Kharon, there is logic in what you are saying good sir about 'CASA accepting mitigation of the NCN finding, but not closing off the NCN due to the 'root cause not being identified'. However the issue is this - CASA like lots of paperwork, evidence, confessions etc etc. By the operator filling in the root cause they are admitting in writing that they admit and
accept that
they stuffed up. This is as good as a murderer admitting in writing that he committed a murder, annotating how he did it and then providing evidence to back his confession (maybe a fingerprint or DNA sample). CASA couldn't give a smear of donkey pooh whether an operator 'understands how they screwed up'. It's about ensuring that CASA aren't scrutinised, implicated or have blame attributed to them for any cock ups, and of course it is about building those 'secret files', you know, the ones that don't exist on operators or individuals apparently, but are miraculously tied up in a bundle and shoved up your Hershey highway on a day that suits them! (Perhaps after a complaint to the ICC??)
And in Barriers case it is very interesting. You see Barrier was never one for 'towing the CASA line', and I mean that in a political sense, or as Sunfish would say; 'to put it another way', Barrier didn't take any CASA bullsh#t. They had received support from local politicians and other operators over the years (this is not a revelation of secrets, it is a well known fact), and CASA FNQ didn't like this. But life goes on, slowly slowly catch the monkey, and when the timing was right Barrier received a Class A piece of CASA wrath at its very best - show cause at Xmas!! Ding ding that's it folks, down tools, pack up and go home, the show is over, no replay and no encore, done, goooone.
Anyway, on a separate note, I know that CASA, in its charter, must apply due diligence. Also, as an example to industry it must record its data, trend information, secure documents in a robust workable system (funny how TRIM and Sky Sentinel fail at this), and produce said information upon request by someone such as the ICAO or even the ANAO.
So my suggestion to the Senators would be this. Once the scope of the upcoming estimates/inquiry/inquisition has been set, ask respondents to supply documentation on how they received an unscheduled audit, regulatory action, a show cause, increased surveillance, persuaded to remove a key person such as HOFO or HAAMC,
after a complaint was made to the ICC or taken up with the AAT! If the operator can supply detailed notes including dates, times and locations, even go so far as to create a gant chart, timeline or flowchart to help paint the picture, I think all will be very very surprised at what they see unfold
This pattern of documented evidence could be perhaps compared to Fort Fumbles record of events (only if they can find them of course), after all an admin clerk could have accidentally shredded them, perhaps a power outage occurred and then a subsequent power surge corrupted those specific TRIM files? Oh dear, these things can happen I have heard!
Anyway, it is past 1659 on a Friday and I have more data searching to undertake. As Leadie would say, Tootle Pip.