Senate Inquiry, Hearing Program 4th Nov 2011
It's gone global. Off latest AvWeb:
AUSTRALIANSENATE: NORFOLK ISLAND CRASH INVESTIGATION COULD LEAD TO CRIMINAL PROBE
Does this mean that a certain person could be going to 'star' in a 'chamber' of his own?
AUSTRALIANSENATE: NORFOLK ISLAND CRASH INVESTIGATION COULD LEAD TO CRIMINAL PROBE
Does this mean that a certain person could be going to 'star' in a 'chamber' of his own?
Last edited by Captain Dart; 27th May 2013 at 21:31.
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Styx Houseboat Park.
Posts: 2,055
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The quiet life.
Sunny – no one wants "revenge", everyone just wants to be compliant, secure and to be able to get on with the business they know best; running aircraft operations and a quiet life. To do this, we must have a "honest", competent regulator who can vaguely at least, define which end the smoke comes out, this we simply don't have.
To change this first you must persuade important, busy, expensive people that there is, indeed a problem (done). Having achieved that, you must convince those folks that the problem is real, is here and is happening now (done). Having struggled to get that far and proven the case, you must persuade them to act (done). Now there are many impediments and inconveniences which may affect the speed of that change, but once the pathway has been established, the gods must help the next incumbents of 'positions of power' if this mess ain't sorted and anything else goes pear shaped (Jury out). Or, ICAO and the FAA who both need to occasionally flex their muscles decide to weigh in (pending rule 787). Then the "law unto themselves" party can kiss their funny hats and Hawaiian shirts goodbye.
Alarm the public? - what a bloody good idea that is – they need to be more than just alarmed. Nothing will fall from the sky without CASA administration. Besides, it's very good aerobic exercise to jump up and down a bit; winds your clock up like.
See SIUYA #1920 – the thick plottens. Told ya..
..
To change this first you must persuade important, busy, expensive people that there is, indeed a problem (done). Having achieved that, you must convince those folks that the problem is real, is here and is happening now (done). Having struggled to get that far and proven the case, you must persuade them to act (done). Now there are many impediments and inconveniences which may affect the speed of that change, but once the pathway has been established, the gods must help the next incumbents of 'positions of power' if this mess ain't sorted and anything else goes pear shaped (Jury out). Or, ICAO and the FAA who both need to occasionally flex their muscles decide to weigh in (pending rule 787). Then the "law unto themselves" party can kiss their funny hats and Hawaiian shirts goodbye.
Sunny # 1919 "There are vital functions that CASA performs that need to keep happening, come what may, otherwise the general public will become alarmed."
See SIUYA #1920 – the thick plottens. Told ya..
..
Last edited by Kharon; 27th May 2013 at 21:24. Reason: SIUYA top catch
Creamie has taken me to task for believing there is a potential political solution, but what other solution is there, given the magnitude of the task of changing the culture. I know the shortcomings of the political system as well as most, but I also know that when a department becomes too much of a political embarrassment, politicians will act.
I took you to task for your child-like naivety in believing the LNP will make any substantial changes to aviation safety regulation and investigation if it gets into government in September.
The “political solution” is the only solution. Unfortunately, the dumb/dumber Laborials haven’t got a clue what to do to change aviation safety regulation and, even if they did, their focus is on more ‘important’ issues – i.e. the opinion polls and focus groups. The biggest decisions they’ve made about aviation regulation in a long time is to remove the CASA Board then reinstate the CASA Board, with both decisions having been justified on precisely the same (specious) grounds. 4dogs is correct (as usual).
The fundamental error they all make (and which you correctly identify, Leaddie) is to believe a change in "leadership" of these organisations makes a difference.
Last edited by Creampuff; 27th May 2013 at 21:47.
I took you to task for your child-like naivety in believing the LNP will make any substantial changes to aviation safety regulation and investigation if it gets into government in September.
We will have to see, after September, won't we. I sincerely hope you are wrong.
Tootle pip!!
I hope I’m wrong, too!
But let’s look closely at the language in Mr Truss’s statement (my bolding).
But do you agree with that argument, Mr Truss?
So the only serious issues raised in the report were about “process”, Mr Truss? No serious issues about the competence or integrity of individuals within government? No serious issues about lack of clarity in rules? No serious issues about the attitude of industry to CASA and the ATSB?
