Time for a blue-sky plan for PM’s travel
It’s with a heavy heart I say it. After all, since when did ‘‘speaking truth to power’’ involve urging our leaders to emulate narcissistic potentates and splash the cash on (choke) ‘‘a private jet’’?
But this week’s Townsville horror is evidence enough we need more reliable and efficient transport for our prime minister and other VIPs than the Defence Force’s Boeing 757s.
Having John Key and his entourage stranded because of a technical fault was embarrassing enough.
It’s a wonder the Australian media didn’t seize the moment and – Michael Cheika-like – run a cartoon with a clown’s nose on the front of the plane.
But cancelling the first day of a long-sought diplomatic and trade delegation to India, an emerging economic superpower and the second most populous nation on the planet, was beyond the pale, especially for a country that relies so heavily on our trade links.
Remember ’Spud One’?
The two 23-year-old 757s bought back in 2003 from a Dutch carrier were supposed to address some of the shortcomings of the previous 727, dubbed ‘‘Spud One’’ thanks to then-PM Jim Bolger’s disparaging nickname; ’’potato head’’.
It was fast, sleek and incredibly short-range.
When Bolger flew to South Africa for Nelson Mandela’s inauguration it was like a tiki-tour of small islands you would otherwise never expect to see in a lifetime.
After two stops in Australia, it was off to the Cocos Islands, then on to Diego Garcia (the secretive US base in the middle of the Indian Ocean dubbed, as only the Americans could, ‘‘the footprint of freedom’’).
Then came a quick touchdown in the Seychelles before an Avgasgobbling hop to Johannesburg.
The 757s are some improvement, in terms of range, but they still require a stopover in Australia whenever Key heads north and west.
True, the armed forces need some sort of troop transport for long-haul deployments to places like Iraq and Afghanistan, but that may change.
And whatever the military’s requirements, it must be time to sever the link between the PM’s transport needs and those of the military.
Why not a smaller, longer-range jet for the prime minister and his entourage that can be used more frequently, or maybe a deal with our national carrier?
Private jets, voter poison
Don’t expect Key to advocate it. In response to the Townsville outage he just faffed on about the planes’ normal reliability, the defence white paper and plans for a replacement sometime next decade.
Politically, it is up there with changing superannuation or building a ‘‘parliamentary palace’’ for MPs out the back of the Beehive. Politicians see it as voter poison and will sip only with extreme caution.
Helen Clark regretted trying it on back in 2004. It didn’t help that her suggestion came after the fallout from her high-speed motorcade that whisked her from Waimate to Christchurch en route to a Bledisloe Cup rugby test.
ACT’s justice spokesman Stephen Franks skewed her idea, saying a private plane showed Clark had delusions of grandeur. ’’Experienced business investors know that aeroplane-yearning is a good early warning sign of a bust company.’’
In no time the media (guilty as charged) were trawling the internet for second-hand jets, turning up a one-owner Challenger 604 for less than $10 million that boasted rosewood trim, steel-blue leather seating for 10, 15-inch flat screen TVs, wireless and other topof-the-line gear. Ouch. The idea soon died.
One long-haul option could be an $80m,18-seater Gulfstream that could make South Africa – or India at a pinch – in a single bound. However, Key would have to ditch the idea of a big media contingent, a business delegation or a full haka party – which under the current set-up make the trip that much more valuable for himself and New Zealand. The Australian prime minister uses a 737, so a next generation long-range model, seating more than 100, could be the sensible compromise for New Zealand.
But that’s only half the answer. There is also the question of maintenance, which the Townsville touchdown highlighted.
As Finance Minister Bill English and NZ First’s Ron Mark pointed out, the problem is not that the planes are worn out, but that they are under-used. That will not be solved by any sort of replacement craft.
What about Air NZ?
Which brings us to the other major option; a lease or part-purchase deal in league with Air New Zealand.
That way the prime minister or foreign minister would always have a well- (and recently-) maintained plane on hand without so much capital sitting idle for so long.
There are some logistical issues, such as the role of defence personnel protecting the kit when the PM is travelling, but they should not be insurmountable.
Perhaps if the prime minister gets stranded by ‘‘a technical fault’’ on Easter Island on his next major trip to Peru in November the calls for a better option will trump the ‘‘business as usual’’ currently favoured by Key and neutralise the poison in the chalice.
A reliable, efficient, right-sized plane is a necessity, not a luxury, for the leader of a geographically distant country like New Zealand.
''Freedom camping, supported by the right structure, is a great way to go. The actions of a few should not be allowed to spoil it for the many.'' Editorial