now dealt with centrally in Europe by EASA, which most of us get the impression do not have a clue at all about what they are attempting to regulate. The whole situation is a complete mess and yet again we shall suffer from it; time, money and jobs.
Secondly, whilst we agree with you that we should be careful with respect to security issues, again I must urge caution and restraint, because yet again the people who are trusted with the task of making decisions have very little understanding of what they are attempting to regulate. In the case of security this is usually left to the Government, however we only need to see the completely OTT security arrangements at major UK airports to see the effect this has had. Do we really want to see small grass airfields, who up until now have existed quite happily and without any problems, have similar security forced upon them? Will we need full-time security jobsworths and footwear searches for weekend flyers going for an hour-long flight in the local area in a Cessna? Again regulatory authorities seemingly have no understanding of the practicalities involved.
Thirdly, as a final point, the aviation industry is already being put through the wringer on a scale never seen before, save for perhaps the aftermath of 9/11. The recent economical problems combined with high fuel prices, "Green" taxation, Government apathy towards the industry, in addition to the above problems I have listed above of interfering, distrusted, uneducated authorities, are combining to cause much damage to a sucessful and vital industry which employs a lot of people, makes a lot of money for the UK, and serves the vital task of the only high-speed, high-capacity method of transport. Many, many people - some on this very forum - have lost their jobs (and hence throwing their lives into chaos) recently due to the above factors. Some like myself are also trying to break into the industry by turning a rewarding, enjoyable, harmless hobby into a rewarding, important and enjoyable career in order to better ourselves.
The bottom line is, until the Government - both present and future - begins to understand and then address these problems by understanding what it is trying to regulate and entrusting decision-making to the hands of people involved in the industry who understand its workings and practicalities, more mass unemployment will follow, resulting in the destruction of a lucrative industry and severely damaging the UK's ability to conduct business internationally because of the loss of a vital transport system.
The implications run much further than being a mere inconvenience to weekend flyers, it causes damage to the whole industry.
Yours sincerely,
Captain Smithy
A humble young PPL who spends his meagre wages on a harmless hobby he enjoys at the weekends/days off and merely asks for others to understand and respect that and to avoid interfering with it - as I do with others.
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: York
Age: 68
Posts: 250
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dear Captain Smithy,
I believe in democracy and therefore have no wish to be co-opted into your political pressure group without being asked and ask that the next time you write to anyone on this forum when writing "WE" please add minus AK7274 as I speak for myself.
Thank you
I believe in democracy and therefore have no wish to be co-opted into your political pressure group without being asked and ask that the next time you write to anyone on this forum when writing "WE" please add minus AK7274 as I speak for myself.
Thank you
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: .
Age: 37
Posts: 649
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fair enough AK, but since when did an individual asking a politician a question constitute a "political pressure group"?
If you are concerned about something you can always try talking to a politician (of any allegiance) about it when the opportunity arises (this being a golden one), or like others you can be content to sit and moan on PPRuNE about it without actually trying to do anything about it...
Just a thought, that's all... what with all that is going on with EASA that everybody seems unhappy about, perhaps this is a golden opportunity to make our concerns heard... in a democracy if you don't bother say anything then nobody will listen because there is nothing to listen to...
Smithy
If you are concerned about something you can always try talking to a politician (of any allegiance) about it when the opportunity arises (this being a golden one), or like others you can be content to sit and moan on PPRuNE about it without actually trying to do anything about it...
Just a thought, that's all... what with all that is going on with EASA that everybody seems unhappy about, perhaps this is a golden opportunity to make our concerns heard... in a democracy if you don't bother say anything then nobody will listen because there is nothing to listen to...
Smithy
Sub Judice Angel Lovegod
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: London
Posts: 2,456
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well, maybe Chris will come to my doorstep and I can ask him directly why he chose to take me to one side at that lunch and say what he did.
I used to have a great deal of respect for Chris. When he first replaced Archie Hamilton as our Tory candidate and then MP he seemed like a young, hard-working, intelligent and reasonably liberal man. My wife and I, who have always tended to be a little left of centre (and I do mean a little) actually thought at one time it might be worth voting for him as an excellent constituency MP.
