[Kharon]

P2, I think the Department is well meaning and the Associations don't have much choice but to jump on the reform bandwagon - it's something about being "inside the tent".

However it was telling watching the smug CASA senior managers as their leader Pip Spence destroyed what credibility she had left in front of the Senate RRAT committee when challenged by Angel Flight. it is now quite clear that she is only a figurehead and she knows it after that performance.

What CASA senior managers don't realise is that Kharon's "Mandarins" (Sunday Brunch Gazette) saw that performance too and will have come to the same conclusion I have - which is that CASA is an administrative accident waiting to happen because its senior management is "problematic". A cursory glance by a Mandarin will reveal the teetering tower of convoluted regulations these "managers' have constructed and that, without urgent action, the whole pile will come crashing down shortly if nothing is done to dismantle it. Furthermore it will become blindingly obvious that Pip and her team aren't capable of executing their part of the Ministers recovery plan.

If anything, unless I'm totally mistaken, the Mandarins response to the problem of CASA is going to be swifter and less charitable than anything you or I would suggest. They do not like Senior managers who become too big for their boots, they don't like it at all. i once watched as they cut a foreign Affairs Manager down to size. he had constructed what he thought was a nice little regulatory nest for himself and he thought he was untouchable too, but that is another story.....

Spot on - particularly if 'twas the Mandarins who raised Spence to her level of incompetence.  Choc Frog nomination.

[thorn bird]

The really sad thing K, is the solution in reality is so simple and cheap in comparison to the hundreds of millions so far spent on alleged "Reform". Perhaps this is why Australian aviation regulations are viewed with so much wonder and amusement around the world. As my old Dad used to say, Australia took the finest traditions of British bureaucracy and refined it into an art form.
Britain used to be a front runner in the design and production of aircraft, some say killed off by bureaucratic overreach regulation, same thing occurred with European regulation. Fortunately or unfortunately realisation came somewhat late, but at least now attempts are being made to resurrect the industry with sensible reform. Much like Britain, Australia's civil aviation regulator had its roots grounded by the Authoritarian Department of defence. In the USA their regulator had its roots grounded in the civilian world, where entrepreneurial enterprise was encouraged rather than suppressed.

New Zealand went through the process triggered by an unfortunate accident, many false starts were made because of opposition by its aviation bureaucrats grounded in the same militaristic traditions. They virtually had to dismantle their whole system to finally produce what are recognised as one of the best regulatory suites in the world, a modern functional suite based on the US FAR's. They had sense enough to realise the Americans were the primal aviation industry in the world, with a mature regulatory suite that achieved outstanding safety outcomes without stifling productivity and innovation. Aligning with them could and did produce excellent safety outcomes as well as significant cost savings.

And all the while Australia has and continues to ignore the obvious.

[Peetwo]

Lead Balloon on Federal ICAC - 

Via the UP - HERE:

Lead Balloon

Why do we need another layer in the form of ICAC when we, the people, have just passed judgement.

Because one of the deleterious effects of Laborial governments over decades is the politicisation of the ‘public service’. It’s now finely tuned to facilitate each side’s rorts and bastardry rather than provide frank and fearless advice in the public interest. A federal ICAC would help to expose these systemic problems in the ‘public service’.

Scotty from Marketing was keen to paint corruption as being only a criminal matter which, accordingly, is a matter for the Federal Police (at the Commonwealth level). But most of the rorts and bastardry done by governments these days is not criminal. Scotty knows that.

Many members of the public don’t know that the words “offence” and “penalty” appear nowhere in the Commonwealth Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Act. Go here and do a search yourself. It’s not a crime for an government official to breach provisions of that Act. It’s not crime to breach the Commonwealth Procurement Rules.

Hundreds of billions of dollars are administered by Commonwealth government agencies, supposedly in accordance with this legislation. But it’s not a crime to fail to comply with it. Insistence on compliance in the face of political pressure may get you sacked. If the government wants to spend a lazy couple of hundred millions on sports grants, why lose your job by standing your ground on compliance? The taxpayers are going to be a couple of hundred million lighter in any event.

Allocating sports grants for partisan political advantage isn’t criminal. But it is unlawful.

Robodebt wasn’t criminal, but the law was not complied with in driving the powerless to despair and, in some cases, suicide. Bureaucrats with no shame or humanity sat in front of Parliamentary Committees and defended that system and pretended not to be aware of the level of stress and damage the system was causing. And of course the arseholes settled the Federal Court litigation so that they could claim that no finding of unlawfulness was ever made by a court. (This is CASA Avmed’s modus operandi: do whatever you like to individually powerless pilots, knowing that most cannot bear the cost or stress of taking Avmed on and, in the rare cases that are fought, only back down if there’s a risk of embarrassment in the AAT or court.)

Who will oversee the Federal ICAC??

Who ‘oversees’ the High Court? Who ‘oversees’ a Royal Commissioner?

The very point of these kinds of bodies is to give people with integrity and expertise the resources, powers and independence to find out facts, without fear or favour. Royal Commissions are generally ad hoc responses to specific issues. Courts don’t get involved of their ‘own motion’ - a dispute between parties has to exist. A properly-constituted corruption investigative body is there, all the time, watching and inquiring. At the Commonwealth level, the cost would repay itself many times over, very quickly.

As to the trashing of reputations, I’ve seen front page newspaper headlines with pictures of people with whom I’ve worked, identified as being under investigation by a State ICAC for misuse of travel and other public sector entitlements. The inquiry was conducted and they were exonerated. Remained employed throughout and are still employed. About the only people who remember the headlines are them. Shrug and move on.

A properly-constituted ICAC makes those who are paid out of public money and have access to public money think very, very carefully about their decision-making and behaviour. Their phones can be ‘bugged’. They can be compelled to give evidence. It’s a vastly different power balance compared with the ‘public service’ versus the individual citizen.

MTF...P2 

[Peetwo]

ANAO Aviation Support Audit out; & Mandarin Atkinson gone - 

Via Dic Doc...

Albanese shakes up public service


Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has axed a number of department chiefs linked to the Coalition in a shake-up of top public servants.

What we know:

• Diplomat Jan Adams, Australia’s ambassador to Japan, and former ambassador for climate change under the Rudd government, will replace Kathryn Campbell as Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade secretary (The Conversation);
  
• Campbell, who will be moved to a defence role, had been in the job less than a year, after being embroiled in the Robodebt disaster as secretary of the department of social services;
  
• Gordon de Brouwer will be appointed as secretary for public sector reform, after helping lead the Thodey review — largely ignored by the former government — that had recommended changes to make the public service more independent;
  
• Jenny Wilkinson, a former head of the Parliamentary Budget Office, will become head of the Finance Department (The Mandarin);
  
• Experienced state public servant Jim Betts becomes secretary of the Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development, Communications and the Arts, replacing Simon Atkinson, who was regarded by Labor as too close to the Coalition;
  
• The new Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water will be headed by David Fredericks;
  

    Albanese will however keep controversial Coalition appointments including  Department of Home Affairs secretary Mike Pezzullo, and Department of Health secretary Brendan Murphy (RiotACT);

Three of the four new secretaries are women, compared to the former prime minister’s 2019 shake-up, when three of five secretaries sacked were women.

Next:

Aviation billions vanish into thin air


More than $5bn in Covid-19 support handed out to the aviation sector was not adequately monitored, a new audit report has found.

What we know:

• The federal government established a suite of support measures in response to the pandemic to assist the beleaguered sector, which was also eligible for the JobKeeper scheme (The New Daily);
  
• The measures included fuel rebates, airport grants, underwriting flight costs and waiving land tax payments;
  
• Qantas received the most financial assistance, including more than $1bn in government support measures and $856m in JobKeeper;
  
• The next highest recipient was Virgin Australia, with $330m in support measures and $285m in JobKeeper;
  
• The audit found the Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Communications department overseeing the spending did not adequately monitor its impact;
  
• A Transport Workers’ Union survey of 1100 workers found nearly half of those sacked by Qantas during the pandemic are still looking for permanent work two years on;
  
• Qantas performance indicators are now plummeting, with the airline now the worst in the country — a decline blamed on outsourcing (The Saturday Paper);
  
• Australia’s air traffic control agency meanwhile is relying on hundreds of hours of overtime as it struggles to fill shifts in airport towers, threatening air traffic services
  

ANAO audit report link: 

COVID-19 Support to the Aviation Sector

PUBLISHED Wednesday 22 June 2022



Recommendation no. 1

Paragraph 3.67

The department develop mechanisms to:

• monitor and evaluate the extent to which the suite of COVID-19 aviation sector support measures is achieving the three objectives set by the Australian Government; and
  
• provide oversight of the total amount of support provided to individual recipients and the sector.
  

Department response: Agreed

 
MTF...P2 

[Peetwo]

Miniscule King's (Albo Govt) priorities on Aviation?? -   

Via the miniscule's Govt webpage;

Sustainable Aviation Fuels Breakfast

Good morning and thank you for having me here today.

I begin by acknowledging the Gadigal of the Eora Nation as the traditional custodians of the lands we are meeting on today.

I pay my respects to their Elders, past present and emerging.

I extend that respect to any Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples who are participating in this event.

