PPRuNe Forums

PPRuNe Forums (https://www.pprune.org/)
-   Australia, New Zealand & the Pacific (https://www.pprune.org/australia-new-zealand-pacific-90/)
-   -   Truss: Aviation Safety Regulation Review (https://www.pprune.org/australia-new-zealand-pacific/527815-truss-aviation-safety-regulation-review.html)

Horatio Leafblower 14th Nov 2013 05:02

Truss: Aviation Safety Regulation Review
Warren Truss
Deputy Prime Minister
Minister for Infrastructure and Regional Development

Media Statement

14 November 2013

Aviation Safety Regulation Review

DEPUTY Prime Minister and Minister for Infrastructure and Regional Development Warren Truss today announced an independent review of aviation safety regulation in Australia.

“This announcement delivers on one of the key commitments outlined in the Coalition’s 2013 Policy for Aviation,” Mr Truss said.

“Australia has an enviable record in aviation safety – among the best in the world – which has been built on a strong regulatory system, forged over many years.”

In launching the review, Mr Truss said aviation activity is expected to double in the next twenty years. The industry is a vital part of our economy and we must ensure it is supported by a regulatory system that delivers the highest levels of safety.

“Now is the right time to reassess how our safety regulatory system is placed in dealing with this dynamic and evolving sector. The independent review reinforces the Government’s commitment to maintaining safety as the highest priority in aviation.

“The review will be strategic in nature. It is about whether we are on the right track to meet future challenges and respond to growing demand in aviation.”

The review is to be undertaken by a panel of leading aviation safety experts and will benchmark Australia’s safety regulation against other leading countries.

Mr David Forsyth AM, will Chair the review panel. Mr Forsyth is a prominent figure in Australian aviation. He is the chair of Safeskies Australia, former chair of Airservices Australia and has over 30 years of experience in safety management and aviation business.

Mr Forsyth will be joined by Mr Don Spruston, former Director General of Civil Aviation at Transport Canada and former Director General of the International Business Aviation Council, and by Mr Roger Whitefield, former Head of Safety at British Airways, former safety adviser to Qantas and former United Kingdom Civil Aviation Authority board member.

The panel will also be supported, as required, by specialist advisers. Mr Truss has appointed Phillip Reiss to take particular responsibility to ensure that the concerns of general aviation and regional operators are well aired.

Mr Truss indicated his confidence that the breadth and depth of expertise secured to conduct this review will ensure that a comprehensive and balanced perspective is reflected in the panel’s findings.

Over the coming months, the review panel will undertake extensive industry and public consultation. Further details, including how to make a submission, will be available from the Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development’s website at: www.infrastructure.gov.au/aviation/asrr<http://www.infrastructure.gov.au/aviation/asrr>.

The review panel will provide its report to the Deputy Prime Minister in May 2014.

The Terms of Reference for the review and information about the review panel members follow at Attachments A and B.

Attachment A

Aviation Safety Regulation Review
Terms of Reference


The principal objectives of the review are to investigate:
• the structures, effectiveness and processes of all agencies involved in aviation safety;
• the relationship and interaction of those agencies with each other, as well as with the Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development (Infrastructure);
• the outcomes and direction of the regulatory reform process being undertaken by the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA);
• the suitability of Australia’s aviation safety related regulations when benchmarked against comparable overseas jurisdictions; and
• any other safety related matters.


The report of the review will:
• examine and make recommendations as required on the aviation safety roles of CASA and the Australian Transport Safety Bureau (ATSB) and other agencies as appropriate;
• outline and identify any areas for improvement in the current interaction and relationships between CASA and the ATSB, as well as other agencies and Infrastructure;
• examine and make recommendations as required on the appointment process and criteria applied for key aviation safety roles within CASA and the ATSB;
• examine the current processes by which CASA develops, consults on and finalises changes to aviation safety regulations and other legislative instruments (such as civil aviation orders) and make any proposals for improving these processes such that new regulations are best practice in safe operations for each relevant sector of the aviation industry;
• review the implementation of the current aviation safety regulatory reform programme and assess the effectiveness of the planning and implementation of regulatory changes, including cost impacts on industry;
• examine and make recommendations on options for improving future aviation safety regulatory reform having regard to international experience and stakeholder views, and the Government’s objective of reducing the cost of regulation to business;
• provide advice to Government on priorities for future regulatory development and implementation strategies; and
• provide advice to Government on options for improving oversight and enforcement of aviation regulations, including rights of review.


