Of Politics and Aviation, Please, not the greens.

[Ultralights]

Greens want to close Essendon aiport

 

Greens' pledge to shut Essendon AirportElection 20109 Aug 10 @ 12:02pm by Julia Adler

Greens candidate Tim Long wants Essendon Airport shut within the next term.

 

THE Greens have vowed to shut down Essendon Airport - no matter which major party wins government at the election.

 

Do the greens have a realistic change of closing the airport? Tell us below.

 

Greens candidate for the seat of Maribyrnong Tim Long said the airport should be shut down in the next term of government.

 

“It needs to be closed for the local community and whatever that takes needs to be done,” Mr Long said.

 

“It needs to be done now and needs to be done in the next term of government.”

 

Mr Long said the airport site should be developed into a “world class, sustainable community” as a residential and commercial precinct.

 

Closing the airport to aviation had long been a Greens policy, he said. “It’s been our position all along.” Mr Long said.

 

“We don’t say things just because they are vote winners.

 

“Closing it conforms with numerous aspects of our polices, not least our health policies, because of the noise and air pollution.”

 

The pledge comes two weeks after Maribyrnong Labor MP Bill Shorten said a re-elected Labor government would not close the airport within the next term of office.

 

But with the Greens set to increase their numbers in the Senate at the upcoming election, but highly unlikely to form government in their own right, Mr Long said the Greens would achieve their goal by lobbying whoever came into power.

 

“We’ll use communication, negotiation and consultation,” he said.

 

“We’ll continue to talk and negotiate with all interested parties with the intention of closing it.”

so they want to close the airport due to environmental and pollution concerns, well, just how much pollution will all the cars, air conditioners, electricity use, waste products, and the construction of this community and commercial centre contribute compared to an airport

 

 

[turboplanner]

Probably a bit more.

 

Seriously, it's about time these turkeys were made to back up their statements with research.

 

 

[dunlopdangler]

It would be a damn shame if those tree huggers get their way, on the occassions I fly myself into Melbourne, I always use Essendon, nice and close to CBD and everything else and because of its location very hot prime real estate just begging for redevelopment and I guess this is going to be the reality even if we didn't have the greens flexing their tiny limp wristed muscles.

 

 

[Ultralights]

it seams to me that someone in the greens there or someone they know has connections to a developer in the region, especially since their statement is aimed directly at Essendon

 

 

[DarkSarcasm]

I absolutely HATE how people bash airports and aviation and dont' think about the good that comes out of it. Ignoring the training of future pilots for the airlines and flying for fun etc, what about the Westpac Chopper, RFDS, Police chopper, Ambulance Chopper, Search & Rescue etc etc etc. All services that those people take for granted of being there if they need them, but don't think about where those services come from. I HATE it!

 

Sometimes I think they should force people buying houses next to/near an existing airport to sign some sort of legally binding document saying that they agree that the airport was there first and that they are buying the house with the knowledge that there is an airport there and what it means for them.

 

But I don't know how to raise awareness of the fact that these services that people take for granted require/come from airports, the media is too busy trying to slag aviation to do anything about supporting it. It doesn't seem like writing letters is enough, even if we all write to our MPs, they're not going to listen to us, they're going to listen to the main public who are probably sitting there saying airports are noisy and dirty and smelly and dangerous etc...

 

 

[Ultralights]

funny how politicians tend to forget how they get around to so many places so quickly while on the campaign trail.

 

 

[turboplanner]

It's interesting Darky that nearby residents don't seem to be the ones doing the damage- it seems to be sneaky developers, some of whom have enough resources to work on a 20 year plan, putting the squeeze on bit by bit .

 

This might take the form of closing one runway and putting up warehouses, then pushing hangarage rates up forcing some owners out, then introducing all sorts of charges, then reducing services until eventually the aviators have moved out. It seems to be a pattern which is being used right around Australia.

 

 

[Wangaratta]

It's interesting Darky that nearby residents don't seem to be the ones doing the damage- it seems to be sneaky developers, some of whom have enough resources to work on a 20 year plan, putting the squeeze on bit by bit .This might take the form of closing one runway and putting up warehouses, then pushing hangarage rates up forcing some owners out, then introducing all sorts of charges, then reducing services until eventually the aviators have moved out. It seems to be a pattern which is being used right around Australia.

