Qatar denied extra capacity into Australia

[FlyingKangaroo]

It's all a racket, and they all know it. Around and around we go.

It'd be harder for me to muster up any respect for anyone involved in this circus than to squeeze a drop of water out of a Saharan stone, but if I were so forced, I'd begrudgingly have to give that drop to Qantas: of everyone involved, they've come the closest to just shamelessly admitting their self-interest and calling it what it is. And quite frankly, that's their "job" in the scheme we've set up.

This all lies on the government, and it's increasingly irritating but predictable watching the government hide and let Qantas cop the flack and even, apparently, re-interpret the Assistant Treasurer's words on behalf of said Assistant Treasurer.

 

[Spacetravel]

It's all a racket, and they all know it. Around and around we go.

It'd be harder for me to muster up any respect for anyone involved in this circus than to squeeze a drop of water out of a Saharan stone, but if I were so forced, I'd begrudgingly have to give that drop to Qantas: of everyone involved, they've come the closest to just shamelessly admitting their self-interest and calling it what it is. And quite frankly, that's their "job" in the scheme we've set up.

This all lies on the government, and it's increasingly irritating but predictable watching the government hide and let Qantas cop the flack and even, apparently, re-interpret the Assistant Treasurer's words on behalf of said Assistant Treasurer.

Exactly, good points.

I'd agree, Qantas is a private business and a private businesses job is to operate a profit by selling products and services at the maximum price the market will pay. I also don't necessarily "blame" them for asking for favours and taking money from the government. I don't think it is right they have received it, but it's the governments job to say no, keep Qantas in check. If as a parent your child asks for money or to stay out later than you think is reasonable and you give it to them without any conditions. Then later after the fact complain they have the money or stayed out late. The response shouldn't be "it's their fault for asking", the parent should have said no when they asked.

So its ridiculous the government gives Qantas all these concessions they ask for then hang them out to dry and act as if Qantas is the bad one here.

Qantas does do some coughty business practices, but its because they are allowed to get away with it.

 

[Pushka]

I suspect the CL access (and other Public Service and ADF benefits - in lieu of points earning) is all part of the Commonwealth contract. Lucrative as that is!

But not to their (adult ) children.

 

[SYD]

But not to their (adult ) children.

No, that’s part of the deal. You +1 get CL access. Not sure what the “1st Lady” does in the meantime? VA?

 

[TheRealTMA]

Don’t believe is possibly to change government policy. After all the previous govt gave Qantas 2.5billion with no specific policy for payback when in profit. Time for the ACCC etc to intervene, It’s time passenger inconvenience laws such as in Europe Uk as EC261 were implemented in Australia, enough of the slot scamming and cancelled flights etc. Make airlines pay for their bad practices and many if the issues would suddenly become a priority for them to consider cus and not shareholders.

For example downgraded from 1A F on Lhr syd flight to J and received £600.00 compensation. Not adequate but something.

 

[pauly7]

Still surprised / not surprised the Qantas sale act has not come up

 

[kyle]

and the 'national interest' reasoning.

Kind of sounds like China's use of 'national security' whenever they don't like something

 

[jakeseven7]

Still surprised / not surprised the Qantas sale act has not come up

LOL please as if, that would require someone with a brain cell to link actual legislation to a real issue, hardly the forte of our political class.

 

[Warragul]

I suspect the CL access (and other Public Service and ADF benefits - in lieu of points earning) is all part of the Commonwealth contract. Lucrative as that is!

The contract for APS/ADF travel is not with Qantas, it is with QBT which hasn't been part of Qantas since around 2010, although QBT is now part CTM.
Staff do select the flights, so you can opt for an airline of choice but in my experience as a traveller and approver of travel there is an eagle eye on justification and follow up for not taking Best Practical Fare of the Day.

 

[FlyingKangaroo]

Rightly or wrongly, material to the Qatar decision or not, the Chairman's Lounge and the PM's son allegedly being given a membership to it have been portrayed and seen by so many as giving rise to a conflict of interest that may have either directly or indirectly influenced the government's decision to deny Qatar additional slots.

I'm not privy to any details, though as a solicitor, it would also make more sense and look better to me if said lounge membership was included in any commercial agreement between the government and Qantas as part of the "services" QF was providing the government. You could at least then attempt to say that the membership is simply a purchased benefit under the agreement and not one given on a discretionary basis for ___ purpose.

I work for a large multinational. Our employees aren't permitted to accept gifts worth over about $100 USD. That's pretty standard. If Qantas were a prospective customer and offered one of my salespeople QFF status or a lounge membership, they'd be forbidden from taking it, even if ultimately it'd have no influence in landing or sweetening a deal.

"Of course, rules for thee, not for me," too often applies too, I suppose.

 

[pauly7]

LOL please as if, that would require someone with a brain cell to link actual legislation to a real issue, hardly the forte of our political class.

Hey don’t shoot the messenger

But if the government was truly interested in everything level and equal then the restrictions placed on the entity via the sale act/amendment should be removed.

Then they could also throw open the doors to anyone and everyone if they so wished.

But I think we need to be realistic that will never happen because despite the masses glossing over it, there are national interests at play here and that’s why the entity is restricted…

 

[eastwest101]

Rightly or wrongly, material to the Qatar decision or not, the Chairman's Lounge and the PM's son allegedly being given a membership to it have been portrayed and seen by so many as giving rise to a conflict of interest that may have either directly or indirectly influenced the government's decision to deny Qatar additional slots.

