NSW EMS (NGO or Private operator)
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
NSW EMS (NGO or Private operator)
NSW EMS Helicopter contracts
I hear that the contracts are being announced today, in regards to future providers.
Question ?
Should NSW follow the Queensland Victorian and South Australian model and have a private government operator or stay with the NGO model?
What are the Pro and cons
I hear that the contracts are being announced today, in regards to future providers.
Question ?
Should NSW follow the Queensland Victorian and South Australian model and have a private government operator or stay with the NGO model?
What are the Pro and cons
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Oz
Posts: 124
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not quite sure what you mean sea breeze. QLD uses government operated helo's, but the EMS machines in Vic and SA are operated by private companies (CHC and Australian Helicopters respectively). I suppose you could say that VIC Pol is government operated, but even their machines are supplied by a private company (CHC).
I have my own veiws on which model I think is best (influenced by 14 years with CHC) but as the contracts are about to be announced I think this discussion is a bit late. I would say that hell will freeze over before the various EMS operators would go for government operated helo's.
I have my own veiws on which model I think is best (influenced by 14 years with CHC) but as the contracts are about to be announced I think this discussion is a bit late. I would say that hell will freeze over before the various EMS operators would go for government operated helo's.
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Some questions to ponder in regards to NGO verses private or total government operated EMS helicopters
NGO’s introduced the concept of Aeromedical transport to the medical fraternity in the 1970’s and in many states still provide this service.
The world has changed since the 1970’s, Government departments such as Police and Health depend upon the concept of air transport to undertake their daily business.
NGO have become a huge charity vacuum cleaner within many parts of Australia sucking the charity dollar out of local communities. As the demand upon the air transport services increase, so has the appetite for more funds to support such services.
I would like to stimulate the debate by asking some basic questions
What benefit will a private rotary operator provide to a government operation?
What benefit will a totally government owned and operated rotary system have?
What is the benefit in staying with the NGO model?
Is there a difference in the pilot training or ability?
Is there a difference in the crew training or ability?
Is there a difference in engineering?
What is the cost to government?
What is the cost to the local communities?
What is the cost to other charities?
Or should governments not be involved in the air medical /rescue scene at all and leave it to anyone who can raise the cash to undertake such a role?
NGO’s introduced the concept of Aeromedical transport to the medical fraternity in the 1970’s and in many states still provide this service.
The world has changed since the 1970’s, Government departments such as Police and Health depend upon the concept of air transport to undertake their daily business.
NGO have become a huge charity vacuum cleaner within many parts of Australia sucking the charity dollar out of local communities. As the demand upon the air transport services increase, so has the appetite for more funds to support such services.
I would like to stimulate the debate by asking some basic questions
What benefit will a private rotary operator provide to a government operation?
What benefit will a totally government owned and operated rotary system have?
What is the benefit in staying with the NGO model?
Is there a difference in the pilot training or ability?
Is there a difference in the crew training or ability?
Is there a difference in engineering?
What is the cost to government?
What is the cost to the local communities?
What is the cost to other charities?
Or should governments not be involved in the air medical /rescue scene at all and leave it to anyone who can raise the cash to undertake such a role?
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interesting view Vice, but I think we probably need some input from one of our leading industry stalwarts to better discuss the pro's and con's of NGO versus comercial operator, where is Gymble when you need him?
Join Date: May 2005
Location: WA
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Gymble is having some time off while his new medication takes effect. They will not let him have internet access. He needs to stay quite. He is expected to be back to his old self soon.
Guest
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 64
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
a question, how could the NSW Health system afford to pay (especially now the nsw government is in VERY large deficit) for a operation in total, over the non profit NGO's who rely heavily on the community gererousity. The government supplies only a small percentage of the cost of running a service now.
QLD has it's gov run service but also has 4 non profit community based machines.
QLD has it's gov run service but also has 4 non profit community based machines.
Guest
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 64
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What would a needle dick pilot like you LHS know about Government finance?
Thankyou Vice, you big dicked pilot, I know bugger all of the "bush ranger"state of NSW finances, except what the rest of the punters hearon the 6 o'clock news. However I have worked for both your big multi national companies and for the small NGO community based operations and I know who I would prefer to work for.
SA government saw the light and moved on.
We shall see what, if it happens, in September then shall we.
****
LHS
SA government saw the light and moved on.
We shall see what, if it happens, in September then shall we.
