Senate Inquiry, Hearing Program 4th Nov 2011
Sprucegoose
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Hughes Point, where life is great! Was also resident on page 13, but now I'm lost in Cyberspace....
Age: 59
Posts: 3,485
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Just read this story on SMH.com.au. Reading between the lines, I reckon Joyce won't be around to face the enquiry come February. Once FWA hands down their arbitration decision, he would have done his job and be looking for the golden parachute!
That's my tip anyway!
That's my tip anyway!
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Look up and wave
Posts: 359
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That's exactly spot on HH.
The little man has been hired as a change manager. He is not there to make friends. He is there to do what was set in motion by Dixon. He is there to play hardball and see how far they can push.
Once it's done he'll be ran out of Sydney and the new face of Qantas will be there to rebuild the fragmented relationship with staff.
Behind the whole affair is Clifford, the puppeteer pulling the strings.
I bet they have not factored in a nurse style strike though. Fark FWA, fark the lot of them. It's time to take the power back.
The little man has been hired as a change manager. He is not there to make friends. He is there to do what was set in motion by Dixon. He is there to play hardball and see how far they can push.
Once it's done he'll be ran out of Sydney and the new face of Qantas will be there to rebuild the fragmented relationship with staff.
Behind the whole affair is Clifford, the puppeteer pulling the strings.
I bet they have not factored in a nurse style strike though. Fark FWA, fark the lot of them. It's time to take the power back.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: sydney
Posts: 114
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I was wondering all along! AJ did openly say the shutdown was 'his' decision. Is AJ the patsy? Rumour has it that if the EBA's aren't settled by Feb he doesn't get the extra couple of million bonus.
AJ gets the full blame for everything, Clifford & the Board live on. Does Clifford step up???? What's needed is a complete cleanout of the Board & Chairman. The lockout has Clifford's fingerprints all over it. Given his history in the mines etc.
AJ during his actions on Sat the 29th Oct said his PR team had to fly from Mel to Syd on Virgin. Then during his next sentence he said the Chairman had to drive from Syd to Mel. AJ is just the spindoctor!
Come Feb, everyone would have forgotten about the shutdown etc by then. Sounds like they're playing everyone.
AJ gets the full blame for everything, Clifford & the Board live on. Does Clifford step up???? What's needed is a complete cleanout of the Board & Chairman. The lockout has Clifford's fingerprints all over it. Given his history in the mines etc.
AJ during his actions on Sat the 29th Oct said his PR team had to fly from Mel to Syd on Virgin. Then during his next sentence he said the Chairman had to drive from Syd to Mel. AJ is just the spindoctor!
Come Feb, everyone would have forgotten about the shutdown etc by then. Sounds like they're playing everyone.
Last edited by bandit2; 23rd Nov 2011 at 10:14.
Fascinating. Not surprising, but fascinating.
Treating the Govt of the day with contempt is not something he would have taken lightly. I read the hansard deeply and as I said previously there were some clangers in there. He had nothing to lose by saying 'no' - but it strengthens (albeit lightly) the 'workers' case.
As a pilot I can only really speak from my POV. What Irish 1/3 did to FWA by dumping a pilot award in an unschooled persons lap is about to be made fully apparent to some poor schmuck.
What will have been painted out as a simple FWA arbitration ruling is going to place the ruler in the international spotlight.
I doubt they will have any concept of what is their future for the next maybe 12+ months until they start 'arbitrating'.
Any decision they make is going to take them into fatigue risk management legislation in an instant. And they will have the international aeroSPACE community breathing down their necks. Everyone from NASA down.
I doubt the company will 'lose' per se, but gee it will be fascinating to watch. The complexity is nothing short of breathtaking....
And all the while, Virgin made the press today for making a profit!! JB, you are such a loser Qantas does not even think about you anymore - if you are quick, you may just be able to get a foot in the door to buy a few 'long haul' 320's before those genii at Qantas get them all
Treating the Govt of the day with contempt is not something he would have taken lightly. I read the hansard deeply and as I said previously there were some clangers in there. He had nothing to lose by saying 'no' - but it strengthens (albeit lightly) the 'workers' case.
As a pilot I can only really speak from my POV. What Irish 1/3 did to FWA by dumping a pilot award in an unschooled persons lap is about to be made fully apparent to some poor schmuck.