And there is an omission from the statement that screams volumes (or maybe I missed this bit): “If elected, a coalition government will move immediately to […insert text that would be inserted by a government that had half a clue and some strategic vision beyond its re-election…].
But let’s look closely at the language in Mr Truss’s statement (my bolding).
The report makes 26 recommendations to improve the conduct, regulation and procedures governing aviation incident investigations, which the Committee argues were not up to scratch.
The Report raises serious issues of process that must be addressed.
And there is an omission from the statement that screams volumes (or maybe I missed this bit): “If elected, a coalition government will move immediately to […insert text that would be inserted by a government that had half a clue and some strategic vision beyond its re-election…].
QONs for Guesstimates tomorrow??
4dogs mentioned the Auditor General:
Well the last couple of audits (from 2000) weren’t complimentary of FF but the trouble is they now refute the ANAO findings an continue to obfuscate any real meaningful action (FF are masters at saying they’ll do something then do SFA!), for those interested
ANAO 2000 report.
ANAO 2002 report (follow up).
ANAO 2010 report.
So it is kind of a dead duck! Unless of course the Senators insist that the whole department gets itself audited in order to prove they had no involvement in obfuscating essential information from the ATSB investigation:
However FF might be good but the Dept is even better at spinning themselves out of the ****e…but it is a good question to ask if for no other reason but to see them squirm!
In case you missed it, as the posting was a bit frenetic this am, “K” had posted this:
The Pete the pot plant QON was answered like this:
And QON 126 (rehash I know) was answered like this:
So those two QONs (at least) deserve a revisit by the Senators??
By the way here is the link for viewing the Guesstimates tomorrow:
http://www.aph.gov.au/News_and_Events/Watch_Parliament
And Creamy this might make you feel all warm and fuzzy! Hot off the cyberpress today:[YOUTUBE]
Doin a Kelpie!
To me, the I-G proposal is about obviating the need for a continuing series of Senate activities to examine what/how/why/when these agencies are doing things in order to get some transparency. For example, the Auditor-General doesn't operate as a "fix" for each of the agencies examined - but the process does force the agency executives to carefully examine the "what/how/why/when" in terms of the potential fallout from public exposure. If an agency fails to protect the relevant Minister from embarrassment, then (in betting terms) the "fix" will soon be "in"!
ANAO 2000 report.
ANAO 2002 report (follow up).
ANAO 2010 report.
So it is kind of a dead duck! Unless of course the Senators insist that the whole department gets itself audited in order to prove they had no involvement in obfuscating essential information from the ATSB investigation:
6.13 Mr McCormick informed the committee that the information from the Chambers Report was used to seek additional funding from the government to improve surveillance activities.14
Which would appear to mean that Mrdak and the department (therefore the Minister) were privy to the findings of the ‘Chambers Report’.
It therefore follows that some of the department were well aware of the systemic issues highlighted in the ‘Chambers report’ and were also party to the implications of withholding that information from the ATSB.
Which would appear to mean that Mrdak and the department (therefore the Minister) were privy to the findings of the ‘Chambers Report’.
It therefore follows that some of the department were well aware of the systemic issues highlighted in the ‘Chambers report’ and were also party to the implications of withholding that information from the ATSB.
In case you missed it, as the posting was a bit frenetic this am, “K” had posted this:
004 # 1915 - I was thinking along the same lines. I note in the latest answers to QON, pot plants and the FAA had almost the same number of words in the reply. Pot plant and FAA expenditure "in the budget" and "all fixed" in two terse, one line replies. The FAA may well be happy with such an agnostic argument and caviller treatment; but let me assure you, the official auditors of Government Pot Plant are not, they are demanding real answers to very tough questions. Perhaps we can get a result at guestimates.
Question no.: 124
Senator NASH: That does not surprise me. Having ascertained that it is $150,000, thank you, Chair. I would hate to think that CASA has to go through the same restrictions that we in this building do and not have plants. I am sure they do a great deal for those of us in this place who need a little bit of greenery every now and again. If you could just take on notice for me the current amount of plants that you have, the current cost of maintenance, who is maintaining them and why you are moving to get a new maintenance regime?
Answer:
Details of CASA’s operating expenses are contained in the Annual Report.
