|
Post by thomarse on Jul 25, 2014 9:40:45 GMT 12
I now hear that it was not only GB but a couple of cronies he had in tow? That he knocked on the door and asked to be let through?
Take the Brownlee aspect out of this and make it any Joe Citizen. The requirement? Prosecution - no ifs, buts, maybes...... Then with a conviction for such an offence, Joe's chances of ever getting into the US? Ha ha!
|
|
|
Post by Bruce on Jul 25, 2014 12:14:45 GMT 12
Big Gerry has resigned his civil aviation portfolio. Going by how little attention he has given it in the past, I don't think he'll even notice...
|
|
|
Post by kiwithrottlejockey on Jul 25, 2014 12:25:17 GMT 12
from The New Zealand Herald....Offer to quit should have been takenBrownlee broke rules of his own portfolio with airport breach and must face music.By JOHN ARMSTRONG | 7:12AM - Friday, July 25, 2014THE Prime Minister should have accepted Gerry Brownlee's offer to resign his Transport portfolio for breaching airport security regulations.
The Transport portfolio includes responsibility for civil aviation. If the minister responsible for the rules covering airport security cannot be bothered abiding by those rules, why should anyone else feel they have to.
His being a minister also put airport security staff in a compromising position — and that is also unacceptable. As a minimum. John Key should have relieved Brownlee of the portfolio on a temporary basis until the Civil Aviation Authority's investigation has ascertained exactly what happened — something which should take only a day or so at most. To some extent, however, Brownlee has — to his credit — pre-empted that investigation by admitting he was in the wrong and the one who is to blame.
This is no minor matter. Avoiding security screening is a serious offence which carries a fine of up to $3000 and up to two months in prison.
Like anyone else, Brownlee should not receive any special treatment and should face the potential legal consequences of his actions.
Cabinet ministers, however, also have to set an example. Otherwise the rule of law is rendered meaningless.
As was the case with the drink-drive charges faced by Labour's Ruth Dyson when she was a minister, Brownlee's resignation should have been cut and and dried.
Dyson lost her Cabinet post but was later reinstated.
Brownlee's offer applied only to his transport role.
But then his remaining in Cabinet was never in question.
Some will draw parallels with Murray McCully's handling of the recent Malaysian diplomatic immunity case. However, there is a vast difference between individual ministerial responsibility for the actions of a Government department and a minister's own (mis)behaviour.• John Armstrong is the NZ Herald's chief political commentator.www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11298716
|
|
|
Post by kiwithrottlejockey on Jul 25, 2014 12:29:57 GMT 12
BTW....Gerry Brownlie didn't willingly admit his security breach after it happened.
He only went public with his apology and offer to resign when he became aware that other passengers on that flight had notified TVNZ News about it and that TVNZ News were about to go public. And that was a few hours after the security breach occurred.
In other words, he was hoping nobody would out him over it, so was keeping quiet until he found out it was about to become broadcast in the news media, when he rushed into damage control.
I guess we can hardly complain about it if other people try to copy what Gerry Brownlie did. Aviation security is a serious matter.
|
|
|
Post by macnz on Jul 25, 2014 13:22:54 GMT 12
Thxs kiwithrottlejockey for keeping this thread updated. Good to see the CAA following through irrespective of the stature of the person. GB...and entourage? Even worse breach. Glad NZ public members spoke up. Armstrong article spot on - nobody should be above the law. Penalty (if prosecuted) appropriate but agree what will be more painful for him is having his name forever flagged on aviation watch lists ..that repercussion probably worse. Aviation security is a serious matter - too right
|
|
|
Post by The Red Baron on Jul 25, 2014 13:32:09 GMT 12
Its big and brave of CAA to be retrospectively investigating this,but doesn't it show how slack and meaningless airport security is. Any terrorist masqueraduing as an over weight politican can by pass it easily it seems. How many heads will roll at Aviation Security?,they will no doubt make an example of the lady who cleans the toilets and fire her.
