casa - Does anything really change???
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2010
Location: More than 300km from SY, Australia
Posts: 817
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
casa - Does anything really change???
Note by Senators to the 2000 ACAS inquiry:
http://www.aph.gov.au/senate/committ...ort/report.pdf
ADDITIONAL COMMENT ON THE PROVISION OF EVIDENCE TO THE COMMITTEE BY CASA
The Committee wishes to comment on the apparent unwillingness of CASA staff, in seeking to justify the actions of CASA, to provide this Committee with accurate and timely information. The Committee is particularly concerned that on some occasions, CASA staff demonstrated more of a concern to perpetuate earlier misleading or incomplete information than to facilitate the Committee’s inquiry.
The Committee initially sought information from CASA on the administration of ARCAS through the Estimates process. In many instances, the responses from CASA staff were subsequently proved to be incomplete. In other instances, the response of CASA staff was simply to take all questions on notice. Responses to questions taken on notice taken by CASA were in many instances not provided by the requested date.
As noted in this report, prior to the hearing on 1 September 2000, CASA officials invested a great deal of time and energy in a reassesment of the Noble Report, and the actions of Mr McKenzie and Mr Hoy.
As stated in CASA’s written submission:
While not questioning the validity of the concerns which prompted Senator O’Brien to seek further information on this matter, the significant diversion of CASA resources which has been necessary to provide the Committee with the evidence to demonstrate the proper use of the Authority’s procedures and delegations and the propriety of the delegate’s decision making has an impact on the officers involved.
The Committee questions whether more frank responses to questions raised in Estimates would not have reduced the effort to which CASA and this Committee was subsequently put, and have made the conduct of this inquiry significantly easier.
Has anything changed??
What is casa's next move??
http://www.aph.gov.au/senate/committ...ort/report.pdf
ADDITIONAL COMMENT ON THE PROVISION OF EVIDENCE TO THE COMMITTEE BY CASA
The Committee wishes to comment on the apparent unwillingness of CASA staff, in seeking to justify the actions of CASA, to provide this Committee with accurate and timely information. The Committee is particularly concerned that on some occasions, CASA staff demonstrated more of a concern to perpetuate earlier misleading or incomplete information than to facilitate the Committee’s inquiry.
The Committee initially sought information from CASA on the administration of ARCAS through the Estimates process. In many instances, the responses from CASA staff were subsequently proved to be incomplete. In other instances, the response of CASA staff was simply to take all questions on notice. Responses to questions taken on notice taken by CASA were in many instances not provided by the requested date.
As noted in this report, prior to the hearing on 1 September 2000, CASA officials invested a great deal of time and energy in a reassesment of the Noble Report, and the actions of Mr McKenzie and Mr Hoy.
As stated in CASA’s written submission:
While not questioning the validity of the concerns which prompted Senator O’Brien to seek further information on this matter, the significant diversion of CASA resources which has been necessary to provide the Committee with the evidence to demonstrate the proper use of the Authority’s procedures and delegations and the propriety of the delegate’s decision making has an impact on the officers involved.
The Committee questions whether more frank responses to questions raised in Estimates would not have reduced the effort to which CASA and this Committee was subsequently put, and have made the conduct of this inquiry significantly easier.
Has anything changed??
What is casa's next move??
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Home
Posts: 46
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Has anything changed??
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
They say those with a much higher intelligence usually lack common sense.
Does this mean the above question was asked by such a person?
Does anyone REALLY expect a change in the CASA?
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaThey say those with a much higher intelligence usually lack common sense.
Does this mean the above question was asked by such a person?
Does anyone REALLY expect a change in the CASA?
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Alabama, then Wyoming, then Idaho and now staying with Kharon on Styx houseboat
Age: 61
Posts: 1,437
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Massaging the turd
Up-into-the-air, there are plenty of things that have changed in the past 12 years at Fort Fumble. You need to stop being a 'glass half empty' type of guy and look at what these assclowns have achieved.
For example:
1) They have stretched the reg reform program out by another 12 years.
2) They have increased the number of executives as well as remuneration packages. They have also grown fatter from indulging in that never empty corporate trough.
3) They have successfully driven countless more small businesses and individuals to the wall with their bullying, intimidation and sociopathic actions.
4) They reappointed a Board.
5) They have built some ergonomic and eco friendly regional office buildings.
6) They have maintained that cosy relationship with QF.
7) They have changed the name of their regulatory organization, designed a soothing soft blue ensignia and introduced the slick 'Safe Skies For All' motto.
