[Peetwo]

The McComic Legacy - Embuggerance through strict liability

Here we go the end of the GA industry is nigh, with the ambulance chasers sniffing around the strict liability Holy Grail...

Passenger sues over injuries, stress after NT crash

• Mitchell Bingemann
  
• The Australian
  
• March 4, 2016 12:00AM
  

A Cessna 210, similar to the one that crashed in the Northern Territory.

A passenger who survived a light aeroplane crash in the Northern Territory in 2014 is suing the aircraft’s operator and insurer for damages.

The crash happened on March 28, 2014, 50km west of the Numbulwar aerodrome, and involved a Cessna 210 aircraft, registered VH-HGZ, which was operated by charter service Catherine ­Aviation.

An Australian Transport Safety Bureau report into the incident found that the pilot had conducted daily inspections of the aircraft prior to flying and found no defects or abnormalities before its ill-fated flight.

About 11.30 CST, the aircraft departed Numbulwar on a climb to a planned cruising altitude of 4500 feet.

“When about 22 nautical miles west of Numbulwar, the passenger felt a bump and detected smoke emanating from the floor area beside the pilot,” the report said.

“The pilot broadcast a mayday on the common traffic advisory frequency, advising of an engine failure and that there were no roads in sight on which to conduct a forced landing, only trees.”

The pilot executed an emergency landing, skidded and hit two trees before stopping.

The ATSB concluded that a connecting rod appeared to have broken and separated from the crankshaft, resulting in a hole in the crankcase. This precipitated a catastrophic engine failure. The smoke entering the cockpit was likely to have been from burning oil.

The pilot and passenger were rescued about three hours later by a helicopter crew.

Both sustained serious injuries and the aircraft was destroyed. Due to memory loss incurred as a result of the accident, the pilot had limited recollection of the events.

But the passenger, who has enlisted Shine Lawyers to represent her, remembers the flight, which she says has since caused her stress and anxiety.

“Our client sustained fairly ­serious back injuries and injuries to her upper shoulder,’’ Shine Lawyers aviation law solicitor Thomas Janson said.

“She also suffers ongoing psychological injuries like post-traumatic disorder, anxiety and she has difficulty sleeping as well, which requires constant care from her partner.’’
The case falls under a strict liability scheme, which is governed by the Civil Aviation Carriers Liability Act.

“Because the flight was a charter operation — more or less a ­licence to transport people — it comes under strict liability,” Mr Janson said. “The best analogy is if you have a speeding fine.

“So it’s very hard for the ­defendant to disprove they are at fault even if they can allege that it was due to a manufacturing error or down to a defect in main­tenance.

“If it was a private operation, then liability would have to be proven. But because it’s a chartered flight, as in this case, then liability does not have to be ­proven.”
Damages under this legislation are capped at $725,000.

The case was filed yesterday in the Federal Court of Australia at the Sydney Registry.
The court will assess the economic loss of the passenger, the ­financial cost of care that is now required, and will also look at ­the effect of injuries on her.

   
Murky Mandarin & the Iron Ring will be rubbing their hands with glee - "The End is Nigh!"

MTF..P2  

[thorn bird]

Net result if the result goes Shines way?

I would think massive rises in our already inflated insurance premiums for a start.

Given under Australia's world leading regulations it is now impossible to even walk near an aircraft. Hell, given CAsA's propensity to morph into MI5, anything you say or transmit, via any medium, maybe even your thoughts are "Strict Liability" criminal offences.
Shine has merely woken up to the fact that before them lies a veritable gold mine provided free of charge by our world leading regulator. The best thing is you don't even have to do any work to tap that mine, your opponent is screwed before they even start.

Bit like our airports really.

So when CAsA has finished sending the entire aviation industry offshore, what next Mr. Turnbull?

[Kharon]

A prelude to an Embuggerance ?

PA 23 accident near Mareeba; not much more info, the ATSB are 'on the job'.

Report - HERE.

N.B. I am only relaying some whispers on the wind here.  But there could be a lot MTF if those whispers pan out, however rumour will need to suffice until more accurate information can be sourced.  

The accident of itself will be of some technical interest, there is gossip that the aircraft did not have a MR although that seems unlikely; but, if it turns out to be true, there are some legal angles which may be interesting.  That the aircraft was apparently not insured, which is another curly one for the legal eagles.  

From a channel 7 new blurb, the words “the aircraft used to be owned by a local tourism operator” seemed fairly innocuous until news started to filter through that there are criminal proceeding against the operator Barrier Aviation in the offing.  For those not familiar with that tale of woe, in short, a Cairns based tourism operator was closed down a few years back, under highly contentious circumstances.  There was much of to-do about the closure and the actions of CASA in doing so.  Now it seems there is to be a further round with the owner to be prosecuted; so at least we will be able to get hard fact on this shortly.

What happened to Barrier is a classic embuggerance and to many represents one of the darkest, dirtiest passages in the CASA history.  This is not the thing that has that has drawn attention.  The prosecution and the CASA department of undesirable tricks are the focus of future interest.  

For example; there is a report of a very biased article from a local newspaper which draws inference that the crash of the PA23 is somehow related to the previous owner of the aircraft; who is being prosecuted by CASA.  There are claims that the article is pure malice; CASA spin and designed to denigrate the ex owner of Barrier even further.  This stand alone is of interest and worthy of some judicious ‘digging’.

But for mine; if this all turns out to be true it speaks volumes for the Skidmore double standard approach to regulating the industry.  Prosecution is becoming ‘popular’ when black letter application of the ‘law’ under strict liability is tested in a court, while the smiling, fluffy, feel good tambourine bashing goes in public.  Some would call that two faced, others would say it sets the seal of doom on any meaningful reform of the regulators attitude.  I say I will check this out and see what transpires.  Careful when dealing with rumour is good advice.

Aye well; we shall see.  MTF. (The gods willing and weather permitting).

Toot toot.

[Peetwo]

..From a channel 7 new blurb, the words “the aircraft used to be owned by a local tourism operator” seemed fairly innocuous until news started to filter through that there are criminal proceeding against the operator Barrier Aviation in the offing.  For those not familiar with that tale of woe, in short, a Cairns based tourism operator was closed down a few years back, under highly contentious circumstances.  There was much of to-do about the closure and the actions of CASA in doing so.  Now it seems there is to be a further round with the owner to be prosecuted; so at least we will be able to get hard fact on this shortly.

What happened to Barrier is a classic embuggerance and to many represents one of the darkest, dirtiest passages in the CASA history.  This is not the thing that has that has drawn attention.  The prosecution and the CASA department of undesirable tricks are the focus of future interest...  

But for mine; if this all turns out to be true it speaks volumes for the Skidmore double standard approach to regulating the industry.  Prosecution is becoming ‘popular’ when black letter application of the ‘law’ under strict liability is tested in a court, while the smiling, fluffy, feel good tambourine bashing goes in public.  Some would call that two faced, others would say it sets the seal of doom on any meaningful reform of the regulators attitude.  I say I will check this out and see what transpires.  Careful when dealing with rumour is good advice...

"Civil Aviation Safety Authority
Gerard Campbell > Executive Manager, Operations Division, CASA"

Indeed, buyer beware of this bloke. Unbelievable that he is acting as the face of Fort Fumble. And as P2 says, he is one of the last Execs from the McComic era that needs to be dispatched to somewhere like McMurdo Sound. That would leave the Witchdoctor and Flyingfiend to go!!!

