[Peetwo]

Review of CASA Annual Report: 2020-21

1st order of business on matters aviation for Chair Glenn Sterle and the committee was the scrutiny of the CASA 20/21 AR...  

 (Ref: https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Bus...98%2f78557 )

Civil Aviation Safety Authority

2.53 The 2020–21 Annual Report of the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) was tabled in the Senate on 22 November 2021. The report details the activities of the Authority over the previous year.

Chief Executive Officer and Director of Aviation Safety's review

2.54 The Chief Executive Officer and Director of Aviation Safety, Ms Pip Spence PSM, highlighted several of CASA's activities and achievements over the reporting period including:

• progress on regulatory reform including the publication of critical guidance materials for the flight operations regulations;
  
• finalisation of the Regulatory Services and Surveillance Transformation Program to take a nationally managed approach to regulatory oversight;
  
• the publication of three ‘plain English’ guides to simplify compliance with general operating and flight rules and fatigue management; and
  
• introduction of six aircraft maintenance engineer scholarships.49
  

2.55 Ms Spence also detailed some of the planned outcomes that suffered delays during the reporting period:

• planned workshops on regulatory philosophy that had been planned would now be held in a virtual and hybrid format in the new year;
  
• amendments to the CASR Part 61 flight crew licensing scheme which were expected to commence in 2020-21 were not progressed. CASA was focussed on furthering these amendments in 2021-22; and
  
• the delay in development of the regulatory roadmap for remotely piloted aircraft systems. The delay was deliberate to enable alignment with the Australian Government’s National Emerging Aviation Technologies Policy Statement, which was released on 6 May 2021. The draft roadmap was now intended to be completed in 2021-22.50
  

Performance

2.56CASA structured the performance statement in its annual report to reflect the targets set out in the Portfolio Budget Statements (PBS) and the agency’s Corporate Plan. Each target was assessed as either ‘on track’ or ‘impact on deliverable’ (which included possible delays).

Portfolio Budget Statement targets

2.57 CASA reported that its PBS targets are measured against eight performance criteria:

• number of accidents per hours flown by industry sector;
  
• number of incidents per hours flown by industry sector;
  
• maintenance of the Effective Implementation Score determined by ICAO Universal Safety Oversight Audit Program;
  
• regulatory implementation delivered in accordance with planned and reviewed targets;
  
• surveillance determined via a National Oversight Plan consisting of scheduled and response events informed by risk;
  
• delivery of a program of aviation safety education seminars to industry participants;
  
• clear, open and transparent engagement with the industry to support the continuous improvement of an efficient and effective aviation safety regulatory framework; and
  
• regulatory service applications are decided within published service delivery timeframes.51
  

2.58 CASA reported that nine of 11 of its PBS targets were on track. The remaining two targets were impacted by other variables, as discussed below.52

2.59 The first target that fell short was the delivery of 90 per cent of aviation safety seminars, with an overall satisfaction rate for effectiveness of 80 per cent. The agency reported the delivery of 88 per cent of seminars, 2 per cent below the target, with the remainder deferred or cancelled due to COVID-19 restrictions. Following a study commissioned in April 2021, CASA reported that of pilots who had attended a seminar 88 per cent agreed that they had learnt something, 89 per cent felt that attending had been worthwhile, and 78 per cent felt that participation had made them a better pilot. In all, CASA reported that the agency had reached 5256 members of the aviation industry via 175 seminars and 578 onsite visits.53

2.60 The second target that was reportedly impacted related to the application of a service delivery timeframe to all regulatory service activities. CASA reported that during 2020-21 demand for regulatory services remained at pre‑pandemic levels. However, the complexity of applications was higher. CASA transitioned regulatory service applications to a new system – the European Aviation Processing system – as part of a wider change to regulatory oversight. The transition to the new system reportedly resulted in delays to development of service delivery timeframes. CASA reported that updated service delivery timeframes based on the new system will be developed in
late 2021.54

Corporate Plan targets

2.61 CASA reported that its Corporate Plan targets are measured against three goals with nine key performance areas, as follows:

• Develop the regulatory framework;
  
• Strengthen international compliance;
  
• Entry control (airworthiness assurance);
  
• Compliance assurance – Surveillance;
  
• Address non-compliance – Enforcement;
  
• Engagement (with key stakeholders);
  
• Promote safety and education;
  
• Robust structures, systems and processes supporting good governance; and
  
• Continually develop its capability and capacity.
  

2.62 CASA reported that 32 of 34 of its Corporate Plan targets were on track. The remaining two targets were impacted by other variables.55

2.63 The target to promote CASA’s regulatory philosophy through workshops for industry members was delayed due to COVID-19 constraints. The agency reported that this work would proceed in 2021-22 through virtual and hybrid presentations. The workshops set out the principles supporting the way the agency performs its functions, exercises its powers, and engages with the aviation community.56

2.64 CASA aims to notify industry participants of surveillance safety findings within timelines defined in the surveillance manual. The agency also requires industry participants to undertake corrective actions to respond to compliance issues within those timelines. During 2020-21, CASA reported that it provided 899 of 901 safety findings within the required timeframe. Of those 901 safety findings, just 564 were successfully closed within the defined timeframe. CASA found that numerous factors affected the timely closing of safety findings including:

