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 27th May 2013, 07:31
  #1901 (permalink)  
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: On track to somewhere good!
Posts: 36

Having a CASA top level team who are fully competent and understand the industry and actually know what they are trying to achieve would be a big help. Someone who believes in smaller and more effective government and does not address every shortcoming with a call for "more resources" would be a good start!
Selcalmeonly is offline  
Old 27th May 2013, 09:54
  #1902 (permalink)  
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 158
Gee Frank tell us what you really think.

I've always had doubts about you, and you write like someone I know, and would prefer never to have known.
You also thought you knew who I was so I wouldn't be relying on your powers of deduction.

I put Sunnie's recent post down to an LSD flashback or a decent dose of Chemtrails from QF94 (remember all those QF bashing posts Sunny, you thought they had forgotten).

As Kharon stated:

I put up an argument, you disagree; in a civilised society it's called
debate. Now then; anytime you wish to debate the issues – here I stand, ready to be proven wrong. But the results of cheap shots from the sideline could be best seen on the news the other night.
Play the ball Frank, some of your postings are borderline loopy.

I have been intrigued to watch the initial euphoric outpourings of "follow the gourd the holy gourd" then, as the realisation set in that nothing is going to change, the recriminations and the pack starting to attack itself.

The next deadline to watch is the announcing of the new ministry after the election, but its not something that I will be holding my breath for.
Lookleft is offline  
Old 27th May 2013, 10:50
  #1903 (permalink)  
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: sydney
Posts: 1,406
So Leftie it would seem that your advise is everyone should just move on, there's nothing here to see, as Australia's "world class" regulatory suite is the envy of the developed world, under which the industry will go from strength to strength? and of course generate safety outcomes that the world can only dream of.
Funny though. I have yet to find anyone in the industry who has that view, CAsA excepted of course, but they are not part of the industry.
Okay I'm prepared to make a little prediction.
If there is no change, GA within ten years, will cease to exist except for essential services which will need to be heavily subsidized by government.
Our domestic airlines will end up in foreign hands, be foreign registered, foreign maintained and crewed by foreigners, because our flying training will not be able to compete to provide the pilots and its three times cheaper to maintain aircraft on other countries maintenance reg's.
Just as our motor industry discovered, its hard to compete against a cost base four times lower than ours, so will the aviation industry.
Its incredible to think we sent people to NZ to help with their regulatory reform project, which they completed in around five years for around $5 million, and offered to sell their reg's to us for one million, but we rejected the offer to spend over 20 years and more than a quarter of a BILLION dollars to create "The envy of the World"

Last edited by thorn bird; 27th May 2013 at 11:17.
thorn bird is offline  
Old 27th May 2013, 11:07
  #1904 (permalink)  
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: australia
Posts: 1,261
...Love it..!

Bit of stress and angst at the Fort???...so out with the CAsA phrase book that covers all occasions...
Look up re ..(seek) "additional funding ... to improve surveillance activities"

This is an old one, been used on a few other occasions...gives the impression that CAsA is short staffed and under funded, and any current failings are due to these lack ofs.

History will show that when Ministers fall for the sucker bait..its all about safety ,you see...then CAsA will blow the dough on pet projects like new luxury accom and buildings.!
This latest cry is the same old, same old diversion and distraction BS.

Dont use the existing workforce more efficiently or target and eliminate wasteful spending....just hold the hand out for more dollars.
MOre dollars is More safety !..the place is like a bloody charity. Give, give.

Wasters Award last week goes to the DAMP plonker who flew up from BNE to CNS to go blow an outfit (OF TWO) in YMBA..which already had small Co./ own DAMP testing in place. Then stated .."short of time, have to get back to BNE". Back next week. And the overall cost is????
DOnt you love to see yr dollars at "work".?
No wonder the place is broke !
aroa is offline  
Old 27th May 2013, 11:57
  #1905 (permalink)  
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: dans un cercle dont le centre est eveywhere et circumfernce n'est nulle part
Posts: 2,606
CASA top level team who are fully competent and understand the industry

You also thought you knew who I was so I wouldn't be relying on your powers of deduction
Don't give a rat's who you are and never bothered to think outside your asylum wall. I hope the meds work OK.

Play the ball Frank, some of your postings are borderline loopy.
And your mother wears army boots.