****
LHS
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: aust
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
LHS, I too have worked for both Multi National and NGO, and have to say that the Multi looked after me far better than the NGO. I knew my pay would be in the bank on the correct day, and I did not have to fight to get allowances. As much as vicey is stirring the pot, I have to say that I firmly believe that the day of the chook raffle is over, and a commercial operator should step in and continue with the job. The current NGO's do not seem to realise that NSW Health/Ambulance are the CUSTOMER, and should be treated accordingly. The NGO's have for many years told the CUSTOMER that they will do it the way they say, because the CUSTOMER don't know what they are talking about. I would suggest that after many years of crap from the services that work for them the CUSTOMER may just have had a gutful of being treated like fools. At least the commercial operators have an understanding of how to treat the CUSTOMER, and I would not be surprised to see some unhappy campers of the NGO type at the anouncement of the winning tender. I expect that there will be several commercial operators doing some serious number crunching over the next few weeks for a slice of a min 7 year contract.
Fatty
Fatty
Guest
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 64
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fatty
couldn't agree with you more. THe multi was very good to and for me and I have been lucky in the ngo world too. And, yes the community based operators will have to extract the digit and become more customer freindly to survive. Unfortunately there seems to be those in the administrative side of things, both private and ngo, that are in the job for themselves and how good it will look on future cv's. Those at the coal face concerned in safe operations, patient care and customer satisfaction bear the brunt of any changes and decisions from the front office.
Luckily, whoever gets any contract to provide EMS/SAR coverage in any state or territory will need crews to operate their machines.
couldn't agree with you more. THe multi was very good to and for me and I have been lucky in the ngo world too. And, yes the community based operators will have to extract the digit and become more customer freindly to survive. Unfortunately there seems to be those in the administrative side of things, both private and ngo, that are in the job for themselves and how good it will look on future cv's. Those at the coal face concerned in safe operations, patient care and customer satisfaction bear the brunt of any changes and decisions from the front office.
Luckily, whoever gets any contract to provide EMS/SAR coverage in any state or territory will need crews to operate their machines.
Vice
You're an angry man
I would suggest that if anyone here is in the know about the in's and out's of government finances and exactly how they come to the decisions they do then they should go and join the great bunch of individuals that are playing monoploly with our tax. No one here is an expert in that field (except maybe you) and this started out as a discussion of the pros and cons of each option and not a pissing contest or an opportunity for you to show us how big your appendage is because of those who help you stroke it.
Very daunting. In fact I wouldn't be surprised one bit if all other tenderers have withdrawn their submissions and crawled home with their tales between their legs based purely on hard Vice Like evidence right here on pprunage
You're an angry man
What would a needle dick pilot like you LHS know about Government finance? That’s right, you listened to the six o’clock TV news so now you know all about power station sales.
Resistance is futile.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: queensland australia
Age: 77
Posts: 563
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
sea breeze, you certainly ask a lot of questions. ????
lhs, in fact the queensland gonernment, aka the queensland taxpayer, drops a very large ammount of money in the collectin bin of the private operators.
well over 1 million to one alone.
vice like, i must love you.
sounds like a set up.
lhs, in fact the queensland gonernment, aka the queensland taxpayer, drops a very large ammount of money in the collectin bin of the private operators.
well over 1 million to one alone.
vice like, i must love you.
sounds like a set up.
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Australia
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
B]vice like, i must love you.sounds like a set up[/B]
Very generous of you Imabell. ViceLike doesn't deserve it though. When he contributes something constructive to any debate on the forum without resorting to obscenities or personal attacks, we will all be better served. Until then, when ViceLike's name came up, my thought was "there goes the neighbourhood".
The topic deserves robust discussion. A lot of people's future will be impacted by the outcome.
Apart from whether it is a good move or not, it is inevitable. Running professional EMS operations on the chook raffle principle is a constant pressure on standards and crewing that does not belong in a public emergency service where the public has come to expect, even demand levels of service that are very difficult to fund through an NGO. That comment in no way detracts from the passion and drive that many in the pioneering days of EMS operations in Australia have displayed and continue to display. It was the only way it was going to start. Now Governments are recognising that the voter expects the service to be funded by them, and will no longer excuse the struggle to survive that has been the lot of many. That struggle has led to turf wars and squabbles which can no longer be tolerated, from a political perspective if nothing else. There has to be a standardized, quality controlled consistent product.
