Qatar denied extra capacity into Australia

[justinbrett]

I actually don't think it that its improbable that the Minister took the decision and the PM didn't know, at least for a few days.

PM was on his way to international meetings when the call from Virgin CEO came through and you can assume that the days prior to that were filled with pretty intense briefings etc about the trip. Minister's office may have sent message through to the PMs office, but that probably got filed as unimportant at the time and not communicated to the PM. If you remember past PM-ships and how access to the PM is tightly guarded by their office, even from Ministers.

Virgin CEO may have originally called at any time, but I'm guessing was given the 'slot' to speak with the PM while he was in the air, or was simply return called then.

Decision on the Qatar Govt appears to be within the Transport Minister's remit, although you'd think the Foreign Minister would have been consulted (reported that she wasn't).

I don't think we have heard from the Transport Minister as to who she spoke to, and when .

Don't you think it's odd he would take that call from VA CEO and do nothing with it? It's highly likely this was the extensive conversation he referred to in Question Time, so far from routine.

Until yesterday he was under the belief the decision was made after that call, so it's not like he would have discounted it because it was too late. If he later went to action it, he would have found out then the decision was already made. By all accounts that call was for nothing.

 

[Himeno]

They were charging very high business fares (much higher than the QF government sponsored repatriation flights) and getting freight revenue - doubtful it was loss making.

While the air service agreement limits were suspended and QR (and any other airline) could fly as much as they wanted (which is why QR started flying to BNE during the border closure, while their limit was 21.)
QF was operating long haul cargo only flights with their A330s and 787s throughout the pandemic, in addition to the DFAT charters.

 

[justinbrett]

Fireworks in Question Time today.

After multiple times of Minister King not answering questions over the Qatar issue, the opposition have suspended question time to get the speaker to change his ruling that the Minister is in order in relation to answering the questions.

The Minister has said the main lobbying her department received was from VA and a third party.

 

[Lynda2475]

The Minister has said the main lobbying her department received was from VA and a third party.

Betting the third party likely to be related to the assault incident - either lawyers, victims etc

 

[Chicken]

Sometimes behind the scenes is better than a song and dance.

Yes, this is true too; but wouldn't you make this a national security matter, brief the opposition, and do a bipartisan shut down?

 

[RooFlyer]

Don't you think it's odd he would take that call from VA CEO and do nothing with it?

Until yesterday he was under the belief the decision was made after that call, so it's not like he would have discounted it because it was too late. If he later went to action it, he would have found out then the decision was already made. By all accounts that call was for nothing.

Again, I'm looking at the circumstances of the call - with PM flying to international meetings. A call from Virgin CEO re Qatar application would have been ranked very low on his and his office's priorities probably in absolute terms and especially at the time. You'd think the staff would have let the Minister know about the call, but under the circumstances, maybe not. I guess the PM did the call and thought 'What's next ...'

The call was for nothing? Probably - but I guess the PM taking the call at all was just a courtesy to the CEO of a major company.

The Minister has said the main lobbying her department received was from VA and a third party.

Did she say if, as has been reported in several different media outlet, that her department actually recommended the extra flights be granted, but her final decision was against?

 

[justinbrett]

Again, I'm looking at the circumstances of the call - with PM flying to international meetings. A call from Virgin CEO re Qatar application would have been ranked very low on his and his office's priorities probably in absolute terms and especially at the time. You'd think the staff would have let the Minister know about the call, but under the circumstances, maybe not. I guess the PM did the call and thought 'What's next ...'

The call was for nothing? Probably - but I guess the PM taking the call at all was just a courtesy to the CEO of a major company.

I really doubt that - the PM is very interested in this area, having been the Transport Minister for 6 years previously, and to have an extensive conversation to just sit on your hands, and not even mention it to his Minister - seems very far fetched.

CEOs don't call the PM for a chat.

Did she say if, as has been reported in several different media outlet, that her department actually recommended the extra flights be granted, but her final decision was against?

No but I'd believe it.

The other question is why the previous government did not approve the 2018 Qatar request and waited four years to approve it - and to put the "national interest safeguard" in that apparently has never been used before (and referenced it wasn't just about flights). Something is there, it would be good to know what it is.