The review will seek the views of the CASA Board and senior management and staff, and the ATSB Commission and senior management and staff in developing its advice to Government on the review’s objectives, and consult closely with:
- international, domestic, regional, general aviation, sport and recreational aircraft and maintenance operators and organisations;
- federal, regional and local airport operators;
- other relevant Government agencies including Infrastructure, Airservices Australia, the Department of Defence and the Office of Parliamentary Counsel (OPC); and
- other industry and public stakeholders.


Australia’s aviation safety governance structures and processes have continued to evolve since the initial establishment of the Civil Aviation Act 1988 (covering the operations of CASA), the Air Services Act 1995 (covering the operations of Airservices) and Transport Safety Investigation Act 2003 (covering the operations of the ATSB).

In addition the establishment of an Aviation Safety Regulatory Development Taskforce in March 2010, comprising dedicated resources from CASA and OPC, was specifically aimed at helping expedite the completion of the regulatory drafting work for an aviation safety regulatory reform programme.

The current regulatory reform programme involves completion of three main regulatory suites covering aircraft maintenance, aircraft operations and flight crew licensing. The maintenance and licensing suites are largely completed with the operations suite scheduled to be completed next year.

The aviation industry and CASA are in the process of implementing the maintenance and licensing regulatory changes already made and in which significant investment in improved systems, training and education is completed or under way.

Work on updated regulations for areas affecting general aviation such as amendments to Civil Aviation Safety Regulations - Part 42 (Continuing Airworthiness - amendments for charter and aerial work), Part 132 (Limited Category Aircraft Operations - Warbirds), Part 138 (Aerial Work Operations) and for sport and recreational aviation (Parts 103, 105 and 149) are scheduled to be progressed in the next twelve months.

Earlier this year a Senate report into Aviation Accident Investigations highlighted a range of issues with the regulation and governance of aviation safety within Australia.

It is therefore timely to consider future aviation safety structures and regulatory development approaches and processes in Australia by evaluating the effectiveness of the current approach, looking at international experience and possible options for future improvements and bearing in mind the commitment of the Australian Government to reduce the burden of regulation on the economy.

It is also timely to look at which areas should be priorities for future regulatory development to meet continued growth in aviation demand.

Review Membership and Timing

The review panel will comprise Mr David Forsyth (chair), Mr Don Spruston and Mr Roger Whitefield. The panel will be assisted by a Secretariat established within Infrastructure, and will be supported as required by specialist advisers.

The review will report to the Minister for Infrastructure and Regional Development in May 2014.

Attachment B

Aviation Safety Regulation Review – Panel Members

Mr David Forsyth AM (Australia) – Review Panel Chair
Mr Forsyth has extensive experience in aviation engineering and management. A professional engineer and a Member of the Order of Australia, he has held executive and board positions across the industry, government, not-for-profit and academic sectors in Australia.

Mr Forsyth currently works as an independent consultant to the aviation industry and has served on a number of Boards, including as Chair of Airservices Australia, Chair of the Safeskies Conference, Vice President of the Royal Flying Doctor Service of Australia (SE Section) and President of the Royal Aeronautical Society Australian Division. He previously worked for Qantas for over 30 years in technical and management roles including: Manager of the Melbourne Maintenance Base; General Manager, Regional Airlines; and Executive General Manager, Aircraft Operations.

Mr Forsyth holds a Bachelor of Aeronautical Engineering (Hons) and a Graduate Diploma in Industrial Engineering Developments from the University of New South Wales (UNSW) and has completed the Stanford University Executive Program. A Councillor of the Royal Aeronautical Society’s Australian division since 2004, he is currently a Senior Visiting Fellow at the UNSW School of Aviation.

Mr Don Spruston (Canada) – Review Panel Member
Mr Spruston has wide-ranging experience in oversight and regulation of the aviation sector with the Canadian Government. He has also been extensively involved in the development and implementation of criteria for reviewing aviation safety regulatory performance as part of the ICAO Universal Safety Oversight Audit Programme (USOAP).

Formerly Director General of Civil Aviation at Transport Canada, Mr Spruston was until recently, the Director General of the International Business Aviation Council (IBAC) based in ICAO headquarters in Montreal, Canada. He has previously held senior positions with Transport Canada including Director General of Aircraft Services, and Regional Director of Air Navigation Services in the Pacific Region.

