Perhaps Blackie this will help gel an answer for you!
Start of the story...Scene 1: Act I
Once upon a time in a land called Crat city a certain new Lib bright star Senator asked a particularly poignant question of a certain head sherangacrat in a committee hearing room…but first the lead up 
because it is important.
"Senator FAWCETT: I notice CASA is often another player in the coronial inquests and often you will highlight something, the coroner will accept it and basically tick off in his report on the basis that a new CASR or something is going to be implemented. Do you follow those up? I have looked through a few crash investigations, and I will just pick one: the Bell 407 that crashed in October '03. CASR part 133 was supposed to be reworked around night VFR requirements for EMS situations. I notice that still is not available now, nearly 10 years after the event. Does it cause you any concern that recommendations that were accepted by the coroner, and put out as a way of preventing a future accident, still have not actually eventuated? How do you track those? How do we, as a society, make sure we prevent the accidents occurring again?
Mr Dolan: We monitor various coronial reports and findings that are relevant to our business. We do not have any role in ensuring that coronial findings or recommendations are carried out by whichever the relevant party may be. I think that would be stepping beyond our brief.
Senator FAWCETT: Who should have that role then?
Mr Dolan: I would see that as a role for the coronial services of the various states. But to add to that, because we are aware of the sorts of findings—as you say, it is not that common that there is something that is significantly different or unexpected for us, but when there is—we will have regard to that obviously in our future investigation activities and recognise there may already be a finding out there that is relevant to one of our future investigations.
Senator FAWCETT: Would it be appropriate to have—a sunset clause is not quite the right phrase—a due date that if an action is recommended and accepted by a regulatory body, in this case CASA, the coroner should actually be putting a date on that and CASA must implement by a certain date or report back, whether it is to the minister or to the court or to the coroner, why that action has not actually occurred?
Mr Dolan: I think I will limit myself to comment that that is the way we try to do it. We have a requirement that in 90 days, if we have made a recommendation, there is a response to it. We will track a recommendation until we are satisfied it is complete or until we have concluded that there is no likelihood that the action is going to be taken.
Senator FAWCETT: Mr Mrdak, as secretary of the relevant department, how would you propose to engage with the coroners to make sure that we, as a nation, close this loophole to make our air environment safer?
Mr Mrdak: I think Mr Dolan has indicated the relationship with coroners is on a much better footing than it has been ever before. I think the work of the ATSB has led that. I think it then becomes a matter of addressing the relationship between the safety regulators and security regulators, as necessary, with the coroners. It is probably one I would take on notice and give a bit of thought to, if you do not mind.
Senator FAWCETT: You do not accept that your department and you, as secretary, have a duty of care and an oversight to make sure that two agencies who work for you do actually complement their activities for the outcome that benefits the aviation community?
Mr Mrdak: We certainly do ensure that agencies are working together. That is certainly occurring. You have asked me the more detailed question about coroners and relationships with the agencies. I will have a bit of a think about that, if that is okay.
Senator FAWCETT: Thank you."
This was followed by a non-answer to what the Lib rising star Senator thought was a QON (must forgive him as he is still learning the game) at the Sup Estimates hearing in October. However no harm done as it was eventually formally listed as a QON that was addressed to DOit head-crat Mrdakari.
However it would appear that Mrdakari has deferred to his most submissive minion to put forward, yet again, the safety investigation methodology and supreme spin according to Beaker.
So headcrat Mrdakari has again played the Senator back into the court of spinners and crats, the question is will the Senator accept this play?
When you read SU’s submission, especially the following from Samantha Hare, I think the Senator is well justified pursuing his original line of inquiry (i.e. FF ignoring Coroner recommendations/findings and 'closing the loop')!
“My partner died in a yak-52 joy flight on 31 August, 2008. His name was Ian Lovell. I along with many others continue to feel shock that such an accident has happened. I think this is because people do not expect such an accident to happen in Australia. Nearly five years later and I now know that the lack of regulation in the Australian aviation industry makes flying a very dangerous venture but my experiences are that the general public continue to be unaware. They do not know that Ian died in an accident waiting to happen, that it could have happened to any member of the public and unless there are changes it is likely to happen again.
The flight was sold to me as a gift certificate for Ian’s 35th birthday.
