Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > PPRuNe Worldwide > Australia, New Zealand & the Pacific
Reload this Page >

Senate Inquiry, Hearing Program 4th Nov 2011

Australia, New Zealand & the Pacific Airline and RPT Rumours & News in Australia, enZed and the Pacific

Senate Inquiry, Hearing Program 4th Nov 2011

Old 1st May 2013, 22:30
  #1621 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Styx Houseboat Park.
Posts: 2,053
Contempt – Oh that.

Oleo – I can't see Barsch in the hot seat, that would be a bit like putting Hempel in charge of an A380; I would like to see someone like the ex ICC Hart (spell check) supported by Cook, Aherne and Hood look-alike competition winners; get some sanity, humanity, common sense and an ability to assess into the mix. Whoever is there needs to weed the pot plants, get rid of some of the corrupt deadwood, hunt down the inutile and those captivated by or beholden to external sources. These people may be easily identified, just ask any operator.

1 On my wish list – bring in the Kiwi's to square off the benighted regulations – please.

2 On my wish list a Regional/GA conference where some of the major safety and operational cost issues created by idiotic CASA rulings, policy and whimsy are addressed.

3 On my wish list provide a forum and a fair hearing for those damaged by idiotic CASA rulings, policy, whimsy and plain old ordinary malice.

As it's a longish list, I'll stop there; certain you get the message. Getting Sleepy Hollow sorted out is only the first small step, we still have a hellish mess to clean up after the party.

'Nuff - Sarcs, what's on the menu today?.....

Last edited by Kharon; 1st May 2013 at 22:43. Reason: Emails to FAA/ICAO/AFP/CDPP/ my Mama (she rocks).
Kharon is offline  
Old 1st May 2013, 22:44
  #1622 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 7,622
Be very careful what you wish for. Yes, it appears that house cleaning is necessary, but before that you must make up a big red rubber stamp saying " not to ever be employed as a consultant".

Furthermore, watch out for "outsourcing" deals with the aforesaid "retired" employees.

If this is not done, a little reorganisation, a few retirements and some consulting contracts and outsourcing could leave you in exactly the same mess you are in now - with the "retires" making even more money.

As I said on multiple occasions, change, if it is to happen, will need to be overseen by Department of PM & C or nothing good will be achieved.
Sunfish is online now  
Old 2nd May 2013, 02:15
  #1623 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: S37.54 E145.11
Posts: 637
CASA Internal Ombudsman

Whatever happened to this function inside CASA (1999 ad)?
The Civil Aviation Safety Authority Australia is seeking the services of suitably qualified and experienced people to be appointed to an internal ombudsman panel. CASA is a Commonwealth statutory body and has the function of conducting the safety regulation of civil air operations in Australian territory and the operation of Australian aircraft outside Australian territory. From time to time, allegations are made concerning the conduct of CASA or CASA officers. The Board of CASA has decided to establish a panel of independent experts from which CASA's Director of Aviation Safety can appoint a member, as required, to inquire into particular matters and make recommendations. Panel members will have extensive experience in public administration and in the conduct of similar types of inquiries. CASA invites tenders from suitably qualified persons for appointment to the panel. So far as possible, CASA will aim to establish a panel which comprises both genders.
QSK? is offline  
Old 2nd May 2013, 02:28
  #1624 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Go west young man
Posts: 1,732
Team A and team B!

Kharon:
Oleo – I can't see Barsch in the hot seat, that would be a bit like putting Hempel in charge of an A380.
Couldn’t agree more and not to mention the grey area associations he has with PA/Rex and some of the individuals listed as industry expert advisers on his website.

Not that I really have any idea about how to go about lancing the boil and then cleaning/disinfecting the pus and corruption (sounds like that’s more Sunny’s bag). However maybe it should be broken up into team A, clean up crew, and team B whose responsibility is to clean the slate and simplify the system with experts that have no personal self interest or ties to the past i.e. fresh new start.

Team A: An individual who has no affiliations what so ever with industry or DOIT and their agencies should head up team A. This person would have a background/reputation in the corporate world as a clean up CEO/Director, with experience in auditing and receiverships, whose sole purpose was to reconfigure a struggling company back to the path of profitability within a limited timeframe. Also this person should be capable of discovering and zipping up all the loopholes that Sunny warns of:
Be very careful what you wish for. Yes, it appears that house cleaning is necessary, but before that you must make up a big red rubber stamp saying " not to ever be employed as a consultant".

