Shame or Fame for McCormack.

DPM McDo'Naught: A muppet for all seasons?


Ref:



Nationals rebels put the boot into their leader as party feels regional backlash

Many MPs are exasperated with Michael McCormack and despairing about where they have washed up post-Barnaby Joyce


[Image: 4688.jpg?width=620&quality=85&auto=forma...be5c62ea36]
Some Nationals are frustrated that Michael McCormack won’t stand up to the Liberals. Photograph: Mike Bowers/The Guardian

In practical terms it’s a strange thing to demand: calling on the leadership to pass a package that has no obvious prospect of passing the parliament without amendment in the time left available.

But six Queensland Nationals have elected to put the boot into their leader, Michael McCormack, for failing on two fronts: failing to pressure the Liberals to pass the so-called “big stick” package, which they believe will lower power prices, and failing to sign up to new taxpayer-backed investments in power generation. For most Nationals north of the New South Wales border, that means new coal generation.

The foray is about a substantive issue. The Nationals have been focused on energy throughout the government’s tortuous, sometimes incoherent, backwards and forwards movements in this policy space over the current term in government.

It’s not a cause of convenience.

But with this sortie, the rebels are hanging a lantern over a problem their leader can’t really solve, and he can’t solve it, predominantly, because the government has comprehensively botched things up.

A brief history might be useful. The then Turnbull government weighed in to power prices and grid reliability a couple of years ago (remembering those are normally state issues) in order to indulge what people imagined would be a quick and dirty partisan fight – only to find themselves mired in an actual policy problem of some complexity, which they’d made themselves responsible for politically.

As a consequence of this basic political miscalculation, the government has been trying to defuse their own cunning plan for most of the current term, without much success.

Added to that longer term problem is a more recent point of friction within the governing coalition, and this is an important driver in the new insurgency.

The coal-friendly quarters of the National party (read the central Queensland crew) are now deeply concerned that the Liberals are going to stiff them on new taxpayer-backed coal-fired power plants in order to hold progressive centre-right voters in the southern states.

[Image: 5184.jpg?width=620&quality=85&auto=forma...e9ac5201c6]
Scott Morrison with Michael McCormack (left) and Barnaby Joyce. Photograph: Mike Bowers/The Guardian

With polling showing voters deeply concerned about climate change, and with the Liberals facing insurgencies in their own heartland, Scott Morrison is now treading more carefully on coal to try to stem a protest vote that looms as a material threat to his government’s re-election chances in May.

The Nationals’ concerns, as well as the rolling energy policy frustrations, has prompted the six MPs to lob their small grenade.

The gesture tells you everything you need to know about the mulish mood inside the National party.

Many MPs are exasperated with McCormack’s performance on a range of fronts, and despairing (I don’t use the word lightly) about where they have washed up collectively in the post-Barnaby period.

There is frustration that McCormack won’t stand up to the Liberals, a passivity that has allowed the Liberals to mission creep into areas like drought and disaster relief, which should be core business for the junior coalition partner.

Nationals are feeling a growing backlash from their constituents, which has been gathering pace in regional areas, giving rise to more coordinated activity by local independents – but they remain divided about what, if anything, can be done about their current predicament.

And the sad part is, to a substantial degree, they only have themselves to blame.

The Nationals have spent years coasting on the personal brand of a populist leader to differentiate themselves from the Liberals, and to send a message to the bush that they are fighting the good fight in Canberra. But they failed to plan for what might happen when that cycle turned from boom to bust.

The Nationals now face an election season with an underwhelming frontman, who just this week struggled to articulate a single instance where the Nationals had sided with the interests of farmers over the interests of miners when they come into conflict.

Quote:[Image: kxLXCwjo_normal.jpg]

The Project

@theprojecttv




Waleed: “Could you name a single, big policy area where the Nats have sided with the interests of farmers over the interest of miners when they come into conflict?”

Nationals leader Michael McCormack responds. #auspol #TheProjectTV

7:55 PM - Mar 6, 2019

https://10daily.com.au/shows/theproject/...s-20190306

Given the Nationals have been fretting among themselves for months, but apparently unable to agree on what to do to turn around their collective fortunes, the antidote now appears to be a version of every man and woman for themselves.