• reduced staff due to COVID-19 restrictions;
  
• inability of the agency to complete onsite validation of findings due to state border closures;
  
• suspension of certificates with open safety findings; and 
  
• implementation of Civil Aviation Safety Regulations Part 139, which required that all open safety findings for aerodromes be reissued under a new regulatory reference.57
  

Staffing and financial information

2.65 CASA reported a total of 857 employees across the agency as at 30 June 2021. Staff are located in all Australian states and territories with the majority residing in QLD and the ACT.58

2.66 CASA reported an operating surplus of $16.2 million during the reporting period, up from a deficit of $12.4 million in 2019–20. The difference of $28.6 million can be attributed to additional funding from government appropriations as part of the Australian Airline Financial Relief Package and a decrease in expenses related to employees and suppliers. The agency also reported that reduced spending on consultancies and service contracts also contributed to the decrease in expenditure.59

Committee comment

2.67 For the purposes of its report to the Senate, the committee considers the CASA annual report to be compliant with reporting requirements and to be ‘apparently satisfactory’.

Senator Glenn Sterle
Chair

MTF...P2 

[Peetwo]

Sterlo takes the Politics out of the Senate RRAT Committee -   

Via the Senate chamber, kudos to Senator Sterle setting the RRAT Committee as apolitical in the 47th Parliament:

(From 10:19 min):

Senator STERLE: "..So I want to support this. I know the Labor Party and Prime Minister Albanese—the Albanese government—support you, Senator Roberts, for bringing this to us. I think it's a magnificent thing, and I also think this is what we should be doing. These are the big-ticket items that, when I first came into the Senate, lo and behold, I thought we would be discussing on a daily basis. How tricked I got! But, anyway, at least let's get back to the big stuff about building a better nation, as I said in my first speech, and leaving it better than how we found it..."

Plus Sterlo takes it up to Alan Joyce -  :

Ref: https://www.abc.net.au/4corners/flight-r...t/14044048

Senator Glenn Sterle
@GlennSterle
·
Sep 6
The @4corners expose on @Qantas last night was damning.
If you haven't watched it yet, do yourself a favour - https://www.abc.net.au/4corners/flight-r...t/14044048
Its heartbreaking to see a once great company treating their staff so poorly. This is not the Spirit of Australia!

MTF...P2 

[Kharon]

A question – begging, pleading almost for an answer.

Can anyone explain why Australia, an ICAO member state, persists in the face of all reason, not to join with most of the sensible world and adopt 'best practice'.

AMROBA - “Global recognition requires harmonisation which is the intent of the Conventions associated with aviation. Other nations concentrate on obtaining agreements from the  major aviation countries, from North America and the European Union.”


AMROBA - Global standards reduce 'red tape' and enhance safety – that is the aim of ICAO.

Unassailable logic from Cannane and AMROBA; a straightforward solution to at least 87% of the aviation industries ground level problems; a universal specific for the ailments of not only GA but the airline cohort. It baffles me; why a relatively small fleet aviation nation remains hidebound and recalcitrant when it comes to adopting and embracing that which is clearly beneficial to not only aviation, but to the nation.

Please explain; I cannot, but the question has been asked and demands answer.

Toot – toot.

[Kharon]

Time, Gentlemen please !

The death knell of many fine discussions; in the Pub (of course). In anticipation of a new RRAT committee opening the batting in the near future and given the past experience of G. Sterle Esq in dealing with 'matters aeronautical' it may well be worth be considering a small part of history which may assist in defining 'the basic problems'; along side previous experiences.  From the pen of Paul (fearless) Phelan, the following extract and article (HERE) shines  a small, bright light into the shadow world of recalcitrant obfuscation.

– ..--

“On Monday October 26, 2004, Bruce Byron held a meeting of all his executive managers in Melbourne. He announced major intended changes in CASA direction, including a requirement to move CASA out of the administration of private general aviation, to focus primarily on the oversight of passenger-carrying operations, including support sectors such as large MROs and airports, and detailed a new approach to regulatory reform, supported by specific directives, that would to return it to conformity with its by now often-stated goals.

Palace revolution.

On Friday of the same week in Canberra at a meeting of some, but not all CASA executive managers, the mood was one of outright revolt, with complete rejection of Byron’s announcements. Byron was not present and it is understood no minutes were kept.

Three separate sources say that ‘the feeling of the meeting,’ rich in expletives, was expressed in terms of “We are the safety experts, we’ll tell the bastards what the rules are, and what the policy is, and if they don’t like it, we’ll run them out of the industry.”
The meeting “agreed” that all the reform program changes put in place in 1996/1999 were a grave mistake, and they would put that right because the Government had “got it wrong”.

Obviously interesting times still lay ahead. In fact the meeting also “decided” that in the face of concerted opposition, Byron would back down and they would have a free run; that the DOTARS and the Minister would not stand in their way, so there would be no more “pandering to the industry” in terms of consultation.

One attendee at the meeting declared that all the changes the PAP had put in place were ‘not Government policy,’ notwithstanding that the PAP briefed the Minister monthly.

