Ifs, buts and agenda.
Or, ducking, weaving and getting off the hook. There are, I'm told, two basic elements attached to any sort of investigation into matters which directly impact on 'public safety', particularly when a government minister must be included in the 'big picture'. Follow the money trail (all of it) is sound advice; but the other side of that coin is plausible denial of 'liability'/ responsibility and accountability. The salt in that particular stew is 'government involvement' in what should be either a State run or Privately run operation. Hybrids just create blurred lines and far too many bolt holes.
It will take a while to backtrack to the very beginning of the Sydney Harbour ferry debacle; in the beginning, there was the notion that a new breed of ferry was required to replace the ageing, slow if reliable ships servicing the harbour. Fair enough: increased demand, increased numbers and the potential costs involved in maintaining and insuring ageing vessels. Fair enough; a reasonable investment for the public purse to make and beneficial to the city, the State and the government election platform. Win – win you'd think, and, in a perfect world you would be correct.
So the journey begins - “we need new boats” and its game on. Long before any public announcement is made the words find their way to various ears and everyone wants a slice of this huge pie. But it is a complicated game; very complicated and the interests of those involved are not only in conflict but juxta opposed. The voice not heard in any of the negotiations is the public one; those who must, eventually pay for the whole shebang; one way or another.
Think about the cost involved in providing a tender; lobbying; presenting and researching a proposal. A big outlay without any guarantee of success on a stand alone basis, let alone being under attack from the competition. An expensive dog-fight with the CEO of any bidder under the pump from the board and investors. You can see why the 'rough' edges of any submission would be smoothed off, buried and never see the light of day, let alone logic. But, the kicker is in how to avoid 'liability' if or when the 'cracks' begin to appear; the ifs, the buts and the escape plans. From the builders al the way through to the operating crews; the agenda is to avoid any and all liability if the wheels come off and the good ship Glorious Notion goes down in flames, or breaks up crossing the harbour heads; or capsizes due to a loss of command steering? Ever see the seagulls scattering when chased of spilled chips; slow in comparison to the Buzzards off the ferry carcase when startled.
So much for the private sector. But here there is government involvement to consider. Elections to worry about, credibility which goes with the job. But there is also 'liability' to add to public condemnation; this before any sort of official, independent inquiry sees public opinion (if there ever is one). But, the kicker is in 'how to' avoid all 'liability' if or when the 'cracks' begin to appear; the ifs, the buts and the escape plans. From the buyers to builders, all the way through to the operating crews; the agenda is to avoid any and all liability if the wheels come off and the Glorious Notion goes down in flames.
Take a long look at the picture today; to say that nearly all the 'ifs and buts' chickens have come home to roost is a fair call. The responsibility, accountability and liability agenda clearly visible; all the stops pulled out, all of them. Department heads back peddling like billy o. Safety watchdogs on short leashes, if not hobbled. Private entity spinning like tops trying to keep 'the facts' under wraps. Such is the reality for a humble member of the public who simply wants to travel from A to B at a reasonable cost, in reasonable comfort; reasonably expecting to arrive in one piece with the kids at Manly for 'fish and chips' on the beach...
The men responsible for and highly experienced in managing the this routine task have raised some very serious safety matters. These matters IMO demand the use of the full powers, without political influence, granted to OTSI (who seem to be conflicted (and 'all at sea')and the AMSA who do have a legal right and obligation to take a long hard look at the situation. I say that if only half of the public safety matters are only half true; then there must an open, no stone unturned investigation. I can only imagine the consequences if there was any sort of cover up or even obfuscation should there ever be a fatal accident involving a fully laden ferry. The Commonwealth spent millions on an aircraft ditching off Norfolk Island; Senate Inquiry, overseas agencies, etc; almost 70 'safety recommendations made (long story) but the NSW government 'safety agency' OTSI see little point in taking the lid off. Nothing to see; no one drowned; so let's not rock the boat – Bollocks....
