[Peetwo]

The trouble with having a Muppet as a Minister?

From over on the Senate Estimates thread - 

But enough of Watt, how about the current crop of Dept stooges supposedly headed up by the mumbling, condescending Acting Secretary Miss (roll-my-eyes) Spence? - Watch:

 1st Senator Sic'em'REX - All over them... 

2nd Sen Gallagher - trained killer... 

...Except for the adept Mr McFixit the rest were a complete and utter rabble, perhaps the fact there is no Minister with any balls at the helm is having a profound effect? And what is it with there not being a replacement Secretary? I would of thought the Mandarin of the Infrastructure Dept would of been one of the most plum jobs in Can'tberra, so how come it hasn't been filled??  

From that it would seem that not only is there a departmental leadership vacuum but having a Muppet for a Crown Minister is also having a telling effect on our democratic processes. Couple that with the politically paranoid Laborial (bi-partisan) approach to aviation safety and we begin to understand why it is we have a 30+ year roadblock to any real world commonsense reform to both the regulator and the regulations...  

Hitch perfectly highlight this roadblock to democracy in his belated LMH: 

...Last Thursday the senate voted down the Centre Alliance's disallowance motion on CASA's Angel Flight restrictions. Ever since the AGAA summit in Wagga Wagga last year the coalition and opposition has said they will take a bipartisan approach to aviation safety and this vote showed that in action: they banded together to make sure commonsense was beaten down. It was only Nationals Senator Susan McDonald who crossed the floor to vote with the independents, but it needs to be pointed out that the other three Nationals senators didn't stick their hands up for either side. Missing also were some other senators who have history of taking up the cudgels for GA. So, did all these absentees just not vote or were they not in the senate that day? Here's some scurrilous speculation to muse about over coffee. Did those senators prefer to completely abstain over the vote rather than cross the floor and be scalded by the steam coming out of their Leaders' ears? With the who-cares-about-aviation majority from both the left and the right obeying those who pre-selected them, aviation needed greater support from those on the major parties that understand the truth. The loss of this vote gives the impression that only the "lunatic fringe" cares about aviation. The real story is that aviation also has supporters on the lunatic left and the lunatic right; they were just missing on the day...

&..

...Australia has become a nation of secrets, with bureaucratic agencies acting as sentinels to protect themselves and the public images of the politicians. Using the excuse of "security", journalists all over the country are facing a censorship campaign from the government not seen at this level since the end of the Second World War. Even the Freedom of Information Act is being abused as more and more agencies are using obscure excuses allowed in the legislation to refuse to disclose information. I was recently exposed to this as CASA redacted a heap of information in documents supplied to Glen Buckley in his battle with the regulator. In fact, the documents were 100% redacted because CASA considered them subject to legal privilege. This is a very thin excuse designed, I believe, to limit embarrassment to CASA. Apparently it is far more important that we do that than adhere to one of the keystones of democracy: the right of the people to know what there elected representatives and the paid bureaucrats are really doing...

   
Hmm...very well said Hitch and choc frog is in the mail -   

This brings me to the following Oz article which perhaps the political elite Federal Laborial's might pay more attention to than both the 5th estate and their silent majority of constituents...       

Leaders told to lead and stop passing the buck to bureaucrats



Prime Minister Scott Morrison with Jeff Kennett. Picture: Getty images
EXCLUSIVE
GEOFF CHAMBERS
FEDERAL POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT
@Chambersgc
12:00AM OCTOBER 14, 2019
26 COMMENTS

Jeff Kennett and Campbell Newman have called on governments to wrest back control from bureaucrats and take firm action on major decisions, as it emerged that the Morrison government had commissioned and endorsed 72 reviews in the past year.

Analysis of reviews and inquiries supported by the federal government since September last year reveals a range of decisions deferred to departments, agencies and commissions for consideration.

While the number of reviews fall short of the 490 reviews by the Rudd-Gillard governments, there has been public pushback against state leaders, including former NSW premier Barry O’Farrell and Queensland Premier Annastacia Palaszczuk, over their penchant for reviews.

Anthony Albanese has also supported reviews into Labor’s election loss and a probe into the NSW Labor Party office.

On key issues, the government has used reviews to delay decisions, including its review of religious exemptions in anti-discrimination legislation. Attorney-General Christian Porter pushed back delivery of the final report by the Australian Law Reform Commission until December next year.

The list of reviews, some of which have been resolved, include committee inquiries, party reviews and joint reviews with other jurisdictions, and is dominated by probes into the financial system and regulators.
Mr Kennett, a former Victorian premier who implemented major projects and reforms during his seven years in office, said he had a general “dislike and distaste for inquiries and reviews”.

“They have become fashionable, and have in part been used for delaying tactics across the board,” he told The Australian. “It has always been my view that governments were elected to govern and have around them people in the public service independent enough to be able to provide good advice so that governments can make decisions themselves.

“I’m not saying all inquiries are bad. There are reasons to review what’s happening in the community. But I would say 90 per cent of inquiries are simply an excuse by ministers and governments of all political persuasions to fail in exercising their responsibility and passing the buck to bureaucrats and consultants.”

Mr Kennett said there were exceptions, such as the royal commission into child abuse, and that some reviews had “merit and are required”. “The issue is that governments need to understand that once they set up certain inquiries, there will be findings that will mean they must adopt recommendations, and this usually requires extra funds,” he said.

Mr Kennett said it was crucial inquiries be “independent” and have a “purpose” to deliver real ­action. 
“These inquiries are increasingly being used by politicians — regardless of which political side they are on — to not accept responsibility in working with the public service to make decisions,” he said.

Mr Kennett took a shot at regulators for failing to enforce key sectors, including aged care.

Mr Newman — the former Queensland premier who oversaw the transformation of Brisbane’s road network as lord mayor — said governments needed to take charge of bureaucrats.

On the issues of dams, he said action must be taken to overhaul environment laws to ensure water infrastructure could be delivered. He said he wasn’t opposed to reviews but it was crucial for all governments to present vision and drive results. “The bureaucrats work for them. Australians will always back in governments that deliver. They want action. They want things to be done,” Mr Newman said. “It’s time for all politicians to ­realise they need to take control of the bureaucracy because they’ve been elected to run a government and give clear direction to public servants and demand action.”

A Morrison government spokesman said it was “getting on with the job of finding solutions to the problems Australians face. “We’re already acting on all of the reviews we’ve commissioned that have reported back to us tackling everything from ensuring our skills and TAFE sector is helping to boost education outcomes, through to lowering energy costs and the way we support our farmers,”he said.

“We won’t be lectured by Anthony Albanese, who was a frontbencher in the Labor governments that commissioned nearly 500 reviews … He was part of a government that was so starved of ideas for our country they outsourced the job to Kevin Rudd’s 2020 talkfest summit.” The Opposition Leader said the high number of reviews reflected a “do-nothing government with no plan for Australia”. “Whenever Scott Morrison encounters a problem, he gives it the mirror treatment — he looks into it rather than taking genuine ­action,” Mr Albanese told The Australian.

Hint less of this...

 

....and more of this - 

Senator Susan McDonald
@SenMcDonald

Yesterday I voted against new rules being imposed by CASA on charities like Angel Flight. The General Aviation sector is drowning under regulation that is not leading to safer outcomes. Regional Australia needs aviation and I am going in to bat for more practical regulation.

And for a Duck's sake get rid of the Muppet miniscule...


MTF...P2 

[P7_TOM]

Vacuum voco locum omnem in quo corpora sine resistentia movetur.

(Vacuum I call every place in which a body is able to move without resistance).

"Nature abhors a vacuum."

And yet, despite the phrase the ‘Canberra Bubble” it seems that there is a rather large void, filled with ‘nothing’. As requested and required by Aunt Pru; I have (as penance) sat and watched and listened to the entire last Estimates sessions. It was a chore to sit through ‘non aviation’ related session – (beastly). However I did draw one inference – which it seemed, and still seems, feasible. There is a vacuum in leadership.

Public servants and their masters may appear to us as being similar to the antics portrayed  “Yes Minister”: and it may well be so at the ‘top of the heap’. But – big BUT – left alone, to their own devices, public servants cannot, nor will not formulate ‘policy’. For that they depend on the (ahem) leadership of the minister. Without clear direction – for right or wrong – they cannot act. A minister may say – count every chicken dinner in Australia – and they will (regardless of cost). But they neither can nor will decide that counting chicken dinners is a great idea. It may be that a minister is dissuaded or persuaded to do something else – often the case I hear. Often, an alternative may be provided for ministerial ‘consideration’ – a better way; that is advice. But it is up to the incumbent minister to decide on how to count the chickens – hatched, matched or despatched.

It is pitiful to see a bench of quite intelligent, qualified people struggling to provide answers to questions which  should, by rights addressed to the minister responsible. Talk about work place safety – there is little, bar their own ingenuity which will protect those in the direct line of questioning. Unfair? Yes I believe it is and yet, below Mandarin level – all are expendable. All for the want of some sane, constructive attention to matters raised for the minister to address. Disgraceful really; when you think about it.

Some plonker from Gods know where, can’t tie his boot laces – suddenly totally dependent ‘advice’ from those, who, by profession do not want to ‘lead’ the country. Crazy system. Estimates clearly (IMO) defines the total lack of leadership, ministerial detachment and an unhealthy reliance on ‘advice’.

All well and good for general entertainment – but is this any way to run a struggling nation? Where is ‘the leadership’. Where are the leaders? Why have we a half-wit running aviation into the ground?. Questions on Notice – you bet.

Right then; duty done – the board awaits and (shock, horror) my glass in empty. Best remedy is but 10 paces away. Easy when you know how – ain’t it.

[P7_TOM]

Of course one can ‘see’ the point of the question.

1) “Can the minister explain how the NTSB investigating the crash of a B17 in the USA took less than a fortnight to provide the ‘basic’ data, just the plain facts relevant to the event. ATSB in the same amount of time failed to publish the ‘basic’ facts, but managed in less than ten days to blame the whole accident on Angel Flight and pursued that line through to a less than useful conclusion, which still stands today? “

But of interest – today – ATSB provided some figures related to the crux of an on going problem – Visually rated pilots persisting into instrument flight conditions. I note ATSB provide numbers – but little in the way of a ‘cure’. CASA ‘experts’ these days would hardly know the difference; no hope of a practical solution to that one.