8) They have managed to push the already fractured 'partnership' and trust between them and 'us' to an all time parlous low.
9) They have managed to almost get Australias safety rating downgraded by ICAO.
10) They have managed to invent ingenious ways to circumvent 'accountability' and make spin, obsfucation and deflection an art form all of it's own!
11) They have successfully managed to squeeze more of the green stuff out of the Australian taxpayer, in turn that has enabled them to fund their thirst for international trips and silly arse conferences that have not enabled them to prove their own processes one single bit.
12) They have managed to fool quite a number more Ministers and Government bureaucrats into thinking that CASA actually contributes to aviation safety.
These are a mere token, a sample, a taste of what they have achieved since the 2000 inquiry (Ground Hog Day comes to mind). To think that nothing has changed is so negative. Plenty has changed, it's just none of it for the better!!
For example:
1) They have stretched the reg reform program out by another 12 years.
2) They have increased the number of executives as well as remuneration packages. They have also grown fatter from indulging in that never empty corporate trough.
3) They have successfully driven countless more small businesses and individuals to the wall with their bullying, intimidation and sociopathic actions.
4) They reappointed a Board.
5) They have built some ergonomic and eco friendly regional office buildings.
6) They have maintained that cosy relationship with QF.
7) They have changed the name of their regulatory organization, designed a soothing soft blue ensignia and introduced the slick 'Safe Skies For All' motto.
8) They have managed to push the already fractured 'partnership' and trust between them and 'us' to an all time parlous low.
9) They have managed to almost get Australias safety rating downgraded by ICAO.
10) They have managed to invent ingenious ways to circumvent 'accountability' and make spin, obsfucation and deflection an art form all of it's own!
11) They have successfully managed to squeeze more of the green stuff out of the Australian taxpayer, in turn that has enabled them to fund their thirst for international trips and silly arse conferences that have not enabled them to prove their own processes one single bit.
12) They have managed to fool quite a number more Ministers and Government bureaucrats into thinking that CASA actually contributes to aviation safety.
These are a mere token, a sample, a taste of what they have achieved since the 2000 inquiry (Ground Hog Day comes to mind). To think that nothing has changed is so negative. Plenty has changed, it's just none of it for the better!!
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: dans un cercle dont le centre est eveywhere et circumfernce n'est nulle part
Posts: 2,606
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Does anyone really expect a change in the CASA?
When a politician lies, people often say, well, what did you expect.
Personally I expect my elected representatives to be honest and trustworthy. I've seen a few, however when you talk about un-elected bureaucrats given unfettered power, (CASA for example), the following Johnny Rivers song comes to mind;
On the way to work one morning
down the path along side the lake
A tender hearted woman
saw a poor half-frozen snake
His pretty colored skin
had been all frosted with the dew
"Oh, well" she cried, "I'll take you in
and I'll take care of you."
CHORUS
Take me in tender woman
Take me in for heaven's sake
Take me in tender woman
SSSSiiiiggghhhhed the SSSSSSnake
She wrapped him up all cozy
in a comforter of silk
and then laid him by the fireside
with some honey and some milk
She hurried home from work that night
and as soon as she arrived
She found that pretty snake she'd taken in
had been revived.
Chorus
She clutched him to her bosom
"You're so beautiful" she cried
"but if I hadn't brought you in
by now you might have died."
Well she stroked his pretty skin again
and then kissed him really tight,
but instead of saying thanks,
the snake gave her a vicious bite.
Chorus
"I saved you!" cried that woman
"and you've bitten me but why?"
"you know your bite is poisonous
and now I'm gonna die."
"Ha ha, shut up, silly woman."
said that reptile with a grin.
"You knew darn well I was a snake
before you took me in."
Personally I expect my elected representatives to be honest and trustworthy. I've seen a few, however when you talk about un-elected bureaucrats given unfettered power, (CASA for example), the following Johnny Rivers song comes to mind;
On the way to work one morning
down the path along side the lake
A tender hearted woman
saw a poor half-frozen snake
His pretty colored skin
had been all frosted with the dew
"Oh, well" she cried, "I'll take you in
and I'll take care of you."
CHORUS
Take me in tender woman
Take me in for heaven's sake
Take me in tender woman
SSSSiiiiggghhhhed the SSSSSSnake
She wrapped him up all cozy
in a comforter of silk
and then laid him by the fireside
with some honey and some milk
She hurried home from work that night
and as soon as she arrived
She found that pretty snake she'd taken in
had been revived.
