Senate Estimates.

In My Opinion, a Sunday ramble for the BRB consideration:

Is this Australia’s gigantic fraud?

Politicians do not operate in a vacuum. They rely on the ebb and flow of perceived public opinion relayed to them via a plethora of minions, who shape their reality and massage their ego’s. At the top of the minion pile sits the mandarin, the master puppeteer, the Sir Humphrey, if you like.

There are strong politicians, there are weak ones; but, the ones with the courage of their convictions, who will act contrary to  “advice” are very rare and even should this few and far between breed, decide to act contrary to “advice”, they are exposed to the wrath of the minions, to run a gauntlet of leaks, innuendo, passive and in extreme cases overt resistance.

When I look back over 50 years involved in aviation a disturbing thought crosses my mind, nothing seems logical, nor even approaches what would pass for common sense.   I do wonder, are we being manipulated, played for fools?

Is a massive fraud being perpetrated on the Australian people?

Someone must have advised politicians that by creating autonomous Government owned monopolistic corporations to regulate aviation, provide ATC and investigate accidents was in the nations interest.

Attach this to an Act which gives these corporations a single indefinable task; “Safety”.Then by adding a principle of user pays; you give the ‘department’ a veneer of being a business entity, monopolistic, but not subject to the same checks and balances that the law provides for private corporations, they can operate in a vacuum.

The notion that a monopoly serves a customer is complete nonsense. Where does a no other option ‘customer’ turn if that service is not up to par; or should the product be flawed or faulty; purchased with no option, warranty or a guarantee?

The aviation Act, carefully moulded and promoted by a master puppeteer was put to our politicians, who were, no doubt bombarded with good reasons and subtly threatened by the “Mystic of safety”.  There can be little doubt, that being heavily influenced by department propaganda, describing how dangerous aviation was, how reckless its proponents, that the politicians who dared raise an eyebrow would have blood on their hands and the ‘public’ to answer to.  In fact, so reckless, wilful and dangerous are the ‘aviation’ businesses that ‘special’, micro management regulations must be framed under the criminal code, so the ‘criminals’ involved in aviation could more readily be prosecuted and removed, without the need for courts or evidence. 

Has this led to an improvement in "Safety"?, the exact reverse is apparent in the statistics and a whole section of what we call the aviation Industry is decimated, capital, jobs and profits disappearing overseas to build up someone else's economies.

Thus, Australian aviation found itself being regulated by organisations that only serve themselves, rather than the industry which supports them, and poorly serve the pubic who pay ever increasing airfares, with ever diminishing safety to support the incompetence.

The incorporation of CAsA and the other agencies was, I believe, a gigantic fraud perpetrated on the Australian people.

These departments only had one mission, enhance “Safety”.  Even that simple task, they have failed miserably to affect.  

Almost half a billion dollars of taxpayers’ money has been squandered just on the incomplete, useless, nugatory fraud which is referred to as ‘regulatory reform’.  Gradually and quite deliberately a protective, safe wall has been built around the system, making those involved completely unaccountable; even to the point where they put themselves above the law, above parliamentary scrutiny, immune from censure and able to ignore recommendations or directives.

It is my opinion that:-

CAsA is a giant expensive fraud, a complete and utter failure as a regulator.

The ATSB has become the bastard child of CAsA and is by extension also fraudulent.  

Simply because it is no longer an “Independent” investigator.

ASA is an expensive monopoly, stuck in the past churning through taxpayers money at an alarming rate for no measurable improvement in services but at an ever increasing cost, not only for the Govt. but for the public, who pay at least an additional $12.00 on a fare, to further support a tax payer organisation.  Double dip tax?

Similarly the privatization of the countries airports is another complete Fraud perpetrated on the Australian people.

How has giving away our primary airports been beneficial to the Australian people? They were public infrastructure, owned by the people for the benefit of the people, but they were also monopolies, potentially huge money making machines.  

Just who “advised” the politicians to give control of these monopolies to very astute entities who were always going to manipulate their business to evade tax. The money the purchasers paid very quickly disappeared into consolidated revenue; and, not a single red cent in tax on a billion a year turnover has been paid. I would say our airports were disposed of at a bargain basement price.

These airports are consistently voted among the worst in the world by the passengers who use them, as well as being amongst the most expensive for the businesses which rely on them.

Privatisation of airports was and is another gigantic aviation fraud against the Australian people.

I will ask again; just how has any of this been of benefit to the Australian people ?
Reply

Governments themselves are a complete fraud. Deceitful, dishonest self indulgent entities run by power hungry men and women who thirst for wealth and prominence.

Western and European governments are a 'business' front for societies 1%. The governments subdue their people, they squeeze, pinch, push and pull every cent they can extract from their defenceless slaves and they then hand that money over to the 1%, and they do it like good, loyal lapdogs. The governments that you see are 'shop fronts', the visible red herring that distracts you from the truth. Governments are cash collection agencies for the upper echelon who are actually the ones who pull the governments strings.

It's all a game. A very serious game, but all a game. We are merely pawns at the lowest level in a very high game of stakes. The life we currently live was decided for us by a group of crooks back in 1776 in Bavaria. The rest as they say, is history........
Reply

(08-20-2015, 09:00 AM)Peetwo Wrote:  
(08-20-2015, 06:16 AM)kharon Wrote:  
(08-19-2015, 11:04 PM)Cap Wrote:  Now that made some *very* interesting viewing.  I have to ask, though (and pardon my ignorance..) what is the expected outcome of these hearings?  Will there be any pressure brought to bear on the minister, or any of the underlings running the show?  Or is it all full of sound and music, but ultimately signifying nothing?

That is the $660,000,000 question ain’t it.   IMO it’s a foregone conclusion, somewhere in the PAIN library is a list of inquiries, reports, commissions etc. from the past quarter century.  All done by Senates of various stripe and colour; none of which have made the slightest bit of difference.  There have been brief flashes of hope, where rules and attitudes were, for brief periods, changed; short lived though they were.

In recent times we have seen CASA, ATSB and now ASA exposed and publicly humiliated, their collective aberrations clearly defined; we have even seen sensible reform proposed and sanctioned by a Minister.  All window dressing.

Meanwhile, in real life, Wodger, Beaker and most of the other bandits happily continue to reek havoc, create mayhem, ignore the law in favour of personal policy and preference.  Do exactly as they bloody well please, unhindered, unfettered, with total immunity.    




Quote:Jane Halton (from the excellent Mandarin) “So people decide that there is a particular requirement, a compliance requirement, which appears nowhere in any chief executive instructions or any piece of legislation, and then it becomes a matter of holy writ that you have to do something this particular way.”

“So whilst we are going to do things about the rules, and the red tape in the rules, [this is] one of the messages I’m giving my colleagues. And in fact I’m talking about this in my department, because I have found a number of examples of this in my department.”

CASA have taken this to ridicules lengths – both ways – to ease the way for favourites and decimate those less liked.  