What will have been painted out as a simple FWA arbitration ruling is going to place the ruler in the international spotlight.
I doubt they will have any concept of what is their future for the next maybe 12+ months until they start 'arbitrating'.
Any decision they make is going to take them into fatigue risk management legislation in an instant. And they will have the international aeroSPACE community breathing down their necks. Everyone from NASA down.
I doubt the company will 'lose' per se, but gee it will be fascinating to watch. The complexity is nothing short of breathtaking....
And all the while, Virgin made the press today for making a profit!! JB, you are such a loser Qantas does not even think about you anymore - if you are quick, you may just be able to get a foot in the door to buy a few 'long haul' 320's before those genii at Qantas get them all
Nunc est bibendum
And if AJ has any half beat PR stunt scheduled to get his mug back in a positive light- or even an interview for a puff piece of journalism about him- between now and February then the Senators are going to be all over him like a rash. Too busy to front the Senate and answer questions about the Act which governs the manner in which Qantas business is conducted in Australia but not too busy to do x, y, z. Another PR stuff up in the making?
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Up left - Down right
Posts: 946
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's back on 16:30 Parliament of Australia: Live Broadcasting
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Styx Houseboat Park.
Posts: 2,055
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Top marks – ASU.
My new hero – Ms. Linda White. 
Single handed she has just done more to destroy the evil empire than all the posturing, rhetoric and oft time dribble than the all rest combined.
Calm, cool, informed and authoritative and infinitley believable.
Kudos ASU.
Hire this wizard boys and girls.
Single handed she has just done more to destroy the evil empire than all the posturing, rhetoric and oft time dribble than the all rest combined.
Calm, cool, informed and authoritative and infinitley believable.
Kudos ASU.
Hire this wizard boys and girls.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: sydney
Posts: 468
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Howard Hughes, I think you are right on the money with your statement.
The board has given him a large pay rise to break the unions, and while not completely broken I believe he has succeeded where Dixon has failed.
At the end of the day neither QF or the unions will be able to claim total success but in the words or Sen. Bob Brown he had a big stick behind his back that he didn't show to anyone, until it was too late.
When all is said and done the board will cut him free as he will have become a "liability", but the huge severance he will be given will cushion his fall.
One more thing, if I hear AJ say we had to this so that "going forward"......
that small phrase gets on my goat every time I hear him say it.
The board has given him a large pay rise to break the unions, and while not completely broken I believe he has succeeded where Dixon has failed.
At the end of the day neither QF or the unions will be able to claim total success but in the words or Sen. Bob Brown he had a big stick behind his back that he didn't show to anyone, until it was too late.
When all is said and done the board will cut him free as he will have become a "liability", but the huge severance he will be given will cushion his fall.
One more thing, if I hear AJ say we had to this so that "going forward"......
that small phrase gets on my goat every time I hear him say it.
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Australia
Posts: 175
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just read this story on SMH.com.au. Reading between the lines, I reckon Joyce won't be around to face the enquiry come February. Once FWA hands down their arbitration decision, he would have done his job and be looking for the golden parachute!
That's my tip anyway!
That's my tip anyway!
If that eventuates then I'd expect the pilots could be months and months away.
No legislative time limits on the arbitration by FWA, so there's alot of water to go under this bridge yet.
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Alabama, then Wyoming, then Idaho and now staying with Kharon on Styx houseboat
Age: 61
Posts: 1,437
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Race to the bottom is getting faster?
Both Qantas and CASA seem fixated on meeting world’s best practice
I will tell you - It is a crock of sh#t, a play on words. The reason people bleat on about 'world's best practise' is so they don't have to pin a process or procedure down. When asked 'why do you do things this way or that way' you can simply answer 'it is world's best practise'. More spin deflecting wankery words.
Since the Sydney RB211 unit was disbanded in flight failures of the engine world wide have risen to more than three times the rate that Rolls-Royce had predicted pending the modification of each them according to a program that has been painfully slow, and much slower than CASA anticipated even in June, when its guidance was that this work would be largely completed by early in the New Year and that it was ‘monitoring’ the situation.
Sandlilands is correct, people are rolling the dice here....tick tock tick tock.
