Raaus sport pilot magazine

[turboplanner]

Very interesting

 

 

[gandalph]

It was. Were you there? One of "the Mob" or an innocent like me?

 

 

[Keith Page]

Very interesting

I can imagine the report for the absent friends, imagine the slant on the interpretation.

KP

 

 

[turboplanner]

No I wasn't there, or one of the mob, but given that you were lecturing about motions being carried at the Queanbeyan meeting, I thought it interesting that you didn't mention that non members were in the room voting, so any motions were invalid.

 

 

[Keith Page]

Hello Turbo,

 

What you are suggesting --- there were some from the dial a mob brigade. That could be true you know.

 

KP.

 

 

[pmccarthy]

No I wasn't there, or one of the mob, but given that you were lecturing about motions being carried at the Queanbeyan meeting, I thought it interesting that you didn't mention that non members were in the room voting, so any motions were invalid.

The motions were not invalid unless moved or seconded by non-members. The outcomes could have been invalid if non-member votes were counted and swayed the outcome. But where is this leading...?

 

 

[gandalph]

I can imagine the report for the absent friends, imagine the slant on the interpretation.KP

No Keith you can't. Well you could, but it would be just that: imaginary fantasy and unsupported supposition.

I went to the Queanbeyan meeting as a fairly new member of RAA and a newcomer to this site so I wasn't a proponent for one side or the other. I abstained from voting because I didn't feel I knew enough of the background to make a reasoned judgement (sorry Don!). But I did listen to the arguments put both from the floor and from the Board and I reported back to my colleagues on the arguments put and on the tenor of the meeting. I don't believe I've said on this site or anywhere else for that matter, that I supported or opposed the proposals put at Queanbeyan BUT I have argued that the outcome of that meeting reflected the wishes of those members who took the time to vote and that in a democratic process we should accept the majority vote.

 

I have spent a good part of my working life writing reports on what I saw, what I heard, what I smelled, what I read and making findings that affected peoples lives based on those criteria alone, NOT on what I felt or believed. Keith, if you're going to make judgements here about my integrity you should perhaps take the time to get to know me better!

 

 

[gandalph]

No I wasn't there, or one of the mob, but given that you were lecturing about motions being carried at the Queanbeyan meeting, I thought it interesting that you didn't mention that non members were in the room voting, so any motions were invalid.

Turbs I wasn't checking membership credentials, someone from the office was doing that. I am not from the office and I've never been an employee of the RAA. So I can't comment on your allegation about non members voting. I had no authority to do that and it didn't occur to me that non-members might have infiltrated the meeting. Do you have some evidence that that was the case?

I didn't think I was lecturing.

 

 

[turboplanner]

Hello Turbo,What you are suggesting --- there were some from the dial a mob brigade. That could be true you know.

KP.

I wasn't suggesting anything, someone else mentioned "mob"

 

 

[gandalph]

someone else mentioned "mob"

That was Keith's descriptor, see posts 119 & 122. I quoted him but I distanced myself from his description.

 

 

[storchy neil]

I stand to be corrected by others this statement is as i see it

 

now I was one of those that wanted change at queanbeyan I was there as you say the old guard were not being made accountable and did not have in their opinion answer to the members for grouse neg of bending and manipulating our rules and regs

 

proof of that was in the CASSA audit who failed we failed for not being more forthright in demanding answers from the top as to what was going on

 

Safety is only as good as the persons responsible for the application of it when an issue off safety was brought to raa reps notice fix your plane and fly so there is still a problem of not addressing the members isues in my opinion still the bloody same

 

as for spending monies to up date the safe working conditions and a modernization off the office so as it up to date 2016 not 2005 neil

 

 

[NT5224]

Hi folks

 

I'm following this discussion with interest -and occasional chuckles.

 

Let me cast my own two cents in the ring: When I first signed up we were AUF, so I've been around a couple years, but not as long as some. I have never taken a interest in the political wranglings of the organization as for me it was always about the flying, and the privileges that membership of our organization conferred. Having said that, I always enjoyed and appreciated the magazine, which I'm sure we all agree improved a lot before hard copy circulation ended. Some great work was done upgrading the magazine -and those efforts should be recognized. Its a shame that the hard copy was withdrawn as a free publication, after such great work. I still pay extra to receive it....

 

Having stated the above I will go on to say that I engaged in the politics of RAA (for the first ever!) to participate in the vote earlier this month. I felt the issues under consideration were tremendously important, and that to some extent their significance was being downplayed in simplified summaries circulated to us members. It also appeared to me that only one point of view was being articulated in the spin. I cast my vote (by proxy as I am overseas) and have observed the outcome. To be honest, the outcome doesn't surprise me, given the way that one position was so forcefully advocated to the membership. Clearly lots of resources went into securing the 'yes' vote.

 

So we are no longer a sporting association but now a limited company with paid directors. The change in the structure of the board means that never again will a fellow Territorian sit at the board table and input into decisions: Even if he has PhD in aeronautical engineering and a string of business degrees!

