[Peetwo]

ANAO slap CASA with a wet lettuce report - 

Yesterday the ANAO tabled in the Parliament their "Civil Aviation Safety Authority Planning and Conduct of Surveillance Activities" audit report (interesting timing -    ): 

Conclusion

11. While CASA has appropriate policies and procedures and largely implements its surveillance functions, its planning and conduct of surveillance activities is partly effective.

12. The appropriateness of CASA’s approach to surveillance is diminished as CASA does not have an overarching strategic plan and its approach to prioritising surveillance does not incorporate risk likelihood or clearly specify why it does not. CASA’s risk approach is not applied consistently across all sectors and industry delegates and there has not been full compliance with conflict of interest declaration requirements by CASA staff. CASA’s surveillance approach largely complies with Australia’s international obligations.

13. CASA has been partly effective in monitoring compliance and reviewing its planning and conduct of surveillance activities. While CASA has a system for monitoring compliance, there has been a downward trend in the level of surveillance in recent years, a trend that commenced prior to the COVID-19 pandemic. In addition, CASA has not regularly reviewed and updated its planned surveillance approach. There is no quality assurance process in place for reviewing the quality of surveillance activities, and there has been no plan developed for reviewing the National Oversight Plan.

14. CASA has regularly reported to its Board and the government on surveillance activities, however, reporting needs to be complete and comprehensive. There has been a reduction in the level of detail in surveillance reporting over time. Recent reporting does not accurately reflect some of the issues CASA has identified.

---

Recommendations

Recommendation no. 1

Paragraph 2.13

The Civil Aviation Safety Authority formalise and fully document the National Oversight Plan including relevant governance processes, performance and review milestones.

Civil Aviation Safety Authority response: Agreed

Recommendation no. 2

Paragraph 2.63

The Civil Aviation Safety Authority improve its approach to risk by:

incorporating risk likelihood as part of its approach to surveillance planning or clearly establish the basis for not considering risk likelihood in its prioritisation of authorisation holders for surveillance; and applying the risk and prioritisation framework consistently across all sectors and industry delegates.

Civil Aviation Safety Authority response: Agreed

Recommendation no. 3

Paragraph 2.75

The Civil Aviation Safety Authority strengthen its approach to obtaining conflict of interest declarations by regulatory staff and managing any risks that are identified.

Civil Aviation Safety Authority response: Agreed

Recommendation no. 4

Paragraph 3.41

The Civil Aviation Safety Authority implement a process for tracking and reporting on surveillance referrals to enforcement.

Civil Aviation Safety Authority response: Agreed

Recommendation no. 5

Paragraph 3.68

The Civil Aviation Safety Authority review its National Oversight Plan and National Surveillance Selection Process.

Civil Aviation Safety Authority response: Agreed

Recommendation no. 6

Paragraph 4.17

The Civil Aviation Safety Authority improve the completeness and comprehensiveness of its reporting to the Board to increase transparency related to its surveillance activities.

Civil Aviation Safety Authority response: Agreed

Recommendation no. 7

Paragraph 4.27

The Civil Aviation Safety Authority improve the completeness and comprehensiveness of its reporting to the Minister to increase transparency related to its surveillance activities.

Civil Aviation Safety Authority response: Agreed

This was Sandy's take on the ANAO report:

Be amused, here is where GI (Government Industries) never breaks ranks.  Quote from the ANAO report about CASA’s (below par) surveillance performance, quote:-

“…incorporating risk likelihood as part of its approach to surveillance planning or clearly establish the basis for not considering risk likelihood in its prioritisation of authorisation holders for surveillance; and….” (My script bolding)

Government Industries section ANAO is a masterful provider of inconspicuous escape hatches, inconspicuous to the casual observer but writ large within the general ranks of Australia’s most powerful  monopoly, the conglomerate of Government Industries. 

CASA agrees to all the ANAO’s recommendations because safety, by virtue of the Act, has no connection to risk. Naturally, otherwise the Emperor has no clothes.

Too bad the ANAO doesn’t conduct an audit on the financial efficiencies of CASA, including the question of how the CEO’s salary lept from c. $635,000 to well over $1,000,000?

Did the Board determine that $635k wasn’t sufficient to attract the quality of applicant in order to fulfil the Board’s requirements? Did the Minister sign off on this appointment and shouldn’t we, the public and General Aviation community, be entitled to know why such a massive increase in salary was necessary?

The destruction of General Aviation continues due to lack of Ministerial control, and lack of Parliamentary responsibility, coupled with the leadership of CASA and its inability to put the National interest ahead of its own.  The latter because the independent model of governance is wrong, and expecting CASA by itself to reduce its power and money wasting is a forlorn hope.

Sandy

Hmm...all fair points but what really impressed me with this report was the ease with which Su_Spence in her reply, with apparent sincerity, reverted to bureaucratic, weasel worded, gobbledygook to effectively make irrelevant the ANAO wet lettuce findings and recommendations:

---

---

 

UDB! Straight out of the Dr A book of Hoodoo Voodoo...

If we needed any further evidence that CASA are a law unto themselves, totally out of control and completely unaccountable this has to be it?? 

MTF...P2