Is change coming? Probably, the but just to cover the tracks, there is no hope of reform, just better avoidance of criticism and arse covering tactics... 

Sadly Ferryman so..so true and if you look at the embuggerance case of Mr Cho Rodgers, that was the subject of the Xenophon/Sterle/Heffernan MOP, then it becomes obvious that the contempt, arrogance & attitude that the CASA/ASA & ATSB executive have for parliamentary process knows no bounds... Dodgy

More on this and the Stevie Easton Mandarin article that kharon quotes from here, very soon because IMO we need to call out the King (M&M) Mandarin & the Department that he rules, as either incompetent or acting contrary to the public & industry interest.

For now there is much to sift through with the ASA performance inquiry set to continue, probably with the calling of certain members of the Board to a further public hearing.

Tabled the other evening :-

Documents tabled at a public hearing in Canberra on 18 August 2015. &..

Additional information received from Airservices Australia on 18 August 2015.

Here is the part (along with add info link) that I think Senator Bullock etc. were referring to when discussing the probity measures in place for the OneSKY project.. 

[Image: OneSKY-Probity1.jpg]
[Image: OneSKY-Probity2.jpg]
However that still leaves the QON by Senator Bullock on where is the documented evidence that the bureaucratic, weasel-worded, probity measures were adhered to??

In terms of the Dick Smith session there is much discussion amongst the PAIN/IOS associates. As an example here is an excellent email reply from Sandy Reith... Rolleyes


Quote:..Dick on the record does a great service to GA. It behoves all of us to publicise the totally unnecessary destruction of what should be a healthy Aussie industry. 


There have been those who may have thought that a strict regime would provide a marginal increase in safety. I dispute this concept, with modern avionics such as synthetic vision coupled with recency (healthy industry) and a suite of real time flight information unheard of twenty years ago, there is every reason to realise a greater degree of safety in GA than ever before. 

In any event don't we progress by being a free country? This is certainly the country that I would prefer both for myself and my children and grandchildren. Personal responsibility should rightly be the prerogative of the individual, most private GA flying does not impinge upon the interests of the public at large.

The 'independent government business unit' of CASA and ASA is a fatality flawed concept. Firstly they are virtually unaccountable and secondly 'user pays' with no competition is a complete nonsense. It is now proven to cost the taxpayer and the health of the nation dearly, irrespective of the exorbitant fees collected. ASA is down the drain even as the monopoly provider. CASA talked Minister Albanese into an extra $89.9 million increase in fuel excise, a special one off four year job for 'safety' somethings, a 40% increase in staff results, Minister Truss rolls it on and not a peep is heard. 

Meanwhile, out there in real land.....faint cries in the distance....

Industry is swamped in the latest quagmire and more likely sinking in the quicksands of Part 61. As Dick said half a million moves at BK 20 years ago, a dismal 270k now in spite of population and wealth growth.

Sandy
 
& the Ferryman response to that (& above) sums it up (slightly edited for sensitive info)..

"..Dick is indeed to be congratulated and thanked.  But how is his contribution to be transmogrified into "CHANGE".   Every time there is an opportunity the industry weighs in, provides excellent, professional analysis and options to the govt.  Countless man hours spent drafting submissions etc.   But nothing ever changes, except the stranglehold tightens..   

..Lets hope ASA are the catalyst.  Bravo Dick, well done and thankyou.."

Hmm...'no comment'   Undecided  

Finally the Hansard is out, fill your boots... Big Grin

Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport Legislation Committee - 18/08/2015 - Performance of Airservices Australia or PDF

Cheers P2 Tongue
Reply

Too many favourites to list, but below are a couple of my favourites;

Senator STERLE: So they are both directors on the board of ICCPM. Airservices Australia, via the taxpayer, is paying Mr Bradford $1 million to negotiate with his mate, who is also the boss of Thales—and this does not look murky?

Mr Harfield : Senator, as I said—

CHAIR: You have a straight face.

Senator STERLE: Are you serious?

Mr Harfield : Senator, as I said—

Senator STERLE: How do I get this gig?

Senator BULLOCK: It is all disclosed, so it must be okay. I think that is their evidence.

Senator STERLE: I cannot believe it!

And;

Senator STERLE: So what are you suggesting? If we want to get the root of how it was all done, we should have the board and the chairman in front of us? Is that what we should be doing? It took you three goes to come out and say you could not quite maybe lock in the whole board. This is what has given us some problems with Airservices before. We have all played the game in Senate estimates. We know that, the more questions we ask, the more answers you can come up with. All we want is the simple truth, a simple yes or no. Am I right that you have confirmed with me that you cannot guarantee that the board absolutely knew of the interlocking relationships between ICCPM since 2012 and Mr Jenkins as a director—

And;

CHAIR: You have had some pretty dramatic, shall we say, events in Airservices and you have lost, in recent times, Mr Russell's replacement. You have lost your chief financial officer, Mr Clarke, have you not?

Mr Harfield : That is right.

CHAIR: He got handed what I would call the 'shit sandwich' on all the financial stuff that went wrong, and Mr Russell went to heaven. What sort of package did he get when he left?

Mr Harfield : I am not privy to any of the confidential or commercial arrangements.

CHAIR: Who is? You are the boss but you do not know.

And;

Senator STERLE: For those of the uninitiated that are sitting around listening to this, this seems very strange that there is a flurry of departures by senior people from Airservices and we know there were some serious pays. I think Ms Staib told us it was nearly $700,000 or whatever. I am sure the CFO was not on a truckies wage. But you have come here today, you know we are going to talk about redundancies and bonuses, and no-one at Airservices thought, 'How far do you think the senators might want to go back?' No-one from Airservices may have thought—and I am looking at you, Mr Harfield, as CEO—'Crikey, we better arm ourselves with some logical pieces of information that will go to why people left, how much they got, the packages, why they got it.' You do not have that information?

This is absolutely appalling and it is a trend being set with Airservices that is actually like pulling teeth. I was hoping, Mr Harfield, you would be a new broom but you are not setting me on fire.

And;

Senator XENOPHON: But do you not want to know about the size of this discretionary fund the board may have? Do we know how big this discretionary fund is that the board may have?

Mr Harfield : There was an allocation under the budgeting arrangements.

Senator XENOPHON: How big was that allocation? Can somebody tell me?

Mr Logan : I am not aware of it.

CHAIR: Who runs the books at this bloody place?

Mr Logan : I do.

CHAIR: And you do not know what is in the books?

Mr Logan : I do know what is in the books. In the case of this particular payment, I have not been privy to the details.

And;

CHAIR: Doesn't that worry you as the boss of the books that you do not know what is going on?

Mr Logan : We have obviously a number of expenses. In this case, I have not looked into the specifics of that particular payment. The payment was arranged before I arrived in the job. I have no doubt that I will be looking into it in detail.