Hempel’s Aviation was recommended to me by Archerfield Airport, the company was advertised on the internet, Hempel’s Aviation employees recommended Barry Hempel as the pilot, I bought the gift certificate directly off Barry Hempel at Hempel’s Aviation located at Archerfield Airport; I paid Barry Hempel of Hempel’s Aviation $495 for what in the past has been referred to by the media as the ‘death’ ticket.
At no time would I have bought this ticket if I had known that the pilot, Barry Hempel did not have a commercial license. At no time was this flight referred to as an adventure flight. At no time were the risks of flying in a warbird discussed and at no time was a waiver signed.
I shared in Ian’s elation at the best present that had ever been bought for him; I drove Ian to Archerfield airport; I dismissed a dream that he had about the plane crashing into water; I had a laugh with him when he told me he was listening to the soundtrack of top-gun whilst waiting to take the flight; I took him out to the tarmac and took photos of him as he was strapped in for his first flight in a warbird, his first experience of aerobatics and first real taste of g-force and we both expected that he would return safely.
Ian’s flight was the third joy flight of the day that Barry Hempel had piloted and all customers were under the impression that the flight was commercial.
I waited on the tarmac to take photos of his arrival. Ian didn’t arrive. Soon after there was a phone call to say a plane had crashed into the water just off South Stradbroke Island. I knew that Ian was gone.
Devastated, traumatised, shock. There aren’t any words that can describe losing a partner in such a way. A motorbike accident is comprehensible and something tangible that I had worried about, but a plane crash seemed as likely as being taken by a shark whilst dangling your feet in the Brisbane River.
Since I have lost Ian I have noticed that planes fall out of the sky regularly.
As do most people who lose a significant person in their lives, I think about Ian every day. We had planned our future together, a home, children, travel, he was the only person I had ever looked to the future with. But now I don’t only grieve the loss of Ian but I also grieve what has been taken away from me by a system that has failed Ian and I for the last four and half years.
Put simply, the ATSB did not investigate; the QPS never recovered the plane; the police report took 3 years to complete; CASA will not admit any fault to prevent any further accidents happening; the Inquest took approximately four years to begin; CASA stalled the Inquest
recommendations for another hearing date and now I have been told to wait again with the additional hearing date being postponed. When I found this out on the 15 November 2012, not even two working days before the hearing date was set to begin, I cried. The tears started at work and basically did not stop for the rest of the day. I feel sheer disappointment that I continue to be put through this, so many years after Ian’s death.
Four and half years and ongoing, is a long time in a person’s life. I was 30 years of age when Ian died and am now nearly 35. The grief and shock of losing Ian has at times consumed me but I have been able to work through it so it is now something that I can control. What I can’t control four and half years on is the legal/regulatory system. I cannot control when I’m going to get that next phone call. When I will be re-traumatised again? It feels like the system is trying to break me, hoping that I can’t handle it anymore and I’ll walk away. What will break me is if I do walk away after all this time. I’ve lost too much. Ian’s death was preventable and four and half years later we are still waiting on recommendations from a Coroner on what needs to happen to try and prevent another accident of its kind.
In the last four and half years my friends have either become engaged, got married, had children, advanced in their career, travelled. It feels like the legal system/CASA has pressed pause on these aspects of my life. I can’t work in social work because the ongoing and unpredictable nature of the legal process impacts on my emotions and my capacity to work in a crisis setting, I have mounting legal fees, the emotional toll impacts on my relationships with other significant people in my life and I can’t travel freely because my life is dictated by the systems schedule.
I wonder when the victims are considered in the process. I wonder what new information is going to come from yet another hearing day called by CASA. I wonder whose interests this serves. I wonder how much more obvious it needs to be that CASA and the medical practitioners involved breached their duty of care. I wonder how many more planes will fall out of the sky. I wonder why my life continues to be put on hold by the system, when I lost my partner due to other people’s/CASA’s negligence.
I wonder how those in the aviation industry who turned a blind eye have been impacted. I wonder whether 2013 will be the year that there is legal resolution for Ian. I wonder whether there ever would have been an Inquest if Ian’s loved ones did not demand it year after year. I wonder whether changes will occur in a flawed Civil Aviation Safety Authority and I wonder whether I will then be able to sit with my grief for Ian peacefully and remember the beauty that he bought to my life without it being tarnished by an incompetent and unjust legal/regulatory system.
Samantha Hare (fiancé of Ian Lovell) Hempel’s Yak 52 South Stradbroke Is 31 August 2008. 2 fatalities.”
There's the backgound Blackie, hope it helps?
