Senate Inquiry, Hearing Program 4th Nov 2011
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Megiddo
Age: 60
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The John and Jonothon files - robust is a must!
Let's play a game called 'wank word'.
Sarcs,
You nailed it. The Doc's writing style is as identifiable as Flyingfiends writing style. Here are some 'word' examples of what Mr Skull supposedly wrote in his statements:
"For the purposes of developing a clearer, more accurate theoretical understanding of the dynamic nature of the common law tradition, this, too, may constitute a preferable analytical perspective, and for the purposes of fostering a genuinely constructive understanding of the perenial and seemingly intractable issues having to do with the relationship between law and custom in the Pacific Islands today, the adoption of such a perspective may well provide the best approach to a functional understanding of the common law tradition".
Hmmm.One could assume that the angry man and the expert on PNG voodoo dolls have morphed into one? But how could that be? by way of a magic trick, smoke n mirors, occult or magic practise?
And a blast from the past. The Beaker and Doc's take on accident investigations and Accidental Justice. A most interesting and robust read, but yes, it is filled with some tautological rubbish:
http://www.casa.gov.au/wcmswr/_assets/main/lib100059/sep-oct11.pdf
Sarcs,
You nailed it. The Doc's writing style is as identifiable as Flyingfiends writing style. Here are some 'word' examples of what Mr Skull supposedly wrote in his statements:
- embrace this
- robust criticism
- tendentiously self-serving and frequently false accusations about, and the vindictive public disparagement
- it impugns
- demagogic vitriol behind the facade of a pointed evaluatory critique
- denigrate,vilify
- 'not hearsay and tautological rubbish
"For the purposes of developing a clearer, more accurate theoretical understanding of the dynamic nature of the common law tradition, this, too, may constitute a preferable analytical perspective, and for the purposes of fostering a genuinely constructive understanding of the perenial and seemingly intractable issues having to do with the relationship between law and custom in the Pacific Islands today, the adoption of such a perspective may well provide the best approach to a functional understanding of the common law tradition".
Hmmm.One could assume that the angry man and the expert on PNG voodoo dolls have morphed into one? But how could that be? by way of a magic trick, smoke n mirors, occult or magic practise?
And a blast from the past. The Beaker and Doc's take on accident investigations and Accidental Justice. A most interesting and robust read, but yes, it is filled with some tautological rubbish:
http://www.casa.gov.au/wcmswr/_assets/main/lib100059/sep-oct11.pdf
Last edited by Valley of Hinnom; 5th Dec 2012 at 04:17.
Hinn old mate you've got to hand it to the Doc he is quite clever in a devious voodoo kind of way.
First he weazles his way into the DAS good books and proposes to help him with his anger management issues by carefully crafting speeches, letters, e-mails that tone down the DAS true nature but still give a hint of the 'madness within'.
Which is kind of a double play because the Doc can still plead pure allegiance until the DAS becomes a liability and then he can point to all the 'indicators' of the 'madness within'....
Pure genius really it's a bit like a modern day voodoo doll.
So Hinn does that make the Doc the 'cleaner' or the 'Don' for the GWM? Or maybe he is both?
First he weazles his way into the DAS good books and proposes to help him with his anger management issues by carefully crafting speeches, letters, e-mails that tone down the DAS true nature but still give a hint of the 'madness within'.
Which is kind of a double play because the Doc can still plead pure allegiance until the DAS becomes a liability and then he can point to all the 'indicators' of the 'madness within'....
Pure genius really it's a bit like a modern day voodoo doll.
So Hinn does that make the Doc the 'cleaner' or the 'Don' for the GWM? Or maybe he is both?
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Megiddo
Age: 60
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
'Is Don is good'?
So Hinn does that make the Doc the 'cleaner' or the 'Don' for the GWM? Or maybe he is both?
But wait, there is more.There will be instant reform and 'out with the old and in with the pooh' - There will be Swastica's in each office, aviation 'blog' sites will be shutdown, the 'ills of society' arrested, and in place of the NCN comes the firing squad and gas chamber. There will be no tolerance for error, violations will be punishable by 'jackboot' and incarceration. Those not holding a PHD in ancient sourcery mating rituals or have the ability to promulgate, postulate and embrace philosophical banter will receive life long bans from industry.