|
|
|
Post by macnz on Jul 25, 2014 13:52:56 GMT 12
Probably spend thousands redesigning the 'Stop'' sign on the door. Give GB credit for saying it was a thoughtless act, how many ministers have you ever heard admit to being thoughtless?
|
|
|
Post by suthg on Jul 25, 2014 14:44:33 GMT 12
I am pretty sure he thought about what he was doing when there was a quick shortcut, to bypass the hold-up ahead, and that he could "muscle" his way through, thinking of his authority would help him get through. He also boarded the plane without being logged onto the manifest, no boarding pass was presented. Not even sure if he had one!!
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on Jul 25, 2014 15:02:41 GMT 12
Has anyone disciplined the security official who opened the door and let him through??
|
|
|
Post by kiwithrottlejockey on Jul 25, 2014 15:36:56 GMT 12
I see that even that mob at WhaleOil have turned against Gerry Brownlie now, and that really says something.
|
|
|
Post by errolmartyn on Jul 25, 2014 15:39:29 GMT 12
I see that even that mob at WhaleOil have turned against Gerry Brownlie now, and that really says something. Something different for them to spume and blubber about for a change! Errol
|
|
|
Post by thomarse on Jul 25, 2014 16:14:20 GMT 12
Dave, I expect that individual will lose his job and rightly so.
Surely the same must apply to the alleged offender?
|
|
|
Post by macnz on Jul 25, 2014 17:01:52 GMT 12
"He (GB) denied telling an airport staff member at the exit door that "the rules had changed. I had two other people with me. There was no way I said that"
>> OK GB incriminate yourself further that was a clever denial.
GB: "I didn't initially consider that it was a huge problem. [Only after a phone call from Aviation Security] I suddenly realised, 'Hell, this is a pretty serious matter".
Keys: "[Brownlee] has obviously got off the plane and taken a second to reflect on what has happened. While he hasn't intended to put himself in this position, he has put himself in this position and he's immediately realised the severity of what he has done and he's offered his resignation."
OK so were these guys even in the same room when they spoke? I would expect they could at least attempt to get their stories consistent when being interviewed ...and what about the other 2 people in the entourage who conveniently slipped by?
|
|
|
Post by macnz on Jul 25, 2014 17:25:06 GMT 12
The Director of Civil Aviation, Graeme Harris, confirmed an investigation had been started into an alleged security breach at Christchurch airport this morning. www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11298499Nothing alleged about it, pretty well reported and confirmed 3 people walked onto a plane without any challenge and then managed to merrily get off the plane and leave the airport without further challenge by this officers. Who cares whether it happened after screening. Isn't the whole departure area suppose to be sanitized? You don't allow the public to wonder around the tarmac and plane before take-off do you? A one page report delivered today can pretty much can sum up the breach, then refer the names to the DPP.
|
|
|
Post by The Red Baron on Jul 25, 2014 20:17:58 GMT 12
Reported it was an airport volunteer,probably someones Grandad or Granny trying to help out that you guys want to crucify. So that begs the question are our airports are being guarded by volunteers from the local rest home?,no doubt the CEO of Aviation Security has fallen on his own sword by now.
|
|
|
Post by baronbeeza on Jul 25, 2014 21:43:32 GMT 12
I worry about aviation security, it is very easy to be over the top... and still get caught out on the day. We certainly don't want to go down the path the Ockers have taken with their ASIC passes and all the drama associated with that.
A little commonsense would not go amiss in this country but it rather appears we have been caught up with international agreements and such like. I think the truth is that there are no standards...many here would travel a lot or work airside at a range of airports around the region. In a RNZAF context could you imagine as much time and energy being devoted in say keeping Wigram secure as Ohakea ?
Airports must be rated in aircraft size and number of movements against any form of threat analysis.
