Josh# 37 – "If barrier are so naughty, why then hasn't that been proven in the federal court, you know, last week when they were there ?".
#40 –(edit- seizure) but a tick for the rest.
Fair point; things that worry me are -(i)- The standard of investigation and evidence probity in FNQ is very suspect, if you weigh it against the Quadrio case: -(ii)- whatever evidence CASA has is not good enough to put Barrier down in a fair dinkum court, but near enough to convince an AAT "member", -(iii)- that if there is to be a 'mediation' then it needs to overlooked by an independent arbitrator, if it is to have a cat in hell's chance of being a 'highly desirable' outcome based safety fix.
If the operator is willing, same - same Tiger, rehabilitated one base at a time; a safety outcome to be proud of, instead of the carnage we always see when CASA gets its panties in a bunch about things that should have been noted and sorted during routine audit. Instant breaches 'discovered' (shock horror) at audit are not overnight events.
The whole thing stinks of 'double jeopardy', can't get you in court, but we can administratively cut your throat. If, and it's a big IF, CASA were known as reliable, honest and above suspicion, the likes of Quadrio, Barrier, Pel Air, Hardy, Polar etc. etc would not get so much as a mention.