CHAIR: Mr Russell flicked a lot of the responsibility away from himself to this Mr Clark on how you spent $300,000 or something travelling around the world first-class with the cook and sipping wine. This Mr Clark was the keeper of all the financial secrets in the finish. The person independently standing at the back of the room could say because you do not know that he might have got a shut-up deal to get out of the place before he blew the bloody whistle. How do we know? We are sitting here thinking: this is very strange as it was with the credit card fraud. As I said at that hearing, you have a responsibility under the Crimes Act to report it.

Mr Logan : Understood.

Mr Harfield : We have just had advice that any agreement is actually subject to legal professional privilege. As a result of that, I am happy to take advice on that and take it on notice.

CHAIR: This is Mr Hood's advice to you, is it?

Mr Harfield : This is the information that has been provided to me that—

CHAIR: He is a cunning old dog, this man.

Oh Sir Anus, you really are a clever cookie aren't you? Secret salaries, bonuses, payouts. Some so secretive that not even the current CFO and CEO even fully know!!!
I am hoping that in the wash up from all of this that the entire Board be called before the Senate. Just when I was starting to wonder if there was anything more putrid than CAsA, along comes ASA.......

In the words of P2, MTF!
Reply

The crack of doom.

Thank you Secretariat.   The folk in the back room do a great job, the video is always available and although Hansard takes a little longer, it is always worth the short wait.  First read through is always fast, just to get the flavour of the session.  First impressions from the video can be deceptive, often the highlights over shadow the ‘meat and potatoes’ of the questioning, but Hansard, for me at least, brings out the subtleties.  For example, the Harfield opening gambit; at first you get the impression of a confident, even overly confident persona; but, when you watch it a couple times the cracks around the edges define the swaggering arrogance of a bully.  The ‘statement’ is two edged, the sales pitch almost convinces that a new broom has been employed, until the contradictions start to mount up.  

Hansard P1  PDF (5)  The ‘I’s’ have it.

Quote:“I will make a very brief opening statement.”

“I would like to acknowledge the work of Ms Margaret Staib etc.”

“[I] am certain that the nation will continue to benefit from her experience, tenacity and skills.”

“I thought it pertinent to take this opportunity to briefly apprise you etc.”.

“I have been a core member of Airservices' executive leadership team since 2005.”

“I would note at this point that Airservices etc.”

“I assure you that I will work hard to correct this.”

“I wrote to the committee providing further detail on the “etc.

“I would like to advise the committee that we will be taking every precaution” etc.

“My Airservices senior executive roles have included being the head of safety, running the air traffic operation for nearly six years and also, recently, leading and running the OneSKY Australia program. Prior to this, I was Australia's head air traffic controller and air space regulator.”

“I would note at this point that Airservices has not always effectively articulated our management of issues raised by the Senate.”

“[I] thank you for allowing me to make these opening comments, and my colleagues will be pleased to answer your questions.”

So intent on ‘selling’ himself to the committee, and so confident in the result is the boards nominated scapegoat, the so glaringly obvious conflicts and confessions are used as part of the braggadocio; mistake number one.   The committee not only had the answers to the questions, but they had a someone, who, by his own admission, was a very important player in the game. Staib had NFI and yet it must be seen that someone, somehow seduced the board. Sub plot, enter the wolf dressed in sheep’s clothing to the hunters clever trap.  

Read on, as the swaggering  “I” rapidly becomes the demure “we” as the bully is challenged. The desired impression of being 'the' right man collapses about itself, and the ‘crack of doom’ is heard loud and clear as Bullock gently lights the way to the block and the axe.

Senator BULLOCK: "So you are happy with the efficacy of those arrangements?"

Quote:MACBETH: Thou art too like the spirit of Banquo: down!
Thy crown does sear mine eye-balls. And thy hair,
Thou other gold-bound brow, is like the first.
A third is like the former. Filthy hags!
Why do you show me this? A fourth! Start, eyes!
What, will the line stretch out to the crack of doom?

I keep being distracted, picking ‘man of the match’ quotes; the more I read and watch, the more I’m convinced that the BRB is going to have to award a ‘team’ medal, like they do for rowing or hockey, where everyone gets a prize.  There are 40 pages left to study, but the opening moves in this no contest match are of particular interest to devotees of the game. Watch as the ASA Board defence is mounted and the pawns are promoted only to be sacrificed, later.  Fascinating.

Quote:Promotion - When a pawn reaches the opposite side of the board, it promotes. This means that the owner of the pawn can choose a queen, a rook, a knight, or a bishop (of his own color), and put that piece instead of the pawn on the board; on the square of the pawn. For example, look at the following position. (White is sitting at the lower side of the board, black at the upper side.)

MFT? -  No doubt about it.
Reply

Kharon, you're getting old my friend. I read the entire novel in one sitting last night!

Very entertaining, especially 'young Jasons' bravado and testosterone riddled self grandeur statements! But in all fairness he can get away with almost anything, mainly due the ASA's Elliot Ness style government protection and the lack of bullets the Senate ultimately hold in their arsenal.
Nonetheless it is one of life's gleaming moments to watch some wily old senate dogs dancing on the grave of the young kid!!!

'Fun skies for all'
Reply

(08-25-2015, 08:09 AM)kharon Wrote:  The crack of doom.

Thank you Secretariat.   The folk in the back room do a great job, the video is always available and although Hansard takes a little longer, it is always worth the short wait.  First read through is always fast, just to get the flavour of the session.  First impressions from the video can be deceptive, often the highlights over shadow the ‘meat and potatoes’ of the questioning, but Hansard, for me at least, brings out the subtleties.  For example, the Harfield opening gambit; at first you get the impression of a confident, even overly confident persona; but, when you watch it a couple times the cracks around the edges define the swaggering arrogance of a bully.  The ‘statement’ is two edged, the sales pitch almost convinces that a new broom has been employed, until the contradictions start to mount up.  

Hansard P1  PDF (5)  The ‘I’s’ have it.


Quote:“I will make a very brief opening statement.”

“I would like to acknowledge the work of Ms Margaret Staib etc.”

“[I] am certain that the nation will continue to benefit from her experience, tenacity and skills.”

“I thought it pertinent to take this opportunity to briefly apprise you etc.”.

“I have been a core member of Airservices' executive leadership team since 2005.”

“I would note at this point that Airservices etc.”

“I assure you that I will work hard to correct this.”

“I wrote to the committee providing further detail on the “etc.

“I would like to advise the committee that we will be taking every precaution” etc.

“My Airservices senior executive roles have included being the head of safety, running the air traffic operation for nearly six years and also, recently, leading and running the OneSKY Australia program. Prior to this, I was Australia's head air traffic controller and air space regulator.”

“I would note at this point that Airservices has not always effectively articulated our management of issues raised by the Senate.”

“[I] thank you for allowing me to make these opening comments, and my colleagues will be pleased to answer your questions.”

