turboplanner

"......spledding quickry to Scomo." 

But the political reporter for the West Australian, well versed in picking up unintelligent speech, was siiting at the table next to them, pretending to read the West Australian.

He later wrote the story and syndicated it to the Washington Post which ran it: "According to the influential aviation site "WreckFline" the little Chinese Dictator Jack XI, aged 61, previously a cotton farmer from Xiaoxin, China thinks we don't understand him when he speaks, and has asked for a meeting with President Joe Biden."

Such is the way of Chinese Whispers in ............................

16 hours ago, aro said:

Are you a qualified lawyer, or one of your backyard lawyers?

Unqualified backyard.

Here's an example of some of the separation of powers during the Covid pandemic in Victoria: https://www.theage.com.au/national/victoria/court-finds-curfew-was-legal-dismisses-case-against-andrews-government-20201102-p56aon.html

11 hours ago, Markdun said:

Well Turbo I don’t know where you have been the last few decades.  COAG has been around since at least the late 1980s.  Partly this was to make funding arrangements from the Commonwealth to the States more transparent, but also under COAG there were (are) various ministerial councils to better co-ordinate State laws across the country.

(a) COAG's too slow

(b) Agree, but I wonder why we have finished up with the National Heavy Vehicle Regulator which is buiding Insepection Stations in places like country South Australia, and holding up Victorian Operators for a week before people in Queensland can work out if its safe to provide a permit for an overdimensional load to travel from Traralgon to Leongatha.

11 hours ago, Markdun said:

 Morrison’s ‘national cabinet’ trashed all this.  

This is an informal group of people with no powers as a body to trash anything; just gives the state and territory leaders a common meeting to take back to their cabinets.

11 hours ago, Markdun said:

 

And you seem to be confused about how laws are made.  National Cabinet is nothing more than a secret discussion group, with ScuMo making an announcement after.    

 

For laws to be made each State parliament still has to enact them, or a State Governor still has to make the regulations.

I'm confused? That's exactly what I've been saying with the exception of the sarcastic description.

".......New Horrand island."

"Next we appry plessure to cave drewwers of New Sou Wares; why or tis New, it ORRD!", and with that Xi stormed off to..................

31 minutes ago, nick_reese said:

Yes, the submission was just in regards to the budget. There was not really any

We submitted the document on June 8 - council meeting was on the 15th of June.

I think it might have been Item 12.3 Final Adoption of 2021/2022 Operational Plan or an earlier Item Reports to the General Manager, but I couldn't get the links to work to see what was inside.

In any case the urgent one and the Monster is the LRAP where the Public Exhibition period started May 17 and ended June 15. 

Even though it has ended I recommended to Munder that someone contact the Council (Planning Manager) and advise that you want to make a submission.

The LRAP is a Planning Document which will be going to the State Government for approval, and you might get the OK to submit.

The Submission must be on Planning Grounds to carry any weight, regardless of what the emotions might be because the emotions count for zero in the decision making.

I recommended to Muger having a Planning Consultant prepare the submission because he/she will understand the meaning of words and phrases that can be critical for you to retain or kick out.

Luckily you have five Planning Consultants in Lismore, one specialising in major project development applications and Master planning, so I'll message those to Munger.

39 minutes ago, Markdun said:

And also why we should be cautious of Morrison’s rebadged ‘Council of Australian Governments’ in the form of ‘National Cabinet’ which purports to bind the States/Premiers and could undermine the Premiers and State Government’s sovereignty and accountability to the people of the States through their respective State parliaments.  It’s the State parliaments that are the bosses of the States, not the Prime Minister.

I haven't seen any sign of a Council of Australian Governments, just a description of a National Cabinet and no suggestion whatsoever of any binding or undermining of State sovereignty. the States are Sovereign States each with their own Governor so about the only way Scomo could do it, would be to invade them all with the Commonwealth Defence Forces, and I hesitated to write that just in case there are 10,000 soacial media posts belting him becaose he hasn't invaded Danistan etc. 