As one of the signatories to the letter, Keith Pitt, put it on Thursday when asked to explain his intervention: “The federal election is coming up and I want to be able to look every one of our constituents in the eye and say I have done everything I possibly can.”

The translation for that is simple: if the leader can’t carry the water for the Nationals, as leaders are supposed to do, then we have to start, at the local level, getting out and carrying our own




&..from the AAP, via Nine News : https://www.9news.com.au/2019/03/08/05/3...quit-paper



Nationals leader McCormack under pressure

By AAP
8:11am Mar 8, 2019

Deputy Prime Minister Michael McCormack is under fresh pressure from Nationals colleagues unhappy with his "lacklustre" leadership and fundraising efforts.

There are renewed rumblings Mr McCormack will face a leadership challenge from the man he replaced, Barnaby Joyce, either before the election or very soon afterwards.

His approach to the government's "big stick" energy bill, which the Nationals are demanding be put to a vote during budget week, is considered the next big test of his leadership.

A group of Queensland Nationals also want the government to underwrite a new regional power generation project before the election.

"I am working hard every day to deliver for regional Australians and I will continue to focus on the issues that are important to their way of life, like lowering power prices," Mr McCormack told the Courier-Mail on Friday.

"Yes, I support coal-fired energy generation. It still provides the majority of Australia's energy needs, especially baseload power.

"The Liberal and Nationals government has introduced legislation to force power prices down and we will continue to work with the parliament to see that legislation through."

Even still, some Queensland MPs are nervous the party will lose heavily at the election and are agitating for Mr McCormack to step aside or be sacked.

Mr Joyce has consistently argued he is not pushing for the leadership spill but will step up if he is asked.

Senior Liberal minister Christopher Pyne tried to dampen suggestions Mr McCormack had lost the confidence of his party and could face a coup.

"I very much doubt it," he told the Nine Network.

"I think the bottom line is what the public want is a government that moves forward with stability."

Labor frontbencher Anthony Albanese laughed off the latest Nationals leadership chatter.

"The idea that Barnaby Joyce could come back as the deputy prime minister, quite frankly, is farcical."



The questions are, who is he? - &; who is he not captured by?

[Image: D1AoWPGU8AE_mzE.jpg]

Quote:LeadSled ...Lead Balloon,

I can assure you, Dick has not fallen for it, he is absolutely ropeable ----- because NOTHING has effectively changed.

As for any "consultation" ---- this in no way even goes close to what was agreed by Barnaby Joyce and Anthony Albanese, with Dick's help.

In my opinion, McCormack has been as thoroughly captured by the "Department" and CASA as any Minister ever has.

This is the "reform" you have when you are not having reform...


https://www.pprune.org/pacific-general-a...st10397119

[Image: D1F2YVwVAAUpZO2.jpg]


Hmm...TICK TOCK DPM McDo'Naught - errr maybe??

MTF...P2  Tongue
Reply

(03-08-2019, 09:25 AM)Peetwo Wrote:  DPM McDo'Naught: A muppet for all seasons?


Ref:



Nationals rebels put the boot into their leader as party feels regional backlash

Many MPs are exasperated with Michael McCormack and despairing about where they have washed up post-Barnaby Joyce


[Image: 4688.jpg?width=620&quality=85&auto=forma...be5c62ea36]
Some Nationals are frustrated that Michael McCormack won’t stand up to the Liberals. Photograph: Mike Bowers/The Guardian

In practical terms it’s a strange thing to demand: calling on the leadership to pass a package that has no obvious prospect of passing the parliament without amendment in the time left available.

But six Queensland Nationals have elected to put the boot into their leader, Michael McCormack, for failing on two fronts: failing to pressure the Liberals to pass the so-called “big stick” package, which they believe will lower power prices, and failing to sign up to new taxpayer-backed investments in power generation. For most Nationals north of the New South Wales border, that means new coal generation.

The foray is about a substantive issue. The Nationals have been focused on energy throughout the government’s tortuous, sometimes incoherent, backwards and forwards movements in this policy space over the current term in government.

It’s not a cause of convenience.

But with this sortie, the rebels are hanging a lantern over a problem their leader can’t really solve, and he can’t solve it, predominantly, because the government has comprehensively botched things up.

A brief history might be useful. The then Turnbull government weighed in to power prices and grid reliability a couple of years ago (remembering those are normally state issues) in order to indulge what people imagined would be a quick and dirty partisan fight – only to find themselves mired in an actual policy problem of some complexity, which they’d made themselves responsible for politically.