Your turn petal.
Frank Arouet is offline  
Old 27th May 2013, 13:06
  #1906 (permalink)  
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Downunda
Posts: 559
Where's the big ass broom??

C'mon boys, no more fighting. We are all entitled to our robust opinions, besides the best thing to do when Lookleft or Algie start their ramblings is to hit ignore.

The job is only half complete. Fort Fumble and ATSBeaker have been outed, the Senate has there number and the pot plants are wilting. Now it's time pull the diseased plants out of their potted homes by the root and dispose of them.

Senate estimates. As the very excitable Mr biscuit has pointed out, there will be some robust debate. My only desire out of this is to see the Senate provide a framework around any agreed funding. A thorough analysis of every cent handed over. Where its going, how it is being used, does it add true value to safety, is it a necessary spend?
For projects there should be accountability - Periodic project reports, sets of milestones, KPI's, transparency! No more pissing of taxpayer funds against the wall on some of the already documented BS that they freely blow OUR money on.
• All staff bonuses should be scrapped effective immediately. The current condition of CAsA and ATSBeaker does not reflect an environment where bonuses are either warranted or deserved. Transfer those funds into safety systems. GONE.
• International business class seating. GONE. This expense is out of control and cannot be justified. Put economy seating in staffs PD's, if they don't like it then don't accept the job. GONE.
• Qantas and VA frequent flyer points. GONE. Those points earned are a perk that CAsA employees should not receive. The points belong to the taxpayer, so they should be collected and used in a manner that will benefit the taxpayer, not an individual CAsA employee. GONE.
• Study trips, study allowances, conferences, seminars and every other bauble on the Xmas tree should be halted effective immediately. GONE.
• Management levels should be pared back, the Board abolished and remuneration for executives radically overhauled and reduced, effective immediately. GONE.
• Daily away allowances and accommodation. Did you know that the higher your salary is and the higher you are positioned in the organisation the higher the overnight away allowance is, the better the level of accommodation you stay in is? This is bulls#it. One accommodation class and one level of overnight allowance is all that one person needs. How the fu#k can an Inspector average $130 per day overnight allowance based in a salary of $100k to $140k, yet the DAS, ASSistant DAS and Deputy DAS average around $300 to $500 per day based on their salaries of between $350k to $500k. WTF??
• Consultant fees - Why do you need to spend millions on consultants to provide human factor, fatigue and SMS services when supposedly the 'experts' are already on the internal payroll?? No more mates rates rorts. GONE.

This is just a sample, a scratch on what these spendthrifts are blowing OUR money on, day after day after day. C'mon Senate, pull in the reigns, no more handing these chumps a blank cheque book.

Last edited by 004wercras; 27th May 2013 at 13:18.
004wercras is offline  
Old 27th May 2013, 13:21
  #1907 (permalink)  
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: sydney
Posts: 1,406
I wholeheartedly agree.
Perhaps if CAsA had spent a tad more time on "Special Audits" of themselves to make sure they were complying with the task the Government set them, instead of junkets to Montreal, we would now have a world class regulatory suite like New Zealand and Singapore and a quarter of a Billion bucks to put towards the deficit, and an industry that might at least have a chance to survive.

Last edited by thorn bird; 27th May 2013 at 13:38.
thorn bird is offline  
Old 27th May 2013, 15:52
  #1908 (permalink)  
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 4,942
Anybody who thinks the CASA problems will be solved by changes at the top are seriously misguided. Indeed, I would suggest that Directors and other senior management, as they come and go, become captive of the culture of CASA.

And what is that culture ----- a long time CASA insider, now a severe critic, refers to the "Iron Ring", the long standing middle of the organisation that perpetuates the "CASA Culture". I agree with him, and the answer is not just another new Director, firing McCormick ( even if, in my opinion, he must go) will not solve any problems.

It would be the post of all time to try to give my explanation of what I think the problem is, but in short, the organisation does not even know what it's job really is --- the administration of aviation safety regulations for the promotion of acceptable safety outcomes.

Since the days of DCA, and the days of the two airline agreement, the underlying culture has been am unwritten assumption that the job is to manage the aviation sector in Australia. In fact, if you happen to be an AOC or CAR30/CASR 145 approval holder --- to micromanage aviation businesses.