Fuehrer Campbell is famous for his love of delivering unwarranted pineapples across Australia's farthest regions. And he patiently counted down the years until he had worked his way into a position where he could finally take revenge and deliver Barrier Aviation the mother of all Friday afternoon pineapples. He is a quiet snake, meandering about, not saying much, listening and observing, then acting like a firey whirlwind consuming all in its path.

Attend a pithy discussion with egg head presenting? I think not.

"Safe protected backs for all"

Spot on Gobbles, not the sort of bloke I'd want preaching to the next gen Wannabes...

For the record, from my research Herr Campbell was one of the strongest proponents of the McComic black letter law dispo, that fronted all the most sinister, weasel worded, CASA manuals & DAS directives such as the Enforcement manual:

..Most of the regulatory decisions CASA makes are such that conformity with authoritative policy and established procedures will be conducive to the achievement of these outcomes. From time to time, however, decision-makers will encounter situations in which the strict application of policy, in the making of a decision involving the exercise of discretion, would not be appropriate. Indeed, in some cases, the inflexible application of policy may itself be unlawful...

  
Hmm...on the Barrier connection, I wonder if Herr Campbell has his fingerprints on any of the (above) disturbing rumour?

The reason being that the quoted foreword from the former DAS McComic was extracted from the latest version 4.4 (published January 2016) of the enforcement manual:

Enforcement manual

Our enforcement manual outlines the policies and strategies we have in place for aviation safety compliance.
Director's preface
Revision history(last update January 2016)
Table of Contents

1. About this manual
   
2. CASA's Enforcement Policy
   
3. Initiating the Enforcement Process
   
4. Compliance-Related Action
   
5. Civil Action - Enforceable Voluntary Undertakings (EVUs)
   
6. Administrative Action
   
7. Administrative Action - Serious and Imminent Risk
   
8. Infringement Notices (Administrative Fines)
   
9. Voluntary Reporting - Aviation Self Reporting Scheme
   
10. The Demerit Points Scheme
    
11. Criminal Action - Prosecution
    
12. Access
    
13. Gathering Evidence and Handling Exhibits
    
14. Note Taking
    
15. Interviewing
    
16. Detaining Aircraft
    
17. Police Assistance
    

• Appendix 1 - Flowcharts - Coordinated Enforcement Processes
  
• Appendix 2 - The Legal basis of Regulatory Enforcement
  
• Appendix 3 - Delegations and Exercise of Powers by Delegates
  
• Appendix 4 - Guidance on the term 'fit and proper person'
  

Complete manual

 Therefore Herr Campbell is still given carte blanche to operate by the McComic black letter law dispo - FFS!  

Also passing strange, is that according to the Director's preface McCormick is still officially the DAS

UFB?- Note the version date & the moniker:

Regardless of whether the above is a reckless, indifferent administration error by the Legal Services Division, the fact still remains that Oliver Skidmore-twist condones the evil intent of the former DAS's black letter law dispensation that was lovingly abused & exploited by the likes of Wodger and Herr Campbell.

This would seem to be in direct contradiction of the CASA's adopting a 'Just Culture' and the new 10 point regulatory philosophy - OST Weasel Words to Qantas Group Safety Conference, [b]Sydney – 13 October 2015:[/b]

Employ rational ‘just culture’ principles


For a safety partnership to be sustainable for a longer period of time, there is one more important cog in the wheel we need to embrace and employ — that is the application of just culture principles.


Most people in aviation have heard the term ‘just culture’ - the concept has been around for some years and is used around the globe in aviation and other sectors involved in hazardous activities.


There are many definitions of ‘just culture’, however, generally it is used to describe an approach where if you make an honest error or mistake and report it we should look at ways to educate, train or grow necessary skills so that it does not happen again.

Of course, this doesn’t mean people can or should get away with anything, or that appropriate action taken in the interests of safety may not be necessary. Gross negligence, recklessness, wilful violations or destructive acts are not tolerated and may well be subject to punishment — there is a clear line in the sand.


I believe, the ‘just culture’ approach will enhance availability of information to CASA, which in turn will make our decisions more informed and measured. The advantage of a just culture approach is that it encourages people to be open and accountable about their mistakes, so there is better reporting of errors and the ability to learn from them is enhanced. Fear of punishment doesn’t stop people from making mistakes. But mistakes can be avoided by robust safety systems, training and an overarching commitment by everyone to achieving the best possible safety outcomes.


I will be leading CASA in implementing a just culture approach. We will work to develop a regulatory and operational environment where genuinely honest mistakes are recognised for what they are — opportunities for learning and improvement. CASA’s response will be to understand why the mistakes were made and how we can reduce the likelihood that the same mistakes will occur in the future.


Where the people and organisations involved demonstrate a willingness and ability to address errors and omissions in a responsible and constructive way, CASA will not need to take enforcement action. Certainly no punitive action will be necessary. We will encourage the individuals and organisations involved to identify and understand the factors behind mistakes. We will then support them in their efforts to develop and take the most appropriate course of action to prevent a recurrence of a mistake through further training and education, while effectively minimising risks to safety in the meantime — I consider this approach a fundamental shift from our recent past - we need to recognise that a cultural change in both CASA and industry are required to harvest the real benefits of this concept.


Elements of a just culture approach are already implicit in CASA’s enforcement policy and practice. However, we will be making this commitment clearer and more explicit as part of our overarching approach to regulatory policy and practice. Together we can all work to maintain and improve safety, while fostering trust and promoting accountability.


New Regulatory Philosophy


To complete setting the future direction for CASA, I released another important policy statement last month — CASA’s new regulatory philosophy.


The regulatory philosophy sets out ten key principles to guide and direct the way our organisation will regulate Australian aviation. What I have talked about so far has been captured in this philosophy.


I believe this new regulatory philosophy is an important milestone for both CASA and the aviation community.


There is now a clear and concise set of principles to guide all our actions


Elements of these principles are already reflected in existing policies and practices but the adoption of this regulatory philosophy will sharpen the focus on how we are performing. I am committed to ensuring these principles make a real, positive and lasting difference to the way CASA operates and the way we interact with the aviation community.


I appreciate some people may be wondering how or whether these principles will make a practical change to the way we carry out our regulatory responsibilities. So I invite the aviation community to use CASA’s regulatory philosophy as a benchmark against which our performance can be measured.

MTF...P2

[Gobbledock]

Just pineapples

Be careful OST, the bloke who really runs CAsA, Dr Voodoo, is not a fan of just culture. He is more of the mindset that every single aviator is a criminal who is yet to get caught. He is not a supporter of 'just culture', Dr Voodoo is a fan of 'just pineapples'.

Just refer back to Quadrio, Stan, Butson, and several other high profile cases. Terry from the Golden West Mafia and Gerrard from the Northern Australia mafia are just two examples of CAsA's truthful approach to 'just culture'. MCComick is/was a bully, Wodger and the Witchdoctor and Flyingfiend, all good examples of what CAsA thinks just culture means......

JUST CULTURE MY ASS!

[Peetwo]

..From a channel 7 new blurb, the words “the aircraft used to be owned by a local tourism operator” seemed fairly innocuous until news started to filter through that there are criminal proceeding against the operator Barrier Aviation in the offing.  For those not familiar with that tale of woe, in short, a Cairns based tourism operator was closed down a few years back, under highly contentious circumstances.  There was much of to-do about the closure and the actions of CASA in doing so.  Now it seems there is to be a further round with the owner to be prosecuted; so at least we will be able to get hard fact on this shortly.