Only a few days after the meeting, Byron called in three of the executives without involving his Deputy and Chief Operating Officer Bruce Gemmell. The three, who left CASA almost immediately, included Bill McIntyre, CASA’s (then) Executive Manager of Standards who had overseen the controversial rule rewrite.

A month after the meeting, on 24 November 2004, Byron issued two directives to Gemmell, with immediate effect. They were clear and uncompromising, and again spelt out the goals of the program using now-familiar phrases.

[Peetwo]

Su_Spence Estimates happens (apparently) at 1630 tomorrow?? - 

Not sure if it will actually happen but apparently the Su_Spence version of CASA is slated for a 1630 appearance tomorrow: https://www.aph.gov.au/-/media/Estimates...9E3139A72F

 

Looking at the program (beyond tomorrow) I have to ask W(hy)TF isn't Popinjay and his Minions appearing before Senate Estimates?? 

 Not ducking happy Jan (Sterlo)! 

   MTF...P2 

[Peetwo]

Aviation White Papered into OBLIVION: Sterlo knocks off Su_Spence team (belatedly apparently -  )??

Su_Spence Estimates happens (apparently) at 1630 tomorrow?? - 

Not sure if it will actually happen but apparently the Su_Spence version of CASA is slated for a 1630 appearance tomorrow: https://www.aph.gov.au/-/media/Estimates...9E3139A72F

 

Looking at the program (beyond tomorrow) I have to ask W(hy)TF isn't Popinjay and his Minions appearing before Senate Estimates?? 

 Not ducking happy Jan (Sterlo)! 

Via APH Watch Parliament: 

So Su_Spence's 'A-team' (along with Popinjay's 'A-team') was knocked off for the entirety of the Budget Estimates - does this signify that Sterlo is going to allow zip scrutiny of the Aviation Safety Crats for the length of Albo's term in Government; or until such time as the reincarnation of the Whitewash paper is distributed to a public toilet near you?? 

MTF...P2 

[P7_TOM]

And! - Another one bites the dust.

The 'virtue signalling 'spend-athon' which reduces services while self promoting the self same lack of reduced service to the public which pays; and pays, for those services.

CASA leading the pack; ATSB close behind; ASA somewhere back' Bourke all demanding 'more' while happily deconstructing their sole design function to provide for the requirements of the travelling public. The latest outfit climbing on the band-wagon; knowing full well that public funding will be forced to pick up the tab is the BoM. That's right folks; just wait until the climate change fanatics (those with major shareholdings in 'renewable s')  find out that the BoM can no longer provide their ammunition.

Links below to two articles which arrived by pigeon this afternoon – herewith provided for your back pocket nerve.

HERE - & _ HERE. True, False or somewhere in between; NDI – Handing over...Will it ever end; with a return to government control through sanity and ministerial responsibility ??

[Peetwo]

RRAT Committee clash at Senate Estimates: 28/10/22

Via the APH website:

CHAIR: I just want to clarify something, because I'm listening intently. Mr Hallinan, can you give us an example of a community car park upgrade? Is it a car park at a shopping centre, is it a car park at a train station or is it a mixture of everything? What is it?

Mr Hallinan : That was the Commuter Car Park Program under the Urban Congestion Fund. Those car parks were attached to train stations and within easy access of the train station, so the locations were anywhere from directly embedded in the train station through to about 500 metres away.

CHAIR: I heard you say that some were cancelled because there wasn't land available. Did I hear that right?

Mr Hallinan : That's correct.

CHAIR: I have to ask the question: how the hell does someone throw a bucket of money at a community upgrade when there's no land? How does that happen? Was there a dartboard in the former minister's office or something?

Mr Hallinan : I wouldn't speculate. They were a series of projects identified as election commitments in 2019, and there was an audit into that program.

CHAIR: I'll make it easy for you. I'm still gobsmacked that we can have a government announce a heck of a lot of money going to a car park where there's no land to improve it. You don't have to do it now, but can you supply the committee with examples of those? Is it a one off, or are there a few of them?

Mr Hallinan : We can take on notice any projects in that group, where there wasn't land available and it couldn't be made available.

CHAIR: I'm only saying it because that's what you said.

Mr Hallinan : There will probably be a couple, but not many.

CHAIR: It will still be very interesting to know.

Senator Chisholm: It goes to the difficulty of what we inherited, where, quite often in the lead-up to the 2019 election, the previous government made a lot of political promises, and then they had no delivery partners—

Senator McKenzie interjecting—

CHAIR: Order! Order! I'll tell you what, Senator McKenzie, I picked that up because I'm listening intently to the evidence given by the official. I don't have a written piece in front of me to ask that question and I find the evidence of sheer incompetence and stupidity absolutely gobsmacking. I'm sure that you may have some differences of opinion, but the idea that we can throw buckets of money at projects where there is no— Okay, you'll come back to us with that. Minister, carry on, you will be heard.

Senator Chisholm: We were very clear that, as part of the budget process, we wanted to identify the waste and rorts. This is an area where there was substantial focus. The fact that promises were made that couldn't be delivered, didn't have delivery partners and didn't have land and that the costings as such to be delivered would have blown out show you that we did the responsible thing. Part of that motivation is also just trying to rebuild the trust that people have in politics. So it sounds like a lofty ambition, but you have to start and that means delivering on what you promise, and that is what we have done in this budget.

