Qatar denied extra capacity into Australia

[RooFlyer]

Sydney Airport is part owned by the aweful Qataris.

 

[SCM]

With what aircraft?
QRs active fleet is fully utilized. In order to rapidly increase service to Australia, they would have to cut service elsewhere.
They have 10 widebodies (2 A380, 8 A350) still in storage, but the clock is ticking to get the work needed on those done to bring them back into service "by christmas".
It doesn't appear that they have anything new coming until 2026.

They have a lot of 350s undergoing various final maintenance (which airbus was gratiously storing), painting, existing ones being repainted as part of their settlement, etc. The short of it is that they have many 350s which are going to be introduced and re-introduced in the next several months - and the timing of the application for more flights was not a coincidence.

And the big elephant int he room QR is already one of the most expensive airlines, so would extra flights have any meaningful effect of air prices? Maybe wth their direct competitors like Etihad or Emerites but not for those who fly via Aisa where there is already plenty of competition.

If they are the most expensive (which is arguable), it because they have the best product which is in very high demand... which is the very reason they want to add more flights. They have a ridiculously high load factor to Australia.

Adding more supply will inevitably bring prices down, it's not rocket science.

 

[OATEK]

And I would think more Aussies currently find a lot of QF's conduct appalling as most Aussies probably don't think about QR very much at all.

I think you are right. Most people I talk to outside the AFF bubble don't think much about Qatar and whether they should/should not have the extra flights, but all have a view on QF (mostly negative).

 

[FlyingKangaroo]

From The Guardian this morning: "Australia agrees to clear-the-air talks with Qatar over controversial airline decision"

I wonder if Qatar will receive a more fulsome and compelling explanation than the public did.

 

[eastwest101]

From The Guardian this morning: "Australia agrees to clear-the-air talks with Qatar over controversial airline decision"

I wonder if Qatar will receive a more fulsome and compelling explanation than the public did.

It will be interesting when the Australian Federal Department officials meet with Qatar officials as to what reasons are given and whether Qatar officials share the reasons given to them or not. Qatar Airways may not share much publically if further discussions are ongoing and positive with a possibility of a better resolution than they currently have for the airline.

This is becoming far too embarrassing for the Australian Federal government and in particular the minister, who as it turns out received Departmental advice about this in Jan 2023 and then sat on it for 6 months while either Qantas wined and dined the government and/or the minister corresponded with the lawyers acting for the women in the ongoing court case regarding the events at Doha Airport in 2020.

The Senate hearings yesterday were pretty much the public servants from the Dept of Transport and Infrastructure throwing their hands up and saying "Ask the minister", so it would appear that my initial guess that the Department possibly recommended acceptance of at least some additional capacity, and then the minister herself went rogue/off on a personal frolic regardless of departmental advice. Certainly, the statements from Qatar Airlines, Virgin Australia, the Departmental staff, and even from Qantas all generally agree on the sequence and timeline of events, from January through to August, its just the minister herself who was running around like a headless chook, and has now conveniently gone to ground, after offering a series of ridiculous, specious and unlikely reasons about the reasoning for her decision.

I will be interested to see if Eamonn Fitzpatrick ex-Hawker-Britton and press secretary to PM Gillard and ALP Strategy Director - the now "triple hatted" lobbyist working for Qatar Airways, Bain Capital (owners of Virgin Australia), and a little outfit called Sydney Airport Corporation Limited will be called to give evidence. He would have some details about this timeline that many journalists might find interesting.

Edited to claify and differentiate between QR the airline and Qatari Government officials

 

[FlyingKangaroo]

Just clarifying that the meeting will be with the Qatari government and not Qatar Airways, but otherwise, agree.

Qantas didn't put itself in the best light yesterday on many issues, but they were right that ultimately, it's the government who needs to explain its decisions, not Qantas.

 

[Lynda2475]

Qantas didn't put itself in the best light yesterday on many issues, but they were right that ultimately, it's the government who needs to explain its decisions, not Qantas.