But it isn’t fine. CASA is failing in its duty of care to use its discretion in the interests of safety
The CASA Director of Aviation Safety said that he had written to the CEO of every Australian airline in March making it clear that its interpretation of the obligations and responsibilities of the CEO and the board of each airline was concerned not with where maintenance was done, but where it was administered, meaning by a responsible person on behalf of the company and subject to the authority and oversight of the Australian safety regulator.
criticism this writer made that higher Qantas standards were in some instances being replaced by lower international standards.
Now, as for the senate hearing and Linda White, excellent work!
May I answer one of Senator Xenophon's questions? He asked about load control incidents. May I suggest the good Senator talk to the ATSB, they recently published a report after extensive investigations into ramp and load incidents, and there has been an astronomical rise in reported incidents, all the figures are there. The figures are damning, CASA rarely tasks the FOI's to look at load control and it has only been in the past 18 months that CASA have even employed Inspectors to specifically look at this issue. My source tells me that only one inexperienced Inspector is doing this. The reason being? You have executives in CASA who are ex pilots or not even commercial aviation people and they still beleive that the only discipline that is of priority or of any risk is flying ops and the guys sitting at the pointy end!! WRONG WRONG WRONG. This mentality is dangerous and outdated.
Linda White also mentioned the notable decline in QF as an entity since 2004. So true. Anything ring a bell? The reign of slash and burn started ramping up in 2004 under Dixon and then Joyce, up until today. These are not coincidences, the past 7 years of destruction has come to a head sadly, QF now has a frightening workforce/management relationship, a stinking reputation for service and in many areas of industry and media they have a declining reputation for safety.
The only people saying 'everything is ok, no problems, all is fine' are the QF execs, corporate interests and the odd ass kissing Pollie. This entire mess is getting worse, I for one along with countless others am sick to death of raising my concerns. Nobody is lstening.
I don't think Senator Xenophon realizes how much trust and hope many many thousands of people now have in him. QF management won't change, nor will CASA and nor will the Minsiter for bad teeth.
Tick tock tick tock tick tock.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: On a long enough timeline the survival rate for everyone is zero
Posts: 731
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Senate Enquiry into Qantas Sales Act, proceedings, 24 Novemeber 2011
The quality (particularly video) is not the best, but it was captured at the highest quality from APH internet feed. Good enough to get the message. My youtube account has been upgraded so I can post >15 min clips, so the whole thing is in one video.
The quality (particularly video) is not the best, but it was captured at the highest quality from APH internet feed. Good enough to get the message. My youtube account has been upgraded so I can post >15 min clips, so the whole thing is in one video.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: On a long enough timeline the survival rate for everyone is zero
Posts: 731
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
TIMA9X, no problems.
Matters the Senate committee might properly consider in the absence of Alan Joyce
Matters the Senate committee might properly consider in the absence of Alan Joyce
by Ben Sandilands
Updated following this evening’s Senate committee hearing
There is a serious issue that the Senate committee inquiring into proposed amendments to the Qantas Sale Act might wish to pursue later this afternoon, in the absence of the too-busy-to-attend Qantas CEO Alan Joyce, when it is scheduled instead to hear more testimony from CASA the air safety regulator.
That issue is the deteriorating safety situation affecting the Rolls-Royce RB211 engines fitted to most of the Qantas 747-400 fleet, including those that operate Pacific routes and the Sydney-Johannesburg flights that often fly far enough south to see icebergs and are at furthest extent, seriously remote from an emergency airport.
Qantas closed its specialist RB211 maintenance shop at Sydney in 2009, outsourcing the work to the HAESL facility at Hong Kong.
The problem with HAESL is not according to good sources its quality, but the loss of control over those increasingly unreliable engines by Qantas which had a workshop renowned for its experience and capabilities in keeping RB211s at optimum performance.
Outsourcing is at the heart of the current labor disputes at Qantas, and is very specifically relevant to the intentions of the proposed Qantas (Still Call Australia Home) Bill sponsored by Senators Bob Brown, the Greens leader, and the SA Independent Nick Xenophon.
Since the Sydney RB211 unit was disbanded in flight failures of the engine world wide have risen to more than three times the rate that Rolls-Royce had predicted pending the modification of each them according to a program that has been painfully slow, and much slower than CASA anticipated even in June, when its guidance was that this work would be largely completed by early in the New Year and that it was ‘monitoring’ the situation.
Qantas has experienced some particularly serious failures of this engine type as reported here.