And imagine the endless opportunities for the 'Don' to publicly expouse those intellectual thoughts, to ratify those opulent tautological murmurings and high level ramblings and spread those messages throughout the aviation community.
No my dear friend Sarcs, this 'Don' shall not retire and take up driving the Volvo to picnic grounds around Canberra. No, he will not retire to the Congo and write books about spiritual law and the application of voodoo in modern society, and no he will not take up spending Thursday mornings shopping at Woolworths then drinking discount coffee at Gloria Jeans. No No No, the 'Don' is here for the long haul, or at least until ICAO and the FAA give us an almighty bollocking or there are several robust smoking holes!
Now, put that in a glossy brochure and shove it under the Board's nose!
Safe tautology for all
Last edited by Valley of Hinnom; 5th Dec 2012 at 06:17.
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: dans un cercle dont le centre est eveywhere et circumfernce n'est nulle part
Posts: 2,606
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"doc be son of pilick". Exposed due to small case.
The masses have risen, the Troika is exposed. The other is a criminal and will be hunted down like a doctor looking for a one arm man.
Thus the retribution should begin from the bottom up. (upwards) where drunks persecuting the sober should be hung out to wither and dry.
The masses have risen, the Troika is exposed. The other is a criminal and will be hunted down like a doctor looking for a one arm man.
Thus the retribution should begin from the bottom up. (upwards) where drunks persecuting the sober should be hung out to wither and dry.
Bloodnok: I'll turn a deaf ear.
Seagoon: I didn't know you had a deaf ear.
Bloodnok: Yes, I found it on the floor of a barber's shop
Seagoon: I didn't know you had a deaf ear.
Bloodnok: Yes, I found it on the floor of a barber's shop
Frank thought this was somewhat appropriate for that quote
[YOUTUBE]
Maybe the Don (ADAS) could take a leaf out of the King Charles Book of punishments for all us anonymous, tautological, bloggers and GA riff raff!!
[YOUTUBE]
Maybe the Don (ADAS) could take a leaf out of the King Charles Book of punishments for all us anonymous, tautological, bloggers and GA riff raff!!
None of you is helping the cause of better safety regulation, better accident investigation and better air services provision.
One of the reasons CASA is effective in downplaying criticism is the patent hyperbole used by some of its critics. Lying? Corruption? Nazi comparisons?
I'm assuming that you don't know how stupid it looks, because if you did you wouldn't post it.
You accuse individuals in CASA of lying and being corrupt, when that’s not the problem (at least not in this case or in any other case of which I’m aware).
The problem is that the sum of the individual parts in the system does not produce a whole that is competent to deal expeditiously and appropriately with everything with which the system is expected to deal. In that kind of system, the expedience of the ‘blame the pilot’ line in the Pel-Air ditching is, understandably, irresistible, but undesirable.
Each of the individuals in the system disclaims responsibility for the system’s failure to deal competently with, for example, completion of the regulatory reform program, following up recommendations arising out of investigations and coronials, and ensuring there’s clarity of AIS information responsibilities for aircraft inbound to Norfolk. Bob was overseas at the time, George was in a different job at the time, Fred only joined a year ago.
From the Hansard of the 22 October 2012 hearing:
So there we have a sizeable chunk of the senior management of CASA, including the person who’s in effect CASA’s PIC, and each of them considers himself to have no responsibility for a commitment made by CASA, on the public record, which remains unfulfilled 10 years later. There are numerous other examples.
By implication, each of those persons, including the CEO, is saying it’s not his responsibility to inform himself of, or to progress the resolution of, any issue, except for the ones that land in his own ‘in’ tray after arrival in his current position.
The Committee got effectively the same line from Airservices.
That commitment was made before I took over as CEO. Why would it be my problem?
It was my job to deliver on that commitment, but I moved to a different job in the organisation before it was delivered. Why would it be my problem?
I was aware the commitment was made, but I didn’t move across to the job of delivering on those kinds of commitments until later. Why would it be my problem?
We’re all aware that the commitment was made. Someone (else) will (hopefully) get on with doing something about, soon.
