[Gobbledock]

Excellent article by Dick Smith. Interesting how ASA has done nothing on the implementation since 1991, 25 years! That coincides with how long Electric Blue has been poncing around the organisation! But it is a coincidence, nothing more.

And as for Houston, he is nothing but a weasel. Anyone who had a level of authority in Can'tberra back in those days knows that footstool Angus bent over for his Masters and at their command he pineappled Mr Smith. C'mon boys and girls, wake up and smell the coffee, trace Houston's career path in very fine detail and you will see why he is still on the Government payroll after all these decades - a loyal, subservient, spineless yes boy.

[Peetwo]

Update to PelAir cover-up re-investigation - The O&O bollocks continues  

Just a quick re-hash on the re-investigation timeline of embuggerance and continued obfuscation by CC Dolan, contrary to promises and undertakings made:

Video record of Estimates 24/02/2014 & 24/02/15  :

&..then after the former DPM called for the ATSB to revisit the PelAir investigation, in light of the damning findings in the TSBC peer review report:

Here is part of the Hansard for that Estimates session:

Mr Dolan : Including Pel-Air and including CASA, as necessary. We have already put in a request for additional information from Pel-Air and from CASA and we will have our normal directly involved party processes where a draft of the report will be provided for comment to all involved parties.

Senator XENOPHON: What time frame are you looking at for this exercise?

Mr Dolan : Our objective, the target, for completion and publication of a final report of this reopened investigation is before Christmas.

CHAIR: Does that mean that this committee might not have been far off the mark?

Mr Dolan : The committee made recommendations that we should reopen the investigation and that we should retrieve the flight data recorders. We have agreed to reopen the investigation and we will also proceed to retrieve the flight data recorders.

Senator XENOPHON: That is quite significant because it is at 42 metres, is it?

Mr Walsh : It is at around 49 metres.

Senator XENOPHON: I have a couple of mates who are happy to put some scuba gear on. I say that lightly. Obviously there are occupational health and safety issues. Senator Heffernan might be able to dive down for it. When will that flight data recorder be retrieved?

Mr Walsh : We are working to do that as soon as reasonably practicable. An important initial part of the process will be to do a reconnaissance of the site to confirm its location, that it is still there.

CHAIR: It could be anywhere by now.

Mr Dolan : No, Senator. We have imagery of it pretty much in situ.

CHAIR: What sort of material is it?

Mr Dolan : It is solid state recording equipment.

Senator XENOPHON: Historically, was it five years or six years ago?

Mr Walsh : It would be going on for six years.

Senator XENOPHON: Are there other flight data recorders that have been recovered at that sort of age that are still okay?

Mr Walsh : Yes. We are confident that, provided the recording devices were functioning correctly and were recording correctly, there is no reason why there should not be good usable data off the recorders.

Senator XENOPHON: Would there be any difficulty, once they are recovered and digital copies are made, for a copy of that to be provided to this committee, if the committee was minded to request it?

Mr Walsh : I would need to take that on notice. There would certainly be issues to address in terms of the CVR, more so than the FDR. The flight data recorder information would be classified as restricted information, and obviously there are mechanisms to provide that to the committee. The CVR data obviously is a lot more sensitive and comes under the guise of an on-board recording. I would need to understand a bit more fully the implications of that. #1

Senator XENOPHON: But presumably the pilot, Dominic James, would be given an opportunity to have access to those as a matter of course?

Mr Walsh : Yes, that is correct.

Mr Dolan : That will definitely be done. The broader question, given the very strong protections that are put in place for cockpit voice recorders, is the extent to which we are entitled to release it.

Senator XENOPHON: If the committee were minded to ask for regular updates on the progress of the report—without in any way compromising confidential information; just to get a broad outline of where you are at—would there be any difficulty with the ATSB providing the committee with that information?

Mr Dolan : The commissioner has asked for regular updates on the progress of the reports and that is the extent of our involvement at this stage, so we would be happy to provide that material to this committee as well. #2

Senator XENOPHON: I think that would be useful to the committee. I think there is a consensus that it would be.

Undertaking #1 (above): Here is the answer to the Mr Walsh QON:

Answer:

Any audio recording on the Cockpit Voice Recorder will be classified as an On-Board Recording (OBR) Information in accordance with section 48 of the Transport Safety Investigation Act 2003 (TSI Act). Division 1 of Part 6 of the TSI Act prohibits the disclosure and use of OBR information for purposes other than accident and incident investigation under the TSI Act (with some very limited exceptions for criminal and civil proceedings). The restrictions on use and disclosure are to ensure industry cooperation and the free flow of critical safety information into the future for safety investigations. The ATSB would be restrained in its ability to respond to a request for the OBR information from the Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport Legislation Committee, noting that doing so would raise compliance issues with the TSI Act. In particular, the ATSB would be concerned to uphold the principles of the protections, limiting the publication of OBR information in the public domain. The ATSB notes that the requirement under Standing Order 26(2) for Estimates Committees to hear evidence in the public domain would make this difficult.



Protections for the Flight Data Recorder Information are less restrictive and the ATSB may be able to disclose information from the recording, other than in the Investigation Report, where a case can be made that it is necessary or desirable for transport safety.

Undertaking #2 - Copy of part of my post off O&O thread:

More Beaker O&O bollocks??

"..Seems the DIP have told ATSB to take the draft away and ‘get real’ i.e.. rejected; and, returned with some force.."
 
Interesting rumour..    In an attempt to follow up - & knowing ATSBeaker don't always publicise updates to active investigations, especially those that are politically sensitive and they are providing top cover for - I dug out the re-investigation 'Update' page :   

Updated: 4 April 2016


The re-opened investigation has gathered a substantial volume of additional evidence, primarily from CASA and the aircraft operator, and has involved over 20 interviews with personnel from the operator and CASA, as well as information from the aircraft’s cockpit voice and flight data recorders. Analysis of the large volume of evidence obtained is continuing as is the development of the draft report, which is now expected to be released for review and comment by directly involved parties around the middle of the year. That analysis is focusing on:

• pre-flight planning and fuel management procedures and practices
  
• in-flight fuel management and related decision-making procedures and practices
  
• fatigue management procedures and practices
  
• flight crew check and training
  
• the operator’s oversight of its flight operations activities
  
• provision of weather and other flight information to flight crews
  
• cabin safety and survival factors
  
• regulatory oversight of activities such as those listed above
  

From that it can be seen that once again the ATSB has discretely (no fanfare) side-stepped notifying the general public and industry on the latest O&O of (re)-investigation AO-2009-072. Well no surprises there, hopefully this further delay update (& the circumstances for the latest delay) has been passed onto (as promised by Dolan) the Senators??

Although it could be that the DIPs (in this case CASA & the operator) have called for wholesale amendment to the DRAFT FR, the above would seem to put the first part of the rumour to bed. 

{P2 OBs - Reading between the lines it would appear that the lid has well & truly been lifted and now the rats are no doubt scurrying to find a bolt hole while the true, scurrilous, unadulterated version rears its ugly head}  

The other part of the rumour could well be true - i.e waiting it out till the cover of the election campaign & the transition to the new parliament. The timing would also (if a DD election) coincide with CC Dolan finally leaving the building, perfect opportunity to come clean. You know fresh start, new chapter, change of philosophy, cultural change and all that 'key word' spin & bulldust...

Personally I don't think so, all of the above will happen regardless of the PelAir re-investigation final report outcome. No I think this delay is more to do with the uncovering of much, much more disturbing revelations that even a dedicated Senate Committee were not able to uncover...

This was the last stated scoping by the ATSB in their 25 May 2015 update (in bold):

Updated: 25 May 2015


The previous update on 24 April 2015 outlined the results of a recent underwater survey of the aircraft’s wreckage. Based on this survey, the ATSB is currently assessing options for the task of recovering the recorders.

Other investigation activities to date have included:

• Reviewing documentation from the original ATSB investigation and the Senate Inquiry conducted by the Senate Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport References Committee in 2012-2013.
  
• Reviewing documentation from investigations into the accident conducted by the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) and the operator.
  
• Reviewing documentation from the operator, including flight records for several Westwind aircraft, check and training records for several flight crew, duty times and rosters, occurrence and hazard reports, audit reports, and safety committee meeting records.  
  
• Interviewing 14 personnel from the operator, including management, check and training pilots and line pilots.
  
• Comparing the operator’s policies and procedures and other requirements with its operational practices, particularly in areas such as flight planning, fuel management, fatigue management, and emergency procedures.
  
• Comparing the results from three bio-mathematical models of fatigue when applied to a series of the operator’s duty periods, and examining the suitability of the FAID model and related guidance material when applied to the operator’s air ambulance operations.
  
• Reviewing documentation from the air traffic services’ providers in Fiji and New Zealand about their policies and procedures for the provision of flight information, and how these were applied during the accident flight.
  
• Reviewing CASA’s surveillance files and related documentation for the operator.
  
• Reviewing documentation and interviewing personnel from the air ambulance contracting company.
  
  

During the Senate Inquiry associated with the original ATSB investigation, significant concerns were raised by some of the aircraft’s occupants about the serviceability and design of the life jackets used by three of the occupants. The re-opened investigation established that the life jackets had been retained by the Norfolk Island Police Force since the accident. The ATSB has now taken possession of the life jackets, and they will be examined after consultation with relevant parties. The life jackets were required to be serviced every 5 years, and all three jackets had been serviced within the 5-year period prior to the accident.

As well as continuing with the above activities, the next phase of the investigation will involve:

• Interviewing several personnel from CASA.
  
  
• Comparing the operator’s policies, procedures and practices with other air ambulance operators.
  
  
• Examining the reliability of weather forecasting at Norfolk Island.
  

 
& also on discovery that the CVR/FDR recordings were not corrupted and therefore useable, it was stated in the 19 October 2015 update:

The previous update on 25 May 2015 outlined the nature of the other investigation activities being undertaken by the re-opened investigation. These activities are close to being completed. In addition, the re-opened investigation has conducted interviews with both flight crew and both medical crew from the accident flight.

The investigation team are now in the process of analysing the available information and they have commenced the preparation of a draft report. Given the delay in recovering the recorders and the amount of information that has been collected and analysed, it is expected that a draft report will be released to directly involved parties for comment in early 2016.

If you think about it the potential ramifications of the latest (04 April) update, could lead to far more than yet another overdue & obfuscated ATSB (re)-investigation. I'm thinking on the implications for withholding evidence from a parliamentary inquiry...   

I'll let you be the judge whether undertaking #1 and/or #2 has been honoured -


MTF...P2

[Kharon]

P2 – “If you think about it the potential ramifications of the latest (04 April) update, could lead to far more than yet another overdue & obfuscated ATSB (re)-investigation. I'm thinking on the implications for withholding evidence from a parliamentary inquiry..”

I reckon V45 has nailed it – for the normal, run of the mill, routine delay and obfuscation we expect for every ‘incident’.  PC and ‘sensitivity’ levels are always high and of course the CASA legend must not be tarnished, nor the predetermined outcome be challenged.  This is the ATSB raison d'être under the Beyond all Reason system.

Even so – P2 (IMO) creeps close to the deeper reasons; but not for ‘withholding’.  Turn it around. We know the Senators hold some pretty damning information and have a pretty fair idea of the real why’s and wherefores.  Beaker ain’t got a lot of latitude and no matter how ‘narrow’ a focus the report takes, the Senate ‘evidence’ must be acknowledged, dealt with and be visible in the report; or else, take it away and do it again - properly. Repeat as often as needed.  

P2 – “No I think this delay is more to do with the uncovering of much, much more disturbing revelations that even a dedicated Senate Committee were not able to uncover..”

IMO a slight correction is needed there: [much] more disturbing revelations that even a dedicated Senate Committee were able to uncover  - but lacked enough empirical evidence to make stick, but they have a fair idea of exactly why the initial report was an aberration.  This 'truth' is being used to keep Beaker and Co. honest, force probity into the set piece. If you take the V45 argument + P2 logic there are many reasons to delay the report until the golden parachutes are fully deployed and the fur lined jock straps have been hand crafted to ensure maximum protection and comfort.  

Aye, you can run, but you can’t hide.  (Joe Louis).

Toot toot.

[Greedy]

P2 – “If you think about it the potential ramifications of the latest (04 April) update, could lead to far more than yet another overdue & obfuscated ATSB (re)-investigation. I'm thinking on the implications for withholding evidence from a parliamentary inquiry..”

I reckon V45 has nailed it – for the normal, run of the mill, routine delay and obfuscation we expect for every ‘incident’.  PC and ‘sensitivity’ levels are always high and of course the CASA legend must not be tarnished, nor the predetermined outcome be challenged.  This is the ATSB raison d'être under the Beyond all Reason system.

Even so – P2 (IMO) creeps close to the deeper reasons; but not for ‘withholding’.  Turn it around. We know the Senators hold some pretty damning information and have a pretty fair idea of the real why’s and wherefores.  Beaker ain’t got a lot of latitude and no matter how ‘narrow’ a focus the report takes, the Senate ‘evidence’ must be acknowledged, dealt with and be visible in the report; or else, take it away and do it again - properly. Repeat as often as needed.  

P2 – “No I think this delay is more to do with the uncovering of much, much more disturbing revelations that even a dedicated Senate Committee were not able to uncover..”

IMO a slight correction is needed there: [much] more disturbing revelations that even a dedicated Senate Committee were able to uncover  - but lacked enough empirical evidence to make stick, but they have a fair idea of exactly why the initial report was an aberration.  This 'truth' is being used to keep Beaker and Co. honest, force probity into the set piece. If you take the V45 argument + P2 logic there are many reasons to delay the report until the golden parachutes are fully deployed and the fur lined jock straps have been hand crafted to ensure maximum protection and comfort.  

Aye, you can run, but you can’t hide.  (Joe Louis).

Toot toot.

