Sarcs # 62- "hmm Minister perhaps a slight adjustment to the TSI Act could be warranted here??"
The TSI Act and the CASA Enforcement manual both have ferocious powers against the hapless offender at the front end. But I wonder about how the 'back end' (so to speak) is policed. The Pel Air inquiry Senators obviously want to eliminate the possibility of a TSI breach from the equation, as they must (No, being in Montreal is not an alibi). But were it not for the inquiry, the notion of TSI breach would not have come to light, nor would the twin daemons of collusion and corruption be hovering about the trough.
It's only when the prospect arises that thoughts of dodgy doings occur. We should, in a better world, be able to trust implicitly the integrity of the body charged with 'using' such powerful weapons, sadly appears the prospect that we cannot. The Enforcement protocols are the same, a two edged sword, but who monitors the application of those rules and ensures that they apply equally to both sides.
It's certainly not the ICC. (Anyway, the fair Elizabeth has gone to grapple with Customs and Excise). It's certainly not the "Board"; and the resident legal eagle has enough on his plate just cleaning up the mess, metaphorically putting out fires and burying the bodies (hell of a job). So then, just who can we rely on to ensure that when great powers are used, they are used transparently, fairly and in the best traditions of probity.
I know – back to my knitting, the breezes in the corridors of power are not the business of a humble ferryman. But I do expect to be busy shortly.