As of early November only 23 out of the 92 RB211 engines in the Qantas inventory had been modified.
There were concerns at that time that the statistical risk of two of these engines failing on the one jet had risen from being very low to unacceptably high.
When one engine fails on a four engine jet its sustainable cruising speed and altitude is diminished to a degree and its remaining range capability is degraded, provided of course it wasn’t a catastrophic disintegration as experienced by the Qantas A380 performing QF32 out of Singapore to Sydney on 4 November 2010, which was powered by different Rolls-Royce engines.
If two engines need to be throttled back or completely shut down on the same 747 the performance of the airliner is considerably impaired, and may on remote routes combine with other problems to prevent a jet reaching a remote strip if for example, debris from an uncontained failure has affected control systems.
However since that report in Plane Talking problems involving two RB211 engines on the one 747-400 did affect a flight from Sydney to Tokyo, early last week, although these were not violent engine events preventing the jet from reaching its destination.
That late night flight, QF21 arrived as scheduled the following morning at Narita but after leaving Sydney had been briefly put in a holding pattern after sparks had been seen coming out of engine number 4.
Passengers were later told by the captain that it was just a carbon buildup in the engine and that they had been cleared to continue to Tokyo.
However on arrival the engine was found to contain molten metal fragments and significant damage to the front of the high pressure compressor and the intermediate compressor, exhibiting burnt, curled and abraded blade tips.
At the same time during the flight to Narita the number 2 engine began to use abnormal amounts of oil, and would have run out of oil, causing it to be shut down had it been operating to Johannesburg, which is 3.5 hours further away from Sydney than Tokyo.
Had that jet been on the Johannesburg run, the need to run the remaining three engines at higher thrust settings would most likely have caused the damaged number 4 engine, to fail, producing a two engine failure with extremely serious implications for a flight across the sub Antarctic regions of the South Indian Ocean, many hours from any runway.
The issue for Qantas and CASA is that both are rolling the dice in relation to unmodified RB211 engines over which Qantas has lost the control and expertise required to fix them much sooner than can be done in Hong Kong.
The guidance from CASA has been that as there is no compulsory airworthiness directive applicable to the RB211 modification everything is fine.
But it isn’t fine. CASA is failing in its duty of care to use its discretion in the interests of safety to order that Qantas cease to operate unmodified RB211 engines on 747s across remote routes.
PAGE 2
November 24, 2011
Matters the Senate committee might properly consider in the absence of Alan Joyce
by Ben Sandilands
And the Qantas fetish for outsourcing work it ought to keep in house makes its commitments to safety first look miserably hollow.
Both Qantas and CASA seem fixated on meeting world’s best practice, which is in some instances lesser and cheaper than what is or was Qantas best practice.
This is an important issue. It needs to be resolved immediately, not after war ships are sent to the last known location of a 747 somewhere far from Australia because a board and management seems to be set on monetizing what are seen as unsustainable procedures supporting the established technical excellence underlying the Qantas brand.
Updated following this evening’s Senate committee hearing
In answer to Senator Xenophon the Director of Aviation Safety at CASA, John McCormick, quoted from the safety authority’s estimates of in flight shutdown rates on the RB211 units used on 747s between March 2010 and this month and said that the Qantas rate was clearly higher than desirable but below the world fleet average, and that it did require action, which Qantas was taking.
McCormick quoted from a prepared document which if it can be released Plane Talking wishes to publish.
In answer to questions concerning the safety aspects of outsourcing maintenance McCormick reaffirmed earlier testimony that while Australian AOC holders could source their maintenance to approved facilities wherever located, for the work to be done to the standards set down by engine or aircraft makers, they could not outsource their responsibility or accountability for that work being performed as required.
The work, wherever done, had to be under the direct control of a person in Australia.
The CASA Director of Aviation Safety said that he had written to the CEO of every Australian airline in March making it clear that its interpretation of the obligations and responsibilities of the CEO and the board of each airline was concerned not with where maintenance was done, but where it was administered, meaning by a responsible person on behalf of the company and subject to the authority and oversight of the Australian safety regulator.
He said these letters had concluded with an invitation to each Australian AOC holder to seek their own legal advice as to the correctness of CASA’s views about their obligations and responsibilities. He also said that he understood that the CASA interpretation was endorsed by each airline’s lawyers.
