[rikur_]

Presumably it might be a positive thing having a Transport Secretary who is a pilot and has an interest in GA.

(I know politics is not allowed, but this seems specifically relevant)

[kingbing]

So Grant Shapps has ben made Sec of State for Transport. I hope it argues well for GA.

[PaulB]

[James Chan]

Wow! Regardless of your beliefs about Boris, I'm most pleased Grant Shapps has got the role.

[CloudHound]

Unfortunately, that means he can't continue as Chair of the APPG-GA.

[Genghis the Engineer]

I was a student with a moderately hardcore Brexiteer Tory backbencher, I haven't seen him in person for years, but we're linked on social media and it's quite entertaining watching him on Twitter congratulating everybody getting appointed as he's doubtless desperately looking at his phone every 5 minutes to check he hasn't missed a call from No.10. I rather feel for the bloke, and I'm sure he'll be in some job tomorrow - he has the profile and ability.

Less frivolously, I think we should be concerned about Sajid Javid in treasury. He's historically been aggressively non-interventionist, in a somewhat Tebbit fashion, and may not be as amenable to investing in new national capability as some predecessors.

G

[tomshep]

So Shapps will be no use to us, like the rest of this sorry lot.

[UpThere]

So Shapps will be no use to us, like the rest of this sorry lot.

John Crace uses rather more colourful language in his sketch on the reshuffle:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jul/24/boris-first-policy-unites-uk-by-blaming-half-the-country-for-our-problems

[JAFO]

So Shapps will be no use to us, like the rest of this sorry lot.

John Crace uses rather more colourful language in his sketch on the reshuffle:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jul/24/boris-first-policy-unites-uk-by-blaming-half-the-country-for-our-problems

It may be colourful but it is, to borrow one of his own neologisms, total Pifflepafflewifflewaffle.

[rikur_]

Back to Grant Shapps for a moment, and thinking a bit about how ministerial roles work.

Presumably some group or person with credibility needs to land a well constructed wish list on his new desk in the next few weeks that he can task his new found department with dealing with. Echoing some of the themes in the APPG MP's summary would be difficult for him to ignore: http://www.generalaviationappg.uk/wp-co ... -final.pdf

[oldbiggincfi]

How about he reverses the damage done by a previous Transport Secretary , John Prescott – Brown field sites and all that .
Maybe a pledge to fly into Manston in a fixed wing to endeavour Kent to have 3 hard runways.

[kanga]

How about he reverses the damage done by a previous Transport Secretary , John Prescott – Brown field sites and all that .
..

oh, dear, not that myth again

a. the 'planning guidance' which appeared to be interpretable as deeming the whole curtilage of any current or former airfield as 'previously developed' ('brownfield') was swiftly clarified to say that only 'previously developed parts' of airfields might be so considered. It has not prevented some developers trying to persuade some Planning Officers/Councillors that the misinterpretation was valid; sometimes successfully ; and

b. all GA pilots owe Prescott (a fromer Merchant Seaman who understood weather information as a safety issue) a debt of gratitude by overcoming Treasury policy ('users must be seen to pay') and requiring Met Office to provde TAFs/METARs etc free online to GA pilots, rather than requiring them to request them via fax on a premium rate telephone line.

As Tebbitt has been mentioned: with BA Pilots threatening strikes, I recall that the BOAC pilots' strikes of the '60s were organised by that radical TU firebrand, the BALPA official, one Norman T .. ..

[flybymike]

Unfortunately, that means he can't continue as Chair of the APPG-GA.

What is the reason for that?

[oakworth]

I would have thought there was a clear Conflict of Interest given that APPG-GA have some clear views on the CAA. Doubt it will make that much difference, he has far bigger fish to fry now. However, there were some good recommendations out of the Kirkhope Inquiry, would be good to see the CAA given a more active role in delivering airspace change.

[Paul_Sengupta]

a. the 'planning guidance' which appeared to be interpretable as deeming the whole curtilage of any current or former airfield as 'previously developed' ('brownfield') was swiftly clarified to say that only 'previously developed parts' of airfields might be so considered. It has not prevented some developers trying to persuade some Planning Officers/Councillors that the misinterpretation was valid; sometimes successfully

Whatever the intention and interpretation, it's done a massive amount of harm in the years since then.