HMHB in regards to the Hempel Inquest it is interesting to note the following passage from page 55 of the hansard:
Mr Dolan: When, nearly 3½ years ago, I joined the newly independent ATSB as chief commissioner, we had over 100 aviation investigations on hand, including four that we classified as level 2—so substantial investigations requiring major and continuing use of our resources. We were averaging about 18 months for the completion of investigations, with some serious outliers in that. We had more work on hand than we knew how to deal with, and we would normally expect in any given year to get one of those level 2 investigations. So we had a lot more work than we were used to. That led to delays in a range of reports and, as new investigations came in, the shifting of resources to different priorities as they arose. It is clear that, in managing that allocation of resources to always-shifting priorities, we did not give enough attention to getting to an expeditious conclusion of this Norfolk Island report. However, that is the context in which that happened.
Senator FAWCETT: Did you have an underspend in your budget this year, last year or the year before?
Mr Dolan: There have only been three complete financial years now. In the first year—in the first of my years of stewardship of the organisation—we had a slight underspend. In the last two years we have had slight overspends, but always within less than one per cent of our allocated budget.
Senator FAWCETT: You have not considered outsourcing any of the work or insourcing extra capacity to expedite the production of reports?
Mr Dolan: Our resources are largely tied up in maintaining our existing investigative capability, who are permanent staff of the organisation. We have a longstanding view that in almost all circumstances it is better to have, if possible, the range of expertise available to us on a permanent basis and therefore immediately available than to rely on potentially risky external outsourcers.
Senator FAWCETT: I am not talking about normal operations. I am talking about a situation where you have a budget underspend and a clear excess of work. Was it even considered? That is all I am asking.
Mr Dolan: In that small underspend, no, we did not consider it.
Which could explain, along with CASA's influence, why they duck shoved the Hempel accident even though according to ICAO Annex 13 they were essentially obligated to investigate. Also the above shows that they had an underspend for 2008 and again under Annex 13 if they are snowed under they can contract a foreign authority to carry out an investigation on their behalf, so essentially they had no excuse!
But that is an aside but it is interesting that Fawcett brought it up, anyway back to the main game.