What happened to Barrier is a classic embuggerance and to many represents one of the darkest, dirtiest passages in the CASA history.  This is not the thing that has that has drawn attention.  The prosecution and the CASA department of undesirable tricks are the focus of future interest...  

But for mine; if this all turns out to be true it speaks volumes for the Skidmore double standard approach to regulating the industry.  Prosecution is becoming ‘popular’ when black letter application of the ‘law’ under strict liability is tested in a court, while the smiling, fluffy, feel good tambourine bashing goes in public.  Some would call that two faced, others would say it sets the seal of doom on any meaningful reform of the regulators attitude.  I say I will check this out and see what transpires.  Careful when dealing with rumour is good advice...

"Civil Aviation Safety Authority
Gerard Campbell > Executive Manager, Operations Division, CASA"

Indeed, buyer beware of this bloke. Unbelievable that he is acting as the face of Fort Fumble. And as P2 says, he is one of the last Execs from the McComic era that needs to be dispatched to somewhere like McMurdo Sound. That would leave the Witchdoctor and Flyingfiend to go!!!

Fuehrer Campbell is famous for his love of delivering unwarranted pineapples across Australia's farthest regions. And he patiently counted down the years until he had worked his way into a position where he could finally take revenge and deliver Barrier Aviation the mother of all Friday afternoon pineapples. He is a quiet snake, meandering about, not saying much, listening and observing, then acting like a firey whirlwind consuming all in its path.

Attend a pithy discussion with egg head presenting? I think not.

"Safe protected backs for all"

Spot on Gobbles, not the sort of bloke I'd want preaching to the next gen Wannabes...

For the record, from my research Herr Campbell was one of the strongest proponents of the McComic black letter law dispo, that fronted all the most sinister, weasel worded, CASA manuals & DAS directives such as the Enforcement manual:

..Most of the regulatory decisions CASA makes are such that conformity with authoritative policy and established procedures will be conducive to the achievement of these outcomes. From time to time, however, decision-makers will encounter situations in which the strict application of policy, in the making of a decision involving the exercise of discretion, would not be appropriate. Indeed, in some cases, the inflexible application of policy may itself be unlawful...

  
Hmm...on the Barrier connection, I wonder if Herr Campbell has his fingerprints on any of the (above) disturbing rumour?

The reason being that the quoted foreword from the former DAS McComic was extracted from the latest version 4.4 (published January 2016) of the enforcement manual:

Enforcement manual

Our enforcement manual outlines the policies and strategies we have in place for aviation safety compliance.
Director's preface
Revision history(last update January 2016)
Table of Contents

1. About this manual
   
2. CASA's Enforcement Policy
   
3. Initiating the Enforcement Process
   
4. Compliance-Related Action
   
5. Civil Action - Enforceable Voluntary Undertakings (EVUs)
   
6. Administrative Action
   
7. Administrative Action - Serious and Imminent Risk
   
8. Infringement Notices (Administrative Fines)
   
9. Voluntary Reporting - Aviation Self Reporting Scheme
   
10. The Demerit Points Scheme
    
11. Criminal Action - Prosecution
    
12. Access
    
13. Gathering Evidence and Handling Exhibits
    
14. Note Taking
    
15. Interviewing
    
16. Detaining Aircraft
    
17. Police Assistance
    

• Appendix 1 - Flowcharts - Coordinated Enforcement Processes
  
• Appendix 2 - The Legal basis of Regulatory Enforcement
  
• Appendix 3 - Delegations and Exercise of Powers by Delegates
  
• Appendix 4 - Guidance on the term 'fit and proper person'
  

Complete manual

 Therefore Herr Campbell is still given carte blanche to operate by the McComic black letter law dispo - FFS!  

Also passing strange, is that according to the Director's preface McCormick is still officially the DAS

UFB?- Note the version date & the moniker:

Regardless of whether the above is a reckless, indifferent administration error by the Legal Services Division, the fact still remains that Oliver Skidmore-twist condones the evil intent of the former DAS's black letter law dispensation that was lovingly abused & exploited by the likes of Wodger and Herr Campbell.

This would seem to be in direct contradiction of the CASA's adopting a 'Just Culture' and the new 10 point regulatory philosophy - OST Weasel Words to Qantas Group Safety Conference, [b]Sydney – 13 October 2015:[/b]

Employ rational ‘just culture’ principles


For a safety partnership to be sustainable for a longer period of time, there is one more important cog in the wheel we need to embrace and employ — that is the application of just culture principles.


Most people in aviation have heard the term ‘just culture’ - the concept has been around for some years and is used around the globe in aviation and other sectors involved in hazardous activities.


There are many definitions of ‘just culture’, however, generally it is used to describe an approach where if you make an honest error or mistake and report it we should look at ways to educate, train or grow necessary skills so that it does not happen again.

Of course, this doesn’t mean people can or should get away with anything, or that appropriate action taken in the interests of safety may not be necessary. Gross negligence, recklessness, wilful violations or destructive acts are not tolerated and may well be subject to punishment — there is a clear line in the sand.


I believe, the ‘just culture’ approach will enhance availability of information to CASA, which in turn will make our decisions more informed and measured. The advantage of a just culture approach is that it encourages people to be open and accountable about their mistakes, so there is better reporting of errors and the ability to learn from them is enhanced. Fear of punishment doesn’t stop people from making mistakes. But mistakes can be avoided by robust safety systems, training and an overarching commitment by everyone to achieving the best possible safety outcomes.


I will be leading CASA in implementing a just culture approach. We will work to develop a regulatory and operational environment where genuinely honest mistakes are recognised for what they are — opportunities for learning and improvement. CASA’s response will be to understand why the mistakes were made and how we can reduce the likelihood that the same mistakes will occur in the future.


Where the people and organisations involved demonstrate a willingness and ability to address errors and omissions in a responsible and constructive way, CASA will not need to take enforcement action. Certainly no punitive action will be necessary. We will encourage the individuals and organisations involved to identify and understand the factors behind mistakes. We will then support them in their efforts to develop and take the most appropriate course of action to prevent a recurrence of a mistake through further training and education, while effectively minimising risks to safety in the meantime — I consider this approach a fundamental shift from our recent past - we need to recognise that a cultural change in both CASA and industry are required to harvest the real benefits of this concept.


Elements of a just culture approach are already implicit in CASA’s enforcement policy and practice. However, we will be making this commitment clearer and more explicit as part of our overarching approach to regulatory policy and practice. Together we can all work to maintain and improve safety, while fostering trust and promoting accountability.


New Regulatory Philosophy


To complete setting the future direction for CASA, I released another important policy statement last month — CASA’s new regulatory philosophy.


The regulatory philosophy sets out ten key principles to guide and direct the way our organisation will regulate Australian aviation. What I have talked about so far has been captured in this philosophy.


I believe this new regulatory philosophy is an important milestone for both CASA and the aviation community.


There is now a clear and concise set of principles to guide all our actions


Elements of these principles are already reflected in existing policies and practices but the adoption of this regulatory philosophy will sharpen the focus on how we are performing. I am committed to ensuring these principles make a real, positive and lasting difference to the way CASA operates and the way we interact with the aviation community.


I appreciate some people may be wondering how or whether these principles will make a practical change to the way we carry out our regulatory responsibilities. So I invite the aviation community to use CASA’s regulatory philosophy as a benchmark against which our performance can be measured.