Furthermore, watch out for "outsourcing" deals with the aforesaid "retired" employees.
Team B is more my bag and is IMHO a lot more interesting.

“K” shines the way..."I would like to see someone like the ex ICC Hart (spell check) supported by Cook, Aherne and Hood look-alike competition winners; get some sanity, humanity, common sense and an ability to assess into the mix."

And that is where ‘in touch with the industry’ organisations like AMROBA come in, here’s a couple of quotes from Sub15:
AMROBA does not believe that Australia & CASA, under the current system of regulatory development, will ever meet ICAO critical elements, as attached, in the same manner as, for example, Singapore has achieved full compliance with the ICAO critical elements. This will not happen until the government of the day takes legislative action to completely overhaul the aviation legislative framework.

Singapore and other Asian countries are leaving Australia behind in relation to aviation business because they have a modern aviation legislative framework. Even New Zealand has a better and more modern legislative framework than Australia.

Over time, the Australian legislative framework has ended up with the wrong mix of requirements in the various Acts and Regulations. Singapore completely restructured their regulatory framework so that the right details are in the right Acts, Orders and Civil Aviation Authority Singapore (CAAS) issued Requirements.
And then this:
The ideal regulatory framework for Australia is one that harmonises in all aspects with NZ so that a full Australasian open aviation market could exist – full recognition of aviation licensed personnel, operators and organisations including aircraft and operational and maintenance standards. Singapore has demonstrated how making Acts that comply with ICAO, instead of being politically amended to meet the pressures of the day, work and creates a safe environment for their communities and industry.
Which would appear to coincide with number one on Kharon’s wish list…“On my wish list – bring in the Kiwi's to square off the benighted regulations – please”…

Hmm “K” for team B perhaps?
Sarcs is offline  
Old 2nd May 2013, 02:59
  #1625 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Salt Lake City Utah
Posts: 3,052
AMROBA makes an important point that is lost on many others.

CASA and the ATSB are the symptom, not the cause.

If you deal with the symptom and not the cause, the symptom will always return.

The cause is the legislative framework, and what successive governments have allowed happen or, through funding decisions, have made happen, within that framework.

Last edited by Creampuff; 2nd May 2013 at 05:43.
Creampuff is offline  
Old 2nd May 2013, 04:11
  #1626 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Holland
Age: 56
Posts: 560
Serious questions. No humour, riddles or tautology.

Ok, my background is technical and safety, this crosses over into processes and procedures and regulatory and legislative requirements. However I do not have a legal background so my open and honest three questions are directed to those who do have specific tailored skills in the legal area.(Humility is not an issue for
me, unlike CAsA I am happy to accept/foster discussion and input on matters I am not fully equipped in). But before I get to that I have a question for Creampuff (or even Sunfish),as follows;

Creamy, Mate are you saying CAsA and ATSBeaker are victims of a rooted legal system? If so I guess we are screwed as how could we change the Australian legal framework? NZ regs work pretty well, aren't they part of the Westminster system as well? Excuse my naivety on higher level legal stuff, but I am trying to paint a clearer picture here, and I do not want to ask Sith Aleck or his Apprentice Anastasi for input as I would like a clear, precise, non fluffed non tautological answer that cuts to the chase.

My three questions are as follows;

Would the suite of regs and rules that are used in say NZ, the USA or Singapore work in Australia?

And,
If there are options out there that would work, exactly what is it that is holding us back? Is it our laws contained within our legal framework or CAsA incompetence?

And,
Is our legal system really all that bad or could the problem, dare I say the 'root cause' of our Regulatory issues be because a selected Lawyer in CAsA has chosen to play, for better words, 'god with the system' in CAsA for over 20 years, and that is the problem? You know, a sort of project, a toy, an experiment funded by the taxpayers?? Not an accusation, just a hypothetical question? Some people enjoy control, usually because they are henpecked, short and have very small genitalia, so perhaps that is a causal factor?

I am not intentionally wanting to drift, but for decades we have talked about how the regs are rooted, how other States have pretty workable systems, and how difficult it is for Australia to 'get it right'.
Hence my wanting to really drill down into what the core problem is, so we can fix it.
If we are dicking around because of the $250 million spent to date on a system that will never work then to that I say 'f#ck it', write it off and start afresh. The money is gone anyway, and besides, that is a drop in the ocean when you consider how much Labor have pissed away in 5 years.