 

[eastwest101]

Yes, this is true too; but wouldn't you make this a national security matter, brief the opposition, and do a bipartisan shut down?

Exactly - if it was a national security matter then the national security council and opposition would be involved and bipartisan. And if Qatar Airways were such a threat to national security, then they wouldn't be flying here in the first place.

And if if were a human rights thing then thats what the Foreign Minister and the Dept of Foreign Affairs with diplomats are designed for. And - importantly - if transport policy is all about human rights then she had better ground all the mainline Chinese carriers, and would be off in the weeds deciding if the human rights records of the Dubai, Abu Dubai, Malaysia, Indonesia, Brunei, PNG, Singapore, Hong Kong, Vietnam etc etc governments are any worse than that of Qatar.

If it were an environmental thing then the Federal Air Transport public servants would be assessing aircraft type and distance and calculating emissions from all flights into and out of the country.

When you remove all the improbable/ridiculous reasons offered for the ministers decision, then most people are still left with simple ministerial discretion/ministerial frolic and/or possibly competition concerns about the effects on Qantas.

 

[justinbrett]

Sky are predicting that Qatar will put in a new application for a fewer number of flights so the government could approve it, without having to appear defeated by the opposition over the matter.

 

[RooFlyer]

CEOs don't call the PM for a chat.

Was anyone saying that it was for just a 'chat'? And what's the evidence it was an 'extensive' conversation? I think you are making a big thing out of little. There was a call; we can guess what was said on both ends of it. It would be recorded, and minuted; no commitments would ever be given.

I've no doubt what you say about the PMs interest in the area formerly, but as PM, and on his way to international conferences etc, his and his staff's priorities will change. Maybe he just regards the Minister with ill-concealed contempt .

Anyway:
* Virgin lobbied but failed to get traction with the PM or the Minister/her department
* Minister ruled against for stated reasons that read like a bowl of spaghetti, but almost certainly has its roots in the incident at DOH (although Foreign Affairs not consulted), and a negative decision was egged on by Qantas lobbying.
* Minister may have gone against the recommendations of her Department
* Minister doesn't appear to have consulted with her colleagues in making her decision;
* Minister may have sent message to PMs office, but if it was it wasn't conveyed to PM
* PM had discussion by phone with Virgin from his plane going overseas - failed to advise Minister
* Just about every interest group or stakeholder has criticised the decision, including other international airlines, except Qantas

I guess the Government was just unlucky that the Minister got caught with eyes in headlights just as Qantas management was imploding.

 

[justinbrett]

Was anyone saying that it was for just a 'chat'? And what's the evidence it was an 'extensive' conversation? I think you are making a big thing out of little. There was a call; we can guess what was said on both ends of it. It would be recorded, and minuted; no commitments would ever be given.

I've no doubt what you say about the PMs interest in the area formerly, but as PM, and on his way to international conferences etc, his and his staff's priorities will change. Maybe he just regards the Minister with ill-concealed contempt .

Anyway:
* Virgin lobbied but failed to get traction with the PM or the Minister/her department
* Minister ruled against for stated reasons that read like a bowl of spaghetti, but almost certainly has its roots in the incident at DOH (although Foreign Affairs not consulted), and a negative decision was egged on by Qantas lobbying.
* Minister may have gone against the recommendations of her Department
* Minister doesn't appear to have consulted with her colleagues in making her decision;
* Minister may have sent message to PMs office, but if it was it wasn't conveyed to PM
* PM had discussion by phone with Virgin from his plane going overseas - failed to advise Minister
* Just about every interest group or stakeholder has criticised the decision, including other international airlines, except Qantas

I guess the Government was just unlucky that the Minister got caught with eyes in headlights just as Qantas management was imploding.

It's not 100% but balance of probabilities is that the extensive phone call he referred to on Monday's QT was the call he referred to on Tuesday's QT (and likely that was known to the opposition which is why that exact question was made). It's also been confirmed today that VA was the main source of lobbying on the decision.

I suspect at the time of the call, the VA CEO didn't know of the decision either, otherwise I'm sure that was brought up (noting there would be a delay from being released from the Minister, going through the Qatar government, to QR, to VA). So lobbying was received by the PM, and by omission it didn't go any further since he never found out the decision was already made. Says to me he was completely disinterested in the actual decision - either because he knew it would be denied, or he was literally not interested in following it up.