I wouldn't like to see us lose that National Cabinet because it puts all the leaders in the same place at the same time and they can beat each other and the Commonwelath up in open discussion and come out with a unified stance instantly.

I've spent 40 years trying to get common transport regulations so we can carry a semi trailer load from Cairns to Perth without having to reduce the payload by 20% or having the truck deregistered on the way through. We achieved commonality in 1975, but only for a few months. Finally, about ten years ago it was decided to have a lead State process the regulations, debate them and pass them through its two Houses, then all other States and Territories would mirror those regulations. I thought it would take aout five or six people, because there weren't all that many irregularities, but first they Mirrored Queensland Transport in staff numbers nd now they are out to around 800 people, and we have less commonality than we had before 1975. I'd prefer a National Cabinet discussing about four regulations a year.

39 minutes ago, Markdun said:

 

Irrespective of the various ‘emergency acts’, in a real emergency courts are prepared to find that common law over-rides legislation.  Hence, a motorist who refused to comply with a police officer’s direction to go down a one-way street the wrong way to not get in the way of firefighters fighting a fire was found guilty despite the fact the police officer’s direction was for the motorist to commit an offence.  So I’m not sure whether the emergency acts do or don’t give more unaccountable power to the executive. 

From what I read the other night there are State of Emergency Acts, and then there are Acts to cover urgently needed actions which have been going through the Parliaments with bipartisan support, some including the words Covid, so I suspect actions carried out under them would be legal.

21 minutes ago, RFguy said:

I'd like to see 800 kg

 

enough so that the plane is not built too light,

 

and  can accomodate an airframe parachute 

 

and a small lycoming.

You can do that in VH Experimental

1 hour ago, kasper said:

Skippy and One track,

 

One thing most general population do not appreciate (and I lump nearly all politicians in this group) is that you can fill you boots under Australian law.

Everything is LEGAL unless made illegal by a recognized law - be that a statute from a parliament or a common law recognized/created by courts.

 

In line with that no discrimination is illegal unless made so by law and thoise laws generally only apply to the provision of goods and services and cover specific grounds. 

People may find discrimination on legal grounds unpleasant, immoral or distasteful but it does not make it illegal.

 

So

• unless there is a law there is no requirement to get a vaccine
• unless there is a service provision AND it is within the grounds for illegal discrimination there is no illegality in a service provider requiring a vaccine or proof thereof the provide a good or service to a person
• unless there is a law there is no requirement to wear a mask or isolate 

 

On the first two I am not aware that there is a law. 

On the third I am aware that there are public health directives and I am personally happy to abide by them without proof of the legal basis on which they are based.

 

Not all people are like me and will accept a restriction without the letter of the law - if it looks about right, is coming from a person in a recognized position of power and makes sense to me I am likely to do it, at least initially, because that is about right for a society.

 

Locally where I live there is a retail food business where ALL the staff refused to wear masks in work and ALL claimed medical exemption from mask wearing and ALL claimed privacy of medical records to not have to disclose to police on multiple occasions.  Technically legal but a bit fishy ... especially as they were berating customers who came in wearing masks during the week the police kept coming back and asking them to wear masks ... and the kicker is that one customer they berated was an off duty police officer ... 

The courts can work out the legitimacy of the fines when they return to court later this month but I suppose technically its within their rights.

 

Australia is also full of backyard lawyers.

A few weeks ago we were having a discussion about the various Acts we are operating under with our States of Emergency, and I mentioned there were the basic Acts, State of Emergency Acts, and started to check them out, but decided to forget about after I found about four interlocking Acts, temporary sunsetting Regulations, directives etc in one State let alone the other States and Territories, and that's before I got to the appointments of responsible people, shared responsibilities etc.  What we may have relied on and worked to since 1958, can be radically changed with the declaration of a State of Emergency and again with a State of Disaster.

