Article: Free Chairman’s Lounge for Politicians: A Conflict of Interest?

[AFF Editor]

Free Chairman’s Lounge for Politicians: A Conflict of Interest? is an article written by AFF editorial staff:

Free Chairman's Lounge for Politicians: A Conflict of Interest?

In Australia, members of parliament are eligible for complimentary membership of Qantas' exclusive, invitation-only Chairman's Lounge. This comes with the

www.australianfrequentflyer.com.au

You can leave a comment or discuss this topic below. When commenting, please be mindful of the AFF terms of service. Discussion of the topic is fine, but partisan political attacks are not.

 

[Hvr]

It is certainly correct that there is the potential for a conflict of interest, but as noted in the article it is small and able to be addressed if it occurs.

Of more concern is the issue of politicians receiving frequent flyer points and not required to use them for official travel.
It could even be argued that they shouldn't receive status credits for official flights noting they already have CL whilst in office.

 

[harvyk]

Let's face it, politicians are likely to obtain some degree of status with lounge access based on their official travel alone.
By granting lounge access and the perks of status even if it's via flying alone, they are already not experiencing air travel in the same way as the average "Aussie battler".

 

[offshore171]

We will never see high speed rail on the eastern seaboard while Qantas is lavishing benefits on politicians...

 

[MEL_Traveller]

Let's face it, politicians are likely to obtain some degree of status with lounge access based on their official travel alone.
By granting lounge access and the perks of status even if it's via flying alone, they are already not experiencing air travel in the same way as the average "Aussie battler".

Agree. When it comes to things like giving away repatriation flights for a profit an airline membership like CL would highlight QF’s ‘spirit of australia’ and well run airline that is very capable.

a far cry from what the rest of us experience.

 

[SeatBackForward]

We will never see high speed rail on the eastern seaboard while Qantas is lavishing benefits on politicians...

Fun fact, in the mid 90's when Speedrail was nearly a thing. Qantas accepted the threat it would face on the SYD<>CBR sector and actually became a partner in the Speedrail consortium:

Qantas Airways Ltd will provide reservations, ticketing, station management and other services.

But of course, current Qantas CEO Alan Joyce is on the record stating high speed rail to Canberra isn't required.

 

[ChrisMars]

Glad this question is raised. There is some good reasons as to why there is a limit on the value of gift given to members of parliament. I am surprised this practice is running unchallenged for so many years.

 

[harvyk]

We will never see high speed rail on the eastern seaboard while Qantas is lavishing benefits on politicians...

Since Lufthansa was mentioned in the original post, they themselves offer ticketing on trains in Germany. Nothing says QF wouldn't do the same.

I do believe CBR-SYD is not exactly a big earner for QF (and many airlines have come and gone offering services ex CBR without including SYD in the mix, DJ / VA is one that springs to mind). I strongly suspect if there was a HSR service which departed CBR and went to SYD T1 / T3 that would suit QF just fine, especially if they got to sell tickets on the service as a code share.

 

[SeatBackForward]

if there was a HSR service which departed CBR and went to SYD T1 / T3

I don't think this will ever happen. If HSR were to happen, it's far more likely to route via Parramatta (or perhaps the new Western Sydney Airport). Or for some really "out there" planning, how about a direct train between airports with a stop in the middle to connect to the greater HSR network!

But codesharing on rail services just seems to make sense for airlines, at least for those with a wider perspective as a transport provider, than just "We fly planes and run quasi banks", surprised its not a more common thing.

 

[dairyfloss]

It is certainly correct that there is the potential for a conflict of interest, but as noted in the article it is small and able to be addressed if it occurs.

Of more concern is the issue of politicians receiving frequent flyer points and not required to use them for official travel.
It could even be argued that they shouldn't receive status credits for official flights noting they already have CL whilst in office.

Are you sure, on the receiving of points? Provided they book through the right channels, then I don't believe they earn points when travelling on duty; only SCs. Their contracts and rate access with QF/VA and others would cover this. Same applies to hotel stays (if booked on the right rates - harder to control). Government rates generally get the nights or stays to accumulate towards status, but not the points.

Cheers,
Matt.

 

[oz_mark]

Plenty of 'potential conflicts of interest' in government, and there always will be. The important thing is that they can be identified, disclosed and managed appropriately.