Yes , any reinvestigation done properly including all the terms of reference listed above will or should uncover an ugly can of worms.One term of reference above caught my attention. That was the term of reference of other air ambulance operator's policy and procedure. Simply for the reason that it would be natural for an operator under scrutiny or being confronted with an accusation to defend themselves by stating " everyone does it like that".Have accusations been made in the draft report I wonder?
It is all very moot however as the subject operator has now set up a aeromedical evacuation service based in Singapore.
 

[Peetwo]

Estimates, Senator Carr motion & more Wong QON -

Due to the PM now confirming there will be a DD election, the Senate yesterday agreed to bring forward the Senate Estimates hearings:

Senator McEWEN (South Australia—Opposition Whip in the Senate) (18:19): At the request of Senator Moore, I move:
   (1) That the estimates hearings by legislation committees for 2016-17 Budget estimates be scheduled as follows:
Thursday, 5 May (Group A), and
Friday, 6 May (Group B);
   (2) That the orders of the Senate of 26 August 2008 and 23 June 2015 cross portfolio estimates hearings on Indigenous matters not be proceeded with for the Budget Estimates 2016-17 only.
   (3) That the committees consider the proposed expenditure in accordance with the allocation of departments and agencies to committees agreed to by the Senate.
   (4) The committees meet in the following groups:

      Group A:
Environment and Communications
Finance and Public Administration
Legal and Constitutional Affairs
Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport

      Group B
Community Affairs
Economics
Education and Employment
Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade.

   (5) The committees report to the Senate by 11 May 2016.
   (6) That the Senate not meet on Thursday 5 May 2016.

The PRESIDENT: The question is that notice of motion No. 1134 moved by Senator McEwen be agreed to.

The Senate divided. [18:20]

DIVISION:AYES 34 (6 majority) NOES 28 PAIRS 0

And today from the Clerk:

D16/31945


20 April 2016


To the Heads of all agencies appearing before Senate Legislation Committees

Dear Agency Head

RESCHEDULED 2016-17 BUDGET ESTIMATES HEARINGS

The Senate agreed yesterday to reschedule the 2016-17 Budget estimates hearings in the following terms:

That—
(1) The estimates hearings by legislation committees for 2016-17 Budget estimates be scheduled as follows:

Thursday, 5 May (Group A), and Friday, 6 May (Group B);
(2) The orders of the Senate of 26 August 2008 and 23 June 2015 relating to cross portfolio estimates hearings on Indigenous matters not be proceeded with for the Budget estimates 2016-17 only.
(3) The committees consider the proposed expenditure in accordance with the allocation of departments and agencies to committees agreed to by the Senate.
(4) The committees meet in the following groups:

Group A:

Environment and Communications Finance and Public Administration Legal and Constitutional Affairs Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport

Group B:

Community Affairs Economics Education and Employment Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade.

(5) The committees report to the Senate by 11 May 2016.

(6) The Senate not meet on Thursday 5 May 2016.

In accordance with an order of the Senate of 25 June 2014, I also draw your attention to the attached resolutions on the accountability of public officials.

Other resolutions relevant to the estimates process, all of which were agreed to on 25 June 2014, include:

• an order for production of documents which requires Ministers, on behalf of each agency or department, to table not later than 10 days before the estimates hearings a statement showing:

(a) the number of questions taken on notice at the previous round of estimates hearings;
(b) the number of answers provided to the committee by the date set by the committee for answers; and
© of those answers not provided to the committee by the due date, the dates on which answers were provided to the approving minister‘s office (Procedural orders and resolutions of continuing effect no. 20B);

• a resolution declaring that declining to provide documents or answer questions on the basis that a freedom of information request has been made for the same information is an unacceptable response and is not supported by the FOI Act (Procedural orders and resolution of continuing effect no. 52B);
• an order providing that legislation committees are required to hold an additional hearing if any three members of the committee notify the Chair that they require this to take further evidence (Procedural orders and resolution of continuing effect no. 9B)

Should the Senate be dissolved, the legislation committees, along with all other committees, cease to operate. The effects of prorogation (without a dissolution) are outlined in my earlier advice of 30 March 2016.

Staff in the Committee Office secretariats who support the various legislation committees (which hold estimates hearings) are always available to answer any questions that you or your staff may have about these procedures. The Clerk Assistant Committees ( Brien Hallett, telephone (02) 6277 3371) and Senior Clerk of Committees (Jackie Morris, telephone (02) 6277 3506) can also provide further advice if needed.

Yours sincerely

(Rosemary Laing)

Very much related to the above (Senate Estimates) and on the subject (one of my consistent gripes) of late Estimates AQON, yesterday Labor Senator Carr sort an explanation from Senator Sinodinos representing the Minister for Industry, Innovation & Science: Consideration by Estimates Committees

Senator KIM CARR (Victoria) (15:03): Mr President, under standing order 74(5), I seek an explanation from the Minister representing the Minister for Industry, Innovation and Science, Senator Sinodinos, as to why the following 24 questions on notice to the CSIRO from additional estimates remain unanswered: 1, 2, 3, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 38, 114, 115, 116, 117, 119, 120, 122, 124, 131, 132, 134, 135, 141, 142 and 143.

{P2 comment - Q/ What about the 250 odd QON that Murky's mob are yet to even begin to answer? - Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development - Questions on notice index: (PDF 948KB)
Answers are due 1 April 2016.}

   

Senator Sinodinos reply - I thank Senator Carr for his question. I have been advised that 99 answers were tabled by the Department of Industry, Innovation and Science earlier today and that the rest will be provided in due course. I have not had the opportunity myself to review all of the questions to see what potentially is stopping further responses being provided with greater alacrity, and I am happy to do that if that will help the process, but I think 99 answers tabled is quite a big effort by the department in relation to, as I understand it, questions that were tabled at Senate estimates. I think it is very important that we not rush the department if we are to make sure that the department gives us the sorts of answers which will satisfy the minister—and, in this case, not just the minister but the shadow minister. So I will make further investigations into the matter. It has not been my practice, I have to admit, to go through each of those answers, but, if the department is finding a problem in providing responses, I will follow up personally with the department, as well as with the minister and his office. But I am concerned that, while this involves certain resources, we make sure we are giving you answers which are not leading to a situation where the answer itself then just leads to further questions because you have not been able to get an adequate answer to your initial question. Having participated in a number of the estimates committee hearings, I have been aware that some very detailed questions have been asked, and I do want the department to take a very forensic approach to this. I appreciate that the senator has been cooperative and patient in the matter, and I will seek to do what I can to deal with it with some alacrity.

Seems like a reasonable answer to me..  

However, apart from the CSIRO late answering of QON, this line of questioning was apparently part of a Wong/Carr strategy to draw out Sinodinos - Donations to Political Parties Brandis, Sen George) . Subsequently Carr went on with his line of questioning, little was he to know that he was about to step into a shit storm :

Senator KIM CARR (Victoria) (15:05): I move:


That the Senate take note of the minister's failure to provide an explanation.


In so doing, I indicate that I believe Senator Sinodinos is sincere in his efforts, but there is a fundamental problem here. It is one thing for the minister representing the minister to make an assurance to this chamber, but it is another thing to actually get an answer.

There is a big gap between those two events. I raised this issue yesterday, Senator Sinodinos, and sought an explanation yesterday about 29 answers from the CSIRO that were outstanding. I might remind you they have been outstanding since 1 April and these were questions asked a number of weeks prior to that. So it is not a case of not having enough time. This is clearly an example where there has been a failure to respond by 1 April, and now, 19 days later, there remains a failure to respond.


This is an important matter. I understand it is likely that this chamber will not be sitting tomorrow. So it is important to actually get a response today. These are matters that go to a hearing of this committee, which is dealing with the CSIRO, next Wednesday. And so, while I accept that the minister is sincere in his efforts and his commitment to raise the matter with the relevant minister directly, I urge him to seek to have these answers provided today, not after the hearings which are on Wednesday.


These are significant matters. It is undoubtedly true that there will be other questions.

That is the nature of the estimates process. But it is simply not good enough to try to snowball us by suggesting we do not have to actually answer the questions. You indicate 99 questions have been outstanding since 1 April. I specifically asked about the 29 in relation to the CSIRO, and I am seeking to have that matter attended to this afternoon and I would ask if the minister is able to give us a response on timing.

What followed was highly amusing and culminated in a lesson in hardball politics delivered by Senators McDonald, Brandis & "I'll be back" Cormann.

First Senator Mack stepped up to the dispatch box - Macdonald, Sen Ian - then Senator Brandis - Brandis, Sen George:

..And that asks us to consider the sufficiency of the minister's response or explanation of the failure to provide an answer. Senator Sinodinos has done so, Senator Carr. Senator Sinodinos, who is the minister with responsibility for this area involving the CSIRO, acknowledged in the explanation that he provided to you that there are some questions that are overdue.

The first point to be made is that it is not at all uncommon. It is the most common thing in the world for answers to questions taken on notice to be overdue. I am not saying that that is not a failure to comply with the requirements of the standing order—it is—but it is also a very commonplace thing. Although I do not have the statistics to hand, I can assure you, Senator Carr, because I did look at these statistics some time ago, that this government's record in complying with time lines for questions taken on notice—questions placed on notice with the Clerk and, more importantly, estimates questions—is much, much better than the record of the previous Labor government. And if I may say so, Senator Carr, it is much better than your personal record when you enjoyed ministerial office...

..You laugh, Senator Carr. You are the one who brought on this unnecessary debate. You are the one who brought this entirely unnecessary debate before the chamber. I am simply pointing out to you that it was an unnecessary and inappropriate use of the procedure. Mr President, you chair the Senate procedure committee. Perhaps, one thing the Senate procedure committee could do in the future is have a look at the appropriate scope of subparagraph (5) of standing order 74. This is an open-ended debate. This could go all day this debate you have inflicted upon us, Senator Carr, in order to achieve an end that could have been achieved by a telephone call. Yet you invoke this very recondite procedure in order to find out answers that you probably already know the answer to. You waste people's time with meddlesome and unnecessary questions and you announce to the Senate, having initiated this unnecessary debate, that the answers are imminent in any event. Senator Carr, why have you inflicted this on the Senate on the last sitting day of the week? Possibly the second last sitting week of this parliament is being detained by you, Senator Carr, by invoking this procedure entirely unnecessarily. Senator Carr—and I see my friend Senator Claire Moore sitting there; as whip, she is no doubt part of the tactics committee of the Labor Party—I wonder whether you might think again about whether there is a more efficient use of the Senate's time than to invoke this procedure in pursuing answers. - Love it

 
If you reckon that was good debate, Senator "I'll be back" Cormann was positively champing at the bit to get into the fray -

  

&..

- Excellent theatre - MTF...P2

[P7_TOM]

Thanks P2 – entertainment par excellance – the clear ring of truth and the blood red mist of true battle. For probity, accountability and the death knell of dirty, underhanded licence being allowed to those who are highly paid to serve the community. Poor old ‘stwapon’ got it wong – again. The vituperous (vitupereux; Fr) : (vituperosus; Lat) attack from Carr and the magnificent lambasting given in return, for me spells a reduction in the rule of the bureaucrat by ‘finger’.

Our very own Senators have fought this battle and played this game of QoN – can’t see either Turnbull, Joyce or Fletcher putting up with it very much longer. The Wong performance of the ‘shrieking banshee’, much like a two year old deprived of it’s hearts desire fell on deaf ears and earned a metaphorical bottom smacking (recommended). Carr payed a heavy price, for taking a silly, cheap, (short?) shot. I’ve no quarrel with a honest opposition, none whatsoever. Indeed I can applaud it: debate, discussion and even argument keep the ‘government’ honest and lively open debate – honestly entered – is most beneficial to the country and it’s people. It is, after all said and done, what we, the tax payer, pay for.

Stwaped on Wong will have to do much better than that if a seat is to be kept and will probably need counselling on anger management; you can after all said, see how much damage a wee dummy spit can do. Ah, Estimates, can’t come too soon. Can’t wait for Beakers last performance - as a castrato.

[Peetwo]

The political donations can of worms?? - Bring it on I reckon..

Extract from my '2016 Election' thread post: 

Wong muck raking & the GRABOR Party -

There was a time where naively I used to think that Senator Wong was an intelligent asset and addition to the Senate chamber..

Then came the RUDD to GILLARD/Independentsx2/GREENS & then of course back to RUDD debacle, where Wong showed her true colours and that was when I began to realise that she was really a political animal...    

Even then (again naively) I was prepared to consider the Wong OBS as an aberration, put it down to the toxic politics of the time, after all isn't it the responsibility of a Senator (regardless of colour) to stand up for; 1) State interests; then 2) the Country interests; and 3) politics coming a very distant last??

Again maybe naively that is what I believed and I was given a perfect example of this with the conduct & outcome of the totally non-partisan PelAir Senate inquiry...   And I also have seen it since in that same committee's dedicated efforts to keep certain agencies honest in Senate Estimates and other inquiries...

But then at one certain RRAT committee budget Estimates Wong made her first (and probably last) appearance and finally the Penny dropped, it was all a façade, a smokescreen, a spin and bulldust show...

This Senator wasn't really concerned about her State interests, she was purely there for potential political point scoring and nothing else..

P9 - I could live with the window dressing of Cash, the bad manners displayed and endless side chats while questions were being asked etc.  No more than a minor irritation, some others came in and asked some fairly pointless questions, which, thankfully, took little of the valuable time available and were not blatantly ‘political’.  But the tedious Wong session took the biscuit.

 
And that was before I discovered the Wong QON - Part I & Part II.   

P9 - Lets just hope the silly ‘politics’ are taken out of the game – early.  Lord, I’m fed up with the sniping, hair pulling and bitch-slapping. Then there’s time wasters; those who put 1500 odd questions on notice, not for answers to shape a policy – Oh no, but for self aggrandisement in hope of one day running the country – 'their' way.  Just how many Wongs does it take to make a right ? (or a left, as best pleases).

  
Then two days ago in a lazy Senate hearing day, the final straw for Wong in my book and perhaps a very real wake up call for industry if Wong, Short-one and the Greens have their way at the next election- 'back to the future' (note all the names under the green ayes):

 What were they voting on? Another political muck raking exercise initiated by Senators Wong & Carr .