As a consequence of this basic political miscalculation, the government has been trying to defuse their own cunning plan for most of the current term, without much success.

Added to that longer term problem is a more recent point of friction within the governing coalition, and this is an important driver in the new insurgency.

The coal-friendly quarters of the National party (read the central Queensland crew) are now deeply concerned that the Liberals are going to stiff them on new taxpayer-backed coal-fired power plants in order to hold progressive centre-right voters in the southern states.

[Image: 5184.jpg?width=620&quality=85&auto=forma...e9ac5201c6]
Scott Morrison with Michael McCormack (left) and Barnaby Joyce. Photograph: Mike Bowers/The Guardian

With polling showing voters deeply concerned about climate change, and with the Liberals facing insurgencies in their own heartland, Scott Morrison is now treading more carefully on coal to try to stem a protest vote that looms as a material threat to his government’s re-election chances in May.

The Nationals’ concerns, as well as the rolling energy policy frustrations, has prompted the six MPs to lob their small grenade.

The gesture tells you everything you need to know about the mulish mood inside the National party.

Many MPs are exasperated with McCormack’s performance on a range of fronts, and despairing (I don’t use the word lightly) about where they have washed up collectively in the post-Barnaby period.

There is frustration that McCormack won’t stand up to the Liberals, a passivity that has allowed the Liberals to mission creep into areas like drought and disaster relief, which should be core business for the junior coalition partner.

Nationals are feeling a growing backlash from their constituents, which has been gathering pace in regional areas, giving rise to more coordinated activity by local independents – but they remain divided about what, if anything, can be done about their current predicament.

And the sad part is, to a substantial degree, they only have themselves to blame.

The Nationals have spent years coasting on the personal brand of a populist leader to differentiate themselves from the Liberals, and to send a message to the bush that they are fighting the good fight in Canberra. But they failed to plan for what might happen when that cycle turned from boom to bust.

The Nationals now face an election season with an underwhelming frontman, who just this week struggled to articulate a single instance where the Nationals had sided with the interests of farmers over the interests of miners when they come into conflict.

Quote:[Image: kxLXCwjo_normal.jpg]

The Project

@theprojecttv




Waleed: “Could you name a single, big policy area where the Nats have sided with the interests of farmers over the interest of miners when they come into conflict?”

Nationals leader Michael McCormack responds. #auspol #TheProjectTV

7:55 PM - Mar 6, 2019

https://10daily.com.au/shows/theproject/...s-20190306

Given the Nationals have been fretting among themselves for months, but apparently unable to agree on what to do to turn around their collective fortunes, the antidote now appears to be a version of every man and woman for themselves.

As one of the signatories to the letter, Keith Pitt, put it on Thursday when asked to explain his intervention: “The federal election is coming up and I want to be able to look every one of our constituents in the eye and say I have done everything I possibly can.”

The translation for that is simple: if the leader can’t carry the water for the Nationals, as leaders are supposed to do, then we have to start, at the local level, getting out and carrying our own




&..from the AAP, via Nine News : https://www.9news.com.au/2019/03/08/05/3...quit-paper



Nationals leader McCormack under pressure

By AAP
8:11am Mar 8, 2019

Deputy Prime Minister Michael McCormack is under fresh pressure from Nationals colleagues unhappy with his "lacklustre" leadership and fundraising efforts.

There are renewed rumblings Mr McCormack will face a leadership challenge from the man he replaced, Barnaby Joyce, either before the election or very soon afterwards.

His approach to the government's "big stick" energy bill, which the Nationals are demanding be put to a vote during budget week, is considered the next big test of his leadership.

A group of Queensland Nationals also want the government to underwrite a new regional power generation project before the election.

"I am working hard every day to deliver for regional Australians and I will continue to focus on the issues that are important to their way of life, like lowering power prices," Mr McCormack told the Courier-Mail on Friday.

"Yes, I support coal-fired energy generation. It still provides the majority of Australia's energy needs, especially baseload power.

"The Liberal and Nationals government has introduced legislation to force power prices down and we will continue to work with the parliament to see that legislation through."

Even still, some Queensland MPs are nervous the party will lose heavily at the election and are agitating for Mr McCormack to step aside or be sacked.