In recent years, this underlying assumed raison d'etra has seen virtually untrammeled development, particularly since 2007 ---- although the foundations goes back to DCA. In recent years the "Iron Ring" has been unconstrained. It is not just the old guard --- with honorable exceptions, a certain type of person is attracted to "regulator" jobs, particularly the "enforcement" part of the organisation. Recruits to the organisationthe soak up the culture like a dry sponge.

Creamie has taken me to task for believing there is a potential political solution, but what other solution is there, given the magnitude of the task of changing the culture. I know the shortcomings of the political system as well as most, but I also know that when a department becomes too much of a political embarrassment, politicians will act.

Have we got to that stage yet, with CASA?? I don't know, but it is very close. Another visit from the FAA would be a huge embarrassment, maybe that would be the straw that broke the camel's back.

Several of your recent posts have really surprised me.

I know of the matters that Kharon, Thorn Bird and others refer to,and it is real. Amongst the "small jet" FOI's, the so called "type specialists" have, in my opinion, very limited turbine experience ---- but that does not stop them demanding wholesale changes to AFM SOP's and Checklists, on the basis of said limited experience and, in my opinion, a continually demonstrated severe lack of basic background aeronautical education, in my opinion, they presume to know more than the collective experience of the FAA, the manufacturers and Flight Safety (in the case of Cessna).

These FOI's, in my opinion, completely ignore CAR 138, which requires an operator to comply with the AFM, which is part of the fundamental certification of the aeroplane, and in the view of most lawyers I know, cannot be changed without the agreement of the Type Certificate holder and the NAA that issues the Type Certificate.

These same FOI's are, in my opinion, demanding pilots adopt flying techniques that are dangerous, by adopting a method of interpretation of required performance that has long since been abandoned, as a result of loss of life in aircraft accidents. But, in my opinion, such is the lack of knowledge of the individual FOIs, and the lack of corporate knowledge in CASA, such outmoded and dangerous techniques are enforced.

What Kharon has had to say about the Skymaster/Avtex case, including the AAT, is also correct, that was a travesty of justice. The transcripts make amazing reading, when you read the judgement, it is almost as if your are reading twp separate cases. Under examination in the witness box, a number of pilot witnesses, under oath, denied the statements CASA presented in their names were their views. At the last moment, CASA withdrew their "star witness", the FOI who was largely responsible for the above mentioned statements.

Nevertheless, the CASA statements were accepted.

Amazingly, in this case, the AAT accepted a version of the flight in icing rules that means that no aircraft that is not equipped for flight in forecast icing conditions can even take off ---- that is, flying under, over or around doesn't count --- you stay on the ground.

For Avtex, CASA denied that a new Ops. Manual, that was a condition on the AOC, was accepted by CASA, even when the AOC condition was removed after the manual was presented to CASA, CASA demanded changes had been made, and CASA FOIs conducted checks based on the new manuals.

Thus, CASA claimed all sorts of non-compliance with the "old manual", of course there were non-compliance's, because at CASA demand that a new manual be developed that, amongst other things, covered two pilot operations, which the old manual did not???

CASA successfully convinced the AAT that the AOCM requirements for RPT license renewal checks applied to Avtex, when it was clearly a non-scheduled operator, and both the old and the new manual complied precisely with the CAO, andin the case of the "old" manual, had done for years. That resulted in findings that a number of pilot had not been properly qualified. This became even sillier, when a training pilot did a renewal based on the old manual, with a CASA FOI, that renewal was later claimed by CASA to not be a valid renewal, because it didn't comply with the new manual.

And so it goes on ---- without a major cultural change ??? ---- we are already in very dangerous territory.

Tootle pip!!

Last edited by LeadSled; 27th May 2013 at 15:57.
LeadSled is offline  
Old 27th May 2013, 21:26
  #1909 (permalink)  
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Styx Houseboat Park.
Posts: 2,053
Good posts (and bad).

