The carrot: &
Albo - "When it comes to issues of aviation, we have tried to ensure as much bipartisanship as possible," he said. "What that requires is a bit of compromise and perhaps not getting everything that you want–indeed, this legislation, the Civil Aviation Amendment Bill 2019, doesn't go as far as Labor would go if we were the government. But it is an important step forward."
- The stick.
Albo - "We must recognise that regulators, as well as the minister, face intense pressures in bearing the responsibility for aviation safety, and I certainly felt it when I was the minister. I know from discussions with Minister McCormack that he had considered these matters very carefully before bringing forward this legislation."
BOLLOCKS.
This Daisy chain of useless, spineless politicians who are held in thrall and hamstrung by the mystique of aviation safety, living in fear of ‘the blood will be on your hands’ need to be sat down and talked to; most severely. Tea and no biscuits.
Please take the time to watch the AMSA hearing –
-. Then consider the implication of the Maritime safety brief AMSA execute very well. It is an extensive, complex remit every bit as potentially dangerous as aviation. Yet there’s Glenn Sterle in furious pursuit of the agency, baying for their blood, or at least a head to take home. He is completely unafraid of tackling ‘safety’ at sea. Yet the moment ‘aviation’ is mentioned, out come the tin hats and the escape vehicles. Why? What is it about aviation that scares ‘em so?
Even more of a mystery is why they don’t get it. People get killed every day – the road toll is a horror story, fire claims it’s share, building sites etc, etc. The list is long and continuous. Sterle wants and will get the changes rung at AMSA; no fear of having his name associated with any changes made. But you don’t see or hear a committee of Senators howling at the CASA about the Essendon DFO killing – hell no. But Angel flight loose a couple of aircraft and the whole of parliament is nodding in acceptance of a new rule set – for safety’s sake? Bollocks.
FDS more like – Essendon draws total political silence, nary a peep of the outrage we see in Sterle v AMSA. Then, this same bunch will be feeling all chuffed because they allowed CASA to bring a new rule set which will not, in any tangible way improve ‘aviation safety’. It’s nuts.
The aviation industry spends so much time ‘ticking boxes’ to ensure compliance with the latest load of pony-pooh to stay legally safe, operational safety is suffering. The ‘habit’ or; if you want to get technical, the ever increasing normalized deviance of ‘Oh it’s just some CASA bullshit’ is undermining real, live operational safety issues. So used to ticking so many boxes that the purpose and intent of basic operational safety is lost in the blizzard of paper work. First world countries have acknowledged this – even the French. Time our Australian politicians got with the program and put a full stop on the Act and demanded first class, effective legislation. The rules, as they stand have a better chance of causing another accident than they do of preventing one. Why should the mystique of aviation safety be treated in a different fashion to any other endeavour which kills and maims? Why are our politicians so afraid of ‘aviation’ blood on their hands and not in least concerned about the carnage on our roads?
With respect, Mr Albanese the changes to the Act are about as much use as a politicians hand shake.
Toot – toot.
Albo - "When it comes to issues of aviation, we have tried to ensure as much bipartisanship as possible," he said. "What that requires is a bit of compromise and perhaps not getting everything that you want–indeed, this legislation, the Civil Aviation Amendment Bill 2019, doesn't go as far as Labor would go if we were the government. But it is an important step forward."
- The stick.
Albo - "We must recognise that regulators, as well as the minister, face intense pressures in bearing the responsibility for aviation safety, and I certainly felt it when I was the minister. I know from discussions with Minister McCormack that he had considered these matters very carefully before bringing forward this legislation."
BOLLOCKS.
This Daisy chain of useless, spineless politicians who are held in thrall and hamstrung by the mystique of aviation safety, living in fear of ‘the blood will be on your hands’ need to be sat down and talked to; most severely. Tea and no biscuits.
Please take the time to watch the AMSA hearing –
-. Then consider the implication of the Maritime safety brief AMSA execute very well. It is an extensive, complex remit every bit as potentially dangerous as aviation. Yet there’s Glenn Sterle in furious pursuit of the agency, baying for their blood, or at least a head to take home. He is completely unafraid of tackling ‘safety’ at sea. Yet the moment ‘aviation’ is mentioned, out come the tin hats and the escape vehicles. Why? What is it about aviation that scares ‘em so?
Even more of a mystery is why they don’t get it. People get killed every day – the road toll is a horror story, fire claims it’s share, building sites etc, etc. The list is long and continuous. Sterle wants and will get the changes rung at AMSA; no fear of having his name associated with any changes made. But you don’t see or hear a committee of Senators howling at the CASA about the Essendon DFO killing – hell no. But Angel flight loose a couple of aircraft and the whole of parliament is nodding in acceptance of a new rule set – for safety’s sake? Bollocks.
FDS more like – Essendon draws total political silence, nary a peep of the outrage we see in Sterle v AMSA. Then, this same bunch will be feeling all chuffed because they allowed CASA to bring a new rule set which will not, in any tangible way improve ‘aviation safety’. It’s nuts.
The aviation industry spends so much time ‘ticking boxes’ to ensure compliance with the latest load of pony-pooh to stay legally safe, operational safety is suffering. The ‘habit’ or; if you want to get technical, the ever increasing normalized deviance of ‘Oh it’s just some CASA bullshit’ is undermining real, live operational safety issues. So used to ticking so many boxes that the purpose and intent of basic operational safety is lost in the blizzard of paper work. First world countries have acknowledged this – even the French. Time our Australian politicians got with the program and put a full stop on the Act and demanded first class, effective legislation. The rules, as they stand have a better chance of causing another accident than they do of preventing one. Why should the mystique of aviation safety be treated in a different fashion to any other endeavour which kills and maims? Why are our politicians so afraid of ‘aviation’ blood on their hands and not in least concerned about the carnage on our roads?
With respect, Mr Albanese the changes to the Act are about as much use as a politicians hand shake.
Toot – toot.