Chorus
She clutched him to her bosom
"You're so beautiful" she cried
"but if I hadn't brought you in
by now you might have died."
Well she stroked his pretty skin again
and then kissed him really tight,
but instead of saying thanks,
the snake gave her a vicious bite.
Chorus
"I saved you!" cried that woman
"and you've bitten me but why?"
"you know your bite is poisonous
and now I'm gonna die."
"Ha ha, shut up, silly woman."
said that reptile with a grin.
"You knew darn well I was a snake
before you took me in."
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Australia
Age: 53
Posts: 547
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CASA don't like anybody they can brand as negative thinkers that includes people from icao and FAA! The organization is rife with bullying and harassment.
were the regs completed in 2005 before Byron changed the focus from the FAA to EASA?
Casaweary had strong views on what has been going on. Whether there was any truth in those posts. What is clear is that our regulator whether a little r or capital R is not very highly regarded.
were the regs completed in 2005 before Byron changed the focus from the FAA to EASA?
Casaweary had strong views on what has been going on. Whether there was any truth in those posts. What is clear is that our regulator whether a little r or capital R is not very highly regarded.
Moderator
were the regs completed in 2005 before Byron changed the focus from the FAA to EASA?
At the risk of sounding repetitious, on the 14th February 2005 the status of the new Regulations was:
Mr Byron—I anticipate we would start sending some of them from about the middle of this year. I do not see this delaying the overall program excessively. We have an action item to develop a plan to forward to the minister about when we plan to have them to the minister, and I assume that plan would be done in the next couple of months. I would be hopeful that it would not be long after early 2006 that most of the draft rules are delivered to the minister.
Accept the fact that under this Government and the current CASA management, the "new Regulations" never will be finished!
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Australia
Age: 53
Posts: 547
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That quote was surely from Yes, Minister!
This was my favorite but Byron beats it.
Humphrey: Notwithstanding the fact that your proposal could conceivably encompass certain concomitant benefits of a marginal and peripheral relevance, there is a countervailing consideration of infinitely superior magnitude involving your personal complicity and corroborative malfeasance, with a consequence that the taint and stigma of your former associations and diversions could irredeemably and irretrievably invalidate your position and culminate in public revelations and recriminations of a profoundly embarrassing and ultimately indefensible character.
Hacker: Perhaps I can have a précis of that?
This was my favorite but Byron beats it.
Humphrey: Notwithstanding the fact that your proposal could conceivably encompass certain concomitant benefits of a marginal and peripheral relevance, there is a countervailing consideration of infinitely superior magnitude involving your personal complicity and corroborative malfeasance, with a consequence that the taint and stigma of your former associations and diversions could irredeemably and irretrievably invalidate your position and culminate in public revelations and recriminations of a profoundly embarrassing and ultimately indefensible character.
Hacker: Perhaps I can have a précis of that?
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Styx Houseboat Park.
Posts: 2,055
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Said it before
Senators - We have it covered - trust us.
We know how to do this
It is becoming painful - bloody Senate. Talk about barns, tailwinds, pony pooh and shovels. How much money are we going to spend before Nirvana.
PNG is light years ahead; started by slinging 'em out.
Strewth.
We know how to do this
It is becoming painful - bloody Senate. Talk about barns, tailwinds, pony pooh and shovels. How much money are we going to spend before Nirvana.
PNG is light years ahead; started by slinging 'em out.
Strewth.
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Alabama, then Wyoming, then Idaho and now staying with Kharon on Styx houseboat
Age: 61
Posts: 1,437
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
24 years of turd polishing
Thanks Tailwheel. Your post got me thinking, only a short step back in time to 2005/2006, around 16 years into the reg reform program.
And back to Tailwheel -
A lovely 'golden nugget' from the annals of history. Yep, pick any given year between 1988 and 2012 and sift through the layers of pony pooh and all you end up with is, well, pony pooh!!
CASA Media Release - Wednesday, 16 March 2005
Safety outcomes the top priority
New aviation regulations must focus on safety outcomes rather than being excessively prescriptive.
This principle for the development of new air safety rules has been laid down by the Civil Aviation Safety Authority’s chief executive officer, Bruce Byron.
Mr Byron told an aviation law conference today that safety outcomes were generally more important than the methods used achieve compliance with regulations.
“We want to get our regulations back to a clear safety focus,” Mr Byron said.
“Where possible I want the rules to spell out the outcome to be achieved and not be excessively prescriptive.