4Dogs – # 1906 '"If an agency fails to protect the relevant Minister from embarrassment, then (in betting terms) the "fix" will soon be "in"!"
See 004 #1908 post - "a good idea in theory"; pretty much gives the juxta position. It's the ability of a department or Minister to influence 'the watchdogs watchdog' that troubles me most. The concept is good; but even with my best, #1 rose coloured glasses, I just can't quite see how any individual, beholden to the Commonwealth, in a position of power, can be 'truly' independent from influence by either part, it's only human nature here not Solomon. Perhaps (and only thinking out loud here) we don't need an IG but an independent 'review panel' drawn from 'industry and ministry'; much like an industry Safety Management Committee, to publicly monitor progress, adjudicate matters like Barrier and evaluate industry concerns. Then folk like AMROBA who do seem to have genuine 'safety, administrative and cost' concerns could voice an opinion, argue the toss and accept the umpires ruling from a 'democratic' process; or at least as close to one as we'll ever get, given human nature and all.

Sarcs # 1907 – Nicely argued, it's rum when the crew writing the Ministers "policy" are the ones to implement it; and, when it all goes tits up, the Minister cops it. Nice work if you can get it. Thanks for the RRAT schedule. (roster changed, beers ordered).

004 # 1915 - I was thinking along the same lines. I note in the latest answers to QON, pot plants and the FAA had almost the same number of words in the reply. Pot plant and FAA expenditure "in the budget" and "all fixed" in two terse, one line replies. The FAA may well be happy with such an agnostic argument and caviller treatment; but let me assure you, the official auditors of Government Pot Plant are not, they are demanding real answers to very tough questions. Perhaps we can get a result at guestimates.

LS # 1917 – Expansion much appreciated, more patience than I have.,.,.,.

My Mama, when disturbed by noisy children playing after lights out, used to position at the bottom of the stairs and say in a quiet, but penetrating way "Boys if I have to come up there",--- - it always had an amazing effect, the almost instant modification of raucous, oft belligerent behavioural patterns. (Aside) Bloody goody two shoes girls never seemed to get a mention in despatches though, wonder why??....... - Aye, it's all passing strange.

Last edited by Kharon; 27th May 2013 at 21:39.
Kharon is offline  
Old 27th May 2013, 21:37
  #1910 (permalink)  
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 7,609
First of all, for those thirsting for revenge, you aren't going to get it. Get used to that idea and move on with your lives, Dump the bitterness, it is bad for your health. You will not get any recognition. You will not be vindicated.

Understand that there is no justice in this world and your tormentors are going to retire on fat pensions to their beach houses and play golf every day.

I know you all find that message hard to stomach, but unfortunately it's the way of the world, so don't shoot the messenger.

To put that another way, I'm sure your experience mirrors that of all those children raped by Catholic Priests, and your chances of "justice" are as bad as theirs, as anyone who heard Cardinal Pells oily testimony yesterday would understand. Even if CASA Flight Operations Inspectors were caught red handed falsifying evidence while buggering each other you aren't going to get an apology from the Minister, it was all in the interests of safety you see, misplaced zeal and all that.

Do I make myself clear? You will never be vindicated.

Now back to the problem which, as they say in the classics, is "multi faceted"...............

We cannot simply "stop" CASA and start again. There are vital functions that CASA performs that need to keep happening, come what may, otherwise the general public will become alarmed.

The Australian regulatory framework and the regulations themselves are a total mess, deliberately designed that way to increase the power of the regulator while shielding it from accountability. A simple attempt at reading some of them and comparing them with other jurisdictions proves it.

The CASA corporate culture is totally and utterly putrid, corrupt and self serving if allegations are to be believed. Concepts of natural justice, procedural fairness and equity are honoured in the breach every day.

The organisation is bloated and dysfunctional and its corporate strategy is rotten in conception and execution at all levels.

The organisation heamorrhages technical expertise and experience. It is technically very weak.

The Regulator and ATSB have lost what trust the industry ever had in it. Please note that I mean the GA industry. The major airlines are a law unto themselves because CASA hasn't he technical ability to even understand their operation let alone police them.

I think that summarises the state of the organisation if posters here are to be believed.

Lets look at environmental factors:

- We are about Three months from a Federal election.

- The general public have no interest in, or understanding of, the matter.

- There is an extremely limited pool of available technical and operational aviation expertise in Australia. The industry is small and incestuous - which invites the creation of vendettas, armed camps of true believers and other nasty games.

- the industry is highly fragmented and the fragile ego syndrome associated with pilots means that coordinated action is virtually impossible.

