View Single Post
Old 12th Dec 2014, 04:43
  #2528 (permalink)  
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Go west young man
Posts: 1,732
BRB hypothesis & the many layers of the Mandarin Onion.

Good catch UITA but I would suggest that Thommo maybe the Director of International Standards in name only and is merely another Murky glove muppet... What no longer surprises me is the sheer audacity; of a) M&M placing a person with a marine background as the chief international conduit to ICAO... and; b) M&Ms current cunning scheme to gain control of ICAO - by nominating McComic to the ICAO top job (fully supported by Albo)..

While on the subject of ICAO - & M&Ms current report card on all things aviation - there was several mentions by Senator Fawcett on the Willyleaks ICAO/FAA audit in the s379 Hansard. The one that caught my eye was the following to McComic where you'll see that Murky again chimes in..:
Senator FAWCETT: Mr McCormick, you are obviously aware of WikiLeaks and their discussion around the FAA and ICAO audit that took place recently. Some of the comments that came out of that—undertrained, underfunded, incapable of understanding the obligations to airline safety oversight—were fairly damning. I have two questions that come out of that. Firstly, has CASA been underfunded in your opinion?

Mr Mrdak: I will jump in early to put on the record that the Australian government has a clear position of not commenting in relation to WikiLeaks matters and matters pertaining to cables. I ran through this a little earlier, Senator, in relation to a question that was asked about a maritime issue. We do not comment on what representatives of other governments may wish to comment on, and certainly not in relation to the material that has been published on WikiLeaks. Having said that—

Senator FAWCETT: That is fine. Can I rephrase the question.

Mr Mrdak: Perhaps if you rephrase it outside that issue.

Senator FAWCETT: Do CASA believe that they have had adequate resources to perform the functions that they know they are supposed to perform to the level that they wish to perform them?

Mr McCormick: At this stage, yes.

Senator FAWCETT: Without commenting on a foreign government's proposal, what it showed to a certain extent was that, with an audit from an independent body, things were highlighted. Some of the comments that have come out from the government and CASA have shown that things have been addressed, so clearly some areas were identified. Is there an internal process of auditing or is there an external auditing body that looks at CASA's operations on a regular basis, rather than having to rely on an overseas body to come through and highlight issues?

Mr McCormick: If I can take the last part of that first, I took over in March 2009 and you will find in Hansard that I stated in, I think, May 2009 that the issues I saw in CASA revolved around four areas. They were: refocusing on our core activity, which is the regulation of aviation safety; increasing the governance of the organisation, which of course includes audit; making sure our staff are properly trained and deployed; and, lastly, completing the regulatory reform program in the most expeditious manner. Those comments and those plans that we put in place predate the FAA audit visit to Australia. Without commenting on the source of some of that information, we work very closely with the FAA. Of course the FAA, like everyone, is entitled to their own opinion, and in some of these areas we would differ...
From that we get the impression that the Angry Man barely holds his contempt in check for the ICAO/FAA audit process . However he does claim ownership of the damning FAA audit report and suggests that he is well on the way to addressing these problematic FAA findings.

The trouble here for Murky is he is party to a State ICAO tripartite agreement and has the ultimate responsibility for reporting to ICAO/FAA on the progress of the response to the 2008 audit findings. And for the average person at the back of the room it would appear that not much has changed since...

There is also the small matter that while under M&Ms control the list of notified differences to ICAO has not reduced one iota, in fact it has grown by more than 10 pages - H18/14 Making Australia by far and away the leader of the pack in non-compliance to ICAO SARPs - no one comes close...

Drift over and back to the BRB hypothesis where "K" was referring to s379... For those interested may I suggest it is also worth referring to the QONs/AQONs for 2011 Estimates, especially Aviation & Airports see here .

Next we will fast forward some 2 years to the Additional Estimates where again Senator Fawcett takes up the cause on behalf of Secondary Airport users/operators, in particular Jandakot & Bankstown - go to Aviation & Airports bookmark here.

Hmm...some light reading in that lot...

Sarcs is offline