CHAIR: Senator Canavan?

Senator CANAVAN: Does the government have land available for the national high-speed rail project that you've committed $500 million to? Do you have the land available?

Senator Chisholm: I'm happy for the department to add to this as well, but obviously—

Senator CANAVAN: Obviously you don't know the answer.

Senator Chisholm: Obviously that was a promise that we made in opposition and intend to deliver on in government.

Senator CANAVAN: Minister, it sounds like you do not have the land. Can we just establish that? Does the government own the land for the high-speed rail project?

CHAIR: Sorry, Senator Canavan. That is something very close to Senator McDonald and me. We have a nation-building project called the Inland Rail project, too, so if we're going to start I don't think—

Senator CANAVAN: Senator Sterle, is that a point of order, or are you just trying to interrupt my line of questioning here?

CHAIR: Let's get some consistency. We're specifically—

Senator CANAVAN: That's what I am asking for, Senator Sterle.

CHAIR: You want to talk about the Inland Rail?

Senator CANAVAN: You gave me the call, Senator Sterle. As chair, you should be a little more balanced here.

CHAIR: And I have just come in, Senator Canavan, and said, 'We'll have some balance,' and I find that question—

Senator CANAVAN: That's not exactly how this works.

CHAIR: The officials can take that on notice and come back to you later.

Senator CANAVAN: Point of order! Chair, you've been here long enough to know it is not your right or in any way in your power to take questions on notice. That is a power for the minister, so point of order; it is not on you to take questions on notice.

CHAIR: You know what, Senator Canavan? I'll let the official answer that, but I'm jumping in first, because I know what's going to come.

Senator CANAVAN: Can I just restate the question: does the government own the land for the high-speed rail project that it has committed to?

Senator Chisholm: I don't think you can compare a commitment to set up an agency to do cleaning work to a promise on a car park in suburban Melbourne.

Senator CAN AVAN: Hang on; hang on. I'm struggling.

Senator Chisholm: I think they are substantially different things that we're talking about there.

CHAIR: Order!

Senator CANAVAN: I'll just ask again. It's a yes-or-no question here. Does the government own the land for its high-speed rail commitment?

Senator Chisholm: As I've said, what we've done is that we had a commitment to set up an agency to do the planning work, which is—

Senator CANAVAN: I'll just keep asking it—

CHAIR: No, you won't.

Senator CANAVAN: Does the government own the land for the high-speed rail commitment?

Senator Chisholm: I've answered the question.

Senator CANAVAN: No, you have not. Does the government own the land for the high-speed rail commitment?

Senator Chisholm: We've set up an agency to do the planning work, which is what our commitment was.

Senator CANAVAN: Can you take it on notice?

Senator Chisholm: Well, I've provided an answer.

Senator CANAVAN: You have not! It's a yes-or-no answer, Senator Chisholm. Have you got the land?

Senator Chisholm: Well, it's not. We've set up an agency to do the planning work, which is what our commitment was.

Senator CANAVAN: So, you do not have the land?

CHAIR: Alright. It's not going to go—

Senator CANAVAN: Hang on, Senator Sterle.

CHAIR: I'm going to rule on it here.

Senator Canavan interjecting—

CHAIR: Order! Senator Canavan, the minister has answered.

Senator CANAVAN: You made an allegation before that it was somehow irresponsible for a government to allocate funds to a project where it did not own the land, vis-a-vis the commuter car parks. We have a situation here where exactly the same situation exists with your commitment to the high-speed rail.

CHAIR: It is nothing of the like.

Senator CANAVAN: How is that any different?

CHAIR: Order!

Senator CANAVAN: By your own words, you were already starting off on an irresponsible path, because you didn't own the land.

CHAIR: I'm going to stop this right now. I tell you what I will do, I'll shut the mics down.

Senator CANAVAN: Senator Sterle—

CHAIR: No, I am ruling—

Senator CANAVAN: I think we need a private meeting, Senator Sterle, because you are interfering with my questions.

CHAIR: I am happy to have a private meeting.

Senator CANAVAN: You're playing defence for the government. This is an absolute farce on your first day of budget estimates. You're meant to be chair, Senator Sterle.

CHAIR: Don't you tell me what I'm 'meant' to be. The minister—

Senator CANAVAN: Can we have a private meeting?

CHAIR: I'm happy to have a private meeting, but we're not having a private meeting until I say I'm ready to have the private meeting, which will be very soon. The minister has answered the question, and you can continue with a rant and a rave and you can look at the cameras and do whatever you need to do, Senator Canavan. As far as we're concerned, the minister has answered the question, and you can ask it six, seven or 400 times more. It ain't going to make any difference. And I'm very happy to have a private meeting. But I tell you what we will do—

Senator CANAVAN: Yeah, let's have a private meeting.

CHAIR: Excuse me—we'll have the private meeting, but we have to contact members of the committee to be here.

Senator McKENZIE: Our members are here.

CHAIR: I don't care. All members of the committee will be called, and we will take the time that it needs to get them from other rooms.

Senator CANAVAN: Can I request that we continue questioning while we make that request, and then we can have the private meeting when they're here?

CHAIR: No. I've just called them.