Senate Hansard reference 19/04 Question time:

Donations to Political Parties

Senator WONG (South Australia—Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) (14:45): My question is to the Minister representing the Prime Minister, Senator Brandis. I refer to evidence to the New South Wales independent investigation against corruption that showed Senator Sinodinos was a participant in at least one meeting that discussed facilitating the making of prohibited donations to the New South Wales Liberal Party through the Free Enterprise Foundation. Did the Prime Minister ask Senator Sinodinos to provide a full account of his conduct before he appointed him to his cabinet?

Senator BRANDIS (Queensland—Attorney-General, Vice-President of the Executive Council and Leader of the Government in the Senate) (14:46): Senator Wong, as you know, no findings adverse to Senator Sinodinos whatsoever have been made—
Senator Wong interjecting—

Senator BRANDIS: and given that you know that—as you have, just across the table, intimated to me that you do know that—it is very inappropriate for you to base a question on an innuendo, well knowing that no adverse finding against the honourable senator was made.

The PRESIDENT: Point of order, Senator Wong?

Senator Wong: My point of order is direct relevance. I referred to the New South Wales independent investigation against corruption. I referred to that evidence and I asked if the Prime Minister had asked Senator Sinodinos to provide a full account of his conduct before he appointed him to the cabinet. A discussion about whether or not there are ICAC findings is not an answer to that question.

The PRESIDENT: Yes, I accept that, Senator Wong. Senator Brandis, you have one minute and 35 seconds in which to answer the question.

Senator BRANDIS: I intend to, but I just thought I should begin by pointing out the inappropriateness and, indeed, unfairness of the premise of the question, when the senator well knows that no adverse finding was made. You are referring to evidence, Senator. Evidence is given in courts, tribunals, commissions and hearings all the time.

Senator Kim Carr: Certainly not given here!

The PRESIDENT: Order! On my left.

Senator BRANDIS: All sorts of allegations are made against people all the time, and the fact that the statements are made does not make them true. If they are not supported by a finding by the relevant court, tribunal, commission or board, they amount to nothing. Now, coming directly to your question, Senator Wong, the Prime Minister most certainly was satisfied that, when he invited Senator Sinodinos to be a member of his government, in every respect he satisfied the requirements of the ministerial code of conduct and was a person of integrity, as we all know him to be.

Senator WONG (South Australia—Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) (14:48): Mr President, I ask a supplementary question. Is the Prime Minister aware of findings of the New South Wales Electoral Commission that implicate Senator Sinodinos in the improper channelling of prohibited donations to the New South Wales Liberal Party through the Free Enterprise Foundation? If so, why has the Prime Minister not stood aside Senator Sinodinos from his position as Cabinet Secretary at the apex of his government?

Senator BRANDIS (Queensland—Attorney-General, Vice-President of the Executive Council and Leader of the Government in the Senate) (14:48): Senator Wong, I am sure the Prime Minister knows of no such findings, because there have not been any. I notice you choose to use the weasel word 'implicate'. If you can point to a finding against Senator Sinodinos, point to it, and if you cannot, desist.

Senator WONG (South Australia—Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) (14:49): Mr President, I ask a further supplementary question. Through you, Mr President, I note that Mr Abbott stood aside Senator Sinodinos pending the outcome of a New South Wales Independent Commission Against Corruption inquiry considering his conduct. In contrast, Mr Turnbull gave him a promotion. What does that say about Mr Turnbull's ministerial standards?

Senator BRANDIS (Queensland—Attorney-General, Vice-President of the Executive Council and Leader of the Government in the Senate) (14:49): Senator Wong, I challenged you to point to a finding against Senator Sinodinos and you were unable to do so, which is the clearest proof to every man and woman in this chamber that that question should never have been asked. You should be ashamed of it...

 
Followed by this excellent passage of Senate theatre where PW & KC got their bottoms spanked: Estimates, Senator Carr motion & more Wong QON

Despite this obvious political smack-down Wong & Carr still went on with it and subsequently PW put forward this late notice reference for Senate inquiry which ultimately led to the above vote - Inquiry page:

Commonwealth legislative provisions relating to oversight of associated entities of political parties

On 19 April 2016, the following matter was referred to the Finance and Public Administration References Committee for inquiry and report by the 4 May 2016:

Commonwealth legislative provisions relating to oversight of associated entities of political parties, with particular reference to the adequacy of:

1. the funding and disclosure regime relating to annual returns;
   
2. the powers of the Australian Electoral Commission with respect to supervision of the conduct of, and reporting by, associated entities of political parties; and
   
3. any related matters; and
   

2.     That the Senate direct Senator Sinodinos to appear before the committee to answer questions.

The Submission closing date is mid-day, Tuesday 26 April 2016. The reporting date is 4 May 2016.

Probably much to the Ferryman's horror   , those ToR got me thinking..thinking..thinking???  Mainly 1. & definitely 3. but also some of 2. maybe??

As most PAIN associates know, PAIN has an extensive file on the PelAir cover-up Senate inquiry, that still gets regular updates and further information added, while we are actively conducting our parallel investigation with the ATSB VH-NGA re-investigation.

Now part of that file includes volumes of information pertaining to any dodgy or otherwise associations between REX and various political parties &/or government agencies. In particular there was one very murky association and political donation that occurred just prior to the Senate inquiry which began 22nd October 2012: “Do you operate or conduct business under any other names?"

Rex made a $250,000 donation to the ALP, $95,700 to the federal Nationals and $40,000 to the Liberal Party. This made the small airline one of the biggest political donors in the country.

“Rex is a public company and it had an obligation to explain whether even one (word) regarding the crash was spoken with any of the political parties,” Mr Xenophon told The Australian.

“This largesse to political parties is inexplicably baffling and I will be buying some shares in Rex and asking them to explain it.”

&..

The airline had earlier incorrectly claimed it had made no donations to the LNP; however, when shown otherwise, Ms Chapple said the airline had meant it had made no donations to the Queensland LNP.

Of particular interest was Rex’s $250,000 donation to the federal ALP given the airline was a highly vocal critic of the Labor government.

In 2013 Rex publicly said the ALP was “hellbent” on destroying regional aviation and “along with it pretty much the rest of the economy”.

Mr Xenophon said it appeared to defy reason why Rex would donate heavily to a government it would shortly afterwards describe as “destroying its industry”.

“Perhaps Rex had a case of Stockholm syndrome?” he said.

In 2009 a Rex aeroplane — operated under the group’s Pel-Air brand — ditched into the ocean with six passengers on board, badly injuring one.

A lengthy Australian Transport Safety Board investigation blamed the Pel-Air pilot involved in the crash but failed to mention 57 breaches or “serious deficiencies” at Pel-Air.

Mr Xenophon headed a Senate committee inquiry into that botched investigation, which led to the federal government last month calling on the ATSB to reopen the investigation.

So what do you reckon Ferryman, is it possible to collate, review, draft, etc. the PAIN associates observations in regards to ToR 1, 2 & definitely 3; into a readable submission inside of four days??   


MTF...P2   

Ps I also seem to recall a certain DIP statement, that recorded the DIP (on the way up to meeting with former minister Albo) bumping into a certain Mr John Sharp coming out of the lift with a number of files etc. under his arm?? - Hmm definitely have to dig that one out    

[Kharon]

A veritable challenge.

P2 – “So what do you reckon Ferryman, is it possible to collate, review, draft, etc. the PAIN associates observations in regards to ToR 1, 2 & definitely 3; into a readable submission inside of four days?”

Item 3 in your bundle M’lud may be stretched to fit, but is the game worth the candle?

Sindodinos is a handy political target; but will ‘blowing the gaff’ really help?  They are all ‘at it’, the donations game; and, if the cat really gets out the bag there will be a little more than double dissolution required. I mean who’ll run the joint while a whole new system of government is arranged, the public service would just love that and the GG will have a meltdown.

On what frame could I hang the fabric of a submission?  It’s public knowledge that Rex (Sharp) as ‘treasurer’ of the Nats made a donation to the Albo Anti Aircraft party on or about the Pel-Air era.  We have photographic evidence of the Truss sharing of an aeroplane cake and of airport promenades..    Perhaps it's just that ol’ John Boy just felt guilty leaving Albo out of the cake sharing and was spotted just personally delivering a piece of same to Albo’s office; the brown paper bag being quite a legitimate way to transport the tid-bit.  

It’s all passing strange; and probably completely innocent. I mean it did look like a great cake and Albo was the boss cocky at the time.  The only questionable part was did McConvict get the crumbs?  Albo ain’t the sharing kind and anyway McComic probably ‘owed’ Albo a couple of slices; so probably not.

The only ‘real’ question PAIN could ask is why the sudden outbreak of largess and break of donation pattern occurred.  Which takes me back to the beginning – is the game worth the candle?

I shall confer with the grown ups; see what can be done.  But my money is on a diluting of first intentions and a hosing down of the spot fire.  People in glass houses seems to me to be a fine title.

MTF? (hope not, wanted a day off on Sunday). Wistfully glances at dusty golf clubs, while cursing P2 in a quiet montone.....  

[Peetwo]

Update: Estimates & Sinodinos witch hunt inquiry.

In the wash up of the Grabor Party Sinodinos inquiry, apparently old mate Arthur decided not to turn up (link - HERE - for Hansard). With the presence of Liberal Senator Seselja some fireworks were guaranteed -

Senator SESELJA: Chair, I have a point of order. I would like to get a clarification if I could. Some have referred to this inquiry as a witch-hunt. In relation to other witnesses whom coalition senators wanted to see called, I would seek your clarification in relation to witnesses who could have shed light on the $40,000 donation washed through the Victorian AWU—people like Cesar Melhem; Ted Lockyer, from Unibilt; and a range of other players. Is there a reason why they were not asked to appear, or is this just about Senator Sinodinos?

Senator RHIANNON: Is there a reason that the New South Wales Liberals are not turning up and all the Liberal Party leadership—


Senator SESELJA: Senator Rhiannon, I have asked a question of the chair—and that was put to the committee, as I understand it. If you are going to pretend that this is not a witch-hunt and just about Senator Sinodinos, I think it is probably good to explain why Cesar Melhem and a range of others were not called given that there were serious allegations at the royal commission in regard to the washing of donations through the AWU, an associated entity—which is obviously directly within the terms of reference.

CHAIR: Those witnesses were considered by the committee and the committee resolved not to call them on the basis that they were not relevant to the terms of reference. You are putting a case—

Senator SESELJA: How are they not relevant?

CHAIR: It was not possible for the committee to discuss that because—

Senator WONG: Chair, on a point of order: Senator Seselja has asked for an explanation and you have provided it. We have witnesses before us. If we could proceed with the inquiry, we would appreciate it.

Senator SESELJA: So this is a 'get us' inquiry, not a 'get to the truth' inquiry.
CHAIR: Senator Seselja, we are now going to hear from our witnesses. I am unable to disclose to you or to anybody else the deliberations that took place in a private meeting, as you well know. The questions you are asking our out of order.

Senator SESELJA: But none of those people were called. Interesting.

 &..

CHAIR: I am concerned that you have not made the clear connection between the activities you are talking about and the question of political donations, because—


Senator SESELJA: You've got to be kidding!

CHAIR: nothing that you have presented describes or speaks to a political donation. However, I am prepared to give you the benefit of the doubt. I think the second point that Senator Ludwig makes, which is if you are in possession of documentation that is underpinning your line of questioning it would be helpful if other senators were able to take it.

Senator SESELJA: Well, they can go on the website of the trade union royal commission. It is publicly available information. This is obviously, clearly, just designed to shut down my questioning, Chair.

CHAIR: Senator Seselja, you have a piece of paper in front of you—

Senator SESELJA: I have a piece of paper, which is the terms of reference. I can read from the terms of reference to point out how relevant this is if you would like. It is an absurd proposition. I am asking questions about how associated entities are getting their money, and we have an inquiry into:

b.the powers of the Australian Electoral Commission with respect to supervision of the conduct of, and reporting by, associated entities …
What part of my questioning about these associated entities is not relevant?

This bit from the Chair - "..I further note that Senator Sinodinos says that this inquiry is 'too short'. In closing, I note that this committee would be very happy to entertain a recommendation from Senator Sinodinos that an inquiry be re-established for a longer period in the next parliament..."

Not that any pollie interested in self-preservation would seriously entertain such an inquiry; however if some enterprising independent did support such an inquiry, could we please call John Sharp & Albo to explain that 250k donation to the Federal Labor party...   
Moving on the following is a basic summary of the Estimates daily program:

2016-17 Budget Estimates


Meeting times to be determined by each Committee (approximately 9.00am – 11.00pm)

(Please note that Committees may agree to amend this schedule and the order that portfolios will be heard)

Consolidated Daily Program (as at the conclusion of each days's hearings)  (to be provided)

[b]Programs
[/b]
GROUP A: Committees in this group will hold a public hearing on estimates on Thursday, 5 May 2016

Environment and Communications (to be provided)

Environment: Thursday, 5 May 2016

Communications and the Arts: Thursday, 5 May 2016                      

Finance and Public Administration (to be provided)

Parliament: Thursday, 5 May 2016

Prime Minister & Cabinet: Thursday, 5 May 2016

Finance: Thursday, 5 May 2016

Cross-portfolio Indigenous matters: no hearing will be held              

Legal and Constitutional Affairs (to be provided)

Immigration and Border Protection: Thursday, 5 May 2016

Attorney-General's: Thursday, 5 May 2016

Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport (to be provided)          


Agriculture and Water Resources: Thursday, 5 May 2016


Infrastructure and Regional Development: Thursday, 5 May 2016

Hmm...Minister Nash & the committee will have a busy day..
Still haven't seen any sign of the 227 QON from last Estimates being answered anytime soon?

Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development


Questions on notice index: (PDF 948KB)
Answers are due 1 April 2016.

