Qatar denied extra capacity into Australia

[RooFlyer]

I’m waiting for Joel Aston to get stuck into that last interview.

I notice Ms King put a transcript of a previous Cairns radio interview on her web site

CATHERINE KING – TRANSCRIPT – RADIO INTERVIEW – 4CA CAIRNS – WEDNESDAY, 16 MARCH 2022 – Catherine King

www.catherineking.com.au

I’ll keep checking back for a transcript of this last one, to check the AFR quotes.

 

[drron]

The airline seats number this year compared to 2019 only tells half the story. Demand is obviously much higher than 2019 because of population growth augmented by the fact very few people were able to travel for 2.5 years. The only International terminal visit we had in that time was to fly to Norfolk Island.

Some screen shots.




So for both international short term arrivals and resident short term returns the figures show a steady increase in numbers.
And then the monthly short term arrivals by month.


And with Chinese group touring starting up in the last months those figures will surely increase.
As will Employment in the Tourism industry. From the ABS again.


And Qantas employed 29,000 in 2019 and now 23,500. Though AJ has said they will add 8500 more jobs in the next 10 years.

 

[Chicken]

Some of you have found too many graphs.

May I encourage to do what I have done, which is e-mailing some of these stuffs to the minister?

 

[stm1sydney]

they don't want to divulge the real reason.

Quid pro quo for CL membership for pollies and their children, <redacted> and other political favours. To the detriment of the Australian travelling public and Australian tourism jobs/industries.

 

[dajop]

If it is indeed QF protectionism at work (and I still think it's probably something else at play in the Qatar/AU relationship), there are other groups who tend to be very focussed on maintaining jobs in specific sectors, that do have a much bigger influence over the government than Qantas itself ever will.

 

[drron]

From the start I thought this might be one of the reasons.

Global LNG export capacity by country 2022 | Statista

Australia has the greatest LNG export capacity of any country worldwide.

www.statista.com

So Australia has the largest capacity to export Natural gas with Qatar number 2. But Qatar plans to increase it's natural gas ouput by 64% by 2027. that can't be beneficial for Australia.

Qatar expects record volume of LNG offtake signings this year

Qatar this year will sign record volumes of long-term liquefied natural gas (LNG) offtake contracts, the country's energy minister said on Tuesday at a conference in Vancouver.

www.reuters.com

Now note the date of that announcement by Qatar - 23/7.
On 18/7 the Australian government announced their rejection of QR's application to increase flights.

12ft |

12ft.io

 

[RooFlyer]

From the start I thought this might be one of the reasons.

in that case, how do Australian exporters to Qatar go if the Qataris decide to retaliate in-kind?

and I still think it's probably something else at play in the Qatar/AU relationship),

Just apply Occam‘s Razor and tell me the answer you get.

 

[Mattg]

I think it just says that people go looking for any reason to say "Qantas bad" when the thing they are using as justification for such a claim often has little or nothing to do with QF, or they attack Qantas for something while other airlines do the exact same thing and everyone ignores it.

I can find Australian open skies agreements with the following:
Austria
China
Cyprus
Japan (except Haneda)
New Zealand
Singapore
Switzerland
Taiwan
United Kingdom
United States

Everyone else is limited in some way. There are more nations with no traffic rights to Australia (except via codeshare through a 3rd nation) then there are nations with open skies.
A lot of the EU members are limited to 7 flights (or less)/week.

Why should we give Qatar open skies and not Canada, Germany or Hong Kong?

That small list of countries accounts for more than half of passenger traffic to/from Australia.

In any case, I don't think anyone is suggesting that all countries should have open skies agreements with Australia. And many of the countries with no traffic rights to Australia are not even in range of a direct flight and/or have no airlines that are interested in operating flights here.

 

[justinbrett]

In any case, I don't think anyone is suggesting that all countries should have open skies agreements with Australia. And many of the countries with no traffic rights to Australia are not even in range of a direct flight and/or have no airlines that are interested in operating flights here.

The answer you gave at the end of the interview - whilst I'm sure you didn't intend it as such - gave the impression (to a casual listener with no background knowledge) that Qatar is being singled out with these caps.

"The reason Qatar Airways is restricted is because of the Air Services Agreement between Australia and Qatar, other international airlines are subject to different agreements and many of them have open skies agreements where they can launch as many flights as they like, so it really is specifically Qatar that's being hamstrung."

That is the only reason we bring up the facts of who has open skies agreements - is it's the exception not the rule for these to be open skies agreements (and usually only when there's two way traffic).

 

[Pushka]

The answer you gave at the end of the interview - whilst I'm sure you didn't intend it as such - gave the impression (to a casual listener with no background knowledge) that Qatar is being singled out with these caps.

"The reason Qatar Airways is restricted is because of the Air Services Agreement between Australia and Qatar, other international airlines are subject to different agreements and many of them have open skies agreements where they can launch as many flights as they like, so it really is specifically Qatar that's being hamstrung."

That is the only reason we bring up the facts of who has open skies agreements - is it's the exception not the rule for these to be open skies agreements (and usually only when there's two way traffic).

Because currently its Qatar whose application was refused?