Senator CANAVAN: You are now trying to delay the scrutiny of your own government, because you don't have the answers.

CHAIR: Excuse me—

Senator CANAVAN: We're an hour in, and Senator Chisholm can't answer basic questions about the government's policy.

CHAIR: Senator Canavan, I'm making it very easy. You have requested—and I'm always so collegiate to help out my colleagues on this committee—a private meeting, and we shall now suspend for a private meeting.

Hmm...democracy at work, not hard to work out why the RRAT Committee put the GA Inquiry on the lapsed inquiries scrapheap - 

I wonder how much that indulgence cost the taxpayer??   

By the bye, apparently they did KISS and make up:

Proceedings suspended from 09:58 to 10:14

CHAIR: We're all back in love again, I'm happy to report! Thank you for your indulgence. During the break, there was a request from Senator Allman-Payne to ask some questions so she can get off to another committee, and Senator Canavan has agreed to that...

MTF...P2 

[Peetwo]

Aviation White Papered into oblivion at Senate Estimates -   

11.30 am
Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development, Communications and the Arts
Transport

Domestic Aviation and Reform
International Aviation, Technology and Services
Surface Transport Policy
Released from the hearing

12.30 pm
Infrastructure Australia
Released from the hearing

12.50 pm
Northern Australia Infrastructure Facility
Released from the hearing

1.00 pm
Airservices Australia
Released from the hearing

1.10 pm
Australian Rail Track Corporation
Released from the hearing

1.20 pm
Australian Maritime Safety Authority
Released from the hearing

Plus as we know CASA were similarly released from the 28th of October hearing and the Popinjay ATSB weren't required to appear at all?? And what do we get in reply from Sterlo and the Albanese Labor Govt? "All the solutions will be in the White Paper.." - WTF? 

MTF..P2 

[Peetwo]

For what it's worth Su_Spence & Harfwit to appear tomorrow at Senate Estimates?

Via APH website, RRAT program for tomorrow... :



Ref: https://auntypru.com/wp-content/uploads/...v-2022.pdf

MTF...P2 

[Peetwo]

Budget Estimates - CASA & ASA but no AMSA (yet)? 

Via the APH:

Plus:

---

Ref: https://www.aph.gov.au/-/media/Estimates...465C79C168

Senator Penny Allman-Payne Airservices Australia - Proposal to Increase Allowable Tailwind at Brisbane Airport 25 November 2022: PDF - 184KB

HANSARD - HERE

MTF...P2 

[Peetwo]

Sandy meets with Senator Paterson - 

Via Facebook:

Sandy Reith
57 m  ·

Happy to meet a good friend, the hard working and perceptive Senator James Paterson at his office in South Melbourne yesterday. Naturally discussions soon turned to matters aviation, no surprise?

James has spent, in recent times, much time overseas meeting with Australia’s allies dealing with various National security issues.  Being away from his young family he is more than aware of the tyranny of distance and the crucial role of Australia’s General Aviation industry. He is also aware of the security aspect of a strong National aviation sector, aerial mobility and its infrastructure.

We discussed the basic problem of aviation administration being removed from direct Ministerial control and a number of the regrowth opportunities for reform. Specific reforms like medical certification, flying training, ASICs, airports and a general reduction of costly and unnecessary regulation were highlighted.

Considering there’s around 35,000 pilot licences and thousands more in aviation maintenance, suppliers and airport personnel, plus their families, there must be a cohort of at least 100,000 that will be very aware of new policies and support from any quarter.

Be sure that Senator Paterson is a friend to our much beleaguered GA industry as it is conversely positioned for great growth of jobs, businesses and services.

James Paterson

It was great to see you Sandy, thank you for your time and insights

MTF...P2 

[Peetwo]

Budget Estimates QON/AQON??? -   

No surprises really but finally the Budget Estimates RRAT QON/AQON for the DITRCA is slowly dribbling in a week after they were due in. 

Yet to fully decipher but as yet there appears to be no QON addressed to CASA or the ATSB. However as a point of interest I note that there is one written QON, addressed to AMSA, from the Chair Senator Sterle that has already been supplied with an answer...  

Topic: AMSA - Expenditure for Senate Estimates attendance
Senator Glenn Sterle asked:

Would you please provide the committee with full costs incurred by AMSA for:

1. Preparing for estimates
2. Full wages etc.
3. Number of personnel
4. Costs while staff/officials waiting in Parliament house on 25 November 2022
5. Parking costs
6. Other expenses
7. Travel
8. Any other costs if you were waiting on any other day.

Answer:

1. Preparing for estimates
2. Full wages etc
AMSA estimates that the wage cost of preparing for Senate Budget Estimates is
$37,473.78. AMSA does not record a detailed breakdown of these costs, and it
would require significant staff time to estimate.
3. Number of personnel: 45
4. Costs while staff/officials waiting in Parliament house on 25 November 2022:
Four AMSA Executive attended parliament house to appear as witnesses for Senate
Budget Estimates on Friday 25 November, and waited for one hour before being
excused, at a cost of $605.36.
5. Parking costs: $28
6. Other expenses: Nil
7. Travel: Nil
8. Any other costs if you were waiting on any other day. Nil.

