Qatar denied extra capacity into Australia

[MooTime]

That was exactly my point.

If jobs move from company A to company B, they're still Australian jobs.

if you say Gov doesn't care as jobs in company A or B then why was that used as an excuse for the QR block...wanting to save Aus jobs?

Let's be honest, this is a mess, allowing extra 28 flights in n out of Aus, would def create more jobs here on the ground in Aus, no doubt.

 

[RooFlyer]

As Aston's column in the AFR notes today:

Yowsers.

 

[justinbrett]

if you say Gov doesn't care as jobs in company A or B then why was that used as an excuse for the QR block...wanting to save Aus jobs?

Let's be honest, this is a mess, allowing extra 28 flights in n out of Aus, would def create more jobs here on the ground in Aus, no doubt.

You'd have to ask the minister.

I would point out that it's 21 extra; 28 is the existing cap. QAT requested 7 flights in each of BNE/SYD/MEL.

As Aston's column in the AFR notes today:

Incorrectly states the number of flights requested (unless everyone else is wrong).

You'd think someone who writes about QF every waking moment would get the basic facts right....

 

[CaptJCool]

Yowsers.

Can’t wait for November when the Big V takes over

In the meantime, seems a farewell tour prevails - something we can look forward to when the Tax Commissioner calls stumps in February 2024

 

[jase05]

Ideally I’d like to see QR give the Australian government the middle finger and continue to run an extra MEL daily through ADL and also add an extra SYD daily via CBR and and extra BNE daily via CNS

 

[MooTime]

You'd have to ask the minister.

I would point out that it's 21 extra; 28 is the existing cap. QAT requested 7 flights in each of BNE/SYD/MEL.



Incorrectly states the number of flights requested (unless everyone else is wrong).

You'd think someone who writes about QF every waking moment would get the basic facts right....

Thankyou for correct me in number of flights being 21. cheers

So you disagree with the minister's excuse of stating Australian jobs was a reason for the QR block?

More flights in & out of Aus benefits our national interest greatly, more jobs on the ground here, more access to flights.
Of course you can't just open the floodgates & allow unlimited in, but the dribble of excuses that the minister has wet the floor with is just embarrassing & very much a look after QF interest portrait.

 

[justinbrett]

Thankyou for correct me in number of flights being 21. cheers

So you disagree with the minister's excuse of stating Australian jobs was a reason for the QR block?

More flights in & out of Aus benefits our national interest greatly, more jobs on the ground here, more access to flights.
Of course you can't just open the floodgates & allow unlimited in, but the dribble of excuses that the minister has wet the floor with is just embarrassing & very much a look after QF interest portrait.

I never stated an opinion on it, given AFF rules:

Political posts are therefore not permitted unless they relate directly to travel or aviation. Furthermore, any such post needs to be factual with no subjective commentary.

Ideally I’d like to see QR give the Australian government the middle finger and continue to run an extra MEL daily through ADL and also add an extra SYD daily via CBR and and extra BNE daily via CNS

In contravention of the treaty. The "via gateway" cap is 7 flights a week which is already taken.

They can fly as many to ADL/CBR/CNS direct if they want. But not via (or originating in) the big 4 (BNE/SYD/MEL/PER).

 

[dajop]

I still don’t think people get it. No matter how many times it is raised … this is government to government negotiation. Who knows what else is on the table.


I only think people care a lot about simply because iQR has a semi decent product and moreso on AFF, plays both sides of the fence in the Australian domestic market.

If this were Saudia, or Air India or Pakistan International Airlines most people wouldn’t care so much.

 

[jase05]

In contravention of the treaty. The "via gateway" cap is 7 flights a week which is already taken.

They can fly as many to ADL/CBR/CNS direct if they want. But not via (or originating in) the big 4 (BNE/SYD/MEL/PER).

I thought I had seen reported the “via” cap was also 21 but appears not which is unfortunate.

 

[justinbrett]

I thought I had seen reported the “via” cap was also 21 but appears not which is unfortunate.

Stop getting your "news" from AFR!

VA (and/or QF) can operate up to a total of another 28 services per week from the big 4 (and another 7 via). Each country gets the same cap, it's not split between countries.

Worth noting however the codeshare agreement between VA & QR was approved based on no overlap. If VA starts operating to DOH - regardless of whether it's a QR wet lease or not - the deal must be renegotiated.

Theoretically that could be mitigated by QR surrendering one or more gateways to VA, so VA could fly BNE-DOH & PER-DOH (2 flights each), and QR could fly SYD-DOH & MEL-DOH (2 flights each).