The question is will it happen this time around? The NSW Government will have to find a lot more than seems to be in the budget for the specified service, and will have to be prepared to wait for available aircraft for 1-3 years depending on equipment, if they intend acompliant result. They will have to find the will to ask for the extra funds, and then fend off all the political flak that will come their way during the waiting period from the very sophisticated lobby machines some charities have developed together with their sponsors.
The Snowy decision must worry each of the bigger players who are trying to put together costings and submissions in what is a very short tender period. Is all the work and extra hours just going to be a dry run to cost another tilt 3-4 years from now?
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: aust
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just another trick, While you have obviously done some work with the details you posted, I feel that you may be clouding the numbers with a little trickery.
CareFlight-- 3 aircraft funded for 2, true, however we must remember that the 3rd was put in for their head injury study, and it was CareFlight pushing this barrow, this is not part of the existing contract, and as such should not be included in the formula you so nicely displayed.
Surf-- 2 aircraft funded for 1, this is true, however we must remember that when the contract started the did have a contract for both, have you used this data in your formula??, To be fair this should have been.
CHC --1 machine-- I must remind you that it was Health that approached CHC, and CHC as far as I am aware offered several options for a short term non contract. From what I am lead to believe Health are very happy with this service, however I digress, and we will accept your numbers.
While we all accept that the current NGO's are doing a good job in the eyes of the public, and their own, I think we need to ask are they doing a good job in the eyes of the customer? Both services have very active PR machines and are very good at having the spotlight shining in their direction at every possible moment, they have to, because if they don't the public would not dip into their pockets to "help".
The public are paying not one but twice for these services, once through their taxes, and once from their post tax money. Why should the public have to pay for this service is the question that needs to be answered.
This issue will always get passionate arguments from the NGO's (no NGO no job so we can understand), and some commercial operators, and not just the red bird, the Aussie Helicopters, Jayrows, Hevilifts and smaller operators too, they would be mad not to try for a slice of the pie. If a commercial operator gets the gig, they must have done some hard work to keep the cost down and be competitive in the tender proccess.
When the contracts are awarded there will be people that feel that they have been hard done by, the commercial operators can continue with what they already have, the NGO's if they miss out will have to shut up shop, and the employees will need to find employment in the commercial world. Many will adapt quickly to life in the real world, and others will flounder.
Good luck to all who tender, and when it's over we can all get back to seeing what else to post about!!
fatty
CareFlight-- 3 aircraft funded for 2, true, however we must remember that the 3rd was put in for their head injury study, and it was CareFlight pushing this barrow, this is not part of the existing contract, and as such should not be included in the formula you so nicely displayed.
Surf-- 2 aircraft funded for 1, this is true, however we must remember that when the contract started the did have a contract for both, have you used this data in your formula??, To be fair this should have been.
CHC --1 machine-- I must remind you that it was Health that approached CHC, and CHC as far as I am aware offered several options for a short term non contract. From what I am lead to believe Health are very happy with this service, however I digress, and we will accept your numbers.
While we all accept that the current NGO's are doing a good job in the eyes of the public, and their own, I think we need to ask are they doing a good job in the eyes of the customer? Both services have very active PR machines and are very good at having the spotlight shining in their direction at every possible moment, they have to, because if they don't the public would not dip into their pockets to "help".
The public are paying not one but twice for these services, once through their taxes, and once from their post tax money. Why should the public have to pay for this service is the question that needs to be answered.
This issue will always get passionate arguments from the NGO's (no NGO no job so we can understand), and some commercial operators, and not just the red bird, the Aussie Helicopters, Jayrows, Hevilifts and smaller operators too, they would be mad not to try for a slice of the pie. If a commercial operator gets the gig, they must have done some hard work to keep the cost down and be competitive in the tender proccess.
When the contracts are awarded there will be people that feel that they have been hard done by, the commercial operators can continue with what they already have, the NGO's if they miss out will have to shut up shop, and the employees will need to find employment in the commercial world. Many will adapt quickly to life in the real world, and others will flounder.
Good luck to all who tender, and when it's over we can all get back to seeing what else to post about!!
fatty
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Perth
Age: 70
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Should NSW stay with the NGO model or become government run with a private aircraft contract. Vetskone states this topic deserves Robust Discussion as a lot of peoples future depends upon it. Yes the people of NSW deserve the best EMS service that a government can provide.