12 minutes ago, nick_reese said:

The proposal at the time was just to address the proposed changes in airport fees, which was the item on the agenda at the council meeting. 

Can you remember what date; I'll see if I can find it.

Sometimes a Council will throw up a red herring, sometimes they just sieze an opportunity when people are distracted.

.........Quokka eggs and Tasmanian Devil steaks when they depart.

This rule was vehemently opposed by the South West Australian Egg Corporation and the Tasmanian Beef Industry who stood to lose billions in revenue, just because....

14 minutes ago, skippydiesel said:

The Gov(s) need to allow service providers, of all sorts, to refuse entry/service to those who are not vaccinated and/or refuse to wear a mask.

 

As I understand the law at the moment, someone offering a public service (shop/trades person/etc)can not refuse entry/service ,as this is viewed as discriminatory behaviour. While I agree with the principal, there are times, this is one of them, when service providers should not be expected to put themselves/family/friends/acquaintances in danger because some 1/2 wit doesn't want to wear a mask/be vaccinated.

 

On the question of forced vaccination - I am against forcing someone to do the right thing for themselves/family/friends/acquaintances.

 

I am all for protecting myself, my family & friends, society in general. from the anti vaxxers. In my mind this would come about by the Gov(s) legislating to force employers (perhaps an amendment/addition to the OH&S legislation) to have, as a condition of continued employment, all staff dealing face to face with the public vaccinated. No jab, no position that requires interacting with the public - their choice is being respected  but it, like many decisions in life has consequences. (Add in the above  - service providers empowered to refuse service)

I would extend this to travel /in/out of Australia.

 

I heard some brain dead polly talking about this today - completely against any form of negative/withdrawal of privileges ,consistence for anti vaxxers. He felt that the whole idea was a breach of individual rights/determination. This is despite a host of legislation/precedence where the population is required, by law, to do/not do certain things that are clearly a breach of an adults right to self determination.

Half the problem with this is that people can't comprehend a disconnection between the Government and the people making the health decisions, so we see these democratic rights claims from thousands of people, yet if you are admitted to hospital and someone orders you to put your arms out and don't be a baby, you do it, or tells you not to go in that room, you don't do it, yet somehow you become one of about 12 million new Australian Health Professionals with Covid.

This is one of the benefits of Lockdown/Contact Tracing with electronic contact training/electronc checkin.

There will be more new cases, but most likely tucked away in isolation, so we can open earlier thanks to the alogorithms.

......Epaulette, who always mamages to muscle in, and who is proposing ...........................

55 minutes ago, nick_reese said:

Incorrect! We formed the Lismore Airport Users Group, and made the following submission, which was completely ignored by the council.

 

Lismore Airport Users Group Meeting 16 May 2021

Spectrum Aviation Hangar, Lismore Airport

 

That looks like a normal letter discussing airport charges to me, which may be why it was ignored.

The Draft Lismore Regional City Action Plan (RCAP) is a Planning Document which proposes to change the Airport forever into something completely different including industry etc. and would have required a Submission of maybe 20 to 40 pages of Aviation-related Planning information to advise against many of the proposed changes, or find solutions where the Airport could still work effectively (including a new Fly Friendly document).

10 minutes ago, Markdun said:

Exactly Glen.  But it’s worse than that.  My 25yo son was up snow skiing a few weeks ago...and working up there.  A group of young 20 something women came in to the shop and refused to put on face masks because, ‘we’re vaccinated, we don’t need to’, obviously not realising that vaccination only reduces transmission and reduces susceptibility.  My fear is exactly that....the vaccine will encourage risky behaviour and the outcome will be worse, particularly so given the R0 of the Delta strain..  Linking vaccination rates to ‘freedoms’ encourages such behaviour.

A lot of people wouldn't be aware that having the vaccine protects them, but not the people they mix with who can die because of their carelessness.