Airservices witness one day: We’re waiting for a safety recommendation.
ATSB witness a different day: We don’t issue safety recommendations, because proactive action to address safety issues is more effective.
No one’s lying.
Everyone’s doing their blinkered bit to the best of his her abilities.
But that’s not good enough, because no one’s responsible for patently obvious systemic problems (unless you're the PIC of NGA...)
That is why the Committee – the whole Committee – is so frustrated and astonished by what it’s hearing.
One of the reasons CASA is effective in downplaying criticism is the patent hyperbole used by some of its critics. Lying? Corruption? Nazi comparisons?
I'm assuming that you don't know how stupid it looks, because if you did you wouldn't post it.
You accuse individuals in CASA of lying and being corrupt, when that’s not the problem (at least not in this case or in any other case of which I’m aware).
The problem is that the sum of the individual parts in the system does not produce a whole that is competent to deal expeditiously and appropriately with everything with which the system is expected to deal. In that kind of system, the expedience of the ‘blame the pilot’ line in the Pel-Air ditching is, understandably, irresistible, but undesirable.
Each of the individuals in the system disclaims responsibility for the system’s failure to deal competently with, for example, completion of the regulatory reform program, following up recommendations arising out of investigations and coronials, and ensuring there’s clarity of AIS information responsibilities for aircraft inbound to Norfolk. Bob was overseas at the time, George was in a different job at the time, Fred only joined a year ago.
From the Hansard of the 22 October 2012 hearing:
Senator FAWCETT: There is actually a broader issue, though, Mr McCormick. There is no closed-loop system so that recommendations that are made by ATSB, that CASA agrees—particularly we have seen a number where, in a coroner's court, the coroner has said, 'We'll close out this issue, because ATSB made a recommendation and CASA said they will do it,' and then a decade later there is has been no action. Is that an issue for the travelling public? I hear you that you were not there for that whole 10 years, but we are talking about a system now, not personalities. Is the system not working as it should?
Mr McCormick: I cannot speak for what happened in 2000. I only got here in 2009. …
Senator FAWCETT: Mr Boyd, were you around?
Mr Boyd: Yes, but not in that position.
Senator NASH: Anybody else? Mr Farquharson? Dr Aleck?
Dr Aleck: I was in Montreal. [CP note: Apart from the stint in Montreal, Dr Aleck has occupied various senior management positions within CASA for an accumulated period of about 10 years to the present.]
[CP Note: Messrs Farquharson and Anastasi, both of whom have been in CASA for all or most of the period 1999 to the present, were also at the table but, according to Hansard, remained silent.]
Mr McCormick: I cannot speak for what happened in 2000. I only got here in 2009. …
Senator FAWCETT: Mr Boyd, were you around?
Mr Boyd: Yes, but not in that position.
Senator NASH: Anybody else? Mr Farquharson? Dr Aleck?
Dr Aleck: I was in Montreal. [CP note: Apart from the stint in Montreal, Dr Aleck has occupied various senior management positions within CASA for an accumulated period of about 10 years to the present.]
[CP Note: Messrs Farquharson and Anastasi, both of whom have been in CASA for all or most of the period 1999 to the present, were also at the table but, according to Hansard, remained silent.]
By implication, each of those persons, including the CEO, is saying it’s not his responsibility to inform himself of, or to progress the resolution of, any issue, except for the ones that land in his own ‘in’ tray after arrival in his current position.
The Committee got effectively the same line from Airservices.
That commitment was made before I took over as CEO. Why would it be my problem?
It was my job to deliver on that commitment, but I moved to a different job in the organisation before it was delivered. Why would it be my problem?
I was aware the commitment was made, but I didn’t move across to the job of delivering on those kinds of commitments until later. Why would it be my problem?
We’re all aware that the commitment was made. Someone (else) will (hopefully) get on with doing something about, soon.
Airservices witness one day: We’re waiting for a safety recommendation.
ATSB witness a different day: We don’t issue safety recommendations, because proactive action to address safety issues is more effective.
No one’s lying.
Everyone’s doing their blinkered bit to the best of his her abilities.