Mr Spruston holds a Bachelor of Science from the Royal Military College of Canada and has an Airline Transport Pilot Licence.

Mr Roger Whitefield (United Kingdom) – Review Panel Member
Mr Whitefield has held senior positions in both regulatory and operational roles within the aviation industry – he was previously a commercial pilot for over 30 years. For the past 10 years he has been a board member of the UK Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) during a period of significant structural and governance reform of the Authority.

He is a member of the International Safety Review Team which most recently conducted an independent safety review of Air France following their loss of an A330 aircraft. He is also Chair of Air Safety Support International (a UK Government company charged with helping deliver aviation safety oversight for British overseas territories). A Fellow of the Royal Aeronautical Society, Mr Whitefield spent a number of years as an external advisor to the Qantas Safety Review Board.

Mr Whitefield has had 39 years’ experience working for UK airlines as a pilot, airline captain and in executive roles, including as Head of Safety and Head of Corporate Safety and Quality with British Airways.


Media Contact: Brett Heffernan on (02) 6277 7680 or 0467 650 020 or [email protected]>

Creampuff 14th Nov 2013 05:24

Peace for our time!

Horatio Leafblower 14th Nov 2013 05:33

Is that a piece of paper in your hand Mr Chamberlain?

I do like the potential of this bit:


The report of the review will:
• outline and identify any areas for improvement in the current interaction and relationships between CASA and the ATSB, as well as other agencies and Infrastructure;
• examine the current processes by which CASA develops, consults on and finalises changes to aviation safety regulations and other legislative instruments (such as civil aviation orders) and make any proposals for improving these processes such that new regulations are best practice in safe operations for each relevant sector of the aviation industry;
• review the implementation of the current aviation safety regulatory reform programme and assess the effectiveness of the planning and implementation of regulatory changes, including cost impacts on industry;
• examine and make recommendations on options for improving future aviation safety regulatory reform having regard to international experience and stakeholder views, and the Government’s objective of reducing the cost of regulation to business;
• provide advice to Government on priorities for future regulatory development and implementation strategies; and
• provide advice to Government on options for improving oversight and enforcement of aviation regulations, including rights of review.
...he has provided an opening, now the RAAA and AOPA and AAFI and the rest of us need to stick our feet into the door and wedge it open.

Creampuff 14th Nov 2013 10:35

Finally they’re having a review.

Just another 7 months or so and all the problems in aviation regulation and accident investigation in Australia will, for the first time ever, be revealed by external experts and rectified by the government.

And then it will be aviation Nirvana.

Lucky I have the attention span of a goldfish. Otherwise I’d remember the last 3 or so times I’ve heard the same crap.

I’m saddened that many of the people who fly or fix aircraft in Australia appear to have the attention span of a goldfish.

Kharon 14th Nov 2013 19:39

Life, as a goldfish.
A review next year eh, well what's to be done then?. Do we all sit and sweat it out over the keyboard, writing and editing; then rewriting. Bore our nearest and dearest witless asking them to read a masterpiece they can't comprehend. Then when it's finally done; wave a tearful, fond farewell to the paperwork as it disappears into the belly of the beast expecting it to make a difference, secretly knowing that within a 12 month it will be treated as every other submission made; redundant from birth.

Control over outcome is what's needed if this expensive inquiry is to get home, the opposition is entrenched, established, have all the levers and know how to pull them. There is little point taking off if you don't intend to arrive at your destination. To get there you can't just do the take off and expect the aircraft to arrive in one piece and land without some driving from you (metaphorically speaking).

Anything other than a determined, concerted, coordinated push for change, seen through to the end will be doomed to failure. Failure will mean creatures like Wodger delivering plagiarised speeches at the RAeS meetings, bald eagles writing more dodgy letters, trained attack dogs patrolling your hanger, see the inutile promoted, the dubious rewarded and your confidential REPCON a signed confession, this process will allow more first class junkets to exotic ports for long lazy holidays with your current squeeze.

You have your review, one shot – now then, what's to be done, lest history repeat itself (again).


Creampuff 14th Nov 2013 20:20

I wouldn’t sweat it.

The report of the ‘Review’ has already been drafted.

