Petition to Minister Truss
CVD AQONs released??
Question no.: 265
Program: n/a
Division/Agency: Civil Aviation Safety Authority
Topic: AAT: O’Brien Tribunal
Proof Hansard Page: 145 (26 May 2014)
Senator Fawcett, David asked:
Senator FAWCETT: … Mr McCormick, may I move on to answers that you gave at estimates last year about the costs associated with an AAT case relating to colour vision deficient pilots. You indicated that, as of 1 December 2013, the costs were $43,500. Can you tell me, in terms of forecast costs, how many expert witnesses CASA plans to call for that inquiry or tribunal?
Mr McCormick: Are you talking about the upcoming O'Brien tribunal in July?
Senator FAWCETT: Yes.
Mr McCormick: I will ask the manager of the legal branch to give you that figure, Senator.
Mr Rule: There will obviously be a number of specialist witnesses called to give evidence.
Senator FAWCETT: Two? Ten? Fifteen?
Mr Rule: I am not across the precise number that would be—
Senator FAWCETT: Would I be wrong if I said 12?
Mr Rule: I could not say that that number is wrong. We are out of the ballpark, but I cannot give a confirmed number at this stage. The exchange of evidence between the parties only just finished at the end of last week, I believe, so there will be some to-ing and fro-ing as to which evidence and which witnesses are required. I can certainly take that on notice and provide a more settled estimate of that for you, if that would assist.
Answer:
Fourteen persons (five being current or former CASA officers, four with current or past experience as aviation regulators and five medical specialists with expertise in relation to colour vision) have provided expert reports or statements at the request of CASA for the purpose of the Tribunal proceedings.
With the exception of Dr Navathe, it is unclear at this stage which of the medical or other expert witnesses will be required to give evidence in person to the Tribunal. A directions hearing was held on 24 June 2014 and CASA has, in accordance with current directions made by the Tribunal, initiated discussions with the applicant’s legal representatives in an effort to identify and potentially narrow the scope of the evidence at the hearing. The hearing has now been rescheduled to commence on 21 October 2014.
Question no.: 266
Program: n/a
Division/Agency: Civil Aviation Safety Authority
Topic: AAT: O’Brien Tribunal
Proof Hansard Pages: 145-146 (26 May 2014)
Senator Fawcett, David asked:
Senator FAWCETT: …you must also have metrics from previous inquiries. Knowing what expert witnesses charge for their appearances, the travel and accommodation costs, the whole cost of conducting the inquiry in terms of transcript fees et cetera, have you made a provision in your budgeting for how much you anticipate this AAT case will cost?
Mr Rule: Obviously, we do do forward estimates of how much we think a case is likely to cost. Generally we do it across quarterly budget considerations, so total cost can get washed out as you conduct these cases piecemeal. Senator FAWCETT: I am happy to add the figures up, Mr Rule, if you could give me the figures across those quarterly milestones.
Mr Rule: We can certainly take that on notice and provide those figures.
Answer:
To date (18 June 2014), CASA has incurred the following expenses:
Barrister fees $8,566
Medical/ expert reports $34,550
TOTAL $43,116
Based on an expected five day hearing, CASA estimates it will incur the following additional expenses:
Barrister fees $20,000
Expert witness attendance fees $15,000
Expert witness travel/accommodation $4,000
Transcript fees $3,000
TOTAL $42,000
Question no.: 267
Program: n/a
Division/Agency: Civil Aviation Safety Authority
Topic: Mandate the CAD Test
Proof Hansard Pages: 146-147 (26 May 2014)
Senator Fawcett, David asked:
Senator FAWCETT: I understand. You did also say in that period that you did not believe there was any intention to mandate the CAD test and that was not the direction CASA was going. But I have subsequently seen a couple of examples where CASA refused to renew the medical of people who previously had multiple renewables of their medical unless they sat the CAD test. Does that not contradict your comment that that is not CASA's intended direction? Mr McCormick: I will go back and check what I actually said at the time, my recollection of the conversation was that we were talking about using the CAD test as the principal test rather than the Ishihara test or something like that. As I said, I will check that on notice.