Mr Joyce has consistently argued he is not pushing for the leadership spill but will step up if he is asked.

Senior Liberal minister Christopher Pyne tried to dampen suggestions Mr McCormack had lost the confidence of his party and could face a coup.

"I very much doubt it," he told the Nine Network.

"I think the bottom line is what the public want is a government that moves forward with stability."

Labor frontbencher Anthony Albanese laughed off the latest Nationals leadership chatter.

"The idea that Barnaby Joyce could come back as the deputy prime minister, quite frankly, is farcical."



The questions are, who is he? - &; who is he not captured by?

[Image: D1AoWPGU8AE_mzE.jpg]

Quote:LeadSled ...Lead Balloon,

I can assure you, Dick has not fallen for it, he is absolutely ropeable ----- because NOTHING has effectively changed.

As for any "consultation" ---- this in no way even goes close to what was agreed by Barnaby Joyce and Anthony Albanese, with Dick's help.

In my opinion, McCormack has been as thoroughly captured by the "Department" and CASA as any Minister ever has.

This is the "reform" you have when you are not having reform...


https://www.pprune.org/pacific-general-a...st10397119

[Image: D1F2YVwVAAUpZO2.jpg]

Update: Via the Courier Mail etc. https://www.couriermail.com.au/news/quee...5770743424

Quote:[b][Image: 05bab7ecab137ba6a799d9cc4964df88]


Joyce poised to reclaim Nats leadership from lacklustre McCormack
[/b]


DEPUTY Prime Minister Michael McCormack has lost the confidence of the majority of Nationals, who are asking the embattled leader to resign or face a spill on the eve of the election.

Red-hot frustration is now building into a “political Sophie’s Choice” for Nationals, who fear moving on Mr McCormack after the election will be too late, especially for Queensland MPs.

A number of MPs and senators who voted for Mr McCormack last year have now abandoned him for his predecessor Barnaby Joyce.

Some believe they cannot wait to roll Mr McCormack after the next election because too many seats are at risk or could be lost. Capricornia, Flynn and Dawson are all marginal.

The lacklustre performance of Mr McCormack and his inability to raise funds comes as the junior Coalition partner is preparing to lose party status in the Senate for the first time since Federation. Losing party status equates to a pay cut for some.

With NSW senator John Williams retiring at the May election, Nationals are not expecting to win the third spot on the ticket.

Senior figures are being leant on to encourage Mr McCormack to step aside for the good of the party.

It is understood Mr Joyce is not agitating and will not call a spill, however he will run against Mr McCormack if one is brought on.

Many in the party believe Mr Joyce as leader would help Nationals hold their seats.

Calls were being made last night to tally rusted-on numbers for Mr Joyce as a growing number of colleagues privately bemoun Mr McCormack’s performance, his “non-existent profile” and the way he is being “walked-all over” by Prime Minister Scott Morrison.

Serious and meaningful conversations, driven by NSW and Queensland MPs, are being held about how the process would work so close to the Budget and the poll, and what it would mean for the Coalition Agreement.

Those advocating for change have been asked to map out on the timing of the coup and then an election-fight back strategy.

One highly-placed source revealed that rolling Mr McCormack would be a plan to help Nationals keep their seats, not a plan to win Government. It is a concession that the relationship between the Coalition partners is in tatters and government could be lost.

Those close to the issue concede the timing of changing leaders was bad but the Nationals needed a fighting chance to hold seats, especially in Queensland.

Last night several sources said a spill could not be ruled out or guaranteed, but believed momentum was building for change.

Mr McCormack would face a challenge by the end of May regardless, they said.

Mr McCormack started losing authority within his party room last year, with Queenslanders Senator Barry O’Sullivan and Member for Wide Bay Llew O’Brien refusing to turn up to party room meetings in Canberra.

The Courier-Mail revealed yesterday six Queensland Nationals broke ranks and wrote to Mr McCormack and Energy Minister Angus Taylor to demand the Government underwrite a coal-fired power station.

Last night MPs were citing Sportsbet odds, showing Nationals MPs were behind in Capricornia, Flynn and Dawson.

Some Nationals, like Victorian Andrew Broad, who was engulfed in the Sugar Babe scandal, are understood to feel as though they have been “thrown under the bus” by Mr McCormack.