Cynical Pilot 16th Nov 2013 09:30

Not sure if anybody heard Albanese's speech on this matter the other day. As fiction goes it was almost as good as "no carbon tax under a government I lead." It's worth seeking it out in Hansard to see for yourself how much he believes CASA do good work...

Jinglie 16th Nov 2013 11:34

CP, I agree. I watched Albo's speech and was almost sick! Laughable the extent of the lies!! It is a national disgrace!

sunnySA 16th Nov 2013 11:56

The speech.

Mr ALBANESE (Grayndler) (11:03): Labor welcomes the minister's statement and the announcement of a further review into the regulation of aviation safety. As the minister said, this country has an enviable record of aviation safety, the result of governments of either political persuasion taking a nonpartisan approach to this issue, as is entirely appropriate. During the period in which the current minister was the shadow minister, when it came to safety and security issues they were dealt with in a manner above politics, and I intend to adopt exactly the same approach. It is absolutely critical that safety not be an issue which becomes part of the political contest.

It is also the case that, when it comes to aviation safety, we can never be too cautious. Continuous improvement must always be our aim, and our pursuit of the best possible aviation safety framework must always be beyond politics. When I became the minister, I commissioned significant reform to the aviation sector through a properly planned green and white paper process. That was the first time that Australia had put in place a comprehensive plan for aviation that went to safety and security, regulatory issues, workforce-planning issues, the general aviation sector and international agreements, so it was a comprehensive plan, not for just a year or two; it was a comprehensive plan for decades ahead.

All the recommendations on safety and security were put in place by the government. We had a process for a strategic plan, including accelerating the modernisation of Australian regulation. I would hope that this review takes it to the next stage. We introduced a board of governance for CASA, chaired by Allan Hawke—a process that received the support of the parliament. In terms of the Australian Transport Safety Bureau, we improved its governance structures as well by having commissioners and by extending the ATSB's responsibilities to also look at rail and shipping, so that you had a comprehensive approach to transport safety issues.

I think this plan has got it right by looking forward and making sure that it looks at the strategic framework and the balance that must be there between appropriate safety, regulation and costs. The minister referred to that and I would agree with that. I would say this, though: there should be no compromise in terms of safety being the absolute priority—something I am sure that the minister agrees with.

I also welcome the appointment of David Forsyth to chair the review. I know David well. I appointed him to chair the board of Airservices Australia in 2008, a position he held with great distinction until last year. Under Mr Forsyth's leadership the board led a major program of investment in critical safety infrastructure, air traffic services and training of skilled personnel.

About $1 billion is being invested in upgrades for air services. We have seen new air traffic control towers. I have opened them not only in capital cities such as Adelaide but also in regional centres such as the Sunshine Coast and Broome. The air traffic control process is also being streamlined to achieve greater cooperation between defence systems and the civil aviation sector.

I am also pleased that the coalition has appointed overseas experts to this review because, in an industry that is by definition international, it is critical that we consider overseas experience.

In fact, just before the recent federal election, I welcomed the ATSB's decision to invite the Canadian Transportation Safety Bureau to undertake an independent review of the ATSB's investigation methodologies and processes.

That review commenced in August. It aims to provide the ATSB with valuable insights about possible improvements in the conduct of investigations. It is due to report to the minister next year, and I look forward to discussing that process with him. I am pleased that Mr Forsyth will be joined in this new review by Don Spruston from Canada and Roger Whitefield from the UK. Both men are indeed highly qualified.

In conclusion, the aviation sector injects some $7 billion into the Australian economy each year. Australia has an enviable record of aviation safety, but we should not be complacent at any time. We need to ensure that we keep our personnel appropriately trained and skilled and be prepared to provide proper resourcing.

In 2010, I was very proud that Labor announced an additional $90 million in funding over four years to provide CASA with long-term funding stability. That was not an easy process to get through our cabinet, but people recognised that this was a priority. I would say to the minister that it is important that the resourcing from government to these organisations in charge of safety and security also be kept up. This extra assistance that we provided has allowed the authority to better meet the demands of a growing and ever more complex domestic and international industry.

The proliferation of low-cost carriers, the huge growth of fly-in fly-out airline and helicopter services, and the emergence of unmanned aerial systems are just some of the big challenges facing aviation safety. Others include new aircraft types and the wider use of satellite based technologies. There is always a balance to be struck between safety regulation and cost. This balancing is best done by experts, not politicians.