Now the minister must respond to the ATSB published numbers, and admit the 'problem' exists. Maybe, his half witted ‘advisor can tell him how the carnage may be stopped. Perhaps not. Industry can – but why should we? Duck ‘em; and when the ‘facts’ outweigh the Pony-Pooh - perhaps then, some 'expert' advice may be needed. One thing is certain – not many of the published  VFR into IMC were Angel Flight jobs {Help needed P2}. Not many at all - despite strident affirmation of ATSB 'statistics' damning AF. Wonder why?

"In the decade from 1 July 2009 to 30 June 2019 the ATSB investigated nine accidents resulting in 21 fatalities where visual flight rules (VFR) pilots inadvertently flew into instrument meteorological conditions (IMC). #VFR into IMC"

https://atsb.gov.au/media/news-items/bot...t-dont-go/

Even so: Angel Flight have had the Beejassus beaten out of them for a thing which was, in no way, shape or form their doing. So why now is ATSB touting numbers?

Resign minister, you are looking more useless everyday that passes, deeper in the muck: or, get some proper expert help. The guy you are using is publicly frying your nuts – an undisguised attempt to gain a nomination as a ‘candidate’ for a government seat perhaps?. Ayup, keeping and feeding your enemies in the tent was never that good an idea. Here is some gratuitous advice – no charge. Add up the number of times you have looked like a Dickhead in front of the aviation community; then ask who guided your inutile thinking and useless words. When a work dog turns sheep killer – there is only one solution.

I don’t give a monkey’s about you – but ‘we’ collectively care about aviation. May I suggest you refer to John Sharpe and his efforts; alongside Morrison. Now there was a thing to be proud of.

“What: my shout; already? – my, how time flies when you’re having fun. Haw, haw, haw!

[Peetwo]

The Mick Mack aviation shitlist continues to grow?

More QoN for the Committee to delve into.

From 'The Australian'

"The Australian Transport Safety Bureau has employed lawyers from the big end of town to threaten editors of the free press in a failed bid to suppress expert critic­ism of their actions, and has banned private-sector contractors from speaking to the media."

"In one FOI refusal, ATSB senior­ officer Colin McNamara said to release the information could damage international ties; while in another, ATSB chief commissioner Greg Hood invoked laws under which bureau officials can be jailed for two years if they provide information to the media."

"When The Australian published analysis from a team led by senior Canadian air crash investigator Larry Vance concluding that the aircraft had been ditched by a pilot, the ATSB hired law firm Minter Ellison to write to the editor­s in a threatening tone asking­ that they “refrain” from publishing that style of article."

"The ATSB banned the leader of the search conducted by Dutch underwater survey firm Fugro, Paul Kennedy, from speaking, and ATSB spokesman Paul Sadler would not say why."

Lots of folk would like those questions answered; along with why government persists in defending a clearly dysfunctional 'Safety Agency'. Are we at a stage where government must begin questioning the actions of both ATSB and CASA? No brainer really - what say you GGGGG Mick Mac. Happy to risk your career betting on these outfits?

Toot - toot.

The LMH: 25 October 2019

"..McDonald looks prepared to put her feet where her mouth is.."

I don't remember anyone in parliament articulating the CASA problem so comprehensively as Senator Susan McDonald did last week. In an eight-minute speech, she said CASA was extraordinarily disconnected from reality, that it doesn't display a desire to act on collaboration or consultation, imposes regulation for the sake of it and imposes regulation that is costly, unreasonable and seeks to strangle aviation. It was cathartic to hear it expressed in the senate in terms that all of aviation can relate to. And McDonald is clearly prepared to back up her words, crossing the floor against the wishes of the Coalition she serves to side with the independents as they tried to have CASA's community service flight regulations disallowed. McDonald looks prepared to put her feet where her mouth is. The question all of this has brought to mind is "what now?" OK, we've a new superhero in the senate, but being a Nationals senator it's her boss who's in charge of CASA and probably arranged for the bipartisan support that sunk the disallowance in the first place. Is Senator McDonald prepared to march into the minister's office, take off her slipper and smack it up and down on his desk in a very Khrushchevian way? That's not likely to happen and could actually be counter-productive. Another option might be to start agitating for more inquiries; also pointless given that so many of them have been ignored or failed to have the desired impact. For all the will of Senators like McDonald and Patrick, the brick wall built by a lack of political will may be too high to climb over and too strong to break through, leaving a long and winding road around the wall as the only path ahead. We can only hope that general aviation has the endurance to make the journey.

McDonald slams CASA over Angel Flight Rejection

25 October 2019
Comments 1 Comment




Senator Susan McDonald addresses the senate over CASA's rejection of the RRAT recommendation on Angel Flight maintenance requirements. (still from Parliament House feed)

Read more at http://www.australianflying.com.au/lates...RayziRV.99

---

Greg Priest • 18 hours ago

Common sense should prevail unfortunately CASA appear as a benevolent dictators based on a belt and braces attitude. There are thousands of car accidents and crashes on our roads but we don't remove cars off the road or increase mandatory vehicle maintenance.

There is an extreme bureaucratic culture in CASA and its time most of the CASA staff be replaced with sensible people having a understanding and consultation culture to meet the objectives.

Finally from the Northern Daily Leader:

---

OCTOBER 24 2019 - 4:26PM

Air safety regulator must consider costs

• Marnie Banger
  
  

The general aviation industry raised concerns about the costs associated with new regulations.

Australia's aviation safety regulator will have to take into account the cost of making rules, under laws which have cleared federal parliament.

The shift comes after the general aviation industry raised concerns about the costs sometimes associated with fresh regulations.

Legislation making the change to the Civil Aviation Safety Authority passed the lower house on Thursday, after clearing the Senate in July.

"The Australian government is very conscious of the challenges faced by small business in Australia, and the need to remove unnecessary costs and regulatory burden," assistant minister Andrew Gee told the chamber on Thursday.

"It is important that we continue to support an aviation industry which is dynamic and sustainable."

Mr Gee insists safety in the industry will always be the most important consideration.

Labor backed the change, believing it strikes the right balance between keeping people safe and address the concerns of the aviation sector.

"While we understand that there will always be groups that say the balance is completely wrong one way or the other ... on balance, we are supporting this bill," Labor MP Catherine King told parliament.

Some commercial pilots had feared the changes could lead to weaker safety standards in favour of profits, but smaller industry players backed the bill because it aims to reduce costs.

Australian Associated Press
From the Hansard:

BILLS

Civil Aviation Amendment Bill 2019

Second Reading

Mr GEE (Calare—Assistant Minister to the Deputy Prime Minister) (16:01): I present the explanatory memorandum to this bill and move:

That this bill be now read a second time.

Australian aviation is an essential part of our economy. It links our regions to our cities, and our cities to the world.

A strong aviation industry requires continuous improvement in the regulatory system which governs it. While Australia has an enviable record in aviation safety—built on a modern regulatory framework—any regulator must continue to keep pace with the industry it regulates.

Some sectors of the general aviation industry are seeking assurance that CASA takes into consideration the economic and cost impacts on industry, and the relative risk environment in the different aviation sectors, when developing broadly applicable aviation safety standards.

The Australian government is very conscious of the challenges faced by small business in Australia and the need to remove unnecessary costs and regulatory burden.

We are committed to aviation safety being the most important consideration in safety regulation and recognise that CASA must be allowed to ensure aviation in Australia is safe and reliable.

Costs and risks are both carefully weighed by CASA when it develops aviation safety standards. The requirements behind this process are spelt out in the government's statement of expectations issued to the CASA board.

Today I introduce into the parliament a bill that incorporates those guiding principles from the government's statement of expectations into the Civil Aviation Act 1988.

The Civil Aviation Amendment Bill is in direct response to the concerns raised by the general aviation industry.

The bill will allow the government to ensure CASA continues to consider the economic and cost impact on individuals, businesses and the community. It will take into account the differing risks posed by those sectors when developing legislative aviation safety standards.

It is important we continue to support an aviation industry that is dynamic and sustainable, with a regulatory system that is responsive and proportionate to risks. The government seeks a level of regulation that maintains the safety of the system without unreasonably restricting innovation and growth.

I commend this bill to the House.

CATHERINE KING (Ballarat) (16:04): The opposition has a very proud record of bipartisanship when it comes to aviation safety. There are, frankly, no margins for error when it comes to aviation safety. As more and more travel, freight movement and recreation is undertaken in our skies, it is important that our aviation safety system keeps people safe. At the same time, Labor understands that the viability of the general aviation industry can be jeopardised by unreasonable regulatory burden.

We understand the importance of the aviation industry in the day-to-day lives of Australians, and this is nowhere more the case than in regional Australia. We also understand that some members of the general aviation sector have raised concerns about red tape and the impact on their operational costs, and the viability of the general aviation sector and jobs in the general aviation industry. Clearly, the regulatory burden that small airline operators in general aviation can carry is vastly different to what can be carried by the larger airlines. If we as legislators don't get that right it could have unintended consequences for the smaller operators and, by extension, regional communities and aviation sector jobs.

We are broadly satisfied that this bill the government has brought forward does take a balanced approach between the need to protect the safety of the travelling public as the pre-eminent operating reason for CASA's existence—it's primary operating order, in essence—and, of course ensuring that red tape does not get in the way of the general aviation sector being viable. This bill responds to concerns from some in the general aviation sector who have been concerned that overregulation is costly for smaller operators. While we understand that there will always be groups who say the balance is completely wrong one way or the other, and that the legislation will never be perfect, on balance we are supporting this bill. We will continue to monitor implementation, however, of these reforms. We do know that this bill does not go as far as some in the general aviation sector would like, but we also know that there are others concerned that any change in the Civil Aviation Act could be seen to water down CASA's primary purpose of ensuring that aviation safety is paramount in their regulatory activities. They are concerned about this bill as well.

We are very strong in and very proud of our track record when it comes to the aviation industry. In government, the now Leader of the Opposition, as transport minister, delivered Australia's first, and only, aviation white paper. One of the stated objectives of that white paper was the maintenance of a safe, efficient and innovative general aviation sector. The white paper provided a comprehensive and balanced framework, bringing together all aspects of aviation policy into a single, coherent and forward-looking statement. Importantly, it included initiatives designed to give the general aviation industry the certainty and incentive to plan and invest for the longer term. To this end, the former Labor government introduced more generous accelerated depreciation rates for aircraft as an incentive for owners to upgrade their aircraft; reduced the number of 24-hour restricted airspace areas from 81 to 15; committed to the continued operation and growth of secondary capital city airports; ensured that the master plans for secondary airports maintained a strong focus on aviation development, not non-aeronautical uses that could compromise future aviation activities; and we lessened the financial burden of regulation on the sector by restricting increases in CASA regulatory service charges to rises in the consumer price index.