Senator NASH: That does not surprise me. Having ascertained that it is $150,000, thank you, Chair. I would hate to think that CASA has to go through the same restrictions that we in this building do and not have plants. I am sure they do a great deal for those of us in this place who need a little bit of greenery every now and again. If you could just take on notice for me the current amount of plants that you have, the current cost of maintenance, who is maintaining them and why you are moving to get a new maintenance regime?
Answer:
Details of CASA’s operating expenses are contained in the Annual Report.
Senator FAWCETT asked:
Senator FAWCETT: I would like to refer you back to the FAA audit that was conducted a couple of years ago. My understanding is that there were a number of deficiencies found during that. Can you give us a status report of rectifications of those?
Mr J McCormick: We can take most of that on notice, if you like. What I can give you now is that the majority issue was around the fact that we did not have sufficient training, in their mind, for our inspectorate. We had already set in place a training school which is now up and running and, in particular, their concerns were over the inspectors who oversaw what is called FAR 129 foreign operators operating RPT, regular public transport, into the US. It was around the amount of training that people had done, where most of the training in the past of say six or seven years ago revolved a lot around on-the-job training and then people had their
basic training either that way or through a course to start with was perhaps not as extensive as it should have been. Since then we have rectified that completely.
Senator FAWCETT: I am happy for you to take those on notice.
Answer:
CASA was advised by the FAA in late 2010 that, as CASA had rectified all identified deficiencies, all of these matters are considered resolved.
Senator FAWCETT: I would like to refer you back to the FAA audit that was conducted a couple of years ago. My understanding is that there were a number of deficiencies found during that. Can you give us a status report of rectifications of those?
Mr J McCormick: We can take most of that on notice, if you like. What I can give you now is that the majority issue was around the fact that we did not have sufficient training, in their mind, for our inspectorate. We had already set in place a training school which is now up and running and, in particular, their concerns were over the inspectors who oversaw what is called FAR 129 foreign operators operating RPT, regular public transport, into the US. It was around the amount of training that people had done, where most of the training in the past of say six or seven years ago revolved a lot around on-the-job training and then people had their
basic training either that way or through a course to start with was perhaps not as extensive as it should have been. Since then we have rectified that completely.
Senator FAWCETT: I am happy for you to take those on notice.
Answer:
CASA was advised by the FAA in late 2010 that, as CASA had rectified all identified deficiencies, all of these matters are considered resolved.
By the way here is the link for viewing the Guesstimates tomorrow:
http://www.aph.gov.au/News_and_Events/Watch_Parliament
And Creamy this might make you feel all warm and fuzzy! Hot off the cyberpress today:[YOUTUBE]
Doin a Kelpie!
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Australia
Age: 53
Posts: 547
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A number of training positions have been put up on the casa site. I bet training is going to be the magic pill to fix up issues. Oleo said announcement of exec of operations was due soon. So will they blame Hoodie?
In regard to audits of industry I'd be interested in knowing if things improved after closing Bankstown and Moorabbin. I got the impression a lot of time was spent traveling these days.
In regard to audits of industry I'd be interested in knowing if things improved after closing Bankstown and Moorabbin. I got the impression a lot of time was spent traveling these days.
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Styx Houseboat Park.
Posts: 2,055
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And now for the report.
Obligations under international agreements.
2.12 The principal relevant international agreement, the Convention on International Civil Aviation (the Chicago Convention), binds 191 member states, including Australia, to the requirements of the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO).
2.13 Established in 1944 with the advent of the Chicago Convention, ICAO is a specialised agency of the United Nations (UN) and the global forum for civil aviation:
It sets standards and regulations necessary for aviation safety, security,
efficiency and regularity, as well as for aviation environmental protection.
2.12 The principal relevant international agreement, the Convention on International Civil Aviation (the Chicago Convention), binds 191 member states, including Australia, to the requirements of the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO).
2.13 Established in 1944 with the advent of the Chicago Convention, ICAO is a specialised agency of the United Nations (UN) and the global forum for civil aviation:
It sets standards and regulations necessary for aviation safety, security,
efficiency and regularity, as well as for aviation environmental protection.