Answer:
As discussed during the Estimates Hearings on 24 February 2014, it is not CASA’s present intention to mandate the use of the CAD test in the regulations. Consistent with the applicable provisions of Subpart 67.C of the Civil Aviation Safety Regulations 1998, CASA has used the CAD test as its third-level test in recent times, on a case-by-case basis. CASA will continue to utilise the CAD test as one of the testing options for the third-level test, on a case-by-case basis.
Program: n/a
Division/Agency: Civil Aviation Safety Authority
Topic: AAT: O’Brien Tribunal
Proof Hansard Page: 145 (26 May 2014)
Senator Fawcett, David asked:
Senator FAWCETT: … Mr McCormick, may I move on to answers that you gave at estimates last year about the costs associated with an AAT case relating to colour vision deficient pilots. You indicated that, as of 1 December 2013, the costs were $43,500. Can you tell me, in terms of forecast costs, how many expert witnesses CASA plans to call for that inquiry or tribunal?
Mr McCormick: Are you talking about the upcoming O'Brien tribunal in July?
Senator FAWCETT: Yes.
Mr McCormick: I will ask the manager of the legal branch to give you that figure, Senator.
Mr Rule: There will obviously be a number of specialist witnesses called to give evidence.
Senator FAWCETT: Two? Ten? Fifteen?
Mr Rule: I am not across the precise number that would be—
Senator FAWCETT: Would I be wrong if I said 12?
Mr Rule: I could not say that that number is wrong. We are out of the ballpark, but I cannot give a confirmed number at this stage. The exchange of evidence between the parties only just finished at the end of last week, I believe, so there will be some to-ing and fro-ing as to which evidence and which witnesses are required. I can certainly take that on notice and provide a more settled estimate of that for you, if that would assist.
Answer:
Fourteen persons (five being current or former CASA officers, four with current or past experience as aviation regulators and five medical specialists with expertise in relation to colour vision) have provided expert reports or statements at the request of CASA for the purpose of the Tribunal proceedings.
With the exception of Dr Navathe, it is unclear at this stage which of the medical or other expert witnesses will be required to give evidence in person to the Tribunal. A directions hearing was held on 24 June 2014 and CASA has, in accordance with current directions made by the Tribunal, initiated discussions with the applicant’s legal representatives in an effort to identify and potentially narrow the scope of the evidence at the hearing. The hearing has now been rescheduled to commence on 21 October 2014.
Question no.: 266
Program: n/a
Division/Agency: Civil Aviation Safety Authority
Topic: AAT: O’Brien Tribunal
Proof Hansard Pages: 145-146 (26 May 2014)
Senator Fawcett, David asked:
Senator FAWCETT: …you must also have metrics from previous inquiries. Knowing what expert witnesses charge for their appearances, the travel and accommodation costs, the whole cost of conducting the inquiry in terms of transcript fees et cetera, have you made a provision in your budgeting for how much you anticipate this AAT case will cost?
Mr Rule: Obviously, we do do forward estimates of how much we think a case is likely to cost. Generally we do it across quarterly budget considerations, so total cost can get washed out as you conduct these cases piecemeal. Senator FAWCETT: I am happy to add the figures up, Mr Rule, if you could give me the figures across those quarterly milestones.
Mr Rule: We can certainly take that on notice and provide those figures.
Answer:
To date (18 June 2014), CASA has incurred the following expenses:
Barrister fees $8,566
Medical/ expert reports $34,550
TOTAL $43,116
Based on an expected five day hearing, CASA estimates it will incur the following additional expenses:
Barrister fees $20,000
Expert witness attendance fees $15,000
Expert witness travel/accommodation $4,000
Transcript fees $3,000
TOTAL $42,000
Question no.: 267
Program: n/a
Division/Agency: Civil Aviation Safety Authority
Topic: Mandate the CAD Test
Proof Hansard Pages: 146-147 (26 May 2014)
Senator Fawcett, David asked:
Senator FAWCETT: I understand. You did also say in that period that you did not believe there was any intention to mandate the CAD test and that was not the direction CASA was going. But I have subsequently seen a couple of examples where CASA refused to renew the medical of people who previously had multiple renewables of their medical unless they sat the CAD test. Does that not contradict your comment that that is not CASA's intended direction? Mr McCormick: I will go back and check what I actually said at the time, my recollection of the conversation was that we were talking about using the CAD test as the principal test rather than the Ishihara test or something like that. As I said, I will check that on notice.