These were very important reforms, and I would say to the government that I think there is a distinct lack of coherence today when it does actually come to aviation policy. It may well be time for the government to look, particularly, at the general aviation sector but also at the overall aviation sector in a more comprehensive way once again. Labor will continue to advocate for the aviation sector, to ensure safe and effective aviation services are available to the Australian community.

In conclusion, the opposition will continue to monitor the implementation of the Civil Aviation Amendment Bill 2019 to ensure that safety is not compromised and that the regulatory burden remains manageable for the sector. But with that, we will be supporting this bill.

Question agreed to.

Bill read a second time.

Third Reading

Mr GEE (Calare—Assistant Minister to the Deputy Prime Minister) (16:09): by leave—I move:

That this bill be now read a third time.

Question agreed to.

Bill read a third time.

And so it was without little to no fanfare or honest, open and transparent debate, that the CA Act was amended, all under the guise of the political bi-partisanship, 'self-protection' racket of course...    

---

And now from off the UP an update (from the man himself) to the CASA attempted embuggerance of GlenB...

A stern message from Glen

---

I have been chased out of the industry by the conduct of Mr Brad Lacy, Jason Mc Heyzer, Mr Craig Martin, and Mr Graeme Crawford. Their conduct has left me on the cusp of being declared bankrupt. My actions improved safety, theirs have reduced safety. That is measurable and demonstrable.

Soon i will initiate a legal action to have their conduct tested. That is a fact.

Soon Mr Mathews as Chair of the Board, and Mr Carmody as the CEO will have to make an important decision. Will they continue to stand behind these personnel. If they are aware of their own CASA Regulatory Philosophy, they will not be able to stand behind them. Its that simple. They will lose all credibility. Mr Mathews will tarnish a distinguished career, and Mr Carmodys credibility as the Head of a Government Department will be tarnished at least.

I am here with my laptop on the roof of my borrowed car, and I am parked at Essendon Airport. Drawing on happy memories, and trying desperately to re-energise myself, and my mind drifted to all the wonderful people that work within CASA. Right back to Robyn Maleki, Phil Betts, Nishi, John Costa, the entire CLARC team over the years, the people in licencing, to the Mathew Fords, and the Peter Finches, to Owen Richards, Peter White, Graeme Taberner, Ben Cook, Tim Baker,John Lindsay, Mr John Hanton, Grant Howard, David Gobbitt, Gavin Secombe, Teoh, Bill Cox, Tim Penney, Michael White,Michelle Massey, Harold Bankien, Colin Mc Lachlan,and many others.

I apologise because I know I have missed many, but that is not the point of this post. There are probably well over 800 well intentioned people in that organisation, people that genuinely want to work with industry and conduct themselves in accordance with CASAs own Regulatory Philiosophy. They really want to go into work, and play their part in improving aviation safety, they really do.

There are others, that I have named above that choose not to.

Is that defamation. Absolutely not. I write it to protect all the good people that work within CASA. If I bitch and moan about “CASA” then I only bring harm to them, and that is not my intention.

Mr Carmody simply cannot allocate any more public funds to this "project", it is a clear breech of his obligations under the PGPA Act. As individuals they are welcome to initiate action against me. I relish the opportunity to tell the truth, and will demonstrate that it is in the public interest. I am actually protecting the reputations of the vast majority of CASA personnel.

In fact if all of those named people stepped aside, and others within CASA stepped up, that would be a measurable and demonstrable increase in aviation safety in Australia, and 100% og the General Aviation industry will concur with that statement. I repeat 100%. Every business owner, every regional aero club, every charter business, flying school, engineer, and pilot will concur.

So where to from now. As my legal process begins, I know my legal team will tell me to stop posting, and I will. So what will I be doing.

I will be working diligently in the background, on my well prepared, and well documented case.

I will be seeking employment outside of aviation.,

I will commence an active campaign commencing at the end of next week, to promote myself as an independent candidate for the seat of Chisolm, and I will topple Gladys Liu, at the next opportunity.

One thing I will not be doing. Once this process commences within the next 21 days, I will not back down. A condition of engaging my legal firm, is that there must be no compromises. This must absolutely, go ALL the way to a determination. A settlement is a bribe. This will go to a determination, so we actually know who is right or wrong.

I encourage Mr Carmody to make the right decisions over the next 21 days, or an irreversible path will commence.

The time has arrived. Any person within CASA that is involved in this process, must now display ethics. You must choose to step aside, or be complicit.

Those of you with ethics will say. ""Sorry, but im not comfortable being involved in this process". Its that simple. You will be fully protected by your union, but more importantly, you will be displaying ethics.

I can assure CASA, that if they choose not to sit down with me in the next 21 days. I am going all the way. You cannot bring so much totally unnecessary harm to me and my family, and not be held fully to account. I mean it, I really do.

The only thing that will stop it, is me having a stress induced heart attack. My wife said the other day. "If you have a heart attack, im going inmto CASA, and im going to slap Brad Lacey" You have been warned.

  
And finally back to the ATSB off Twitter: 

OBVIOUS from ATSB THREATENING whistleblower staff that telling truth about #MH370 is not their piority. @cryfortruth so the next question is what are ATSB hiding?

And speaking of coverups... #MH370

"The Australian news asked for internal SSWG memos under the freedom of information act, and the ATSB got their heavy mob lawyers to put on the frighteners." (12.16.18 @ 2:19 pm)

Correct.

Ah yes the Chief Commissioner Greg Hood's threat of criminal prosecution (ie 2 years jail) if any ATSB employee even hinted at talking out of school ie blowing the whistle? (especially those involved in the SSWG &/OR the #MH370 Annex 13 AAI)

TICK...TOCK - times up Minister time to show you Aunty Pru's cards...




MTF...P2 

[P7_TOM]

Just a stray, quiet thought.

It is probably best that I put this as simply and plainly as possible and hope the minister grasps the message. The Glen Buckley case ain’t a shit-storm; not just yet. It could however become a serious matter when Angel Flight, Essendon, MH370 and a couple of other ‘items of interest’ get rolling. The matter of the Forsyth Report and some other ‘smoking guns’ in combination may not, as yet be ringing the tiny alarum bell in political circles; it should be.

Buckley is taking a legal approach – industry is watching; knowing, full well the battle he faces. We would all hope he can win a resounding victory and the government takes note of the outcome. Indeed, it is to be hoped that he manages to get the lid off the can of worms which is the aviation safety culture, as espoused by CASA. He may not; manifold are the ways of the unshriven.

Isolated and standing alone, Buckley’s chances are slim. This could be remedied by a call for everyone, who has – imagined, real or otherwise –complaint  to make a submission to the Senate. Clear the air, examine, in the blaze of jurisprudence, whether or not CASA are acting honourably and for the benefit of the nation.

If it turns out to be so, then those with ‘complaint’ must ‘shut-up’ – end of – no further discussion required.

If it turns out that CASA have been making a pig’s ear of managing aviation; then the government will have just cause to reform and correct the aberrations. With industry expertise and support, to make Australian aviation a thing of national pride again.

What must not; cannot, be allowed to continue is the doubt. Investors, career seekers, business – small and large simply cannot continue where there is doubt in the integrity, actions, expertise and ‘honour’ of the regulator.

There are some big questions out there. They need answers, faith in the integrity of government ability to honestly and openly address the major problems aviation faces, allegedly, sheeted home to the regulator must be addressed. World wide aviation is booming – everywhere – except in Australia. “Why is it not?” Seems like a fair question a reasonable man could expect an answer to.

There is a problem minister – your problem at the moment. The only sure bet is that it ain’t going away. Pretending there isn’t one is foolhardy. Your call.

“Is this glass leaking?”………….

[Peetwo]

Just a stray, quiet thought.

It is probably best that I put this as simply and plainly as possible and hope the minister grasps the message. The Glen Buckley case ain’t a shit-storm; not just yet. It could however become a serious matter when Angel Flight, Essendon, MH370 and a couple of other ‘items of interest’ get rolling. The matter of the Forsyth Report and some other ‘smoking guns’ in combination may not, as yet be ringing the tiny alarum bell in political circles; it should be.

Buckley is taking a legal approach – industry is watching; knowing, full well the battle he faces. We would all hope he can win a resounding victory and the government takes note of the outcome. Indeed, it is to be hoped that he manages to get the lid off the can of worms which is the aviation safety culture, as espoused by CASA. He may not; manifold are the ways of the unshriven.

Isolated and standing alone, Buckley’s chances are slim. This could be remedied by a call for everyone, who has – imagined, real or otherwise –complaint  to make a submission to the Senate. Clear the air, examine, in the blaze of jurisprudence, whether or not CASA are acting honourably and for the benefit of the nation.

If it turns out to be so, then those with ‘complaint’ must ‘shut-up’ – end of – no further discussion required.

If it turns out that CASA have been making a pig’s ear of managing aviation; then the government will have just cause to reform and correct the aberrations. With industry expertise and support, to make Australian aviation a thing of national pride again.

What must not; cannot, be allowed to continue is the doubt. Investors, career seekers, business – small and large simply cannot continue where there is doubt in the integrity, actions, expertise and ‘honour’ of the regulator.

There are some big questions out there. They need answers, faith in the integrity of government ability to honestly and openly address the major problems aviation faces, allegedly, sheeted home to the regulator must be addressed. World wide aviation is booming – everywhere – except in Australia. “Why is it not?” Seems like a fair question a reasonable man could expect an answer to.

There is a problem minister – your problem at the moment. The only sure bet is that it ain’t going away. Pretending there isn’t one is foolhardy. Your call.

“Is this glass leaking?”………….

Yesterday on miniscule Mick Mack's FB page he posted this -   :

---

Michael McCormack MP
Yesterday at 7:51 AM · [url=https://www.facebook.com/pg/MichaelMcCormackMP/posts/?ref=page_internal#][/url]

When the small business sector is healthy, all Australians are better off.
It means more jobs, more choice, better living standards and more vibrant and connected communities.
Wonderful to address the Southport Chamber of Commerce on the Gold Coast with Angie Bell MP - Member for Central Gold Coast.

---

Obviously BM and Mike Smith couldn't let that ride unchallenged...  

 

Benjamin Morgan You’re right... that’s why AOPA Australia has been calling on you to reign in CASA’s over regulation of Australia’s general aviation industry, seeking to stop small businesses from being pushed into closure... But instead of backing small businesses, you have continued to back Big Government!