I also thank Heidi Hauf for her kind introduction and thank her and the team at the Sustainable Aviation Fuel Alliance Australia New Zealand for putting on this morning’s event.

I also acknowledge the representatives here today from nations across our region and beyond. There are too many to name, but thank you for your participation.

As you know, Australians went to the polls in May and elected a new government determined to work across the economy and with industries to deliver a cleaner future and a better path to net zero.

If you want to see the Australian Government’s commitment to taking real action to tackle the global challenge of climate change and grow the future of energy in Australia, you just have to see our participation in the many events making up the Sydney Energy Forum.

In my view, even the Prime Minister making a serious and considered major address to a Forum like this marks a significant shift in the Government’s approach.

Today, I am delighted to be here today as the Minister with portfolio responsibilities which include aviation.

It is challenging time for aviation – you can see that in the queues at airports – but it is also exciting.

However, my ambition – and the ambition of our government – goes much further than simply a return to the pre-pandemic status quo.

My ambition is to embrace the opportunities that exist for sustainable future growth in the aviation sector, growing jobs and delivering a cleaner environment.

To set the scene for this growth, our Government intends to take a number of steps.

Firstly, we have already announced that we will deliver a new Aviation White Paper.

This paper will consider all aspects of the sector, but it will have a priority focus on how to maximise the sector’s contribution to achieving net zero carbon emissions.

In the more immediate term, my Department has already begun work on establishing a unit to work across government – and, importantly, with industry partners – to identify how best the government can work with the transport sector to play our part in achieving net zero.

I must say, it was one of the surprises of coming to government that there was no dedicated team working on climate change policy across the infrastructure and transport portfolios.

Over recent years, industry has raced ahead of government, and I know many of you are progressing your own initiatives.

Now, we are hurrying to catch up.

With transport being one of Australia’s largest sources of emissions, there is no time to waste.

This event – highlighting sustainable aviation fuels – gives hope to us all about what may be possible.

We know that industry is looking to sustainable aviation fuels to play a role in emissions reductions and we know the potential for sustainable aviation fuels is significant.

We also know that governments across the world are working closely with industry to drive new innovations in sustainable fuels and sustainable aviation.

The reality is – particularly in Australia – we love to fly, but we also need to fly.

I am sure most of you here, like me, spend more hours in the air than you care to count.

If we are to play our part, we need to make flying sustainable.

That is why – in addition to the aviation white paper and the departmental climate change unit – we intend to establish a group along the lines of the Jet Zero Council seen in the UK or the Council for Sustainable Aviation Fuels in Canada.

A step like this will be another example of our government’s commitment to advancing net-zero across the economy, as well as leading concrete action to cut emissions here and abroad.

By driving international competition and collaboration, we will drive innovation and progress across the world.

As a nation more dependent on aviation than almost any other, we have a unique opportunity and responsibility to drive change.

As a minister, I am determined to take on that challenge.

Our government, working with industry, to deliver sustainable aviation and grow jobs and innovation right here in Australia.

While our intent is clear, the way in which this change will be delivered is not.

I know that this challenge can only be overcome through collaboration, which is why I look forward to working with you on how we form this body and how we can best work towards net-zero flights from Melbourne to Sydney, the east coast to Perth, and Australia to the world.

Thank you very much for your time this morning.

Also reference Oz Flying - HERE.

FFS...

MTF...P2 

[Peetwo]

 Topcover and CYA jobs for former Mandarins and their minions -   

I note that Sir A is back feeding from the bottomless taxpayer funded trough, with Albo calling a review into the Defence bureaucracy...

MEDIA RELEASE
03 Aug 2022
Prime Minister, Deputy Prime Minister, Minister for Defence

Today the Albanese Government announced details of the Defence Strategic Review, including the Terms of Reference and the independent leads who will conduct this Review for government.

In 2020, the Defence Strategic Update identified that changes in Australia’s strategic environment are accelerating more rapidly than predicted in the 2012 Force Posture Review. As our national security landscape changes, it is vital that our defence force remains positioned to meet our global and regional security challenges.

To meet these challenges, the Review will examine force structure, force posture and preparedness, and investment prioritisation, to ensure Defence has the right capabilities to meet our growing strategic needs.

This is a large task, and it is for this reason we have appointed two eminent leads to conduct the Review; former Minister for Defence, Professor the Hon Stephen Smith and former Chief of the Defence Force, Air Chief Marshal Sir Angus Houston AK AFC (retired).

The Albanese Government is committed to ensuring we have a capable and sustainable Australian Defence Force, which is informed with the best possible strategic assessments.

As independent leads, Professor Smith and Sir Angus will ensure the Review’s recommendations to government meet this criteria.

Professor Smith and Sir Angus will deliver the Review and its recommendations to government in early 2023.

Submissions to the Review from all interested parties are welcome until noon AEST, Sunday 30 October 2022.

For more information or to submit a paper for consideration as part of the Review, visit Defence Strategic Review.

A copy of the Terms of Reference can be found on the Defence website.

(For Albo's 'long association' with Sir A comment ffwd to 11:40 and then think on how that's worked out when you consider the Great OnePie White Elephant... ) 

   
Next I note that Murky is back helping head up yet another Labor Party Govt review into his old department...  

 

Independent Review of Infrastructure Australia

On 22 July 2022, the Australian Government announced an independent review of Infrastructure Australia (the Review). The Review will consider IA's role as an independent adviser to the Commonwealth on nationally significant infrastructure priorities and advise on what changes may be needed to IA's focus, priorities and - if necessary - legislation.

The Review will ensure that IA is positioned to achieve its core purpose—to provide quality, independent advice to the Commonwealth on nationally significant infrastructure that supports the economy, builds the nation and addresses future needs.

The Terms of Reference (ToR) for the Review are below.

Reviewers

The Australian Government has appointed Ms Nicole Lockwood and Mr Mike Mrdak AO to lead the review.

Nicole Lockwood

Ms Lockwood is the Chair of Infrastructure Western Australia, a member of the Boards of the Green Building Council of Australia, the WA Association for Mental Health, and is also a non-executive Director of NBN Co.

Mike Mrdak AO

Mr Mrdak is President and CEO for Australia and New Zealand of NEC. He is a previous Secretary of the Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development, and of the Department of Communications and the Arts.

(ps I also note that Murky is also the Chair of the Airport Development Group / Northern Territory Airports)

Hmm...dodgy? Nah..nothing to see here - 

Finally, from one of the ultimate Can'tberra topcover minions, I note that HVH is yet again self-promoting...

 Via Linkedin:

Greg Hood

Deputy Chair Airservices Australia

Hoping to make a positive contribution as a mentor following an interesting and fulfilling 42 year career in aviation (and still going)! #career #aviation #womeninaviation



Greg Hood — Mentoring Women in Aviation

• 1 min read

MTF...P2 

[Peetwo]

Time to go back to ToRs on the Westminster system? -   

(Ref:- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Westminster_system)



Via the AP email chains:

Dear Blank (fill in your favourite Federal MP or Senator -   )

The Age quotes Albanese:-

“ Albanese said Morrison had been running a “shadow government” that was “unbecoming, cynical and just weird ... contrary to the Westminster system”. 

Albanese removed the Australian Transport Safety Bureau from his Department in 2009. It’s functioning has been downhill since then (often just a cover for CASA). 

In 1988 Labor Transport Minister Gareth Evans did the same with Aviation and CASA has been a disaster for what used to be a thriving General Aviation industry. 

Albanese wouldn’t know about the Westminster system if he fell over it. 

And:

Just retired ATSB CEO Greg Hood was ex CASA and thick with previous CASA boss Shane Carmody. I’ve personally seen them working together, at an Avalon airshow seminar.

ATSB accident reports are very soft on CASA’s regulatory or administrative faults that have had contributive bearings on particular accidents. So much so that a Senate Committee investigation caused an independent review by Canada’s Transportation Safety Board.

https://www.bst-tsb.gc.ca/eng/coll/2014/...41201.html

Excerpts:-

“ The TSB Review of the Norfolk Island investigation revealed lapses in the application of the ATSB methodology with respect to the collection of factual information, and a lack of an iterative approach to analysis. ……..

……. First of all, an early misunderstanding about the responsibilities of the Australian Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) and the ATSB in the investigation was never resolved.”

And still isn’t, with obvious repercussions for the safety of flight in Australia.

A direct result of the absence of Westminster system Ministerial oversight and responsibility.

 (Compliments to Sandy -   )

MTF...P2 

[Peetwo]

Sandy on a mission - 

Via the UP:

The ASIC is impractical and worse than useless

A very well known and highly experienced instructor and charter pilot, retired a couple of years ago, confided to me that the initial ASIC was acquired (when first promulgated) and was used until retirement.

This person flew regularly from the base security controlled airport (SCA) to and fro to many other SCAs.

Never pulled up for wearing an expired card.

Apart from the obvious impediment to the general attraction of GA and therefore contributing to its decline, it’s meant that some outback flyers have been reluctant to service their aircraft where maintenance is, for some, within practical reach only at an SCA.