So intent on ‘selling’ himself to the committee, and so confident in the result is the boards nominated scapegoat, the so glaringly obvious conflicts and confessions are used as part of the braggadocio; mistake number one.   The committee not only had the answers to the questions, but they had a someone, who, by his own admission, was a very important player in the game. Staib had NFI and yet it must be seen that someone, somehow seduced the board. Sub plot, enter the wolf dressed in sheep’s clothing to the hunters clever trap.  

Read on, as the swaggering  “I” rapidly becomes the demure “we” as the bully is challenged. The desired impression of being 'the' right man collapses about itself, and the ‘crack of doom’ is heard loud and clear as Bullock gently lights the way to the block and the axe.

Senator BULLOCK: "So you are happy with the efficacy of those arrangements?"


Quote:MACBETH: Thou art too like the spirit of Banquo: down!
Thy crown does sear mine eye-balls. And thy hair,
Thou other gold-bound brow, is like the first.
A third is like the former. Filthy hags!
Why do you show me this? A fourth! Start, eyes!
What, will the line stretch out to the crack of doom?

I keep being distracted, picking ‘man of the match’ quotes; the more I read and watch, the more I’m convinced that the BRB is going to have to award a ‘team’ medal, like they do for rowing or hockey, where everyone gets a prize.  There are 40 pages left to study, but the opening moves in this no contest match are of particular interest to devotees of the game. Watch as the ASA Board defence is mounted and the pawns are promoted only to be sacrificed, later.  Fascinating.


Quote:Promotion - When a pawn reaches the opposite side of the board, it promotes. This means that the owner of the pawn can choose a queen, a rook, a knight, or a bishop (of his own color), and put that piece instead of the pawn on the board; on the square of the pawn. For example, look at the following position. (White is sitting at the lower side of the board, black at the upper side.)

Just to chuck another interesting snippet into the mix, it would seem that members of the RAAA (well the executive at least) have been closely monitoring the ASA Senate inquiry - see here - & have dished out a 'Bullocking' of their own.. Big Grin

Quote:..Recent Senate Hearings into a range of worrying tender probity issues and the high turnover of senior executives have also raised concern across the regional aviation industry...


...“Airservices Australia is a government monopoly service provider in serious need of an independent review”, said RAAA Chair Jim Davis...

...The RAAA also notes the significant turmoil within senior leadership ranks of Airservices Australia over recent weeks. This has raised questions across industry as whether the $1.6b OneSky project, that will replace the current air traffic system, is being managed optimally.

It must not be forgotten that every dollar Airservices Australia receives comes directly from industry, including a guaranteed 10% dividend paid to the Government. When industry sees exorbitant bonuses being paid to senior executives at the same time that a senate hearing is questioning the probity of the OneSky project, serious questions must be asked.


Monopolies inevitably take advantage of their market position to the detriment of their customers. Airservices Australia is no different and should be exposed to the mitigating influences of the market...
 
OK back to the Hansard.. Blush

MTF...P2 Tongue
Reply

Is this a dagger which I see before me.

Walking home through quiet streets with P7 the normal silence was broken’ “Never had much truck with Pollies” say’s he.  Wondering what’s coming next I say nothing, after a while; “wish the bloody Wallabies could copy the cohesion, willingness to run, an ability to pass at just the right time and get the same sense of purpose those Senators have, that’s a first class team”.  What could I say; they are.   Neither TOM or I are great fans, sure we support our teams when they play and have returned home from many a rugger match with sore throats, but we have never been one eyed ‘tragics’.  This may change, it would change if democracy and parliament system could be made to work half so well as that Senate committee does.  

The next BRB indaba is going to be fun; but I’m betting on a team award rather than a man of the match.  The early betting is so close, I’m almost prepared to declare a draw and vote for a years supply of Tim Tam and a huge round of applause for the committee.  We shall see.  It will depend on your point of view but a study of Hansard just about puts it beyond argument.  There were three distinct phases of play.

The genteel opening gambits, where the opposition was allowed a chance to explain the case, confess the mess and present solutions.  As non of the honourable options were taken, the committee changed up a cog and went in hard.

This took us to the ruck and maul, where confessions and admissions were still a viable, negotiable option, this offer was declined.  This option, despite it being clear to even Blind Freddy that the committee had all the answers was rejected, arrogance triumphed over probity and any chance of salvation went begging.

The final phase was a simple, public flogging and humiliation.  A masterclass of how not to rely on bluff, bluster and bullshit when you are outclassed, out gunned and have no cards left in your hand, carnage is an apt description.  The final humiliation was Hoody sat there stony faced, reading the game correctly, keeping his powder dry (Bravo) and letting Harfi fry in his own juices.  The ‘accountant’ (what’s his name) was too busy trying to pass wind without soiling himself, he stood back and pushed Harfi toward the bus at every chance.  And so, it came to pass that the bus did arrive.  Imagine, the crowd tense and silent as the hapless half back catches the ball, looks down the paddock only to see the entire forward pack steaming in at full throttle, determined to do some real damage and he has no one to pass to, the rest of team have buggered off, out of the way.

For mine, it all goes to hell in a handcart from the Board defence ploy; page 10 Hansard, after the Sterle-Bullock interchange.  I’ve left out the responses, they don’t signify:-

Quote:Senator STERLE: Mr Harfield, you said 'the board appointed'. Who chose Thales?

Quote:Senator STERLE: Were the board aware of all the links between Mr Bradford and Mr Jenkins—that they were both directors on ICCPM? Were they aware that one of them, Mr Jenkins, is the managing director of the company that was successful, and that they have engaged this other company, ICCPM, to negotiate with Thales? Was the board aware of that?

Quote:Senator STERLE: So they are both directors on the board of ICCPM. Airservices Australia, via the taxpayer, is paying Mr Bradford $1 million to negotiate with his mate, who is also the boss of Thales—and this does not look murky?

Quote:Senator STERLE: At what stage did the board become aware? After they ticked off, cracked the bottle of champagne and said, 'We've got a good deal here', or was it before?

Quote:Senator STERLE: You have to put it in simple terms for me. Before the contract was ticked off for what was allegedly going to be so many hundreds of millions of dollars—we have not even touched on what it is going to blow out to if there is a blow-out—the board was fully aware of the interlinking relationships between Mr Jenkins, ICCPM, Bradford and Thales. They knew all that. That was all in front of them before they said: 'This won't look smelly. We can tick off on this.'

Quote:Senator STERLE: Please look me in the eye and say the board knew of all the relationships before the contracts were signed and the agreement was done.

Quote:Senator STERLE: So what are you suggesting? If we want to get the root of how it was all done, we should have the board and the chairman in front of us? Is that what we should be doing? It took you three goes to come out and say you could not quite maybe lock in the whole board. This is what has given us some problems with Airservices before. We have all played the game in Senate estimates. We know that, the more questions we ask, the more answers you can come up with. All we want is the simple truth, a simple yes or no. Am I right that you have confirmed with me that you cannot guarantee that the board absolutely knew of the interlocking relationships between ICCPM since 2012 and Mr Jenkins as a director—

Quote:Mr Harfield: I cannot confirm whether they understood all the nuances.