And outgoing Senator O’Sullivan is believed to in part blame Mr McCormack for failing to help him at his preselection. Both supported Mr McCormack’s leadership bid last year.

It comes as Nationals last night spoke of another potential indiscretion of an MP which could embarrass the party.

It did not relate to Mr Joyce, who stepped down in February after allegations by West Australian business woman Catherine Marriott that she was sexually harassed by Mr Joyce.

Mr Joyce’s resignation was after of weeks of pressure when news broke of a pregnancy with his former staff member Vikki Campion. Ms Marriott’s allegations have never been substantiated.

The Courier-Mail asked Mr McCormack’s office last night if the Deputy Prime Minister was aware that he had lost the support of his party room and were talks about removing him, and if he supported a new coal-fired power station in Queensland or NSW?

In a statement, Mr McCormack said: “I am working hard every day to deliver for regional Australians and I will continue to focus on the issues that are important to their way of life, like lowering power prices.

“Yes I support coal-fired energy generation. It still provides the majority of Australia’s energy needs, especially baseload power.

“The Liberal and Nationals’ Government has introduced legislation to force power prices down and we will continue to work with the parliament to see that legislation through.

“My colleagues in The Nationals are keen to see that outcome as well and that’s what we are all focused on.

“Labor are backing higher prices by not supporting this legislation; they don’t care if prices increase.

“They have no practical way of bringing down prices and maintaining a reliable energy supply for all Australians.

“This legislation is a test for Bill Shorten: Does he back lower power prices or not?”
Reply

Angel Flight update: Marjorie Pagani takes St Carmody to the Federal Court - GAME ON??  Wink

[Image: D1GJV4CU8AArpk2.png]

(02-26-2019, 06:29 PM)Peetwo Wrote:  
(02-25-2019, 09:49 PM)Kharon Wrote:  If not; why not?

I have just sat through, paying attention, to the CASA Friday special video in the Senate. I have – so help me. I even watched and listened carefully to St. Carmody; by Gad he’s good.  

Mark you, when the minister is carefully managed, spoon fed and watered by St. Carmody’s very own personal aviation specialist, on loan to whichever pathetic specimen of human kind wears the Emperor’s new clothes; an overwhelming sense of confidence must be expected. Hell, with that sort of entrée and backing; you could sell the hanger cat to the public as the next ducking Messiah. So long as the minister is ‘in the loop’ and as dumb as a hammer – you are on a winner. Why would St. Carmody (the self righteous) even break wind, let alone tremble when a couple of stray Senators start asking easy, uniformed questions?

One of the more alarming elements of the whole thing is that St Carmody (ordained preventer of accidents) has either a very slick understanding of ‘statistics’ or has someone on tap who can not only make statistics jump through hoops; but is capable of making those hoops. Remarkable results – to order.  For instance hours:-

Let us examine this ‘safety’ myth that total hours can, in any practical way, relate to the safety of not only CSF operations, but ‘private’ operations in general. I have a good mate who has many thousands of hours in command of a fairly hefty jet transport – which routinely does long haul international flights; top of his game, all flight checks passed and he is bloody good at commanding the aircraft. Would I trust him to fly my family in a single piston engine, propeller driven aircraft, at night to a strange port? No I bloody well would not. Why? Well, he ain’t current for a start and not in the groove for seconds, nor does he have the toys, horsepower and systems support he has learned to rely on in his normal daily work. There is however a young lady of my acquaintance who does very little else except nurse an aging single engine aircraft about the country side, often after sunset, with very limited basic equipment and very few options in so far as power, redundancy or systems backup; yet I would, without a second thought allow my nearest and dearest to travel with her. Why?

One pilot is in current practice with the operational environment the other is not. The young lass could, perhaps get the jet started but that would be the end of it – my mate could probably get the aging beast started; and, relying solely on past experience even manage to fly a circuit or two. But, in an equal race – neither could do the others job. They are simply worlds apart. My mate has not been near an aging single engine aircraft for 30 years; our young lady has never flown a heavy transport. QED?