Broken Hill would likely be a good example, used to be a very busy GA airport with several dozen aircraft on tie-downs and numbers parked in and around the now non existent maintenance business. Last time there about four years ago, maybe half dozen GA aircraft.

Another unfortunate unintended consequence is that there are far fewer knowledgeable eyes at SCAs, eyes that might pick up on suspicious behaviour.

There’s been a few suggestions in this thread about how to change the ASIC to make it more palatable. I’m drawn to LB’s thoughts:-

“I’ve always been struck by the fact that many pilots are their own worst-enemy. They revel in the mystique of aviation, which merely invites more and more regulation and bureaucratic intrusion. Flying is ‘special’. We must make sure only special people - like me - can fly. People with the ‘right’ ‘background’ - like me.”

Human nature has its various qualities, ego is undoubtedly playing out here. Having been CFI and CP, including RPT, and active flying from the mid 60s, I look back and ask why should we not fly in a regulatory environment that would have similarity in risk management with other means of transport, such on our roads. I don’t agree that BFRs are necessary, and I heard today that CASA is requiring the instructor rating to qualify for Chief Pilot. The applicant, with one five pax twin and a couple of singles has been trying for three months (so far) to obtain a charter AOC, CASA keeps on coming back for rewrites. How different in the USA where there’s a practical template and minimal cost, or as it used to be here. I started with a charter licence by submitting a 12 page ops manual, no interviews and no fees paid. If Australians want to be strong in an uncertain world, and want prosperity for health and happiness then free enterprise must prevail, people vote with their money and assess risk. If we want to encourage responsibility then, at least by degrees, people must be allowed to choose.

It all comes back to politics, and few people actually engage with their representatives. Politics should be seen to be our most important skill in society and we need to grow up in this regard because all too often we denigrate politics and politicians. Maybe it’s because it’s too much like hard work to be really involved and it confronts our own behaviour in the sense of what we would be like if in the shoes of MPs.

Next via the AP email chains, Sandy in reply to this Scott Hargreaves letter to IPA members:

Dear IPA Members

Talking with IPA members about the challenges facing Australia, it’s not uncommon to hear the lament: ‘where are the business leaders?’, with the emphasis on leadership. Australia over many generations benefitted from great business leaders who provided leadership to the wider community by identifying the challenges of national development, and keeping politicians focussed on the power of markets to unleash prosperity. Some of them came together to found the IPA in 1943. Whereas now there is perception that most corporate CEOs mainly grandstand on woke issues under the guise of ‘ESG’ concerns. 

But at least on Wednesday this week, thanks to [i]The Australian Financial Review[/i], we know exactly where Australia’s official business leadership was: on the Prime Minister’s jet travelling from the Business Council’s conference in Sydney to the Jobs and Skills Summit at Parliament House. Even the Qantas CEO Alan Joyce caught a lift – perhaps he didn’t want to fly on his own airline in case he got a last-minute text saying his flight has been cancelled as experienced by so many Australians recently.

As I will discuss further down in this email, the Summit is not actually focussed on the real issues facing Australia. It is an exercise in what is called corporatism; the idea that Big Government, Big Unions and Big Business can sit down and agree on what should be done. They meet in the Great Hall at Parliament while the chambers of the House of Representatives and the Senate, where the people’s representatives sit, lie empty. It is by its nature a project of the elite institutions. It is our local version of what in America they call ‘the Swamp’.

This was also a criticism of the original summit convened by Bob Hawke in 1983, but that at least had a broad remit to look at the key economic issues facing the nation. The 2022 version was limited to ‘Jobs and Skills’ – and then stacked with unions who made up 25 per cent of attendees. The result from Day One was a series of stage managed ‘outcomes’ in industrial relations, for what the Albanese Government and the union movement wanted to do anyway.

The rejoinder might be that 25% of the attendees were from ‘business’, but what we increasingly see in Australia is that the peak industry bodies are becoming more and more detached from the views of their members, and more and more reliant on government. Earlier this year I checked the annual report of a State Chamber of Commerce and saw that revenue from governments exceeded that from members – as it soaked up grants for ‘training’, ‘marketing’ and so on. How likely are they to go against the preferred narrative of Government?

Political editor for The Australian Financial Review, Phil Coorey, said it was like a ‘two-day episode of The Drum’, referring to the ABC’s program on which ‘approved’ voices get to appear and agree with each other on why the government should do more on issue x, y or z. It is now 1,592 days since anyone from the IPA was invited to appear on The Drum (and come to think of it, the IPA’s invitation to the Jobs and Skills Summit must have gotten lost in the mail). In any event, Coorey concluded:

All the public sees is a government being collegiate and consultative, unaware and unfazed it may have all been pre-ordained.

Small business barely gets a look in, and didn’t go much beyond the Council of Small Business Organisation (COSBOA). It doesn’t fit the corporatist model. COSBOA, meanwhile, has agreed to the Government and union proposal to shift from enterprise bargaining to a ‘multi-employer’ model, and this is being touted as a ‘win’, but those who remember the damage done to business by ‘pattern bargaining’ in the 1970s and 80s would disagree.

To me it seems more that the pressures put on small business by the current system are so intolerable they’re prepared to consider something else. The Age in Melbourne this week reported on the struggles of my favourite independent chain of bookstores, Readings, which employs 170 people and has been put through hell in its struggles to conclude an enterprise agreement opposed by the Retail and Fast Food Workers Union.

It’s dividing staff ... they’ve been mounting a public campaign outside the shop which has been very distressing for me and others who work for me, as the people outside the shop aren’t Readings staff members.

That quote is from the founder, Mark Rubbo. No wonder the article says:

He is open to multi-employer bargaining agreements after describing his business as being locked in a ‘traumatic’ and ‘extremely expensive’ enterprising bargaining stoush.

As the Maritime Union leader, Christy Cain, said of the invite list for the Summit: ‘If you’re not at the table, you’re part of the menu’.

In a shameless digression I might say also that no-one invited Zoe Buhler to the summit to talk about being arrested and handcuffed in her own kitchen while pregnant, in front of her children, or more generally the damage done to the rule of law in Australia by draconian lockdowns, particularly in Victoria. Fortunately, Zoe had her own forum to speak to Australians, on the steps of the Ballarat Magistrates’ Court, with the IPA’s John Roskam standing beside her.

I was very proud of the IPA when I saw the photos of John and Zoe on our Facebook page, and the interviews with them both on the main TV channels [Watch coverage on Channel 7 here], and when I read Chetna’s wonderful email to members yesterday. The positive response has been overwhelming. As one member wrote, ‘the IPA’s support of Zoe is the reason I am an IPA member’.

So what should a meeting of the nation’s actual leaders talk about? For that I will turn to one of our newer and younger Research Fellows, Paddy O’Leary, who has just published in Sydney’s The Daily Telegraph a terrific article on the real context our nation’s leaders should be considering:

Today, as tensions rise throughout the Indo-Pacific with China’s expansionist intent on show for all, a frank assessment of Australia’s resilience is overdue.
On a recent podcast episode with the Institute of Public Affairs, former Prime Minister, Tony Abbott, highlighted three crucial components for national defence: alliances, firepower and national resilience.
Alliances and firepower are obvious. ‘The one thing we’re not thinking about at all’, the former PM emphasised, ‘is the national resilience piece and that’s what we really need to be focusing on’.
National resilience involves safeguarding supply chains, securing our energy independence, stockpiling crucial resources and ensuring we have the means to function in times of great crisis.

Mainstream Australians understand the linkages between energy security and national security, even if those gathered in Parliament House this week do not. In March 2022, the IPA commissioned a poll of 1,007 Australians and 61% of those thought ‘The federal government should be more focussed on national defence than meeting Australia’s net zero emissions by 2050 target.’ [Read here]

Paddy is a Research Fellow within the IPA’s Centre for the Australian Way of Life, and makes the link between our national security and the state of our culture:

The fundamental prerequisite for any national security and defence strategy is a citizenry who are willing to fight, endure and, if necessary, sacrifice because they believe their country is worth defending. Patriotism, of the humble and dutiful kind, is just as important as submarines. Henry Kissinger, in his most recent book Leadership, points this out: ‘No society can remain great if it loses faith in itself or if it systematically impugns its self-perception.’
It would be naive to assume that decades of culture wars, identity politics, climate doomism and historical revision have not affected our willingness to endure the costliest of burdens – war – to preserve the Australia we know today.

Paddy pointed to the corrosive impact of the National Curriculum and the deconstruction of our national heritage undertaken within our universities, and says:

All of this has an effect. Many Australians have lost trust in political authority, traditional institutions are decaying and ideas of national identity are dividing rather than uniting.
Earlier this year polling commissioned by the IPA revealed that barely one-third of young Australians surveyed believe Australia is worth fighting for. The nation we are today is the outcome of a long history of efforts, sacrifices and fidelities. Australia, for all its flaws, is a remarkably successful country with an extraordinary history.

This is why we have the IPA, and the Centre for the Australian Way of Life, and why we are proud to provide an opportunity for young Australians like Paddy who can make the case for Australia. As he concludes:

We are far from perfect and there is work to be done. But what we have is worth defending. [Read here]

Thank you for your support.