Answer:
As discussed during the Estimates Hearings on 24 February 2014, it is not CASA’s present intention to mandate the use of the CAD test in the regulations. Consistent with the applicable provisions of Subpart 67.C of the Civil Aviation Safety Regulations 1998, CASA has used the CAD test as its third-level test in recent times, on a case-by-case basis. CASA will continue to utilise the CAD test as one of the testing options for the third-level test, on a case-by-case basis.
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: sydney
Posts: 1,469
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So about eighty grand to destroy around four hundred careers.
Not bad value for money Sarcsy.
That works out around two hundred Bucks per career.
Compared with the costs of other CAsA embuggerances per career destroyed its a very good result.
Congratulations CAsA, bravo, well done.
Not bad value for money Sarcsy.
That works out around two hundred Bucks per career.
Compared with the costs of other CAsA embuggerances per career destroyed its a very good result.
Congratulations CAsA, bravo, well done.
In with the new ???
Can we take it that all these "expert" witnesses will be producing RECENT evidence?
After all Pooshie claims that "recent" material puts the kybosh on 25 years times 500 CVD pilots of safe pilotage.
It had better be good..but as we can attest from past AATs CAsA is well versed in the art of bull**** supreme and spin.
After all Pooshie claims that "recent" material puts the kybosh on 25 years times 500 CVD pilots of safe pilotage.
It had better be good..but as we can attest from past AATs CAsA is well versed in the art of bull**** supreme and spin.
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Yosemite
Age: 52
Posts: 177
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Trough update
My source tells me that there is definitely only two DAS candidates that remain in the running, one 'local' and one from overseas. The new DAS, whoever that may be, won't start until January 2015. After the settling in period has finished the A380 endorsed subordinate will be leaving the asylum, actual departure date not yet confirmed. An additional Fort Fumble rumour is that the bald eagle Campbell may also find himself without a long future also. Interesting. And finally there were many many champagne corks popped when the little man PJ left the building!!!!
Last edited by Soteria; 30th Sep 2014 at 12:47.
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Yosemite
Age: 52
Posts: 177
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A walk down Willyleaks lane - FAA consider a downgrade of Australia
May I remind Mr Truss and his minions, who continue to sprout diatribe about how safe Australian aviation is, of the below cable leak:
Cable Viewer
Naughty naughty Truss, nothing has changed my bucktoothed friend: MrDak reappointed. Beaker reappointed. Terry (of A380 and Sky Sentinel fame) still employed. Dr Voodoo still employed. Peter Boyd still employed. TO NAME BUT A FEW.
Natural justice for Quadrio denied. Natural justice for Ziggy chick denied. Natural justice for Shane Urquhart denied. Natural justice for Clarke Butson denied. Natural justice for Australian CVD pilots denied. TO NAME BUT A FEW.
C'mon sleepy Warren, time to get out from beneath your 10 tonne farmers hat, wake up, have a stretch and then get to fu#king work as you have a thoroughly raped Australian aviation industry to repair before the IOS start getting itchy feet.
Cable Viewer
¶1. (C/NF) Summary: The FAA team concluded their audit
(reftels) and gave a brief assessment of preliminary
findings. While the team recognized improvements on previous
shortcomings and commended many areas, a few
problems remain. Australian officials seem committed to
overcoming the shortcomings before a second and final FAA
visit within the next three months, but the possibility of a
category downgrade does exist and is being taken
seriously. The team outlined the sequence of events going
forward and agreed to work closely with Embassy Canberra.
End Summary.