This !

Too many QF bashers here trying to make this all QFs fault, when they were in their legal rights to lodge an objection but ultimately they have no say, it all sits with the govenrment.

But wrt the law suit QR and it subsidiaries which are all 100% owned by Qatari government are one and the same.

So whilst the Australian government may need to give Australians who elected them some insight they actually do not have to justify their decision to the Qatari government at all.

 

[FlyingKangaroo]

So whilst the Australian government may need to give Australians who elected them some insight they actually do not have to justify their decision to the Qatari government at all.

Ironic then that it appears the Qataris may get a better justification than the Australian people.

 

[Lynda2475]

Pathetic on every level.

 

[PineappleSkip]

it would appear that my initial guess that the Department possibly recommended acceptance of at least some additional capacity, and then the minister herself went rogue/off on a personal frolic regardless of departmental advice

This suggests that the Qataris won't get a great deal of joy or insight out of the promised discussion with DITRDCA and DFAT

they were in their legal rights to lodge an objection but ultimately they have no say, it all sits with the govenrment.

I heard quite a lot of RG's and VH's evidence before the committee yesterday and it was pretty obvious from their behaviour yesterday that they had had quite a lot to say to government, and didn't want it outed. They stonewalled on what they had said and were very edgy about even providing an in confidence submission, after it was pointed out to them that they could be compelled to provide it anyway.

 

[RooFlyer]

This is becoming far too embarrassing for the Australian Federal government and in particular the minister, who as it turns out received Departmental advice about this in Jan 2023 and then sat on it for 6 months while either Qantas wined and dined the government and/or the minister corresponded with the lawyers acting for the women in the ongoing court case regarding the events at Doha Airport in 2020.

The government is probably weighing the embarrassment of Minister King's performance Vs the virtue of 'standing up' to the Qataris over the Doha Airport incident.

So whilst the Australian government may need to give Australians who elected them some insight they actually do not have to justify their decision to the Qatari government at all.

I don't think the Qataris had to front the Senate enquiry, but they did. I think common diplomatic courtesy would say that a reply with reasons would be appropriate when talking about discussion on bilateral treaties, don't you? Or is simply giving the fork appropriate diplomacy?

And a little bit from the Australian On-line today re Mr Joyce's possible appearance

Alan Joyce could face the prospect of jail time if he fails to front a Senate inquiry into the blocking of extra flights from Qatar.
The former Qantas chief has been warned he will need to face the inquiry when he returns to Australia from a European vacation.

Coalition senator Bridget McKenzie warned Mr Joyce that he could face a “whole raft of processes” if he refuses to answer questions about the government’s decision to block a bid from Qatar Airways to introduce more flight into major Australian cities.

A little bit grand-standing-ish ; I haven't heard that Joyce has said he won't attend, just not via video link while he's overseas on vacation. Wonder how long he can hold off? Will the 'Chase for Skase' become the 'Chase for Joyce'?

 

[stm1sydney]

LOL a good deal of Aussies find their conduct appalling, and feel nothing but I'll will.

Fair enough for you to hold this view but this is clouding your judgment. The Govt has still not come up with a single convincing argument for why it rejected the application.

 

[Quickstatus]

So whilst the Australian government may need to give Australians who elected them some insight they actually do not have to justify their decision to the Qatari government at all.

Sure except that Qantas is neck deep in it due to their outsized influence in Canberra

The Govt has still not come up with a single convincing argument for why it rejected the application.

The govt does not have to give any reasons nor does the Minister have to follow the advice of the her public servants.
However the problem is that Qantas has made itself a pariah and any decision by the Minister against QR gives the impression she is favouring the pariah especially in light of the Chairman's lounge memberships including Albos son. In other words the impression that she did not act in the public interest. Minister King then botches it with ridiculous explanations which then just increases the spotlight and speculation about the real reason.

I believe King has been told to take leave and she will be replaced. McKenzie is just brow beating the Govt - Joyce is the proxy for Albo.