Scott

Scott Hargreaves

Executive Director
Institute of Public Affairs

Sandy's reply:

Excellent letter Scott, thank you. 


Resilience goes to our strength and our posture as seen by states with potentially coercive, or worse, intentions. A ‘think twice’ stance from us. 

This is why I’m passionate about the 3/4 bureaucratic destruction of our General Aviation (GA) industry and the irresponsible alienation of Commonwealth airport land away from aviation uses. Particularly at our major secondary airports, Moorabbin and Bankstown as examples (they used to vie with each other as to which was the busiest in the Southern Hemisphere) where aviation businesses have been evicted in favour of warehouses for the profit of land developers. 

Aviation allows speedy transport of personnel and materiel, of crucial importance for defence. 

Successive governments, since Gareth Evans pushed aviation out of his Department in 1988, have allowed a runaway Commonwealth monopoly corporate to fee gouge and run a continuous make work program with ever more extreme and complex regulations. The Parliament rubber stamps all, including inappropriately migrating the regulations (a mountain) into the criminal code. As a private pilot I could be prosecuted for the criminal offence of not filling in my log book. This ‘crime’ doesn’t rate a mention in the USA.  

But wait there’s worse.

Zoe Buhler, of course a shocking transgression of our freedoms, but the very well respected Glen Buckley of Australian Pilot Training Alliance has lost his business, had to sack employees, tried to carry his staff but finished up losing his home. He was taken on as an interim pilot instructor with another firm but lost that job because CASA told his employer that it couldn’t countenance him in any GA employment. 

His only sin, no safety issues anywhere, an exemplary operator, was creating a practical system for flying training clubs and businesses to comply with CASA’s extreme, complex (unnecessary) and very expensive new strictures under an umbrella organisation. 

If interested search Glen Buckley and APTA. 

You couldn’t make it up and be believed. 

Rule of law? Where’s our leadership? 

Sandy Reith 

MTF...P2 

[Peetwo]

Lead Balloon on the irrelevancy of the Commonwealth Ombudsman's office - 

Via the GlenB UP thread: https://www.pprune.org/pacific-general-a...st11322854

Lead Balloon

If you want some insight into the extent to which the Ombudsman’s office has been compromised, you might recall its 2017 report into Centrelink’s automated debt raising and recovery system (commonly known as ‘RoboDebt’). At today’s hearing of the RoboDebt Royal Commission, internal legal advices provided to the agency were tendered. Those advices were to the effect that it was not lawful to use ‘averaged’ ATO income information as the sole and conclusive basis on which to calculate and pursue debts. But that’s precisely what the ‘online compliance intervention’ system did (unless the victim was able to battle the inadequate Centrelink communications system – the first witness today described having to send a 71 page fax of bank statements, twice (you remember faxes?) after conversations with ‘someone’ in Centrelink, which faxes were then ‘lost’ by Centrelink).

The Ombudsman didn’t bother to ask whether Centrelink had sought and obtained legal advice about the lawfulness of the ‘online compliance intervention’ system. [But see my correction below.] The Ombudsman did say this in his report, though:

We asked DHS whether it had done modelling on how many debts were likely to be over-calculated as opposed to under-calculated. DHS advised no such modelling was done. In our view the risk of over-recovering debts from social security recipients should be the subject of more thorough research and analysis.

That’s some special genius, right there.

Maybe there should be some kind of government ‘watchdog’ with power to look into whether a government agency is pursuing powerless individuals for alleged debts that don’t exist. Let’s call that ‘watchdog’ the ‘Ombudsman’. And let’s appoint as ‘Ombudsman’ someone who understands that ‘over-recovering debts’ is a euphemism for taking money off people when they don’t actually owe it. After all, a drover’s dog knows that it’s unlawful and immoral to take money off people when they don’t actually owe it and hopefully there are candidates out there with the smarts and integrity of a drover’s dog.

Correction added 2 Nov 22: According to proceedings today at the Royal Commission, the Ombudsman did ask for legal advices about the use of 'averaged' income data as the sole basis for calculating and pursuing debts. There followed an internal Departmental discussion about whether to provide to the Ombudsman the late 2014 advice as well as a January 2017 advice that appeared to be inconsistent with the former, but the latter - according to the lawyer who provided the advice (today's witness) - was an answer to a different and specific and highly hypothetical scenario. The author of the 2017 advice did not know whether the 2014 advice - which had been 'second counselled' by the author of the 2017 advice, was ever given to the Ombudsman. I can't find any reference to that request or what the Ombudsman did about the response, in the Ombudsman's report. In any event, I stand by my overarching view that ‘over-recovering debts’ is a euphemism for taking money off people when they don’t actually owe it, and that should have rung alarm bells, long and loud, in the Ombudsman's Office.

---

Sandy Reith

Watchdogs

LB has illustrated the woeful inadequacies of yet another of our myriad ‘independent’ government agencies.

Undoubtably we could enhance our government with a new and accountable means of investigating and overseeing the machinations of the mighty juggernaut that’s known as the Public Sector (once was the Public Service).

Here’s a suggestion, we vote for representatives who will pursue our particular concerns on our behalf. We could have them come together in a place of speaking together and call it Parliament. They would have to understand that they not only made law but they were also responsible to their individual constituents.

---

Lead Balloon

In fairness, I should say that I’ve had considerable success in complaining to the Commonwealth Ombudsman’s Office about bureaucrats who were labouring under the misconception that their compliance with the law was optional. Strong and effective action by the Ombudsman’s Office recalibrated the bureaucrats and I was consequently paid money to which I was entitled. But that was over two decades ago.

Since then the Commonwealth Ombudsman has also become:

- the Postal Industry Ombudsman

- the Overseas Students Ombudsman

- the Private Health Insurance Ombudsman, and

- the VET Student Loans Ombudsman.

You (Sandy) have identified elsewhere the annual budget of the Commonwealth Ombudsman. My view is that the budget would have to be ten times that in order for the Ombudsman to do, properly, all of the jobs the Commonwealth Ombudsman's Office is now supposed to do.

All of the phaffing around on Glen's matter indicate to me an organisation which is, at best, out of its depth. It's not that hard to work out what CASA knew - constructively if not actually - about APTA's legal relationship with and operational control of the people, premises and aircraft to be engaged in operations the subject of each application for a variation to APTA's AOC to cover those operations. As I've said before, that was (and remains) the very purpose of an AOC variation process.

MTF...P2 

[Peetwo]

AP Caption Competition - 

Via Linkedin:

"..The privilege is in having a wonderful team who nominated me for this award. Work hard, but find a bit of fun. Okay, a lot of fun. And share it with everyone..."
Ref: https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn...758878208/

Here is one IOS member's response to that attempted downplay of self-aggrandisement...  

"..Self indulgence regarding another CBR awards night. It’s so disconnected from reality, as you know. The ANAO should audit the numbers of these gestures and measure their performance. At least there’d be some achievements to read about.."

 

And courtesy Robocop Popinjay:

Ref: https://lnkd.in/gxMShkAK

Here's one nomination for this week's APCC choccy frog award (part in bold)...  

This is gold. Popinjay “action man” superhero, kitted up alongside some other braided PR type. The big announcement? We’re hiring junior staff!!!

And it gets worse! It’s media and PR!!

Great demonstration, publicly, of what’s important!!

This photo could have the caption “police eye off Popinjay for impersonating them, particularly his clothing, but it is the new style facial hair that’s got our interest”..

MTF...P2 

[Peetwo]

Senator Jacinta Nampijinpa Price Essay - 'The heart of the matter'

Via the Oz: 

---

The heart of the matter
All Australians are created equal, and they should be treated in the same manner.

By JACINTA NAMPIJINPA PRICE

A portrait of Jacinta Nampijinpa Price by Johannes Leak from the State Library of NSW collection.

“When you want to help people, you tell them the truth. When you want to help yourself, you tell them what they want to hear.”

That’s one of my favourite quotes from Thomas Sowell, the great American writer and thinker. Sowell grew up in segregated North Carolina, and then lived in Harlem. His father died before he was born and his mother was unable to care for him; consequently, his brother and sisters had him adopted by his great-aunt. After Sowell dropped out of high school he was drafted into the US Marine Corps during the Korean War. After his discharge he studied at Harvard University, Columbia University and the University of Chicago, and he’s regarded as one of the most brilliant economists of his generation. Sowell has fought against ignorance and racism all his life and he’s done that on the basis that we are all individuals worthy of respect, regardless of our skin colour or background.

We are all entitled to the dignity of being treated as individuals who can make choices and have responsibilities. Unfortunately, this is not how the left see it. The left seek to divide us by pigeon-holing society into two classes, the oppressors and the oppressed. They have carefully manufactured gender stereotypes for men and women while, simultaneously, generating brand-new gender constructs. They have also developed racial stereotypes, enshrined within Critical Race Theory, to condemn the “white race” as oppressors, and subjugate “people of colour” as victims. If I were to follow leftist dogma and regard myself as nothing more than an oppressed Aboriginal woman, I would be wallowing in my victimhood and rationalising the notion that I am inferior to my oppressors. According to that dogma I have no agency in my life and no ability to make choices. This is dogma that we must reject, for many reasons, not the least because it is patronising and deeply dehumanising.