McCormick said he took the view that it was the CEO of an airline who took the decisions as to how much money would be invested in flight safety and maintenance and were thus legally accountable for how much, on what, and with what result.
He cited his decision to ground Tiger Airways domestic operation in July because its management of safety issues did not meet the requirements. He said there were “issues with flying errors, a disregard for the rules, and damage to aircraft” in Tiger, without elaborating on the last mentioned factor.
“We had no confidence they were maintaining a safe enough standard to fly in Australia,” he told the hearing.
McCormick said he would provide a written response to the committee concerning the issues raised in this article earlier today, in particular CASA’s non use of its discretionary powers to prevent 747s with unmodified RB211 engines operating remote oceanic routes and Sydney-Johannesburg in particular, and the criticism this writer made that higher Qantas standards were in some instances being replaced by lower international standards.
The committee considering the Qantas (Still Call Australia Home) Bill and related matters has now adjourned until a date in the New Year.
by Ben Sandilands
Updated following this evening’s Senate committee hearing
There is a serious issue that the Senate committee inquiring into proposed amendments to the Qantas Sale Act might wish to pursue later this afternoon, in the absence of the too-busy-to-attend Qantas CEO Alan Joyce, when it is scheduled instead to hear more testimony from CASA the air safety regulator.
That issue is the deteriorating safety situation affecting the Rolls-Royce RB211 engines fitted to most of the Qantas 747-400 fleet, including those that operate Pacific routes and the Sydney-Johannesburg flights that often fly far enough south to see icebergs and are at furthest extent, seriously remote from an emergency airport.
Qantas closed its specialist RB211 maintenance shop at Sydney in 2009, outsourcing the work to the HAESL facility at Hong Kong.
The problem with HAESL is not according to good sources its quality, but the loss of control over those increasingly unreliable engines by Qantas which had a workshop renowned for its experience and capabilities in keeping RB211s at optimum performance.
Outsourcing is at the heart of the current labor disputes at Qantas, and is very specifically relevant to the intentions of the proposed Qantas (Still Call Australia Home) Bill sponsored by Senators Bob Brown, the Greens leader, and the SA Independent Nick Xenophon.
Since the Sydney RB211 unit was disbanded in flight failures of the engine world wide have risen to more than three times the rate that Rolls-Royce had predicted pending the modification of each them according to a program that has been painfully slow, and much slower than CASA anticipated even in June, when its guidance was that this work would be largely completed by early in the New Year and that it was ‘monitoring’ the situation.
Qantas has experienced some particularly serious failures of this engine type as reported here.
As of early November only 23 out of the 92 RB211 engines in the Qantas inventory had been modified.
There were concerns at that time that the statistical risk of two of these engines failing on the one jet had risen from being very low to unacceptably high.
When one engine fails on a four engine jet its sustainable cruising speed and altitude is diminished to a degree and its remaining range capability is degraded, provided of course it wasn’t a catastrophic disintegration as experienced by the Qantas A380 performing QF32 out of Singapore to Sydney on 4 November 2010, which was powered by different Rolls-Royce engines.
If two engines need to be throttled back or completely shut down on the same 747 the performance of the airliner is considerably impaired, and may on remote routes combine with other problems to prevent a jet reaching a remote strip if for example, debris from an uncontained failure has affected control systems.
However since that report in Plane Talking problems involving two RB211 engines on the one 747-400 did affect a flight from Sydney to Tokyo, early last week, although these were not violent engine events preventing the jet from reaching its destination.
That late night flight, QF21 arrived as scheduled the following morning at Narita but after leaving Sydney had been briefly put in a holding pattern after sparks had been seen coming out of engine number 4.
Passengers were later told by the captain that it was just a carbon buildup in the engine and that they had been cleared to continue to Tokyo.
However on arrival the engine was found to contain molten metal fragments and significant damage to the front of the high pressure compressor and the intermediate compressor, exhibiting burnt, curled and abraded blade tips.
At the same time during the flight to Narita the number 2 engine began to use abnormal amounts of oil, and would have run out of oil, causing it to be shut down had it been operating to Johannesburg, which is 3.5 hours further away from Sydney than Tokyo.
Had that jet been on the Johannesburg run, the need to run the remaining three engines at higher thrust settings would most likely have caused the damaged number 4 engine, to fail, producing a two engine failure with extremely serious implications for a flight across the sub Antarctic regions of the South Indian Ocean, many hours from any runway.
