Aviation policies of Labor & the Coalition

[Guest High Plains Drifter]

Perhaps we (RAAus) need to be a bit more pro-active.

 

I see Labour policy has emissions and Australian industry high on the agenda.

 

Would it be too left field, for RAAus to approch the new government with a proposal for the government to fund development of a new 100HP Biodiesel fueled aircraft engine.

 

Biodiesel is emissions nuetral.

 

Presently Australia has two aircraft engine manufactures - one or both jointly may be able to develop the new engine. Both these companys export engines so have a track record of generating income and jobs for Australia.

 

Apart from light aircraft, the coming widespread usage of UAV's would be another user of Aero-Biodiesel engines in this horse power range.

 

Obviuosly there are spin off benifits for the Australian Biofuels industry, Farmers and the technoligy secters.

 

HPD

 

 

[Guest palexxxx]

Too late now, we can't do anything about it now. Don't blame me, I voted Liberal.

 

Peter.

 

 

[Guest pelorus32]

Went off and did some circuits in the heat and the thermals today. On the way back had some time to think about this some more.

 

Bottom line for me is this: If we don't like the aviation (and particularly Rec aviation) policies of one party or another then that's simply a reflection that we (members and Board/Exec) have failed to effectively engage in the policy development process.

 

It's been my experience that if you engage in effective dialogue about policy; and if your views are not extreme; then you almost always end up with parties expressing policies that you can live with and perhaps like.

 

If you don't engage in the process then you simply get what you're given and like it.

 

It's a long process - it goes on continuously for ever!!

 

So if we haven't got what we want now then we've got work to do - with both parties. One is in power now and another one will be in power later. Plus the Greens, like it or not, Labor owes the Greens big time and the Greens may well be important in the Senate so we better talk to them as well.

 

This is about building relationships, sharing views and putting positions up for discussion.

 

The bigger we get the more potentially powerful we are but the more that's at stake.

 

Food for thought.

 

Regards

 

Mike

 

 

[Matt]

Labor in for long haul with reforms

 

Not sure if anyone saw this in the news on Friday.

 

LABOR has promised to establish a 20-year national aviation plan to encourage growth, tackle industry fragmentation and promote a more cohesive government approach if it wins power tomorrow.

 

Releasing his party's aviation policy yesterday, Opposition transport spokesman Martin Ferguson accused the Howard Government of being unprepared for the current industry growth cycle, neglecting general aviation and failing to plan for the future.

 

Mr Ferguson said a Rudd Labor government would work to develop a national aviation plan in its first 12 months, setting an industry framework for the next 20 years.

 

"Aviation is a lifeblood industry for Australia - a critical service for our economy, our regions and linking us to the rest of the world," Mr Ferguson said.

 

"Australia has a proud aviation history, but we have no aviation plan for the future."

 

The plan would include a detailed analysis of future passenger and freight growth, including regulatory barriers and capability gaps threatening that growth.

 

It would seek to integrate allsectors of the industry, address the skills shortage and provide a more cohesive government approach.

 

It would also tackle the problems facing general aviation.

 

Mr Ferguson said the general aviation industry action agenda set up by the Howard Government had been deliberating for too long with no result and promised to quickly release findings and urgently implement recommendations.

 

Labor is also promising to scrutinise government agencies again. The Civil Aviation Safety Authority would get a new board, inappropriate airspace reforms would be axed and all remaining regulatory functions would beremoved from Airservices Australia.

 

Airservices would not be allowed to return to location-specific charging and would be required to work with airlines and airports to ensure regional Australia was not disadvantaged.

 

The air navigation provider would also not be privatised.

 

CASA would get a small management board with full delegation to manage the authority and Labor would separate regulatory reform from compliance and enforcement. Labor would ensure that all regulatory functions were removed from Airservices but fire fighting and control towers would not be contracted out.

 

The politicisation of airspace reform and its capture by "the personal agendas of powerful individuals" would not continue under Labor.

 

The Office of Airspace Regulation, in consultation with Airservices, would also remove aspects of the national airspace system not appropriate to Australia.

 

Other platforms included a focus on environmental improvements through improved air traffic control and the development of emission indicators.

 

Airlines, airports and Airservices would also be required to share information and monitor the costs of delays and congestion in the aviation network.