---

Mike Smith You are right Michael McCormack and there is a lot more you could do within your own portfolio to create more jobs, more choice, better living standards and more vibrant and connected communities. Australia's aviation industry, from light aircraft operation through to the major airlines is suffering under the weight of over regulation and unique Australian regulation. The whole Australian industry is missing out on a global boom starting from pilot training through to airline operations. Australia has for example, excessive and expensive regulation for flying training such that it is dwindling in our country when it is booming in the U.S.A. If you were serious about promoting Australian small business, you might look long and hard at the regulation of flying training and aircraft maintenance in Australia and compare that with how it is done in the U.S.A. where safety standards are arguably better than they are in Australia but with far less restrictive regulation. As well as the cost imposed by the regulator, look also at the cost of ensuring and maintaining compliance. A good place to start might be to review the Forsyth report and ask industry how many of its recommendations have really been implemented.

And on behalf of AP...

Sam Jackson What about the Glen Buckley small general aviation business? On track to become a successful mid-size business that was completely compliant with the civil aviation safety regulations with a tick of approval from CASA and then the next minute it was not?? https://auntypru.com/sbg-27-10-19-the-bu...-blind.../ & https://auntypru.com/glen-buckley-v-civil-aviation.../ 2nd the Benjamin Morgan leadership and proper oversight where your mouth is Minister Senator Susan McDonald Senator Rex Patrick Senator Glenn Sterle

MTF...P2 

[P7_TOM]

Lies, damned lies and statistics.

Usually, because it bores me rigid, I leave to ‘number crunching’ to the boys. But, tonight I happened to notice a couple of ‘interesting’ ones.

No doubt the ‘minister’ has been fed all kind of tales about the rabble on Aunt Pru – told they are insignificant and hardly rate a mention. Not sure, but I notice that once again, AP has topped 3.5 million unique views. Many of those relate to the ‘politics and politicians who keep denying Australian aviation business is dying, while other nations are flourishing. Senate Estimates has attracted 12,600 readers this month; bringing it’s total for the year so far to 84,000 unique readers.

Now the minister has had 5,200 people, this month, who have read of his antics.

McDonowt :50,703 : 55,909 = 5206

Started the year at 14,151 today, his very own forum stands at 55,909: this makes 41, 760 unique reads of his potted history; as it relates to his dreadful management of Aviation. The fellahin are working on a Christmas list of errors, cock-ups and howlers. Should be a hoot – “K” has been mapping it out and the results look to be hilarious.

There’s a lot of folk watching you minister – the scorecard looks grim; you have to consider how you will appear in the New Year – so far it is not shaping up well – on the numbers. Chester was a total flop, but his numbers were a lot better than yours are. Just a friendly note to let you know how you are really being seen in aviation circles. Oh, MH 370 is alive and heading your way -

“Yes please – Uhm, did I leave my darts here?

[Peetwo]

Another couple for the Mick Mack aviation safety shitlist - 

Still catching up on this but from last week in the Oz:

---

Pilot courses on hold during audit



Enrolments in aviation courses with Box Hill Institute are believed to be on hold as the TAFE college responds to an audit by the Australian Skills Quality Authority.

As The Australian revealed last week, 15 former students of Box Hill and Soar Aviation were seeking refunds of their VET loans because they were unhappy with the training they received. That figure has grown to 35 students, including 30 from Melbourne and five from Sydney.

It followed revelations more than 400 students were enrolled in two-year commercial pilots’ licence courses at Box Hill in 2018, which had received $11m in loan payments in return.

Department of Education figures showed only six people had graduated from the diploma course but Soar Aviation CEO Neel Khokhani said the figure was as high as 61. Box Hill CEO Vivienne King confirmed ASQA had audited aviation delivery at the institute and it was currently responding to the audit report as requested.

---

Plus:

Flight training suspended at Soar Aviation



ROBYN IRONSIDE
Follow @ironsider
6:37PM NOVEMBER 3, 2019



Neel Khokhani, CEO of Soar Aviation. Picture: Aaron Francis
Flight training has been temporarily suspended at Australia’s largest pilot academy, Soar Aviation, after training partner Box Hill Institute demanded documentation about its fleet.

The TAFE college informed students of the three-day hiatus in flight training late Friday, saying Box Hill Institute “maintains safety as its top priority”.

It comes as a growing group of current and former students seek a refund of their VET loan money from Box Hill and Soar, based on their claims they did not receive the training they were promised.

Their complaints to Victoria’s Department of Education are now the subject of an inquiry by the Special Investigations Unit.


The Australian Skills Quality Authority, which is the regulatory body for VET loan-related courses, has also been examining the aviation courses provided by Box Hill and Soar.

ASQA delivered its report to the TAFE college last week, and CEO Vivienne King said they were “responding as requested”.

That was followed by the email to students, informing them the college had “requested Soar to suspend flying for BHI students for the next few days”.

“We will provide further information as soon as we can,” read the email from the college’s aviation department.

A further email to students from Soar Aviation, signed by CEO Neel Khokhani, said “Box Hill Institute had requested documentation in relation to our fleet”.

“We will be “pausing flight operations until this is provided,” Mr Khokhani said.

“We will automatically cancel any flights you have booked for Saturday, Sunday and Monday. “You will not be charged for these flights.”

He apologised for any inconvenience and promised to “be in touch soon”.

One of the concerns raised by students was that their training was being conducted in Foxbat recreational aircraft rather than the Cessna 172s they were promised.

The students also complained they were being made to redo training runs repeatedly despite being proficient, at an added cost.

Federal Department of Employment figures show in the first six months of 2019, 289 people were enrolled in the Commercial Pilot’s Licence diploma course at Box Hill at a cost of $7.1m in VET loans.

The data showed the unit of study completion rate was 47.6 per cent.

Flight Training Adelaide had 32 students enrolled at a cost of just under $900,000 in VET student loans, with a 100 per cent completion rate.

Mr Khokhani, 30, was recently named on Australia’s Young Rich List, based on his $66m fortune.

Soar partnered with Box Hill in 2016, and according to Department of Employment data has produced fewer than 20 graduates.

But Mr Khokhani said 61 people had successfully obtained their CPL with many going on to jobs in the aviation industry, including as flight instructors.

---

And from the embuggerance & SBG threads:

Lead Balloon; Respect.

& 

GlenB embuggerance latest - 05/11/19: St Commode email account - WTD??


MTF...P2 

[Peetwo]

Mick Mack on Drone noise? "Nothing to do with me - talk to CASA!" -    

Via ABC News:

---

Google-affiliated drone delivery company clashes with Government over safety and noise concerns

By political reporter Jack Snape

Posted earlier today at 1:09am

[b]PHOTO:[/b] Drone company Wing wants the Federal Government to keep responsibility for aviation laws. (Supplied: Wing)

[b]RELATED STORY:[/b] Blaring TV, busy office or leaf blower: Delivery drone noise found to be 'quite noticeable'
[b]RELATED STORY:[/b] Google-linked drone delivery service accused of profit shifting during world-first Australian trial
[b]RELATED STORY:[/b] 'Jobs for drone pilots' promised, but new robot delivery company is light on local vacancies

The Federal Government's move to dodge responsibility for noise in the emerging drone-delivery sector has been met by opposition from a surprising source — the world's leading drone-delivery company.

Key points:

• Google-linked drone company Wing has rejected a recommendation from the Federal Government to hand responsibility for drone noise to the states
  
  
• Delivery drones are being used to deliver food, coffee and small items in the ACT and Queensland, but their noise has prompted complaints
  
  
• Submissions to the national drone noise review close on Friday
  

An issues paper released as part of a federal drone-noise review recommends the states and territories take on responsibility from the Federal Government for regulating drone noise.

Jonathan Bass, global head of marketing at Wing, rejected this suggestion and linked the issue of noise to the overall aviation-safety regime.

"We think that it could have unintended consequences for safety," he said.

"We believe the Federal Government should regulate anything that occurs in the air space, and noise should be considered as part of other impacts of that review."

Wing's delivery-drone services are currently available to people in the northern suburbs of Canberra and parts of Logan in Queensland.

Fears safety may be secondary priority

Early trials by Wing, part of the Google group of companies, had been plagued by noise complaints from neighbours.

It forced the company to develop a new propeller system that minimises noise for neighbours.

Measured at 69 decibels from 15 metres away, the noise level is equivalent to a loud television, a busy office or a leaf blower.

Wing argues the sound is less intrusive than other neighbourhood noises, which may continue for a longer duration.

[/url]

Bureaucrats [url=https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-09-12/canberra-delivery-drone-noise-levels-revealed/11503262]were originally unaware the Federal Government was responsible for drone noise. A national drone-noise review was commenced earlier this year.

The Federal Government's issues paper suggests states are better placed to address local noise issues.

"Many drones are not like other aircraft, with the ability for drones to operate far closer to people on the ground and operating shorter distances than other aircraft," it states.

"The proximity of drone operations to the community in built-up and residential areas raises the question of whether states/territories or local government are better placed than the Commonwealth Government to regulate drones."

Wing's submission to the review warns: "If noise regulations are developed at a state or local level and isolated from one another, it may place the safety of unmanned aircraft as a secondary priority, which would be inconsistent with the Australian Government's aviation objectives."

Deputy Prime Minister Michael McCormack rejected the suggestion the Federal Government was not taking noise complaints from residents seriously.

"I would urge people if they do have concerns about drones and the noise that they are making to contact their local federal member and indeed, write to the Civil Aviation Safety Authority, and we will obviously look at it," he said.

Wing's submission also cautions against regulating drones based on "societal benefit" — for example whether one is delivering emergency medical supplies — noting cars are not regulated by whether they are taking a doctor to work or a child to school.

Submissions to the national drone noise review close on Friday.

---

Hmm...notice how quick the miniscule withdraws behind the skirts of the CASA Iron Ring - FFS! 


MTF...P2 

[P7_TOM]

Having friends ‘on the land’ and an interest in how well this nation's agriculture and water is being managed; I had to reach for the houseboat bucket when I strayed (curse you P2) onto that ‘Twitter’ thing; and, I saw this:-

https://twitter.com/M_McCormackMP/status...86/video/1

If that don’t beat the band, I don’t know what does. Has this Idiot no shame?

1) Who owns the cotton crop?
2) How much revenue for Australia was generated from that crop?
3) How tax was returned from the sale of that crop?
4) How much water (H2O for the technical crew) was ‘purchased’ to raise the cotton crop?
5) From whom was that water purchased and who benefited from that sale?
6) Was that ‘T’ shirt “made in Australia”? If so by whom and who owns that company?
7) How much of that ‘T’ shirt is actually cotton?
8) Where was the screen printing done?
9) Who paid for that?
10) How was the ‘T’ shirt ordered, by whom and who paid?