Hmm...extrapolate AMSA's expenditure for Estimate's across all the taxpayer teat feeding and industry funded endless Alphabet soup Govt agencies, the bill for Senate Estimates must be mind blowingly astronomical... However that is the system we have, so what is the Chair's point in highlighting AMSA's wasted expenditure for the last Estimates? Is he suggesting that AMSA (and maybe other Govt Agencies) should, like the ATSB, get a free kick thru any real Parliamentary Scrutiny??

One has to ask how the lack of scrutiny of the ATSB (in the last 2 years of Budget Estimates) is working out, when you consider that Popinjay continues to cry poor and refusing to investigate fatal RAAus accidents, while continuing to investigate pointless defined known cause accidents and covering up the internationally sensitive DFO approval process investigation, all at significant cost to the ATSB (taxpayer)... 

MYF...P2 

[Peetwo]

Airport screening QON; & another WOFTAM review? - 

Via RRAT Estimates webpage: https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Bus...mates/rrat

Status Answered
Hearing Date 02/12/2022
Overdue No
Asked Of Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development, Communications and the Arts
Proof Hansard Page/Written 11
Portfolio Question Number SQ22-000807

Question
Senator McKENZIE: So, the program is anticipated to not be extended post this financial year?
Ms Purvis-Smith: That will be a decision of government. At the moment, the program finishes on 30 June 2023, as it was previously. We're working with airports as to when we think the money might be expended.
Senator McKENZIE: Are you confident that we'll get it all out the door, given you're in conversations with regional airports regularly?
Ms Purvis-Smith: It changes all the time. Some airports actually expend their money before others, so it will depend. I think we've contracted 36 in place, with 36 airports, so we are working with that.
Senator McKENZIE: Out of a total of how many?
Ms Purvis-Smith: I think there are only two who are yet to accept. One. One has just accepted.
Senator McKENZIE: Which one is that?
Ms Purvis-Smith: I don't have that with me.
Mr Vincent: With this program, we generally don't provide too much in the way of detail of individual grantees, on the basis of security concerns. It is right that-
Senator McKENZIE: Mr Vincent, it's Senate estimates. It's okay. Probably a Liberal or a National MP knows where this airport is. I don't, and I'm asking you the question.
Mr Betts: We will take that on notice.
Ms Purvis-Smith: We can take that on notice...

Answer
Please find answer attached.

Answer:

As at 12 December 2022, 37 airports have executed funding agreements with the
Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development, Communications and the
Arts (the department) under the Regional Airports Screening Infrastructure (RASI) program
to support the cost of the minimum necessary capital works required to accommodate
enhanced security screening requirements and/or provide a contribution towards initial
operating costs.

In addition, one airport has been offered support under the RASI program but has yet to execute a funding agreement under the program with the department or else alternatively withdraw its application. Due to the sensitive nature of releasing the details of airports required to meet security regulations, the former Minister for Finance provided an exemption from publishing grant information for individual airports under the RASI program in 2020.

---

Status Unanswered
Hearing Date 02/12/2022
Overdue Yes
Asked Of Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development, Communications and the Arts
Proof Hansard Page/Written 13
Portfolio Question Number SQ22-000808

Question
Senator McKENZIE: ... Has the department or the minister responded to the letter of 21 October from Whyalla City Council regarding the future of screening services at Whyalla Airport and the risk that cessation of that uneconomical service will actually result in the loss of Rex and Qantas services to and from Whyalla?
Mr Vincent: I'll take that on notice.
Ms Purvis-Smith: I'm not aware of whether the minister has responded to the letter.
Senator McKENZIE: Has the department received the letter?
Ms Purvis-Smith: We have received-
Senator McKENZIE: Have you drafted a response for the minister and sent it up?
Ms Purvis-Smith: I'm not sure, I'd have to take that on notice.
Senator McKENZIE: I think there'll be a corro list somewhere that will have that data-
Ms Purvis-Smith: And I don't have it to hand, Senator.
Senator McKENZIE: Well, I don't want to wait until 16 December to get that answer, because this is an
urgent problem in Whyalla now.
Ms Purvis-Smith: We'll see what we can do.
Senator McKENZIE: Can we search the corro record, please?
Ms Purvis-Smith: I might also add on Whyalla that we are talking to Whyalla all the time. We are in open conversations with Whyalla.
Senator McKENZIE: Okay.

---

Status Answered
Hearing Date 02/12/2022
Overdue No
Asked Of Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development, Communications and the Arts
Proof Hansard Page/Written 14
Portfolio Question Number SQ22-000809
Question
Senator McKENZIE: Is one of the topics being discussed the longer-term support options for sustainable security screening at regional airports? This isn't the Home Affairs incoming brief; it's yours. Is one of the options being considered long-term operational funding?
Ms Purvis-Smith: We're looking at all options in terms of when we're working with Home Affairs.
Senator McKENZIE: Including operational funding?
Ms Purvis-Smith: We haven't got to that stage, I think.
Senator McKENZIE: When did they start the review? Mr Vincent, when did they start the review?
Mr Vincent: The then Minister for Home Affairs appointed Ms Kerri Hartland to lead an independent review, including engagement with industry representatives, and to provide recommendations for targeted deregulatory initiatives.
Senator McKENZIE: When?
Mr Vincent: Not being my portfolio-
Mr Betts: We'll see if we can find it.
Senator McKENZIE: That would be great. Give someone a call.