Lets stop polishing the turd, 25 years later and not a spot of sheen to be found, it is still sh#t. Lets hire the Kiwis and fix the damn thing once and for all. New regs, new CAsA and a new ATSBeaker. The time has come to force change. Words are cheap. Lets get off the roundabout and take the first baby steps to fixing the problem. A decent Manager doesn't just throw down his fist and tell you what is f#cked, he provides a solution to the problem, sometimes several.

Lets roll up our sleeves and get our hands dirty. Dear Senators, you have our attention and support, lead the way........

Last edited by my oleo is extended; 2nd May 2013 at 04:39.
my oleo is extended is offline  
Old 2nd May 2013, 06:10
  #1627 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 7,622
I once knew a lawyer in a Government department. He really wanted to be a prosecutor/ judge/attorney General so that he could sublimate the aggression he felt towards those he believed had "wronged" him - which included pretty much everyone.


Getting him to write a simple legal agreement for any of us was an exercise requiring great tact and discretion because he always included the most blood curdling penalty clauses for non compliance with the agreement in drafts which were totally unnecessary, and which none of our clients would ever sign in a pink fit. (Eg: "you agree to pay the Department a fine of $10,000,000 if you breach confidentiality, etc.)

We always had to wheedle and cajole to get these stupid and unnecessary clauses removed. He was like a pit bull terrier that had to always be kept muzzled.

One wonders if CASA might have had to deal with the same problem, but with less success? The use of the "Friday afternoon fax" which is very bad legal form, and the strict liability criminal offences might indicate they still have a problem.

Last edited by Sunfish; 2nd May 2013 at 06:14.
Sunfish is online now  
Old 2nd May 2013, 07:10
  #1628 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Salt Lake City Utah
Posts: 3,052
MOIE

No, it’s not the “legal system”.

It’s the political system.

The political system in Australia has (d)evolved to the point at which the primary aim of the major parties is to obtain and retain power for power’s sake. The major parties are just machines, fine-tuned to that purpose.

Although many individual parliamentarians within those parties may be very decent and dedicated people, they are still part of the machine.

The machine has an automatic response to any issue: How many votes are in it?

Even if all of the allegations that have been made against CASA and the ATSB are true, there is no political imperative to do anything about it. The issue is not one that will make or break any government.

What CASA and the ASTB do, and how well or badly they do it, affects tiny percentages of tiny probabilities of the events that might change a small percentage of votes, sometime in the future. Events that might change a small percentage of votes sometime in the future aren’t on any major party’s radar.

The answers to your 3 further questions are:
1. See above.
2. See above.
3. See above.

Even Sunfish, who understands the above, often makes the mistake of blaming the monkeys rather than the organ grinders.

Last edited by Creampuff; 2nd May 2013 at 07:11.
Creampuff is offline  
Old 2nd May 2013, 07:34
  #1629 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 7,622
Creamy I agree with you, it goes without saying.

I think CASA and ATSB also agree with you - and calculate that they will be left alone accordingly.

There are three events that might change this:

1. An effective PR/ industrial campaign by the GA industry, perhaps including strikes.

2. A major accident.

3. What I will call "chance" - I know of one chunk of a Commonwealth Department that got overhauled and employees removed after they got a little too arrogant in front of a bystander who just happened to be a very, very senior public servant.
Sunfish is online now  
Old 2nd May 2013, 11:53
  #1630 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: dans un cercle dont le centre est eveywhere et circumfernce n'est nulle part
Posts: 2,606
it’s not the “legal system”. It’s the political system.
The legal system has duped the political system for too long. Strict liability is a product of a document not picked up by the bored and unintelligent politicians then not allowed to progress by interferrence with a dis-allowance motion in the Senate, where it was seized upon by persons in considerable power and abused.

The whole scam of reversal of burden of proof lies with those that allowed this abomination.

Creampuff, It's my opinion your hands are not clinically clean in this regard.

A metaphor, mixed or other, is Captain Bligh rowing away in a whaler while the crew toss potplants out of the ship.

What vessel are you on exactly?

Last edited by Frank Arouet; 2nd May 2013 at 11:57. Reason: Re-reading Mutiny on The Bounty.
Frank Arouet is offline  
Old 2nd May 2013, 12:08
  #1631 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Go west young man
Posts: 1,732
“Political will”!

Love it Frank!

Sunny:
Creamy I agree with you, it goes without saying.
I’ll second that Creamy…AMROBA…ALAEA…etc!