MTF...P2

Just pineapples

Be careful OST, the bloke who really runs CAsA, Dr Voodoo, is not a fan of just culture. He is more of the mindset that every single aviator is a criminal who is yet to get caught. He is not a supporter of 'just culture', Dr Voodoo is a fan of 'just pineapples'.

Just refer back to Quadrio, Stan, Butson, and several other high profile cases. Terry from the Golden West Mafia and Gerrard from the Northern Australia mafia are just two examples of CAsA's truthful approach to 'just culture'. MCComick is/was a bully, Wodger and the Witchdoctor and Flyingfiend, all good examples of what CAsA thinks just culture means......

JUST CULTURE MY ASS!

[Peetwo]

It is a bit hard to sort the wheat from the chaff just yet, maybe this dude deserves everything coming to him, however you can see the classic signs of CASA building a case of embuggerance on hearsay, character assassination, combined with very little factual evidence:

Adelaide developer Roostam Sadri faces two years jail for ‘illegally’ flying plane

March 27, 2016 8:46pm
Ken McGregor The Advertiser


Roostam Sadri, left, with his lawyer Michael Abbott, QC.


AN ADELAIDE businessman is facing up to two years jail over allegations he illegally flew a plane and lied in an application for a pilot’s licence.

Roostam Sadri, 70, is being prosecuted by the Civil Aviation Safety Authority, who have charged him with two counts of performing an essential duty without authorisation and one count of knowingly making a false statement in an application.

Court documents seen by The Advertiser allege Sadri, who has headed various South Australian companies and multimillion-dollar developments, had unauthorised control of the plane in return flights from Adelaide to Victoria on January 25, 2014, and January 27, 2014, respectively.

“(Sadri) In South Australia and Victoria did perform a duty essential to the operation of an Australian aircraft during flight time when he did not hold a civil aviation authorisation that was in force and authorised him to perform that duty,” the documents allege.

Under the Civil Aviation Act, Sadri faces a maximum penalty of two years’ jail.

Prosecutors will also allege Sadri, of Wattle Park, lied when he made an application for a student pilot licence at Hobart, on August 4, 2013.

“(He) made a statement, namely that no action had been taken against him in relation to any aviation related licence, certificate, rating or authority by any organisation in an application for a student pilot licence to CASA knowing it was false,” documents allege.

He faces a maximum jail term of one year if found guilty of that offence.

Sadri has not entered an official plea but has indicated he will contest the charges.

He has engaged the services of prominent QC, Michael Abbott.

The matter has been set down for a pre-trial conference if it cannot be resolved beforehand.

    
Oh well at least the dude can afford a decent lawyer, still have to ask is it worth chasing and what was the real risk to aviation safety...
MTF...P2

[crankybastards]

There is a precedent. Toller and a Cessna Caravan.

[Gobbledock]

Sounds like more CAsA bullshit. The poor blokes hand probably brushed the control column while he blew his nose on the first occurrence (should AVMED be advised?) And on the second occasion old mate was probably trying to remove a squashed fly off the windshield and accident accidentally brushed the control column (is that non-approved maintenance?).

It's probably been a while since Flyingfiend and and Dr Voodoo have had a chance to prove their masculinity and prove that they still have dicks (albeit tiny ones).

"Waste of taxpayer money for all"

[Peetwo]

Dr Hoodoo Voodoo warns of future Jabiru embuggerances -  

The last remaining member of the old 'Golden West Mafia' & King of spin & bulldust and IOS 'strict liability' embuggerances, has a warning for all those current & wannabe Jabiru  owners who dare to blatantly aviate a Jabiru without restriction -

CASA lifts limits on Jabiru, with a warning

Jabiru has accused CASA of preparing a ‘biased’ report that has stifled its business.

• Anthony Klan
  
• The Australian
  
• 12:00AM July 29, 2016
  

Journalist
Sydney
https://plus.google.com/110790254144288601738
@Anthony_Klan
[img=0x0]http://pixel.tcog.cp1.news.com.au/track/component/author/382d6e8b83340485d649c6efc054086b/?esi=true&t_product=the-australian&t_template=s3/austemp-article_common/vertical/author/widget&td_bio=false[/img]
The air safety watchdog has warned owners and operators of aircraft with engines built by Queensland manufacturer Jabiru to remain vigilant despite it recently relaxing its restrictions on the aircraft over a spate of ­engine failures.

Earlier this month the Civil Aviation Safety Authority lifted restrictions placed on Jabiru-powered aircraft, including restrictions on flying over populated areas and a requirement passengers sign litigation waivers, on the majority of the Jabiru fleet.

CASA legal affairs managers Jonathan Aleck said that, despite a number of improvements, there were still concerns surrounding Jabiru engines.

“Our concerns were real and demonstrable and not the result of an exclusively CASA assessment, with the Air Traffic Safety Bureau corroborating as well,” Dr Aleck said.
Jabiru had made three modifications to its engines, including a problem with engine “through bolts”, which hold tighter the engine’s crank case where the engine’s pistons are housed.

Dr Aleck said the changes had reduced engine failures but “the problem has not been solved” because it was still unclear precisely what had been causing the failures.

“They (Jabiru) have not been vindicated, the problem has not been solved,” he said.
CASA has come under fire from Jabiru, which has accused it of preparing a “biased” report which has stifled its business.

The Aircraft Owners and ­Pilots Association, which has 2600 members, also targeted CASA over its handling of the matter, saying no other countries had sought to impose flight restrictions of planes with Jabiru engines.

Dr Aleck said CASA’s handling of its concerns with Jabiru engines had been appropriate and reasonable.

It had not sought to ground the fleet until problems were solved, only to require passengers and student pilots, who may be unaware of the possible mechanical problems, made an informed decision before flying in a Jabiru-powered aircraft.

Could someone please get rid of the 19th century practitioner of Hoodoo Voodoo & the fine art of strict liability embuggerances; in this day and age the Doc's philosophy of totalitarianism is no longer appropriate for a supposedly 1st world aviation safety administrator - FDS!  


MTF...P2  

[thorn bird]

P, a tad ironic, but it was interesting to note on the same page of the Australian right next to the above epistle, an article promoting an all new ITALIAN sports aircraft.

On the one hand a promotion of an aircraft from a foreign country, where innovation and enterprise are nurtured and promoted by their government, as opposed to our own regulator and its legal mouthpiece frantically attempting to discredit virtually the last man standing of Australian manufacturers.

Dr?.....such a nice title.... Dr of what exactly? Was it inserted into the article to imply " here is an expert", someone with knowledge and expertise in aviation, whereas in reality anything the good Dr has been involved in regarding aviation has ended up a cluster..ck.

One has to ponder, does a PHD in Papua New Guinea voodoo magic qualify someone as an expert in aviation?

It is a moot point that he is even expert in aviation law.

There are many who would say, he's just another unqualified, incompetent trough dweller and well paid member of the Iron ring that are causing so much damage to our industry and its reputation.

It would be startling if just once, someone from our regulator had something positive to say about our industry.

[Gobbledock]

Aagh yes, good ol Dr Voodoo. Once again, and as he has done for several decades, he uses an opportunity to remind the aviation industry that he and his conga line think all of industry are 'dirty'.

What a f#cking parasite.

[Kharon]

A serpent’s egg Vicar?

Well; I am surprised.  Surprised to see the man famous for greasing the pineapples, but never actually doing the ‘thrusting thereof’ out on a limb, isolated and forced to do his own explaining.  It would be nice to think that the heavy handed, adversarial approach applied to the Jabiru embuggerance heralded the start of the end of the whispering era.  