2.16 In light of this, the ATSB's accident investigations and reports must be assessed against its obligations under the Chicago Convention. The committee received considerable evidence suggesting that the ATSB did not comply with ICAO guidelines and standards in completing its investigation and report on the Norfolk Island ditching. Examples are analysed in later chapters of this report. The committee recognises that the ATSB has filed some differences with ICAO but this recognition does not equate to agreement in all cases.
and we had, from memory, $89.9 million in long-term funding,
My bold and formating.
Last edited by Kharon; 28th May 2013 at 21:31. Reason: If we are to have sappy video - then....vomit at will kids.
Reforming CASA and ATSB A Priority for Labor and the Coalition
From AFR.com, authors Phillip Coorey and Laura Tingle (my bolding):
Rotten to the core.
Federal political parties will begin lining their pockets with millions of dollars in extra public funding well before the September 14 federal election due to a clause which backdates the new pay-outs to April 1.
The government confirmed the first quarterly instalment of about $2.5million will be distributed as soon as legislation passes the Senate next month, boosting the campaign war chests of all players. Some of the September quarter money may be distributed before the election.
The new, additional public funding for so-called “administrative’’ purposes, is worth a combined $20million a year to all parties and elected independents over three years.
It was secretly negotiated between Labor, the Liberal Party and the Nationals over more than a year.
Coming on top of the tens of millions in existing public funding shelled out after each election, parties and independents will now receive $1 for each vote they receive in the House of Representatives and $1 for each Senate vote. The money will be paid at 33c a year and in quarterly instalments.
The backdated payment for the June quarter will be based on the 2010 election results.
Legislation will be introduced on Wednesday and be through both houses when the Senate resumes on June 17. …
The government confirmed the first quarterly instalment of about $2.5million will be distributed as soon as legislation passes the Senate next month, boosting the campaign war chests of all players. Some of the September quarter money may be distributed before the election.
The new, additional public funding for so-called “administrative’’ purposes, is worth a combined $20million a year to all parties and elected independents over three years.
It was secretly negotiated between Labor, the Liberal Party and the Nationals over more than a year.
Coming on top of the tens of millions in existing public funding shelled out after each election, parties and independents will now receive $1 for each vote they receive in the House of Representatives and $1 for each Senate vote. The money will be paid at 33c a year and in quarterly instalments.
The backdated payment for the June quarter will be based on the 2010 election results.
Legislation will be introduced on Wednesday and be through both houses when the Senate resumes on June 17. …
Last edited by Creampuff; 29th May 2013 at 01:09. Reason: Changed heading - the parties look so much the same I confused them for each other.
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Styx Houseboat Park.
Posts: 2,055
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Senate Inquiry into Norfolk ditching.
PA-6.13 Mr McCormick informed the committee that the information from the Chambers Report was used to seek additional funding from the government to improve surveillance activities.
Hansard – We did look at our structure, we did look at where we needed to go forward and at changes we wished to make, and we approached the government and said, 'We need to get this on to a long-term funding strategy.' We put forward a new policy proposal, an NPP, to increase our numbers, which the government also supported, and we had, from memory, $89.9 million in long-term funding, which we are still under
Is there any possible rational, ethical justification for paying for election campaign costs from the public purse?
Is there any prospect at all that we will see in our lifetimes a "keep the bastards honest" party in Australia, a party that has an even chance of achieving a majority.
(I'd vote for a sarcs led, leadie, kharon party. Sure their mums would too)
Last edited by Fantome; 30th May 2013 at 21:58.
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Downunda
Posts: 562
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CASA DAS Reg Reform Video Poohtube
I actually watched the full 8:16 minutes of manure last night. What can I say but 'Lame'! Glad I had the spew bucket handy.
Some video highlights were;
• Another potential 4 years to get the maintenance regs across the line. Unbelievable. How many more millions to be spent? Lets see, 30 years!! Bloody hell, some pilots will have worked an entire career up to retirement within an incomplete system of rules and regulations that should have covered the very process and procedures that should have kept them and their passengers safe. CAsA fools.
• Big Chief Screamimg Skull mentions the term 'grown organically'! Was he referring to office pot plants? Mushrooms in the worm farm? Biochemical fuel for his Comcar (if he remembers to fill it up?
Watch out John, Senator Nash is watching!