Tabled Documents
View File
1.) Document titled 'Flight Operations: Flight Standing Order: Application of Flight Time Limitations'. Tabled by Senator Nick Xenophon on 8 February 2016.
(PDF 1775KB)
2.) Document titled 'Information Brief: Melbourne Basin Coordination Incidents'. Tabled by Airservices Australia on 8 February 2016.
(PDF 1653KB)
3.) Document titled 'Information Brief: LAHSO at Melbourne Airport'. Tabled by Airservices Australia on 9 February 2016.
(PDF 4836KB)

Additional information and clarification of evidence
View File
1.) Correspondence received 15 February 2016 from Ms Judith Zielke, Deputy Secretary, Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development, correcting evidence given on 8 February 2016.
(PDF 506KB)
2.) Correspondence received 24 February 2016 from Mr Mark Skidmore AM, Chief Executive Officer, Civil Aviation Safety Authority, correcting evidence given on 8 February 2016.
(PDF 1757KB)

Given the tightened timetable due to the imminent calling of the DD, I can kind of understand but surely Minister Nash & miniscule Chester are kicking butts to get the AQON out in time...

Especially after the Senator Carr/Wong motion on the subject of unanswered QON & the subsequent smackdown from Senator "I'll be back" Cormann...  

MTF...P2

[Peetwo]

Update: Estimates & Sinodinos witch hunt inquiry.

This bit from the Chair - "..I further note that Senator Sinodinos says that this inquiry is 'too short'. In closing, I note that this committee would be very happy to entertain a recommendation from Senator Sinodinos that an inquiry be re-established for a longer period in the next parliament..."

Not that any pollie interested in self-preservation would seriously entertain such an inquiry; however if some enterprising independent did support such an inquiry, could we please call John Sharp & Albo to explain that 250k donation to the Federal Labor party...    

 

In a further follow up to a) the good theatre above; and b) the Sinodinos witch hunt inquiry, I note that the 'Senate Finance and Public Administration References Committee' have already put out an interim report - see HERE - where the fiercely partisan committee talk about sanctions of Senator Sinodinos:

1.12      The committee notes the following possible responses available to the Senate, including motions:

• requiring Senator Sinodinos to attend the Senate chamber in order to explain the reasons for his non-compliance to the Senate;
  
• directing Senator Sinodinos to attend a further hearing of the committee;
  
• referring the non-compliance with a senate order to the Senate Standing Committee of Privileges, consistent with Parliamentary Privilege Resolution 6(8);
  
• to censure Senator Sinodinos;
  
• to consider whether a contempt has been committed, under Standing Order 82; and
  
• to pursue other remedies which may be available under the Parliamentary Privileges Act 1987.
  

  
This was the Coalition Senators dissenting reply to that interim report (my bold):

1.1        This inquiry is unworthy of the Senate.

1.2        Never before has the Senate directed any of its Ministers to appear before one of its Committees. Ministers are accountable through questions with and without notice, and through the Estimates process. The motion establishing this inquiry stands without precedent and violates well-established Senate practice.
1.3        The usual process is for a Committee to invite a Minister to attend. Senator Arthur Sinodinos invoked the words of former Senator Mark Arbib, then a Minister in the Rudd Labor Government, in his declining a request to appear before a Senate Committee. The Committee refused to recognise the principle invoked by a Labor Senator when applied to a Liberal Senator.
1.4        The Electoral Commissioner, Mr Tom Rogers - the sole witness at the less than two-hour Committee hearing - noted in his submission that this space of public policy has already been the subject of 'significant scrutiny' and the Committee has a short reporting period. Mr Rogers also highlighted that the Australian Electoral Commission has already made numerous submissions to parliamentary inquiries, including to the Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters - the proper Committee to inquire into political donations.
1.5        We note that the majority of associated entities are affiliated with the Australian Labor Party and that these entities declared in total more than $800 million of income to the AEC for financial year 2014-15, representing more than 90 per cent of all associated entities declared income. We also note that unions alone gave the ALP direct donations worth more than $5.3 million in financial year 2014-15.
1.6        We asked for a number of witnesses to be invited to give evidence at this inquiry's hearings, including the Hon Bill Shorten MP, Mr Cesar Melham MLC, Mr Noah Carroll, Mr Lance Wilson, Ms Fiona Ward, and Mr Ted Lockyer. Labor and Greens Senators on the Committee did not entertain inviting these witnesses to appear.
1.7        These witnesses could have testified about the washing of a $40,000 in kind donation from Unibuilt Pty Ltd to Bill Shorten's 2007 Maribyrnong election campaign via the Australian Workers Union – an associated entity.
1.8        The Chair's attempt to justify the exclusion on these witnesses on grounds of their being “not relevant to the terms of reference” further demonstrates the partisan nature of this exercise.
1.9        Asked why these witnesses were not relevant to the terms of reference, the Chair posited that “it was not possible for the Committee to discuss that because...” before receiving riding instructions from Senator Wong to proceed regardless.  The Chair then proffered that she was unable to disclose private Committee deliberations and that such questions were out of order.
1.10      Clearly questions about the activities of the Victorian AWU – an ALP associated entity - are relevant to the inquiry's terms of reference.
1.11      This was underlined by the fact that the Electoral Commissioner answered a series of questions about this donation, which went undisclosed for eight years until Mr Shorten fronted the Royal Commission into Trade Union Governance and Corruption.
1.12      For the record it should be noted that the Royal Commission made no finding in relation to whether this donation breached the Electoral Act. A number of issues about it remain unresolved.
1.13      Senator Wong's intemperate criticism of Mr Rogers during the Committee's hearing on 28 April, also deserves comment.
1.14      Consistent with his past practice, the Electoral Commissioner rightly refused to be drawn on questions about evidence to a NSW ICAC inquiry, much of it contested, put to him by Senator Wong, preferring to wait until ICAC reports its findings.
1.15      That Senator Wong should twice accuse him of “turning a blind eye” and ignoring evidence, thus impugning his integrity and independence, simply because he wouldn't fall into line with her partisan line of questioning, further illustrates the purely political nature of this exercise, notwithstanding Senator Wong's unsuccessful attempts at parsing.
1.16      In conclusion, the establishment of this inquiry, the conduct of the Chair and Senator Wong at its one hearing and the content of the majority report, has been a partisan political exercise, unworthy of a Senate Committee and unworthy of further consideration by the Senate.

So much like with Senator "I'll be back" Cormann's clinical smack down of Senator Wong a week before, again PW is exposed for the partisan political animal she really is. IMHO if there is anyone that should be sanctioned here it is Senator Wong for wasting taxpayers money on a political witch hunt on this bogus inquiry & bogus (2000 odd) written - WONG QON III - QON...


MTF...P2

Ps If I was Short-one I'd think seriously about where PW appears on the South Oz Senate card, she is becoming a walking, talking liability...UFB!  

[Peetwo]

Moving on the following is a basic summary of the Estimates daily program:

2016-17 Budget Estimates


Meeting times to be determined by each Committee (approximately 9.00am – 11.00pm)

(Please note that Committees may agree to amend this schedule and the order that portfolios will be heard)

Consolidated Daily Program (as at the conclusion of each days's hearings)  (to be provided)

[b]Programs
[/b]
GROUP A: Committees in this group will hold a public hearing on estimates on Thursday, 5 May 2016

Environment and Communications (to be provided)

Environment: Thursday, 5 May 2016

Communications and the Arts: Thursday, 5 May 2016                      

Finance and Public Administration (to be provided)

Parliament: Thursday, 5 May 2016

Prime Minister & Cabinet: Thursday, 5 May 2016

Finance: Thursday, 5 May 2016

Cross-portfolio Indigenous matters: no hearing will be held              

Legal and Constitutional Affairs (to be provided)

Immigration and Border Protection: Thursday, 5 May 2016

Attorney-General's: Thursday, 5 May 2016

Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport (to be provided)          


Agriculture and Water Resources: Thursday, 5 May 2016


Infrastructure and Regional Development: Thursday, 5 May 2016

Hmm...Minister Nash & the committee will have a busy day..
Still haven't seen any sign of the 227 QON from last Estimates being answered anytime soon?

Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development


Questions on notice index: (PDF 948KB)
Answers are due 1 April 2016.

Tabled Documents
View File
1.) Document titled 'Flight Operations: Flight Standing Order: Application of Flight Time Limitations'. Tabled by Senator Nick Xenophon on 8 February 2016.
(PDF 1775KB)
2.) Document titled 'Information Brief: Melbourne Basin Coordination Incidents'. Tabled by Airservices Australia on 8 February 2016.
(PDF 1653KB)
3.) Document titled 'Information Brief: LAHSO at Melbourne Airport'. Tabled by Airservices Australia on 9 February 2016.
(PDF 4836KB)

Additional information and clarification of evidence
View File
1.) Correspondence received 15 February 2016 from Ms Judith Zielke, Deputy Secretary, Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development, correcting evidence given on 8 February 2016.
(PDF 506KB)
2.) Correspondence received 24 February 2016 from Mr Mark Skidmore AM, Chief Executive Officer, Civil Aviation Safety Authority, correcting evidence given on 8 February 2016.
(PDF 1757KB)

Given the tightened timetable due to the imminent calling of the DD, I can kind of understand but surely Minister Nash & miniscule Chester are kicking butts to get the AQON out in time...

Especially after the Senator Carr/Wong motion on the subject of unanswered QON & the subsequent smackdown from Senator "I'll be back" Cormann...  

Update: Looks like the relevant agency sessions will be lumped together...

Tight schedule, the person at the back of the room will be dizzy...

Still no sign of the 227 AQON - Ministers? Murky?..anyone?? 



MTF...P2       

[Peetwo]

The Heff's last hurrah-  

Yesterday Senator Heffernan a true gentleman of the bush & unerring advocate of regional & transport issues, gave his last speech in the Senate Chamber.  And today will be the last time Senator Heffernan will Chair the Senate Rural & Regional Affairs & Transport committee in Estimates - we at PAIN will dearly miss him :

"..My aspirations are bound by the honour boards of past campaigns in both war and peace. My commitment is to reward the individual, unburden the dependent and protect the vulnerable. My hope is that in walking the tightrope between rights and responsibilities the balance will always be maintained in Australia by the peaceful democratic processes of our parliament..."

  

Senator HEFFERNAN (New South Wales) (13:43): It is good to see you in the chamber, Sterlo.  This is my last speech. I seek leave to incorporate my first speech into this speech.


Leave granted...

Senator HEFFERNAN: I would firstly like to thank the constituency of New South Wales for allowing me the great honour and privilege of representing them in this chamber for the best part of 20 years—in particular, those from rural and regional Australia; I have long fought to have their voices heard in this place. I would like to thank my family and acknowledge that I would not be here without their support: my hardworking wife, Margaret, who is in the gallery up there; Kate, who is also in the gallery; and my other children, Will, Ted and Harriet. Hello, everybody. They have always displayed much understanding—a bloody lot of understanding—and given me great support through the inevitable highs and lows of family, farming and politics. I would also like to thank all current and former members and senators and my parliamentary colleagues, my current and former staff and the Liberal Party and, in particular, John Winston Howard, who rang me up and said one day, 'What about having a crack in the Senate?' So there you go, I had a crack.


Those passing by have commented on a sign displayed in my office titled 'the Heffernan pledge'. It states, 'I will behave at estimates, I will not swear and I will give other Senators an opportunity to ask questions.' I am sure Senator Sterle will agree how well I have followed these guidelines.


I will go to my maiden speech, which I will incorporate. From John Buchan's 'Great Captains' from Homilies and Recreations, I quote:


We can make a catalogue of the moral qualities of the greatest captains but we cannot exhaust them. First there will be courage, not merely the physical kind, but the rarer thing, the moral courage which we call fortitude—the power of enduring when hope is gone. There must be the capacity for self-sacrifice, the willingness to let worldly interests and even reputation and honour perish, if only the task be accomplished. The man who is concerned with his own prestige will never move mountains. There must be patience supreme patience under misunderstandings and set-backs, and the muddles and interferences of others. There must be resilience under defeat, a tough vitality and a manly optimism, which looks at the facts in all their bleakness and yet dares to be confident. There must be the sense of the eternal continuity of a great cause, so that failure and even death will not seem the end, and a man sees himself as only a part in a predestined purpose. It may not be for him to breach the fortress, but the breach will come. I add another quality: the greatest captains have laid their spell not only on the mind and spirit, but on the heart of their armies.


I will now quote from various parts of my maiden speech in 1996 which I think are still relevant.


I wish to pay tribute to our primary industries. Primary industry, which is generally carried on in rural, regional and remote Australia and includes fishing, farming, forestry and mining, continues to contribute 75 per cent of Australia's net external earnings.


That was in '96.


Our regional cities, towns and villages that support our fishermen, foresters, farmers and miners are a vital part of that contribution, as are our rural women.


Our rural women are often taken for granted. Many run the farm, more often the farmer. Rural women display greater patience, more resilience and are generally better educated than are rural men. 'Marry a teacher or nurse and drought proof the farm' is still a well-known bush convention. Rural women often have to contend with droving, drafting and old harvest trucks, yet find the time to do the books, do the washing and ironing, cook the meals, oversee the homework, school excursions and weekend sport, water the garden and look like a lady of leisure for church on Sunday. Our rural women deserve a medal for holding together the spirit of family farming.


Our farmers are an endangered species. Despite the declining numbers of farmers, now down to 120,000, and an increasing average age, now 53; despite the drift to the coast and the fact that more people live in the western suburbs of Sydney than all of rural Australia; despite the decline of farm employment from 27 per cent of total employment in the 1920s to three per cent today; and despite the relentless decline in terms of trade for agriculture, our farmers and the world's farmers have to feed an extra 90 million people every year.


We live in a world where 1.3 billion people lack regular access to fresh water, where 800 million people do not enjoy food security, where 185 million children suffer malnutrition and where 1 billion people have an income of no more than $1 a day. Population growth is wearing down Mother Earth and swallowing up our farming land and agricultural water resources. Twenty-five per cent of the world's agricultural land is degraded and 25 per cent of the world's wild fisheries are overfished. If the world does not wake up, in 100 years there will be no tropical rainforest.