In every major tale, from Lockhart through to Quadrio, from Pel-Air to Jabiru there is a thread connecting back to the very centre of the spiders web.  You may, if you pay attention, find a similar pattern of syntax through many of the atrocities perpetrated on industry – always from behind the paywall of protection, ever leading back to the one spot, behind the coveted throne.

To quote Aleck, through McConvict “It’s passing strange”; strange to see the now obviously isolated master of smoke and mirrors being quoted, alone, in the ‘press’.  I find it peculiar that no one else was sent in to run interference; or, to obfuscate the facts; or, cover up the cock-up; or even, take the political heat.  If you watch the Estimates or, better still some of the Pel-Air tapes, you will not see the Doc ‘front and centre’ slugging it out with the hostile Senators.  Always to one side of centre, within whispering distance only speaking when the dummy fluffs it’s lines; or the game gets too close for comfort.  Only then is the sibilant, sotto voice of ‘weasel reason’ is heard; quietly bending the argument to support the insupportable. Time and time again the pattern emerges.  The riposte is predictable, often operationally risible, legally tenuous and borderline disingenuous.  This is typified in the Klan interview.

Before we visit that particular pile, remember; the appalling mess made of the ‘Jabiru’ pogrom may be sheeted home directly to the whispering beard. It typifies the general buggering up of every job ever attempted, from the WA debacle to running the LSD the first time around.  Along with the Jabiru horror story, we get a clearly defined picture of the intractable nature of ‘CASA on a mission’, the use of powers and the ability to destroy a viable operation simply because that is ‘the’ default setting.  Now, we believe through direct political pressure, CASA must be seen to change it’s stance.  It is another Aleck driven catastrophe, only on this rare occasion, he must face the questioning of his actions and decisions, alone.  

Nary a mention that the heavy handed approach was not ever meant to be ‘helpful’ or to promote ‘safety’; just a vicious, destructive exercise of power. Read the weasel words, enjoy  the grand masters ‘style’ of subtle embuggerance and note the uncompromising stance of ‘we were and will be correct, in any event’ attitude as it shines out through the dross.

“Earlier this month the Civil Aviation Safety Authority lifted restrictions placed on Jabiru-powered aircraft, including restrictions on flying over populated areas and a requirement passengers sign litigation waivers, on the majority of the Jabiru fleet.”

The dramatic, self glorifying, knee jerk overreaction CASA imposed is deemed farcical; it must go.  Fair enough say the pundits; is Aleck apologetic? No way Jose.  

“CASA legal affairs managers Jonathan Aleck said that, despite a number of improvements, there were still concerns surrounding Jabiru engines.”

Implications – well; if and it’s a big IF there were ‘concerns’ which could be justified; every single Jabiru would be grounded.  That was the planned embuggerance.  But now, a back-flip is required and CASA must rely on the veiled hint of ‘concerns’ while attempting a dignified withdrawal. The ‘mystique master’ at cobbed throttle.

“Our concerns were real and demonstrable and not the result of an exclusively CASA assessment, with the Air Traffic Safety Bureau corroborating as well,” Dr Aleck said.

So real and so demonstrable that every flight ended in disaster?  Bollocks.  Note the careful reference to the ATSB ‘top cover’ and ‘corroboration'.  Hell's bells, Beaker would prostitute his pet cat if CASA wanted it – for a percentage of course.  Beaker’s ATSB has been proven to have zero credibility and yet Aleck will invoke their name to baffle the public ear and add a frail tissue of additional credibility to the thin narrative line.

“Dr Aleck said the changes had reduced engine failures but “the problem has not been solved” because it was still unclear precisely what had been causing the failures.”

Implication – CASA having designed and instituted the changes are keeping a watchful, caring almost paternal eye on their errant charge. Top quality arse covering indeed, nicely spun out to hide the real work done to solve the problems, the money spent to rectify and the talent which made it so.  

“They (Jabiru) have not been vindicated, the problem has not been solved,” he (Aleck) said.”

Ah, the steel fist.  Not - Jabiru working closely with the CASA experts have not completely resolved all of the perceived problems; but ‘we’ are confident enough to lift the restrictions to owners and operators who comply with our safety advisory.  None of that here; “You will remain guilty until you can prove your innocence, even then, we may appeal that decision”, is the implied threat. The difference? Well it’s a threat, but this time whispered by the author, not some hapless mouthpiece.

And so to the grand finale:-

“Dr Aleck said CASA’s handling of its concerns with Jabiru engines had been appropriate and reasonable.”

I’d bet good beer, paid for in coin of the realm that there just may be a frisson of disagreement with that closing remark.

Aye, ‘tis a masterful work, writ by a well practiced hand, executed with the aplomb and familiarity of long, well polished practice.  

Why, man, they did make love to this employment,
They are not near my conscience. Their defeat
Does by their own insinuation grow.
'Tis dangerous when the baser nature comes
Between the pass and fell incensèd points
Of mighty opposites. (Hamlet).

Toot toot.

[crankybastards]

There is a certain irony knowing PNG is the "seat" of the "cargo cult". This concept is now known universally as "trough-ing" in Canberra where a long receptacle is available to encourage taxpayer dollar input to benefit the "tribe".

This snippet of information brought to you by the voodoo hoodoo honcho medical association Soon to take over medical issues and certification.

[Peetwo]

A serpent’s egg Vicar?

Well; I am surprised.  Surprised to see the man famous for greasing the pineapples, but never actually doing the ‘thrusting thereof’ out on a limb, isolated and forced to do his own explaining.  It would be nice to think that the heavy handed, adversarial approach applied to the Jabiru embuggerance heralded the start of the end of the whispering era.  

In every major tale, from Lockhart through to Quadrio, from Pel-Air to Jabiru there is a thread connecting back to the very centre of the spiders web.  You may, if you pay attention, find a similar pattern of syntax through many of the atrocities perpetrated on industry – always from behind the paywall of protection, ever leading back to the one spot, behind the coveted throne.

To quote Aleck, through McConvict “It’s passing strange”; strange to see the now obviously isolated master of smoke and mirrors being quoted, alone, in the ‘press’.  I find it peculiar that no one else was sent in to run interference; or, to obfuscate the facts; or, cover up the cock-up; or even, take the political heat.  If you watch the Estimates or, better still some of the Pel-Air tapes, you will not see the Doc ‘front and centre’ slugging it out with the hostile Senators.  Always to one side of centre, within whispering distance only speaking when the dummy fluffs it’s lines; or the game gets too close for comfort.  Only then is the sibilant, sotto voice of ‘weasel reason’ is heard; quietly bending the argument to support the insupportable. Time and time again the pattern emerges.  The riposte is predictable, often operationally risible, legally tenuous and borderline disingenuous.  This is typified in the Klan interview.

Before we visit that particular pile, remember; the appalling mess made of the ‘Jabiru’ pogrom may be sheeted home directly to the whispering beard. It typifies the general buggering up of every job ever attempted, from the WA debacle to running the LSD the first time around.  Along with the Jabiru horror story, we get a clearly defined picture of the intractable nature of ‘CASA on a mission’, the use of powers and the ability to destroy a viable operation simply because that is ‘the’ default setting.  Now, we believe through direct political pressure, CASA must be seen to change it’s stance.  It is another Aleck driven catastrophe, only on this rare occasion, he must face the questioning of his actions and decisions, alone.  