But that’s not good enough, because no one’s responsible for patently obvious systemic problems (unless you're the PIC of NGA...)
That is why the Committee – the whole Committee – is so frustrated and astonished by what it’s hearing.
Mr McCormick: I cannot speak for what happened in 2000. I only got here in 2009. …
Senator FAWCETT: Mr Boyd, were you around?
Mr Boyd: Yes, but not in that position.
Senator NASH: Anybody else? Mr Farquharson? Dr Aleck?
Dr Aleck: I was in Montreal. [CP note: Apart from the stint in Montreal, Dr Aleck has occupied various senior management positions within CASA for an accumulated period of about 10 years to the present.]
Senator FAWCETT: Mr Boyd, were you around?
Mr Boyd: Yes, but not in that position.
Senator NASH: Anybody else? Mr Farquharson? Dr Aleck?
Dr Aleck: I was in Montreal. [CP note: Apart from the stint in Montreal, Dr Aleck has occupied various senior management positions within CASA for an accumulated period of about 10 years to the present.]
The technical name I was taught in organizational behaviour at business school is "diffusion of responsibility".
The best historical example I know was the debacle of the treatment of the British sick and wounded in the Crimean war - over which Florence Nightingale made such a fuss.
The eventual royal commission found that the entire mess was caused by the non arrival of a shipment of hay, due to stress of weather. So no one was to blame, it was an act of God.
But lets cut to the chase. Is it not "troubling", perhaps even hypocritical, that an organisation like CASA, which preaches and administers criminal sanctions for aviation offences of strict liability, and which sheeted home the entire blame for the Norfolk Island crash on the pilot while allegedly deflecting and concealing any criticism of its own role, should opine that "no one is to blame" for its own administrative shortcomings????? Are not its own administrative mistakes, when they occasionally happen, offences of strict liability? Does it apply the same standards to itself as it demands we apply to our own operations?
To put that another way: Perhaps if CASA could issue itself with a "request for corrective action" (RCA) as it does to any participant in the rest of the industry whose performance it judges as less than stellar, its own alleged problems would be speedily fixed.
Physician heal thyself.
Last edited by Sunfish; 5th Dec 2012 at 20:18.
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: on the edge
Posts: 823
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Perhaps if CASA could issue itself with a "request for corrective action" (RCA)
I am bemused Sunfish that you say the ATSB is ignoring the Reason Model to lay blame against PIC, yet you want them to lay blame against an organisation.
perhaps even hypocritical
The average lifespan of the CASA CEO/DASR is 4 to 5 years. Mr McCormick is therefore likely to be gone, soon. (Sooner, if he continues to lead with his chin.)
And that’s one cause of the systemic problems.
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 705
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interesting Observation
Throughout this whole sorry tale it is interesting that the one document that demonstrates the inadequacies of both the ATSB "investigation" and the requlator's past and present deficiencies was the special audit of Pelair that ran concurrently with the investigation. Of course blind Freddy could assess the ATSB output and call it the crock that it is but it is another thing in an organisation (I'm using the word loosely) like CASA to draw attention to obvious flaws in previous oversight of that and other operators. Not the best career move. From what I heard one of the audit team got a "well done" and is now being shafted for some mysterious reason.
Last edited by flying-spike; 6th Dec 2012 at 07:37.
Throughout this whole sorry tale it is interesting that the one document that demonstrates the inadequacies of both the ATSB "investigation" and the requlator's past and present deficiencies was the special audit of Pelair that ran concurrently with the investigation
However it can be explained because the ATSB and CASA were running a parallel investigation (as per the MOU) and therefore the ATSB relied on the CASA investigative team (ALIU) to give a summary of the findings of the Special Audit.
The bigger question that needs to be asked is if the Special Audit Team had the bases covered for any possible enforcement action to do with the company management, pilots etc..etc why then deploy an investigative team at all?
Although the accident had the potential to be very serious with possibly up to six fatalities the potential violations would seem to be encompassed by the remit of the special audit team.
Supposedly the investigative team carry out accident investigations when there may potentially be signs of breaches of the Act that could lead to criminal or administrative charges. So the investigators are essentially compiling a report that could end up being the basis of a brief of evidence.