If I was the VA CEO, and I called the PM - I would expect some results, or at least an explanation of why not - it seems she got neither.

Could the third party be Emirates?

 

[MooTime]

We sure are getting a thorough run here on details, fabo stuff.

Why just mention VA & not mention the 3rd party, VA is a private company, of course yet some sort of major player in this issue so maybe relevant to mention.

Can't see how the gov can't give real reason why the QR request was blocked, but after so many flip flop reasons, MP King would have to be a liar if she now gave a single reason as all other excuses would have to be a lie.

Ah such a mess, new request for less flights, wouldn't that be interesting now! How many excuses used could still be warranted?

 

[justinbrett]

Why just mention VA & not mention the 3rd party, VA is a private company, of course yet some sort of major player in this issue so maybe relevant to mention.

Can't see how the gov can't give real reason why the QR request was blocked, but after so many flip flop reasons, MP King would have to be a liar if she now gave a single reason as all other excuses would have to be a lie.

Ah such a mess, new request for less flights, wouldn't that be interesting now! How many excuses used could still be warranted?

Yes I was thinking that too - technically VA is a third party.

My other guess for the third party is Flight Centre, since they have been the most vocal non-airline business.

 

[straitman]

Yes I was thinking that too - technically VA is a third party.

My other guess for the third party is Flight Centre, since they have been the most vocal non-airline business.

Are the other ‘third party’s’ allowing Flight Centre to carry the load and be seen to be the stirrers of the pot?

 

[justinbrett]

Labor are now attempting to amend the terms of reference of the Senate Inquiry to go back to 2016. Vote will be tomorrow.

 

[RooFlyer]

I thank @Pushka for pointing to this site in another thread (and apologise if they were going to post it).

‘Blocking other airlines was in the national interest’ says PM from Qantas Chairman’s Lounge – The Chaser

'Why would anyone even think to suggest otherwise?'

chaser.com.au

 

[Pushka]

I thank @Pushka for pointing to this site in another thread (and apologise if they were going to post it).

‘Blocking other airlines was in the national interest’ says PM from Qantas Chairman’s Lounge – The Chaser

'Why would anyone even think to suggest otherwise?'

chaser.com.au

It's a great site isn't it!

 

[lorikeet1326]

This whole saga is such a disgrace for the government and Qantas. QF is not even a competitor to QR to Europe - not at all, for example I have family in central Europe I need to fly to Vienna, my only options from MEL with a single stopover are Emirates and Qatar. Most people flying to continental Europe would use EK or QR, only fool would be flying through London with QF (detour, waste of time, lots of stopovers). I want more competition to continental Europe, I want more QR flights. Maybe UAE lobbied QF to block QR? Would be even worse.

 

[jrfsp]

This whole saga is such a disgrace for the government and Qantas. QF is not even a competitor to QR to Europe - not at all, for example I have family in central Europe I need to fly to Vienna, my only options from MEL with a single stopover are Emirates and Qatar. Most people flying to continental Europe would use EK or QR, only fool would be flying through London with QF (detour, waste of time, lots of stopovers). I want more competition to continental Europe, I want more QR flights. Maybe UAE lobbied QF to block QR? Would be even worse.

Except QF would sell you a tickets on the EK flights so there is financial benefit for QF

 

[Himeno]

This whole saga is such a disgrace for the government and Qantas. QF is not even a competitor to QR to Europe - not at all, for example I have family in central Europe I need to fly to Vienna, my only options from MEL with a single stopover are Emirates and Qatar. Most people flying to continental Europe would use EK or QR, only fool would be flying through London with QF (detour, waste of time, lots of stopovers). I want more competition to continental Europe, I want more QR flights. Maybe UAE lobbied QF to block QR? Would be even worse.

QF has a joint venture with EK. QF sells QF coded flights on EK's network and makes money off flights to Europe (and parts of Asia and Africa).
EK operates to 67 destinations within Europe, Asia, North Africa and the Middle East that QF does not operate to, and QF competes with QR on those routes via codeshares on EK services.