17 minutes ago, Arron25 said:

We are continuously hammered with the risk of AV , but where are the similar statistics for the others?( i often wonder "follow the money" or is it media 'bu***it burnout) I did hear Phizer has an induced heart disease problem. While all the time the media, both social and main stream, ignore that so many 'normal' activities have risks in the multiples more dangerous. Is it because these other risks are 'grandfathered' and untouchable by the less reputable  lawyer brigade

No just that there is a political below the line campaign to disrupt vaccine take up, which is a cynical and despicable thing to do, but people will stoop to do it for profit. The media gets sucked in by writing new footage or showing distraught people toget a spin on the central Covid-19 story which is relatively boring, but the side effects of drugs are printed out for you when you get a prescription, and sometimes there's almost a book of side effects in the pill carton. Not all of these side effects will kill you of course, but the starting point is Australia's TGA for our levels of medical substance safety. You also have similar decisions to make when you go in for an operation and are told the risks, particularly with anaesthetics.

Victoria opens a production line drive through vaccination centre in Melton this morning which takes 12 cars at a time, and includes the medical advice and consent process for AZ.

.....the real intent of the flag. This will be done by replacing the star with a ...................

21 minutes ago, Markdun said:

Glen, I’m the same. 
The calculation of the risk of AZ...is the low one or two in a million of AZ.  But the risk of death from Covid is the risk of catching Covid times the risk of dying once you have it (one in five if you’re over 80, probably less than 1% for someone less than 60...it’s a log relationship to age, or an average of say 2.5%).  This suggests that it would only be wise to vaccinate with AZ if your risk of catching Covid is greater than 8 in 100,000.  And to some extent this risk depends on one’s circumstance (do you work in a high risk job say at a hospital, school, Bunnings, do you live in higher density dwellings, in a city etc) and ones behaviour (as we see in the UK where older people are hiding themselves away and young people are partying).  

So the vaccine hesitancy, particularly for people under 70 who are not working, not keen to socialise, can hide out on their yacht or bush block, is (or was) rational. It wasn’t  (isn’t?) axiomatic that the ship would sink.  But that has changed because of our ‘captains’ determination to put those life jackets to use by secretly opening the sea cocks and leaving the hatches in the water tight bulkheads open, pretending that if everyone wears a life jacket it’s back to normal, and if someone isn’t wearing one it’s their own fault.

The guys at Chaser also make an analogy of someone running a nuclear power plant leaking radiation with radiation suits being analogous to vaccines.

The problem with that theory, is that you certainly can separate, but you can't see covid and you can't control the morons who leave their masks below their noses and lean over you etc. or leave aerosol on the goods you might pick up in the supermarket, or with the Delta strain, which might blow your way in a corridor.

48 minutes ago, nick_reese said:

one of the glaring gaps in the apparent planning process is the lack of consulation with airport users

Nick, the airport users had their chance for consultation between May 17 and June 15 this year, and it's beginning to look like none of the airport users engaged or made submissions. See the posts above with Munger. 

There's still a possibity of getting a submission in, but a lot of work to do.

Declaring these locations colonies of Guinea-Bissau using the flag borrowed from the Torries Strait Islanders which features the rear end of a bull, but with more brown and green, and ......

7 hours ago, Munger said:

https://www.planningportal.nsw.gov.au/lismoreRCAP

 

Is that the document you are looking at?

That's one of them. My previous post was to show the links on how to get the information.

You have a lot of work to do starting with identifying whether anyone else with a business has made any submission or intends to. Someone needs to present about 20 to 40 pages of submission assessing the Planning impacts from these proposals, the main one being it is not going to be recognisable as a working airport if all these plans get up.

Also any Airport precedents in NCAT are important in stopping proposals inappropritea to aviation.

All of this is where the Planning Consultant becomes invaluable.