“The regulations should then be supported by an advisory method of compliance.
“In other words, if you adopt this method you will satisfy the regulatory requirement (and satisfy CASA). But other methods may well produce the required outcome and may therefore be an acceptable means of compliance.”
Mr Byron told the Aviation Law Association of Australia and New Zealand that some people in the aviation industry had doubts about the way CASA had conducted consultation while developing new regulations.
He said these doubts centred on whether everyone had been given enough time to consider the large volume of proposed new rules being released and whether CASA had seriously considered suggestions put forward by the aviation industry.
“Some said it was just ‘lip-service’ and CASA would implement the regulations in the way that it wanted.
“It is almost irrelevant whether the concerns had any substance or not. Perception plays a big part in attitude formation in the aviation world and I suppose in most fields of human interaction.
“There was a perception among a sufficiently significant group of players that there were problems with the way the regulatory development process was going.”
Mr Byron said for these reasons he had issued directives that effectively put the regulatory reform processes on hold and set new principles for rules development.
The speech can be read at: http://casa.gov.au/corporat/ceo/05-03-16.htm
Media contact:
Peter Gibson
mobile 0419 296 446
Ref: 0509
Safety outcomes the top priority
New aviation regulations must focus on safety outcomes rather than being excessively prescriptive.
This principle for the development of new air safety rules has been laid down by the Civil Aviation Safety Authority’s chief executive officer, Bruce Byron.
Mr Byron told an aviation law conference today that safety outcomes were generally more important than the methods used achieve compliance with regulations.
“We want to get our regulations back to a clear safety focus,” Mr Byron said.
“Where possible I want the rules to spell out the outcome to be achieved and not be excessively prescriptive.
“The regulations should then be supported by an advisory method of compliance.
“In other words, if you adopt this method you will satisfy the regulatory requirement (and satisfy CASA). But other methods may well produce the required outcome and may therefore be an acceptable means of compliance.”
Mr Byron told the Aviation Law Association of Australia and New Zealand that some people in the aviation industry had doubts about the way CASA had conducted consultation while developing new regulations.
He said these doubts centred on whether everyone had been given enough time to consider the large volume of proposed new rules being released and whether CASA had seriously considered suggestions put forward by the aviation industry.
“Some said it was just ‘lip-service’ and CASA would implement the regulations in the way that it wanted.
“It is almost irrelevant whether the concerns had any substance or not. Perception plays a big part in attitude formation in the aviation world and I suppose in most fields of human interaction.
“There was a perception among a sufficiently significant group of players that there were problems with the way the regulatory development process was going.”
Mr Byron said for these reasons he had issued directives that effectively put the regulatory reform processes on hold and set new principles for rules development.
The speech can be read at: http://casa.gov.au/corporat/ceo/05-03-16.htm
Media contact:
Peter Gibson
mobile 0419 296 446
Ref: 0509
And back to Tailwheel -
Mr Byron—I anticipate we would start sending some of them from about the middle of this year. I do not see this delaying the overall program excessively. We have an action item to develop a plan to forward to the minister about when we plan to have them to the minister, and I assume that plan would be done in the next couple of months. I would be hopeful that it would not be long after early 2006 that most of the draft rules are delivered to the minister.
A cock up supreme ...or what?.
This quote has to be a Golden Dog Turd award winner!!! 
From a 2005 coroners report into Rec Aviation fatality2005..p32
"CASA believes that they (CARS, CAOs) are overly prescriptive, ambiguous,disjointed,too reliant on exemptions, difficult to interpret, to comply with, and enforce."
Well Hell!!, whoever would have thought of that.!!
Is that an admission of guilt, for negligence, neglect in not doing anything to rectify the situation.?
Suffer the industry as a result.
From a 2005 coroners report into Rec Aviation fatality2005..p32
"CASA believes that they (CARS, CAOs) are overly prescriptive, ambiguous,disjointed,too reliant on exemptions, difficult to interpret, to comply with, and enforce."
Well Hell!!, whoever would have thought of that.!!
Is that an admission of guilt, for negligence, neglect in not doing anything to rectify the situation.?
Suffer the industry as a result.
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Styx Houseboat Park.
Posts: 2,055
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pantomime indeed.
Aroa - "CASA believes that they (CARS, CAO) are overly prescriptive, ambiguous, disjointed, too reliant on exemptions, difficult to interpret, to comply with, and enforce.
FA- At least Crosby, Bendix and Co. had talent for the pantomime.