We are a lucky people living in a lucky nation. Our way of life, democracy, and freedoms are the envy of the world. We have welcomed millions of people to our shores and there are so many more people who would rather live in Australia than anywhere else. But we can never forget that nations, just like individuals, very much make their own luck. We are lucky Australia was settled by the British rather than colonialists from any other country. History cannot be undone, and the inevitable inquiring explorations of mankind have meant all corners of the Earth have been settled. This landmass we call home was never going to be left untouched by anyone other than our First Peoples. The British brought with them the rule of law, concepts such as freedom of speech and freedom of religion, and what became our democracy. Too often when young Australians are taught history, these gifts are either ignored or taken for granted. Yes, like every nation our history features dark and shameful incidents but that is not our whole history. We shouldn’t shy away from the fact that our history is made up of the good and the bad. There is much to celebrate from our efforts to strive to make better lives for all Australians.


We need to focus on nation building, not nation burning, writes Jacinta Nampijinpa Price.

Our nation’s schools’ sole responsibility should be to educate, not indoctrinate, but we have in recent times witnessed the overwhelming politicisation of our children. Children are now encouraged to skip school to be paraded as activist spearheads by adults who place the weight of the world on their shoulders. Meanwhile, children in remote communities, where school atten­dance rates are in some places as low as 19 per cent, do not have the privilege of gaining an education that the activist class take for granted. Everyone wants to be an activist – to push governments to solve their dilemmas – but no one wants to be responsible for themselves.

Our aim should not be to blame our current democratic institutions for all our perceived failures but to encourage the individual responsibility of all Australians. We need to focus on nation building, not nation burning.

Cancel culture’s war on free thinking and free speech must be brought to an end. In order for future generations to benefit from common sense we must arm ourselves with the weapon of truth and stand unified with pride in our shared Australian values and national identity.

When we live in reality, when we call out and say “the emperor has no clothes”, we can begin to solve some of our most challenging problems and we can begin to lift our marginalised out of the pit of their despair. It is time to reassert the values that all good and decent people have fought the hard, long battle to impose through law, the right to freedom of speech, and the overcoming of racism and sexism. All it takes is courage and good sense.

When cultures collide, as happened in Australia over two centuries ago, everyone is affected, for good and for ill. My mother was born under a tree and lived within an original Warlpiri structured environment through a kinship system on Aboriginal land. Her first language was Warlpiri, and her parents, my grandparents, only came into contact with white settlers in their early adolescence in the 1940s. I’m proud my family are from the Northern Territory. In the Territory we call a spade a spade. We are realists and this is likely due to the direct connection to our environment. We have space to think, and the harsh reality of our country is that you need to be very aware of your surroundings and yourself; otherwise, you could perish rather quickly. We had the foundation of a sophisticated but brutal culture, where it was kill or be killed over resources such as water, women and later livestock – food for survival – or from doing the wrong thing like marrying the wrong way or sharing knowledge that’s not yours to share.


Over 250,000 walking across Sydney Harbour Bridge for Walk for Reconciliation in 2000. Picture: Troy Bendeich

I can understand the widespread willingness to recognise Australia’s Indigenous heritage. But most of that “recognition” is virtue-signalling.

In Australia, we have experienced historically significant acts of symbolism that include the 2000 reconciliation walk across Sydney Harbour Bridge. For six hours, 250,000 Australians of all backgrounds walked together to demonstrate the fact that we are not racist but are overwhelmingly in support of Aboriginal Australia. We have spent a week every year since, commemorating this event and what it means.

Throughout Australia, the reinvention of culture has brought us welcome to country or recognition of country, a standard ritual practice before events, meetings and social gatherings by governments, corporates, institutions, primary schools, kindergartens, high schools, universities, workplaces, music festivals, gallery openings, conferences, airline broadcasts and so on and so forth. I personally have had more than my fill of being symbolically recognised.

Australians of Indigenous heritage haven’t only been racially stereotyped – we’ve been politically stereotyped too. Because of my skin colour I’m supposed to vote Labor. It was an exchange with the former leader of the Labor Party Bill Hayden, who conveyed this very stereotype, that compelled Neville Bonner to confirm his membership within the Liberal Party of Australia. Bonner had been handing out how-to-vote cards for a Liberal friend when Hayden exclaimed, “What are you doing handing out those how-to-vote cards? We do more for you bloody Aborigines than those bastards do.” “Well,” Bonner thought, “How dare someone come up to me and presume that, because I’m black, I should support a particular party!”

It is the same attitude we hear with platitudes of motherhood statements from our now Prime Minister, who suggests, without any evidence whatsoever, that a Voice to parliament bestowed upon us through the virtuous act of symbolic gesture by this government is what is going to empower us. This government has yet to demonstrate how this proposed Voice will deliver practical outcomes and unite, rather than drive a wedge further between Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australia. And, no, Prime Minister, we don’t need another handout, as you have described the Uluru statement to be. No – we Indigenous Australians have not come to agreement on this statement, as you have also claimed. It would be far more dignifying if we were recognised and respected as individuals in our own right who are not simply defined by our racial heritage but by the content of our character.

For all the symbolism and the “recognition” the left claims it provides to Indigenous Australians, the left continues to ignore Indigenous communities. The lifting of alcohol bans in dry communities, despite the warnings from elders, will see the scourge of alcoholism and violence return to those communities. Coupled with this, we see the removal of the cashless debit card, which allowed countless families on welfare to feed their children rather than seeing the money claimed by kinship demand from alcoholics, substance abusers and gamblers in their own family group. I could not offer two more appalling examples of legislation pushed by left-wing elites guaranteed to worsen the lives of Indigenous people. Yet at the same time we spend days and weeks each year recognising Aboriginal Australia in many ways – in symbolic gestures that fail to push the needle one micro-millimetre toward improving the lives of the most marginalised in any genuine way.

The left are more interested in symbolism than outcomes. Symbolism is easy. Creating a symbol is a one-off act that doesn’t require diligence and persistence. Once it’s done it’s done, and you can move on to the next symbol of your virtue. Achieving outcomes is hard. There are no easy wins and achievement is measured not on the front page of a newspaper but over years and decades of hard work.

More recently the emotional weaponisation of the word “heart” in Uluru Statement from the Heart, the Voice and now the repeated use of the question “if not now, then when?” have all been crafted to appeal to our emotions. But we have every right to question, seek clarity or outright disagree with a vague proposal that’s being sold as a completely new approach to resolving disadvantage.

I began this essay by quoting Thomas Sowell. Something else he said goes like this – “If you have always believed that everyone should play by the same rules and be judged by the same standards, that would have gotten you labelled a radical 60 years ago, a liberal 30 years ago and a racist today.” I believe one of our great strengths as a country is that, as Australians, we all play by the same rules and every Australian is entitled to equal dignity and respect, regardless of our background and upbringing, and regardless of how many generations our forebears have been here. Australia is a great country and our way of life is the envy of the world. I am proud to be Australian.

Jacinta Nampijinpa Price is a Country Liberal Party senator for the NT. This essay for Essays for Australia draws on some of her recent comments and writing.

---

MTF...P2 

[Peetwo]

Sandy in reply to Senator Sarah Henderson:

Via AP emails:

ABC Four Corners’ code breaches demand journalistic standards review not arrogant attack on media regulator

The attack by the ABC on Australia’s media regulator reeks of arrogance and self-entitlement, and is completely unacceptable. 

The finding by the Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA) that the Four Corners program “Fox and the Big Lie” breached accuracy and fair and honest dealing requirements of the ABC Code of Practice is serious.

The finding warrants a comprehensive review by the ABC as to how journalistic standards at Four Corners, and across ABC news and current affairs programs more broadly, can be improved.

However, rather than learn the lessons of these code breaches, the ABC has improperly attacked the independent regulator demonstrating an untenable disregard for the need to comply with its own Code of Practice.

This response, in itself, brings the ABC into disrepute and builds the case for further legislative reform of the national broadcaster.

I call on Managing Director, David Anderson, to implement a full review of ABC journalistic standards in response to the ACMA’s adverse finding.  How can Australians have full trust in a public broadcaster which does not consistently acknowledge and remedy its failings?  I also raise concerns about the ABC’s failure to declare a potential conflict of interest between the author of its public statement on this matter and a Four Corners reporter.

I note with disappointment that Labor’s Communications Minister, Michelle Rowland, has declined to defend the important work of the ACMA, an independent Commonwealth statutory authority, which is responsible for regulating communications and media services in Australia.
22 December 2022


Media Contact
Kerry Ridgeway
0408 316 298
kerry.ridgeway@aph.gov.au

Sandy's reply:

Sarah,

That arrogance and self serving attitude is not confined to the ABC. 

Remember how Immigration threatened to deport Belle if I did not quit asking for the extra $2000 that I was forced to pay due the proven lie (tracking info) that they only received my papers several weeks later? 

They never paid up. 

Or CASA, I wrote to the CEO Pip Spence in June and, despite separate attempts, couldn’t get even an acknowledgement of receipt of correspondence until belatedly through Dan Tehan, after months, he got a nothing answer, signed by Pip Spence, but obviously written by a nothing underling with no grasp of the issues. 