Have you no shame at all. The hypocrisy is mind bending.  Question 11  “when will you resign and go away”?

Cry, the beloved country; indeed.

[Peetwo]

Angel Flight embuggerance update 27/11/19: A tale of a captured Minister and a complicit Laborial parliament destroying an industry through sheer bloody ignorance...  

References: https://auntypru.com/sbg-24-11-2019-thre...-fountain/






Plus: https://aopa.com.au/angel-flight-founder...his-wings/

Well done that man.

A good, valuable innings, nicely played. You’d have to take your hat off to man like Bristow and wish him well to enjoy his retirement.

“Mr Bristow set up a remarkable system of linking health professional registrations and referrals between all large city hospitals, to outback clinics, remote area nurses and specialist institutions, as well as a network of essential skilled volunteer pilots and drivers.  All services are free and at no cost to any person needing medical attention or to the government.”

No small achievement, a remarkable one when you consider the work, determination and effort involved stringing all the diverse elements into a cohesive, working system – all voluntary. The energy and dedication required phenomenal.

I wonder what his thoughts must be on the ATSB report into Mt Gambier event and the CASA response to that report? A fellah with the amount of drive, intelligence and determination to set up and run Angel Flight would have to be a little taken aback by it; probably with good reason.

One could understand a reasonable man’s disappointment with a punitive regulatory philosophy. Take the two ‘fatal’ events involving Angel Flight ‘missions’ (I do wish they’d call ‘em something else): both essentially pilot error. Errors made by pilots trained, qualified and licenced under the current system. Both persisted into weather conditions which they were neither trained nor qualified to be operating in; deadly mistakes, made by the pilots; not Angel Flight.

Yet rather than address the ‘core’ issues, CASA prefer to bring in a new rule set, which punishes the many and changes nothing. Why can’t some of the alleged CASA ‘experts’ be sent to work with AF, help draft up some guidelines for the aircrew involved? Simple stuff like weather forecast analysis training; promoting early awareness leading to early notice that it may not be possible to carry out the assigned flight. Or, even a ‘checklist’ in the style of Flight Safety’s CFIT checklist system; which encompasses fatigue, weather, destination and in flight awareness of potential high risk elements. There are lots of things which could be done to foster, promote and reduce potential risk. The ‘rules’ CASA dreamed up do nothing to promote a real safety culture; they just punish those remaining ‘law abiding’ citizens who have not – as yet – made the wrong decision. I call that unfair, unreasonable and counter productive.

Only my opinion of course; but I say a lot of time, money, effort and aggravation has been expended to produce a negative outcome, which will not prevent another Loss of Control (LoC) in instrument only conditions. It will however force underground open reporting and determined addressing of an accident series which has been around for a long, long time. But I digress.

Enjoy your retirement Bill; well done. There may just be a few out in Bush who would second my best wishes. Cheers. (Cue round of applause).....

AOPA Oz - ..Today Angel flight has provided free flights and airport/city specialist drives totaling more than 20 million kilometres.  With in excess of 47,000 fights, carrying over 100,000 rural Australians from every Australian State and Territory, and every age group, Angel Flight continues to grow, ensuring rural people no longer need to drive up to 14 hours each way on dangerous outback roads to obtain medical check-ups and treatment, and for compassionate visits for those who must be close to loved ones in often very difficult situations...

Indeed Bristow should be lorded for his original concept and the tenacity with which he has promoted and grown that original concept...

However the following is an indictment and unfortunately a perfect example of how our democratic processes are being constantly eroded and corrupted by a self-serving, self-preserving bureaucracy scuttling around the protected, sterile, fantasy world inside of the Can'tberra bubble...

To begin the following Govt response to the Senate ATSB performance inquiry was tabled on 19 November while parliament was not sitting:

  Government response presented out of sitting on 19 November 2019.  

This response was also conveniently closeted away inside of the Additional Documents web page associated with the inquiry.

Then yesterday in the Dynamic Red this tabled document was listed for debate under item 13 'Consideration of documents' but was deferred due more important Govt business. Today at item 14 it is listed last on the agenda, so I wouldn't be holding my breath on any debate occurring today...  

Finally here is the disgusting, puerile but typical response from our useless and captured Crown Minister...

---

...The Australian Government welcomes the Senate Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport
Legislation Committee’s report on the inquiry into the Performance of the Australian
Transport Safety Bureau, and in particular its report on the June 2017 crash of a flight
conducted on behalf of Angel Flight Australia (the report).

The Government is pleased that the Committee recognised the expert analysis conducted by
the Australian Transport Safety Bureau (ATSB) in examining the Angel Flight operations.
While the Committee provided comment on whether non-passenger carrying positioning
flights should have been included in the ATSB’s main calculations of risk, the Government
notes the ATSB’s focus on passenger carrying operations is consistent with the
Government’s Statement of Expectations to the agency.

In providing this response to the Committee’s report, the Government reiterates the
importance of the independence of regulatory bodies, such as the Civil Aviation Safety
Authority (CASA). CASA’s independence is set out in the Civil Aviation Safety Act 1988 which
also allows CASA to issue legislative instruments relating to the safety operation and
maintenance of aircraft where it deems necessary. For these reasons, the Government
notes the two recommendations in the report.

The Government is committed to maintaining a safe aviation environment for all
Australians. Passengers, whether fare paying or not, are generally less able to determine the
level of risk involved in the service they are boarding and rely on the Government to ensure
an appropriate level of aviation safety is maintained. The Government supports CASA, as
Australia’s civil aviation safety regulator, using its expertise and professional judgement to
fulfil that responsibility...

Recommendations of the Senate Committee

The Department notes that recommendations 1 and 2 refer to the ‘Civil Aviation
(Commercial Service Flights – Conditions on Flight Crew Licences) Instrument 2019’,
whereas this should read ‘Civil Aviation (Community Service Flights – Conditions on Flight
Crew Licences) Instrument 2019’.

Recommendation One
The committee recommends that the Civil Aviation Safety Authority amend the Civil Aviation
(Commercial Service Flights – Conditions on Flight Crew Licences) Instrument 2019 to remove
the provisions for additional aeroplane maintenance requirements, which are beyond those
required for airworthiness in the general aviation sector.

The Government notes this recommendation.

The CASA view remains that the inclusion of the modest additional aeroplane maintenance
requirements for Community Service Flight (CSF) activities is an appropriate and
proportionate measure to address the identified risk of a high-use private aircraft
undertaking passenger carrying flights.

Recommendation Two
The committee recommends that the Civil Aviation Safety Authority amend the Civil Aviation
(Commercial Service Flights – Conditions on Flight Crew Licences) Instrument 2019 to clarify
what constitutes the 'operating crew' for a community service flight, particularly as this
relates to additional pilots and mentoring arrangements.

The Government notes this recommendation.

CASA advises that the definition of ‘operating crew’ in the Civil Aviation Regulations 1988
already provides for a pilot being mentored on a CSF. Further, the evidence provided by
CASA as part of this Inquiry has clarified this issue sufficiently...

---

God help our ailing GA industry because this miniscule and the Laborial Government/Parliament never will...  


MTF...P2 

[Kharon]

“Air Safety is our prime concern”
 
Why even bother with the pantomime P2 describes below? Why not just admit that the cosy bipartisan deal absolves every politician from any and all responsibility for aviation safety. The fact that it also makes them complicit in every abomination inflicted on the aviation industry need not trouble them. The duckling parliament can’t even agree on the tea to be served or the colour of the toilet paper, yet somehow, miraculously, bipartisan agreement is reached on matters aeronautical, without a whisper of dissention. Ducking remarkable I’d say.  
 
P2 - “[the] following is an indictment and unfortunately a perfect example of how our democratic processes are being constantly eroded and corrupted by a self-serving, self-preserving bureaucracy scuttling around the protected, sterile, fantasy world inside of the Can'tberra bubble...”
 
To begin the following Govt response to the Senate ATSB performance inquiry was tabled on 19 November while parliament was not sitting: 
 
 
Government response presented out of sitting on 19 November 2019. 
 
This response was also conveniently closeted away inside of the Additional Documents web page associated with the inquiry.
 
Then yesterday in the Dynamic Red this tabled document was listed for debate under item 13 'Consideration of documents' but was deferred due more important Govt business. Today at item 14 it is listed last on the agenda, so I wouldn't be holding my breath on any debate occurring today.
 
“Air Safety is our prime concern”  BOLLOCKS.
 
If aviation safety is an ‘important’ concern of government then why has an important Senate ATSB performance inquiry being shuffled to the back of the queue?
 
ATSB and CASA, our very own home grown, expensive ‘safety agencies’, time and again wind up in an ‘inquiry’ of some sort. The last, into Angel Flight highlighting the gross deficiencies in thinking, action and integrity. The cost, in public expenditure of the safety investigation (ATSB) : safety action (CASA); and, Senate inquiry would be a truly large figure. Yet the debate is deemed less important than other business. Shuffled off to the back of the list, until parliament breaks up for the long empty period between now and February.
 
Not that it will make the slightest difference – ‘debate’ is a misnomer. Bipartisan cop out would be a better descriptor. Both sides of parliament complicit in allowing yet another travesty to slither away into the dark recesses of history while ATSB and CASA remain unchallenged regarding one of the most disgusting, underhanded, brainless results in a long history of similar reports and actions.
 
Nowhere near good enough minister; the blood will be on yours and your parliamentary mates bipartisan hands when the results of your negligence and cowardice finally come to the attention of the tax paying, voting public.
 
Aye, a village has lost an idiot and they ain’t looking for him; I wonder why.
 
Toot – toot.

[Peetwo]

“Air Safety is our prime concern”
 
Why even bother with the pantomime P2 describes below? Why not just admit that the cosy bipartisan deal absolves every politician from any and all responsibility for aviation safety. The fact that it also makes them complicit in every abomination inflicted on the aviation industry need not trouble them. The duckling parliament can’t even agree on the tea to be served or the colour of the toilet paper, yet somehow, miraculously, bipartisan agreement is reached on matters aeronautical, without a whisper of dissention. Ducking remarkable I’d say.  
 
P2 - “[the] following is an indictment and unfortunately a perfect example of how our democratic processes are being constantly eroded and corrupted by a self-serving, self-preserving bureaucracy scuttling around the protected, sterile, fantasy world inside of the Can'tberra bubble...”
 