Quote:CHAIR: I will reflect on my memory. At one stage of the game in your previous role you were in charge of all this?

Mr Harfield: Yes.

Quote:CHAIR: So you were actually in charge of the whole game.

From here it’s one way traffic, Harfield may not resign, perhaps Angus will not fire him until the blame game is over; but I’d bet good money the top job is now and forever, out of his reach.

Toot toot.
Reply

Of toys, boys and the knights of the round table

Ferryman said;

"From here it’s one way traffic, Harfield may not resign, perhaps Angus will not fire him until the blame game is over; but I’d bet good money the top job is now and forever, out of his reach".

Agreed good sir! 'Young Jason' seemed most chuffed about his current CEO title. Initially he spoke excitedly like a 14 year old schoolboy who just got his first handful of real titty down behind the bike racks!! He was nonchalant, boastful, excited, enthusiastic, and oh so eager to share! But then he got cut down to size by the old dog Senators. Pretty soon young Jason looked more like a 14 year old schoolboy who only dreamed that he got his first handful of titty, and he woke up in a sticky sweaty state and realised it wasn't even a dream, rather his nightmare had just begun!

Nah, for my liking any internal promotion to CEO should be reserved for the nubile Hoody. He hasn't been indoctrinated over the decades and there are patches of skill and competence still visible which could be of value. Anyone else from the Russell years should be considered 'tainted goods' and disposed of forthwith. An(g)us also needs to go as the past few years under his stewardship have been parlous, not to mention secretive and at times downright bizarre. My money would be on bringing in an external candidate for the ASA CEO role, someone preferably from an international background. As with CAsA and ATSBeaker there are many competent choices out there, much better choices than the ridiculous ex RAAF/Australian bureaucrats that keep getting gifted the top roles.

Then again, I must admit it would be fun to watch young Jason over a period of the next 3 years face senate estimates and perhaps more senate inquiries, where his youthful exuberance could be squashed, decimated and destroyed by the wily old Senate dogs. How much fun could the Senators have with this hotshot young ASA lad, toying with him like a Lion at times plays with it's prey before taking it by the jugular!! Hell boys, I wish I was a Senator myself, I would do that shit for free. And I would deliberately make the inquiry/estimates run 3 hours late just to piss off the 'dipshits' I was grilling!! 

Hey Heff, will you take on someone Gobbledocks age for work experience, pretty please??

P_666
Reply

Quote:GD – “My money would be on bringing in an external candidate for the ASA CEO role, someone preferably from an international background. As with CAsA and ATSBeaker there are many competent choices out there, much better choices than the ridiculous ex RAAF/Australian bureaucrats that keep getting gifted the top roles.”

Amen to that; let's at least spend the dollars on professionals.

The Kiwi success story paints a clear picture; ruthlessly they cleaned out all the deadwood and started again, with fresh blood and new ideas.  ASA, ATSB and CASA are all stuck in a time warp.  The resistance to cultural change within these organisations is remarkable and has survived, unscathed for generations.  The only constant.

Hoody is a not a bad sort, but he has blood on his hands from his CASA days, best of a bad lot, I’ll agree and probably in the right position.  But it’s the top end which needs to be cleaned out; but will it?  The Houston defence has been built, the early part of the last committee session laid the foundations and we will be expected to swallow the fairy story.  A few like Harfi tossed on the bonfire, couple of sacrificial lambs. the odd scapegoat a brief period of window dressing and it will be business as usual.  You can see it happening now with CASA; delay, soothing words, empty gestures, oil on the troubled waters; time passes, normal service resumed; it’s a game.

Big money and power politics will win the game; any suspicion that An(g)us had his fingers in the pie will be eradicated.   But I ask you, is it likely that a board responsible for hundreds of millions of dollars and huge contracts are so naïve that they are unaware of what occurs behind the scenes, when this much money is involved.

Bollocks – they know, they remain at arms length; but they know.  Hell the tea lady knows how it works.  There are two options; the board is either complicit or; so naïve that they would buy the harbour bridge from a bloke in the pub.  Either way – it’s unacceptable, except it is accepted by those who pay for the fun and games; the mugs, i.e. us.

Leave Hoody running ‘operations’ and bring in a real CEO; one who is well versed in and skilled at ‘negotiations’ of this type; a person who know the game, can find the ladders, spot the snakes and manage the board.  As GD says, plenty of first class contenders out there; just a matter of getting the right specification from the DoIT.  Can you imagine the Murky Machiavellian drafting the ‘spec’ for a honest, clean skin who knows the game.  Fat chance, but, it’s nice thought to start the day.
Reply

(08-28-2015, 05:36 AM)kharon Wrote:  
Quote:GD – “My money would be on bringing in an external candidate for the ASA CEO role, someone preferably from an international background. As with CAsA and ATSBeaker there are many competent choices out there, much better choices than the ridiculous ex RAAF/Australian bureaucrats that keep getting gifted the top roles.”

Amen to that; let's at least spend the dollars on professionals.

The Kiwi success story paints a clear picture; ruthlessly they cleaned out all the deadwood and started again, with fresh blood and new ideas.  ASA, ATSB and CASA are all stuck in a time warp.  The resistance to cultural change within these organisations is remarkable and has survived, unscathed for generations.  The only constant.

Hoody is a not a bad sort, but he has blood on his hands from his CASA days, best of a bad lot, I’ll agree and probably in the right position.  But it’s the top end which needs to be cleaned out; but will it?  The Houston defence has been built, the early part of the last committee session laid the foundations and we will be expected to swallow the fairy story.  A few like Harfi tossed on the bonfire, couple of sacrificial lambs. the odd scapegoat a brief period of window dressing and it will be business as usual.  You can see it happening now with CASA; delay, soothing words, empty gestures, oil on the troubled waters; time passes, normal service resumed; it’s a game.

Big money and power politics will win the game; any suspicion that An(g)us had his fingers in the pie will be eradicated.   But I ask you, is it likely that a board responsible for hundreds of millions of dollars and huge contracts are so naïve that they are unaware of what occurs behind the scenes, when this much money is involved.

Bollocks – they know, they remain at arms length; but they know.  Hell the tea lady knows how it works.  There are two options; the board is either complicit or; so naïve that they would buy the harbour bridge from a bloke in the pub.  Either way – it’s unacceptable, except it is accepted by those who pay for the fun and games; the mugs, i.e. us.

Leave Hoody running ‘operations’ and bring in a real CEO; one who is well versed in and skilled at ‘negotiations’ of this type; a person who know the game, can find the ladders, spot the snakes and manage the board.  As GD says, plenty of first class contenders out there; just a matter of getting the right specification from the DoIT.  Can you imagine the Murky Machiavellian drafting the ‘spec’ for a honest, clean skin who knows the game.  Fat chance, but, it’s nice thought to start the day.