AMROBA have been consistent in stating the obvious about ‘political will’ for change and openly discuss the risks/implications if there is no change to the current status quo, AMROBA News letter15/01/2013 (my bold):
Like all other political/judicial enquiries, this one has and will attract a lot of very sincere and appropriate submissions from many quarters. The outcome will be recommendations to add a provision in an Act or two, maybe additional regulations BUT never a real recommendation to rewrite the aviation legislative system to modernise our antiquated aviation system.
And from ALAEA Fed sec proposed letter to pollies (my bold):
Instead, CASA surveyors are out hounding small Airline Operators because they have made paperwork errors whilst genuine complaints against major carriers in this country are left idle. There are problems with this organisation that is meant to be keeping our skies safe. Whether it is through lack of funding or corporate capture, a review of how they operate is well overdue. The current Government appear to be out of their depth in dealing with these issues, we need to ensure that the next Government isn’t.
However Creamy then goes on to say...
"The machine has an automatic response to any issue: How many votes are in it? Even if all of the allegations that have been made against CASA and the ATSB are true, there is no political imperative to do anything about it. The issue is not one that will make or break any government..."

Which is again stating the obvious! The no ‘political imperative’, ‘no votes’ maybe relevant for the upcoming election, especially in the current political environment, but it is also in the interest for the major political parties to be keeping an eye on the future, Political parties also need to sustain future voting power.

Therefore if future votes could be dependent on acting or amending a not so popular policy now, then history indicates that politicians will take a punt (albeit occasionally), suck up the short term loss and act (classic example was John Howard’s gun buy back!).

In the case of the inquiry with all the damning available evidence and the levels of agency ineptitude displayed, would the pollies risk sitting on their hands and do nothing only to get ICAO dumping the ‘State’ down to level two in a future audit?

Taking the ‘sit on hands’ approach could have the potential to become ‘political suicide’ with the knock on effect of being downgraded to level 2 and the subsequent damaging effects it would have on the economy. The voter backlash could create a big enough swing to see a pollie/government out of a job!

Allowing the current status quo to continue could also lead to the decimation of General Aviation. The loss of the GA sector would be a significant hit to GDP and leave a lot of people out of a job. People without jobs are also voters!

Hmm interesting conundrum the Senators are in!

Sidenote: AG 'contempt for the rules' ?? Oh and Fed Sec gets a mention!

Last edited by Sarcs; 2nd May 2013 at 22:06. Reason: Hope no video footage pops up on pooh tube??
Sarcs is offline  
Old 2nd May 2013, 22:27
  #1632 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Salt Lake City Utah
Posts: 3,052
Yes Frank, I’m a CASA stooge…

Almost every piece of primary legislation passed by the parliament includes strict liability offences. If you think parliamentarians don’t know what strict liability means, and don’t know that it’s sprayed all over the pieces of legislation they pass, it’s you who’s unintelligent.

But keep arguing with us monkeys, if it stops you being bored.
Creampuff is offline  
Old 2nd May 2013, 22:41
  #1633 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Styx Houseboat Park.
Posts: 2,053
Political wall.

The mathematics of gambling, or the laws of probability and complex systems have long fascinated me. For the amusement and delight of the Bar Room Barristers a 'book' with tote odds is often opened and beers are bet (that means shouts, so a one beer bet can get expensive). A book for the current Senate Inquiry was proposed and for the first time ever, I not too reluctantly declined.

There are too many imponderables to consider; Creamy has some parts of the negative correctly identified, Sunny adds to the matrix while generating further (unqualifiedly) aspects, such as public service mandarins with long sharp knives. Frank, Oleo and Sarcs provide equally variable options. All valid and to some extent, quantifiable.

Parts of the equation which puzzle are el Jefe's fury, the general disgust of the committee, residual anger from being 'white-papered' by their previous inquiry, a natural response to being treated with utter contempt (see AMROBA). Then there is the wonderful bipartisan atmosphere, Searle becoming a significant 'team' player. Then the certain knowledge that if there is another cock up like PA resulting in an international full audit or a down grade; the bone will be well and truly pointed at the politicos who took the soft options. This renders the selection of a coefficient well nigh impossible.

Then there are the variables to consider, e.g. the percentage chance of a preventable accident occurring have increased, due to several factors: among them a persistent arrogant disdain for accepting external suggestions from industry, coroners, overseas expert bodies or CASA generated and ignored evidence. The departure of good, honest, qualified, expert men (and women) and the almost useless replacement parts, makes identification of the variable very blurred.