To begin the following Govt response to the Senate ATSB performance inquiry was tabled on 19 November while parliament was not sitting: 
 
 
Government response presented out of sitting on 19 November 2019. 
 
This response was also conveniently closeted away inside of the Additional Documents web page associated with the inquiry.
 
Then yesterday in the Dynamic Red this tabled document was listed for debate under item 13 'Consideration of documents' but was deferred due more important Govt business. Today at item 14 it is listed last on the agenda, so I wouldn't be holding my breath on any debate occurring today.
 
“Air Safety is our prime concern”  BOLLOCKS.
 
If aviation safety is an ‘important’ concern of government then why has an important Senate ATSB performance inquiry being shuffled to the back of the queue?
 
ATSB and CASA, our very own home grown, expensive ‘safety agencies’, time and again wind up in an ‘inquiry’ of some sort. The last, into Angel Flight highlighting the gross deficiencies in thinking, action and integrity. The cost, in public expenditure of the safety investigation (ATSB) : safety action (CASA); and, Senate inquiry would be a truly large figure. Yet the debate is deemed less important than other business. Shuffled off to the back of the list, until parliament breaks up for the long empty period between now and February.
 
Not that it will make the slightest difference – ‘debate’ is a misnomer. Bipartisan cop out would be a better descriptor. Both sides of parliament complicit in allowing yet another travesty to slither away into the dark recesses of history while ATSB and CASA remain unchallenged regarding one of the most disgusting, underhanded, brainless results in a long history of similar reports and actions.
 
Nowhere near good enough minister; the blood will be on yours and your parliamentary mates bipartisan hands when the results of your negligence and cowardice finally come to the attention of the tax paying, voting public.
 
Aye, a village has lost an idiot and they ain’t looking for him; I wonder why.
 
Toot – toot.

Nailed it "K", however I hate to say it but it actually got worse yesterday in the Senate chamber(pot)....

Courtesy of Youtube here is the segment of concern:

And my desciption with Thorny and the "K" posts tagged:

Yesterday without even a whimper the Australian Senate delivered yet another telling blow to an ailing General aviation industry by conceding to the pointless and expensive bureaucratic (CASA/ATSB) inflicted embuggerance of Angel Flight.

Thornbird: "The Government is committed to maintaining a safe aviation environment for all
Australians." https://auntypru.com/forum/showthread.ph...5#pid10825
&..
Kharon; “Air Safety is our prime concern” https://auntypru.com/forum/showthread.ph...7#pid10827

Ref: https://auntypru.com/sbg-20-10-19-the-vo...ilderness/



Hmmm...and where was 'Sic-em-REX' and the "the voice of one crying in the wilderness"??

MTF...P2

[P7_TOM]

And; they get paid, for this?

I am truly beginning to believe that both parliamentary party leaders, under advice from the mandarins are deliberately, with foreknowledge, side stepping the steaming piles of Pony-pooh laying about the ‘corridors of power’. IMO ‘they know’ just what a mess the air safety management and support systems is really in; but dare not acknowledge it. The ‘red face’ brigade, stretching back a decade or two would be horrified if their bipartisan, blind eye, reliance on expert advice and the constant stream of ‘kool-aide’ being fed to them from the “safety agencies” turned out to be a dose bullshit to baffle brains.

It is so easy to keep paying the protection money demanded, dodge the bullets, go ‘bipartisan’ and send out endless condolences to the aggrieved. “Our ‘expert advice’ is::::

I would like to know how many sitting members even read the Angel Flight reports and Hansard from the Angel Flight fiasco; let alone read and understood the rubbish ATSB presented and the lunacy of the CASA response and understood it. Not too many I’d bet. The greatest lie and inexcusable response “Oh, CASA did it, they are the experts and they must be right.

“Air Safety is our prime concern” - BOLLOCKS!!

For the deaf, the dumb and the blind :

[Peetwo]

And; they get paid, for this?

I am truly beginning to believe that both parliamentary party leaders, under advice from the mandarins are deliberately, with foreknowledge, side stepping the steaming piles of Pony-pooh laying about the ‘corridors of power’. IMO ‘they know’ just what a mess the air safety management and support systems is really in; but dare not acknowledge it. The ‘red face’ brigade, stretching back a decade or two would be horrified if their bipartisan, blind eye, reliance on expert advice and the constant stream of ‘kool-aide’ being fed to them from the “safety agencies” turned out to be a dose bullshit to baffle brains.

It is so easy to keep paying the protection money demanded, dodge the bullets, go ‘bipartisan’ and send out endless condolences to the aggrieved. “Our ‘expert advice’ is::::

I would like to know how many sitting members even read the Angel Flight reports and Hansard from the Angel Flight fiasco; let alone read and understood the rubbish ATSB presented and the lunacy of the CASA response and understood it. Not too many I’d bet. The greatest lie and inexcusable response “Oh, CASA did it, they are the experts and they must be right.

“Air Safety is our prime concern” - BOLLOCKS!!

For the deaf, the dumb and the blind :

P7 asked: And; they get paid, for this? - Yep and the rort has been going on for how long??

Since this is on the useless NFI miniscule's thread here is a M&M post from a slight step back in time with words of wisdom at the end from none other than Sandy...

 

McCormack’s rise shows paucity of talent within politics



New Deputy Prime Minister and new Nationals leader Michael McCormack in his office at Parliament House in Canberra. Picture: Kym Smith

The Australian12:00AM February 27, 2018



DENNIS SHANAHAN
POLITICAL EDITOR Canberra

When the first Abbott government ministry was named after the Coalition’s election victory in 2013, the last person listed in ­descending order of importance was Nationals MP Michael ­McCormack, named as the “parliamentary secretary to the minister for finance”.

That was less than five years ago, and yesterday the former newspaper editor and MP for Riverina in southwest NSW vaulted to No 2 on the ministerial list as Deputy Prime Minister and ­Nationals leader.

Looking like a vacuum in the space left by the larger-than-life Barnaby Joyce, just eight years after entering parliament, the see-through McCormack has become Deputy Prime Minister and the man to hold the reins when Malcolm Turnbull is absent.

But this is not because of some meteoric rise or undeniable brilliance that has pushed McCormack to the top of his party and into the most senior and secret councils of Australian government; it’s a result of paucity of ­talent within the Nationals and, unfortunately, a symptom of a wider diminishing experience and talent in federal politics.

The churn of leaders, ministers and MPs on all sides since the fall of the Howard government and the beginning of a dismal decade of political power plays and ­voracious publicity has dramatically reduced the experience of our federal parliamentarians and the quality of government.

There are now only four ­Coalition ministers with experience from the Howard government, all Liberals: Turnbull, Julie Bishop, Christopher Pyne and Peter Dutton. There are only 12, including those four, from the first Abbott ministry of 2013 in frontline positions. The other eight surviving Abbott ministers are Nigel Scullion (the only National), Greg Hunt, Scott Morrison, Mathias Cormann, Mitch Fifield, Marise Payne, Michael Keenan and Michaelia Cash.



In 2013, even after seven years in opposition, Tony Abbott, who had become leader of the Liberal Party after 15 years in parliament and prime minister after 19 years’ service, named 22 ministers and parliamentary secretaries who had served under John Howard.

After running on a record of “experience” in government and demanding Labor give government “back to the adults” in 2013 the Coalition is looking decidedly short of long-term experience.

Since Turnbull became Prime Minister there are or have been sitting on the backbench a former prime minister, a former deputy prime minister, a former treasurer and more than a dozen former senior and junior ministers.

The biggest single loss of ­Coalition ministerial experience was after the Turnbull removal of Abbott as prime minister in 2015 when Abbott, Joe Hockey, Kevin Andrews, Eric Abetz, Ian Macfarlane and Bruce Bilson — all Howard ministers — were dumped to the backbench.

Joyce’s move yesterday from the frontbench to the cockies’ corner of the Nationals backbench in the House of Representatives is just another bleeding of political talent and experience from the Coalition and the body politic.



New Nationals leader Michael McCormack in question time yesterday. Picture: Gary Ramage

But McCormack’s rise to ­leader after less than 10 years in parliament and five years on the frontbench is not an aberration: Joyce himself was elected in 2016 as ­Nationals leader less than 10 years after entering the Senate and less than three years after being elected to the House of Representatives. In contrast his predecessor, Warren Truss, was in parliament from 1990 and elected leader only 17 years later.

Instead of long-term ministries building experience in governance, the turmoil of leadership challenges creates a ministerial turnover that leaves governments in exile sitting on the backbench and ripe for retirement and further loss of experience.

On the Labor side, Mark ­Latham, Kevin Rudd, Julia Gillard and Bill Shorten were elected Labor leader with barely 10 years’ experience or much less, and with virtually no experienced ministers to call upon.

Rudd, who joined parliament the same year as Gillard, became prime minister in less than 10 years, and Gillard replaced him when she had barely more than 10 years’ ­experience.

When Rudd was elected in 2007 — after Labor was in opposition for more than 11 years — there were only two MPs with any experience in the former Keating government he named in his first ministry: John Faulkner and ­Warren Snowdon.

Today, after five years in opposition, there are 15 members of the Labor frontbench, including Shorten, who can boast relatively long ministerial experience in the Rudd and Gillard governments, including Anthony Albanese, a former deputy prime minister, Tanya Plibersek, Penny Wong, Chris Bowen, as a former ­treasurer, Tony Burke, Richard Marles, Joel Fitzgibbon, Mark Butler, Mark Dreyfus, Jenny Macklin, Brendan O’Connor, Julie Collins, Catherine King, Jason Clare and Ed Husic and Shayne Neumann as parliamentary secretaries.

It is now Labor’s strategy to portray the Turnbull government as being in chaos, divided and unable to govern as ministers are pushed aside or forced to resign.

Sandy as ususal never lets an opportunity go by...

Alexander

To Dennis’s contention that Ministers lack experience one could add that they have deliberately distanced themselves from the responsibilities of government. As just one example, but a common practice from both sides of politics, Mr. Albanese relinquished control of the Australian Transport Safety Bureau by turning it into yet another statutory Commonwealth body. In a long winded speech (mid 2009) he explained that the move would eliminate any political interference and that the ATSB’s independence would ensure a high standard of work, reporting as it does particularly on aviation safety. Many would now question it’s performance since ‘independence’, not least being it’s tarnished report into the ditching of a Rex subsidiary aircraft at Norfolk Island.

This move away from Ministerial responsibility was again recently highlighted by Barnaby Joyce attempting to excuse the movement to his electorate from Canberra of a Commonwealth bureaucracy, another independent statutory body, Not his business says Barnaby, being independent it goes and presumably does just about whatever it feels like.