 

 

[Mazda]

That was the article in The Australian on Friday. So much for lifeblood - they released the policy the day before the election!

 

Anyway, they are in now. Let's see how they go.

 

 

[Guest ozzie]

No matter who is in or what their policy is it will still be the mad crazy outa control rollercoaster ride that i have been on for the last 32 years. So all you newbies, have your tickets ready, cause here we go again.

 

ozzie

 

 

[facthunter]

Change of Gov't.

 

Without getting political, could it get much worse? especially with airports, (like Goulburn) Potentially we do have a great opportunity in this country if we can get our act together. Martin Fergusson WAS the shadow minister concerning Aviation. He may still be there after Thursday. Support your organisation and get in touch with your local member. I don't feel that since civil aviation was put in with all other forms of transport, that it received the attention it deserved. I've always believed aviation is unique, and that it has to be understood on a different level (I was almost going to say PLANE) than trains boats & buses, in that it can come unstuck pretty fast if things are not done right.(Training & maintenance as examples) Regards Nev..

 

 

[Guest ozzie]

Totally agreeing with Nev. We do have a serious chance to really not only get the new minister and local MPs leaning more our way so to speak. A real chance with a new govt to save our airports/strips from lazy councils. A chance to address a lot of problems and over regulations/pricing (asic card costs). Big chance for even those who voted the other way to to take full advantage of the situation, ambush em before they have time to learn how to dodge the issues.

 

Ozzie

 

 

[727engineer]

CASA would get a small management board with full delegation to manage the authority and Labor would separate regulatory reform from compliance and enforcement. Labor would ensure that all regulatory functions were removed from Airservices but fire fighting and control towers would not be contracted out.

 

The politicisation of airspace reform and its capture by "the personal agendas of powerful individuals" would not continue under Labor.

 

I wonder if they are referring to a certain "Mr Smith";) who contributed alot of funding in the last election for John Andersons campain, and then "paddled his own canoe" pushing John to get his way?:pig:

 

 

[Guest High Plains Drifter]

Quote from 727 - "I wonder if they are referring to a certain "Mr Smith" who contributed alot of funding in the last election for John Andersons campain, and then "paddled his own canoe" pushing John to get his way?"

 

Bit of a mystry post 727, I'm wondering what you think Mr Smith gained from his efforts ?

 

HPD

 

 

[Guest Fred Bear]

More political crap via some 'sources'. Probably repeating some other stuff but anyway, someone might be interested:

 

* LABOR OUTLINES AVIATION POLICY: Just 48 hours before its emphatic federal election win over the Howard Liberal government, Labor's transport spokesman Martin Ferguson laid out the party's policy for a 20-year aviation plan.

 

In announcing the policy, Ferguson took the opportunity to highlight what he called the Coalition's “neglect†of the aviation sector during its 11 year tenure. "Aviation is a lifeblood industry for Australia - a critical service for our economy, our regions and linking us to the rest of the world," he said. "Australia has a proud aviation history, but we have no aviation plan for the future. The industry has rallied to recover from the impact of 9/11, the demise of Ansett, SARS and the Bali bombings – with unprecedented growth fuelled by the resources boom, low cost carriers and larger aircraft into regional airports. But the Howard government has not prepared for this growth. It has continued in spite of the Howard government's mismanagement and inaction, but this can not continue.â€Â

 

Ferguson said the Rudd Labor government will work to develop a national aviation plan in its first 12 months in power with the goal of setting an industry-wide framework for the next two decades. He said the plan will address future growth and capability gaps by “analysing future passenger, movement and freight growthâ€Â; implement an integrated approach to redressing any capability gaps, one which will integrate all sectors of the aviation industry; see “Australia become a world leader in aviation trainingâ€Â; provide a more cohesive government approach in conjunction with other agencies and government levels including “leveraging opportunities from sharing civilian and defence aviation assetsâ€Â; and to renew the general aviation sector which Ferguson says has suffered in the face of airport privatisation.