However if you read the CAIR 09/3 it doesn't draw on any evidence chain, document exhibits, use any forensic analysis (especially as they refused to recover the CVR/FDR), basically that report reads like a 'bare bones' version of the ATSB Final report except it was produced over two years before!
Here's a link to the CAIR 09/3 that has been extracted and copied from Attachment 4 of the FF submission (hopefully it'll work as I'm new to zippyshare):Zippyshare.com - CASA investigation report.pdf
Last edited by Sarcs; 7th Dec 2012 at 01:00.
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Styx Houseboat Park.
Posts: 2,055
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's a puzzle.
FS # 990 –"From what I heard one of the audit team got a "well done" and is now being shafted for some mysterious reason".
Examine them further against the known 'modus operandi' of the infamous Sydney regional office and the management situation within that office. To do so 'publicly' would require the Senate to widen the scope of the current enquiry and provide protection to those who know the 'facts'. The answers are there, it's a question of getting the RRAT to the point where they can understand the need to expose the underlying reasons for the current mess. There is only a tissue thin layer between the Senate and an accurate appraisal of exactly what happened, and why.
Consider a hypothetical scenario:- after the event, the standard make CASA shine response from Sydney was to 'develop' a 'hand crafted' brief, designed to destroy the operator and the pilot. This is done by the amplification of various breaches to ensure they become "Breaches" (SOP). The Breaches are then 'fitted' into various parts of multiple, assorted laws and – hey presto, you have your neatly packaged 67 serious 'safety' items available for use in the AAT. Crucifixion details complete. Then comes the curve ball, for some reason the crucifixion is cancelled and a tea party is ordered instead. But what to do with all this lovely paperwork and the honest men who compiled it?
The rest you know; Sarcs is on to it. But will the truth ever surface from under the paper mountain?; that friend Spike is a bloody good question.
"You will not apply my precept," he said, shaking his head. "How often have I said to you that when you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth? - Holmes – The Copper Beeches.
Last edited by Kharon; 6th Dec 2012 at 19:53.
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Holland
Age: 60
Posts: 560
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
one of the audit team got a "well done" and is now being shafted for some mysterious reason
Which audit team Mr Spike? The special audit team or the less competent audit team?
If you refer to the special audit team then that may be the very problem Mr Spike. If one does their role correctly and professionaly it could make the more senior yet incompetent folk there look even more stupid? It could also be frowned upon that a robust in-depth audit took place because that can result in a lot of deficiencies being aired, which in turn could lead to more work for the regulator to undertake, and they wouln't enjoy that would they? It may also make the regulator appear to be incompetent of not doing it's job correctly if an Operator has excessive findings.
So it is probably no surprise that the special audit has actually backfired on CASA from that perspective. Hence the alleged shafting of one of the auditors.
Is that CASA's version of 'just culture 101'? It looks as if the real issues, the bigger problems in the place stem from the top tier rather than the frontliners. Cut away the chaff at the top and some robust wheat may shine from underneath?
On a final note, my guess is that at the end of the day as long as the executives receive their bonuses and huge salaries they won't care what happens to the audit team anyway.
And can anybody out there explain what CASA managements bonuses are based upon? Even better, can anybody explain why they receive bonuses in the first place? On some of the data posted on prune I have worked out that almost 800k was paid out in bonuses last financial year? It certainly can't be based on performance that is for certain? How is it quantified? What are each persons KPI's and/or measurables? The DAS earns roughly the same as the Prime Minister (who by the way is also overpaid). His minions are not far behind. That these guys get paid so high and get bonuses is beyond belief and beyond reasonable. Time for the Senate to recomend an overhaul of that lucrative set-up don't you think? Might be time for the business class travel perk for the executives to be removed as well, and make them travel on the cheapest economy fare of the day, like all the other plebs have to. It might help Swanny in his quest for the almighty surplus.
Last edited by my oleo is extended; 7th Dec 2012 at 01:35.
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Australia
Age: 53
Posts: 547
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And can anybody out there explain what CASA managements bonuses are based upon? Even better, can anybody explain why they receive bonuses in the first place?
Business class travel for execs and international. Domestic for low level staff is cheapest economy of day.