---

Answer:

The then Australian Government announced a targeted independent review of aviation and maritime transport security regulatory settings in April 2021.

Further details are available on the website of the Australian Government Department of Home Affairs at: https://www.cisc.gov.au/legislative-information-and-reforms/aviation-and-maritime-transport-security/reviews-and-inquiries

---

Status Unanswered
Hearing Date 02/12/2022
Overdue Yes
Asked Of Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development, Communications and the Arts
Proof Hansard Page/Written 14-15
Portfolio Question Number SQ22-000810

Question
Senator CANAVAN: On this topic-I'm refreshing my memory-there was a review done by the then Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Cities and Regional Development. There is a version of it on your website titled Passenger security screening enhancements-case studies of financial impacts at six regional airports. This report is dated December 2019. I can distinctly remember seeing this document, but I'm not sure whether it was made public. Do people at the table remember that?
Ms Purvis-Smith: It's before my time.
Senator CANAVAN: In that document, which is a review into the security arrangements-and there's a lot that's been redacted; this was probably an FOI or some such-it says the cost at the Whyalla airport would increase by $69 per passenger. Is that figure familiar, or do you have updated figures for how much it would cost per passenger at Whyalla?
Ms Purvis-Smith: I don't have that level of detail. We can take that on notice, if you like.
Senator McKENZIE: Mr Vincent, do you have that level of detail?
Mr Vincent: That is also before my time.
Senator McKENZIE: Is it in your folder?
Senator CANAVAN: Even if it's before your time, obviously calculations were done by this department. We're talking about roughly three years ago, and we're still talking about the impact of these issues. I'm surprised that, if you don't know about that figure, you don't know the cost at the Whyalla airport per passenger of these changes.
Ms Purvis-Smith: I would need to take that on notice.
Senator CANAVAN: Do you have a figure?
Ms Purvis-Smith: I would need to take that on notice.
Senator CANAVAN: Okay...

Following the review link provided will send you to this:

Current Reviews and Inquiries

Independent Review into Australia’s Aviation and Maritime Transport Security Settings

In line with the 2021-22 Budget Deregulation Agenda, the Australian Government commissioned an independent review of Australia’s aviation and maritime transport security settings (the review). This new measure was announced in a media release on 20 April 2021 by the Hon Ben Morton MP, Assistant Minister to the Prime Minister and Cabinet.

The review will ensure that Australia’s transport security framework maintains important security safeguards while also reducing red tape and unnecessary costs, which will facilitate increased trade and tourism as the aviation and maritime industries recover from the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic. It will also take into account findings on the current security environment, including the evolving threat of terrorism and the impact of the pandemic on the aviation and maritime industries.

The review will pinpoint ready-to-implement regulatory reform priorities in Australia’s aviation and maritime transport security frameworks, as well as reform options to deliver enduring efficiencies for industry to foster long-term growth.

To ensure that the aviation and maritime transport security framework appropriately contributes to the facilitation of economic recovery from the COVID-19 pandemic, and continues to be fit for purpose, the review will identify options to reduce the regulatory burden for industry, and streamline interactions between industry and Government.

To achieve this, the review will focus on identifying readily implementable changes, including options to:

• ensure legislative requirements are proportionate to risk
  
• reduce legislative prescription to maximise flexibility to enable industry to implement security measures, and innovative business practices and technology, that are tailored to individual operations
  
• enhance regulatory and enforcement mechanisms to enable graduated responses that are proportionate to security outcomes, and
  
• reduce regulatory ‘touch-points’ between industry and Government.
  

The review will consider reforms to the policy and legislative frameworks for transport security. This includes, but is not limited to the range of measures as outlined in the Aviation Transport Security Act 2004 and the Maritime Transport and Offshore Facilities Security Act 2003.

The review will also complement the forthcoming implementation of reforms to strengthen the security and resilience of critical aviation and maritime transport infrastructure operators, as well as other similar initiatives being undertaken within the Department of Home Affairs and broader Commonwealth agencies.

The Minister for Home Affairs, the Hon Karen Andrews MP, has appointed Ms Kerri Hartland as the independent reviewer to lead the body of work. Ms Hartland is currently the Principal Advisor at Proximity Advisory Pty Ltd. Prior to this, she was an Australian public servant for approximately 30 years prior to joining the private sector. Most notably, Ms Hartland was the former Secretary at the Department of Employment, Skills, Small and Family Business, and former Deputy Director General, Australian Security and Intelligence Organisation.

In March 2022, Ms Hartland will provide the Australian Government with recommendations aimed at ensuring security settings are fit-for-purpose and sustainable.

Queries on the review can be directed to AMS.deregulation@homeaffairs.gov.au

Hmm...well March 2022 has been and gone, so what was the outcome? Or is this just another review that has been relegated to the Parliamentary shelfware warehouse? 



MTF...P2 

[Peetwo]

FWIW - Estimates hearings next week...  

