Re: Tripling of Capacity for Air Traffic

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Before you start praising the " privatization " of NAV Canada you should
read yesterday's National Post, where Terence Corcoran wrote a long article
about it and airport privatization. The article was based upon an interview
that Corcoran had with  Doug Young, the government minister who was
responsible for privatizing it and the airports. Young said that the
privatization was nothing but a sham by the government to off load a
service, maintain its monopoly status and yet still reap the same amount of
money for the government. As a monopoly it can charge whatever it wants
regardless of the state of the aviation industry. Young also claims that
quality has dropped as there is no competition to NAV Canada. It has no
shareholders and is quite literally responsible to no one, not even the
captive mass of suckers who have no choice but to pay what they want.

The other component was airport privatization where the federal government
receives about $200 million a year in airport rent, yet they were supposed
to have sold the airports. Another off-loading of services but the
government stills wants to maintain the same revenue stream. This is
compounded by local governments who are now turning airports into Taj
Mahals with ever increasing " airport improvement fees" again regardless of
the state of the industry.



At 04:29 PM 1/30/2004 -0800, you wrote:
>Canada's ATC system has been "privatized", in that their operations are
>managed by a private corporation.
>
>ATC services were not sub-contracted out to the lowest bidder. Rather
>when NavCanada was 'created', they lost the 'benefit' of being able to
>run deficits at the tax-payer expense, but conversely no longer had to
>manage it's staff under federal government labour rules. This permitted
>better and more appropriate wages and benefits, appropriate to the
>nature of the job.
>
>If anything, the safety and training standards were likely
>strengthened, improved and simplified to make it easier to monitor.
>
>(Personal opinion here) Governments are quite good at enacting
>legislation desired by the public, and usually quite good for
>monitoring products and services shrouded by such legislation. But they
>traditionally do quite poorly in providing those products and services.
>
>In Canada NavCanada is privatized and even the issuing of passports is
>privatized. In British Columbia, speeding tickets and drivers licenses
>are issued by a 'private' company.
>
>But they are all under government jurisdiction, and baring a good
>argument, do a reasonable job.
>
>Matthew
>
>http://www.redmac.ca - Getting Canadian's their Macintosh accessories
>http://www.justaddanoccasion.com - Great gift ideas, featuring smoked
>salmon
>
>On Jan 30, 2004, at 3:07 PM, damiross2@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
>
> > ATC can be contracted out, with no compromise to public safety, at a
> > net reduction in costs to the taxpaying public.  It can still be under
> > governmental control, just not using government (i.e. civil service)
> > personnel.
> >
> > David R
> >> ATC is something that is inherently governmental, just from the sheer
> >> fact that
> >> it crosses state lines and deals with safety.  Privatized ATC is an
> >> invite for
> >> disaster

[Index of Archives]         [NTSB]     [NASA KSC]     [Yosemite]     [Steve's Art]     [Deep Creek Hot Springs]     [NTSB]     [STB]     [Share Photos]     [Yosemite Campsites]