The loss of land from dryland agricultural production to urban development requires, in resource transfer terms, 1,000 tonnes of water to produce from irrigation 1 tonne of wheat. Many land scarce societies who face such transfers face the paradox of the reproductive rights of the current generation and the survival rights of the next generation.


The great challenge in feeding the world will be to produce enough food at a price that is affordable to all without destroying the environment. Rural, regional and remote Australia has taken up this challenge. We have adopted land care and our farmers are bonded to the land, often in a similar way to the custodial and spiritual ways of our Indigenous people. They have stuck through drought, fires and floods, through good times and bad and compete in world markets corrupted by the US and European treasuries and in many years have accepted fresh air and freedom as their only income.


My tribute also extends to my bush companions, our Indigenous people, who live in rural and remote Australia. I share their love of the land and their concern for the loss of their timeless culture. They, like myself, sleep many nights under the stars, understand the value of a campfire and can read Mother Nature, her seasons and warning signals. They, sadly, often live in a mire of low self-esteem, shunned by the passage of time and technology.

… … …

For many years, try as many have, we have failed these people. They, like our jackeroos, drovers, shearers, shearer's cooks and all rural dwellers, are a precious part of Australia's culture. All these people need not feel isolated and forgotten. They will have a champion for their cause in me.

… … …

Only a strong economy will fund from income the compassionate side of government, 'the true measure of good government'. Bold initiatives will produce a strong economy, real jobs and real wealth. Australia is ready for an era of bold initiatives, an era of national savings and real wealth creation. Like the Snowy Mountain scheme of the 20th century, we need a plan for the 21st century—a plan which will bring cohesion and long-term benefit to all.


Our plan should include a very fast train which adopts an inland route and has passenger and freight capacity and time lines to link our capital cities. The VFT will break down the barrier between city and country, curb the environmentally destructive urban sprawl, open up development corridors for the next 100 years and be the bridge to the 21st century. It will take Australia from a country retiring to the coast, living on welfare and resting on its laurels to a new frontier for development with job opportunities and excitement.


We should also harness some of the millions of megalitres of fresh water that flows annually into our northern tropical seas. This water … can be used to open up some of the last tracts of virgin farming land available in the world. Such a plan would recognise that in a world of shrinking land, mineral and water resources Australia has much to offer. It would also allow many remote communities, both black and white, a lifeline to higher self-esteem and a train ride to better health and education facilities and employment opportunities.

…   …   …

For my own state of New South Wales, the development of an inland international air … terminal would be a catalyst to restructure and vertically integrate the Murray-Darling farm enterprise … With the added value of workplace reform it would allow Murray-Darling farmers to competitively enter Asian supermarkets as fresh food suppliers to three billion people.


Madam President, the paradox and urban consolidation and urban sprawl, public and private transport, productivity employment, the myriad of environmental issues, clean air, fresh water—we buy fresh water now; will we eventually have to buy clean air?—

this was in 1996 and we are seeing it now— are not some trendy 'Greens' issues; they are our issues. They are planet survival issues which will not be solved by lobby groups, radical political agendas or single issue … parties. These issues will only be solved by government achieving interaction and understanding between city and council, between the various competing energies and agendas and between the producers and the users.

…   …   …

We have tolerated a public purse which has allowed rights to overpower responsibilities and build in billion dollar rorts; an archaic tax system that taxes battlers and the thrifty, yet allows taxable profits in key industries to be exported by foreign owned and vertically integrated companies—


that includes transfer pricing and of course these days derivative swaps.

My last appeal to parliament is to create a federal judicial commission—and this is away from my speech in 1996—for reasons that are well-documented, but have never been made public. I am sure the torture of history, as is the case in the current McClelland royal commission, will tell the truth. When I made my first speech to this chamber on 10 December 1996—it seems like only yesterday—my final words were:

… every time I hear the bugle sound the last post, I am reminded that I belong to a generation that has never been to war, has taken much and given little. I am reminded that the debt we all owe to earlier generations of Australians cannot be repaid but merely serviced.

My aspirations are bound by the honour boards of past campaigns in both war and peace. My commitment is to reward the individual, unburden the dependent and protect the vulnerable. My hope is that in walking the tightrope between rights and responsibilities the balance will always be maintained in Australia by the peaceful democratic processes of our parliament.


My dream—


and it is today—


is that on the day of my last speech in this chamber I will be able to say that I have served in a parliament whose members have all put the nation's interests ahead of their own; a parliament which has robustly discarded as un-Australian the morays of the eighties and its legacy of greed, corruption and debt … a parliament which has delivered the opportunity for all Australians to enjoy independence of means and mind; and, finally, that my contribution in this place will be judged by my fellow Australians as worthwhile.

My only wish then—


which is now—


will be that God allows me to return with my family to the peace and tranquillity of the bush.


Thank you.

A couple of memorable moments from the Heff:

Ripping it into Beaker on UAVs (at 02:00 min)..

& from last Estimates... - A Senator Said “Fuck That’s Risky Shit” And It’ll Make Your Day

&..the classic - "A cover-up or a balls-up"

Finally the original "person at the back of the room" quote from the PelAir cover-up inquiry:

 

  
Farewell Heff, it is not going to be quite the same without you -


MTF...P2

[Peetwo]

The Heff's last hurrah-  

Yesterday Senator Heffernan a true gentleman of the bush & unerring advocate of regional & transport issues, gave his last speech in the Senate Chamber.  And today will be the last time Senator Heffernan will Chair the Senate Rural & Regional Affairs & Transport committee in Estimates - we at PAIN will dearly miss him :

"..My aspirations are bound by the honour boards of past campaigns in both war and peace. My commitment is to reward the individual, unburden the dependent and protect the vulnerable. My hope is that in walking the tightrope between rights and responsibilities the balance will always be maintained in Australia by the peaceful democratic processes of our parliament..."

  

Senator HEFFERNAN (New South Wales) (13:43): It is good to see you in the chamber, Sterlo.  This is my last speech. I seek leave to incorporate my first speech into this speech.


Leave granted...

Senator HEFFERNAN: I would firstly like to thank the constituency of New South Wales for allowing me the great honour and privilege of representing them in this chamber for the best part of 20 years—in particular, those from rural and regional Australia; I have long fought to have their voices heard in this place. I would like to thank my family and acknowledge that I would not be here without their support: my hardworking wife, Margaret, who is in the gallery up there; Kate, who is also in the gallery; and my other children, Will, Ted and Harriet. Hello, everybody. They have always displayed much understanding—a bloody lot of understanding—and given me great support through the inevitable highs and lows of family, farming and politics. I would also like to thank all current and former members and senators and my parliamentary colleagues, my current and former staff and the Liberal Party and, in particular, John Winston Howard, who rang me up and said one day, 'What about having a crack in the Senate?' So there you go, I had a crack.


Those passing by have commented on a sign displayed in my office titled 'the Heffernan pledge'. It states, 'I will behave at estimates, I will not swear and I will give other Senators an opportunity to ask questions.' I am sure Senator Sterle will agree how well I have followed these guidelines.


I will go to my maiden speech, which I will incorporate. From John Buchan's 'Great Captains' from Homilies and Recreations, I quote:


We can make a catalogue of the moral qualities of the greatest captains but we cannot exhaust them. First there will be courage, not merely the physical kind, but the rarer thing, the moral courage which we call fortitude—the power of enduring when hope is gone. There must be the capacity for self-sacrifice, the willingness to let worldly interests and even reputation and honour perish, if only the task be accomplished. The man who is concerned with his own prestige will never move mountains. There must be patience supreme patience under misunderstandings and set-backs, and the muddles and interferences of others. There must be resilience under defeat, a tough vitality and a manly optimism, which looks at the facts in all their bleakness and yet dares to be confident. There must be the sense of the eternal continuity of a great cause, so that failure and even death will not seem the end, and a man sees himself as only a part in a predestined purpose. It may not be for him to breach the fortress, but the breach will come. I add another quality: the greatest captains have laid their spell not only on the mind and spirit, but on the heart of their armies.


I will now quote from various parts of my maiden speech in 1996 which I think are still relevant.


I wish to pay tribute to our primary industries. Primary industry, which is generally carried on in rural, regional and remote Australia and includes fishing, farming, forestry and mining, continues to contribute 75 per cent of Australia's net external earnings.


That was in '96.


Our regional cities, towns and villages that support our fishermen, foresters, farmers and miners are a vital part of that contribution, as are our rural women.


Our rural women are often taken for granted. Many run the farm, more often the farmer. Rural women display greater patience, more resilience and are generally better educated than are rural men. 'Marry a teacher or nurse and drought proof the farm' is still a well-known bush convention. Rural women often have to contend with droving, drafting and old harvest trucks, yet find the time to do the books, do the washing and ironing, cook the meals, oversee the homework, school excursions and weekend sport, water the garden and look like a lady of leisure for church on Sunday. Our rural women deserve a medal for holding together the spirit of family farming.


Our farmers are an endangered species. Despite the declining numbers of farmers, now down to 120,000, and an increasing average age, now 53; despite the drift to the coast and the fact that more people live in the western suburbs of Sydney than all of rural Australia; despite the decline of farm employment from 27 per cent of total employment in the 1920s to three per cent today; and despite the relentless decline in terms of trade for agriculture, our farmers and the world's farmers have to feed an extra 90 million people every year.


We live in a world where 1.3 billion people lack regular access to fresh water, where 800 million people do not enjoy food security, where 185 million children suffer malnutrition and where 1 billion people have an income of no more than $1 a day. Population growth is wearing down Mother Earth and swallowing up our farming land and agricultural water resources. Twenty-five per cent of the world's agricultural land is degraded and 25 per cent of the world's wild fisheries are overfished. If the world does not wake up, in 100 years there will be no tropical rainforest.


The loss of land from dryland agricultural production to urban development requires, in resource transfer terms, 1,000 tonnes of water to produce from irrigation 1 tonne of wheat. Many land scarce societies who face such transfers face the paradox of the reproductive rights of the current generation and the survival rights of the next generation.


The great challenge in feeding the world will be to produce enough food at a price that is affordable to all without destroying the environment. Rural, regional and remote Australia has taken up this challenge. We have adopted land care and our farmers are bonded to the land, often in a similar way to the custodial and spiritual ways of our Indigenous people. They have stuck through drought, fires and floods, through good times and bad and compete in world markets corrupted by the US and European treasuries and in many years have accepted fresh air and freedom as their only income.


My tribute also extends to my bush companions, our Indigenous people, who live in rural and remote Australia. I share their love of the land and their concern for the loss of their timeless culture. They, like myself, sleep many nights under the stars, understand the value of a campfire and can read Mother Nature, her seasons and warning signals. They, sadly, often live in a mire of low self-esteem, shunned by the passage of time and technology.

… … …

For many years, try as many have, we have failed these people. They, like our jackeroos, drovers, shearers, shearer's cooks and all rural dwellers, are a precious part of Australia's culture. All these people need not feel isolated and forgotten. They will have a champion for their cause in me.

… … …

Only a strong economy will fund from income the compassionate side of government, 'the true measure of good government'. Bold initiatives will produce a strong economy, real jobs and real wealth. Australia is ready for an era of bold initiatives, an era of national savings and real wealth creation. Like the Snowy Mountain scheme of the 20th century, we need a plan for the 21st century—a plan which will bring cohesion and long-term benefit to all.


Our plan should include a very fast train which adopts an inland route and has passenger and freight capacity and time lines to link our capital cities. The VFT will break down the barrier between city and country, curb the environmentally destructive urban sprawl, open up development corridors for the next 100 years and be the bridge to the 21st century. It will take Australia from a country retiring to the coast, living on welfare and resting on its laurels to a new frontier for development with job opportunities and excitement.


We should also harness some of the millions of megalitres of fresh water that flows annually into our northern tropical seas. This water … can be used to open up some of the last tracts of virgin farming land available in the world. Such a plan would recognise that in a world of shrinking land, mineral and water resources Australia has much to offer. It would also allow many remote communities, both black and white, a lifeline to higher self-esteem and a train ride to better health and education facilities and employment opportunities.

…   …   …

For my own state of New South Wales, the development of an inland international air … terminal would be a catalyst to restructure and vertically integrate the Murray-Darling farm enterprise … With the added value of workplace reform it would allow Murray-Darling farmers to competitively enter Asian supermarkets as fresh food suppliers to three billion people.


Madam President, the paradox and urban consolidation and urban sprawl, public and private transport, productivity employment, the myriad of environmental issues, clean air, fresh water—we buy fresh water now; will we eventually have to buy clean air?—

this was in 1996 and we are seeing it now— are not some trendy 'Greens' issues; they are our issues. They are planet survival issues which will not be solved by lobby groups, radical political agendas or single issue … parties. These issues will only be solved by government achieving interaction and understanding between city and council, between the various competing energies and agendas and between the producers and the users.

…   …   …

We have tolerated a public purse which has allowed rights to overpower responsibilities and build in billion dollar rorts; an archaic tax system that taxes battlers and the thrifty, yet allows taxable profits in key industries to be exported by foreign owned and vertically integrated companies—


that includes transfer pricing and of course these days derivative swaps.

My last appeal to parliament is to create a federal judicial commission—and this is away from my speech in 1996—for reasons that are well-documented, but have never been made public. I am sure the torture of history, as is the case in the current McClelland royal commission, will tell the truth. When I made my first speech to this chamber on 10 December 1996—it seems like only yesterday—my final words were:

… every time I hear the bugle sound the last post, I am reminded that I belong to a generation that has never been to war, has taken much and given little. I am reminded that the debt we all owe to earlier generations of Australians cannot be repaid but merely serviced.

My aspirations are bound by the honour boards of past campaigns in both war and peace. My commitment is to reward the individual, unburden the dependent and protect the vulnerable. My hope is that in walking the tightrope between rights and responsibilities the balance will always be maintained in Australia by the peaceful democratic processes of our parliament.