However VA has a hurdle that QR doesn't - getting approval from the IASC. If it's obvious this setup is just to circumvent the rules and give QR more slots, they will likely block it.

 

[MooTime]

If VA starts operating to DOH

VA operating to DOH ???? haha best for the Humor thread.

(context I know, but just had to laugh at that one)

 

[RooFlyer]

I still don’t think people get it. No matter how many times it is raised … this is government to government negotiation. Who knows what else is on the table.

We know exactly what was on the table with respect to this decision, because the minister has told us several times ... several different ways ....

 

[levelnine]

I only think people care a lot about simply because iQR has a semi decent product

People care about flying on better products?! Shock horror. Stop the presses. Something nefarious is afoot!

In any event, you're wrong. More competition from all carriers is better. I'd warmly welcome the arrival of Ryanair. The particular airline doesn't matter. The more options for consumers at all price points and quality levels, the better off we all are.

 

[Quickstatus]

Ideally I’d like to see QR give the Australian government the middle finger and continue to run an extra MEL daily through ADL

... to push the climate change angle that the Minister says is important. It might just be the solution.

 

[Melburnian1]

The government doesn't care about how many QF employ.

Individual Ministers including the PM still very much care about maintaining entry to the CL (as do almost all politicians)!

It's corruption. It's the travelling public that suffers from less competition and fewer frequencies per week.

Protectionism ain't dead in good ol' Oz, a country whose leaders love to lecture others.

 

[CaptJCool]

Individual Ministers including the PM still very much care about maintaining entry to the CL (as do almost all politicians)!

Protectionism ain't dead in good ol' Oz, a country whose leaders love to lecture others.

Just imagine if they all still had GOLD passes!

 

[OATEK]

The article seems to argue that the decision to reject was released to the press from a letter sent to the women in the court action, and before formal advice to QATAR. I still consider that this is at the heart of the decision.

"The decision was revealed in a letter from Ms King to the five women taking legal action against Qatar Airways over their alleged indecent treatment at Hamad International Airport.

The women had written to Ms King asking her to oppose more bilateral air rights for Qatar Airways."

From the Australian. https://www.theaustralian.com.au/bu...t/news-story/3f945160b9868aba058b32aa3838ce6d

 

[Gold Member]

From Theage - Melbourne Airport calls for open-skies approach amid Qatar saga

Go to 12 foot ladder to view without paywall - 12ft – Hop any paywall

An excerpt from the article that captured my interest;

“Qatar’s application was supported by the bulk of the industry and – according to industry sources who spoke on the condition of anonymity – the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, Austrade, various airport owners and all state governments.

King has not said why Qatar was rejected but has said the additional flights were not in the “national interest” and would have resulted in fewer jobs for Australians. This justification has been questioned by most of the tourism and aviation sector, which has accused the government of a lack of transparency.”

So DFAT, Austrade and “various state governments” don’t want to lose their precious Chairman’s Lounge entitlement. We get it, but they’ve proven this to the public for many many years despite public outcry. So why stop now. It’s a sad indictment on Politicians and society to see our taxpayer funds being abused so flagrantly

EDIT: Airport Owners interest which I mistakenly understood which “must fly” rightfully corrected me on.

 

[Must...Fly!]

I read that as the parties mentioned supported the application, the implication being the minister has gone rogue in a sense in opposing it.

 

[justinbrett]

From Theage - Melbourne Airport calls for open-skies approach amid Qatar saga

Go to 12 foot ladder to view without paywall - 12ft – Hop any paywall

An excerpt from the article that captured my interest;

“Qatar’s application was supported by the bulk of the industry and – according to industry sources who spoke on the condition of anonymity – the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, Austrade, various airport owners and all state governments.

King has not said why Qatar was rejected but has said the additional flights were not in the “national interest” and would have resulted in fewer jobs for Australians. This justification has been questioned by most of the tourism and aviation sector, which has accused the government of a lack of transparency.”

So DFAT, Austrade and “various state governments” don’t want to lose their precious Chairman’s Lounge entitlement. We get it, but they’ve proven this to the public for many many years despite public outcry. So why stop now. It’s a sad indictment on Politicians and society to see our taxpayer funds being abused so flagrantly

EDIT: Airport Owners interest which I mistakenly understood which “must fly” rightfully corrected me on.

I get the impression that most of the population are only just now learning of the concept of bilateral caps and opposing it on principle, even though they've been in place for almost a century. As are custom tariffs on a number of goods, even with countries we have free trade agreements with. This is the world we live in.

Australia generally does support open skies agreements - the vast majority of our big markets are open skies. It generally requires two way traffic - the problem with Qatar is that no Australian carrier wants to fly there.