While we wait for the AAI report response to be tabled, the WLR panel to brief the miniscule, the TSBC tick-a-box review report and eventually Mr FAA’s knock on the door (re Ben’s piece: Australia suppresses criticism of its aviation safety body)…..
Kharon:
Stone walls, a hanging ceiling and one tiny window to wriggle though, perhaps the ToR the Canadians are working with may put a light on; but I doubt it. Today I filed with the BRB my version of the Beaker school report from the Canadian cousins, there a bottle on it, for who gets the closest – more later (if the report ever turns up and Commissioner Dolan ever gets done tweeking it).
Perhaps an option for the miniscule, which may temporarily appease Mr FAA, could be to bring in the ICAO audit team from 2004 for a revisit (audit review) of the ATsB. There would certainly be no manipulated ToRs as the procedure for audit is all laid out in the previous 2004 report…
“….2. OBJECTIVES AND ACTIVITIES OF THE MISSION
2.1 The audit was carried out following the standard auditing procedures provided for in ICAO Doc 9735 — Safety Oversight Audit Manual with the objective of reviewing the relevant activities conducted by the ATSB to determine whether the SARPs of Annex 13 and associated guidance material were being followed. The objective was also to offer advice, as applicable, to the ATSB in implementing these provisions.
2.2 The ICAO audit team reviewed the ATSB compliance with the SARPs set out in Annex 13 and other relevant procedures, and adherence to guidance material and relevant safety-related practices in general use in the aviation industry, as referred to in such material. The ICAO audit team also reviewed whether the ATSB had the organizational structure and the legal status necessary to carry out its obligations.
2.3 The ICAO audit team also reviewed the ATSB’s regulatory provisions, examined records and documentation and conducted interviews, in order to make its findings and recommendations, on the basis of safety oversight audit general requirements, as follows…”
Basically put there is no need for Beaker's ToRs and dodgy, non-transparent agreements, as it is all nicely laid out (transparent) within the ToRs (attachment A) of 2004 and the audit/review is guided by ICAO Doc 9735 — Safety Oversight Audit Manual.
{Comment: Hmm…I wonder why Beaker didn’t think of this, after all ICAO are the experts on such things and the original team would only require a small refresher to come up to speed on the last decade’s err…shenanigans??}
Refresher and ICAO team CV for the miniscule; here is the report from the ICAO team of 2004: ICAO AUDIT REPORT OF THE ATSB (Canberra, 31 May to 4 June 2004)
It is interesting to note, in that report, that some of the recommendations/NCNs are still apparently outstanding or response actions have only fairly recently been updated, example (reference: pg 33 Appendix 4-3):
FINDING:
The ATSB’s policy is to place the primary focus on fare-paying passengers and to investigate all fatal accidents (unless they involve sport aviation). However, accidents that are considered to have little potential benefit for prevention may not be investigated in detail. In such cases, the ATSB would not necessarily attend the scene, conduct an in-depth investigation or produce an extensive report.
RECOMMENDATION:
The ATSB should investigate all accidents as defined by Annex 13. The depth of such investigations should be at least to a level where it is evident that no further enhancement of aviation safety can be achieved.
CORRECTIVE ACTION PROPOSED BY THE ATSB:
This recommendation is related to the earlier recommendation at Appendix 2-2 and the ATSB response at 2-2 is also relevant. The ICAO audit recommendation that all accidents should be investigated at least to a level where it is evident that no further enhancement of aviation safety can be achieved has significant budgetary implications that are outside of the control of the ATSB. While many accidents are essentially repetitive and involve little new safety learning and diminishing returns in their investigation, it is rarely possible to be so absolute as to assess that no further enhancement of aviation safety can be achieved by further investigation.
The ATSB will, before the end of August 2004, advise the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Transport and Regional Services, the Departmental Secretary and the Department of Finance and Administration of the audit recommendation and its budgetary implications.
ACTION TAKEN BY THE ATSB:
The ATSB formally briefed the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Transport and Regional Services on the final ICAO Audit and its recommendations by Minute dated 22 October 2004. This Minute was also the formal mechanism for briefing the Department of Transport and Regional Services (DOTARS) Secretary and Deputy Secretaries. The ATSB briefed the Department of Finance and Administration (DOFA) at Division Head level on the ICAO Audit with a focus on recommendations CE-3/02 and CE-5/03 on 23 November 2004 via the Department of Transport and Regional Services’s Chief Financial Officer. On 21 December 2004 the Department of Finance and Administration responded that any additional funding was a matter in the first instance for the Minister's consideration against other priorities in his portfolio. DOFA stated also that only proposals with specific authority from the Cabinet or the Prime Minister were eligible for budget consideration.
In 2007-08 the ATSB was funded to undertake approximately 80 new aviation safety investigations of which about 30 are of the more comprehensive variety. Choice of the 80 from approximately 8000 accidents and incidents reported was based on published selection criteria. In addition, for the financial years 2007-08 to 2009-10 the ATSB was provided with additional budget funding to assist Indonesia with its transport safety improvement program.
STATUS: Completed (monitoring).
Well this is helpful miniscule…
..(from above) it would appear that the audit report ATSB actions etc would have had to come across your desk from time to time, not to mention that the former miniscule (JA) surely would have briefed you on where it was at in ’05??
So it is a good fit (miniscule) for the Beaker TSBC review charade conundrum, perhaps you’ve already considered it?? 
I suppose the other way you could go (miniscule) is to personally request the TSBC consider using the 2004 ICAO audit team’s ToRs for their review and plead that they may also consider carrying out the review in reference to ICAO Doc 9735 — Safety Oversight Audit Manual , might help you save face and bring some veracity to the subject…forever helpful L&K K2 (Sarcs)