I think that is what they are trying to do at Wangaratta with that Freight Hub or something.

 

 

[Guest ozzie]

I suggest that you do a bit of serious reserch into not only the Australian greens but also the other green parties from around the world. The early greens were the Environmental groups and the United Tasmanian Group. Driven behind the scenes by the remains of the Communist Party (that Menzies attempted several times to ban and that finally disapaited from the Korean War and the histeria brought on by the Petrov Affair) and also the leftist Union movement. Even tho the Greens preach social justice, peace, grassroots democracy it is at the cost of growth and expansion of industry and commerce. I am sure that there are those who will contradict what i say, but closure Esserdon and other airports near high populations of voters with restriction of aviation growth in general will reap them more votes than they will lose. Another area they are working on is forming nearly the entire East Coast into marine parks. Obviously this will just about kill off the commercial fishing industry a small group compared to the other much larger group recreational users. ask a green party member what their policy is for real alternative energy manufacture and research here in Australia and returning other areas that we have lost to other countries over the last 20 years. The Greens are just like any other party seeking to get control at any cost but they will be like a dog determined to catch the car it is chasing when it does catch it, it does not have a clue what to do with the damm thing. how do we stop them? lobbie the RAA AOPA CASA and anyone one else who has a bit of clout and get them to confront all parties not just the one in control.

 

The most important step we can make is get CASA off this Safe Skies rant and do what is expected of the FAA in the US and make them (CASA) contribute to the commerce of this country. CASA has to find ways of getting more airports, more Australian based aviation industry, easier accessable airspace at a affordable price. Aviation for productive commerce. If it does not happen we are stuffed within 10 years.

 

 

[turboplanner]

If you think Ozzie's off the track, just have a think about the status of aviation now, and ten years ago in the areas you know about.

 

 

[dazza 38]

i going to fill out the ballot next week, and number all the five boxes and put the greens last.

 

 

[facthunter]

Senate Vote.

 

Check that one up. IF you vote as per the "party" box it will run the way that party have allocated preferences. I don't know if you can tick all "party" boxes. It may be an invalid vote. In the past I have filled out ALL individual boxes to avoid this. Tedious, but I think it is the only way.

 

The thing about the greens ( who do have SOME good points) Never have to face the situation where they will be the government in their own right, so they can be a bit extreem in their policies and still attract enough people to give themselves the balance of power in the Senate. They do not appear to know what "compromise " means. Very few people in the real world think they can get "everything" first time. Nev

 

 

[dazza 38]

I made a BOO BOO, in my above post.This is from the latest SSAA, magazine.They say,"when voting for the senate, it is essential to correctly number every candidate below the line to ensure that the Greens are placed last".Then they say,"if you vote the greens last, you can rest assured that they wont indirectly get your vote.You will control your preferences and not be subjected to the backroom party deals of labour or liberal.

 

 

[Guest Crezzi]

For those you who want to work out the preferences of your senate candidates this site might help https://www.belowtheline.org.au/

 

Cheers

 

John

 

 

[riverduk]

Hey John,

 

thanks for the web site, was leaning towards family first, still am, but gotta laugh, they must really dislike the :Disappointed:'s more than us, they put the Australian sex party b4 the

 

:Disappointed:'s, reckon they are on to something

 

cheers, Da Duk

 

 

[winsor68]

If you think Ozzie's off the track, just have a think about the status of aviation now, and ten years ago in the areas you know about.

Having had the Greens in government for the last 10 years I guess you should expect that.... Hang on... wasn't it the Liberal party that ruled for most of the last ten years?

 

Sorry to be a stick in the mud but... I fly and I am voting Green.

 

 

[riverduk]

Having had the Greens in government for the last 10 years I guess you should expect that.... Hang on... wasn't it the Liberal party that ruled for most of the last ten years?Sorry to be a stick in the mud but... I fly and I am voting Green.