Nary a mention that the heavy handed approach was not ever meant to be ‘helpful’ or to promote ‘safety’; just a vicious, destructive exercise of power. Read the weasel words, enjoy  the grand masters ‘style’ of subtle embuggerance and note the uncompromising stance of ‘we were and will be correct, in any event’ attitude as it shines out through the dross.

“Earlier this month the Civil Aviation Safety Authority lifted restrictions placed on Jabiru-powered aircraft, including restrictions on flying over populated areas and a requirement passengers sign litigation waivers, on the majority of the Jabiru fleet.”

The dramatic, self glorifying, knee jerk overreaction CASA imposed is deemed farcical; it must go.  Fair enough say the pundits; is Aleck apologetic? No way Jose.  

“CASA legal affairs managers Jonathan Aleck said that, despite a number of improvements, there were still concerns surrounding Jabiru engines.”

Implications – well; if and it’s a big IF there were ‘concerns’ which could be justified; every single Jabiru would be grounded.  That was the planned embuggerance.  But now, a back-flip is required and CASA must rely on the veiled hint of ‘concerns’ while attempting a dignified withdrawal. The ‘mystique master’ at cobbed throttle.

“Our concerns were real and demonstrable and not the result of an exclusively CASA assessment, with the Air Traffic Safety Bureau corroborating as well,” Dr Aleck said.

So real and so demonstrable that every flight ended in disaster?  Bollocks.  Note the careful reference to the ATSB ‘top cover’ and ‘corroboration'.  Hell's bells, Beaker would prostitute his pet cat if CASA wanted it – for a percentage of course.  Beaker’s ATSB has been proven to have zero credibility and yet Aleck will invoke their name to baffle the public ear and add a frail tissue of additional credibility to the thin narrative line.

“Dr Aleck said the changes had reduced engine failures but “the problem has not been solved” because it was still unclear precisely what had been causing the failures.”

Implication – CASA having designed and instituted the changes are keeping a watchful, caring almost paternal eye on their errant charge. Top quality arse covering indeed, nicely spun out to hide the real work done to solve the problems, the money spent to rectify and the talent which made it so.  

“They (Jabiru) have not been vindicated, the problem has not been solved,” he (Aleck) said.”

Ah, the steel fist.  Not - Jabiru working closely with the CASA experts have not completely resolved all of the perceived problems; but ‘we’ are confident enough to lift the restrictions to owners and operators who comply with our safety advisory.  None of that here; “You will remain guilty until you can prove your innocence, even then, we may appeal that decision”, is the implied threat. The difference? Well it’s a threat, but this time whispered by the author, not some hapless mouthpiece.

And so to the grand finale:-

“Dr Aleck said CASA’s handling of its concerns with Jabiru engines had been appropriate and reasonable.”

I’d bet good beer, paid for in coin of the realm that there just may be a frisson of disagreement with that closing remark.

Aye, ‘tis a masterful work, writ by a well practiced hand, executed with the aplomb and familiarity of long, well polished practice.  

Why, man, they did make love to this employment,
They are not near my conscience. Their defeat
Does by their own insinuation grow.
'Tis dangerous when the baser nature comes
Between the pass and fell incensèd points
Of mighty opposites. (Hamlet).

Toot toot.

Excellent post "K" & IMO you totally nail the cynical duplicity in Dr Aleck's statements. Dr Aleck barely conceals the contempt & underlying threats in his dialogue with the Australian's Anthony Klan. However what I find strange is that Anthony Klan would even bother to write such a piece, after all it was only recently that he'd put a line under his Jabiru series of articles - see HERE. So why rehash something which is of limited readership interest?

Maybe like Senator O'Sullivan...

or the longer version here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YPyTIbuvLI8

 ...AK could also have got a sniff of the evil incarnate that emanates from the last of the original GWM & Iron Ring one Jonathon Aleck.    

Gobbles: "..Aagh yes, good ol Dr Voodoo. Once again, and as he has done for several decades, he uses an opportunity to remind the aviation industry that he and his conga line think all of industry are 'dirty'.

What a f#cking parasite..."

Like GD I too believe that Dr Hoodoo is the root of all evil in Aviation House and until such time as this parasite is marched out of the building, there will never be any real cultural change at CASA -

Here's a reminder of the man who whispers and very rarely speaks, with perfect silky smooth, weasel-worded lexology.

First remember this bollocks from the PelAir cover-up?

And more recently from 02:45 on the VARA ADS-B exemption:

Beware the snake in the grass:



MTF...P2

P7 CF Edit - Nicely done P2 & "K"; the video puts it beyond reasonable doubt or appeal.  Weighed, measured and found wanting.  MTF - betcha boots.

[Kharon]

“Will you walk into my parlour?” said the Spider to the Fly,

Against my natural aversion to self induced, projectile vomiting I watched the ‘second’ video P2 dredged up; the one where the MoU is under fire and McComic has fluffed his lines.  The cloud of dust kicked up by the Aleck diatribe is a wonderful demonstration if the dissemblers art.  Fast, confusing, confounding, challenging and; lots of it.  The dust hiding the mirrors, the smoke lost in the torrent of weasel words.   One must wonder why?  What possible motivation would generate that amount of obfuscation?  The Mou itself could, that’s what.  Why? Well, here’s a mud map.

Start at the gate of independent ATSB.  Stroll down memory lane to where BASI aka ATSB could, would and did kick the bejeesus out of CAA aka CASA when a part of the causal chain reflected ‘short-comings’ in the authorities activities.  Lockhart River is as good a place to start as any.  Mick Quinn’s submission to the Pel-Air inquiry mentions a natural tension and occasional stress relief therapy.  Which, in theory, is all well and good, provided that both camps are managed by men of ‘goodwill’ and integrity.  The history of the MoU shows us that ATSB lost the battle for ascendency, politically and financially.  CASA had more ‘legal fire power’ and remain useful for shielding the responsible minister.  For ATSB to retain  even a semblance of their former self, they were obliged to stand in the shadow of the now all powerful CASA.  Here again, while playing second fiddle is unfortunate, men of good will could shrug off the ‘politics’ and still do a great job.  Enter the dragon.

The ego’s and political ‘necessity’ which took CASA to the top of the heap, gave them the sort of power and the big bucks that could not, nor would not countenance criticism of any sort; not from anyone.  That, to this day remains the case; not from the Minister, not from the Senate, not from the Courts, not from the Coroner, not from the ICAO or the FAA and most certainly not from the industry.  The ATSB, before Dolan, still had a little steam left in the boiler and took the occasional, half hearted slap at the vaunting ‘regulator’.  Even this was intolerable to CASA; so the MoU was regenerated, based loosely on the much abused, manipulated principals of the Miller report.  Cherry picked and manipulated (no P2; there’s no CF for guessing by whom), the bastard child was whelped, weened and passed into being; supported by politicians with NFI of anything bar covering their collective beam ends and avoiding thinking.

Today, we still have this anathema underscoring the reporting of accident and incident.  It’s a crippled thing now, totally dependent on life support; it was always a pretty sick ticket anyway; but Dolan administered the final paralysing dose, provided by his mates at CASA. This aberration is what Aleck is determined to protect.   Listen again; listen to the part about “well, we’ll tell you when you have given us too much information”.  The magical forewarning that something CASA have done was part of a causal chain; time to prepare and cover the error is all they need.  Pel-Air demonstrates this perfectly.

It’s all a bit like some lusty young swain saying to a pretty maid – “Trust me; I’ll only pop it in a little way, if you don’t like it, I’ll take it out; promise”.