I welcome the minister's acknowledgement today that Australia's safety performance is among the best in the world and that it is built on a strong regulatory system. The opposition will follow the review and carefully consider its recommendations when they come forth in May.

I say to the minister that I believe it would be appropriate that there be a confidential briefing given to the opposition before the release of the recommendations. I have committed to him, publicly as well as in private, to ensure that these issues continue to be held as those not the subject of political debate. As I say, I pledge cooperation with him on this matter and give credit to him for the way in which he dealt with difficult issues such as the introduction of body scanners here in Australia, which was introduced without political rancour and with bipartisan support.

Kharon 16th Nov 2013 18:07

Post of the year award.

Jinglie #9 –"It is a national disgrace!"
That's a bit tough, Albo's speech may have been a national embarrassment; but to fully understand the international disgrace you really should read – This post -

I'll stick my neck out and say that the Sarcs post more clearly defines, in one page the need for reform than all the bloody awful polly chatter, CASA waffle and ATSB probability statements ever printed. Nicely played Sarcs, please accept my vote for the post of the year award. Bravo....:D....Indeed, well done Sirrah......http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/sr...ies/thumbs.gif

Sunfish 17th Nov 2013 04:48

Ahhhhh, children. The message here is in the fine print:"The panel will also be supported, as required, by specialist advisers". I would also add that there will undoubtedly be some "administrative support".

Now folks, remember little Sunfish waxing lyrical about the good folk at Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet?

Guess who will have written the terms of reference, press release, selected the members, written the letters of appointment and most importantly written the brief to Cabinet that got the Elephant stamp??

Anyone? anyone?

To put it another way, a young (30-ish) honours economics phD has just been invited to run a stake through the heart of CASA and its perverted "safety" argument in return for a Deputy Secretaries slot at Transport and who knows what other transport related appointment afterwards?

You may never know her name until a year or Two after the ruins have been cleared and her role on the secretariat of the review is revealed in her resume.

Of course if she doesn't succeed she won't be an up and comer in PM&C afterwards.

Frank Arouet 17th Nov 2013 06:29

More information needed, however oblique it is.

It's no good saying I told you so when it happens. So protect your reputation now. :suspect:

aroa 17th Nov 2013 07:16

Albo boasteth the mosteth...
:mad:..."I commissioned SIGNIFICANT REFORM by having properly planned white and green papers"

The White paper was Kleenex SuperSoft material passing over GA in two paras that said nothing.

All we got out of his years was "ops normal" and WORSE :mad::mad:

Still, being an inveterate liar is par for the course for the likes of Albo.
As far as aviation goes he doesnt know his arsk from his albo !!

The Golden Dog Turd Award of the year I'd say.:D

Dick Smith 17th Nov 2013 10:31

"There is always a balance to be struck between safety regulation and cost"

Notice these words in the ex ministers speech. Quite a breakthrough I would say.

Now we need to change the Act to reflect reality

At the present time under 9A - functions -it states. - " CASA must regard the safety of air navigation as the most important consideration"

This means more important than cost and is clearly not complied with.

Does anyone have some better suggested wording?

Kharon 17th Nov 2013 19:38

Curious – yet again.
Scary business this thinking lark; a man should never start it. Always amazes me, how little I know about the 'way' of matters which can affect so many are managed and how much faith and trust we must, of necessity, have in the folk responsible.

CP# 6 –"The report of the ‘Review’ has already been drafted."
With a bit of luck, Creamy is probably 80% correct. The hope of course is, that the report recommends a six month warning bell of a six month lead up to the NZ (or similar) rules being adopted. It is the right fix for so many reasons. Supported (gods willing) by a DAS and a team with the right stuff to make sure the adoption is as painless as possible.

DS# 15 –"Now we need to change the Act to reflect reality"
The regulation mess rightly gets all the attention; but now I wonder, while we are at it, would/could /should/ the Acts be repealed. How does that work? does the parliament approve 'the Act' and do the regulations depend on the Act for their horsepower? Too much for my wooden head, but I'm curious now. Apart from the foster and promote etc. amendments do we need to change the Act??. Anyone??