EMS in NSW is the largest provider of EMS helicopters in Australia but it relies upon charities to provide its air services and equipment to provide the public with medical / rescue transport. Just another Trick has said Charities are cheap, but we all know that you get what you pay for and if we look further, one begins to ask “ARE THEY CHEAP” or are we being conditioned to think that they are. Imabell you are right QLD Government does inject a lot of money into its government fleet. However how much do you think NSW puts into each NGO? A lot of money MUCH, MUCH more than a million dollars to each operator and there are four NGO operators within NSW, with a lot less service capabilities than other states.
Service capability
Look at Careflight Sydney over the last four years how many days has their helicopter been unavailable for service?
How many days has their service been restricted because of
Careflights Call sign should be OFF LINE 1
Why has no one ever taken Careflight to task over there inability to provide the services that they are paid to provide?. “Politicians, Politicians” “Yes Careflight is untouchable this contract is for show”. How can Careflight not get this EMS contract. They have worked for years to suck up to and manipulate every politician in power to assist them to progress their cause. Political manipulation is an art and the Helicopter NGO’s are masters at it, however Careflight is the master of them all. WHY has there never been an investigation into how Helicopter NGO’s continue to gain government funding without full and open disclusuer.
Surf LifeSaving is no stranger to Political Manipulation one can only look at the Carr Factor that has provided 12 million dollars to Lifesaver helicopter service to build a new base on the edge of a sensitive national park. Where was the review of retrieval / rescue services in relation to helicopter asset location. 12 Million dollars would have provided a lot of air time. WHY WAS THIS FUNDING PROVIDED with no thought to future service delivery or needs. Political Manipulation has for years been the thorn in the side of moving the EMS helicopter system of NSW into the future. Morris Iemma has distanced himself from the Carr mismanagement and aledged underhanded deals of the past. If this is to be a truely open tender then it needs to be monitored and scrutinised by the media and the public to ensure that the political deals do not restrict the tendering process.
Well Sea Breeze you wanted stimulation.
I have put my head up and expect to get hammered for it, but something needs to be done to ensure that this tender is a fair and open tender without the spin Doctors influence.
EMS in NSW is the largest provider of EMS helicopters in Australia but it relies upon charities to provide its air services and equipment to provide the public with medical / rescue transport. Just another Trick has said Charities are cheap, but we all know that you get what you pay for and if we look further, one begins to ask “ARE THEY CHEAP” or are we being conditioned to think that they are. Imabell you are right QLD Government does inject a lot of money into its government fleet. However how much do you think NSW puts into each NGO? A lot of money MUCH, MUCH more than a million dollars to each operator and there are four NGO operators within NSW, with a lot less service capabilities than other states.
Service capability
Look at Careflight Sydney over the last four years how many days has their helicopter been unavailable for service?
How many days has their service been restricted because of
- No IFR capabilities
- No winch capability
- No Doctor
- No crew due to duty hours or sickness
Careflights Call sign should be OFF LINE 1
Why has no one ever taken Careflight to task over there inability to provide the services that they are paid to provide?. “Politicians, Politicians” “Yes Careflight is untouchable this contract is for show”. How can Careflight not get this EMS contract. They have worked for years to suck up to and manipulate every politician in power to assist them to progress their cause. Political manipulation is an art and the Helicopter NGO’s are masters at it, however Careflight is the master of them all. WHY has there never been an investigation into how Helicopter NGO’s continue to gain government funding without full and open disclusuer.
Surf LifeSaving is no stranger to Political Manipulation one can only look at the Carr Factor that has provided 12 million dollars to Lifesaver helicopter service to build a new base on the edge of a sensitive national park. Where was the review of retrieval / rescue services in relation to helicopter asset location. 12 Million dollars would have provided a lot of air time. WHY WAS THIS FUNDING PROVIDED with no thought to future service delivery or needs. Political Manipulation has for years been the thorn in the side of moving the EMS helicopter system of NSW into the future. Morris Iemma has distanced himself from the Carr mismanagement and aledged underhanded deals of the past. If this is to be a truely open tender then it needs to be monitored and scrutinised by the media and the public to ensure that the political deals do not restrict the tendering process.
Well Sea Breeze you wanted stimulation.
I have put my head up and expect to get hammered for it, but something needs to be done to ensure that this tender is a fair and open tender without the spin Doctors influence.
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,957
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Future EMS NSW
Shouting just a tad there JAT mate. Some good points have emerged; especially SB’s notes re availability and I tend to agree with the dedicated professional approach.
Here are a couple more firelighter observations but not grenades.