You name them, Meat Australia, AirServices (OneSky fiasco), the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (ruination of General Aviation) and numerous others all paying their CEOs more than the Minister that once had direct responsibility for their functions. We have to pay commercial rates say they.

Even the basic function of Parliamentary representatives has been severely downgraded, the proliferation of Ombudsmen in place of your MP. The theatrical Parliamentary farce known as Question Time another example. Dennis is quite right, our democracy is diminished, the trend is clear and has been for many years. Alex in the Rises.

http://fyre.it/EePqRFQg.4

P2 comment: The 2009 Albo speech (and context) mentioned by Sandy features in this 'dots and dashes' post -  The beginning of the end for the ATSB

"...Enhanced independence will result from a combination of factors. The ATSB will alone be responsible for administering the functions of the Transport Safety Investigation Act 2003 and exercising its investigation powers. There will be the capacity for the Minister to provide notice of his or her views on the strategic direction for the ATSB, to which the ATSB must have regard. However, other than the ability for the Minister to require the ATSB to investigate a particular matter, the ATSB will not be subject to a direction from anyone with respect to the exercise of its powers and functions.


The creation of a statutory agency will also give the ATSB discretion and responsibilities in its own right under the Public Service Act 1999 and Financial Management and Accountability Act 1997 with respect to the management of its staff and resources. The ATSB will, therefore, have operational independence with respect to the exercise of its investigation powers and functional independence with respect to the administration of its resources..."

Gotta ask yourself when was the last time that we had elected political leaders/PMs/DPMs/Ministers/Statesman that actually did what they are elected to do and properly over-sighted the machinations of Government? 



MTF...P2    

Ps Here's a thought was Mick Mack the bureaucracy's and Iron Ring pick for a puppet minister? Did the thought of mad old Barnaby possibly exposing their corrupt status quo was just too much of a risk? 

[P7_TOM]

First and foremost in any modern political mind is “me”. Lawyers, journalists and other such riff-raff all competing for their slot in the great trough. Statesmen, leaders and even humble Mp’s who used to be there out of a commitment to make sure Australia and it’s people had the ‘best deal’ their tax dollar could provide; now legend. This is not what we have now. Every single one of our 'great’ statesmen and politicians; of whatever stripe had only one goal; to advance Australia fair. It seems to me this is no longer the case, the land is governed by those who seek only to advance their own position, personal wealth and ego, based on little more to offer than their personality. McCormack is such a creature; one of a long list, too busy self promoting, playing at ‘politics’ as they see ‘em rather than getting stuck in and dragging this once proud, free, rich, democratic nation out of the ‘dependency’ on minerals boom and bust; and, selling off large lumps of the country to other nations; and, selling off our national aerodromes to developers and the like, just so they may gain enough credit to be re-elected.

It's not even open corruption (baksheesh) – it’s a sly, sneaky, underhanded sort of weasel way of feathering their own nest (or power base and funding) through the under the table type of backhander; in votes or money, which is disabling and denigrating this wide brown land. I only have one vote – I cannot change one iota of the ‘way thing’s are’ – but my disgust is my own and; thank the gods, I can, for the moment at least, express that as freely as I please.

McCormack is a living, breathing, trough dwelling parasitic example. A leach on this nation's life blood. His lasting legacy to this nation will be the destruction of aviation enterprise, innovation, investment and freedom. Keep him in government if you must – but FDS – get him away from matters aeronautical, before he seriously ducks it up to an unrecoverable tragedy. (A) He’s brainless; (B) He is totally ‘captured’ by CASA and ATSB – they own him. © His only advice comes directly from St Commode, the runt of the St Commode litter and an expert in trough feeding, as per the established Canberra hierarchy tradition.

OTT?– Probably; but, ye gods I am so weary of seeing this nation sold off, buggered up and mislead by ‘advertising’ for snake oil salesmen, which ‘the 7 morning show’ would kill for. Well -

My two bob. I earned it – spent as pleased me best. End of; and Yus, ‘us ‘as ‘ad a couple and struggling to keep ‘em down. Who mentioned McCormack anyway?

[Peetwo]

Shame it is then for Mick Mack - 

The word is out Mick Mack is nothing but a spineless, self-serving pollywaffle...  

Via the New Daily:

---

‘Grow some spine’: Furious farmers lash Deputy PM over drought




Farmers at the Convoy to Canberra protest at Parliament House on Monday. Photo: AAP

Furious farmers have berated Deputy PM Michael McCormack in Canberra, accusing him of doing too little to support his farming constituents.

“Show some passion. Where’s your passion?” one farmer, named by The Australian as John Russell from Kyabram, demanded of the Nationals leader in an early face-off on Tuesday.

Mr Russell is among NSW and Victorian farmers in Canberra for a second day of protest at the government’s handling of the water crisis. They are calling for the Murray-Darling Basin Plan to be dumped.

Organisers said there were more than 2000 people at the Convoy to Canberra demonstration in front of Parliament House – and 110 trucks.

“You could walk up there tomorrow and tell the Liberal Party ‘we’re crossing the floor’ unless they do something. The National Party is not going to exist after the next election unless you grow some spine and stand up,” Mr Russell said.

“I haven’t seen any passion from you. You’re like a poker player. Get up there and say ‘this is not f—ing good enough – get angry!

Mr McCormack responded: “I’m pretty passionate, don’t worry about that.”

But Mr Russell said the Nationals leader wasn’t showing enough support for farmers.

“You’re useless. Barnaby [Joyce] was the only bloke who came down here yesterday. He had some spine,” he said.

Mikearoo

@mpbowers


John Russell from Kyabram tries to fire up deputy PM Michael McCormack at the Convoy to Canberra protest on the front lawns of Parliament House this morning “Where’s the passion?” @knausc @murpharoo @AmyRemeikis #PoliticsLive

The confrontation came early on Tuesday after the Nationals leader went out to greet the convoy.

The group had also protested on Monday – before heading into parliament, where one man was swiftly ejected from the public gallery of the Senate after lobbing a barrage of abuse at Nationals deputy leader Bridget McKenzie. Others launching more verbal volleys toward government senators before storming out of the chamber.

On Tuesday, Mr Russell told the Deputy PM the drought was no excuse for the water crisis facing many farmers.

“Don’t give us that bulls–t. We’ve lived with that for all our life. We know what rain is, and we know what irrigation water is,” he said.

“But when it rains, there’s always more water,” Mr McCormack said.

“Yes we understand that. No, that bulls–t doesn’t wash,” Mr Russell said.

The pair also argued about water buybacks – with Mr Russell saying they should never have happened.

“I appreciate that. We weren’t in government when that happened,” Mr McCormack said.

On Monday night, Convoy to Canberra protesters met Water Minister David Littleproud and Environment Minister Sussan Ley.

Later on Tuesday, the Morrison government ordered an investigation into the operation of the Murray-Darling Basin Plan, to report in March next year.

Mr Littleproud said he had listened to the concerns of farmers.

Alson on Tuesday, NSW Deputy Premier John Barilaro and Water Minister Melinda Pavey demanded changes to plan. Mr Barilaro repeated his threat to walk away from the basin plan, saying NSW had no more water to give and could not stand by it in its current form.

A co-organiser of Convoy to Canberra, Barooga farmer Carly Marriott, said the basin plan had devastated her community.

“This is affecting every single person in our community, and we might not be the majority but God we’re important. And you need us,” she told the ABC.

The man responsible for implementing the plan acknowledges it is causing significant economic pain to some farmers.

Murray-Darling Basin Authority chief executive Phillip Glyde said there was no one the drought hadn’t touched, with bushfires, water shortages and native animals feeling the brunt.

“Pausing or ditching the Basin Plan wouldn’t turn the taps or pumps on – and it wouldn’t alleviate the pain being felt in these communities during drought,” he said.

“In these times, remaining committed to restoring the health of the basin is important. When times are tough, available water is stretched and everyone wants more.”

-with agencies

---

Well that worked out well for Mick Mack..err NOT! Almost wish I was there...  

MTF...P2 

[P7_TOM]

Uhmm - seems like it's early Spring cleaning. Gov't trying to get ahead of the rot; too late - far too late. Across the board through 'bipartisan' and complicit ignorance - the country is in a mess. Two years to fix ASA, ATSB and CASA: dream on. The rest of the supposed "public servants" ain't any better. 'Government' of a farm or an aircraft means exactly the same thing. So why are our 'politico's' not doing their job? Next stop for the Gravy train is at my houseboat dock - look forward to seeing y'all. Don't forget your two pennies. No pennies - no passage; it is that simple.

ABC - nearly onto the great scam of 'governance'.

Just in case you forgot.

[Peetwo]

Democracy Broken - Part II

Angel Flight embuggerance update 27/11/19: A tale of a captured Minister and a complicit Laborial parliament destroying an industry through sheer bloody ignorance...  

References: https://auntypru.com/sbg-24-11-2019-thre...-fountain/




However the following is an indictment and unfortunately a perfect example of how our democratic processes are being constantly eroded and corrupted by a self-serving, self-preserving bureaucracy scuttling around the protected, sterile, fantasy world inside of the Can'tberra bubble...

To begin the following Govt response to the Senate ATSB performance inquiry was tabled on 19 November while parliament was not sitting:

  Government response presented out of sitting on 19 November 2019.  

This response was also conveniently closeted away inside of the Additional Documents web page associated with the inquiry.

Then yesterday in the Dynamic Red this tabled document was listed for debate under item 13 'Consideration of documents' but was deferred due more important Govt business. Today at item 14 it is listed last on the agenda, so I wouldn't be holding my breath on any debate occurring today...  

Finally here is the disgusting, puerile but typical response from our useless and captured Crown Minister...

---

...The Australian Government welcomes the Senate Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport
Legislation Committee’s report on the inquiry into the Performance of the Australian
Transport Safety Bureau, and in particular its report on the June 2017 crash of a flight
conducted on behalf of Angel Flight Australia (the report).

The Government is pleased that the Committee recognised the expert analysis conducted by
the Australian Transport Safety Bureau (ATSB) in examining the Angel Flight operations.
While the Committee provided comment on whether non-passenger carrying positioning
flights should have been included in the ATSB’s main calculations of risk, the Government
notes the ATSB’s focus on passenger carrying operations is consistent with the
Government’s Statement of Expectations to the agency.

In providing this response to the Committee’s report, the Government reiterates the
importance of the independence of regulatory bodies, such as the Civil Aviation Safety
Authority (CASA). CASA’s independence is set out in the Civil Aviation Safety Act 1988 which
also allows CASA to issue legislative instruments relating to the safety operation and
maintenance of aircraft where it deems necessary. For these reasons, the Government
notes the two recommendations in the report.