Yes, an extreme case study – but since when did ‘hours’ signify safety? Angel Flight could (IMO) resolve this silliness quite easily. A pilot data base which would qualify or disqualify a NVFR/IFR or VFR operation on the basis of current in-practice minimums, in compliance with the Regs. A training course which certified that AF pilots have undertaken a course entailing ‘CFIT’/ Weather avoidance analysis, flight planning, fuel management and ‘risk mitigation’ etc. Even had a ride along with a qualified person to ensure that ‘standards’ were met across the operational board. Simple enough to arrange and do. This would provide ‘evidence’ of competency, recent experience and disqualify those who were not ‘currently qualified’ from conducting AF operations until they were. Small expense incurred – occasionally – to provide a venue; lots of experienced folk willing to assist – on a voluntary basis.

No wonder Sen. Patrick say’s “I can’t quite see it” when referring to this cockeyed CASA notion of how ‘safety and statistics’ support their claim that the ‘Little Wings’ version is OK and AF is a setting up an increased level of danger to those who travel. Bollocks.

Even more remote from reality is the CASA take on ‘engine hours’ and aircraft maintenance. Ask any commercial pilot about ‘fit’ aircraft. When do most ‘mechanical’ problems appear – after maintenance. Which aircraft operate and fly the best? Those which ‘fly’ often is the answer. Which is the mechanically and systems malfunction worst aircraft they ever flew – the one which has been in the shed for a twelve month is the answer.

CASA and in particular St. Carmody continue to display their complete disassociation from the realties of working aircraft, pilot fitness for the scheduled operation and sound operational practices.

St. Carmody and his acolytes may be familiar with ‘theory’ but the view from the Ivory tower is limited; the answers are down in the grass roots and basic tenets; not in some academically dreamed up notion of a legally arguable ‘safety’ case. Practical reality; not a sound legal defence against litigation. But Hells Bells, they can’t even get the legal/medico stuff right – as the USA attorney’s are about to point out. The Mt Hotham incident should be the can opener; the Essendon DFO the worms inside that can. Will CASA get a spanking for operational ineptitude? I hope so; for it is well deserved and long overdue. It I were ‘the minister’ I’d be worried more about that and the fall out afterwards than supporting some half arsed waffle stating that sick folk getting a ride to treatment are at more risk than the same folk going shopping – in the DFO – having been given a cost shared ride into town. Pure, unadulterated, political arse covering BOLLOCKS.

Will anything ever change? Yes is the resounding answer – the revised Act, as presented, has, in legal terms imposed a more onerous, retrogressive set of requirements than the one to be replaced. Don’t believe me though – just read it, very carefully – then watch Hansard video 1 and see the smug, satisfied smirk on the wizened face of Jonathon (where’s my marbles) Aleck when it is mentioned. But please, do read the amendment to the Act – ask a legal friend to explain it – and pray to your gods of choice that amendment gets thrown out, into the garbage, where it belongs. A bonus would be the scrawny arse of Aleck following it.

But enough – I’ve only just seen the ‘vision splendid’ once; however, I can assure you, I will watch it all again  MTF? Damn straight there is……..

Toot- Toot.

(02-25-2019, 07:24 PM)Peetwo Wrote:  The Dictatorial, deluded world of Carmody Capers -  Dodgy
Still waiting on the Hansard but after a technical glitch (now rectified by the good crew at ParlAV -  Wink  ) I have now completed the Fort Fumble Estimates video segments in five parts.











My first takeaway from watching the recordings is that the total and utter rubbish emanating from both Carmody Capers and Dr Hoodoo Voodoo Aleck is so full of weasel word rhetoric and disconnected, illogical spin'n'bollocks as to be a perfect script for a comeback series of 'Yes Minister' -  Dodgy

Update - Hansard: 

https://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/sea...nt=Default

Quote:Mr Carmody : That's fine. I understand everything you've said. I would make the point, however, that as a director of aviation safety my responsibility is to keep Australians safe. They're the decisions I make, which the government has empowered me to do and wants me to do, based on the evidence that I have. I've made those decisions and it's up to the parliament. If the parliament wishes to disallow, I understand that process completely.

Senator PATRICK: And I'm a senator who wants to make sure that people who rely on these flights to get medical treatment also do so safely, but there's always a balance to be had here and I'm just not sure it's right.

Mr Carmody : There is certainly a balance, and this is—

Senator PATRICK: We can make it completely safe by banning everyone from flying, and there will be no accidents.