• In his robust interview in the Board room in the ergonomicly compliant Brisbane building you can see Pot Plant Pete in the background to the right of Chief Screaming Skull. Is Pete flourishing from all the carbon output and pooh flowing from the Chiefs mouth ?
• Chief Skull mentions people's non understanding of reg writing, the legal requirements etc, and he excitedly points out that you can't just put these things out 'willy nilly'. Another shot at the intelligence of the ills of society?
• And the video, scroll to 5:31 - Jetstar flight attendant boarding the aircraft on the ramp and not wearing reflective vest or hearing protection! Obviously CAsA support this procedural non compliance by including that in the video! Will CAsA now issue a NCN? Conduct a special ramp safety audit?
I can only hope that the next version posted will be to the Hitler video on Poohtube. An overlay of Fuhrer wording in place of The Skulls voice would be
somewhat amusing and more entertaining.
Some video highlights were;
• Another potential 4 years to get the maintenance regs across the line. Unbelievable. How many more millions to be spent? Lets see, 30 years!! Bloody hell, some pilots will have worked an entire career up to retirement within an incomplete system of rules and regulations that should have covered the very process and procedures that should have kept them and their passengers safe. CAsA fools.
• Big Chief Screamimg Skull mentions the term 'grown organically'! Was he referring to office pot plants? Mushrooms in the worm farm? Biochemical fuel for his Comcar (if he remembers to fill it up?
Watch out John, Senator Nash is watching!
• In his robust interview in the Board room in the ergonomicly compliant Brisbane building you can see Pot Plant Pete in the background to the right of Chief Screaming Skull. Is Pete flourishing from all the carbon output and pooh flowing from the Chiefs mouth ?
• Chief Skull mentions people's non understanding of reg writing, the legal requirements etc, and he excitedly points out that you can't just put these things out 'willy nilly'. Another shot at the intelligence of the ills of society?
• And the video, scroll to 5:31 - Jetstar flight attendant boarding the aircraft on the ramp and not wearing reflective vest or hearing protection! Obviously CAsA support this procedural non compliance by including that in the video! Will CAsA now issue a NCN? Conduct a special ramp safety audit?
I can only hope that the next version posted will be to the Hitler video on Poohtube. An overlay of Fuhrer wording in place of The Skulls voice would be
somewhat amusing and more entertaining.
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Styx Houseboat Park.
Posts: 2,055
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And so it begins:-
Sandilands – Plane Talking.
Self explanatory – short read, worth 60 seconds on Ben's piece, wouldn't bother with the spinning ATSB document without a bucket handy. The comments are worth a quick look.
Shame – ATSB......
....
.....
Self explanatory – short read, worth 60 seconds on Ben's piece, wouldn't bother with the spinning ATSB document without a bucket handy. The comments are worth a quick look.
Shame – ATSB......
.........
Last edited by Kharon; 29th May 2013 at 02:35.
Ben’s QONs for Guesstimates!
§ Why is the ATSB spending money producing the so called ATSB Investigator Bulletin when it claims it can’t even afford to raise the flight data recorder from the wreckage of the Pel-Air Westwind from its comparatively shallow location on the sea floor near Norfolk Island?
§ How can anyone trust this organisation after reading and considering this report into the ATSB, and its relationship with CASA when the so-called Investigator, below, starts popping up in their email?
§ How can anyone trust a national air safety investigator that doesn’t make safety recommendations after an accident in which six people had to escape from a ditched corporate jet, a Westwind, contrary to Australia’s international air safety obligations in relation to such accidents?
§ How can a body whose chief commissioner, Martin Dolan, lost the confidence of the Senate inquiry through his dubious testimony, be considered to be under appropriate and responsible administration?
§ How is an ATSB report, which is crafted in concert with CASA, to frame most of the blame for the accident on a pilot, in keeping with Australian expectations of fair, thorough, comprehensive and diligent investigation after Mr Dolan dismissed the relevance of a suppressed internal CASA audit which found the operator Pel-Air to have been in serious breach of dozens of safety standards?
§ Why is it tolerable in Australian government for the ATSB to dismiss as irrelevant such systemic and organisational factors as a CASA audit that found that it had failed very comprehensively to carry out its duties of oversight and intervention in the Pel-Air operation, when such actions by CASA could have prevented the accident?