Via the APH website: https://auntypru.com/wp-content/uploads/...2/RRAT.pdf

8.45pm Civil Aviation Safety Authority

9.15pm Evening break

9.30pm Airservices Australia

10.00pm Australian Transport Safety Bureau

10.15pm Western Sydney Airport

10.30pm Australian Maritime Safety Authority

Hmm...anyone want to take any bets on whether any of the above sessions will actually occur...err anyone?? 

MTF...P2 

[Peetwo]

Supplementary Estimates - The Three Amigos...   

(Caution vomit bag maybe required -   )

Courtesy the APH website, via Youtube:

MTF...P2 

[Sandy Reith]

What to make of these hearings?

We’ve heard it all before ad nauseam, some glimmers from the likes of Sen. Brockman but obviously they don’t have the depth of knowledge to make the case.
For example medicals where the statistics do not support the incredible stringencies and colossal costs imposed on pilots. Also Ms. Spence got away with her statement that only 100 applicants were denied.
In reality there’d certainly be hundreds of pilots that simply gave up due to ever increasing demands from AVMED for numerous expensive tests etc., and for many pilots especially in the bush, travel to specialists isn’t economical or where they must work practically impossible.
Ms. Spence should have given out those numbers, those that lapsed due to impositions, and especially those that were denied against specialists advice.

[Kharon]

Is the Suspense almost over?

Watching the Estimates session, carefully, in company with BRB, after the third watch through; there was a profound silence. Now I know many just don't even bother to watch Estimates (why would you). Many of those that do may pay attention to a 'bit' that is of interest, attention slipping away before and after that item of interest (fair enough too). But if you have a crew who do pay attention and have the fortitude to sit through the session three times; you come away with some insights worth discussing. It is bloody tedious and time consuming and tedious and mind numbing and tedious; however, the results after thirsts have been slaked are often well worth the effort.

I admit, the first 'take away' notions expressed are usually funny and often ribald; but then its down to business. Big ticket items, like 'is Spence in control' and has 'Spence thrown in the towel'.  'No and Yes' consensus in that order, no objections noted.

First reaction to that will be 'Bollocks' – but compare the first Spence session with the last and note the changes. Pay attention to the 'whole' – language, (spoken and body)  . Tired, lack lustre answers to questions and rapid almost sycophantic deferment to the Real Estate sales agent type at the end of the row, for smoothing spin and soothing words. Anyway; the upshot was a call for the Tote to be opened on the Spence tenure. The 'book' offers 4/1 for a departure date before Easter. Even money for the end of the financial year and 5 will get you two (5/2 odds on) before Christmas. Tote open....

Item next is the time allocated to, the time of day and the pathetic questions the Senators ask.  It is no wonder that the 'take that on notice' answer is so very often used. Even less of a wonder that those carefully prepared, cleverly crafted answers are hardly ever re examined in depth at the next short, late session. The system suits all; it is a wasteful, cynical game. Although it is 'handy'; and can be (and often is) used to demonstrate that indeed there were questions asked and answers given; the sum total of that expense, in real terms is 'no return' no further informed questions and nothing changed in any meaningful way. Shames them all, particularly those who should be asking the difficult questions. Short attention spans and no real interest perhaps?

In short; Estimates need to either piss or get off the pot. We've watched countless hours of this stuff; high blown questions which miss the point; platitudes and clever words in answer; all at great expense while an entire industry is slowly shrinking and sinking; this while the rest of the first world is forging ahead, generating revenue and creating an industry which provides futures and employment.

For myself, my 'disappointment' with the Senate committee system is, along with many others, at a point where 'they' have become irrelevant. ASA, ATSB and CASA simply take the Mickey and the money, knowing full well that no Senate committee has ever laid a glove on 'em, not in any significant way.  Advance Australia? – fair dinkum?? I call BOLLOCKS.........

Toot – toot.

[Peetwo]

Senate Committees - CHALK & CHEESE?? - 

Not sure if anyone has noticed but the Chair for the RRAT committee Senator Sterle (much like former Senator O'Sullivan) has become a stooge for the Government. IMO he is a captured man and beholden to Albo for an additional six year gig as a Senator.

Here is an example, via Twitter: 

Senator The Hon. Bridget McKenzie

Labor senators storm out and have pulled quorum on the Senate RRAT committee with 4 agencies left, denying senators the right to scrutinise taxpayers and industry funding

Senator Glenn Sterle has sold his soul to the devil in PM Albanese - time for him to resign as Chair of the Senate RRAT Committee...BRB/AuntyPru verdict - 

Now compare that dismal, fractured and obviously politicised performance (plus the shambolic RRAT performance from the previous day) to this from the USA Senate Commerce Committee yesterday, via Youtube:

(PS You can FFWD thru large parts of this but the difference in democratic process in the House of Review is quite remarkable)

What the HELL ARE WE PAYING FOR? A Senator is supposed to be for State, then Country with Politics last - FFS time for you to go Senator Sterle! 

MTF..P2 

[Gentle]

Sterle is a disgrace…

I indicated this essentially on the other aviation website with comments on the latest Ballina ATSB report (farce)…

And I can see an ironic smile on Sandy’s face when I say that I liked the way Bridget’s questions appeared to make the swill dwellers reach for their testicles…. 

Just like Australian men currently seem to do when I pull up in my EV!

And yes Wombat, it’s a Tesla….