[Peetwo]

Hansard now out: see HERE.

ATSB Estimates: Hooded Canary on a hot tin roof - 

The normally high profile/high viz Hooded Canary has not been sighted for what seems like months...  However yesterday he reappeared in a brief and somewhat subdued session with the RRAT committee in Senate Estimates. The main line of questioning came from sic'em REX on the Angel Flight imbroglio and in particular the Carmody Capers empowered, bollocks instrument...  

Haven't got the Hansard yet but without further ado here is the very interesting session in pictures...  

P2 comment - Hmm...a whistleblower in the midst? I guess it was only a matter of time...

Senator PATRICK: My line of questioning is going to go to the issue of Angel Flight and the instrument that has been tabled in the parliament. I have moved a disallowance which will be decided in the next parliament, but I do want to talk to you about some details because you are in the processes of investigating an Angel Flight that occurred. So that's the context, and I'll put on the record that I have spoken to a number of people involved who have talked to me about various different matters. I'll just also put on the record that, because they're connected to these proceedings and the questions I'm about to ask, I view them as being protected by parliamentary privilege. Some people may have talked to me about—

CHAIR: Hold on. Let's be clear. What are you endeavouring to establish here? You mentioned them.

Senator PATRICK: No, I'm saying I might ask some questions that go to some of the investigations that have been carried out—that they're currently carrying out.

CHAIR: Yes, but why would you need to put them on record? It just sounded like you were bestowing parliamentary privilege—and it may be the case.

Senator PATRICK: I'm just saying I've had conversations with people who have perhaps told me things that they might not otherwise have been able to tell me but for the fact that I'm about to engage in some questions—

CHAIR: Yes, but I'm not sure you should give them the confidence that the parliament—

Senator PATRICK: Okay.

CHAIR: No, Rex; I just don't want to leave it hanging. The words 'parliamentary privilege' were used. I'm not sure it's up to us to bestow that on a whistleblower who's shared information or documents with you. I don't know that it works like that. You might remember we had some in camera whistleblowers recently, and we advise we had was that information at their disposal in a documentary form probably shouldn't have been.

Senator PATRICK: I've taken advice from the Clerk.

CHAIR: Oh, all right. If you want to cite the Clerk into the Hansard, you go ahead.

Mr Hood : Would it help if I outlined where we're at in terms of the investigation?

Senator PATRICK: Yes, you can do that.

Mr Hood : On 28 June 2017, a Tobago aircraft impacted terrain near Mount Gambier, killing all three on board. The ATSB sent an investigation team, and obviously we followed due process since then to investigate the accident and then, of course, to provide the natural justice opportunity to those directly involved in that accident, that being primarily the regulators, the Civil Aviation Safety Authority and Angel Flight to respond to us. We provided an extension to those parties until last Friday. We have received a substantial submission from both parties and, from my perspective, in terms of due process, natural justice, public interest and, of course, the sensitivities of next of kin, the ATSB hasn't traditionally talked about investigations that are currently underway. We think we're about a month to a month and a half away from the final publication of that investigation report.

Senator PATRICK: Sure. My questions are not going to go to the accident itself. I respect that there are good reasons for us not speculating on things. What I want to do, however, is match the instrument that's been tabled against facts that are involved in that particular accident. You'd be aware that an instrument has been tabled that requires 250 hours of in-command time. That is just a simple question of fact. We were told that this instrument was in some sense in response to the previous Angel Flight crash and, indeed, this crash. My understanding is that the pilot in both of those crashes had more than 250 hours. I'm asking you to confirm that. I can actually go through each one of the requirements in here and ask you whether or not it would have had an effect on the previous flight and, indeed, this flight. I'm not actually trying to get to the cause of the accident. I'm trying to focus on whether, if this instrument were in play, it would have made a difference in either Mount Gambier or the previous flight.

Mr Hood : Thank you. The difficulty for us is that, being in the natural justice process, we've done our analysis. We've come up with our draft findings. We're obviously aware of the CASA instrument. We weren't consulted in relation to the CASA instrument, but we're aware of it. And, of course, commenting on the merits of CASA's instrument in a draft report sense in our findings is not complete. As I said, we received substantial input from both Angel Flight and CASA in relation to our draft report. So I think it would be premature for us to comment in relation to CASA's instrument.

Hmm...but maybe someone has already talked out of school?? ref: And - From the Funny Coincidence department.

I fully support - minimum pilot experience and currency - minimum licensing requirements - minimum Class1 medical - all night flight to be using instrument procedures - aircraft maintenance to charter standards. The general public has not enough knowledge to make the call. The emotions involved lead pilots to make hasty and not always good decisions about their capabilities. I know everyone wants to help and be seen a hero but no-one wants their nearest and dearest to end up in a crumpled heap of metal in cumulogranite. The PATS scheme whilst less glamorous is adequate for most people's transport. A little extra input from doctors into the application assists in ensuring the patient gets transport appropriate to their condition.

https://consultation.casa.gov.au/regulat...=842062909

..Mr Hood : In our draft report we've looked at both what happened and why, in terms of the Angel Flight accident at Mount Gambier. Consistent with looking at the why we've obviously looked at the operator, as we have the regulator as well. The other point to make is we're completely independent of CASA in this matter. Our report has been developed in complete isolation of any action that CASA may have chosen to take in relation to that instrument. 

Senator PATRICK:Sure. But if you're intending to make some adverse finding in relation to Angel Flight and perhaps suggesting that their pilots are under pressure, for example—because Mr Carmody indicated to us that their pilots are under a particular pressure because of the nature of these flights. My understanding is your draft report effectively says that, but it's not grounded by evidence. You haven't gone to a whole range of different Angel Flight pilots and talked to them about any pressures they might have...

Hmm...no comment required, I'll leave that to the experts....  


MTF...P2