The 'frog in a sock' brigade has infiltrated the ranks... Big Grin

Good points you make Ferryman and maybe you should be making that pitch to the new appointee to the Board, as it would seem there maybe an ulterior motive to his low fanfare appointment by DPM Truss - fresh from a week off-- Wink -- 'that man' again:  

Quote:John McGee: PM’s ‘Lycra mate’ inside Airservices  
[Image: ean_higgins.png]
Reporter
Sydney


Tony Abbott will from next month have a member of his “Lycra Cabinet”, the group of close male friends from school and university days who cycle ­together, on the inside of the government-owned body Airservices Australia.  

The move comes as Deputy Prime Minister Warren Truss declined to repeat a statement expressing confidence in Airservices’ handling of a $1.5 billion project after Labor and Coalition senators claimed it had been compromised by “incestuous” and “dodgy” family and ­corporate alleged conflicts of interest.

In a little-reported move earlier this month Mr Truss, whose transport portfolio covers aviation, announced John McGee, a lawyer and investment banker, would join the Airservices board.

Mr McGee, until recently managing director of Bank of New York Australia, has immaculate credentials for the appointment, made by cabinet.

“Senior ministers wanted someone with strong commercial experience,” a government source said. “In particular, it was thought Mr McGee’s financial, legal and governance experience made him a valuable addition to the board.”

Some aviation industry observers suggested that in addition, the Prime Minister might be grateful to get someone he has long known and trusted installed inside in the organisation at a crucial time.

A Senate committee will call Airservices chairman Angus Houston and other board members before it to explain how much they knew about a web of personal and corporate interconnections surrounding contracts awarded for a new state-of-the-art national air traffic control system called OneSKY.

So concerned were senators on the rural and regional ­affairs and transport legislation committee about what they regarded as a lack of clear answers from Airservices executives at a hearing last week that the committee will write to the National Audit Office seeking a “serious audit” of the organisation.

The hearing had initially been called to grill Airservices executives about performance bonuses of up to $100,000 they each received in a financial year when profits halved and return on equity targets were not met.

It emerged that Airservices had paid a consulting group, the International Centre for Complex Project Management, several million dollars to advise it on OneSKY. An ICCPM consultant, former RAAF officer Harry Bradford, has already been paid $1 million to act as Airservices’ lead negotiator with the successful prime contractor, international aerospace group Thales.

It emerged Thales Australia’s managing director, Chris Jenkins, is also chairman of ICCPM, prompting senators to ask why there was not a conflict of interest with Mr Bradford paid by Airservices to negotiate on its behalf a deal with the head of his own consultancy group.

Earlier this month, before the Senate committee hearing, Mr Truss told The Australian through a spokesman he was “satisfied that the ongoing negotiation and acquisition of One­SKY are being managed appro­priately”. Following the hearing, Mr Truss declined to repeat the comment, but said through a spokesman he had confidence in Sir Angus as chairman.

“The minister is aware … some matters were raised in relation to the Airservices OneSKY project, including management of perceived conflicts of interest,” the spokesman said.

“Airservices confirmed at the hearings that there were independent probity and conflict of interest arrangements in place and will provide the committee with more details.”

Hmm...so what's the tote on how long huff'n'puff Harfy will last.. Huh

A Miniscule doubt?? Confused

This bit..

"..Earlier this month, before the Senate committee hearing, Mr Truss told The Australian through a spokesman he was “satisfied that the ongoing negotiation and acquisition of One­SKY are being managed appro­priately”. Following the hearing, Mr Truss declined to repeat the comment, but said through a spokesman he had confidence in Sir Angus as chairman.."

..kind of reinforces the "K" assertions in his last post.. Wink

MTF..P2 Tongue
Reply

"Tony Abbott will from next month have a member of his “Lycra Cabinet”, the group of close male friends from school and university days who cycle ­together, on the inside of the government-owned body Airservices Australia".

Well the appointment won't be because Tony needs an insider, it will be because Tony will be punted by this time next year. It's more likely just another nepotistic appointment, jobs for the mates, the usual reason. And to be honest the last thing we need is another middle age egotist strutting around in his lycra showing of his 'Frank and beans'. Fools.

I think it more interesting how Farmboy wouldn't 'endorse' ASA a second time, but he only expressed faith in Sir Anus. That's a message in itself, An(g)us is safe, the new Board blood is safe, but everyone else is fair game, and that includes 'young Jason. I reckon this game has a few yards to run yet, and only the smartest or best connected will survive! Hey Jase, better have your CV updated mate. Perhaps Herr Russell and friends will give you a job?

And finally Mr Truss, you have done well old mate and put some quick recovery plans into place pronto. Lined up a fall-guy, brought in Sluggers school buddy, watching your words even more carefully. Some rapid fire ass covering! But will it be enough Miniscule? Might not be if the Senators get your footstools on the stand and the ANAO get their teeth into your cash cow ASA?

Nice try, but it's still TICK TOCK Miniscule.
Reply

Dreamtime in Walkabout land.

Quote:P2 – “Hmm...so what's the tote on how long huff'n'puff Harfy will last.”

He’ll probably be in the job until 90, given the glacial speed this government operates at.   It seems as though the whole aviation sector is swimming through glue; every thing takes two to five years, which should be the sentence dished out, not the bloody time scale.  

But, while the Senators have got the tools out, I wonder if we will get to hear from the ‘coal face’.   Hoody is juggling hot coals and the troops are known to be ‘unhappy’ although that story seems to have been lost in the mists of myth and legend surrounding the obscene behaviour of ‘management’ levels within ASA.

I’d like to hear their thoughts and ideas on how to get ‘the system’ up and running properly – across the board - the ‘union’ reps and some of the top controllers; practical people who work the system each and every day.  There must be a reason for the hated ‘courage’ badges and the childlike ‘vision’ of how it’s all wonderful.

At face value we seem to have an operationally crippled service, an intimidated workforce, a crap training system, a middle management which inspires just about anything but confidence and hundreds of millions floating about the place with not too much to show for it.

I reckon if anyone who had the first clue was in charge the entire mess would be publically sorted out within a month, it’s going to take weeks just to get the Senate committee ‘on stage’ let alone drag in the recalcitrant, the venal and the greedy into a genteel gabfest.  Then it will take a half year for the report, then another half year while the word weasels do their work, by then there’ll be an election and nothing; not one single solitary ducking thing will happen – even then – after all that – Truss will do sod all.

Aye, business as usual.  A day late and no one really knows where the dollar went; we should change our name from Dun-Under to Dun –Over.

Toot toot.
Reply

Kharon said;

"I reckon if anyone who had the first clue was in charge the entire mess would be publically sorted out within a month, it’s going to take weeks just to get the Senate committee ‘on stage’ let alone drag in the recalcitrant, the venal and the greedy into a genteel gabfest.  Then it will take a half year for the report, then another half year while the word weasels do their work, by then there’ll be an election and nothing; not one single solitary ducking thing will happen – even then – after all that – Truss will do sod all".