§ Since when can an individual be comprehensively scapegoated for the failures of two once trusted aviation safety bodies in Australia to properly ensure the safety of the public through the enforcement of rules, the carrying out of duties, and the independent investigation of accidents?
§ Whether the terminology refers to ‘the Labor way’ or coalition insistence of open, transparent and responsible public administration, why would something as rotten as the conduct of the ATSB and CASA in the Pel-Air accident be tolerated for even another day?
Why, how, how, how, how, why, since and whether indeed Ben?? All good questions that deserve answers…top stuff Ben although a somewhat lone wolf domestically….
However it would appear there is more interest media wise internationally than there is here! But then we always expected that from our apathetic MSM like we expected the same level of apathy from our totally disengaged ‘Minister for bad teeth’ and his Dept.
Here’s an interesting exercise…google the following and stand back and count the number of links to the Avweb article…
“Australian Senate: Norfolk Island Crash Investigation Could Lead To Criminal Probe”
Avweb have also now put this sordid tale to their blog page for those interested in making a comment, here is the link for the ‘insider blog’.
Quote from that blog which perhaps highlights that Ben's comments on the Senate report is not a lone opinion from a "tendentious blogger":
§ How can anyone trust this organisation after reading and considering this report into the ATSB, and its relationship with CASA when the so-called Investigator, below, starts popping up in their email?
§ How can anyone trust a national air safety investigator that doesn’t make safety recommendations after an accident in which six people had to escape from a ditched corporate jet, a Westwind, contrary to Australia’s international air safety obligations in relation to such accidents?
§ How can a body whose chief commissioner, Martin Dolan, lost the confidence of the Senate inquiry through his dubious testimony, be considered to be under appropriate and responsible administration?
§ How is an ATSB report, which is crafted in concert with CASA, to frame most of the blame for the accident on a pilot, in keeping with Australian expectations of fair, thorough, comprehensive and diligent investigation after Mr Dolan dismissed the relevance of a suppressed internal CASA audit which found the operator Pel-Air to have been in serious breach of dozens of safety standards?
§ Why is it tolerable in Australian government for the ATSB to dismiss as irrelevant such systemic and organisational factors as a CASA audit that found that it had failed very comprehensively to carry out its duties of oversight and intervention in the Pel-Air operation, when such actions by CASA could have prevented the accident?
§ Since when can an individual be comprehensively scapegoated for the failures of two once trusted aviation safety bodies in Australia to properly ensure the safety of the public through the enforcement of rules, the carrying out of duties, and the independent investigation of accidents?
§ Whether the terminology refers to ‘the Labor way’ or coalition insistence of open, transparent and responsible public administration, why would something as rotten as the conduct of the ATSB and CASA in the Pel-Air accident be tolerated for even another day?
Why, how, how, how, how, why, since and whether indeed Ben?? All good questions that deserve answers…top stuff Ben although a somewhat lone wolf domestically….
However it would appear there is more interest media wise internationally than there is here! But then we always expected that from our apathetic MSM like we expected the same level of apathy from our totally disengaged ‘Minister for bad teeth’ and his Dept.
Here’s an interesting exercise…google the following and stand back and count the number of links to the Avweb article…
“Australian Senate: Norfolk Island Crash Investigation Could Lead To Criminal Probe”
Avweb have also now put this sordid tale to their blog page for those interested in making a comment, here is the link for the ‘insider blog’.
Quote from that blog which perhaps highlights that Ben's comments on the Senate report is not a lone opinion from a "tendentious blogger":
Systemic safety evolves from unbiased understanding of accident causes and on this point, the ATSB dragged the entire safety edifice backwards. In blaming the pilot for the accident almost entirely, it failed to account for known failings in CASA's oversight that, in an ideal world, might have shaped or at least informed his judgment or simply flat-out prohibited the flight in equipment suited to the task only if everything went just right. This kind of flawed accident investigation sows mistrust and is an absolute menace to advancing safety based on known flaws.
Last edited by Sarcs; 29th May 2013 at 06:13.
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Sale, Australia
Age: 80
Posts: 3,832
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This kind of flawed accident investigation sows mistrust and is an absolute menace to advancing safety based on known flaws.
I suspect the Australians will have their hands full fixing this because the Senate report gives the impression that it's a cultural shortcoming within the agencies themselves. At least the investigation into the investigation gives them a good start.