Or the ATSB who cry poor and won’t investigate a mid-air collision that cost several lives. The same organisation that was audited by the Canadian Transportation Board in a peer review which resulted in a scathing and embarrassing expose’ of our now independent ATSB. 

Why? It’s obvious that the corporatisation of the arms of government, giving power to independent statutory bodies, is a denial of the Westminster principle of Ministerial responsibility. This is much to blame for the intolerable and costly transformation of the Public Service into the Public Sector. 

This Public Sector is increasingly in competition, unfair competition, with the Private sector. Unfair because of monopoly power. For example the independent corporate CASA has invented a plethora of unnecessary permissions for which it charges exorbitant fees. Such statutory authorities are supposed to follow a Minister’s Statement of Expectations. These Statements are merely weak and generalised suggestions with no force of law behind them. Thus they breed ill disguised contempt for any questioning, even from MPs. 

This diseased state of affairs is part and parcel of the Canberra machine, ‘Government Industries’ well and truly on its own trajectory and detracting from our prosperity, opportunities and strength as a Nation. 

Unless and until elected Parliamentary Representatives decide to reverse the trend, and take the democratic responsibility conferred by the voting public, then the bureaucracy will continue to rule for itself. Governance via Departments with responsible Ministers must be the principle means of administration. 

The naive notion that the arms of government can be hived off to government sponsored monopoly corporates who will govern with high efficiency at the lowest cost, at the same time mindful and concerned to follow the will of the voting public, is wishful thinking at best, denial of representative responsibility at worst. 

Sandy 
Both CASA and the ATSB are creatures of Labor Ministers, Gareth Evans the former, Anthony Albanese the latter.  

While on the subject of GI (Government industry) agencies that arrogantly ignore stakeholder and taxpayer concerns, I note the following Senator McDonald tabled correspondence to her from legal firm Emanate, representing landowners who are to be affected by the ARTC (Australian Rail Track Corporation) land buy up for the planned inland rail project: Ref - https://auntypru.com/wp-content/uploads/...letter.pdf

 

Attention: Senator Susan McDonald
Australian Rail Track Corporation (ARTC)
Transport for New South Wales (TfNSW)
Relevant Matter
ARTC: Emanate Landowners

Background
Emanate is retained on behalf of eighteen (18) Landowners (LO) along the North Star to Border
and Narrowmine to Narrabri projects, two (2) of the thirteen (13) projects which make up the
total ARTC: Inland Rail Project.

Each of (18) LO have been delivered “Opening Letters” over different dates ranging from
November 2021 to February 2022 which state an Offer will be delivered within the terms of the
Land Acquisition (Just Terms Compensation) Act 1991 (NSW) (Act).

To date:
1. No Offer in terms of Act has been delivered;
2. No clarity of a way forward has been delivered;
3. No substantive indication / timing of when LO may expect to receive an Offer has been
delivered;
4. No expert reports which identify any impacts of rail on Land as prepared by Inland Rail
experts, which consider detailed, final design of the railway or rail crossings so as LO is aware
of their interface with the railway line, or how LO will have to rearrange, redesign, and
redevelop their businesses after construction of rail, to be able to continue to operate around
a newly constructed railway system including crossings, have been delivered;
5. LO experts’ have provided Emanate with details as to the documentation and materials which
each require to enable them to properly predict / consider and detail the impacts of the
construction of the railway line and its associated infrastructure on Lands;
6. We have requested the reports in our emails, however, ARTC, as agent for TfNSW, have failed
to deliver any updated or current information / expert reports which relate to LO lands;
7. We have requested actual expert Flood Modelling, used by ARTC and TfNSW in their
assessment of the flood impacts upon the land, in excess of ten (10) occasions as detailed
hereafter at item ten (10) to item twenty (20);
8. ARTC and TfNSW refuse to deliver expert flood model, so as to enable LO retained hydrology
expert to complete his duties to the required standard, so as LO have an accurate idea of the
flood impacts which will definitely impact on their land as a direct and natural consequence of
the construction of the railway line, which is their right as a disposed Landowner;
9. ARTC have not delivered any agreement / confirmation of payment of LO legal, valuation,
hydrology and or other expert reports required to assist in assessing impacts on Land in
accord with Act.

Requests for Information

Emanate has written to ARTC and TfNSW through both their internal legal department, and
solicitors: Clayton Utz requesting delivery of expert reports / documents / material to the
assessment of impacts of Inland Rail project will have on LO lands, on the following dates:
10. Friday, 11 February 2022;
11. Tuesday 22 February 2022;
12. Wednesday 2 March 2022;
13. Thursday 3 March 2022;
14. Friday 19 March 2022;
15. Wednesday 13 April 2022;
16. Wednesday 20 April 2022;
17. Monday 16 May 2022;
18. Wednesday 8 June 2022;
19. Thursday 21 July 2022; and
20. Thursday 4 August 2022;
which detail, the following, which is required for LO retained experts to complete their duties as
retained:
21. ARTC Map identifying ARTC Rail updated construction batter locations on Land;
22. actual digital flood model prepared by ARTC engineers which has been used and relied upon
by ARTC and their consultants to predict flood behaviour or impacts of overland flow water, as
it impacts Land;
23. details of the ARTC detailed design for ARTC project area;
24. Specific reference to updated ARTC concept design for ARTC project in EIS; and
25. Specific PDF set of updated ARTC engineering drawings detailing and presenting the current
updated state of the rail track and batter design.

Despite our repeated requests for information, and despite Emanates best efforts, ARTC and
TfNSW continue to refuse access to updated, most recent and relevant documentation, directing
us to either the Inland Rail website, or provided expert reports /documentation which are not
current or up to date.

Further Issues
Further, ARTC have not in any way delivered to LO any clarity or information with regard to their
interface with the railway in the future, and in most instances, are denying LO crossings or access
to the land which they now freely traverse to run their businesses, this being despite Rail Safety
National Law (NSW) No 82a section 108 [5] which states parties must negotiate interface.
Inland Rail, have instead, decided where they will place crossings and the like, without any
consultation with the LO, and without any regard to how they run their businesses.

It follows, many of the LO which have retained Emanate have lost all faith in ARTC and TfNSW,
their continued lack of clarity, is ultimately, leading to an untenable position between all LO and
ARTC / TfNSW.

Summary
It is unacceptable, for a federal government owned corporation (ARTC) not to deliver expert
reports as they impact lands, or any information which relates to LO interface with the railway,
to LO, whose lives and businesses relate to relate Land, which is being taken, by a project which
has delivered no clarity as to if it will even be completed.

Going Forward
Would you please assist / investigate and or arrange conferences with the ARTC decision makers
to determine / agree a way forward.

We are available to confer / meet to enable discussions to proceed ASAP.

Future Action
Should you wish to discuss the foregoing please do not hesitate to contact Barry Taylor
.
Kind Regards,

 ...        

MTF...P2 

[Kharon]

Ho, Ho, Ho - Holy cluster - ducks Batman!

For my sins, I thought long and hard about putting this twiddle up on the forum; it is only the opinion of one man – but, in faith, it represents the opinion of many, many others. Those affected, directly or indirectly by the bloody woeful state the 'official' management of Australasian aviation (under the incumbent minister) has degenerated into and continues to languish; this, despite millions spent on ensuring plausible deniability for government responsibility. I write for those who have a long, long, legitimate list of very valid, reasoned and supported complaint. It is up to the incumbent minister to not only acknowledge these real, valid complaints; but to rectify the glaring obscenities perpetrated and resident within their very own creation. They created this 'Frankenstein' : no one else could. Now it must be fixed - by those as created it. Why? Well no one else can – that's why.

“O, beware, my lord, of jealousy;

It is the green-ey'd monster, which doth mock

The meat it feeds on.”

Where to begin? There is more than enough empirical evidence available, from this last year, standing alone, to support an industry wide call for a broad brush reform of the way in which the aviation industry is managed by the 'authorities'. The 'head of power' and ultimate fiscal responsibility resides with the minister; no matter how much 'wriggle room' and distance is placed between that power base and ministerial responsibility. In purely value for tax payer and industry dollars, the Australian public is paying way over the odds for the services delivered; this is the price the country pays for ministerial distance. This 'distance' ploy has paved the way to some serious exposure, legal, political and fiscal. Just one of the many examples for consideration is the disgraceful response to the Essendon event. In so many ways the flaws within the entire 'system' – from DoIT approval for the build up; to the shameful ATSB 'investigation', to the CASA light approach to the fitness of the pilot to fly make a mockery; advantaging only through public gullibility. Make no mistake, the American lawyers representing the families will, eventually, have their days in court. There will be blow back. If AP can clearly define the daisy chain, imagine what a team of dedicated, experienced, connected, savvy, legal brains and independent 'investigators' will weed out.

“That is no excuse," returned Mr. Brownlow. "You were present on the occasion of the destruction of these trinkets, and, indeed, are the more guilty of the two, in the eye of the law; for the law supposes that your wife acts under your direction."