The issue for Qantas and CASA is that both are rolling the dice in relation to unmodified RB211 engines over which Qantas has lost the control and expertise required to fix them much sooner than can be done in Hong Kong.
The guidance from CASA has been that as there is no compulsory airworthiness directive applicable to the RB211 modification everything is fine.
But it isn’t fine. CASA is failing in its duty of care to use its discretion in the interests of safety to order that Qantas cease to operate unmodified RB211 engines on 747s across remote routes.
PAGE 2
November 24, 2011
Matters the Senate committee might properly consider in the absence of Alan Joyce
by Ben Sandilands
And the Qantas fetish for outsourcing work it ought to keep in house makes its commitments to safety first look miserably hollow.
Both Qantas and CASA seem fixated on meeting world’s best practice, which is in some instances lesser and cheaper than what is or was Qantas best practice.
This is an important issue. It needs to be resolved immediately, not after war ships are sent to the last known location of a 747 somewhere far from Australia because a board and management seems to be set on monetizing what are seen as unsustainable procedures supporting the established technical excellence underlying the Qantas brand.
Updated following this evening’s Senate committee hearing
In answer to Senator Xenophon the Director of Aviation Safety at CASA, John McCormick, quoted from the safety authority’s estimates of in flight shutdown rates on the RB211 units used on 747s between March 2010 and this month and said that the Qantas rate was clearly higher than desirable but below the world fleet average, and that it did require action, which Qantas was taking.
McCormick quoted from a prepared document which if it can be released Plane Talking wishes to publish.
In answer to questions concerning the safety aspects of outsourcing maintenance McCormick reaffirmed earlier testimony that while Australian AOC holders could source their maintenance to approved facilities wherever located, for the work to be done to the standards set down by engine or aircraft makers, they could not outsource their responsibility or accountability for that work being performed as required.
The work, wherever done, had to be under the direct control of a person in Australia.
The CASA Director of Aviation Safety said that he had written to the CEO of every Australian airline in March making it clear that its interpretation of the obligations and responsibilities of the CEO and the board of each airline was concerned not with where maintenance was done, but where it was administered, meaning by a responsible person on behalf of the company and subject to the authority and oversight of the Australian safety regulator.
He said these letters had concluded with an invitation to each Australian AOC holder to seek their own legal advice as to the correctness of CASA’s views about their obligations and responsibilities. He also said that he understood that the CASA interpretation was endorsed by each airline’s lawyers.
McCormick said he took the view that it was the CEO of an airline who took the decisions as to how much money would be invested in flight safety and maintenance and were thus legally accountable for how much, on what, and with what result.
He cited his decision to ground Tiger Airways domestic operation in July because its management of safety issues did not meet the requirements. He said there were “issues with flying errors, a disregard for the rules, and damage to aircraft” in Tiger, without elaborating on the last mentioned factor.
“We had no confidence they were maintaining a safe enough standard to fly in Australia,” he told the hearing.
McCormick said he would provide a written response to the committee concerning the issues raised in this article earlier today, in particular CASA’s non use of its discretionary powers to prevent 747s with unmodified RB211 engines operating remote oceanic routes and Sydney-Johannesburg in particular, and the criticism this writer made that higher Qantas standards were in some instances being replaced by lower international standards.
The committee considering the Qantas (Still Call Australia Home) Bill and related matters has now adjourned until a date in the New Year.
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Styx Houseboat Park.
Posts: 2,055
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SS - master of spin.
I was intrigued by SS 'robust' defence of outsourcing all kinds of functions where Big Q is concerned, in almost the same breath as he proudly and loudly declared "We grounded Tiger".
He forgot to mention the reason behind his little Tiger hunt. Outsourced administration and maintenance control, not a couple of dubious 'in flight' episodes.
Spin on John; spin right on by.
He forgot to mention the reason behind his little Tiger hunt. Outsourced administration and maintenance control, not a couple of dubious 'in flight' episodes.
Spin on John; spin right on by.
Hansard for Thursday the 24th:
http://www.aph.gov.au/hansard/senate/commttee/s472.pdf
Good read!
cheers
http://www.aph.gov.au/hansard/senate/commttee/s472.pdf
Good read!
cheers