There are one or two constants; for example, Xenophon has been a steady, able supporter of matters aeronautical and must, by now have a fairly good grip on the essentials: Fawcett is an able, qualified, experienced man and I believe a honest one. There are many other contestants which may be drafted into the equation.

But the real head scratching, bung twister is industry expression and public reaction to being spoon fed CASA manipulated safety reports which should provide a solid base line for mathematically reducing the odds against anyone ever going for an involuntary swim, fully clothed in the middle of the night; but don't. Once you accept being bullied, subjugated, or swindled – you're stuck with it. Bit like the old saw about boiling frogs.

Nope, you guys are braver, bolder men than I am to call it, but the equation [email protected]#t in :: S*it% out seems to hold.

Coffee Minnie – oh, and cancel the GWM meeting; Gobbles has got the Skype working.

Last edited by Kharon; 2nd May 2013 at 23:26. Reason: PAIN - 2600 for the ICAO choccy frog comp.
Kharon is offline  
Old 2nd May 2013, 23:21
  #1634 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 7,622
There is an old bureaucratic tactic called "file stuffing" and the various threads on PPRuNe and elsewhere are the modern equivalent if they can be coherently collated.

The method of file stuffing is very simple. Every time your "target" makes the slightest mistake or infringement, you add a description of it to the targets file. It matters not how trivial. The file includes things like the gardener being caught mowing the nature strip outside the ops room at 7.00am in defiance of noise polution laws in 1981 or the fact that one of your pilots made a log error in 1972, or the day in 1993 when an FOI with a tape measure caught you refueling an aircraft 15cm short of the required building clearance.

It matters not what, when or how trivial the alleged offence committed, the purpose is to achieve sufficient thickness of the file, preferably at least Three inches, Two or more volumes is even better. When the appropiate opportunity appears - say you commit an offence, you strike. You figuratively throw the file on the judges desk and state "look, Judge! This person is a serial offender, look at the size of this file of his offences!

It matters not what you say then because no one has the time or inclination to listen to your long winded justifications, the damage is done, you have been successfully painted as a serial offender and scofflaw.

CASA seems to do this a lot and the AAT falls for it every time. However, Two can play this game and it appears that One or Two people are keeping a list of CASAs apparent transgressions and when the time unfortunately comes when there is another major accident, we can sit back and say "why are we not surprised?".

Last edited by Sunfish; 2nd May 2013 at 23:23.
Sunfish is online now  
Old 3rd May 2013, 00:07
  #1635 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Go west young man
Posts: 1,732
Top post "K"...so basically your saying their damned if they do and damned if they don't?? The Senate estimates beer'n'nuts hearing on the 29th could be required viewing!

Sunny:
However, Two can play this game and it appears that One or Two people are keeping a list of CASAs apparent transgressions and when the time unfortunately comes when there is another major accident, we can sit back and say "why are we not surprised?".
Hmmm does a 100mb file count? Suppose in hard copy it would be well over 3 inches and enough pages to challenge any recent proposed CASR parts.

Noticed Ben has picked up on the AG mobile phone story...love it Ben!

Correction for Senate Estimates date:
Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport
Agriculture, Fisheries & Forestry: Monday 27 May and Tuesday 28 May 2013
Infrastructure and Transport: Wednesday 29 May 2013
Regional Australia, Local Government, Arts & Sport: Thursday 30 May 2013
So that would be a week after the report comes out...could still be required viewing!

Last edited by Sarcs; 5th May 2013 at 07:33. Reason: correction for estimates date!
Sarcs is offline  
Old 3rd May 2013, 00:23
  #1636 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Sydney
Posts: 53
Conversation with FAA

So, had good talk with FAA this morning, 15:30 their time. Can't say too much just yet. He was very concerned with the shenanigans going on with down under with Aviation. I am leaving hospital today and will send all the docs etc to him, which is what he requested. Fingers crossed.
Ziggychick is offline  
Old 3rd May 2013, 02:51
  #1637 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Holland
Age: 56
Posts: 560
Good work Ziggy! Hope you are feeling better too
Had I realised you were going to be in Hospital for so long I would have sent you a few Bob Seger CD's (very soothing) and perhaps a copy of the White Paper to put you to sleep or make you laugh!
Hey maybe the next time you are in hospital having treatment ESSO and his friends may visit? Hope somebody fuels up his car!

