Beware The Camel's Nose: AOPA Objects To CA User Fees | Aero-News Network
Aero-News Network
RSS icon RSS feed
podcast icon MP3 podcast
Subscribe Aero-News e-mail Newsletter Subscribe

Airborne Unlimited -- Most Recent Daily Episodes

Episode Date

Airborne-Monday

Airborne-Tuesday

Airborne-Wednesday Airborne-Thursday

Airborne-Friday

Airborne On YouTube

Airborne-Unlimited-04.22.24

Airborne-Unlimited-04.16.24

Airborne-FlightTraining-04.17.24 Airborne-AffordableFlyers-04.18.24

Airborne-Unlimited-04.19.24

Join Us At 0900ET, Friday, 4/10, for the LIVE Morning Brief.
Watch It LIVE at
www.airborne-live.net

Mon, Apr 17, 2006

Beware The Camel's Nose: AOPA Objects To CA User Fees

Canada Proves An AOPA User Fee Objection

User fees for some ultimately mean user fees for everyone. That's one reason why AOPA opposes aviation user fees in the United States.

Canada has proven the point.

When the private corporation Nav Canada bought the country's air traffic control system in 1996, it assured general aviation that its only fee would be a fixed, annual fee.

Now Nav Canada has implemented daily use charges for general aviation aircraft at seven Canadian airports.

"The age of pay-as-you-go is upon us, indeed a very slippery slope that has played out elsewhere in the world," said Kevin Psutka, president and CEO of the Canadian Owners and Pilots Association (COPA).

"COPA considers this a devastating precedent that will most likely be expanded over time to capture more airports and/or services."

And COPA expects that the airlines, which had pushed for this GA user fee increase, will be asking for more. Just as U.S. airlines are currently pushing for user fees on some segments of general aviation.

"We can't let the camel get his nose under the tent here in the United States," said AOPA President Phil Boyer.

"This is the perfect example of why any FAA proposal for fee-for-service would ultimately be bad news for general aviation. User fees would inevitably trickle down to the pilots of light general aviation aircraft.

"And this shows what happens when a private corporation runs air traffic control. Corporations are always looking for new ways to generate revenue — new ways to charge their customers.

"Air traffic control is not a commodity that can be supplied by the lowest bidder, nor charged on a per-use basis," Boyer continued.

"It is about protecting public safety, in the air and on the ground. Everyone has a stake in that, and that makes air traffic control a government function that is rightfully paid for with taxes."

FMI: www.aopa.org, www.copanational.org

Advertisement

More News

ANN's Daily Aero-Term (04.24.24): Runway Lead-in Light System

Runway Lead-in Light System Runway Lead-in Light System Consists of one or more series of flashing lights installed at or near ground level that provides positive visual guidance a>[...]

ANN's Daily Aero-Linx (04.24.24)

Aero Linx: Aviation Without Borders Aviation Without Borders uses its aviation expertise, contacts and partnerships to enable support for children and their families – at hom>[...]

Aero-FAQ: Dave Juwel's Aviation Marketing Stories -- ITBOA BNITBOB

Dave Juwel's Aviation Marketing Stories ITBOA BNITBOB ... what does that mean? It's not gibberish, it's a lengthy acronym for "In The Business Of Aviation ... But Not In The Busine>[...]

Classic Aero-TV: Best Seat in The House -- 'Inside' The AeroShell Aerobatic Team

From 2010 (YouTube Version): Yeah.... This IS A Really Cool Job When ANN's Nathan Cremisino took over the lead of our Aero-TV teams, he knew he was in for some extra work and a lot>[...]

Airborne Affordable Flyers 04.18.24: CarbonCub UL, Fisher, Affordable Flyer Expo

Also: Junkers A50 Heritage, Montaer Grows, Dynon-Advance Flight Systems, Vans' Latest Officially, the Carbon Cub UL and Rotax 916 iS is now in its 'market survey development phase'>[...]

blog comments powered by Disqus



Advertisement

Advertisement

Podcasts

Advertisement

© 2007 - 2024 Web Development & Design by Pauli Systems, LC