My dream—


and it is today—


is that on the day of my last speech in this chamber I will be able to say that I have served in a parliament whose members have all put the nation's interests ahead of their own; a parliament which has robustly discarded as un-Australian the morays of the eighties and its legacy of greed, corruption and debt … a parliament which has delivered the opportunity for all Australians to enjoy independence of means and mind; and, finally, that my contribution in this place will be judged by my fellow Australians as worthwhile.

My only wish then—


which is now—


will be that God allows me to return with my family to the peace and tranquillity of the bush.


Thank you.

A couple of memorable moments from the Heff:

Ripping it into Beaker on UAVs (at 02:00 min)..

& from last Estimates... - A Senator Said “Fuck That’s Risky Shit” And It’ll Make Your Day

&..the classic - "A cover-up or a balls-up"

Finally the original "person at the back of the room" quote from the PelAir cover-up inquiry:

 

  
Farewell Heff, it is not going to be quite the same without you -


MTF...P2

Ps From Estimates 05/05/16...

[Peetwo]

The Heff's last hurrah-  

Yesterday Senator Heffernan a true gentleman of the bush & unerring advocate of regional & transport issues, gave his last speech in the Senate Chamber.  And today will be the last time Senator Heffernan will Chair the Senate Rural & Regional Affairs & Transport committee in Estimates - we at PAIN will dearly miss him :

"..My aspirations are bound by the honour boards of past campaigns in both war and peace. My commitment is to reward the individual, unburden the dependent and protect the vulnerable. My hope is that in walking the tightrope between rights and responsibilities the balance will always be maintained in Australia by the peaceful democratic processes of our parliament..."

  

Senator HEFFERNAN (New South Wales) (13:43): It is good to see you in the chamber, Sterlo.  This is my last speech. I seek leave to incorporate my first speech into this speech.


Leave granted...

My dream—

and it is today—

is that on the day of my last speech in this chamber I will be able to say that I have served in a parliament whose members have all put the nation's interests ahead of their own; a parliament which has robustly discarded as un-Australian the morays of the eighties and its legacy of greed, corruption and debt … a parliament which has delivered the opportunity for all Australians to enjoy independence of means and mind; and, finally, that my contribution in this place will be judged by my fellow Australians as worthwhile.

My only wish then—


which is now—


will be that God allows me to return with my family to the peace and tranquillity of the bush.


Thank you.

From Estimates 05/05/16...

Hansard from above video:

Senator Nash: Chair—


CHAIR: We are finished.



Senator Nash: We are finished?



CHAIR: I am finished!



Senator Nash: Can I have the indulgence of the chair just for a minute?



CHAIR: You can.



Senator Nash: Thank you very much, Chair. That would be a first. Chair, I just want to take this opportunity to wish you all the very best in your future path. Nearly 11 years ago, I came into this place and was sitting on that side with you, and for nearly nine years or something I was on that committee with you, Senator Heffernan. Two of the greatest things I think we did were stopping the BSE beef from the States and stopping the ADM takeover of GrainCorp.



It was an absolute honour to work with you, and it will be a great loss to this place. Your tenacity, your intelligence, your ability to be across every issue in detail—and that is one of the things I learnt from you: 'Know your stuff, Sparky'—and very much your representation of rural and regional people have been absolutely extraordinary. We are going to miss your colour and movement. I am particularly going to miss you, Senator Heffernan, and I hope the winds blow you on a wonderful path to your future.



CHAIR: Thank you very much, Minister. It is a great pleasure, but to understand the privilege of being in parliament, and the privilege of being able to help people just with knowing the right person to phone, et cetera—it just blows you away. I am most grateful for your words. The other thing is to see young people make their way up the scale, and someone like you now doing a very important job for rural Australia, in particular. Thank you very much, but I have to go and jump off the cliff now—hand my phone in and hand the car keys in.



Senator EDWARDS: Senator Nash, Minister, we join you in your comments and your best wishes for good fortune to smile upon not only Senator Heffernan but also Margaret, his long-enduring wife—I was going to say long-suffering, but I will not presume to know. Certainly, he has added to all of our lives here, and we will miss him—you are quite right.

Senator WILLIAMS: Bill, one of the greatest things that you do is have a great working relationship with Sterlo on the other side of the politics. The two of you work so well together that you put politics aside to the benefit of the committee, and I think you both should be saluted very much for that. All the best, mate.


CHAIR: I would like to acknowledge Glenn. I have to say, if you are visitor to this committee—as we call them, an interloper—it is sometimes a bit of a shock to culture, because we may appear to be blueing when we are winking on the side, but we have absolutely—Sterlo, haven't we—dealt with the issue and set aside the politics. I have a very strong view in public life: do not have a price and do not play politics with people's livelihoods, and I think that suits this very well.



Then we go to the professional staff that have actually made our reports readable, intellectual and logical. We must thank the professional staff as well.



Senator STERLE: For those watching and listening and thinking, 'Why isn't he saying anything?' we had a man hug yesterday. I enjoyed one of the best valedictory speeches. I spoke yesterday. No-one is going to miss the Heff more than me here—and that sounds very strange, because we are the yin and yang in the Senate. We said a lot yesterday, and we will certainly still be mates for a long, long time to come, Heff.



CHAIR: Thank you very much to the Hansard people over the years, who have successfully deleted most of the swear words!



Senator WILLIAMS: All the best to you, Tim Watling—you have been a great secretary.



CHAIR: So, we will adjourn.

The camaraderie & mutual respect amongst those Senators is self-evident, it give's a keen observer like myself hope that the toxicity and venomous politics of the lower house will never totally envelope the Upper House and that the creed of the 'true' Senator will be upheld by at least a core of decent, hardworking men & women...
MTF...P2   

[Peetwo]

AQON finally released: After a couple of hiccups, see here from James...

My name’s James and I’m the Estimates Officer you emailed.

The AQONs have not been deleted and they are on the public record. However, there has been a problem with the website since late last week. I am currently working through the problem, and so I cannot tell you when they will be available on the website again.

In the  meantime, are there any specific AQONs you’re after or alternatively would you like me to contact you when I’ve fixed the website issues?

Cheers,
 
James

...the AQON have been released and there is some doozies... :
 

Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development
Questions on notice index: (PDF 668KB)
Answers are due 1 April 2016.

Answers to Questions on Notice

Date received
1-7
Western Sydney Unit
(PDF_228KB)
04/05/2016, 05/05/2016
8-84
Corporate Services Division
(PDF_5.5MB)
04/05/2016, 05/05/2016
85-92, 95-107, 110-118, 120-126, 129-136
Infrastructure Investment Division
(PDF_896KB)
04/05/2016, 05/05/2016
138-146
Infrastructure Australia
(PDF_106KB)
04/05/2016
147-157
Surface Transport Policy Division
(PDF_496KB)
04/05/2016
158-173
Civil Aviation Safety Authority
(PDF_201KB)
04/05/2016
174-185
Airservices Australia
(PDF_13.6MB)
04/05/2016
186-191
Aviation and Airports Division
(PDF_93KB)
04/05/2016
192-196
Australian Transport Safety Bureau
(PDF_89KB)
04/05/2016
197-209
Australian Maritime Safety Authority
(PDF_2.5MB)
04/05/2016
210-212
Office of Transport Security Division
(PDF_64KB)
04/05/2016
213-219
Policy and Research Division
(PDF_97KB)
04/05/2016
220-224
Australian Rail Track Corporation
(PDF_1.3MB)
04/05/2016
225
Local Government and Territories Division
(PDF_15KB)
04/05/2016
226-227
National Transport Commission
(PDF_37KB)
04/05/2016

MTF...P2

[Kharon]

What a bloody shambles.

It is; it’s an absolute disgrace.  Working for Aunty with P2 and the crew on a daily basis you get kind of used to dealing with the aberrations, the obfuscation and wading, hip deep, in crap streaming out of the Canberra autocracies which purport to govern the aviation industries and the safety of the travelling public.  Having just spent ten days at sea, with little else to do except the simple tasks of trimming sails, making a brew and dealing with wind and ocean; the crash of reality on returning to dry land comes as quite a shock.  One needs to step away and forget all about ‘the troubles’ for while before returning to the fray; only then does the true horror of it become clear.

Step 1, grab an ale; step two, fire up the computer; step 3, catch up: step 4, reach for more ale and digest reading.  We must thank P2 and the Estimates crew for finally getting the AQoN published.  There is little wrong with the ‘back room’ team at the Senate, always helpful, mostly cheerful and best of all they respond to sensible requests.  If only we could get the ‘aviation’ agencies imbued with the same attitude, the world would be a better place.

Reading through the AQoN’s is, I admit is a chore; but it needs to be done – if industry is to fully come to terms with the beast. For the beast is out of control, ungovernable and hell bent on mindless destruction.  One need go no further than the Skidmore performance at Estimates and the CASA AQoN’s to realise this:-

ADSB – logic and common sense fail, dismally, to have any positive effect.  The CASA board either powerless or disinclined to moderate; the ‘minister’ a simple minded delivery boy, running errands for department heads.

CVD – logic and common sense fail, dismally, to have any positive effect.  The CASA board either powerless or disinclined to moderate; the ‘minister’ a simple minded delivery boy, running errands for department heads.

Part 61– logic and common sense fail, dismally, to have any positive effect.  The CASA board either powerless or disinclined to moderate; the ‘minister’ a simple minded delivery boy, running errands for department heads.

While 61 has been slowly but surely insinuating it’s self into industry, the true tales of serious effect and impact are emerging.  As a total, complete and utter balls up it must stand alone in the annals of aviation stupidity; a peerless exemplar of how not to do it – or; how to do it, if you are intent on mass embuggerance.   The PAIN – pilots only loop – has been collecting part 61 horror stories for a while now and believe it is almost time for a serious, factual report to be made on the repercussions this truly dreadful law has provided; operationally, financially and personally to those it has affected the most.  But where to send the ‘report’?  Who will read the analysis ?  Is that person capable of comprehending what is written? Is there someone, somewhere with the juice, interest and ability to unscramble the legal aberration which Skidmore and his Casamites must enforce?

The short answer is No.  The true horror is hidden in the shadow of part 61; if you can stand it, have a quick read of the ‘new’ enforcement manual; then abandon hope; for there is none.  “Prove it” howls the mob – “Easy” says I – Neither CASA nor the department heads will attend any meeting that involves those who dare speak out and state the industry view.  No Sir, only the house trained, tame sycophants, willing accomplices, the purblind, the venal and those controllable few who will accept the aberrations as normal are allowed to wallow in the mud, blood and shite pool of CASA delinquency.

Well done P2 (again) I will catch up, once I can safely leave the bucket.

Toot – MTF – toot.

[Peetwo]

The Airservices Australia conundrum??  

From the Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport Legislation Committee (Senate-Friday, 28 November 2014):

...Mr Clark : We employ around 4,300 people. We are a billion dollar company. We are nationally distributed, with over 30 to 40 individual locations, with a distributed staff base. Over the last three years we have had four issues of credit card misuse, for which the misuse totalled $14,000. Of that $14,000, we have recouped $6,500. On two of those occasions we have not been able to recoup, for a variety of reasons...

...Mr Clark : I do not think I could have assisted in answering the question. I think, between the people sitting at the table answering the question, including Ms Staib, there was a degree of confusion vis-a-vis the lack of detail around what was the matter being discussed.

Senator STERLE: No, that is disingenuous.

CHAIR: That is a workshopped answer.

Senator STERLE: Someone only had to say, 'Yes, we have had an issue.' Then someone at the table—Ms Staib or one of her lieutenants, who are so loyal—could have come out and said, 'We can provide you with the details, we would prefer to talk about it later,' or whatever, and not try and fob us off. That is what happened, and none of you ran to her defence, unless you were under instruction not to.

CHAIR: No, hold. Mr Clark, that might be a workshopped answer. It was very clear what we were on about and, I have to say, my impression from this side—and not from the back of the room—is that maybe there are certain things that the old Greg Russell club that exists in Airservices does not want Ms Staib to know about and on some matters she may be kept in the dark. I am just wondering whether you are part of that. Surely, you knew what Senator Sterle was on about. Do not pretend there was some confusion. It was black and white...

"K" and I vividly remember that session as the last time that arrogant twat Clark would appear before the Senate committee - good riddance to trough dwelling fat cat trash...

In regards to the highly visible disdain that the former CFO, & other members of Airservices Australia executive, held for our elected representatives in their attempts to hold them to account on various non-transparent, possibly fraudulent executive financial practices; one has to ask how did it get to that point because apparently it was not always so??
        
The following perhaps provides a clue to a point in time when there was a distinct paradigm shift in the perceived power base in the air safety bureaucracy.

Minutes of the Aviation Safety Forum 16th meeting:

Item 16.9 – National Airspace System

Mike Smith, Executive Director of the National Airspace System

Implementation Group, attended the meeting for this item.

Mike Smith gave a presentation on the implementation status of the National
Airspace System(NAS). Implementation is being managed by the NAS
Implementation Group, which comprises staff drawn from Airservices
Australia, the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA), Defence, DOTARS and
other appropriate organisations. The Implementation Group is overseen by
the Aviation Reform Group.

The ASF noted that CASA’s involvement in NAS comprises: requisite
regulatory change; safety case assessment; and helping with education.

Phase 2

Mike Smith told the ASF that the NAS communication strategy was developed
in consultation with a considerable number of industry members. Emphasis
was given to making sure, before it was sent out, that the information was
cogent and relevant and would not be misused. This care had been repaid
with many complimentary responses from pilots on the quality and
comprehensiveness of the material.

Mr Smith advised that the distribution of NAS material was timed to coincide
with the normal Airservices Australia distribution cycle, so that pilots would
receive new charts and AIP Supplements around the same time they received
the information explaining the NAS changes. The information being provided
is virtually a location-by-location account of what happens to the airspace.
The Implementation Group ensured that interested parties not on the
Airservices chart list also received the information. In the case of sport
aviation, special material was produced for the sport aviation organisations to
send out in their journals.