I also believe that the treatment of the women was central to King's decision and she wanted to pressure Qatar into settling the lawsuit. A quid pro quo. Extra flights in return for lawsuit settlement. But she has completely botched it helped by the public attitude toward Qantas.

 

[anat0l]

The govt does not have to give any reasons

True, but it's obviously not very satisfying and makes for a poor disposition of the government. I'm not certain this would be an issue that would break a party if there were an election, but so there.

Pub test has also not passed.

 

[Lynda2475]

the treatment of the women was central to King's decision

Obvious to all who care about what happened and a legit reason imo given no remedy from QR the employer of the staff that committed the atrocities nor their governments overloads who are ok with it.

<redacted>

 

[Danger]

This !

Too many QF bashers here trying to make this all QFs fault, when they were in their legal rights to lodge an objection but ultimately they have no say, it all sits with the govenrment ...

I wholeheartedly agree. I think I've said it somewhere on AFF but if Qantas could successfully lobby itself out of, say, all labour relation laws in Australia, then all power to it. Provided Qantas acts within the bounds of the law, it's the government of the day that ultimately makes the decision and is to be held to account.

This suggests that the Qataris won't get a great deal of joy or insight out of the promised discussion with DITRDCA and DFAT

I heard quite a lot of RG's and VH's evidence before the committee yesterday and it was pretty obvious from their behaviour yesterday that they had had quite a lot to say to government, and didn't want it outed. They stonewalled on what they had said and were very edgy about even providing an in confidence submission, after it was pointed out to them that they could be compelled to provide it anyway.

I loved Finch's attempts to get surety out of McKenzie that any information Qantas provided to the committee would be held in confidence. His link with Deloitte (or maybe PwC) was priceless. It got so far under McKenzie's skin you could barely see her eyes, her nose was pointing that far upwards.

Sure except that Qantas is neck deep in it due to their outsized influence in Canberra ...

My view is that's a credit to Qantas. What publicly-listed company wouldn't want cabinet ministers on speed dial?

If Qantas came out tomorrow and said it had lobbied aggressively for Qatar to be denied extra rights, I could hardly blame it. It's detrimental to me and it seems plenty of others, but Qantas is looking after its bottom line as one would expect.

 

[RooFlyer]

However the problem is that Qantas has made itself a pariah and any decision by the Minister against QR gives the impression she is favouring the pariah especially in light of the Chairman's lounge memberships including Albos son. In other words the impression that she did not act in the public interest.

And then there is this, from The Australian yesterday

Anthony Albanese took our advice, Qantas tells Senate committee

Qantas has revealed that the Albanese government followed its advice to stop the competition watchdog’s regular airline monitoring reports, as new airline chief executive Vanessa Hudson admitted executives did consider paying back more than $1bn in Jobkeeper.

In another example of Qantas’s influence over the government, the committee heard the airline was opposed to an extension of funding for the Australian Competition & Consumer Commission to continue its quarterly monitoring reports on the domestic airline industry.

Qantas general counsel Andrew Finch confirmed those views were relayed to the Department of Infrastructure and Transport, before the government made the decision not to maintain the monitoring reports.

Virgin Australia was also asked for its position, and informed the department they saw “ongoing utility” in the reports.

It’s understood Bonza and Rex were also in favour.

 

[DC3]

Ma and Pa flyers won’t even remember any of this in a few weeks time. Not at all like AFF.

 

[RooFlyer]

Ma and Pa flyers won’t even remember any of this in a few weeks time. Not at all like AFF.

Well... Yes. Your 'Ma and Pa flyers' are not at all like ( most ) AFF members ( in many regards). Point being?

 

[Quickstatus]

If Qantas came out tomorrow and said it had lobbied aggressively for Qatar to be denied extra rights, I could hardly blame it

It might as well as the Pub already believes that all Qantas cares about are the executives in 10 Bourke St, it's bottom line and the elite and everyone else can go to hell.