Originally Posted by
PiperCameron
Well, she certainly isn't being paid in cash by the passengers..
And there's the rub. I'm assuming she's able to have the charity entirely responsible for any "reward" and/or consequences... but at the end of the day, CASA are responsible to the government of the day and what agreements are made behind closed doors (for the public good, of course) us outside of the hallowed halls of power are never likely to know.
There are so, so many ironies in the fact that your statement is correct in fact but shouldn't be in principle.
In principle, CASA is responsible to
the Parliament, not the government of the day. In principle, CASA was set up as a statutory authority separate from the Commonwealth so as to
insulate it from political interference from, for example, the government of the day.
Another irony is that, in principle, CASA is bound by the law, too. But, in practice, the regulatory requirements are whatever it wakes up and decides it wants them to be each day, unless someone has the resources to fight for years to prove CASA wrong.