Implementation of Phase 2 is on track for 27 November, in terms of the
involvement of the relevant government agencies, including Defence. Mr
Smith noted that the Implementation Group has worked closely with Qantas,
particularly the regional airlines, and that they have all signed off on their
internal safety cases. In that respect, John Raby expressed his concern that
Virgin Blue was not consulted, given that it has significant relevant operations
and will have to change some of its standard operating procedures. Mr Smith
apologised for what was an administrative oversight.

John Raby also expressed concern about the risk of high-capacity RPT
aircraft operating in E airspace with ‘rogue’ VFR pilots who do not have their
transponders switched on. Mike Smith advised that there are additional
transponder requirements and that he was writing to pilots that day to caution
them about the importance of being particularly alert and vigilant while
everyone becomes accustomed to the new system, and reporting all incidents
to inform post-implementation evaluation.

Mr Smith pointed out that ‘rogue’ pilots are a considerable risk under the
present system, with evidence of over 1,000 unauthorised entries into
controlled airspace a year. He also noted a recent survey by the
Implementation Group in which 47% of the 1500 pilots responding had said
they were not confident that proper MBZ calls are being made. There will be
an analysis of the survey results by types of licence to identify how
widespread the problem is.

Bill Whitney sought assurance that there is a failure plan in place in the event
of mid-air collision. Mike Smith advised that contingency plans exist at a
number of levels, within and across agencies for such events. These plans
will be applied in the same way as they are now.

Phase 3

The third phase of NAS is scheduled for implementation on 10 June 2004.
This will involve the application of North American CTAF procedures at all
aerodromes in Class G airspace. (This includes MBZs reclassified as CTAFs).
Mr Smith advised that Australian CTAFs are different from those in the United
States. Accordingly, the Implementation Group is reworking the Australian
Risk Model (ARM) to populate it with the United States elements. The ARM
will provide the basis for a comparative assessment with MBZs.

Mr Smith acknowledged that the issue is a very contentious one. He argued
that in practice, however, pilots will be able to choose, to a large extent,
whether they fly in E or other airspace. Traffic information will continue to be
provided in the terminal area.

David Cooke raised the issue that non-pressurised aircraft may need to cruise
lower in winter and, in practice, will be forced into Class G airspace. Mike
Smith advised that it is intended to introduce corridors or blankets of lower
level Class E airspace on busy routes and on other routes where users are
prepared to pay for it.

Mr Smith argued that the concern among some members of the industry
about the replacement of mandatory requirements with recommendations is
misplaced. He believes the experience in a range of industries shows that
recommendations will deliver higher standards and better safety outcomes,
due to the transfer of the onus of care and responsibility to individual pilots.
Mr Smith noted that the current system has generated complacency.

In response to ASF queries about the evidence supporting improved pilot
attitudes, Mr Smith advised that in the United States there is a very high level
of compliance with procedures at entry to the circuit and while on the circuit.
US pilots are generally more diligent in the terminal and more vigilant in
looking out of the window. Collision rates in the United States are just as good
or better than those in Australia, though in both countries the rate is so low as
to make valid statistical comparison impossible. He agreed with David Earley,
however, that a significant cultural change is required of Australia’s pilots.

The ASF also raised the issue of comparative radar coverage. Mr Smith
responded that while the United States has about 85% radar coverage, the
15% not covered represents an area larger than Victoria. He noted that
Australia also has high radar coverage where we have high traffic levels, but
that overall we have fewer than 200 IFRs in the air at any given time
compared with the 4,500 to 9,000 in the United States.

David Cooke pointed out that there is no United States equivalent of
Australia’s GAAPs. Mr Smith advised that in practice the United States Class
D towers work similarly to our GAAPS. He believes that Australia’s Class D
towers will evolve to work in a similar way to GAAP airports.

Mr Smith told the ASF that training very close to complete for CTAFs as an
earlier introduction had been planned originally. Information material is well
advanced and a video will be available in February or March. He indicated
that he should be able to provide CTAF material to the ASF’s February
meeting.

Subsequent NAS changes

NAS should be fully implemented by around 2006. Arrangements for
managing the implementation process over the whole of that period are yet to
be determined.

Mike Smith noted that ADSB technology is moving along within a similar
timeframe. He pointed out that while there is no tie between NAS and ADSB,
the two are complementary.

&.. off the SMH Beaker thread: 

..However with Beaker what really piqued my interest was his involvement with the implementation of the NAS (2B), remembering that he was the Muppet that commissioned Jeff Griffith to review the possible ramifications of modifying (to Australian unique conditions) Class E over D in the NAS(2B) program:  https://infrastructure.gov.au/aviation/p...report.pdf

The following is a link to Hansard from 26 May 2004 Senate Estimates: http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/sear...632%2F0002

From the Hansard link there is a lengthy but excellent passage of Q&A & general debate by the RRAT committee Senator's of Mike Smith (the former Executive Director of the National Airspace System) that is worth taking the time to read, example:

Senator O'BRIEN —If you want to be so churlish, then so be it. You can deal with the consequences. The minute suggests there was some opposition to the need for a design safety case, especially by Mr Dick Smith. Is it true that the design safety case conducted by the National Airspace System Implementation Group was for only the 10 characteristics that were considered to be different in the Australian National Airspace stage 2b from the US NAS?

Mr M. Smith —My recollection is that we applied the Airservices process in determining whether elements of the NAS stage 2b required design safety case work. Where it was identified that those elements did require that work, then that work was conducted by my group in conjunction with Airservices. So for the elements that the SCARD process identified required design work, then that work was in fact done. I cannot recall what they all were, but for instance Mr Matthews indicated that some of them were relatively minor. I can recall one that said that a particular set of procedures, which is part of the US NAS, would be introduced but we would not include the part of the US rules that says, `This procedure should not be used on presidential aircraft,' simply because we do not have presidential aircraft in this country. Nonetheless, that was required to be addressed as part of design. Another related to application of a particular set of procedures 10,000 feet above sea level but within 2,500 feet of the terrain. Again, we do not have a circumstance that matches that requirement in Australia, given that Kosciusko is somewhat less than 7,500 feet tall. That is the sort of design issue that the SCARD process came up with. But wherever there was a difference, including those, then design safety case work was conducted.

Senator O'BRIEN —So the answer to the question is yes, but you are giving me additional information. Is that how I should understand it?

Mr M. Smith —That is true.

And if you then go to the previous page of Hansard for Airservices Australia you will witness a completely different, almost subservient, ASA executive not arguing the toss with the Senators but informing them of where their contribution to the NAS 2B implementation program was at, example:

CHAIR —Welcome. My understanding is that you have an opening statement. Is that correct?

Mr B. Smith —Yes, Senator. Should I proceed with that?

CHAIR —Yes.

Mr B. Smith —We would like to put the following information on the record for this committee in order to update progress and clarify issues relating to the National Airspace System. Since I last appeared before this committee on 17 February 2004 considerable safety analysis has been undertaken. On Monday 24 May the board issued a progress report on this work. Airservices Australia board confirmed that some changes will need to be made to part 2b of the National Airspace System—known as the NAS—reforms that were introduced on 27 November 2003. Our conclusion to date is that it is unlikely that reclassification of en route class E airspace to class C airspace will be required. Qualitative assessments associated with this work do, however, point to the need for enlarged class C steps around class C aerodromes as a minimum requirement.

In the light of further data and analysis regarding the benefits and risks associated with the current NAS 2b airspace arrangements, the board has decided to focus future work on two options to enhance the airspace in parallel, both of which are expected to involve minimal change to class E en route airspace. One option involves the use of special E airspace above and around class D or regional towers; the other involves class C airspace above class D towers and some changes to en route class E, for airspace design reasons, in the Sydney-Melbourne corridor. Airservices Australia is directing resources to further investigate these two options, including safety analysis, cost benefit assessments, risk hazard assessments and mitigation identification, and to further consult with industry on these options.

Airservices Australia board also announced further interim enhancements to complement actions already undertaken. These enhancements or risk mitigators were identified as a result of the extensive data collection and analysis conducted to date. They include additional controller training on operational responsibilities and duty of care, working with the Civil Aviation Safety Authority on improved definitions of traffic information and safety alerts, additional pilot education material, working with CASA on educational material to reduce violations of controlled airspace, better coordination with airlines regarding the serviceability of traffic alert and collision avoidance systems—or TACAS—with all operations in relation to transponder failures or noncompliance, and workshopping the feasibility of depicting key instrument flight routes on visual charts.

Overall the board is encouraged by the work under way to narrow the scope of the changes in airspace required. Airservices Australia is on track to complete consideration of the issues in time for any changes to be incorporated into the 25 November 2004 Aeronautical Information Regulation and Control—or AIRAC—distribution deadline. That completes my statement.

    
The stark comparison between the ASA, CASA & Department interaction with the Senate & industry back then, compared to the arrogant tossers from the ASA executive team in the youtube video at the top of the post IMO is simply staggering - when did this paradigm shift in the power base from Department to ASA occur & why?
MTF..P2

[Peetwo]

Defence & ASA attempted O&O of PFOS/PFOA contamination issue?

Rehash of where the Foreign Affairs Defence & Trade Senate Committee inquiry ended up:

Contamination of Australia's Defence Force facilities and other Commonwealth, state and territory sites in Australia.
On 30 November 2015, the Senate referred the following matter to the Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade References Committee for inquiry and report:-

Contamination of Australian Defence Force facilities (Part A) reporting by 4 February 2016, and contamination of other sites using firefighting foams (Part B) reporting by 30 April 2016.

Murky's mob drawn into Defence Inquiry - It was inevitable that the PFOS, PFOA contaminate issue (Part B) would eventually require a response from both Airservices & the Department of Infrastructure & Regional development:

111

Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development (PDF 147 KB)  Attachment 1 (PDF 751 KB)  Attachment 2 (PDF 982 KB)  &..

113 - Airservices Australia (PDF 1426 KB) 

To begin it is extremely encouraging that the Dept & ASA have very much been on the front foot with this matter (PFOS/PFOA contamination), basically ever since it was first brought to their attention back in 2003. However there would have to be some serious concerns about where potential contamination has been identified...

Key actions taken include:

• Since 2009, Airservices has worked with Commonwealth, State and Territory health and environment experts, regulators, policy agencies, airport owners and operators, and research institutions to inform development of appropriate national standards and guidelines including screening levels for soil and water. This work is ongoing.

• In 2010, Airservices engaged an expert to undertake a voluntary health study on ARFF staff’s exposure to PFCs.

• Airservices has undertaken soil, surface water and groundwater sampling at current fire training grounds where PFCs were used between the 1980s and 2003.

• Airservices is undertaking risk assessments of airport sites where fire fighting foams containing PFCs have been used to determine if any migration of PFC residues from fire stations and training grounds has occurred which may have impacted beneficial users. Further site testing may commence following the outcomes of the risk assessment and will be based on a range of factors developed in consultation with regulators and experts.

• Airservices is undertaking a number of research and development activities to better characterise and develop solutions to the PFC issue as it applies to our sites.

In 2014, Airservices and the Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development (DIRD) engaged GHD Pty Ltd to develop a risk-based framework, ‘Managing PFC Contamination at Airports’, to guide decision-making when dealing with contamination issues on airport sites. The framework was finalised in June 2015.

o GHD reviewed international screening levels and other guidance to develop screening levels that could be used in this management framework. Airservices has adopted this framework in its operations nationally.

o The framework has been provided by Airservices to DIRD, and it has subsequently been distributed to the airport lessee companies and DIRD’s Airport Environment Officers as well as the Department of the Environment and the Department of Health. The draft interim framework and screening levels have no regulatory authority.

Airservices will continue to take a proactive approach to managing risks as a result of past use of fire fighting foams that contained PFCs and, for this purpose, is continuing engagement with regulators to assist in the identification and development of practicable responses.

Back to the inquiry, I note that Keith Campbell (Bankstown fame) has recently made a submission - 126 Mr Keith Campbell    -  (PDF 13220 KB) :

Apparently the part B of this inquiry was completed prior to the calling of the election: Report - Part B  

Reading that report, I get the distinct impression that Part B of the inquiry has been purposely rushed through in an attempt to whitewash the negative publicity that this toxic contamination was starting to generate. Why do I think this? Well the last place there was a public hearing was in Oakey QLD and the part B report primarily focuses on the Oakey contamination issues. This is despite there being many more Defence and Commonwealth facilities where the PFOS/PFOA fire retardants (foams) were used.

However I don't think one Senator Nick Xenophon is going to allow the matter to be shoved under the carpet, here is a news bulletin from six days ago...     

Defence ignoring Qld toxic water: Xenophon
AAP on May 29, 2016, 6:59 pm

Senator Nick Xenophon has called on Defence to stop ignoring Oakey's "toxic water nightmare".

Independent senator Nick Xenophon has taken his campaign into the southern Queensland seat of Groom, calling for Defence to stop ignoring Oakey's "toxic water nightmare".

Groundwater in the small town, 154km west of Brisbane, has been contaminated by chemicals contained in firefighting foam that was used for decades in training activities at the local army aviation centre.

Senator Xenophon says the Department of Defence must pay for regular blood testing of residents and compensate landholders following a collapse in property values, as well as those with health issues.

"They can't just keep ignoring this," he told AAP.

"The issue is Defence has an obligation (to act) ... are they worried about setting a precedent for around the country where they used these fire retardants?"

The Department of Defence says it is taking the matter seriously and is working with other agencies on the issue, which may also affect civilian airports, industrial sites and state firefighting facilities.

The firefighting foams that have contaminated Oakey groundwater contain perfluorooctanesulfonate (PFOS) and perfluorooctanesulfonic acid (PFOA) chemicals, which have been linked to adverse health effects including cancers.

The Oakey contamination was the subject of a Senate report earlier this month, which received many submissions from residents concerned about elevated levels of the chemicals in their blood...

And from a NewsCorp article yesterday - it would now appear that the ALP are going to make this an election issue in Senator X's home turf:

Labor lashes government over Defence investigation into possible groundwater contamination around Edinburgh RAAF base
June 3, 2016 11:28pm
Tory Shepherd and Elizabeth HensonThe Advertiser

Fears that cancer-causing toxins have leached into groundwater and on to properties surrounding the RAAF base at Edinburgh, have prompted a Defence Department investigation.

