"The Age"this morning states explicitly that the pilot returned a positive reading. So, I don't think that bit is in dispute. We do not know the reading, so it could equally be the minimum threshold record-able as remnants of wine with dinner the night before (or mouthwash after breakfast) or swigging a hip flask as she walked on. Without getting do deep into semantics, it may be possible to record a positive reading, but still be competent, safe and legal.
But, the part that interests me is that CASA are quoted in the article saying its a matter for Qantas not CASA because the testing was done under the Qantas drug & alcohol test regime. Really? Exactly what does CASA see as its role? And where do they exhibit independence?
I also like the line saying the investigation will take a month. Is that because CASA needs 28 days to seek legal advice on what its role should be?