There will be an inquiry, people will get hurt.. Holes will be found in the system. Now, rather than come up with a more realistic and sensible solution we will get to see even more security arrangements having to be put in place to cover these newly discovered 'deficiencies'. It is a growth industry and if we look at Aussie it will soon be out of control.
I can see the need for passenger screening for international flights, that is obvious. All International airports have sterile areas and transit passengers may not always be re-screened. NZ is a small country and I am not sure if the threat of hijack, bombing, or whatever has changed in the last 20 or 30 years. When I think of incidents I can think of three that come to mind. The chap in Fiji and the bottle of Whisky. The Somali lady with the knife and one instance where I ended up trying to fly an Islander with a crazy drunk lady sitting alongside me. The other passengers must have known about her situation and yet not one spoke up... It was all news to me until after the takeoff. Any amount of increased security will still not filter out all the loopies getting about on every flight within NZ. We are still yet to see the fallout of MH370 hit the crews and groundcrews as well.
I doubt this inquiry will be good news for anyone in the industry. Really the less said the better in many respects.
|
|
|
Post by Peter Lewis on Jul 25, 2014 23:12:21 GMT 12
Oh no, of course not. You don't understand. That's not how the public service operates. He will very apologetic, but explain that its not his fault. He has done the best he can within the pitifully small budget and meager resources he has been given. The only way to ensure that this sort of thing will never happen again will be to allocate his department much more money and a lot more staff with, of course, a substantial salary rise for himeslf as compensation for the increase in workload.
|
|
|
Post by kiwithrottlejockey on Jul 26, 2014 1:32:49 GMT 12
CLICK HERE to listen to a discussion on The Rock FM's " Morning Rumble" programme about what happened with Gerry Brownlie at Christchurch versus what happened to Bryce Casey and Ben Boyce after they pulled a stunt with security at Auckland Airport and got slagged off by John Key for being totally irresponsible.
|
|
|
Post by kiwithrottlejockey on Jul 26, 2014 2:08:47 GMT 12
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on Jul 26, 2014 14:27:48 GMT 12
Pilot knew Brownlee wasn't screenedThe pilot of an Air NZ flight Transport Minister Gerry Brownlee travelled on knew the minister had not been screened by security. 26 July 2014 The pilot of the Air New Zealand flight Gerry Brownlee travelled on was aware the transport minister had not been screened by security. Mr Brownlee offered his resignation on Thursday after he bypassed a security check at Christchurch Airport. Prime Minister John Key didn't accept it, but said there was no excuse for Mr Brownlee's actions. The Civil Aviation Authority is investigating and Labour and the Greens want Mr Brownlee to stand down while the investigation continues. Air New Zealand's chief flight operations and safety officer David Morgan says the pilot of the plane was advised by a senior Aviation Security Service (Avsec) officer, who visited the cockpit prior to departure, that Mr Brownlee was on board and that he had not been security screened. "However, the officer advised the pilot that Avsec was happy to allow Mr Brownlee to travel and that he was not required to be screened," Mr Morgan said in a statement to NZ Newswire on Saturday. "This was an error and the pilot should not have operated the flight with an unscreened passenger on board." Air New Zealand will co-operate fully with the CAA investigation. "However, this is not a disciplinary matter and there is no justification to stand the pilot down. We are in the process of reminding staff of security screening requirements," Mr Morgan said. New Zealand regulations say the plane should have been emptied and all passengers security checked again, media reported. Mr Brownlee says he was running late to catch a flight and used an exit door to get into the gate lounge, avoiding the usual security check. Two members of his staff were with him. Mr Brownlee says he doesn't want the airport official who let him through to take the blame. The penalty for getting on a plane after bypassing a security check is three months in prison or a $2000 fine. It isn't clear whether that offence would apply because Mr Brownlee and his two staff members were allowed through the door. NZN home.nzcity.co.nz/news/article.aspx?id=190770&fm=psp,tst
|
|