 

Labor also plans to address environmental issues by taking a “sensible approach to reducing aviation's impact on the environment and avoid solutions – such as those applied in Europe - that impose more costs on industry and the travelling public,†and to increase efficiency by working to reduce “the amount of delay and congestion in the aviation network.â€Â

 

The policy also said that “the Civil Aviation Safety Authority has not responded well to governance changes introduced by the Howard government,†despite Labor enabling “bi-partisan support for those changesâ€Â. It says changes made in the wake of the Lockhart River crash have not gone far enough, so Labor will “appoint a small management board and provide it with full delegation to manage the safety regulator. It will be a competent, professional board with the respect of government, the community, business and the aviation industry,†and “will separate the policy and regulatory reform function from that of compliance and enforcement.â€Â

 

Labor also claimed that the Howard government had “allowed airspace management to become politicised and captured by personal agendas of powerful individuals,†and undertook to “review the Australian Air Traffic Management Plan and remove aspects of the National Airspace System (NAS) that are not appropriate for Australia.â€Â

 

It remains to be seen if Martin Fegurson is appointment Transport Minister to implement his aviation plans. During a media conference on the morning after his election, Prime Minister elect Kevin Rudd said he would decide on the makeup of his cabinet in the coming week, including the key portfolios of Transport and Defence.

 

 

[facthunter]

Change.

 

Whatever is being said, it's a time for review. We have no certainty of anything, but on the other side there is the chance of sorting out a lot of what I can only term "stupidity". The B***DY ASIC being a case in point. Our input is needed sooner rather than later. Once anything is done, you are stuck with it. I believe we should work with AOPA and all like- minded organisations at this time. The system seems to be run for the airlines and not much else. Nev..

 

 

[TechMan]

Despite what Mike has indicated in his statement about visiting the shadow minister at the time, rest assured that RA-Aus did in fact visit him and discuss Rec Aviation and future policies with him prior to the election. This was done while Middo was still here.

 

Now, if only he does actually become Transport Minister....

 

Chris

 

 

[facthunter]

Our organisation.

 

There is possibly a need to clarify what I stated above . When I say "we" I mean the RAAus. That may not be obvious. What "we" need to do is input & get behind our organisation, and suggest that the differences that have been evident between some of the respective (non-airline) groups are minor in principle, and are territorial in nature, and should be put aside for the greater common good. Nev..

 

 

[JohnMcK]

Further to my last post. The thing that should be worrying each and every member of RAAus is that at the time I went and spoke to Martin I was told that NOBODY from RAAus (the head office/Board) had been anywhere near him. That startled me and he also expressed surprised.Hi All,

 

The above is not correct. I am a new Board Member and don't have first hand information, but Lee Ungerman, our new CEO has confirmed to the Board that Paul Middleton, our previous CEO, Did have discussions with the shadow minister before he retired, and strongly presented the RA-Aus case to the Labor spokesman.

 

 

 

Regards,

 

 

 

John McK

 

[JohnMcK]

Hi All,

 

You can be assured that we have two excellent people in our organization now, our President John Gardon, and our CEO Lee Ungerman, who will do their best to look after our interests.

 

John McK

 

 

[Admin]

John

 

I could be wrong but I believe Mike went there some long time ago as I remember a post made early this year from Mike about it (I may be wrong but I think it was about March) so at the time it was most probably correct and perhaps it was in fact these forums that initiated Middo going and seeing him - well, a feather in our cap if that was the case but somewhat irrelevant. :big_grin:

 

Perhaps it may be better if when we feel something to be incorrect that a PM to the writer to discuss first before making subsequent posts or for a request to edit a post be made - keeps us all friendly and working together :big_grin:.

 

 

[Guest pelorus32]

Further to my last post. The thing that should be worrying each and every member of RAAus is that at the time I went and spoke to Martin I was told that NOBODY from RAAus (the head office/Board) had been anywhere near him. That startled me and he also expressed surprised.Hi All,

 

The above is not correct. I am a new Board Member and don't have first hand information, but Lee Ungerman, our new CEO has confirmed to the Board that Paul Middleton, our previous CEO, Did have discussions with the shadow minister before he retired, and strongly presented the RA-Aus case to the Labor spokesman.

 

 

 

Regards,

 

 

 

John McK

 

With respect John that information came from Middo at the time I discussed with him meeting Martin Ferguson. That was in May and June. At that time Middo quite clearly told me that neither he nor anyone else had been to see Martin for a very long time if at all.