The MoU needs to be destroyed; in it’s present form, it is an evil plaything of those who would be the ultimate and only authority on matters aeronautical and gardians of the Myths and Legends of ‘Aviation Safety.

Master Hood has been a Casamite; dabbled in airspace and now frolics in the rarefied, if stultifying air of the ATSB top deck; I wonder how long he’ll put up with CASA telling him what happened, why and how the end story will be writ.  No matter, ‘twill be fun to watch, whatever the cards hold as the game unfolds.  Will he tell Aleck to put the MoU where the sun don’t shine –  Can Hoody loose the shackles that bind and restore ATSB to fame and fortune?  Time will, as it always does, tell the tale.  I’m taking bets.

Lame Duck – Evens.

Non Event – 4/1.

Play nice – 5/2.

Status Quo 2/5.

Mummy’s Little Helper – 2/1 odds on.

Smoking Gun 10/1.

Independent Road – 16/1.

I did it my way – 25/1.

Selah.

V1.

“Will you walk into my parlour?” said the Spider to the Fly,
 'Tis the prettiest little parlour that ever you did spy;
  The way into my parlour is up a winding stair,
   And I've a many curious things to show when you are there.” - Mary Howitt.

V last.
And now, dear little children, who may this story read,
To idle, silly, flattering words, I pray you ne'er give heed;
Unto an evil counselor close heart, and ear, and eye,
And take a lesson from this tale of the Spider and the Fly.

[Peetwo]

Q/ Is the ICC beholden to the Hoodoo Voodoo?

ASRR Recommendation 37:

37. The Civil Aviation Safety Authority amends the current Terms of Reference of the Industry Complaints Commissioner so that:

a. the ICC reports directly to the CASA Board
b. no CASA staff are excluded from the ICC’s jurisdiction
c. the ICC will receive complaints that relate to both the merits and the process of matters
d. on merits matters, including aviation medical matters, the ICC is empowered to convene an appropriately constituted review panel, chaired by a CASA non-executive director, to review the decision
e. while all ICC findings are non-binding recommendations, the original decision-maker is required to give reasons to the CASA Board if a recommendation is not followed.   

Of all the Forsyth report recommendations it could be argued that No.37 is the most important for CASA to be compliant with. The significance of an effective ICC was also strongly reiterated at Para 3 ©. in the former Minister Truss SOE to the Board of CASA:

3.        ensure that CASA, in performing its functions:

© considers recommendations by the Industry Complaints Commissioner (ICC) about systemic issues arising from the ICC’s investigations;

Coupled with the requirement from the former Minister for CASA to comply with R37, apparently the new ICC has been very proactive in embracing the principles and improving the effectiveness of his position. Perhaps this improvement in performance is best reflected in the recent figures released by CASA in their 'External Scrutiny' webpage:

Complaints

Complaints-handling mechanisms

The Industry Complaints Commissioner (ICC) offers industry a transparent and accessible mechanism for making complaints about the administrative actions or services provided by CASA staff, delegates or authorised persons.

The ICC reviews the complaints to determine whether the actions or services were wrong, unjust, unlawful, discriminatory or unfair. The ICC operates within governance arrangements that support a complaints-handling process aimed at resolving problems between members of the industry and CASA officers and ensuring that any deficiencies in CASA’s processes and procedures are identified and rectified.

In line with the Government’s response to the ASRR’s recommendation 37, the ICC now reports directly to the CASA Board.

Complaints in 2014–15

In 2014–15, the ICC received 124 complaints, a reduction compared to 2013–14, when 135 complaints were received. Of the complaints received in 2014–15, 75 were investigated by the ICC, 37 were referred to other areas of CASA and 12 complaints about the aviation industry were not within CASA’s jurisdiction.

The number of out-of-jurisdiction complaints decreased significantly (by 71.4 per cent), from 42 in 2013–14 to 12 in 2014–15. This may be attributable, in part, to the ongoing availability of the online aviation information resource centre.

As in previous years, the majority of complaints (64.5 per cent) related to the activities of the Industry Permissions Division (39) and Operations Division (41).

Complaints for the Industry Permissions Division decreased (by 48.7 per cent), from 76 in 2013–14 to 39 in 2014–15. Complaints for the Operations Division remained fairly constant, with 45 complaints in 2013–14 and 41 in 2014–15.

Of the 39 complaints received for the Industry Permissions Division, 18 related to aviation medicine.

Figure 10 shows the complaints received by CASA from 2012–13 to 2014–15 and the categories into which those complaints fell.

Figure 10 Complaints, by category, 2012–13 to 2014–15

Also in line with ASRR recommendation 37 in May the CASA Board released their latest 'Governance Arrangements' for the ICC.

Which is all well and good but apparently there is a component of those governance arrangements that is being arrogantly subverted by the former Associate Director of Aviation Safety but still?? Chair of the Ethics & Conduct Committee and last major proponent of the unofficially recognised CASA Iron Ring.

Para 3.2 of the Board GA for ICC:

3.2 Reports to the Ethics and Conduct Committee

The ICC will prepare a report for each meeting of the E&CC in such form and addressing such matters as are specified from time to time by the Chair of the E&CC.

   
Okay joining the dots, the following is from what I assume ( i.e. only available record) is an un-amended (since 2013) 'Terms of Reference' for the E&CC:

2. Composition

2.1 The E&CC is comprised of six (6) permanent members and one or more non-permanent members.

2.2 The permanent members are:

2.2.1 the Associate Director of Aviation Safety (Chair of the E&CC);

2.2.2 the Deputy Director of Aviation Safety

2.2.3 the Manager, Governance Systems Branch

2.2.4 the Head, People and Performance

2.2.5 the General Counsel; and

2.2.6 the Industry Complaints Commissioner

2.3 Non-permanent members include Executive Manager(s) of the relevant CASA Division(s), having regard to the issues to hand. The E&CC will determine which Executive Managers, if any, should participate as a non-permanent member in respect of any particular matter.

At 2.2.1, the ADAS position does not exist anymore and if Jeff Boyd as Chair of the Board is serious in complying with R37 he needs to appoint a new Chair of the E&CC, who does not have a serious conflict of interest, with a repetitive history of embuggerance on industry such as Dr Aleck...

9.2 Where the E&CC finds a provision of a relevant CASA policy to be irreconcilably inconsistent with a provision of these Terms of Reference or a procedure developed by pursuant to section 6 above, these Terms of Reference shall prevail, subject to any contrary determination by the Director of Aviation Safety.

Mr Boyd while your amending the ToR for the E&CC, you need to get your fellow Board member Ms Stone, without Hoodoo Voodoo's influence, to reconstitute the ToR so that clause 9.2 does not confer ultimate power to the E&CC, rather that power should go to the ICC with the overseeing governance of the Board - just saying...  


MTF...P2

[Kharon]

Embuggerance in Action.

You won’t see any pretty little graphs or trite, nimble, dissembling statements made on the actions of the real ‘power’ which protects, defends and covers over the real evil done by CASA operatives.  Nor will you ever see a report into the workings of, or decisions made by the Ethics Committee, which run the show.  

If and it is a very big IF, there is to be any visible sign of ‘real’ CASA reform, driven by Senate persuasion, an examination, in depth, of some of the decisions and ruling made by this committee is essential.  In fact, it is the only worthwhile ‘inquiry’ to make. The powers and controls this small body has written for their use  are as scary as the total lack of accountability, to anyone, for any of its actions, or lack thereof.  This is as deliberate as it is cynical.