Toot – toot..
Or, ducking, weaving and getting off the hook. There are, I'm told, two basic elements attached to any sort of investigation into matters which directly impact on 'public safety', particularly when a government minister must be included in the 'big picture'. Follow the money trail (all of it) is sound advice; but the other side of that coin is plausible denial of 'liability'/ responsibility and accountability. The salt in that particular stew is 'government involvement' in what should be either a State run or Privately run operation. Hybrids just create blurred lines and far too many bolt holes.
It will take a while to backtrack to the very beginning of the Sydney Harbour ferry debacle; in the beginning, there was the notion that a new breed of ferry was required to replace the ageing, slow if reliable ships servicing the harbour. Fair enough: increased demand, increased numbers and the potential costs involved in maintaining and insuring ageing vessels. Fair enough; a reasonable investment for the public purse to make and beneficial to the city, the State and the government election platform. Win – win you'd think, and, in a perfect world you would be correct.
So the journey begins - “we need new boats” and its game on. Long before any public announcement is made the words find their way to various ears and everyone wants a slice of this huge pie. But it is a complicated game; very complicated and the interests of those involved are not only in conflict but juxta opposed. The voice not heard in any of the negotiations is the public one; those who must, eventually pay for the whole shebang; one way or another.
Think about the cost involved in providing a tender; lobbying; presenting and researching a proposal. A big outlay without any guarantee of success on a stand alone basis, let alone being under attack from the competition. An expensive dog-fight with the CEO of any bidder under the pump from the board and investors. You can see why the 'rough' edges of any submission would be smoothed off, buried and never see the light of day, let alone logic. But, the kicker is in how to avoid 'liability' if or when the 'cracks' begin to appear; the ifs, the buts and the escape plans. From the builders al the way through to the operating crews; the agenda is to avoid any and all liability if the wheels come off and the good ship Glorious Notion goes down in flames, or breaks up crossing the harbour heads; or capsizes due to a loss of command steering? Ever see the seagulls scattering when chased of spilled chips; slow in comparison to the Buzzards off the ferry carcase when startled.
So much for the private sector. But here there is government involvement to consider. Elections to worry about, credibility which goes with the job. But there is also 'liability' to add to public condemnation; this before any sort of official, independent inquiry sees public opinion (if there ever is one). But, the kicker is in 'how to' avoid all 'liability' if or when the 'cracks' begin to appear; the ifs, the buts and the escape plans. From the buyers to builders, all the way through to the operating crews; the agenda is to avoid any and all liability if the wheels come off and the Glorious Notion goes down in flames.
Take a long look at the picture today; to say that nearly all the 'ifs and buts' chickens have come home to roost is a fair call. The responsibility, accountability and liability agenda clearly visible; all the stops pulled out, all of them. Department heads back peddling like billy o. Safety watchdogs on short leashes, if not hobbled. Private entity spinning like tops trying to keep 'the facts' under wraps. Such is the reality for a humble member of the public who simply wants to travel from A to B at a reasonable cost, in reasonable comfort; reasonably expecting to arrive in one piece with the kids at Manly for 'fish and chips' on the beach...
The men responsible for and highly experienced in managing the this routine task have raised some very serious safety matters. These matters IMO demand the use of the full powers, without political influence, granted to OTSI (who seem to be conflicted (and 'all at sea')and the AMSA who do have a legal right and obligation to take a long hard look at the situation. I say that if only half of the public safety matters are only half true; then there must an open, no stone unturned investigation. I can only imagine the consequences if there was any sort of cover up or even obfuscation should there ever be a fatal accident involving a fully laden ferry. The Commonwealth spent millions on an aircraft ditching off Norfolk Island; Senate Inquiry, overseas agencies, etc; almost 70 'safety recommendations made (long story) but the NSW government 'safety agency' OTSI see little point in taking the lid off. Nothing to see; no one drowned; so let's not rock the boat – Bollocks....
Toot – toot..