 

Realistically, the board will now be dominated 'skills-based' Canberrans who are part of the inner clique, and if positions are salaried, it will change the altruism of serving the organisation, and the competition for positions. Vested interests will doubtless become yet more vested, now that money is involved.

 

Clearly I'm personally disappointed with how things have gone for our association, but will respect the democratic process, and the decision of my peers.

 

Now I'm really hoping these blokes prove my concerns unfounded. Our association (or is it a company now?) is an amazing thing: It grants us the privilege of flight without the costs or over-regulation of flying GA. So I reckon we should get behind the new board structure and give it a chance. As many have pointed out, there is a need for dramatic change if RAA is going to turn around the current state of affairs (dwindling funds, dwindling membership and by extension, dwindling influence with The Regulator). If this switch to a corporate entity was what was required to fix the problems and maintain our flying privileges, then I reckon its a small price to pay. And if the new board can win a MTOW increase to somewhere north of 700kg, all will be forgiven.... :)

 

Hell, I might be even be able to wet my fuel tanks with two up... ;)

 

Alan

 

 

[Keith Page]

No I wasn't there, or one of the mob, but given that you were lecturing about motions being carried at the Queanbeyan meeting, I thought it interesting that you didn't mention that non members were in the room voting, so any motions were invalid.

The other point worth considering is what about a member being present and had put a proxy in previously.?

Yep Turbo just plain shenanigans..

 

Regards

 

KP

 

 

[Keith Page]

Hi NT5224, No truer word said.

 

You mentioned from the Canberra area..True.

 

NT no hope. True.

 

Stand back and have a look not from with in go way back and have a look you will see interesting things.

 

The people in NT and Regional Nth.Qld they have become successful by perspiration and natural business procedures, the Canberra and surrounds click they must have this novel after their name the bigger it is the more votes they get hence Nth. Aust will miss out for ever.

 

That why one of the prerequisites of the new board must have academic skills why not some visionary/perspiration skills.

 

Regards,

 

KP

 

 

[turboplanner]

The other point worth considering is what about a member being present and had put a proxy in previously.?Yep Turbo just plain shenanigans..

Regards

 

KP

Well fortunately, with the recent vote replacing the Constitution which was nibbled around during and after that time, with a new one most, if not all the votes at Queanbeyan have been superseded so there is no issue, but you never know when someone with a beef will sit down, do his homework, track any weaknesses he can find and use that in a case to his advantage.

It was very pleasing to see, with the action taken at the most recent meeting to separate members from non members, that a lesson had been learnt from Queanbeyan, and you can't ask for more than that.

 

 

[Keith Page]

What I hear Hec Field/Jacob's Well in Qld was the trial run for that non member trick.

 

The situation regarding the proxy and attendance surfaced there.

 

However put it all together oh that will never be achieved.

 

Regards,

 

KP.

 

 

[Admin]

As many have pointed out, there is a need for dramatic change if RAA is going to turn around the current state of affairs (dwindling funds, dwindling membership and by extension, dwindling influence with The Regulator).

Well said NT, and I believe with my crystal ball that the membership will continually drop further putting even more pressure on RAAus finances and complete structure...I am willing to put $100 on it because they can't see the big picture from themselves.

After Queenbeyan a small group of people got together and set out to remove the clique. As they said to me the only way to change things was to replace the board with themselves. That they did so what was achieved...a small group of people chose on their own to replace an existing small group of people so the clique is still there but just different names. The biggest argument at Queenbeyan was that the then clique were not being ethical in the way they handled that members meeting with votes etc. The same has happened with the recent vote so nothing has changed. To me they are doing exactly the same as their argument for getting rid of the old clique except now that small group are doing so with more stealth and force whilst pretending to do the right thing. The only thing different from the Queenbeyan era is the names and dates have changed

 

 

[winsor68]

Neil, Why would you be accused of bringing RA-Aus into disrepute?Frank.

RAA in years past used to make these sort of accusations to anyone who didn't ignore the obvious failures RAA was showing long before the audits confirmed it.

 

 

[Doug Evans]

think if thing keep heading the way they are there will be a lot of un rego & and none compliance in the future ........ me thinks !!

 

All if we can get a back too basic fun flying authority too start a new branch there may be a few jump ship !

 

just my two bob worth .....

 

 

[Keith Page]

Food for thought Doug,

 

Why would there be such a push for disciplinary procedures, there may be a view that there are people and planes will head for the hills and there will be a case of catch me if you can.

 

Regards,

 

KP

 

 

[Admin]

think if thing keep heading the way they are there will be a lot of un rego & and none compliance in the future ........ me thinks !!All if we can get a back too basic fun flying authority too start a new branch there may be a few jump ship !

just my two bob worth .....