Sunfish, indeed CAsA have such robust files on many operators and individuals. Said files are archived in TRIM and retrieved from the bowels of the system, dusted off and placed in the end of a prickly pineapple as and when required!
The Regulator is very fond of the 'dirt file' (apologies to those who are offended by apostrophes). My guess is those who structured the early DCA were ex members of J. Edgar Hoover's surveillance teams, and those practises have been passed down to this day.
Sadly procedure 4.1.2 Grassy Knoll has never been complied with in regards to CAsA! (Just kidding boys, don't get your SMS in a knot!)

Use of these files becomes almost frenzy like especially when an industry person files a compliant with the ICC or lodges in the AAT. Coincidence? Hmmm.

Last edited by my oleo is extended; 3rd May 2013 at 02:54.
my oleo is extended is offline  
Old 3rd May 2013, 11:32
  #1638 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Victoria
Posts: 80
CAsA do NOT hold files on pilots.

Sunfish, I hate to disappoint but CAsA do NOT hold files on pilots. In 2007 the now head of LSD, one A. Ana stasi, formerly of OLC, made this statement under oath, having been warned by S.M. Fice of the AAT, that he would be guilty of perjury if he didn't tell the truth.

When again asked with reference to Medical Files, he admitted that YES we do hold those. So it would appear that CAsA is the only Government Enterprise that do not hold files. In their usual concerned fashion, Natural Justice and Rule of Law and all that decoration no action was taken.

Unfortunately when at law school Adam must have missed that 15 minute lecture on Ethics.

So unless things have changed CAsA will NEVER, I repeat NEVER go so low as to keep a file on us pilots. Not if Adam has anything to do with it.
Stan van de Wiel is offline  
Old 3rd May 2013, 18:23
  #1639 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 7,622
I fail to understand how CASA could NOT hold files on pilots, electronically or otherwise. There must be a file or why would you receive an ARN?

Furthermore there is a thing called a public records act or equivalent that prohibits destruction of certain records and prescribes retention periods for others.
Sunfish is online now  
Old 3rd May 2013, 20:08
  #1640 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Styx Houseboat Park.
Posts: 2,053
Rank and File.

There are philes of all types at FF, anglophiles, bibliophiles, coprastasphile, defecaloesiophile etc.....

But the ones Sunny refers to exist, on both sides of the fence. The more interesting ones however begin and end with the CASA system. Yes Sunny there are a few files laying about the place, hell I've even got one or two myself – somewhere about the place. Great rainy day reading. Three steps to Nirvana:-

1) Get a copy of all the CASA procedure for achieving anything –

2) Obtain all the associated paper work,

3) Then, simply confirm that the prescribed, published procedure was followed.

It sounds dry, but be assured it's not. Eight times out of every 10 you will find that procedural 'slips' have been made: the ninth will have deliberate breaches, omissions and will have 'run around the back' of the system. Number ten will blow your socks off. One in every ten will be a deliberate manipulation of system, a stretch of the regulation and contain some heroic bluff, puff and spin. Of course this makes a happy playground for the legal chaps and chapesses, but not too much fun for those now caught within 'the system'.

Now, I notice AA getting a mention herein. The BRB jury is still out on this chap, lots of discussion and many, many tales; but little solid evidence of malice and aforethought. The BRB reckon his is a tough job, trying to keep the lid on and cover everyone's ass. It is what he gets paid for; sure he's a lawyer and a little like Harvey in that, like it or not, they both do a good job – for the client i.e. CASA. A legal type once told me that they are obliged to act on the clients brief (Creamy, sit down) and are not in a popularity contest, but paid to win. That aside, the man will always take a call and respond to a written request - you may not like the response, but at least AA does not run away or ignore. I can appreciate that.

I wonder though – just how often a man (or woman) in AA's position has to run about the place, putting out fires not of his (or her) making. How often there is a pregnant "Oh Faruk" moment when a gross obscenity lands on his desk, out of the blue, exploding like a fully loaded chamber pot lobbed through the window. I expect he'd do his job and clean up the mess, protect the troops and satisfy the demands of his lords and masters. I'd bet the pot plants are bloody well fertilised.

BRB jury stalemate, benefit of the doubt and decision delayed until creditable evidence presented M'lud; if, and we must, apply the play the ball, not the man rule, to be fair.

The word Fairyophile just popped into my old wooden head – I'll ask Gobbles if it's kosher....

Last edited by Kharon; 3rd May 2013 at 22:22. Reason: Vainglorious attempt at being PC – Yuhk, yuk, yak. & second coffee syndrome.
Kharon is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.