How can any responsible politician wash their hands of the ATSB and with a clear conscience turn away from the shame and potential legal embarrassment this outfit is bringing to this nation. There are peerless 'accident investigation' outfits on this planet; ISASI for one, NTSB for another, Canadian TSB, UK AAI, for others; a tight knit global fraternity of 'Tin-kickers'. It would behove any minister to have a 'quiet chat' with these outfits; off the record, no names, no pack drill; just advice and opinion. Then forearmed, rebuild from the ground up; save a fortune and provide an operation of some value to the industry it is supposed to serve. Sooner or later, there is going to be 'trouble' with the legal profession if this ATSB pantomime is allowed to continue; particularly in regard to Coronial inquest findings. 


What is the relationship between a coronial inquest and a civil law claim?
A Coroner cannot determine civil liability, although the Coroner’s finding may be relied upon in subsequent civil proceedings and/or insurance claims. As such, the inquest may be a useful source of evidence for future civil proceedings.



It is important to note that the Coroner does not make a finding as to guilt or innocence of criminal liability and is similarly required to refrain from making a finding that appears to determine civil liability.



Where the Coroner’s findings suggest there may have been negligence on the part of any person, it is up to the relatives of the deceased to take any appropriate action.


“All courses of action are risky, so prudence is not in avoiding danger (it's impossible), but calculating risk and acting decisively. Make mistakes of ambition and not mistakes of sloth. Develop the strength to do bold things, not the strength to suffer.”


“Insurers will wish to know about the circumstances surrounding each death. Inquests offer an opportunity to hear evidence on all key issues which are likely to arise in determining liability arising out of any claim following a death. The hearing is likely to take place relatively quickly after the death and the evidence given is likely to be determinative. Even if the insurer cannot directly take part in the proceedings, all inquests are public and simply being present in Court to make a note of the evidence is likely to be an invaluable exercise.”


“For there is but one essential justice which cements society, and one law which establishes this justice. This law is right reason, which is the true rule of all commandments and prohibitions. Whoever neglects this law, whether written or unwritten, is necessarily unjust and wicked.”

One can readily determine 'why' it is essential to the Coroner that the ATSB report is provided to clarify and define the circumstance and where appropriate breaches of regulation or protocols were a factor. Insurance company lawyers must, by default, depend on clearly defined facts and circumstances. ATSB flat refusal to investigate a fatal; or, to obfuscate the results of investigation; or, to create an internal protective bias, has a great potential to backfire; all the way back to the ministerial hot seat. ATSB is now clearly, a self and internationally defined, in written form, simply a top cover agency: hand maiden through the MoU to the CASA. And by extension, the minister.

“The more corrupt the state, the more numerous the laws.”

Should I continue? Probably not. Never the less. Many Senators and industry advocates have tried to undo the Gordian knot of CASA, ATSB and ASA; the evidence is there, by the shed load, carefully stored over the decades. The shame for this government is self evident; it was a Labour government which created three unaccountable 'quangos'; untouchable by design, a gift to those who could, would and do revel in the autocracy. The cost to this nation, the detriment to the aviation industry through cost and arcane regulation is readily quantifiable; simply through the loss of taxable revenue the industry used to generate. Compare the cost of 'agency' to the non airline revenue generated income – just a nonsense ain't it?

“It could probably be shown by facts and figures that there is no distinctly native American criminal class except Congress.”

Politicians claim, loud and long their 'dedication' to this wide brown land. Time they set about proving it. Their Qango experiment has failed; dismally. That failure has and continues to affect not only the well being of an industry, but the international reputation Australia. The acclaim and a reputation for a superb aviation environment – is long gone now; lost in regulation and fear of the same. Accident reporting through BASI was once held as 'gold standard' – alas, no more. Internationally now seen as sham and a national shame. The practical, logical acceptance of ICAO is but a fiction, mysteriously lost within a mountain of complex, convoluted regulation which, at the end of the day, requires only that one must, at all cost, retain the right to remain silent.


“Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt.”

Australian government carries this shame and expense into the new year. Perhaps, even if just to save the economy a bit hit, the government could get off its collective arse and do something about it all, before there is no revenue generating industry left standing. Make no mistake about it; one day there will be an event which will rock this nation – it will be the 'minister' who must answer the questions; and that minister will be standing alone. ASA, ATSB and CASA will all hide behind their government allocated mandates – cheap; - for the price a minister's hide. Sooner or later, under the basic tenets of the law, in this land; there will be a ministerial head on a pike; for there the blame resides. But what then? Responsibility – is what the public pay dearly for; that and wisdom – look up the word - RESPONSIBILITY – that is what politicians are paid for.


“He did not care for the lying at first. He hated it. Then later he had come to like it. It was part of being an insider but it was a very corrupting business.”

But enough; Christmas 'tis 'the' season etc.. Dogs, cat, donkey and horse have no idea what all the fuss is. I slink off, unnoticed, walk to the stable – the quiet greetings warm me, a word in the horse's ear with dinner repaid by a nudge; donkey loud, hungry and happy as usual, dogs patiently wait their turn while following my well trodden evening path until it is their turn to eat. The cat; well, she sits by the keg tap,  a gentle nudge to my hand as I reach for clean glass, patiently waiting until I sit on the workshop stool, happy just to sit in the peace and quiet of good company. I would not wish for any other – a pint of Ale, a smoke and the excellent, quiet companionship of those on whom I may rely for friendship and comfort, no matter what.

Selah...

[Peetwo]

Sandy in reply to Money Morning - 

Via the AP email chains: Link - https://www.moneymorning.com.au/

11/01/2023, 10:22 am

Subject: Kiryll’s Australia European comparisons

Hello Money Morning,

May I respectfully suggest that a better comparison would be with the more free enterprise model of the USA which has a similar geographic spread and is far less bound by the stultifying rigidities of government imposed land use controls which are so prevalent in Europe and Australia. Around twenty years ago the London Economist characterised our land use “planning” law as about the strictest in the world. Australia’s suburban detached house and backyard model is nowadays very much the product of the system that’s been distorted well away from that which would pertain in a free market. 

It’s the political landscape that is the most telling factor today in determining the degree of the Australian ‘tyranny of distance.’ 

For example we are embarking on a colossal expense by government to build a new rail link that has no prospect of commercial success according to all of several studies. It’s perfectly obvious that investment in roads would be far more advantageous to allow goods to go directly to the places of need as dictated by the market. Overbearing bureaucratic control in the field of Australia’s General Aviation, due to our corporatisation of the administration (loss of Ministerial control), has proven disastrous. A quite extraordinary decline in one very important area of communication considering our vast and sparsely populated continent. 

Having followed in my lifetime the spectacular post WW2 free market growth then witnessed our lapse into the bureaucratic morass of land zoning, which denies all of the opportunities and efficiencies of market forces, causes me to follow the fortunes of zoning free Houston Texas. I suggest that here is an excellent example, perhaps unique, of the efficiency of a free market in the most crucial of all ‘commodities’ that of the land itself. 

Houston has strong population growth, people voting with their feet, they have one great advantage compared to Europe or Australia, much lower residential costs and land valuation and therefore a much lower mortgage burden. 

In regard to Germany’s success in ‘renewables’ where it is now reopening lignite mines, and a world where there are millions fearing for their lives and millions who would like to be on breadlines, this is even more political with confounding complexities and makes news about some hydrogen fuel project hopeful but hardly helpful. 

Regards,     Sandy Reith 

MTF...P2 

[Peetwo]

Senator Jacinta Nampijinpa Price bells the cat on Australia Day and the voice?? - 

Via the AP emails:

Dear P2,

Australia Day, 2023.

As you and I were celebrating our wonderful country with family and friends, the inner-city elites were marching in the streets, setting Australian flags on fire, demanding we cancel Australia Day.

In stark contrast, Alice Springs – my home town – was on fire with crime and violence.

Forget “Invasion Day” – my neighbours are more worried about home invasions.

“Genocidal colonialism” is usually the last thing on your mind when a gang of machete-wielding thugs bursts into your house in the middle of the night.

That didn’t stop the woke elitists taking to the streets in Sydney and Melbourne and Canberra, though.

You and I have heard their arguments before.

The activists scream about reparations while trouble-free white Teal voters feel good about themselves for standing up for ‘justice’ (before heading off to their beach holiday retreat for the long weekend).

But this time there’s a sinister undertone to their protests.

While the professional activists and white managerial strivers shout to the wind about the injustices of Australia Day, Alice Springs is falling apart.

While they will go home and sleep soundly, Indigenous women and children are scared in their beds as alcohol fuelled violence rages around them.

It’s gotten so bad Albo finally realised he had no choice but to turn up.

I’ve been calling on the Prime Minister for months to take a break from his overseas trips, visit the Territory and take some real action.

This week – after months of avoiding us – Albo finally got on the private jet to Alice Springs.

But so far all we’ve heard from him is talk.

He doesn’t have the courage to take REAL action in a way that will actually curb the violence and chaos.

To make matters worse, Minister for Indigenous Australians Linda Burney has rolled up to complain that if only we had a Voice to Parliament we could have stopped this earlier.

What a crock.

Let me tell you, Linda, I am Indigenous.

I’m from the Northern Territory.

I have a voice.

I am literally in the Parliament.

And you didn’t listen.