• Probe into claims of cancer-causing toxins surrounding RAAF base
  

THE Defence Department has “had its head in the sand” over carcinogenic poisons in groundwater and the Government should be “ashamed of its inaction”, Labor says.

The Opposition will release its policy on the issue on Saturday after The Advertiser revealed on Thursday that the Defence Department was investigating possible contamination at the RAAF base at Edinburgh.

Firefighting foam with toxins that can cause a range of cancers and other disorders was used at the base until 2004.

Opposition defence spokesman Stephen Conroy told The Advertiser that if elected, Labor would establish a national taskforce to respond to contamination.

“The Government and Defence have had their head in the sand on this issue. The Government should be ashamed of its inaction,” he said...

I wonder if that is a particularly wise move considering the evidence given by the DoIRD & ASA above and the fact this contamination issue dates back to the Hawke/Keating years.

Also the article goes on with reference to a previous article featuring Senator X, this time with the focus on Adelaide airport...

"..Independent Senator Nick Xenophon also raised concerns on Thursday the toxins may have leaked into groundwater at Adelaide Airport.." 

...& also on a Yahoo 7 video and newsfeed:

7 News can reveal a cancer causing toxin is leaching into groundwater at Adelaide Airport. http://www.7news.com.au 

http://snpy.tv/1TMQg5t 

7 News | Adelaide airport
7 News - 7 News | 6pm nightly

  
What do you reckon the chances are of there being a NX initiated RRAT Senate inquiry sometime after the new parliament sits??

MTF...P2

[Peetwo]

Defence & ASA attempted O&O of PFOS/PFOA contamination issue?

Back to the inquiry, I note that Keith Campbell (Bankstown fame) has recently made a submission - 126 Mr Keith Campbell    -  (PDF 13220 KB) :

 

Defence ignoring Qld toxic water: Xenophon
AAP on May 29, 2016, 6:59 pm

Senator Nick Xenophon has called on Defence to stop ignoring Oakey's "toxic water nightmare".

Independent senator Nick Xenophon has taken his campaign into the southern Queensland seat of Groom, calling for Defence to stop ignoring Oakey's "toxic water nightmare".

7 News can reveal a cancer causing toxin is leaching into groundwater at Adelaide Airport. http://www.7news.com.au 

http://snpy.tv/1TMQg5t 

7 News | Adelaide airport
7 News - 7 News | 6pm nightly

  

Update 05/06/16 courtesy SMH:

Potentially cancer-causing contaminant PFOS found at Sydney Airport

Date June 5, 2016

• (29)
  
• Read later
  

Michael McGowan

Two men fishing at Botany Bay as planes come into land and prepare to take off at Sydney Airport. Photo: Kate Geraghty

A potentially cancer-causing chemical that led to bans on commercial fishing and depressed housing values when it was discovered north of Newcastle has been found at dozens of sites across Sydney, including Sydney Airport and the Richmond RAAF Base.

A report commissioned by the Baird government has revealed that legacy contamination from perfluorooctane sulfonate and perfluorooctanoic acid exists at sites across Sydney.
Also known as PFOS and PFOA, the toxic perfluorinated compounds were used for decades in firefighting foams and household products like non-stick pans.

Aerial view of the area surrounding Sydney Airport, in Mascot. Photo: Google Maps.

Prepared by Mark Taylor of Macquarie University, the report says that Airservices Australia, a Commonwealth body responsible for airport firefighting, has told the NSW EPA of "issues" surrounding the historical use of the foams at Sydney and Bankstown airports.


It revealed that Airservices Australia wrote to the NSW Office of Environment and Heritage as early as 2011 to advise it that "preliminary results of a contamination and risk assessment investigation at current and former fire training ground sites at Sydney Airport" had found "contamination" from the chemicals "in on-site soils and groundwater" and "aquatic fauna".

"PFOS and PFOA were also found in water and sediments in waterways adjacent to current and former fire training ground sites," Professor Taylor's report states.

It has prompted a call for a wider study into the spread of the chemicals throughout the Sydney basin.

Dr Mariann Lloyd-Smith, a senior advisor with the National Toxics Network, said it was "certainly likely" that it would have spread to locations throughout Sydney.

"The government should be funding PFOS and PFOA exposure studies, particularly in major cities," she said. "At a place like [the Airport] we simply do not know how it has spread."

Sydney Airport is bordered by the Cooks River and Botany Bay. A legacy of industrial contamination in the area means the use of groundwater from much of the Botany aquifer is banned.

Dr Rob Weaver, the general manager of safety at Airservices Australia, told a Senate hearing in April that tests of ground and surface water outside of Sydney Airport did not find "likely significant human health risks".

"What we find is that, where we go and test on-airport, off our sites, the soil is broadly below US residential levels," Dr Weaver said.

"We know PFCs are in the environment [and] we know that we have them in our blood.

"What we find around airports is that the levels are generally below the US EPA levels for residential soil."

However, those levels are based on interim short-term exposure standards that were significantly lowered in a long-awaited decision by the US EPA in May, and Greens Senator Lee Rhiannon said they needed to be updated "as a matter of course".

"If a level of uncertainty exists with a contaminant, that's a reason to act," she said.

"It's certainly concerning, we've already seen in the communities that have been affected by this contamination they've really been devastated."

Professor Taylor's report also found that studies had discovered PFOS and PFOA contamination in a number of Sydney waterways.

At Richmond, where Defence has known about contamination from the base since at least 2013, the contaminants have been found in the Hawkesbury River, as well as in the Georges River near a former Defence site at Moorebank.

Air Vice-Marshal Greg Evans, Defence's national spokesman on PFOS and PFOA, said he could "only predict that there probably will be some [contamination at Richmond] because foam firefighting practices were conducted there".

A 2011 study also found PFOS and PFOA in water, soil and animals in Homebush Bay and the Parramatta River estuary, but the authors concluded that low concentrations measured in mussels and oysters would not pose a risk to humans, and NSW Fire and Rescue has previously used foam containing the contaminants at its training college in Alexandria.

PFOS and PFOA contamination has become an increasingly widespread issue after it was revealed to have leached into surface and ground water at homes surrounding the Williamtown RAAF Base near Newcastle last year.

Since then, commercial fishing has been closed in two major waterways, and banks have restricted lending on properties within the contamination "red zone" surrounding the base.

The crisis prompted a Senate inquiry that recommended Defence compensate home owners, and forced Defence to launch a nation-wide investigation of the contamination at 18 Defence sites, including Richmond.

The health impacts of the two contaminants remain an issue of debate globally.

Studies have found links between PFOS and PFOA and a number of diseases, including thyroid disorders and kidney and testicular cancer, and the US EPA says the "weight of evidence" from human studies "supports the conclusion that exposure to the chemicals was a human health hazard".

However, Assistant Defence Minister Michael McCormack has repeatedly stated there are "no links" between the contaminants and health risks.

On Saturday, the Labor Party announced it would fund 10,000 voluntary blood tests for residents living in areas affected by the contamination, an issue on contention in Williamtown where NSW Health and Defence have refused make them available.

Shadow Defence Minister Stephen Conroy said he was "absolutely shocked" that Mr McCormack "has gone around this country saying there is nothing to worry about, there is no issue here".

"If his family was in one of these red zones, he wouldn't be saying that." 

MTF...P2

[Peetwo]

Where there is a will, there is a way.

After the tussle in Tamworth....   

Tamworth Edition Of Q&A Postponed After Barnaby Joyce And Tony Windsor Punch On In Car Park

"I'm pretty sure Barnaby was concussed at some point,"



6 June, 2015. 18:34
CLANCY OVERELL | Editor | Contact
Deputy Prime Minister Barnaby Joyce and his sworn personal and political rival, Tony Windsor have spent the last 45 minutes ‘stinking on’ in the Tamworth Town Hall car park, it has been confirmed.

This breaking news comes via ABC North-West NSW, who were the first to clarify that tonight’s New England edition of Q&A has been pushed back by half an hour due to the unruly behaviour of both Federal candidates...

...and the stoush was continued as a war of words in the ABC Q&A seession in the Tamworth Town Hall.
At one point there was an interesting segment where BJ soft-cocked a question on the Federal Government's ability to stop coal seam gas exploration on the Liverpool plains. BJ basically iterated that Feds were powerless to stop such potential projects as the primary responsibility for these decisions was the State government's. 
This however was subsequently refuted by Tony Windsor as being not entirely true, see here: 

I have made my task to do whatever is within my power to assist and if we just look at the facts, of course ... it was the Labor Party that gave out the mining leases on the Liverpool plains."

Joyce told the audience that the federal government was often constrained in acting to prevent mining on agricultural land because it was a state issue.

But Windsor said the Commonwealth could act if it really wanted to.

‏@QandA 15h15 hours ago

The water trigger have some power of approval, says @TonyHWindsor. @Barnaby_Joyce discusses mining approvals #QandAhttp://snpy.tv/1XwI8wD 

{Watch video linked to this tweet.. https://twitter.com/QandA/status/739785842428776448 }

Q&A - Highlight
The water trigger have some power of approval, says @TonyHWindsor. @Barnaby_Joyce discusses Santos #QandA - Watch more at abc.net.au/qanda

"The federal government can stop those developments," he said.

"There is a process that can, in fact, work, and it's an objective process. Both
Minister Joyce and Minister (Greg) Hunt have been complicit by neglect in terms of this particular issue."

There was also mention of when the Federal government in similar circumstances was able to stop the proposed sand mining of Fraser Island in 1991, by not approving the export licence of the mining company and then declaring Fraser Island a national park & World heritage site.

These examples got me thinking about the plight of secondary airports and how similar statements by previous governments, of both persuasions, stating limited powers under the Airports Act to control leasehold owners planned non-aviation developments and by definition contrary to the Act.

Referencing the excellent revised Phelan paper here:

The link – HERE - will give you view of a Paul Phelan essay which was drafted some time ago now; but the predictions and forecast have been proven.  

Author’s Preface (May 2016)

This analysis was originally prepared in 2010 to assist petitioners to (then) Infrastructure Minister Albanese in a similar matter to the one now before the AAT . As such it represents a snapshot in time 2010 in relation to events which in multiple ways have been employed to circumvent the protections provided to secondary airport and local ownership airport users under the Airport Local Ownership Plan, Lease contracts and deeds of transfer. The analysis has been modified only to the extent that the section headed “Jandakot” and the first line of the Introduction below have been updated to reflect related situations and events.

Most of the situations identified in this study still exist at various airports, and in the main the industry attributes them to the inertia of the responsible department through its failure to enforce the terms of lease or transfer as applicable.

Worth a read – if you still need an aerodrome to conduct your business.

Summary.

Clearly the airports cannot be trusted to be their own regulators. Dumping the quasi-government powers that the FAC held straight over to the managements of the privatised airports was a ludicrously incompetent act, and allowing this ever-worsening situation to continue, further demonstrates the ineptitude of successive responsible administrations.

The Commonwealth has clearly failed adequately and effectively to monitor the activities of organisations who control both GAAP and ALOP airports. This failure extends over the present and previous two governments and to the relevant Ministers and their departments throughout that period.

The Roofing Insulation debacle, and the educational building program have nothing on this series of failures. The current Minister and his department now have a duty to restore the nation’s airports to a status which meets the requirements set out in the legislation, published policies and lease documents already in place.

They also have the tools to do so, and ongoing neglect of their obligations would represent a grave breach of the respective obligations of the public officials involved. 

Definitely a must read:-

Within that paper there was a clear example of where, if a Minister of the Crown was ready willing & able, the government of the day, if so motivated, could effect a proposed development or redevelopment plan of a secondary airport or ALOP leasehold owner:

Jandakot
Now cited as Australia’s busiest general aviation airport, Jandakot was saved by a most uncharacteristic political intervention. In 2006 airport tenants became concerned at announcements that the airport head-lessees were planning to shut down the airport and move it to a new location considerably further from Perth, obviously in preparation for converting the entire landholding to commercial real estate.

The airport “owners” had cited the closeness of Jandakot to Perth International which they said would mean that continued operations at Jandakot would pose air traffic management problems, particularly with the introduction of the larger Airbus A380, Which in fact has better performance than a B747-400 under comparable conditions.

In a very straight-to-the-point latter, the (then) minister Mark Vaile wrote to Ascot Capital Limited[1], the head lease owners, suggesting that they should forget the proposal and get on with meeting their obligations under the Act:

Should you wish to proceed with developing the airport development and relocation proposal, Ascot Capital Limited should not assume any right to re-develop the current site. The Jandakot airport site would be subject to the Commonwealth Property Disposals Policy, which, except in very limited and specific circumstances, requires a sale on the open market for full market value with the proceeds to the Australian Government. The policy does not provide any opportunity for a land-swap or similar negotiated arrangements as may be contemplated in the proposal put forward by Ascot Capital………..
…..the airport site is Commonwealth land with JAH holding a 99 year lease to run an airport on the site. In the absence of a much more convincing case to the contrary, the Government remains committed to the Jandakot airport site and is of the view that the long-term airport lease on the existing site should remain.

No indication should at this time be given that the Australian Government is in any way inclined to support the proposal to relocate Jandakot Airport. I would like to restate the Australian Government’s position that JAH proceed with implementing the approved Master Plan for Jandakot airport and operating the airport in accordance with the Airports Act 1996.

In effect, Minister Vaile said he would enforce the provisions of the Airport Act, if here, why not at all the other airports?

It is perfectly within the authority and the duty of the government and the Minister to deliver similar messages to the head-lessees of Archerfield, Bankstown, Moorabbin and Parafield.

---

[1] See Appendix II

Unfortunately the current incumbent miniscule was quite obviously appointed to act as Barnaby Joyce's photogenic filter and nothing more; and is subsequently way too busy selfying himself around the countryside to give a rat's arse.

This means the likes of the Murky Machiavellian and his minions will be equally less likely to give a rat's about the current disturbing plight & decline of our secondary airports - yes indeed another lap round the mulberry bush...


MTF...P2