 

[dairyfloss]

I think there's something else in it for both the pollies & the airlines, and it's that having politicians, particularly well known, senior or controversial ones sitting about in what are effectively public spaces would actually increase the risk profile of travel and these areas substantially. The cost to monitor and manage that is not insignificant, and if it's not the airlines paying, then it's the taxpayer, through added security personnel. Add the ongoing pain of whiners and nuisances, topped up at an open bar, and I for one am very happy for them to enjoy the CL in peace.

Cheers
Matt.

 

[odysseus]

Since Lufthansa was mentioned in the original post, they themselves offer ticketing on trains in Germany. Nothing says QF wouldn't do the same.

Actually far more than that. You can get flight sectors on train segments connecting to a flight i.e. connecting trains have an LH flight number, and they also interline so you can check in and do other functions on the ground/train service. Basically the train is like many other air partners.

 

[Ade]

then I don't believe they earn points when travelling on duty; only SCs.

This is correct. As part of the WoAG travel advice, those on Commonwealth funded travel are entitled to SC's only, not frequent flyer points. The booking is usually organised by a team/agency that sells seats on a certain fare class which will automatically set the points earned to 0. This is my understanding.

 

[Ade]

I for one am very happy for them to enjoy the CL in peace.

I'm not entirely sure if the CL is a *peaceful* place. I have been to the CL in CBR, it's eerily quiet during the AM hours, but in the PM hours, it's busy ... I'd say crowded too, depending on how one would define as *crowded*. To me, if 2 seats in a 3 seater couch is taken, then it's crowded. So if CL is at 50% capacity, then it's crowded. I also say this because those that go into the CL might expect more *personal space* than those, say, in J lounge.

I have also noticed that there are few people who swing by CL, grab a newspaper and leave. That's it, don't say for a cuppa or a salad ... grab a copy of the AFR and exit the lounge ...

 

[harvyk]

Plenty of 'potential conflicts of interest' in government, and there always will be. The important thing is that they can be identified, disclosed and managed appropriately.

Agreed 100%. Realistically all the CL offers is a private place to sit, some free food and booze, priority access to customer service reps and choice of seats on aircraft.

My thoughts to that is:

Politicians are excellent at finding free food and booze (my Mrs used to work catering at Parli house, there was one certain ex-poli who was an expert at inviting herself to functions and going straight for the booze), and they are quite good at getting invites to functions. So free food / booze isn't exactly a game changer.

Priority access to customer reps, well once you get to a certain level in life, you get priority access to all companies (not just airlines either), QF is just upfront about this little perk.

Choice of seats on aircraft, I've got a better choice of seats on an aircraft than many other people on that aircraft. Yes not CL level of access, but that NB sitting next to me may not realize that. Again it's not a oh yee gods type perk.


All companies lobby government. Some are quite good at keeping it under the table, others are a little more overt. In QF's case they have basically published how they are treating the pollies. This is also not to say that QF (and VA) haven't got lobbyist working in the background which we don't know about. I would suggest that the billions in dollars of payments during COVID was perhaps more the result of lobbying efforts rather than CL membership.

 

[dairyfloss]

I'm not entirely sure if the CL is a *peaceful* place. I have been to the CL in CBR, it's eerily quiet during the AM hours, but in the PM hours, it's busy ... I'd say crowded too, depending on how one would define as *crowded*. To me, if 2 seats in a 3 seater couch is taken, then it's crowded. So if CL is at 50% capacity, then it's crowded. I also say this because those that go into the CL might expect more *personal space* than those, say, in J lounge.

I have also noticed that there are few people who swing by CL, grab a newspaper and leave. That's it, don't say for a cuppa or a salad ... grab a copy of the AFR and exit the lounge ...

Yes - perhaps busier, but still a hell of a lot less chance of Joe Public having a go at someone in the CL after one too many James Boags

 

[Princess Fiona]

Interesting as there is no CL or VA equivalent for Int travel.
Are the pollies only allergic to the general public on Domestic travel ?

 

[harvyk]

Interesting as there is no CL or VA equivalent for Int travel.
Are the pollies only allergic to the general public on Domestic travel ?

Well they do get F lounge access by default on International, so it's not exactly like they are sitting out with the great unwashed.

 

[Melburnian1]

We will never see high speed rail on the eastern seaboard while Qantas is lavishing benefits on politicians...

Completely agree. Big conflict of interest, even though HSR would be far more reliable and efficient than the domestic airlines will ever be.

High speed trains would also help regional development, and encourage 'last minute travel', again something the airlines don't.

Plus much more comfort on board and direct CBD to CBD with a stop in the outer suburbs for those who prefer to drive to (or be dropped off at) a more convenient location.

So many nations overseas embrace this - we're backward to not do so.