I know a couple of acts that are in desperate need of some serious attention; but that'll keep....http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/sr...ilies/evil.gif

Good to see you back Sunny...:D

Frank Arouet 17th Nov 2013 22:10

Dick, it depends on the interpretation and implementation of the words;

At the present time under 9A - functions -it states. - " CASA must regard the safety of air navigation as the most important consideration"
To this must be added or implanted that the Industry cannot be strangled by unnecessary regulatory burdens and The Act should be unambiguous and reflect contemporary world wide standards. (US KIWI PNG and just about everywhere else).

With regards affordable safety, words need to be used to reject current thinking of making it unaffordable for Industry to operate without fostering and promotion. Affordable safety is relative and should be all encompassing. Safe skies may be empty skies, but it can't continue on this track, or aviation as we know it will obviously cease to exist.

As an aside, CASA have demonstrated on many an occasion that they are not fit to write the regulations, not fit to prosecute the regulations and not fit to administer penalties without AAT intervention.

To this end if CASA wish to write the regulations, The Commonwealth Police should investigate and prosecute the offences and the DPP should administer the penalties. The Industry Complaints Commissioner should be abolished if CASA are paying the salary and the appeals process needs to be more balanced and affordable than that in the AAT. All appeal matters need to be Judiciary taxed to prevent CASA defending the indefensible to the last cent in the taxpayers purse. People have their livelihoods ruined without any recourse to a redress of wrongs perpetrated upon them with frivolous and vexatious charges. This is a two way street so intending Defendants need to have their ducks in a row.

Someone smarted than me can probably work this rant into meaningful words.

GedStreet 18th Nov 2013 02:05

CASA is a detriment to GA.
CASA is a cost. They cost the industry money which could have otherwise be spent on grass roots safety.

Safe Skies for All?? Only when CASA has everyone OUT of the sky!

However, if we want safe skies for all, those on the ground, potentially under the debris should pay towards their own safety. CASA should be funded from consolidated revenue and go back (again) full circle. Then we all have a say in CASA's performance too. Dismal and underhanded as it has been of late.

FAA is in charge of safety and fostering the Aviation industry in the USA. We need that approach. Maybe repeal the Civil Aviation Act, sack CASA en-masse and contract Aviation safety and growth to the FAA.

Time for another name change, CASA!

Paragraph377 18th Nov 2013 05:59

Possible starting point for new CAsA governance?
It has probably been covered but the following needs to be included in the body of any charter, wording, statement or framework made by CAsA or the Government.
As follows:

· CAsA accepts the responsibility to act in a manner that is equal in fairness, quality and ethics in nature across all aspects of the aviation industry
· CAsA accepts full accountability for the decisions, actions, policies, procedures and regulations it implements, introduces and mandates
· CAsA accepts accountability for the actions of all its employees including inspectorate, management and administration staff
· CAsA accepts both its moral and legal obligation to use taxpayer funding in a responsible, transparent and fair manner
· CAsA accepts that the outcomes of internal/external investigations, audits, reviews and discussions into its activities be published publicly for the purpose of transparency and accountability
· CAsA accepts the commitment to honour judicial recommendations by courts or law and/or coroners courts in all matters
· CAsA accepts that it will honour recommendations that are produced from senate or other government inquiries, commissions or reports into its activities. CAsA also commits to responding in full to all questions, queries or request in a manner that is timely and transparent, and accepts to do so within a 30 day timeframe at maximum
· CAsA accepts the formation of an independent ICC consisting of non CAsA employees or persons connected to the CAsA by way of consultancy or paid services.
· CAsA accepts the decisions made by the AAT and agrees that it will not expend taxpayer funds fighting fair and equitable decisions made during the AAT process. CAsA further accepts that it will pay compensation to any person/individual who is inconvenienced, unduly treated, falsely accused or found innocent of false, non existent, incorrect or malicious charges
· CAsA accepts its obligation to be a good corporate citizen by standardising process, policies and procedures network wide to ensure consistency and fairness across all sectors of the aviation industry

It is absolute time that cronyism, payback, bullying or unjustifiable actions be removed from the authority once and for all. I am sure others with a more legal/statutory background have more to add or changes to make to the above, but you get my drift. No more excessive power, no more thumbing of the nose at industry and the government itself, no more misuse of taxpayer money for the sole purpose of payback and revenge. NO MORE HIDING FROM AND AVOIDING ACCOUNATBILTY. ACCOUNTABILTY HAS TO BE INTRODUCED INTO THIS ORGANISATION AT ALL LEVELS FOR ALL EMPLOYEES.

All times are GMT. The time now is 06:11.

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