(reftels) and gave a brief assessment of preliminary
findings. While the team recognized improvements on previous
shortcomings and commended many areas, a few
problems remain. Australian officials seem committed to
overcoming the shortcomings before a second and final FAA
visit within the next three months, but the possibility of a
category downgrade does exist and is being taken
seriously. The team outlined the sequence of events going
forward and agreed to work closely with Embassy Canberra.
End Summary.
Natural justice for Quadrio denied. Natural justice for Ziggy chick denied. Natural justice for Shane Urquhart denied. Natural justice for Clarke Butson denied. Natural justice for Australian CVD pilots denied. TO NAME BUT A FEW.
C'mon sleepy Warren, time to get out from beneath your 10 tonne farmers hat, wake up, have a stretch and then get to fu#king work as you have a thoroughly raped Australian aviation industry to repair before the IOS start getting itchy feet.
Outcome???
Eddie - In respect to the second FAA visit, what was the outcome?
If you read further on the Willyleaks cable:
Preventing Worst-Case Scenario
-------------------------------
¶5. (C/NF) A downgrade to Category 2 would be the worst-case
scenario, which would entail measures such as
freezing Australia-U.S. flight operations to current levels
and terminating code-sharing arrangements, such as the one
between Qantas and American Airlines. CASA officials are not
taking this possibility lightly and seem committed to
resolve the shortcomings in order to avoid a downgrade.
¶6. (C/NF) Comment: FAA team members were extremely satisfied
with CASA officials' openness and eagerness to
make constructive improvements based on the assessment. FAA
Qmake constructive improvements based on the assessment. FAA
and CASA clearly have a good working relationship and
we will monitor progress toward maintaining Category 1
status. We will also monitor that CASA's efforts enjoy
adequate support at the ministerial level as well as from
CANBERRA 00001081 002 OF 002
Australia's commercial airlines.
BLEICH
-------------------------------
¶5. (C/NF) A downgrade to Category 2 would be the worst-case
scenario, which would entail measures such as
freezing Australia-U.S. flight operations to current levels
and terminating code-sharing arrangements, such as the one
between Qantas and American Airlines. CASA officials are not
taking this possibility lightly and seem committed to
resolve the shortcomings in order to avoid a downgrade.
¶6. (C/NF) Comment: FAA team members were extremely satisfied
with CASA officials' openness and eagerness to
make constructive improvements based on the assessment. FAA
Qmake constructive improvements based on the assessment. FAA
and CASA clearly have a good working relationship and
we will monitor progress toward maintaining Category 1
status. We will also monitor that CASA's efforts enjoy
adequate support at the ministerial level as well as from
CANBERRA 00001081 002 OF 002
Australia's commercial airlines.
BLEICH
Then we had the former DAS commissioning Wodger to write a largely plagiarised report:
11Internal CASA report titled "Oversight Deficiencies- Pel-Air and Beyond" also known as the Chambers report (dated 1 August 2010), received 10 October 2012;(PDF 6210KB)
Whether that $89 million had the desired effect (i.e addressing the FAA concerns) well the jury is still out...
However after the PelAir debacle etc. the average punter (person at the back of the room) will definitely be struggling to see any major improvements in the way FF go about business. And now with the $89 million effectively spent, some would even surmise that the situation is in fact much, much worse...
MTF...
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Styx Houseboat Park.
Posts: 2,055
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
WOB Eddie.
Eddie –"[In respect to the second FAA visit,] etc"
We can only hope Uncle Sam is watching.
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: In my Swag
Posts: 490
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks for the replies, it would seem that diplomacy was the winner.
The part of the industry I work in has missed, or maybe ignored, the problems you guys are talking about.
The part of the industry I work in has missed, or maybe ignored, the problems you guys are talking about.
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Great Southern Land
Posts: 74
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2008 Audit
Eddie – the link – HERE – will take you to Zippyshare for a copy of the 2008 audit, that will start you off in the right place.
Please take care and only click on the –
- button, to avoid spam and hassles. Enjoy.
P9 a.k.a. K9 – my turn tonight.....
Please take care and only click on the –
- button, to avoid spam and hassles. Enjoy.P9 a.k.a. K9 – my turn tonight.....