For my sins, I have been crawling about in the dark, dirty places of CASA actions, covered in cobwebs with only a dim candle to light my way, in an attempt to get to the heart of this very subject.  It is journey I wish I’d never made. It will take a while to forget the stench and cleanse the filth.  I am not speaking of the overt, easily defined pressures CASA are bringing on industry to get the volume down and take some of the spotlighted aberrations off stage. That campaign is running at full speed right now, cosy lunches eaten with velvet glove over scaly claw, the inducements and not so subtle threats. But not of the real deal horrors.

You can make a complaint – sure you can; you may be able to emphatically prove, beyond all reasonable doubt that embuggerance occurred; you may even be able to prove that CASA officers acted incorrectly or worse.  The ICC may even confirm that complaint.  So what.  Once all the rigmarole of ICC and meetings and grudging retraction is done, your complaint may – just may find it’s way into the rarefied, complex, convoluted atmosphere of the ‘Board’ and on to the Ethics committee.  That’s it; no more will be heard and worse, nothing further will happen to whoever ‘wronged’ you. In fact you may, if you pay attention and watch very closely see that ‘advancement’ often follows.  I could cite three, very serious, vicious individual cases, which are particularly relevant, and another dozen serious cases, if permission was granted. Should there ever be an inquiry with full protection, these cases will be first and foremost.

Unfortunately, without a suitable platform, silence must be maintained. That, stand alone is a sad, sorry, disgusting statement. There should be, but it won’t happen, be a united push for an inquiry into the workings and ruling of the ‘Ethics’ committee.  The very least acceptable outcome being that the ‘case’, the committee’s pronouncements, rulings and decisions along with the minutes be made public.   “Not in a million” howls the mob.  This I know to be true, for that would implicate the minister and that, boys and girls, just ain’t going to happen.

The IOS believe that the workings of this committee and their output should be made available for scrutiny and independent peer review, if not to the public then at least to the minister.

The ignored and maligned Senate recommendations from Pel-Air and the ASRR provided a good platform for inquiry. IMO, it is time for an ‘in depth’, public examination of just how CASA is actually, in reality run, and by whom.  The minister cannot be held accountable if he is not made aware of the true situation; he cannot possibly know so long as the industry is under threat and the rule of silence prevails.  But, I expect quiet little ‘easements’ and sugar coated enticements serve to help disguise the very real threats.  So not much will change, not for real anyway.

There never was, not ever, such a thing as a free lunch.

He who sups with the devil should have a long spoon.

Selah.

[crankybastards]

Marginally off topic: The ABC reports the NSW Greyhound fiasco is being constitutionally challenged due to activities in other States. One can only guess it's on the basis of free trade between the States which is guaranteed by said Constitution and disadvantages people in NSW from carrying out their trade/ business. This is worth watching because it has similarities with the aviation industry and the CAsA determination to destroy it.

[Peetwo]

BRB assessment of R37 & the E&CC -

Ferryman quote: "..You can make a complaint – sure you can; you may be able to emphatically prove, beyond all reasonable doubt that embuggerance occurred; you may even be able to prove that CASA officers acted incorrectly or worse.  The ICC may even confirm that complaint.  So what.  Once all the rigmarole of ICC and meetings and grudging retraction is done, your complaint may – just may find it’s way into the rarefied, complex, convoluted atmosphere of the ‘Board’ and on to the Ethics committee.  That’s it; no more will be heard and worse, nothing further will happen to whoever ‘wronged’ you. In fact you may, if you pay attention and watch very closely see that ‘advancement’ often follows.  I could cite three, very serious, vicious individual cases, which are particularly relevant, and another dozen serious cases, if permission was granted. Should there ever be an inquiry with full protection, these cases will be first and foremost..."

I've still got the minutes scrawled over the back of a beer coaster somewhere?? But I seem to recall we had a hefty session at the last BRB darts comp - against that top crew from AMSA - on the subject of the ICC and the possible positive effects of the Rev Forsyth's R37 if properly implemented. But then someone drew attention to para 3.2 from the Board's latest missive on the governance procedures for the ICC :

Para 3.2 of the Board GA for ICC:

3.2 Reports to the Ethics and Conduct Committee

The ICC will prepare a report for each meeting of the E&CC in such form and addressing such matters as are specified from time to time by the Chair of the E&CC.

After that it was unanimously agreed that until such time as Jeff Boyd & the Board give Dr Aleck his marching orders and simply disband the E&CC, then any effective implementation of R37 will be null & void and Mr Boyd is not serious in rooting out the evil influence of the CASA Iron Ring...  

P2 question: Why is it not possible for the board itself to act in oversight of the internal ethics and conduct of CASA's employees?

So why did the BRB come to this unanimous decision? 

I will attempt to flesh out some of the BRB examples mentioned where Dr Aleck as the Chair of the E&CC either simply ignored; or firmly embraced ongoing embuggerances . He also agreed and/or set policy as ADAS which would allow black letter law for corrupt CASA officers to carry out duplicitous embuggerances unencumbered by CASA enforcement policies and protocols.

The following reference is from the current version of the CASA Enforcement manual (version 4.4 last revision 17/02/16), which ironically is still counter-signed by the former DAS McCormick and not at all by Skidmore:

Departure from Authorised Policy

Adherence to CASA’s authorised policies will almost always produce an appropriate decision. As said, however, from time to time there will be circumstances in which the strict application of policy may not result in the “preferable” decision. In these cases it may be appropriate (and possibly necessary) to depart from otherwise applicable policy.
Any departure from policy must be justified in order to ensure that it:

• Is genuinely necessary in the interests of fairness
• Does not inappropriately compromise the need for consistent decision- making; and, of course
• Is not in conflict with the interests of safety.

Without fettering a decision-maker’s discretion, it is therefore expected that appropriate consultation will occur before a decision is made that is not the product of the policies and processes set out in this manual. The prescribed consultation process is described below...

It is interesting to note that Dr Aleck is supposed to have been the main architect and original draftee of the EM. Therefore the above 'black letter' dispensation would have at least been agreed to in principle by the former ADAS. Which brings up another conflict of interest, because since that version of the EM was released Dr A has been demoted as ADAS and is now the head of the Legal Services Division. Yet apparently he still remains as the Chair of the E&CC...

Next example comes from the well documented and ongoing embuggerance of Dominic James, which was instigated by the former Sydney/Bankstown Regional Manager Wodger Chambers, while being ably aided & abetted by McComic.







So was Dr Aleck advising Greg Hood in his capacity as the ADAS or in his capacity as the Chair of the Ethics & Conduct Committee?

And if you think the conflict of interest in CASA embuggerances were maybe a thing of the past for Dr Aleck, well think again and refer to my post#56 (above) on the ongoing embuggerance of Jabiru...

or the longer version here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YPyTIbuvLI8

 ...AK could also have got a sniff of the evil incarnate that emanates from the last of the original GWM & Iron Ring one Jonathon Aleck.    

Gobbles: "..Aagh yes, good ol Dr Voodoo. Once again, and as he has done for several decades, he uses an opportunity to remind the aviation industry that he and his conga line think all of industry are 'dirty'.

What a f#cking parasite..."

Like GD I too believe that Dr Hoodoo is the root of all evil in Aviation House and until such time as this parasite is marched out of the building, there will never be any real cultural change at CASA -  

'Ongoing' because if Dr Aleck is left to wander the halls of Aviation House, he will retaliate for being humiliated at Senate Estimates, mark my words...   


TBC...P2