Hey Winsor, what's done is done, can't live in the past, can only look forward. On that point, I hope you don"t enjoy trips to the bush, fishing, hunting, 4 X 4 driving, camping or any other outdoor activities apart from your flying cause a vote for the greens will see your life changed for the worse forever. As for being a stick in the mud, go for it if that's your thing, but just remember, that's an outdoor activity and the greens will probably stop that too!

 

Unfortunately it seem inevitable that they will end up with the balance of power in the senate and when this country is completely stuffed by their policies, we'd love to be able to say we told you so but by then the most modern form of communication will be 2 tins and a piece of string (natural fibre of course) and you will just sit in the cockpit of your flying machine going brrrrrrrrrrrrrrrmmmmmmmm and remembering how good it really was in 2010 BG (b4 :Disappointed:'s) happy voting,

 

cheers,Da Duk

 

 

[winsor68]

Jeez Riverduk... At least it makes a refreshing change from blaming Asylum seekers for the imagined woes of our future.

 

The Greens aren't perfect... but they are the only party with the survival of humanity at the heart of their policy. And that can't be a bad thing.

 

 

[turboplanner]

Eh??????

 

 

[Guest Walter Buschor]

love this one. I was considering to vote greens but all I can say now is "bugger them".

 

It is bad enough that they are against guns but I never thought they are against airfields.

 

guess if we lost it all we could still all smoke the green weed and hallucinate our way through the sky. much safer and to top it off it won't cost anything. Same goes for fishing and shooting.

 

fly safe

 

Walter

 

 

[winsor68]

Walter... Don't believe everything you are reading here in regards to Green policy. If we don't look after nature doesn't it automatically follow that there will be no animals to hunt? And perhaps when we look at it logically there are airports around the country that would be better shut... Doesn't change the fact that there is no political party giving any support to private aviation in this country and that more support is desperately needed be it Greens/Lib or ALP.

 

I think considering voting for the Family First party is the most alarming thing I have read on here... Great idea... Lets elect the Christian Taliban and see what happens to your rights.

 

 

[Guest Crezzi]

Excellent - politics and now religion as well.

 

I'm going to enjoy watching this thread

 

 

[turboplanner]

JThe Greens aren't perfect... but they are the only party with the survival of humanity at the heart of their policy. And that can't be a bad thing.

It might pay you to have a closer look at their policy at this link

 

Sexuality and Gender Identity | The Australian Greens

 

"Marriage for all"? Well the "husband" and wife shown in the link photo (Warning, some people may be disgusted) aren't going to contribute progeny for the survival of humanity.

 

I took a quick look in case the Greens had gone green, but all the old policies are there:

 

Equal right to parent (so poor little kids never get to have a mother and father)

 

regulated use of Cannabis

 

syringe exchange

 

injecting rooms

 

trial prescribed heroin

 

Its all there in their words.

 

 

[riverduk]

The Greens aren't perfect... but they are the only party with the survival of humanity at the heart of their policy. And that can't be a bad thing.

You are right Winsor they aren't perfect, no politician is, but "survival of humanity" please! it's not whats at the heart of their policies that's the problem, it's how they intend to implement them and that is what will do the damage. Locking people out of forests or stopping people from fishing and telling us what we can and can't eat is not a democracy, it's a dictatorship and they will not stop until they get their way no mater what others think.

 

Another example from the very top of the greens: Bob Browns push for recognition of same sex marriages, why? because he feels like a second class citizen? why should his preferences or any others be forced on me just because he says they should ?

 

Alright, before anyone starts on the homophobe BS, let me say, I respect their right to make a choice as they see fit, I don't believe it is a healthy choice but I do respect the fact it is their choice to make (having said that, I can't see how male + male = good for survival of humanity)

 

The fact is because BB wants it to be, he will not stop until he gets his way, if only to validate his own situation and so it will be with all the other policies that they want turned into law, a greens balance of power will bring this country to it's knees.

 

cheers, Da Duk

 

 

[skeptic36]

"Marriage for all"? Well the "husband" and wife shown in the link photo (Warning, some people may be disgusted) aren't going to contribute progeny for the survival of humanity.

Could be how they are going to suppress population growth :yuk:

 

 

Regards Bill