I suspect the Australians will have their hands full fixing this because the Senate report gives the impression that it's a cultural shortcoming within the agencies themselves. At least the investigation into the investigation gives them a good start.
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Australia
Age: 53
Posts: 547
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
5.40pm
They have just been called for an one hour.
7 senators wanting to ask questions.
They are straight into management numbers vs FOI and AWI's etc.
Getting asked lots of questions on Sky sentennel and who owns the IP.
Just stated ex southern region manager is now QA manager.
The AMROBA meeting is being discussed. The number of complaints at the meeting and after.
Ben has written his first article this one regarding Pel Air update.
Pel-Air update: Minister wants to respond with urgency | Plane Talking
Senator Xenophon asked about supporting docs relating to the Chambers report and if all of those had been disclosed.
7 senators wanting to ask questions.
They are straight into management numbers vs FOI and AWI's etc.
Getting asked lots of questions on Sky sentennel and who owns the IP.
Just stated ex southern region manager is now QA manager.
The AMROBA meeting is being discussed. The number of complaints at the meeting and after.
Ben has written his first article this one regarding Pel Air update.
Pel-Air update: Minister wants to respond with urgency | Plane Talking
Senator Xenophon asked about supporting docs relating to the Chambers report and if all of those had been disclosed.
Last edited by halfmanhalfbiscuit; 29th May 2013 at 09:32.
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Downunda
Posts: 562
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oink oink it's gravy time!
Nice one Biscuit!
Yes, Sky sentinel, another dud system that isn't working well. No need for the Senators to search too far for where it came from as everyone knows it came from a mate of one of the GWM Maybe the Senators will request a copy of the tender documents for the I.T approval? Perhaps they will look closely at who authorised the purchase or had input into the decision? Examine rhe ownership of the company who won the 'tender'? Of course CAsA would have followed a robust and rigorous program to ensure that taxpayer money was spent in accordance with the law? Otherwise the AFP could once again become involved?
And QA to be headed up by the ex southern region manager? Let me guess - the brother in law of the above mentioned GWM person? Do these individuals have no shame? No doubt a pay hike will accompany the role.
What did Mel Brooke's say in Blazing Saddles - "it's good to be the king".
I would like to see scrutiny of every promotion internally or manager brought in from the outside in the past 5 years. Look at who they flew with, who they are related to, what is actually on their CV compared to the candidates who weren't successful. It's a disgrace, a sham, a shonky outfit .
So line up boys, put out your hands and lets see if the Senate will pave our palms in gold for the next 12 months! Where to boys - Montreal, Washington, Maldives or perhaps Brussels? Seminars, conferences, lectures, bonuses, allowances, perks, troughs troughs troughs! Oh stop, I think I'm going to climax!!
Yes, Sky sentinel, another dud system that isn't working well. No need for the Senators to search too far for where it came from as everyone knows it came from a mate of one of the GWM
Maybe the Senators will request a copy of the tender documents for the I.T approval? Perhaps they will look closely at who authorised the purchase or had input into the decision? Examine rhe ownership of the company who won the 'tender'? Of course CAsA would have followed a robust and rigorous program to ensure that taxpayer money was spent in accordance with the law? Otherwise the AFP could once again become involved?And QA to be headed up by the ex southern region manager? Let me guess - the brother in law of the above mentioned GWM person? Do these individuals have no shame?
No doubt a pay hike will accompany the role.What did Mel Brooke's say in Blazing Saddles - "it's good to be the king".
I would like to see scrutiny of every promotion internally or manager brought in from the outside in the past 5 years. Look at who they flew with, who they are related to, what is actually on their CV compared to the candidates who weren't successful. It's a disgrace, a sham, a shonky outfit .
So line up boys, put out your hands and lets see if the Senate will pave our palms in gold for the next 12 months! Where to boys - Montreal, Washington, Maldives or perhaps Brussels? Seminars, conferences, lectures, bonuses, allowances, perks, troughs troughs troughs! Oh stop, I think I'm going to climax!!
Last edited by 004wercras; 29th May 2013 at 09:51.
CASA was whipped with some pieces of wet lettuce.
ATSB are currently being whipped with the same.
