Quote:P2 “Okay, enough for now, I'm sure "K" & others can fill in the gaps.”
Good digging P2; spot on actually and well done: the dots all connect to form a picture much like the Dorian Grey painting; but it’s bad news I’m afraid – “K” and many of us, you included are at the BRB long weekend turn-out, which, thankfully will slow the inevitable response. This is a deep subject, the Act; many claim it unconstitutional and; rumour has it that the architect. J. Aleck admits this is so. “K” is whip for this and I expect (hope) that rather than a blast from Hell there will be a series of considered responses to some very pertinent, pointed questions. The DoIT amending the Act being one. The board actions, or marked lack thereof being another.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ ~ Alas,Too late it seems, wrote the above directly after reading yours, clearly everyone who believes an overhaul – NZ style of the CASA first, closely followed by a ‘new’ Act is disappointed in the lack of progress. Nearly every wise head, outside of the DoIT influence realises that there must be changes to the Act and those who choose the ‘narrow’ interpretation.
The Hamilton submission to the ASRR nails down the root; the AMROBA submission describes why change is necessary. The only fellah who failed to drag in the Act was the Rev. Forsyth, but to be fair, it was outside of his remit, but the submissions to his review certainly identified the problems created by the Act.
One of the more interesting items on the upcoming agenda is a proposition for a private members bill calling for the Act to be amended or, better yet, repealed and replaced.
P2 - It really is very naughty of you to put together such a challenging post just before the BRB AGM; wicked. I shall have an ale with the ‘lad’ this evening see if I can temper the response; but, you know full well what red flags do to bulls. Let us hope the blue fuse paper has not been lit, before it’s time.
MTF – certainly; once the cordite smoke has dissipated.