PPRuNe Forums - View Single Post - Merged: Senate Inquiry
View Single Post
Old 31st Oct 2013, 10:31
  #1604 (permalink)  
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Go west young man
Posts: 1,732
A.R.R.T rhymes with F.A.R.T.(S)!

Seems that the IOS are not the only ones strolling through the 192 page ATsBeancounter Beaker’s spinneaucracy....but I’m a little miffed by what the article from the MMSM (Murdoch mainstream media) is actually attempting to highlight....

Australia'sair accident rate revealed in new report

...maybe SC is just trying to help us out by summarising and deciphering the Beaker spin???

Speaking of m..m..m..mandatory reporting!! And as it is that time of the year for government agencies to have completed their annual reports (31/10/13)...where oh where is Fort Fumble’s AR?? The mind boggles with all possible permutations!

Oh well..while we’re all waiting Para 377 on the Hempel thread drew my attention to a recently released 2054 page FF FOI doc (DAME’s Handbook). Now I’ve no doubt that the DAME Handbook (handbook if you’re a Giant ) is a most absorbing informative read but a read that for now I’ll put on the backburner (till tomorrow at least). However what caught my attention on FF’s disclosure log was an entry for July: f13-4067

Now this document may have been dredged up elsewhere on here (and is probably more relevant to Creamy’s Reg Reform thread) but many of the findings and recommendations of the ARRT in 2007 have a familiar theme to this and many other threads.

Here is a couple of examples:
The Taskforce agreed that the Government’s aviation agencies can learn from these specific examples and should enhance existing or implement new procedures to ensure transparency and adequate industry awareness of new initiatives. In addition, the consultation models of leading overseas aviation countries should be considered when developing a best practice model
Recommendation 4: The Government’s aviation agencies review and enhance existing consultation arrangements and implement new procedures where warranted to ensure transparency and adequate industry awareness of new initiatives.

The Taskforce also considered the broader effectiveness of the SCC itself and took advice from Mr Graham, who has chaired the Committee since 2006. The Taskforce agreed there would be value in CASA monitoring its regulatory development processes and the use of joint CASA/industry project teams to develop regulatory policy proposals followed by more focused consultations through the SCC. The Taskforce further considered views on the role of the full SCC that meets in plenary three or four times per year.

The Taskforce considered that the regulatory development process should be the subject of on-going review and evaluation in order to make the best use of the knowledge and abilities of SCC members and enhance the interaction between the CASA/industry project teams and the SCC subcommittees and working groups. The Taskforce noted that the role of the full SCC could also be reconsidered in this light.
Recommendation 6: CASA monitor the regulation development process using joint CASA/industry project teams and continue to review the role of the SCC in this process, in order to achieve further effectiveness and efficiency gains.

Here is a finding and recommendation that is particularly relevant to a recently released ATsB report on LOS incidents and the thread ATSB Concerned over Military Control Loss of Separation Events
Military Airspace
The Taskforce discussed an issue raised by various sectors of the aviation industry in relation to military aerodromes and civilian access to military airspace. The airspace and air traffic control service provision for civilian aircraft at Williamtown air base near Newcastle being a case in point.

The Taskforce Members agreed that this had been an issue for quite some time and the risk profile of the aerodrome was increasing, noting the matter was complex with numerous significant stakeholders. The Taskforce agreed that the matter should be raised at very senior levels with the RAAF to ensure that a solution could be agreed and implemented as soon as possible.

Given the history of this matter a solution will only be forthcoming if the respective Ministers oversee and reach agreement on a new approach. As part of these discussions, the safety of the travelling public at aerodromes such as Williamtown needs to be considered as the first priority, without limiting Regular Public Transport growth or necessarily changing the status of the aerodrome.
Recommendation 10: The Minister for Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government raise concerns about air traffic and airspace management at Williamtown and other military aerodromes with the Minister for Defence, to ensure that safe and reasonable practices are implemented to protect civilian aircraft and fare paying passengers in accordance with existing safety principles.
Well I’m sure there are others on here that can mine some other gems from this comprehensive and historical ARRT report...so fill your boots (or not)!

Q/ Wonder who (and why) FOI'd the ARRT report??

Observation: The ARRT report also makes you realise how much the previous Labor governments were totally in the wilderness when it came to actually governing. Six years of stagnation within the industry while the Minister let the bureaucracy run rampant and totally unaccounted for.

Former Labor Senator Richo sums it up best in regards to accountability..." Keep political power where the buck stops: with the elected minister "...

One of the hallmarks of pretty well all of those ministers was their capacity for overruling departmental advice. The minister is the elected person, with the end result of all decision-making resting with them. The buck should stop with the minister.

On many occasions I rejected the advice I received from my various departments. I recall writing "rubbish" or "nonsense" on the tops of pages sent to me. A good minister should not abrogate the responsibility of office. If a minister simply chooses to tick the box on every piece of advice received then there has been a power shift to unelected, unseen and indeed faceless people. Bureaucrats are not elected. Their job is to advise the minister and they will sometimes get things wrong. A minister should not feel constrained in treating that advice.
Sage advice...so Trusster take heed mate and perhaps refer to the ARRT report after taking advice from the Kingcrat??

Last edited by Sarcs; 1st Nov 2013 at 01:31.
Sarcs is offline