That perhaps indicates where cost cutting is/was happening and where it isn't.
Last edited by halfmanhalfbiscuit; 7th Dec 2012 at 16:02. Reason: Elephant in room.
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: West of SY OZ
Posts: 82
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
casa and Bonuses
Sorry if this is a bit of a thread drift, but maybe the casa bonus system is an item (d) part of the Senate investigation.
What were the bonuses given to move the Moorabin and Bankstown district offices into Melbourne and Sydney respectively.
Maybe a FOI would be instructive as to the amount of bonus given to the "bright spark" who dreamed up the idea to move the GA people away from where they do all their "work":
Any ideas??
What were the bonuses given to move the Moorabin and Bankstown district offices into Melbourne and Sydney respectively.
Maybe a FOI would be instructive as to the amount of bonus given to the "bright spark" who dreamed up the idea to move the GA people away from where they do all their "work":
Any ideas??
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Australia
Age: 53
Posts: 547
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Advo-cate
Good point. How much time is wasted traveling from Melbourne office to Moorabbin these days? Does the GA community still have the same level of contact with casa?
The Melbourne office is close to designer shops in Collins street. Oh and corporate headquarters of airlines. But inspectors should be close to industry!
Consolidating offices started a number of years back. At least Brisbane is at the airport that makes sense. The Melbourne office was ex Fair Work, right size and available. Possibly made at regional manager and operations exec. Ultimate sign off higher?
Oxford took over Moorabbin office.
Good point. How much time is wasted traveling from Melbourne office to Moorabbin these days? Does the GA community still have the same level of contact with casa?
The Melbourne office is close to designer shops in Collins street. Oh and corporate headquarters of airlines. But inspectors should be close to industry!
Consolidating offices started a number of years back. At least Brisbane is at the airport that makes sense. The Melbourne office was ex Fair Work, right size and available. Possibly made at regional manager and operations exec. Ultimate sign off higher?
Oxford took over Moorabbin office.
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Styx Houseboat Park.
Posts: 2,055
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Another one bites the dust.
Oct 20.2009: CASA is required to carry out surveillance which, on one level—that is the level that is best generally understood—involves physical presence on an aerodrome and the actual inspection of aviation activities that are being undertaken. Given this fact, and viewing all information at arm’s length, I am unable to reconcile a decision to close Townsville with the superior desire to increase surveillance.
Oct 20.2009: The future of aviation in Australia relies on the success of general aviation. To be blunt, if we kill GA, we kill aviation and many other activities that rely on it. In summary, I look forward to contributing to the ongoing success of aviation in Australia. I cannot do anything about the past, but I can do a lot about the future, and that is what I intend to do.
Another one bites the dust
Last edited by Kharon; 7th Dec 2012 at 20:17.
Biscuit, CASA may be at BN Airport but the BN operators have their respective FOI's based out of the state at Tamworth likewise the Toowoomba turbine guys.
This should be changed as its been a total failure
This should be changed as its been a total failure
Way back when I started at Ansett at Tullamarine, Casas predecessor lived literally across the road. I visited once or twice. I expect the real surviellance and "enforcement" in those days took place at the airport club - as it should do.
Centralising CASA in 35 Collins street is a winning strategy, you get to charge for travel time which increases revenue. You have all those nice restaurants and cafes, Pellegrinis, Becco, Florentino, the Italian Waiters club, good book and jewellery shops. Worked there myself.
Centralising CASA in 35 Collins street is a winning strategy, you get to charge for travel time which increases revenue. You have all those nice restaurants and cafes, Pellegrinis, Becco, Florentino, the Italian Waiters club, good book and jewellery shops. Worked there myself.
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Australia
Age: 53
Posts: 547
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Centralising CASA in 35 Collins street is a winning strategy, you get to charge for travel time which increases revenue. You have all those nice restaurants and cafes, Pellegrinis, Becco, Florentino, the Italian Waiters club, good book and jewellery shops. Worked there myself.
megle2 Biscuit, CASA may be at BN Airport but the BN operators have their respective FOI's based out of the state at Tamworth likewise the Toowoomba turbine guys.
This should be changed as its been a total failure
This should be changed as its been a total failure