First, the clip below predicts that those that cover under the veil of “charity” need to be bloody careful less the taxman may take the view that some of your legit deductions don’t turn out quite so legit in the future.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200606/s1670851.htm
While tax is federal and the fed govt couldn’t give a flying root in a thunderstorm about state issues it is the state that pays for state services, or as others have pointed out their taxpayers do.
What do state Govt’s think? 1) All oz states are labor. 2) Labor party worldwide employs advertising agencies to get re-elected not constructive policies. 3) In the NT an internal letter was leaked that showed that even though the govt when faced with its most embarrassing issue, that of aboriginal housing / child sexual abuse etc, the first thing that they focused on was their re-election stocks regardless for any inspiration toward the very unfortunate victims of the issue.
That is what the potential successful tenderer is dealing with.
Another point that comes to mind is the good advice that Mr Bristow got from his accountant, re suitablitity / affordability of product.
There are those that pander that big is best, and others that smallest suitable is best. We certainly do not need flying twenty bed hospitals, good for train smashes but hopeless when hovering downtown (because they are too big to land) the down at heel suburbs as they will only blow away the houses of all of the needy (and remember this) non tax paying residents.
I also believe that Vice Likes’ nom de plume, style and signature is abhorrent and look forward to the day when his flamboyant brashness is curtailed somewhat. If he owns the outfit he hints that he is part of well he can say what he likes. Of course with the rider that if his comments are still in the same vein then he will be regarded with the same disdain. If he doesn’t own it then someone should point out to the owners just how their shopfront is being displayed.
Certainly if I was competing for the said contract and even though pprune is a gossip column with absolutely no liablility for substance I would work out how to use his comments to my advantage by portraying them as the attitude of the company that he represents. Very small beer there Mr Vice Like!
Apart from that I reckon JAT has come up with the best common sense outcome so far but hey, since when has any oz govt tender system been based on common sense?
Shouting just a tad there JAT mate. Some good points have emerged; especially SB’s notes re availability and I tend to agree with the dedicated professional approach.
Here are a couple more firelighter observations but not grenades.
First, the clip below predicts that those that cover under the veil of “charity” need to be bloody careful less the taxman may take the view that some of your legit deductions don’t turn out quite so legit in the future.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200606/s1670851.htm
While tax is federal and the fed govt couldn’t give a flying root in a thunderstorm about state issues it is the state that pays for state services, or as others have pointed out their taxpayers do.
What do state Govt’s think? 1) All oz states are labor. 2) Labor party worldwide employs advertising agencies to get re-elected not constructive policies. 3) In the NT an internal letter was leaked that showed that even though the govt when faced with its most embarrassing issue, that of aboriginal housing / child sexual abuse etc, the first thing that they focused on was their re-election stocks regardless for any inspiration toward the very unfortunate victims of the issue.
That is what the potential successful tenderer is dealing with.
Another point that comes to mind is the good advice that Mr Bristow got from his accountant, re suitablitity / affordability of product.
There are those that pander that big is best, and others that smallest suitable is best. We certainly do not need flying twenty bed hospitals, good for train smashes but hopeless when hovering downtown (because they are too big to land) the down at heel suburbs as they will only blow away the houses of all of the needy (and remember this) non tax paying residents.
I also believe that Vice Likes’ nom de plume, style and signature is abhorrent and look forward to the day when his flamboyant brashness is curtailed somewhat. If he owns the outfit he hints that he is part of well he can say what he likes. Of course with the rider that if his comments are still in the same vein then he will be regarded with the same disdain. If he doesn’t own it then someone should point out to the owners just how their shopfront is being displayed.
Certainly if I was competing for the said contract and even though pprune is a gossip column with absolutely no liablility for substance I would work out how to use his comments to my advantage by portraying them as the attitude of the company that he represents. Very small beer there Mr Vice Like!
Apart from that I reckon JAT has come up with the best common sense outcome so far but hey, since when has any oz govt tender system been based on common sense?
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Topendtorque your right Just another trick is very loud maybe anger management is required. Sandblaster all services have days off line they just pay the penalty depending on the contract. May be the meat raffle did not sell that week so it was cheaper to be off line.
I like the political connection, as we all know its there but how do you stop corruption at that level.
I like the political connection, as we all know its there but how do you stop corruption at that level.
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Gold Coast, Queensland
Posts: 943
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As already mentioned, their ad clearly states they are tendering for various contracts & so they want to know what crews are available if they should win any. Seems very sensible to me.