Naughty naughty Kharon. Did somebody in Sluggers PMC sneak you a copy of their internal meeting minutes and game plan? I believe so!!

And from the article in The Genitalian on the 29th;

"Airservices air traffic control general manager Greg Hood did not directly respond yesterday to Mr Smith’s claims, or suggestions that Airservices had misled the public, but insisted Tasmanian airspace was safe".

Bad bad Hoody. Adopting the Sir An(g)us approach of not answering questions directly and then making pithy statements like 'it's all ok, everything is safe'! Tsk tsk old mate, you should know by now that the IOS treat these types of statements with utter contempt and relegate such bollocks into the toilet tidy-bin. Stand by boys and prepare to hit the flush button, here comes another pony pooh ASA statement so let's send it to where it belongs!

Australian politicians and their bureaucrat minions leave behind them a legacy of large financial clusterf#cks, so why should ASA be any different? They can't even get a $6 million safety upgrade done properly in Tasmania, and now they are gifted the $1 billion plus OneSky system to oversight and manage? Oh Lordy, get me out of here, quick. The dipshits in power in Australia leave behind a legacy of billion dollar screw ups including the Collins submarines, Sea Sprites, BER, NBN, infrastructure failures, an unworkable shitty antiquated tax system, a dying Barrier Reef and a completely rooted mighty Murray river, plus failures to deliver much needed revenue from the mining industry and SACL, to name just a few examples.

Nope, sorry lads, the lunatics are definitely in charge of the asylum. Nothing will change in our governments or within the bureaucracies that serve their masters. Sorry, I love this country, but it's been the Australian way for the past century - to plan but not act, or when we do act it is knee jerk, irrational and costly. It's systemic, endemic and entrenched. I shall now leave my soapbox as I turn to the industry I love and kiss it goodby.


Tick tock Australian aviation, tick tock
Reply

(08-24-2015, 07:35 PM)Peetwo Wrote:  Peetwo
(08-20-2015, 09:00 AM)Peetwo Wrote:  More on this and the Stevie Easton Mandarin article that kharon quotes from here, very soon because IMO we need to call out the King (M&M) Mandarin & the Department that he rules, as either incompetent or acting contrary to the public & industry interest.

For now there is much to sift through with the ASA performance inquiry set to continue, probably with the calling of certain members of the Board to a further public hearing.

Tabled the other evening :-

Documents tabled at a public hearing in Canberra on 18 August 2015. &..

Additional information received from Airservices Australia on 18 August 2015.


Quote:..Dick on the record does a great service to GA. It behoves all of us to publicise the totally unnecessary destruction of what should be a healthy Aussie industry. 

There have been those who may have thought that a strict regime would provide a marginal increase in safety. I dispute this concept, with modern avionics such as synthetic vision coupled with recency (healthy industry) and a suite of real time flight information unheard of twenty years ago, there is every reason to realise a greater degree of safety in GA than ever before. 

In any event don't we progress by being a free country? This is certainly the country that I would prefer both for myself and my children and grandchildren. Personal responsibility should rightly be the prerogative of the individual, most private GA flying does not impinge upon the interests of the public at large.

The 'independent government business unit' of CASA and ASA is a fatality flawed concept. Firstly they are virtually unaccountable and secondly 'user pays' with no competition is a complete nonsense. It is now proven to cost the taxpayer and the health of the nation dearly, irrespective of the exorbitant fees collected. ASA is down the drain even as the monopoly provider. CASA talked Minister Albanese into an extra $89.9 million increase in fuel excise, a special one off four year job for 'safety' somethings, a 40% increase in staff results, Minister Truss rolls it on and not a peep is heard. 

Meanwhile, out there in real land.....faint cries in the distance....

Industry is swamped in the latest quagmire and more likely sinking in the quicksands of Part 61. As Dick said half a million moves at BK 20 years ago, a dismal 270k now in spite of population and wealth growth.

Sandy
 
& the Ferryman response to that (& above) sums it up (slightly edited for sensitive info)..

"..Dick is indeed to be congratulated and thanked.  But how is his contribution to be transmogrified into "CHANGE".   Every time there is an opportunity the industry weighs in, provides excellent, professional analysis and options to the govt.  Countless man hours spent drafting submissions etc.   But nothing ever changes, except the stranglehold tightens..   

..Lets hope ASA are the catalyst.  Bravo Dick, well done and thankyou.."

Hmm...'no comment'   Undecided  

Finally the Hansard is out, fill your boots... Big Grin

Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport Legislation Committee - 18/08/2015 - Performance of Airservices Australia or PDF

Well..well it would seem that the Senators are not prepared to let moss grow underfoot, nor let Murky & his mates begin obfuscating an out for the under siege Harfy & his trough swilling crew... Big Grin

Quote:Upcoming Public Hearings

09 Sep 2015
Canberra, ACT
[Image: pdf.png]

Unfortunately the program and who is to appear is yet to be firmed up, however given next week is in the sitting week my bet is it will be much like last time. Big question is will Sir Angus be appearing and will we get encore from Dick?

MTF..P2 Tongue

Ps Still no AQONs from Murky - Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development - nor has Beaker acknowledged the Miniscule's SOE. Although the relevant webpage has been updated, so maybe Beaker is finally pulling his finger out Dodgy :

Quote:Minister's statement of expectations

For the Australian Transport Safety Bureau
16 April 2015 to 30 June 2017

This Statement of Expectations (SOE) outlines in a formal and public way, the Government's expectations concerning the operations and performance of the Australian Transport Safety Bureau (ATSB) from 16 April 2015 to 30 June 2017.

This SOE serves as a notice of strategic direction to the ATSB under section 12AE of the Transport Safety Investigation Act 2003 (the Act) and replaces the previous SOE which came into effect on 1 July 2013.

