Great research boys:-
For mine, it's a shame that Sen. Fawcett was using a different version of the ICAO Annexe 13. I felt he had some pretty heavy ordnance lined up, but decided to let it go. No doubt the premise of non compliance would stand a test but, without the actual words to use, a tactical withdrawal was prudent. The committee pretty much has the idea anyway.
I was fascinated by the Beaker body language though; he scarcely glanced at Sanga, the only remark addressed to him was off hand, allowing disagreement "If you wish". Sanga wisely kept his trap shut, meanwhile old whiskered, whispering Julian was leaning in close, providing the cue cards and 'attaboys'.
While Fawcett was scratching around in his notes, Beaker, from a cue card reads the part of Annexe 13 about his discretionary powers and the OBR recovery, then, quite animated for him he uncoils and flicks a piece of lint off his shoulder, drinks his water, smiles at Julian (pseudo high 5). No doubt they think they have just scored a major point off a cheap shot. Think again boys,– Sen. Fawcett has the whip hand here and if required he can mount the argument again. Beaker is very lucky that there was some kind of mini stuff up with the Senators notes.
The attempt to use a Ministerial directive in defence was abandoned as a no go, early. DF seemed not to be too intimidated by the "regard" one must have for the Ministers directive, not that minister anyway. The Chambers report has come back to haunt both CASA and ATSB; that crock was meant to assist with the internal (infernal) chess game, not the Senate. What a hoot; whoops. At the risk of being repetitive, anything Chambers touched must now be suspect; Pel Air honestly done will reflect that and much more.
Gobbles told the one about the fellah who used two bricks to castrate camels, "don't that hurt ?" asked an observer; "Only when you get your thumb caught in between the bricks" was the answer. Made me smile all night, thought it fit the bill to a T.