- the cost and revenue structure of GA operations invites "get rich quick" players.

The available options for the Government at this time are:

- Do nothing and leave the matter for the next government to attempt to address. Given the Ministers lack of enthusiasm for this part of his portfolio, this is the most likely scenario in my opinion. I would expect CASA and ATSB would share this view.

- Embark on cosmetic reform now. I view this as unlikely unless the Department, CASA and ATSB believe that it can be executed without any cost in terms of the current Ministers time and that it would satisfy / mollify a new Minister in an Abbott Government.

This may be an attractive option if Mr. Mrdak believes that Abbott can be successfully encouraged to appoint a new Minister with no Aviation experience or interest. I suspect that Sen. Fawcett would be lobbyed against preceisely because he DOES have aviation knowledge and could thus be in a position to make waves and other unpleasantness for a new government.

- Embark on real reform now. This is unlikely because a new Minister will want to be part of this process and in any case I believe Mr Mrdak would be in quasi caretaker mode by now anyway.

So that why I'm saying sit back and keep taking it up the arse from CASA boys. Nothing is going to change before the election. Most probably nothing is going to change after it either. Its just a continuation fo BOHICA. All you will do is mark yourself for more "attention" from CASA if you stamp your pretty little foot.

Real reform, if it comes, can only involve the adoption of the NZ/FAA regulations. The Australian ones are totally broken. The Act needs rewriting to ensure that the "fostering industry development" mantra is included and stop the organisation achieiving its safety goal by preventing aviation.

Furthermore, it is most likely that American or other foreign management expertise will be needed to mange the process.

It is going to be necessary to break up CASA into Two parts separating regulation and enforcement.

The existing CASA workforce is going to have to be made to apply for new jobs in the new organisations in the hope that the middle management culture can be destroyed and its acolytes pensioned off with big payouts

So that is my take folks. Jumping up and down and howling for justice is going to get you nowhere just now, it may never get you anywhere because the Abbott government will have more on its plate than little CASA. Your best hope is that a junior in PM & C decides to fix CASA up as a weekend project and write it up as a case study for her corporate stratey class when she does her MBA.
Sunfish is offline  
Old 27th May 2013, 21:42
  #1911 (permalink)  
Join Date: Nov 1998
Location: Planet Earth
Posts: 606
For what it's worth...

From the Media Releases page of the website of Warren Truss MP, Federal Member for Wide Bay and Leader of the Nationals:

Air crash investigation needs full throttle response
27th May, 2013

“MINISTER Anthony Albanese must urgently respond to the recommendations flowing from a Senate Committee investigation into a ditched Pel-Air flight off Norfolk Island in November 2009,” Nationals leader and Shadow Minister for Infrastructure and Transport Warren Truss said today.

“The recommendations, handed down last Thursday by the Senate Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport References Committee in their Aviation Accident Investigations Report, make disturbing reading.

“The Senate Inquiry was established following the release of the Australian Transport Safety Bureau’s (ATSB’s) report into the Norfolk Island incident almost three years after the event.

“The circumstances of the flight were both a disaster and a miracle. Despite mistakes being made by the pilot on the air ambulance trip from Apia (Samoa) to the Australian mainland, all four passengers and two crew were saved, the aircraft successfully ditching at night off the coast of Norfolk Island during bad weather.

“However, the purpose of the Senate Inquiry was not the incident itself, but the alleged breakdown in investigation and reporting by the ATSB and the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA).

“Specifically, the report states:

‘The committee accepts that the pilot in command made errors on the night, and this inquiry was not an attempt to vindicate him. Instead, the committee’s overriding objective from the outset was to find out why the pilot became the last line of defence on the night and to maximise the safety outcomes of future ATSB and CASA investigations in the interests of the travelling public’.

“The report makes 26 recommendations to improve the conduct, regulation and procedures governing aviation incident investigations, which the Committee argues were not up to scratch.

“People have every right to expect world’s best practice when it comes to aviation safety, which includes comprehensive investigation and reporting of incidents. The community is entitled to have confidence in our aviation safety regulations and the conduct of our regulators.

“Similarly, it is vital that through comprehensive incident investigations and reporting, industry and regulators are accorded the opportunity to learn from past mistakes and improve systems to overcome existing weaknesses.