My expectations are that the ATSB will:
  • Perform its functions in a manner that supports Government transport safety policy by giving safety the highest priority;
  • Continue to give priority to transport safety investigations that have the potential to deliver the best safety outcomes for the travelling public;
  • While retaining operational independence in discharging its functions, remain an active and effective participant in the transport policy and regulatory framework, working effectively with the Department of Iinfrastructure and Regional Development, other Government agencies including the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA), Airservices Australia, the Australian Maritime Safety Authority, the Office of the National Rail Safety Regulator, and the transport industry;
  • Continue to be a global leader in transport safety investigation, research and analysis, and fostering public awareness of transport safety;
  • Implement the parts of the Government's response to the Aviation Safety Regulation Review Report relevant to the ATSB in an effective and timely manner;
  • Implement the agreed recommendations of the Transportation Safety Board of Canada review of the ATSB in an effective and timely manner;
  • Prepare a workforce plan to come into effect from 1 July 2015, to be annually updated, which will outline the ATSB's approach to meeting and maintaining its future workforce needs over the next four years to ensure it has access to the skills and competencies necessary to function as a modern transport safety agency;
  • Implement policies, programs and other initiatives to enhance transport safety, including:
    a. subject to available resources, providing assistance to accident investigations in other countries, in accordance with international protocols;
    b. supporting the Government's transport safety agenda in the Asia/Pacific region;
    c. continuing to undertake an appropriately-scoped research agenda informed by analysis of its own safety data and investigation findings;
    d. continuing to review current investigation policies and practices to ensure that the ATSB retains its reputation as a best practice safety investigation agency and its influence on the national and international safety agenda;
  • Work closely with CASA to ensure continued arrangements are in place, consistent with the current Safety Information Policy Statement and informed by 'just culture' principles, for the appropriate sharing and use of safety information by the ATSB and CASA;
  • Work closely with National Rail Safety Regulator to ensure that arrangements are in place for the appropriate sharing and use of safety information by the A TSB and the Regulator and that these arrangements are transparent to the rail industry and consistent with a strong reporting culture;
  • Provide timely and accurate assistance, information and advice on safety issues to governments, industry and the community;
  • Provide timely advice to Government when the costs of necessary investigation activities are likely to exceed established ATSB budget levels, so that appropriate consideration can be given by the Government to the need for budget supplementation; and
  • Maintain high standards of professionalism, service, probity, reporting, accountability and transparency, consistent with the provisions of the Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Act 2013 and adhere to the Australian Public Service values and code of conduct.

WARREN TRUSS
Minister for Infrastructure and Regional Development
19 April 2015

[Image: share.png][Image: feedback.png]

Last update 31 August 2015
  
Reply

Trifecta for the MM stable.

The corporate cloak and the minions dagger are, once again, used to confound industry.

We let the Skidmore response to the Ministers SoE slide by as it masterfully side stepped  the government stated intent to follow the Forsyth reforms; there were enough loop holes, escape clauses and weasel words to ensure and prove that which has become increasingly obvious during the Skidmore reign.  There is no hope of serious reform.  That has been made clear since the Muff took centre stage, all that remained was for the Murky Machiavellian crew to put out a statement making it ‘kosher’.  Skidmore is a past master of talking well and achieving SFA, except that which ‘fostered and promoted’ his own legend.  So it was no big disappointment when the ‘statement’ was published.

But ATSB should know better; this ‘thing’ Dolan has signed off is another escape route, crafted by experts with the sole aim of changing sod all, while looking good.  You can easily picture it; there’s Beaker, fresh from another failed attempt at swimming lessons; feeding his face on the best of Toulouse tucker, when a text pings in – “Sign this Mate, all will be well, enjoy your break, L&K MM”.   “OK” texts Beaker; “Use the one on record”.  And so the legend of the ATSB is continued; unabated, unashamed and unrepentant.

Can’t wait to see the ASA effort; which will make it a trifecta of pure, unadulterated first class Pony-Pooh.  Better fetch the big wheelbarrow GD, there’s a lot of it to shift.

Aye, nothing to see, move along, the new whitewash will cover the blood stains and the cloak of mystique will vanish all trace of the aberrations and indecency inflicted on the public, who have a right to expect better.

Selah.
Reply

Okay, I may be a bit slow because I'm from the country....

But in all the probity questioning from AsA's special attendance 2 weeks ago, NX asked about a LAHSO incident at Melbourne Airport in early July.

Mr Hood replied that it was a serious incident and ATSB was investigating.

Yet a perusal of the ATSB list of investigations on their website shows no such incident.

Didn't this website (?P2) a while ago question whether ATSB was really investigating all incidents submitted by AsA?

Or is my memory failing me from too much spud farming in the mainly unsurveilled eastern Tasmania.

Farmer Joe.
Reply

Seconds out, round two.

Not too slow, Joe.  We have been discussing this topic on both the ASA and ATSB threads; there’s not too much variation across the network in opinion, not only how the ASA handled it, but the latest attitude of ATSB toward investigating.  NX is not the forgetting type – but, as the Answers to Questions on Notice (AQON) are famous for (a) not being answered and needing to be reframed, (b) those answers are delayed as long as possible; NX may have a long wait before receiving his ‘non-answer’ and then be obliged to wait for the next estimates session for a less obfuscated answer.  Round and round she goes; it will never stop, everyone knows.  Anyway, welcome, sorry about the delay – Mea culpa.

While we’re on the Senate, we have the next ASA appearance to look forward to, if the last was any indication, the show will be worth watching.  The BRB have, finally, settled the ‘man of the match’ award; you could throw a blanket over the field at the finish line; democracy prevailed in the end – a vote settled it.

The ‘You-tube’ count put the Edwards ‘world of hurt’ dialogue in front by a short head, cool, concise, cutting and lethally accurate, delivered in true CEO style.  The pathway to that point was paved with gold, laid down by the other Senators.  

So, despite everyone having a favourite, from Bullock who delivered a Bollocking, to Xenophon who put the ‘frighteners’ on and ran the back line brilliantly, it was declared a team effort, democracy winning.  This is how government should work – Bravo and bloody well done.

‘We’ were going to send the committee Tim Tams for morning tea; but no doubt that would be construed as ‘inducement’, if we could get ‘em past security.  There was even a proposal to ask the Secretariat to purchase and deliver them; but voted down.  They have more than enough to do without running errands for the IOS.

So what else is there left to offer; not much except our sincere appreciation for doing a dirty job, very well indeed.  Thank you Senators.

Toot toot...... Big Grin
Reply

Farmer Joe welcome to AuntyPru. Your roasted spud smothered in butter, cheese and mayo is in the mail. As part of the IOS WHS induction to AuntyPru I must advise you that with you being a farmer and all that, the 'feeding of the chooks' is not permitted in the lunchroom or in front of other IOS.

Now, The Ferryman has pretty much answered your question, but I would like to know this - if CAsA can audit an operator, issue NCN's and wrap a timeframe of 20 days (or is it 21? I've forgotten) in which you must respond with root cause and remedial action, why can't the same principle apply to senate estimates or senate inquiries? If CAsA, ASA or ATSBeaker do not respond adequately and on time then they are penalised. Perhaps executives are docked bonus money, the organisation is 'fined' dollars out of its annual budget, executives receive 'performance punitive measures' etc. The problem is that there is no incentive for the alphabet soup organisations to take the Senators or anybody else seriously as they are unaccountable. Change the accountability status and watch how quickly these crooks start to reply with explanations and with fixes. Otherwise it's just the same tautological shit just a different day.

"Safe rooster booster for Farmer Joe and all"
Reply

Couple of quotes from the P2 hand grenade – HERE – which may assist with thought

Quote:In a damning submission to the Senate, the International Bar Association (IBA) described Australia's foreign bribery laws as ineffective and our record of enforcement "woeful".

Quote:"The system is not working. Unless people go to jail, unless people see imprisonment as the real ultimate penalty, there will be no behavioural change," Mr Wyld said

Concur with GD; just so long as these blighters are unaccountable, the party will continue.

Game on tomorrow evening 1700 for the public – P2 will no doubt post the details.
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)