Both ‘sides’ (a false dichotomy) of the political spectrum rely on the same collection of political hacks, overworked cynics, incompetents, psychopaths, breathlessly keen newbies and other hangers-on to insulate the government from political heat.
The coalition, if elected, will support Mr Dolan.
Think about that.
ATSB are currently being whipped with the same.
Both ‘sides’ (a false dichotomy) of the political spectrum rely on the same collection of political hacks, overworked cynics, incompetents, psychopaths, breathlessly keen newbies and other hangers-on to insulate the government from political heat.
The coalition, if elected, will support Mr Dolan.
Think about that.
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Styx Houseboat Park.
Posts: 2,055
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well, did you ever.
Creamy – I am going to take you task here; those lettuce leafs were not wet. I ask M'lud that our learned colleague retract the "wet" statement, it implies a vicious attack was mounted and may well mislead the jury....
Mind you, between the bloke who droned on for ever and the whining complaints on aircraft noise they did manage to waste a shed load of time, which probably suited some, very well. But enough of irrelevancies; Searle was very good, happy to allow a serious dust up between McComic (who me) and Mac Donald (yes you); but, one chickened out and anyway, no one would hold the jackets. That may have been entertaining.
The Bar Room Barristers, happily ensconced deep within the quiet oasis of the local were fairly well behaved although there was several outbreaks of popcorn throwing, booing and offerings of ribald advice. But the breathless hush that settled over the crew when Fiona's turn came around was electric; all knew the tough questions were coming; and, they did. The peels of glee and howls of delight were sustained by the motley crew well into Beakers dreary little piddle. Then, in the interests of a peaceful life, the set was turned off half way through that – the language was truly getting beyond blue reason.
The consensus: Pete the Pot Plant rules – OK and the coalition had better support him rather than some bland vegetable matter plonked in situ.
PS. Senator Nash; there was great consternation when you mentioned Pete was drying out. We trust that as an elected member of the Senate and honorary member of the BRB, you will endeavour to protect and nurture this important symbol of the "ills of society". He's really all we've got......
Taxi Minister ???.....
Ben Sandilands – Plane talking: has more patience with the – ATSB - and the –Minister - than I do.
Mind you, between the bloke who droned on for ever and the whining complaints on aircraft noise they did manage to waste a shed load of time, which probably suited some, very well. But enough of irrelevancies; Searle was very good, happy to allow a serious dust up between McComic (who me) and Mac Donald (yes you); but, one chickened out and anyway, no one would hold the jackets. That may have been entertaining.
The Bar Room Barristers, happily ensconced deep within the quiet oasis of the local were fairly well behaved although there was several outbreaks of popcorn throwing, booing and offerings of ribald advice. But the breathless hush that settled over the crew when Fiona's turn came around was electric; all knew the tough questions were coming; and, they did. The peels of glee and howls of delight were sustained by the motley crew well into Beakers dreary little piddle. Then, in the interests of a peaceful life, the set was turned off half way through that – the language was truly getting beyond blue reason.
The consensus: Pete the Pot Plant rules – OK and the coalition had better support him rather than some bland vegetable matter plonked in situ.
PS. Senator Nash; there was great consternation when you mentioned Pete was drying out. We trust that as an elected member of the Senate and honorary member of the BRB, you will endeavour to protect and nurture this important symbol of the "ills of society". He's really all we've got......
Taxi Minister ???.....
Ben Sandilands – Plane talking: has more patience with the – ATSB - and the –Minister - than I do.
Last edited by Kharon; 29th May 2013 at 21:23. Reason: Well, he did say wet. I'll allow damp, but wet is a gross overstatement.
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Australia
Age: 53
Posts: 547
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Kharon, yes Fiona wasn't too impressed with the answer to her question on notice taken CASA to task to explain where it was. They well took that QON in the end.
Was it Fiona who asked about taxi costs?
You could see the relief on the CASA faces when the time wasting questions started. Oh well next one will be under a new government with a new minister I'm assuming. Whoever it is I'm sure will have more interest in aviation than Albanese.
Was it Fiona who asked about taxi costs?
You could see the relief on the CASA faces when the time wasting questions started. Oh well next one will be under a new government with a new minister I'm assuming. Whoever it is I'm sure will have more interest in aviation than Albanese.