The Government is committed to maintaining a safe aviation environment for all
Australians. Passengers, whether fare paying or not, are generally less able to determine the
level of risk involved in the service they are boarding and rely on the Government to ensure
an appropriate level of aviation safety is maintained. The Government supports CASA, as
Australia’s civil aviation safety regulator, using its expertise and professional judgement to
fulfil that responsibility...

Recommendations of the Senate Committee

The Department notes that recommendations 1 and 2 refer to the ‘Civil Aviation
(Commercial Service Flights – Conditions on Flight Crew Licences) Instrument 2019’,
whereas this should read ‘Civil Aviation (Community Service Flights – Conditions on Flight
Crew Licences) Instrument 2019’.

Recommendation One
The committee recommends that the Civil Aviation Safety Authority amend the Civil Aviation
(Commercial Service Flights – Conditions on Flight Crew Licences) Instrument 2019 to remove
the provisions for additional aeroplane maintenance requirements, which are beyond those
required for airworthiness in the general aviation sector.

The Government notes this recommendation.

The CASA view remains that the inclusion of the modest additional aeroplane maintenance
requirements for Community Service Flight (CSF) activities is an appropriate and
proportionate measure to address the identified risk of a high-use private aircraft
undertaking passenger carrying flights.

Recommendation Two
The committee recommends that the Civil Aviation Safety Authority amend the Civil Aviation
(Commercial Service Flights – Conditions on Flight Crew Licences) Instrument 2019 to clarify
what constitutes the 'operating crew' for a community service flight, particularly as this
relates to additional pilots and mentoring arrangements.

The Government notes this recommendation.

CASA advises that the definition of ‘operating crew’ in the Civil Aviation Regulations 1988
already provides for a pilot being mentored on a CSF. Further, the evidence provided by
CASA as part of this Inquiry has clarified this issue sufficiently...

---

God help our ailing GA industry because this miniscule and the Laborial Government/Parliament never will...  


MTF...P2 

First and foremost in any modern political mind is “me”. Lawyers, journalists and other such riff-raff all competing for their slot in the great trough. Statesmen, leaders and even humble Mp’s who used to be there out of a commitment to make sure Australia and it’s people had the ‘best deal’ their tax dollar could provide; now legend. This is not what we have now. Every single one of our 'great’ statesmen and politicians; of whatever stripe had only one goal; to advance Australia fair. It seems to me this is no longer the case, the land is governed by those who seek only to advance their own position, personal wealth and ego, based on little more to offer than their personality. McCormack is such a creature; one of a long list, too busy self promoting, playing at ‘politics’ as they see ‘em rather than getting stuck in and dragging this once proud, free, rich, democratic nation out of the ‘dependency’ on minerals boom and bust; and, selling off large lumps of the country to other nations; and, selling off our national aerodromes to developers and the like, just so they may gain enough credit to be re-elected.

It's not even open corruption (baksheesh) – it’s a sly, sneaky, underhanded sort of weasel way of feathering their own nest (or power base and funding) through the under the table type of backhander; in votes or money, which is disabling and denigrating this wide brown land. I only have one vote – I cannot change one iota of the ‘way thing’s are’ – but my disgust is my own and; thank the gods, I can, for the moment at least, express that as freely as I please.

McCormack is a living, breathing, trough dwelling parasitic example. A leach on this nation's life blood. His lasting legacy to this nation will be the destruction of aviation enterprise, innovation, investment and freedom. Keep him in government if you must – but FDS – get him away from matters aeronautical, before he seriously ducks it up to an unrecoverable tragedy. (A) He’s brainless; (B) He is totally ‘captured’ by CASA and ATSB – they own him. © His only advice comes directly from St Commode, the runt of the St Commode litter and an expert in trough feeding, as per the established Canberra hierarchy tradition.

OTT?– Probably; but, ye gods I am so weary of seeing this nation sold off, buggered up and mislead by ‘advertising’ for snake oil salesmen, which ‘the 7 morning show’ would kill for. Well -

My two bob. I earned it – spent as pleased me best. End of; and Yus, ‘us ‘as ‘ad a couple and struggling to keep ‘em down. Who mentioned McCormack anyway?

Uhmm - seems like it's early Spring cleaning. Gov't trying to get ahead of the rot; too late - far too late. Across the board through 'bipartisan' and complicit ignorance - the country is in a mess. Two years to fix ASA, ATSB and CASA: dream on. The rest of the supposed "public servants" ain't any better. 'Government' of a farm or an aircraft means exactly the same thing. So why are our 'politico's' not doing their job? Next stop for the Gravy train is at my houseboat dock - look forward to seeing y'all. Don't forget your two pennies. No pennies - no passage; it is that simple.

ABC - nearly onto the great scam of 'governance'.

Just in case you forgot.

Tall Tail 2: On Leopards Spots and Parliamentary Pantomimes -

Following on from P7's (aka Ol'Tom) obvious disdain for miniscule Mick Mack and the 'broken democracy' theme...

Yesterday was the last Parliamentary sitting day for the year and while trolling through Hansard I noted  the usual mutual Laborial backslapping in the 'valedictory' speeches - see HERE:

---

Perhaps a little more vomitus than usual -   

Senator CORMANN: I'm trying to not go so far as to get Penny into trouble! I think Penny and I are known to engage robustly, when appropriate, in the battle of ideas and in the political battle, but I have always very much appreciated the friendship and the professionalism and, quite frankly, the really trusting relationship that we've been able to build, which does help to facilitate the 'managed conflict' that is required on occasions in this chamber. In the end, we do have to facilitate the resolution of issues that are sometimes difficult to resolve, and it does involve a lot of logistics along the way. I've had the privilege of working closely with Penny for many years now...

Senator WONG (South Australia—Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) (16:56): I rise to respond to my friend and colleague Senator Cormann. I start by beginning with the observation that obviously we did hope that we might be giving these speeches from the other side of the chamber, and at the end of 2019 we reflect on the way things are somewhat different. This has been a long year and a challenging year, and I just want to place on record a few thanks to people in this place and also beyond...

...To Senator Cormann, this is what my staff wrote for me: 'Senator Cormann and I may not have political principles in common, but we do share a hairstyle.' I'm thinking of sacking that staff member, because I don't think that's true. And the next line is, 'Although I'm pleased to say his has gone a little greyer than mine over the last couple of years'—I don't think that's true either, but it's very kind...

I also noted that at the same time as this Laborial love fest was going on that the RRAT committee was getting on with the serious business of examining the disturbing decimation of the Australian Dairy industry:

Senator Susan McDonald
@SenMcDonald

At a Senate hearing today, representatives of Aldi said they have it in writing from processor Lactalis that farmers are being paid a farmgate price above the costs of production.
In light of farmers saying the opposite, I have asked Aldi to investigate as a matter of urgency.

 

And then I noted further down the Hansard that at the very same time the RRAT committee was collating evidence for it's Dairy inquiry there was a (very convenient -   ) Govt response tabled for the committee's completed Air Routes inquiry: 

 

(Note again no objection or interest in further debate on the Govt response)

Now it should be remembered that there was a very large rural and regional community participation and response to that inquiry. Consequently there was numerous public hearings held across the length and breadth of regional Australia, culminating in an inquiry that went across two parliaments and took over 20 months to complete (round about the same time as the proposed GA inquiry -   ), so a costly parliamentary inquiry.

Now you can read it (and weep) on the Govt response in Hansard (last committee link reference) but I would just like to draw your attention to the only 'rejected' Govt (miniscule Mick Mack) response to a Senator Patrick recommendation:

Recommendation 5
In recognition that the current Civil Aviation Safety Regulations have stalled the wings of General Aviation, the Australian Government must initiate a major rewrite of the Regulations, such that they are significantly simplified.

The Australian Government does not agree with this recommendation.

The Australian Government rejects the assertion the Civil Aviation Safety Regulations (CASR) "have stalled the wings of General Aviation".

The Australian Aircraft Activity 2018 report by the Bureau of Infrastructure, Transport and Regional Economics (BITRE) shows that total hours flown by the General Aviation sector has increased by approximately 9 per cent since 2015. While hours flown in some sub-sectors have decreased, hours flown in other sub-sectors such as Instructional Flying (Commercial) has increased by more than 30 per cent since 2015.

The CASR have been developed in consultation with industry and are written in accordance with the Australian Government legislative drafting manual.

Further, the BITRE study found that, among the nine key challenges affecting General Aviation, the only one relating to regulation noted that the "impact of regulatory changes" was a challenge to General Aviation; therefore, the Australian Government does not support a major rewrite of the Regulations.

The Government supports the Civil Aviation Safety Authority's continued work in developing guidance material to foster greater understanding and easier adoption of the CASR by the general aviation community. The development of a plain English guide for general operating and flight rules (CASR Part 91), which explains the regulations in lay terms using diagrams and charts, is one such example.

Hmm...need I say more?? - INCOMING! 


MTF...P2 

[thorn bird]

"The Government supports the Civil Aviation Safety Authority's continued work in developing guidance material to foster greater understanding and easier adoption of the CASR by the general aviation community. The development of a plain English guide for general operating and flight rules (CASR Part 91), which explains the regulations in lay terms using diagrams and charts, is one such example."

Blind Freddy?

Pick up the phone and call the CAsA 1300 number. While you wait endlessly to speak to a real person you are treated to a carefully crafted diatribe of how wonderful CAsA is. I'm sure I can get K to award a chokkie frog to the person who can count the number of times "Safety" is mentioned.

Here's the rub, tens of thousands of pages of obtuse "legalese" that cost us, you and me, close to 500 million bucks so far, and they really haven't even started yet. That is just the cost TO produce the tens of thousands of pages, not the cost OF complying with them.

Now they are expending millions more to explain to us what they mean and how to comply with them.

All this is supposed to make us more safe.......really?

The US regulations run to about a thousand pages, require no translation because they are written in plain english.

If safety is the goal, as CAsA go to great expensive lengths to espouse, and as statistics confirm, the USA achieves far better safety outcomes than we do. Would it not be more logical to embrace the US way of doing things. Seems to me that CAsA are not spending our money in a very productive way. There is an alternative, which would save considerable amounts of our money and achieve better outcomes. That is to accept we are crap at legislating aviation, largely because as history shows we end up killing the very thing we are attempting to legislate for and do not attain the safety outcomes we intended to achieve.

What was the definition of insanity again?