 

Subsequent to my visit to Martin I had a further discussion with Middo where I said to him what Martin had told me: that Rudd had told him he would be the Minister if he wanted to be. Middo at that time said to me that it appeared that a visit to Martin Ferguson by RAAus was probably necessary. It of course remains to be seen whether Ferguson does in fact become Minister.

 

I said in my post "...at the time I went and spoke to..." that was exactly what Middo told me AT THAT TIME.

 

I'm afraid it is CORRECT.

 

However I see this as a shared responsibility of not just the Board/Exec but all members. That's why I acted and that is my challenge to all of us.

 

Sorry to disagree with you, but with respect to what Middo told me - and I believe what he told me - you are unfortunately wrong.

 

Kind regards

 

Mike

 

[Guest pelorus32]

With respect to Ian's point about PMs. This matter was raised by an RAAus staff member today and I responded to him with a PM. John Mck has chosen to deal with the matter publicly and so I have responded publicly, not my desired mode of response but given John's response I think appropriate in order to set the record straight.

 

Kind regards

 

Mike

 

 

[JohnMcK]

Hi Ian and Mike,

 

Thank you for your comments and clarification on this matter.

 

Regards,

 

John McK

 

 

[Guest Fred Bear]

What I believe we need is an independent representative for all our aviation issues/regs in this country. Someone who is a pilot/has knowledge etc not some politician who knows stuff all about aviation. Then, I believe, we would see changes for the better in regards to the management of australian aviation. My two cents.

 

 

[TechMan]

Looks like we will have to engage Anthony Albanese.

 

The full list is:

 

"

 

HERE is a full list of the ministers in prime minister-elect Kevin Rudd's new federal Cabinet.

 

Julia Gillard, Deputy Prime Minister, Education, Employment and Workplace Relations, Social Inclusion.

 

Wayne Swan, Treasurer.

 

Senator Chris Evans, Leader of the Government in the Senate, Immigration and citizenship.

 

Senator John Faulkner, Special minister of State, Cabinet Secretary, Vice president of the executive council.

 

Simon Crean, Trade.

 

Stephen Smith, Foreign Affairs.

 

Joel Fitzgibbon, Defence.

 

Nicola Roxon, Health and Ageing.

 

Jenny Macklin, Family, Housing, Community services and Indigenous Affairs.

 

Lindsay Tanner, Finance and Deregulation.

 

Anthony Albanese, Infrastructure, Transport and Regional development, Local Government, Leader of the House.

 

Senator Stephen Conroy, Deputy Leader of the Government in the Senate, Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy.

 

Senator Kim Carr, Innovation, Industry, Science and Research.

 

Senator Penny Wong, Climate Change and Water.

 

Peter Garrett, Environment, Heritage and the Arts.

 

Robert McClelland, Attorney-General.

 

Senator Joe Ludwig, Human Services, Manager of Government Business in the Senate.

 

Tony Burke, Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry.

 

"

 

http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,22842376-5013469,00.html

 

Chris

 

 

[Guest pelorus32]

Hi Chris,

 

yeah it appears so. The ABC has a different list interestingly:

 

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2007/11/29/2105169.htm?section=justin

 

But Anthony Albanese is certainly the man.

 

Regards

 

Mike

 

 

[Guest High Plains Drifter]

Mr Anthony Albanese MP, Member for Grayndler (NSW)

 

Anthony Albanese was first elected to Federal Parliament in 1996 as the Member for Grayndler. Anthony served as Parliamentary Secretary to the Shadow Minister for Family and Community Services between 1998 and 2001. Following the 2001 Federal Election Anthony was promoted to Shadow Minister for Ageing and Seniors before taking on the Employment Services and Training portfolio in 2002. After the 2004 Federal Election, Anthony became Shadow Minister for the Environment and Heritage. In June 2005 Anthony also became Shadow Minister for Water.

 

In December 2006, Anthony became Shadow Minister for Infrastructure and Water and Manager of Opposition Business in the House of Representatives.

 

In his first speech in Parliament in 1996, Anthony spoke of the need for long-term infrastructure planning. Through his political life, Anthony has demonstrated a keen interest in economic and social policy. He strongly believes in enhancing our quality of life and protecting the environment.

 

More at - http://www.anthonyalbanese.com.au/file.php?file=/about.html

 

 

[Guest Fred Bear]

But knows nothing about aviation...