I told you abolishing cashless debit cards and opening the floodgates of alcohol would cause absolute chaos and it has.

The alcohol bans have to come back, not just for a week, but fully and properly.

I have put forward a law in the Senate that will help fix these issues.

Albo and Linda need to come to the table and get it passed.

Forget the Voice. Forget all the activist rubbish. The safety of Indigenous women and children has to come first.

This Australia Day, it’s time Albo gets serious and stops talking about problems and starts fixing them.



Jacinta Nampijinpa Price
Senator for the Northern Territory
 

Well said that Lady!   

MTF...P2 

PS On the subject of Australia Day IMO Paul Murray, in his wrap up of the PML show last night,  captured the vast majority of Australian's views on the subject: via Twitter: https://twitter.com/Tim_jbo/status/1618601418684002306

Listen up lefties: #AustraliaDay is a day of unity,
this is how #TheirABC used to celebrate our national day 1988 before the march of the Marxists through our government institutions took hold.

When I think about it, it's so sad to see what we have become.

- 

[Kharon]

Bravo, that lady. Well done indeed...

There's not many, only a few Politicians who can be respected, even fewer who deserve even applause or admiration, let alone elevation to true 'statesmanship'. But, Jacinta Price  is most certainly up there with the very best of the 'best'. My compliments, Milady..

I wonder, if that once all of the 'political' Argy-Bargy is done, a 'simpler', kinder solution to the basic problem may be found. This 'simple' solution has been of great benefit to this nation; there are many shining examples alive today to support this notion; in all walks of life. Not going to 'bang-on' – it has all been said before by wiser heads than mine.


Chinese proverb. (A good one). “Give a man a fish, and you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish, and you feed him for a lifetime”.

Or, if you prefer the much earlier version – from the 12th century:-


Lastly, the eighth and the most meritorious of all, is to anticipate charity by preventing poverty, namely, to assist the reduced brother, either by a considerable gift or loan of money, or by teaching him a trade, or by putting him in the way of business, so that he may earn an honest livelihood and not be forced to the dreadful alternative of holding up his hand for charity. . .


My two bob's worth – FWTW..

[Peetwo]

Is Betts a fair bett??

Via the Mandarin...  

Jim Betts on getting sh*t done in 2023



One of Jim Betts’ highlights of 2022 was telling senate estimates he had never been a member of the Communist Party.
Betts joined the APS last year when he was named secretary of the federal department with the longest name – the Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development, Communications and the Arts. Prior to this, he had spent time as a state bureaucrat in the Victorian and NSW governments.

In this instalment of The Mandarin‘s Secretary’s Sticky Notes series, in which we ask departmental leaders five questions about their role and what they expect to face this year, Betts lays out how he’s approaching his department’s wide remit with staff wellbeing front of mind.

1. What’s at the top of your department’s agenda for 2023?

As the name implies, the Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development, Communications and the Arts’ agenda is diverse.

In 2023, we’ll be looking to put proper strategic frameworks around the commonwealth’s roles in urban policy, regional development and infrastructure investment, making us an informed and influential investor, not just a writer of cheques.
Key to those frameworks will be the towering priorities of decarbonising our economy and redressing intergenerational disadvantage, not least for First Nations people.

We need to make sure that regulation protects safety and the public interest whilst enabling new technology and services, ranging from online digital platforms to automated vehicles and drones.

We have an ambitious agenda for media reform, strengthening democracy and public interest journalism, extending digital connectivity and delivering the landmark National Cultural Policy – Revive – launched by the prime minister and arts minister on January 30.

2. What do you think the biggest challenge will be for your department in 2023?

The government’s agenda is ambitious and resources are tight after years of compounding efficiency measures. Our people are tired and have been working round the clock since the earliest days of COVID. On the other hand, “if not now, when?”
We have a huge opportunity to make a difference on our watch, but it mustn’t come at the expense of the health and wellbeing of APS staff.

3. What is your biggest leadership challenge?

My biggest challenge, as always, is to extinguish the fear and deference that the hierarchical culture of the APS can engender.

The robodebt royal commission has yet to conclude, but we have seen enough sobering evidence of the harm that fear can do when it creates a culture of silence and complicity. I want a department that is daring, kind, creative, collaborative and inclusive.

And as the referendum draws near, I want my Indigenous colleagues to know that their secretary is on their side, always striving to create a workplace that is safe, respectful and directed at delivering real results in partnership with community.

4. What was the highlight of 2022?

I read 75 novels. I was a consultant for nine weeks. I joined the APS. I got to tell senate estimates that I was not and had never been a member of the Communist Party.

5. What’s your motto for the public service in 2023?

Be kind. Listen carefully and with compassion. Get sh*t done.

As a side note it was pointed out to me that Secretary Jim Betts has also been appointed (probably because he was told to) on another bureaucratic WOFTAM agency, the National Transport Commission: see here - https://www.ntc.gov.au/about-ntc/who-we-...missioners

Here's his bio:

Commissioner 

Jim was appointed as Secretary of the Commonwealth Department of Infrastructure, Transport Regional Development, Communications and the Arts in July 2022. He's spent over 30 years working in government agencies in the U.K, Victoria and New South Wales. 

Prior to becoming Secretary, Jim was a partner at strategy consultancy EY Port Jackson Partners and previously led the New South Wales Department of Planning, Industry and Environment as Secretary. During that period, the Department undertook transformational reform in areas like land use planning, water, urban design, sustainability, climate change, biodiversity conservation and energy. 

From 2013 to 2019, Jim was Chief Executive Officer of Infrastructure NSW where he led the development of two State Infrastructure Strategies, oversaw the state’s infrastructure program, delivered major state infrastructure projects and developed a state plan for the construction sector.

Before moving to New South Wales, Jim held roles as Secretary for the Victorian Transport Department and Victoria’s Director of Public Transport. 

 
So the guy is a doer...

 Maybe this is why you can see the obvious frustrations of JB with both the Committee and his Aviation & Airport division team, in this segment of the RRAT Senate Estimates: 

I also wouldn't mind being a fly on the wall for the NTC meetings for the interactions between JB and WOFTAM career bureaucrat and former ATSB Rail Commissioner Carolyn Walsh?? 

Hmm...passing strange that in CW's bio that there seems to be an omission of the 10 years that CW spent as a ATSB Commissioner:  

Chair

Carolyn commenced as Chair of the National Transport Commission on 1 January 2018. She has been a Commissioner since 1 January 2014.

Carolyn is currently a member of the Board of the NSW Environment Protection Authority and a member of a number of NSW Government agency audit and risk committees. She also provides consultancy services in safety and risk management.

Her past roles with the NSW Government have included Chief Executive of the Independent Transport Safety and Reliability Regulator and Executive Director, Office of the Coordinator General of Rail. She has also held several positions within the Commonwealth Department of Industry, Science and Resources.

Carolyn has a Bachelor of Economics and is a graduate of the Australian Institute of Company Directors.

MTF...P2 

[Sandy Reith]

Due to finger trouble the edited version of this comment has become #299

[Sandy Reith]

“Secretary’s Sticky Notes” Mr. J. Betts

Crikey, astonishing, can this be real? Certainly it’s all encompassing. Everything covered including Inclusion and Carbon Free. Could it be concealed scorn, or is this just a jumped up bumptious string of words? If one were asked to extol, boost and ride the gravy train of Government Industries this would be an excellent model.

This is what we have come to in the Australian Public Service, the Secretary of the Department of Infrastructure and Transport, Arts and Et Cetera, James Betts, no doubt being paid $600,000 plus pa.

“We have an ambitious agenda for media reform, strengthening democracy and public interest journalism, extending digital connectivity and delivering the landmark National Cultural Policy – Revive – launched by the prime minister and arts minister on January 30.”

“put proper strategic frameworks around the commonwealth’s roles in urban policy, regional development and infrastructure investment, making us an informed and influential investor, not just a writer of cheques.”

Tripping over the awe inspiring Dorothy Dixers 1 - 4 we arrive at the odorous description of Mr. Betts overarching ambition. Charming.

5. What’s your motto for the public service in 2023?

“Be kind. Listen carefully and with compassion. Get sh*t done.”

We’ve been having the latter done to General Aviation for years, thanks all the same.

Media reform? Get ready for “public interest journalism.”

Could this mean clamp down any critical citizen who thought freedom of speech was a real element of our democracy?

Or perhaps a new media conglomerate, with the ABC folded into yet another statutory monopoly Government corporation to be sole arbiter and broadcaster of news fit for the great unwashed.

“The National Cultural Policy,” we will be told what culture is good for us. Wonder how many lucky sycophants are employed for this program, and what will be the punishment for those who prefer to think for themselves?

Digital connectivity? Might as well expand MyGov compulsorily into all departments and what’s wrong with facial recognition? CASA would love that, they were after our phone records a while ago, might as well have all digital currency and our bank records too.

Glory be, nirvana beckons, and we’ll all saved by the Department for Everything. Perhaps it’s all just a bad dream and I just need to be woke up.

[Kharon]

Hear, hear!!

Finally, one politician who actually 'gets it' – he probably is not the only one, but at least he has the 'wherewithal' to say it. Well said Sir.

HERE -