 

[RooFlyer]

I wish I could find a transcription of the interview Minister King have. I mean that’s relevant to the QR decision. Really revealing interview.

Because currently its Qatar whose application was refused?

It’s the ONLY decision recently where additional capacity has been refused. All the stuff about other agreements, open skies for others etc etc is just a ‘look over there’ distraction. Topic is

Qatar denied extra capacity into Australia

 

[dajop]

Because currently its Qatar whose application was refused?

Qatar (the airline) didn't apply. Qatar (the government) requested amendment of the agreement to grant additional capacity between the two countries, and this request was not agreed to. A subtle but important distinction. This is not an airline asking for additional slots, this is a government request to amend an agreement, and thus is subject to everything else that is going on between the two governments.

It's like us asking China to remove tarriffs on wine we export to China. One scenario is that China says go away - we have a domestic wine industry to protect. Or another scenario is they say " Yes we'll agree to it, but only if you do Y". The third, and less likely scenario is "Yes, no problems, whatever you ask for".

 

[RooFlyer]

Qatar (the airline) didn't apply. Qatar (the government) requested amendment of the agreement to grant additional capacity between the two countries, and this request was not agreed to. A subtle but important distinction.

Sorry, since Qatar Airways is a 100% state organisation its really no distinction at all. One part of the Qatari state apparatus goes into bat for h the benefit of another branch. If we keep just using just Qatar or Qatari, then little meaning is lost in these discussions.

It's like us asking China to remove tarriffs on wine we export to China. One scenario is that China says go away - we have a domestic wine industry to protect. Or another scenario is they say " Yes we'll agree to it, but only if you do Y". The third, and less likely scenario is "Yes, no problems, whatever you ask for".

Sorry again can’t accept that analogy. The refusal to allow Qatar Airways additional access would be analogous only if Qantas was seeking additional access to Qatar, and was refused.

Qantas could fly dozens of flights to Qatar if it wanted to. It chooses not to. That isn’t a reason why Qatar shouldn’t be allowed to fly additional planes into the major cities here to cater for the demands of Australians.

 

[justinbrett]

It’s the ONLY decision recently where additional capacity has been refused. All the stuff about other agreements, open skies for others etc etc is just a ‘look over there’ distraction. Topic is

Qatar denied extra capacity into Australia

I was referring to Matt's interview who DID reference those other open skies agreements.

Holding countries to their caps is not a new concept. Fiji holds us to ours.

 

[dajop]

Sorry again can’t accept that analogy. The refusal to allow Qatar Airways additional access would be analogous only if Qantas was seeking additional access to Qatar, and was refused.

Throws my hands up in the air. Governments have other things to negotiate on rather than just aviation ... it's all interwoven, they just don't negotiate reciprocally on one element at a time. Qatar wants better access for QR. Australia wants better access for live kangaroo exports to Qatar, but Qatar says no sorry we don't like eating kangaroo meat, so Australia says sorry, QR can stick to their current 28 services (OK I'm being deliberately ridiculous to illustrate the point).

 

[justinbrett]

It's like us asking China to remove tarriffs on wine we export to China. One scenario is that China says go away - we have a domestic wine industry to protect. Or another scenario is they say " Yes we'll agree to it, but only if you do Y". The third, and less likely scenario is "Yes, no problems, whatever you ask for".

It's a very apt analogy (even if some don't understand it) because we all know the wine tariffs had nothing to do with wine!

 

[RooFlyer]

Throws my hands up in the air. Governments have other things to negotiate on rather than just aviation ... it's all interwoven, they just don't negotiate reciprocally on one element at a time.

Sure - we've heard this before. Wheels within wheels within wheels, unseen hands at work, global issues too big for us mere mortals to comprehend, yada yada. On the other hand, as I alluded to above - if we don't know, then Occam's Razor says we shouldn't erect complex and convoluted arguments for something, when there is a more straightforward, and not unlikely, possible explanation. For instance:

* a 'get square' for the incident at DOH where women were assaulted, as IIRC the Minister wrote to some of those involved.

* protection of Qantas' commercial interests - with their 'big expensive plane order' - also as the Minister spoke about.

Isn't that straightforward enough, without resorting to the interests of the Emiratis, some defence deal, protection of the environment and the rest of the 'unseen' stuff that have been put up by various folk?

 

[Himeno]

I was referring to Matt's interview who DID reference those other open skies agreements.

Holding countries to their caps is not a new concept. Fiji holds us to ours.

Yes, and the Australian side of the Fiji ASA has 1 seat/week remaining to allocate. Perhaps Australia should demand more seats from Fiji? Would people scream about it should Australia ask and Fiji said no?

 

[RooFlyer]

Would people scream about it should Australia ask and Fiji said no?

Depends if the demand is there, I guess?

 

[Chicken]

It's a very apt analogy (even if some don't understand it) because we all know the wine tariffs had nothing to do with wine!

I guess this is the observation, there maybe something else going on here, except we all know the reason on why isn't Australian wine going into China, so the government doesn't need to say anything; but we don't know why isn't the government allowing Qatar to fly here, and the government haven't asked a spin doctor on how to spin this, so they just dribble rubbish which now makes them look like gear knobs.

Or maybe this government is just another gear knob.