That would be a massive job not to mention the time and money needed and would take some very dedicated individuals to achieve

 

 

[octave]

Well said NT, and I believe with my crystal ball that the membership will continually drop further putting even more pressure on RAAus finances and complete structure...I am willing to put $100 on it because they can't see the big picture from themselves.

So for those who can't "see the big picture" perhaps you could spell it out a little clearer? After the recent vote you made it clear that although you disagreed you would give it a year to see how it went (or words to that effect) but you seemed to have changed your mind. Do you have new information?

 

I am getting a little sick of people seemingly trying to kick RA AUS to death. Yes of course it is open to criticism, but this seems to be mainly presented as "I heard that" or "I am predicting that"

 

If people think there was something illegitimate about the Queanbeyan vote then ask around amongst those who were there, get evidence, involve relevant authorities. The same applies to the recent vote.

 

Some people are saying that RA AUS has "lost" 1 million dollars (or even 2) . Lost implies that it is gone and no one knows where it went. The recent CASA audit problems as I understand it were a failure over several years and over the tenure of several boards to ensure RA AUSs system were modernized and kept up to the standard that CASA demand. This of course was always going to be costly to fix. If members feel that this money has been misspent or worse then instead of vague accusations how about downloading the financial reports and putting the work in to identify the source of this loss.

 

I first joined AUF in 1988 so I have seen it's ups and downs. I am more than happy to vote the present board out at the next election if they do not deliver but until then I am not prepared to snipe and undermine without solid evidence of mismanagement.

 

For me one of the joys of flying is taking up passengers, and then trying to convince them that they too could learn to fly. I tell them how the RA system works and what they would need to do. I also until recently would direct them towards this forum as a source of information, I now no longer do this, there seems little point in directing the would be RA pilot to this forum when so many pilots seem so unhappy and dissatisfied and that RA AUS is either corrupt or incompetent or in it's dying days.

 

Anyway that is my opinion and I guess maybe I am in the minority, perhaps this forum is not the right place people like me.

 

Cheers

 

 

[Admin]

So for those who can't "see the big picture" perhaps you could spell it out a little clearer? After the recent vote you made it clear that although you disagreed you would give it a year to see how it went (or words to that effect) but you seemed to have changed your mind. Do you have new information?

Yes - verified by 4 seperate sources including one in authority and also by an action that RAAus undertook on paper

 

 

[Doug Evans]

Agree but think there are people who have the skill too pull it off and if it should i think the raa would have a few of it current members move house i would most likely be one myself if the system would work for my type of flying !

 

things now are gearing too much towards ga side not for the affordable and fun side of flying .

 

eg : any one that went too old st could see the difference from early years when the craft there where AUF craft now 98 % are GA & LSA i could only see 6 craft that would fit in the affordable and fun side of flying which is a shame there must be a lot of old school plane sitting in hangars over the country not flying or only been used now and then because there not being supported bye the body that made the hole flying seen aviable back in the AUF days there have dumped the root for the GA path which is a shame for the new guy trying too get into low cost fun side of thing s'

 

is is even getting hard to find a trainer too teach in an AUF type craft eg Drifter ,thuster .tail dragger most use jabs or sav which in my eyes are LSA craft .

 

 

[David Isaac]

....... So we are no longer a sporting association but now a limited company with paid directors. The change in the structure of the board means that never again will a fellow Territorian sit at the board table and input into decisions: Even if he has PhD in aeronautical engineering and a string of business degrees!Realistically, the board will now be dominated 'skills-based' Canberrans who are part of the inner clique, and if positions are salaried, it will change the altruism of serving the organisation, and the competition for positions. Vested interests will doubtless become yet more vested, now that money is involved.

It is disappointing that there is so much misinformation being promulgated about our incorporated entity. The change in the structure has NO negative impact on the rights and privileges of members; my local aeroclub has been a company limited by guarantee since its inception in the late 70s. We have always been incorporated it is just that we are incorporated under the Corporations Act and Regulations instead of incorporated under the Associations Act.

The directors are NOT paid and can never be paid unless a resolution by the members agrees.

 

The statement that "The change in the structure of the board means that never again will a fellow Territorian sit at the board table and input into decisions: Even if he has PhD in aeronautical engineering and a string of business degrees!" completely lacks integrity because anyone can stand for the Board even if certain characteristics may be desirable, ultimately you and I as members decide who we vote on the Board; not the sitting board.

 

It is difficult to understand what would motivate you to suggest that ..."...the board will now be dominated 'skills-based' Canberrans who are part of the inner clique, and if positions are salaried, it will change the altruism of serving the organisation, and the competition for positions. Vested interests will doubtless become yet more vested, now that money is involved". When the information you base this statement on is just simply NOT correct.

 

We the members decide where our organization goes, we can either be a part of the bitchy problem or get off our negative asses and do something positive to ensure we maintain our right to fly. Yes right ... unless we are so involved in bitching, it is taken from us by the one and only organisation who I am absolutely convinced doesn't want us flying. CASA.