“The Report raises serious issues of process that must be addressed. Minister Albanese must restore public confidence in our accident investigatory bodies and deal with the concerns raised in the Inquiry as a matter of urgency.”


Hopefully Albanese will be provided with an opportunity to respond in Parliament with his 'spin' on this whole sorry episode?
SIUYA is offline  
Old 27th May 2013, 22:03
  #1912 (permalink)  
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: with the other ex-CX pond scum (a zoologist was once head of Flight Ops)
Posts: 0
It's gone global. Off latest AvWeb:


Does this mean that a certain person could be going to 'star' in a 'chamber' of his own?

Last edited by Captain Dart; 27th May 2013 at 22:31.
Captain Dart is online now  
Old 27th May 2013, 22:11
  #1913 (permalink)  
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Styx Houseboat Park.
Posts: 2,053
The quiet life.

Sunny – no one wants "revenge", everyone just wants to be compliant, secure and to be able to get on with the business they know best; running aircraft operations and a quiet life. To do this, we must have a "honest", competent regulator who can vaguely at least, define which end the smoke comes out, this we simply don't have.

To change this first you must persuade important, busy, expensive people that there is, indeed a problem (done). Having achieved that, you must convince those folks that the problem is real, is here and is happening now (done). Having struggled to get that far and proven the case, you must persuade them to act (done). Now there are many impediments and inconveniences which may affect the speed of that change, but once the pathway has been established, the gods must help the next incumbents of 'positions of power' if this mess ain't sorted and anything else goes pear shaped (Jury out). Or, ICAO and the FAA who both need to occasionally flex their muscles decide to weigh in (pending rule 787). Then the "law unto themselves" party can kiss their funny hats and Hawaiian shirts goodbye.

Sunny # 1919 "There are vital functions that CASA performs that need to keep happening, come what may, otherwise the general public will become alarmed."
Alarm the public? - what a bloody good idea that is – they need to be more than just alarmed. Nothing will fall from the sky without CASA administration. Besides, it's very good aerobic exercise to jump up and down a bit; winds your clock up like.

See SIUYA #1920 – the thick plottens. Told ya....

Last edited by Kharon; 27th May 2013 at 22:24. Reason: SIUYA top catch
Kharon is offline  
Old 27th May 2013, 22:42
  #1914 (permalink)  
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Salt Lake City Utah
Posts: 3,052
Creamie has taken me to task for believing there is a potential political solution, but what other solution is there, given the magnitude of the task of changing the culture. I know the shortcomings of the political system as well as most, but I also know that when a department becomes too much of a political embarrassment, politicians will act.

I took you to task for your child-like naivety in believing the LNP will make any substantial changes to aviation safety regulation and investigation if it gets into government in September.

The “political solution” is the only solution. Unfortunately, the dumb/dumber Laborials haven’t got a clue what to do to change aviation safety regulation and, even if they did, their focus is on more ‘important’ issues – i.e. the opinion polls and focus groups. The biggest decisions they’ve made about aviation regulation in a long time is to remove the CASA Board then reinstate the CASA Board, with both decisions having been justified on precisely the same (specious) grounds. 4dogs is correct (as usual).

The fundamental error they all make (and which you correctly identify, Leaddie) is to believe a change in "leadership" of these organisations makes a difference.

Last edited by Creampuff; 27th May 2013 at 22:47.
Creampuff is offline  
Old 28th May 2013, 05:06
  #1915 (permalink)  
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 4,942
I took you to task for your child-like naivety in believing the LNP will make any substantial changes to aviation safety regulation and investigation if it gets into government in September.
We will have to see, after September, won't we. I sincerely hope you are wrong.
Tootle pip!!
LeadSled is offline  
Old 28th May 2013, 08:10
  #1916 (permalink)  
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Salt Lake City Utah
Posts: 3,052
I hope I’m wrong, too!

But let’s look closely at the language in Mr Truss’s statement (my bolding).
The report makes 26 recommendations to improve the conduct, regulation and procedures governing aviation incident investigations, which the Committee argues were not up to scratch.
But do you agree with that argument, Mr Truss?
The Report raises serious issues of process that must be addressed.
So the only serious issues raised in the report were about “process”, Mr Truss? No serious issues about the competence or integrity of individuals within government? No serious issues about lack of clarity in rules? No serious issues about the attitude of industry to CASA and the ATSB?