I'm not privy to any details, though as a solicitor, it would also make more sense and look better to me if said lounge membership was included in any commercial agreement between the government and Qantas as part of the "services" QF was providing the government. You could at least then attempt to say that the membership is simply a purchased benefit under the agreement and not one given on a discretionary basis for ___ purpose.

I work for a large multinational. Our employees aren't permitted to accept gifts worth over about $100 USD. That's pretty standard. If Qantas were a prospective customer and offered one of my salespeople QFF status or a lounge membership, they'd be forbidden from taking it, even if ultimately it'd have no influence in landing or sweetening a deal.

"Of course, rules for thee, not for me," too often applies too, I suppose.

Strong theme of politicians making rules for everyone else but exempting themselves from said rules. Guess who is exempt from National Privacy regulation, proposed legislation on misleading and deceptive conduct, and truth in advertising laws? The federal governments messaging has been extremely mixed since they took the ACCC off task of monitoring airfares and competition in the airline industry. The Qantas Sales Act is a long standing gripe that is one of the few legitimate gripes that Qantas has, but the recent Qatar decision and various spurrious justifications offered of "national interest"/climate change/human rights etc are the sure sign of internal division and buck-passing in cabinet and possibly the public service.

I suspect that the impeding Federal Industrial Relations legislation form Tony Burke will have a few carefully laid land mines for Vanessa Hudson and the Qantas outsourcing IR team to have to deal with, don't forget the final decision/appeal about the legality of the Covid sacking of ground handlers has yet to play out in the courts. Soon there will be a Federal Anti-Corruption Commission in existence with a whole heap of new staff keen to make a name for themselves and the Chairmans Lounge might be brought forward as an issue. Some other tough conversations the Fed Government is gonna have to have is the very artificial flight caps at SYD, under-resourcing of air traffic control and possibly reform or a tough conversation about slot hoarding at SYD.

Just saw John Sharp (the CEO of Rex and now "competition champion") on Seven this morning sinking the boot into Qantas. The Federal Government must love this - Alan Joyce taking all the heat for what can only be described as either Fed Government deception, incompetence or corruption.

 

[Pushka]

No, that’s part of the deal. You +1 get CL access. Not sure what the “1st Lady” does in the meantime? VA?

He has a partner. Reckon she doesn't join him?

 

[jrfsp]

Interesting reading that VA has (obviously) been supportive of the QR rights and so far has not heard from the government after trying to arrange a meeting.

From the ABC:

"Speaking on RN Breakfast this morning, Ms Hrdlicka disputed the national interest argument.

"I would just encourage the government to step back and say, let's get all the facts on the table and understand what's actually in the national interest.

"There's over $500 million in economic interest at stake here for the tourism industry — that's a lot of jobs."

Ms Hrdlicka wants the government to reopen the decision and says Virgin has sought meetings with the prime minister but hasn't heard back."

 

[Must...Fly!]

Maybe they should attach a Beyond membership pamphlet to the request.

Just idle thinking from Singapore.

 

[jakeseven7]

Hey don’t shoot the messenger

But if the government was truly interested in everything level and equal then the restrictions placed on the entity via the sale act/amendment should be removed.

Then they could also throw open the doors to anyone and everyone if they so wished.

But I think we need to be realistic that will never happen because despite the masses glossing over it, there are national interests at play here and that’s why the entity is restricted…

Sorry wasn’t having a go, and agree with you completely - just frustrated that politicians don’t get the big picture and the mainstream news is, well you know.

Maybe VA2 should have a sales act placed on them. And Rex. And Bonza . Can you even imagine.

 

[justinbrett]

Maybe they should attach a Beyond membership pamphlet to the request.

Just idle thinking from Singapore.

They're already members.

 

[Must...Fly!]

They're already members.

I'm sure they are. It was an attempt at dry humour, perhaps a struggle in this humid country.

 

[Layslow]

God the endless bleating and Qantas bashing has hit new highs. And Jayne Hrdlicka saying fares would drop by 40% is just absurd, a nonesense - and can't be based on any fact/research. As Joyce said yesterday we already have open skies with the US and with American carriers having unfetted access to our market - and we theirs. That makes complete sense. But what did Qatar bring to the table for Australian Carriers - more access to ... Qatar? No one travels there and its a different playing field and one that over 20 carriers fly direct to other points to Europe/Africa etc so its already highly (price) competitive. Also just on the bribery nonense with Government ... I also work for a multinational company and when we moved our travel contract to Qantas - there was a heap of Qantas and Business Class Lounge access provided to our senior staff - and knowing friends who have their travel contract with Virgin - they do the same. So... is that bribery? Of course not, its a part of a commercial agreement. The fact that Chairman's Lounge access is disclosed by MP's and with only 6 lounges - the suggestion that would be enough to stifle competition policy - is again, complete rubbish. Where was this when the US Open Skies agreement was being negotiated?

 

[FlyingKangaroo]

The ire for this decision should be directed at the government, not Qantas.

That said, that Qantas is copping so much of it says quite a bit about Qantas' current reputation, and their leadership haven't done it many recent favours, be it about this specific decision or a host of other issues. There's been hyperbole and hypocrisy from all sides, but as far as this specific decision, the number of needless own goals from both Qantas and the government the last few weeks is pretty remarkable.