A fart - in a thunderstorm.
TB – “Pretty much says it all and I suspect there are a lot more white hats like him. I just reverently hope takes the time to make a submission to the Senate Inquiry an "insiders" story carries a lot of weight and can open the Pandora's box on the machinations of the CAsA machine in action, or if you prefer inaction.” (MA is brave to have said as much as 'he' did. Bravo that man).
Spot on. How many times now have we called for ex ATSB, ASA and CASA employee’s to be questioned by an Inquiry panel? Lot and lots is the answer; for there secret lays. Exit interviews by an independent, official body or person would clearly define a true understanding. Confidentially could be protected – the exit statement protected and anonymous, to side step the blood curdling ‘non disclosure’ agreement.
The ‘new’ RRAT inquiry allows scope for individuals to detail their ‘CASA’ experience. A simple statement of fact, detailing cause, effect and outcome, made confidentially may just be the catalyst required to shine a light on the very real, urgent need for reform of the regulator and importantly, how it does business.
I believe, that until the Senate committee and the public ‘know’ what ‘we’ know and some of the horror stories are examined, Buckley for the latest in a long line; there is little hope of breaking the bipartisan automatic rubber stamp process, or achieving ministerial clarity.
Toot – toot.
TB – “Pretty much says it all and I suspect there are a lot more white hats like him. I just reverently hope takes the time to make a submission to the Senate Inquiry an "insiders" story carries a lot of weight and can open the Pandora's box on the machinations of the CAsA machine in action, or if you prefer inaction.” (MA is brave to have said as much as 'he' did. Bravo that man).
Spot on. How many times now have we called for ex ATSB, ASA and CASA employee’s to be questioned by an Inquiry panel? Lot and lots is the answer; for there secret lays. Exit interviews by an independent, official body or person would clearly define a true understanding. Confidentially could be protected – the exit statement protected and anonymous, to side step the blood curdling ‘non disclosure’ agreement.
The ‘new’ RRAT inquiry allows scope for individuals to detail their ‘CASA’ experience. A simple statement of fact, detailing cause, effect and outcome, made confidentially may just be the catalyst required to shine a light on the very real, urgent need for reform of the regulator and importantly, how it does business.
I believe, that until the Senate committee and the public ‘know’ what ‘we’ know and some of the horror stories are examined, Buckley for the latest in a long line; there is little hope of breaking the bipartisan automatic rubber stamp process, or achieving ministerial clarity.
Toot – toot.