And there is an omission from the statement that screams volumes (or maybe I missed this bit): “If elected, a coalition government will move immediately to […insert text that would be inserted by a government that had half a clue and some strategic vision beyond its re-election…].
Creampuff is offline  
Old 28th May 2013, 09:23
  #1917 (permalink)  
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Go west young man
Posts: 1,732
QONs for Guesstimates tomorrow??

4dogs mentioned the Auditor General:
To me, the I-G proposal is about obviating the need for a continuing series of Senate activities to examine what/how/why/when these agencies are doing things in order to get some transparency. For example, the Auditor-General doesn't operate as a "fix" for each of the agencies examined - but the process does force the agency executives to carefully examine the "what/how/why/when" in terms of the potential fallout from public exposure. If an agency fails to protect the relevant Minister from embarrassment, then (in betting terms) the "fix" will soon be "in"!
Well the last couple of audits (from 2000) weren’t complimentary of FF but the trouble is they now refute the ANAO findings an continue to obfuscate any real meaningful action (FF are masters at saying they’ll do something then do SFA!), for those interested

ANAO 2000 report.

ANAO 2002 report (follow up).

ANAO 2010 report.

So it is kind of a dead duck! Unless of course the Senators insist that the whole department gets itself audited in order to prove they had no involvement in obfuscating essential information from the ATSB investigation:
6.13 Mr McCormick informed the committee that the information from the Chambers Report was used to seek additional funding from the government to improve surveillance activities.14

Which would appear to mean that Mrdak and the department (therefore the Minister) were privy to the findings of the ‘Chambers Report’.

It therefore follows that some of the department were well aware of the systemic issues highlighted in the ‘Chambers report’ and were also party to the implications of withholding that information from the ATSB.
However FF might be good but the Dept is even better at spinning themselves out of the shite…but it is a good question to ask if for no other reason but to see them squirm!

In case you missed it, as the posting was a bit frenetic this am, “K” had posted this:
004 # 1915 - I was thinking along the same lines. I note in the latest answers to QON, pot plants and the FAA had almost the same number of words in the reply. Pot plant and FAA expenditure "in the budget" and "all fixed" in two terse, one line replies. The FAA may well be happy with such an agnostic argument and caviller treatment; but let me assure you, the official auditors of Government Pot Plant are not, they are demanding real answers to very tough questions. Perhaps we can get a result at guestimates.
The Pete the pot plant QON was answered like this:
Question no.: 124

Senator NASH: That does not surprise me. Having ascertained that it is $150,000, thank you, Chair. I would hate to think that CASA has to go through the same restrictions that we in this building do and not have plants. I am sure they do a great deal for those of us in this place who need a little bit of greenery every now and again. If you could just take on notice for me the current amount of plants that you have, the current cost of maintenance, who is maintaining them and why you are moving to get a new maintenance regime?
Details of CASA’s operating expenses are contained in the Annual Report.
And QON 126 (rehash I know) was answered like this:
Senator FAWCETT asked:

Senator FAWCETT: I would like to refer you back to the FAA audit that was conducted a couple of years ago. My understanding is that there were a number of deficiencies found during that. Can you give us a status report of rectifications of those?
Mr J McCormick: We can take most of that on notice, if you like. What I can give you now is that the majority issue was around the fact that we did not have sufficient training, in their mind, for our inspectorate. We had already set in place a training school which is now up and running and, in particular, their concerns were over the inspectors who oversaw what is called FAR 129 foreign operators operating RPT, regular public transport, into the US. It was around the amount of training that people had done, where most of the training in the past of say six or seven years ago revolved a lot around on-the-job training and then people had their
basic training either that way or through a course to start with was perhaps not as extensive as it should have been. Since then we have rectified that completely.
Senator FAWCETT: I am happy for you to take those on notice.

CASA was advised by the FAA in late 2010 that, as CASA had rectified all identified deficiencies, all of these matters are considered resolved.
So those two QONs (at least) deserve a revisit by the Senators??

