The evidence is clear: Canberra needs a second airport. Yet the ACT Government has decided against it due to opposition from within the ACT Government public service.
Based on extensive Freedom of Information data it is apparent that the opposition can only have two causes. Either a few key ACT Government officers are stunningly incompetent, or corrupt.
It is not suggested that this behaviour is widespread, but that three or four key people managed to develop a culture antagonistic to the proposal for a second airfield within the relevant sections of the ACT Government public service. This culture is based primarily on advice that was completely at odds with the facts at their disposal.
We will be releasing more FOI documents on this website including evidence of conflicts of interest.
October 2014
Author and Contact
This website was authored by David Edmunds based on FOI material gathered by David Edmunds and Chris Price. Both are long-term Canberra residents and pilots. Chris Price wrote the original proposal for an airfield at Williamsdale south of Canberra, in 2004. David Edmunds, a teacher, introduced aviation studies to the ACT education system in 1992 and taught the course for the next 15 years.
Contact: dedmunds@netspace.net.au
Chapter 1: The Vision
First world countries with scheduled jet transport universally have a second airfield. Canberra is the exception, but we do not have to be.
Chapter 2: The Background
A study in the mid 1950's recognised the need for a second airfield in Canberra. It took until 2011 for a site to be identified, the relevant studies to be completed, and the ACT Government to decide why there would be no second airfield. This is a story of incompetence and corruption in parts of the ACT Government public service, and political acquisence to their agenda.
Chapter 3: Officials Move to Kill a Second Airfield
Two key public servants provide crucial advice, completely at odds with the evidence in front of them.
Chapter 4: Stunning Incompetence or Worse?
FOI documents referenced here show the disparity between what a few ACT Government officers were telling their ministers, and the information they had in documents on file.
Chapter 5: The ACT Government Misled
For some years from 2005 the question of the airfield was raised a number of times and the response to ministers was characterised by inaccurate information and a lack of basic research.
Chapter 6: The Recommendation
In 2011 the ACT Government received a positive economic feasibility report, so the ACT Government officers responsible recommended against the airfield, again.
Chapter 7: Minister Andrew Barr's Decision
Minister Barr accepts the recommendation of his public servants, despite the contradictions in his briefing document, and then refuses to talk to anyone.
Chapter 8: The ACT Planning and Land Authority (ACTPLA)
How come the Government organisation central to decisions such as this has managed to provide substantial negative advice, but does not retain a single relevant document? It appears that ACTPLA documents have either been lost, disappeared or been destroyed. Is this legal?
Chapter 9: The Chief Minister Drops the Bundle
The Chief Minister fails to either consult or to address clear and obvious issues of process or corruption, despite clear indications of a problem.
Chapter 10: The Ombudsman
In which the ACT Ombudsman find a problem and wimps out.
Conclusion
The only possible explanation is that there were key people with particular interests in seeing that the airfield project did not progress. These interests were undeclared and constitute corrupt practice.