Once everyone at the airport is on the same page and deciding to protect their asset, what you could do is phone the Planning Manager, see if you could get a meeting with him her to outline your planning concerns (vs emotional concerns)

I would make a submission asap, even an abbreviated one saying "theses are aour key concerns" because in making a submission, you may then be entitled to take issues to NCAT whereas at the moment you are not unless someone else has made a submission in which case you can put in a Request to be Heard.

.

8/8/21

Lismore Airport Changes

Congratulations, You were headed for the bullseye I think; 

On the NSW Department of Planning, Industry and Environment website, follow the arrow heads to get to the Airport plans.

In Planning, the State Government develops a vision and plan for the State; from that comes a vision and plan for each region; from that comes a vision and plan for each local government area which is usually developed by the Council using guidelines sent to them by the State Government.

It's usually the planning officers doing this development work, and they eventually put it before Councillors who vote on it, maybe change a few things then it goes  back to the Minister for planning.

This is the trail of links:

Plans for your Area > Regional Plans > North Coast > North Coast Region > Lismore Regional City Action plans >

“The Draft Lismore Regional City Action P7 Plan was on Public Exhibition from 17 May 21 until 15 June 21”

“All feedback is being closely considered in the drafting of the final RCAP that will be released later in the year.”  >

[Either you guys missed that or maybe the meeting you had was Community Consultation. I would still make a submission, quickly, but you need to get a Planning Consultant to do it, because they know all the signals, timings, what counts and what should be said to try to preserve what you have.]

RCAPS > draft Lismore RCAP > View the Exhibition documents. > Draft Regional City Action Plan 2036  >

Page 2

Item 2  Airport Industrial Estate [that doesn’t sound very good at all]  >

Fig.11 Urban renewal and release.

Item 2  Airport

Page 11

Lismore Regional Integrated Transport Network

“Support employment and industry growth of the airport precinct through an Airport Freight and Logistics Masterplan

Page 20

5.4       Investigate the potential for food processing [factories], packaging & distribution 1

[factories & trucks] in proximity to Lismore Regional Airport.

5.5       Investigate the potential of the airport as a training and export facility [non-aviation details follow]

            $1.8 million upgrade of Lismore Regional Airport + $4.4 million ILS, will attract more GA + ag flights + a new runway etc.

Page 21

Collaborative Opportunity 5

Guide future growth of the Lismore Airport facility precinct via an Airport & Logistics

Masterplan developed by Lismore City Council. Timing: long

2 hours ago, Munger said:

Can you enlighten me what the 'planning Scheme' refers to with reference to the options below? Is it the LEP?

I think you might have hit the bullseye there. Big changes coming to Lismore. I'll draft up a couple of pages on what I found;  Lismore Regional Airport mentioned about 14 times.

10 minutes ago, onetrack said:

There was a report a few days ago in the West Australian newspaper that brought forth a future projections study on the virus situation, that was done for the W.A. Govt.

 

The essence of the study, carried out by numerous health experts and others with substantial qualifications, was that, even with 80% of the population vaccinated, we are still looking at a possible 1300 deaths annually, and still looking at regular lockdowns (as outbreaks of new variants of the virus appear).

It's the variants that have all the experts worried - sooner or later, a variant is bound to appear that is substantially more transmissible than any current variety, and which will be able to find its way past many vaccinated peoples immune systems. This thing really is the virus from hell.

The 80% is nonsense and as you say would commit us to a steady level of deaths.

It's pushed heavily by business people who don't care.

Right back in the Wuhan days, Covid-19 was recognised as a virus which can mutate (I can't remember whether that came from the Geelong laboratories or the WHO), and it has mutated.

The Countries who opted for vaccination have no option but to develop new vaccines as new strains occur.

We have an advantage with contract tracing and containment rings.

It would be good if someone was able to invent a vaccine which would kill the virus off, and that's still a possibility.

This came out about an hour ago from the Victorian Premier for Melbourne; NSW country hold up is probably because of the Sydney outbreak.