By the way here is the link for viewing the Guesstimates tomorrow:


And Creamy this might make you feel all warm and fuzzy! Hot off the cyberpress today:[YOUTUBE]

Doin a Kelpie!
Sarcs is offline  
Old 28th May 2013, 09:48
  #1918 (permalink)  
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Australia
Age: 49
Posts: 547
A number of training positions have been put up on the casa site. I bet training is going to be the magic pill to fix up issues. Oleo said announcement of exec of operations was due soon. So will they blame Hoodie?

In regard to audits of industry I'd be interested in knowing if things improved after closing Bankstown and Moorabbin. I got the impression a lot of time was spent traveling these days.
halfmanhalfbiscuit is offline  
Old 28th May 2013, 22:22
  #1919 (permalink)  
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Styx Houseboat Park.
Posts: 2,053
And now for the report.

Obligations under international agreements.

2.12 The principal relevant international agreement, the Convention on International Civil Aviation (the Chicago Convention), binds 191 member states, including Australia, to the requirements of the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO).

2.13 Established in 1944 with the advent of the Chicago Convention, ICAO is a specialised agency of the United Nations (UN) and the global forum for civil aviation:

It sets standards and regulations necessary for aviation safety, security,
efficiency and regularity, as well as for aviation environmental protection.
Given all the hooh hah, is there not an obligation on ICAO to have a look see at just how far removed Australia is from ICAO alignment. Not in the grey, misty arena of "compliance", nor the slippery area of "registered differences"; but to ensure that, like our near neighbours, we are properly aligned with the ideals, spirit and intent of the ICAO model. It is passing strange that we seem to spend a lot of time, effort and money telling ICAO that we don't; if we are going to have some 2000 odd differences logged, it begs the question why, (apart from the bleeding obvious) be a part of it. We could save lots by either getting out or getting "in". This messing about on the philosophical and legal boundaries seems to achieve nothing much more than an excuse for lovely overseas holidays and keeping a special room within the sheltered workshop.

2.16 In light of this, the ATSB's accident investigations and reports must be assessed against its obligations under the Chicago Convention. The committee received considerable evidence suggesting that the ATSB did not comply with ICAO guidelines and standards in completing its investigation and report on the Norfolk Island ditching. Examples are analysed in later chapters of this report. The committee recognises that the ATSB has filed some differences with ICAO but this recognition does not equate to agreement in all cases.
The Senate event may only be of passing interest to the public, but the fiscal implications of a downgrade, which we only just avoided last go around are horrendous. If push comes to shove, and I think it may, there are serious consequences which need to be considered, by all. Not just the ills of society crowd.

and we had, from memory, $89.9 million in long-term funding,
Imagine being just able to manage to 'remember' a number like Eighty Nine Million. They must have used chamber pots to hide the pea and played the old 'Shell game with the ministry boys for it.

My bold and formating.

Last edited by Kharon; 28th May 2013 at 22:31. Reason: If we are to have sappy video - then....vomit at will kids.
Kharon is offline  
Old 28th May 2013, 22:32
  #1920 (permalink)  
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Salt Lake City Utah
Posts: 3,052
Reforming CASA and ATSB A Priority for Labor and the Coalition

From AFR.com, authors Phillip Coorey and Laura Tingle (my bolding):
Federal political parties will begin lining their pockets with millions of dollars in extra public funding well before the September 14 federal election due to a clause which backdates the new pay-outs to April 1.

The government confirmed the first quarterly instalment of about $2.5million will be distributed as soon as legislation passes the Senate next month, boosting the campaign war chests of all players. Some of the September quarter money may be distributed before the election.

The new, additional public funding for so-called “administrative’’ purposes, is worth a combined $20million a year to all parties and elected independents over three years.

It was secretly negotiated between Labor, the Liberal Party and the Nationals over more than a year.

Coming on top of the tens of millions in existing public funding shelled out after each election, parties and independents will now receive $1 for each vote they receive in the House of Representatives and $1 for each Senate vote. The money will be paid at 33c a year and in quarterly instalments.

The backdated payment for the June quarter will be based on the 2010 election results.

Legislation will be introduced on Wednesday and be through both houses when the Senate resumes on June 17.
Rotten to the core.

Last edited by Creampuff; 29th May 2013 at 02:09. Reason: Changed heading - the parties look so much the same I confused them for each other.
Creampuff 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.