Merged: Senate Inquiry

[Frank Arouet]

This post highlights what many have been fighting for so long without much to show for the effort. It's too simplistic to say CAsA is running a protection racket for "compliant" organizations who have been shown to be unsafe to the very real and tangible wellbeing of the travelling public. Indeed too many lives have been wasted by waxing over one accident so that nothing is learnt to prevent the next. We can highlight this concept with a time line starting, (just for example), with Seaview, progressing to Monarch, progressing to Whyalla, progressing to Lockhart River, progressing to Pel Air...etc.. etc..


The real problem is cronyism at all levels of government and industry. We will possibly see and confirm this if someone from Kowloon gets the DAS job. We probably see this now with the Canadian report and we can say with a degree of accuracy that the mix of characters across the spectrum with Rex is a valid observation. Politicians won't help you obviously. They are thin on loyalty excepting only if you are powerful enough to keep them in power.


It's nothing to do with mates rates, more like a secret society with funny handshakes and this needs to be addressed by someone outside of Australia. The UN sticks out like a sore thumb and specifically the convention on human rights. Tim Wilson at Australian Human Rights Commission is probably the best start point. He has yet to be tarnished and has instant UN access. If that fails, cc the complaint to head office in Geneva or wherever is home these days for that lot.


It simply needs someone with enough real person signatures and identities to make the complaint.


Even Slater and Gordon will take this on if the complainants agree on a common theme and there's a quid in it for them. Past approaches have failed because the Australian aviation industry is full of "alpha" male and female players who, if locked in a room by themselves would all agree the system is crooked but wouldn't in a million years come up with a common goal. They would end up killing each other after the third drink.


I've seen it all before. the last time about 3 months was wasted fighting over the acronym that best suited the purpose. Christ! No wonder I gave up.


In my Army days an appreciation was simple;


1) Situation.. Well we know about that.
2) Mission.. This is tricky. It should be one sentence.
3) Execution.. How do we go about achieving the mission. UN perhaps.
4) Admin and logistics.. Well, book keepers and note takers are needed.
5) Command and control.. Faaark! "alpha" males (and females). This is where you loose me.


When you lot can agree to a mission statement and commander, let me know. Until then, I'll just hang around for therapy.


BTW. I have no case that CAsA needs answer to me. My matter was settled years ago. Indeed I could say I had a win of sorts, (only cost me money. I retained my sense of humor) and still talk with some from the factory. However I can see what the problem is, and although many ask my opinion personally, few take notice to act on my advice. I can only support your efforts and urge you to maintain the impetus. You are, what we call in the Army, divided, and as such you will be conquered.


Kick some arse Ziggy, they need a job and a leader.