The rot set in once he achieved Shadow office, his policies and behaviour became more and more infected by the underhand slime of the nasty end of the Nasty Party.
When he was Shadow Health Secretary he created a stupid headline grabbing scam because he had found one lady who had been poorly treated by the NHS (something to do with her shoulder? I forget.) With all his background in Cambridge and the BBC, you would think that he would have encountered the concept of the Gaussian (Normal) Distribution, whereby however good the NHS was getting there will always be examples of people who are let down by the system.
When I tackled him with this at a dinner at the House of Commons his reply was unbelievably patronising. He agreed (implicitly) that he was using the Tory baying press to score cheap points with people too stupid to think for themselves, and he smirked proudly about this being all his idea.
In the context of this thread, I put this forward as an example of how he will say whatever he thinks will improve his and the Tories ratings, regardless of truth.
Since then Chris has made at least two enormous mistakes in his public utterances.
The first was when his own party employed a cheap political gimmick of recruiting an Army General to their ranks and he went straight on stage and denounced it for the gimmick it was, thinking that it was done by the Labour Party.
The second and much worse was to align himself with the Christian Right and say that some service providers should have a right to debar homosexuals. This from a man who is Shadow Home Secretary and presumably is hoping to be appointed Home Secretary on May 7th.
I really hope that, however shallow and callow David Cameron is, he will at least realise that Chris is too reckless and unpredictable for senior office, even if he doesn't debar him for having homophobic and extremist religious views.
I still don't know why he took me to one side at that lunch, but taken in the context of his other boo-boos I guess it's just par for the course.
The only thing I will say in his favour is that it is brave and responsible for him to step forward and enter this debate online on this forum and respect where respect is due.
I used to have a great deal of respect for Chris. When he first replaced Archie Hamilton as our Tory candidate and then MP he seemed like a young, hard-working, intelligent and reasonably liberal man. My wife and I, who have always tended to be a little left of centre (and I do mean a little) actually thought at one time it might be worth voting for him as an excellent constituency MP.
The rot set in once he achieved Shadow office, his policies and behaviour became more and more infected by the underhand slime of the nasty end of the Nasty Party.
When he was Shadow Health Secretary he created a stupid headline grabbing scam because he had found one lady who had been poorly treated by the NHS (something to do with her shoulder? I forget.) With all his background in Cambridge and the BBC, you would think that he would have encountered the concept of the Gaussian (Normal) Distribution, whereby however good the NHS was getting there will always be examples of people who are let down by the system.
When I tackled him with this at a dinner at the House of Commons his reply was unbelievably patronising. He agreed (implicitly) that he was using the Tory baying press to score cheap points with people too stupid to think for themselves, and he smirked proudly about this being all his idea.
In the context of this thread, I put this forward as an example of how he will say whatever he thinks will improve his and the Tories ratings, regardless of truth.
Since then Chris has made at least two enormous mistakes in his public utterances.
The first was when his own party employed a cheap political gimmick of recruiting an Army General to their ranks and he went straight on stage and denounced it for the gimmick it was, thinking that it was done by the Labour Party.
The second and much worse was to align himself with the Christian Right and say that some service providers should have a right to debar homosexuals. This from a man who is Shadow Home Secretary and presumably is hoping to be appointed Home Secretary on May 7th.
I really hope that, however shallow and callow David Cameron is, he will at least realise that Chris is too reckless and unpredictable for senior office, even if he doesn't debar him for having homophobic and extremist religious views.
I still don't know why he took me to one side at that lunch, but taken in the context of his other boo-boos I guess it's just par for the course.
The only thing I will say in his favour is that it is brave and responsible for him to step forward and enter this debate online on this forum and respect where respect is due.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: 75N 16E
Age: 54
Posts: 4,729
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
his reply was unbelievably patronising
Seems that only now are NuLabour taling about tackling most of the problems that they said they were going to tackle 13 years ago (and blamed the Tories for) but the difference now is that they have wasted £160,000,000,000 of our money.....
Just my humble opinion, and one reason I could never vote labour.