Mr Carmody : That's certainly not our intent. That is why, as you know, I listened to what was said with rotary-wing and said it was not my intention to limit the field; my intention was to make sure these activities occur. But we are in the precautionary space. I cannot prevent two accidents that occurred—I cannot do that. What I can do is raise standards to prevent the next accidents occurring. I can't do any more with organisations like Angel Flight than encourage them to raise their standards. I cannot get them to do anything else, because they are not subject to my regulatory oversight. I can only encourage them to raise their standards. I've done that.

Senator PATRICK: You gave every one of their pilots a licence.

Mr Carmody : With respect, they would say they are not their pilots.

Senator PATRICK: Okay. Sure. I'm done, Chair. Thank you very much for your time, Mr Carmody.

Mr Carmody : My pleasure.

ACTING CHAIR: Just to follow up what Senator Patrick said: I think the reason we are both concerned about these regulations is that we've heard from the general aviation sector over a long period that they feel they are being squeezed out of existence by the level of regulation they face. As Senator Patrick said, we could make things a lot safer if everybody stopped flying, but I don't think that's where any of us want to be...

Via AOPA Oz:

Quote:ANGEL FLIGHT SEEKS FEDERAL COURT APPLICATION FOR STAY AGAINST CASA 09/19 CSF LEGISLATION
March 13, 2019 By Kreisha Ballantyne

ANGEL FLIGHT CEO MAJORIE PAGANI MOVES TO PROTECT GENERAL AVIATION INDUSTRY RIGHTS

[Image: AngelFlightCEO.jpg]

[img=705x0]https://aopa.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/AngelFlightCEO.jpg[/img]
Angel Flight has hit back this week at CASA, lodging an application to the Federal Court in Victoria seeking a stay of CASA’s 09/19 Community Service Flights legislation, which many in the aviation industry regard as inappropriate and unnecessary.

CASA claim to have underpinned their 09/19 legislative changes on a statistical review of CSF incidents and accidents, asserting that CSF participants are four (4) times more likely to be injured when compared to the mean general aviation average.

Both Angel Flight and AOPA Australia have refuted CASA’s claim and have called on the regulator to publish their CSF statistical study and safety-case, however, to date nothing has been published.

In response, Angel Flight has engaged the services of a highly credentialed Australain statistician to review CASA’s claimed rates of incidents and accidents for general aviation and more specifically CSF operations.  Preliminary analysis indicates that there is no difference between GA and CSF flights.

The matter is expected to come before the court Friday 15th March 2019.



EXCERPT FROM THE FEDERAL COURT APPLICATION
Details of claim
The Applicant is aggrieved by the decision for the reasons set out in the affidavit of Marjorie Elizabeth Pagani, sworn on 12 March 2019.
Grounds of application


  1. The Instrument was not authorised by regulation 11.068 of the Civil Aviation Safety Regulations 1998 (Cth) (the CASR) because the “class of authorisation” specified in the instrument is not a “class of civil aviation authorisation” prescribed by the CASR (s 5(1)(d) of the ADJR Act).
  2. Further or in the alternative to ground 1, the Instrument was not authorised by regulation 11.068 of the CASR because:
    1. it is expressed to apply in relation to a type or kind of aviation operation (“community service flights”) and not a class of persons, aircraft or aeronautical product as required by s 98(5AA) of the Civil Aviation Act 1988 (Cth) (the CA Act)
    2. pursuant to s 98(5AA) of the CA Act the Instrument is not a “legislative instrument”; and
    3. regulation 11.068 of the CASR only empowers the Respondent to make legislative instruments

(s 5(1)(d) of the ADJR Act).


  1. Further or in the alternative, the Instrument creates a new class of operation, namely, “community service flight”, the creation of which is not authorised by regulation 11.068 of the CASR.
  2. The Respondent breached the rules of natural justice by failing to provide the Applicant with an opportunity to be heard in relation to:
    1. the restriction in relation to passengers imposed by clause 7(1)© of the Instrument as made, which did not appear in the draft instrument published for the purposes of consultation in December 2018; and
    2. the changes to “Aeroplane maintenance requirements” from those contained in the draft instrument published for the purposes of consultation in December 2018 to those contained in the Instrument as made

(s 5(1)(a) of the ADJR Act).
Orders sought
Interlocutory relief


  1. An order that the entry into force of the Instrument be stayed pending further order of the court.

Final relief


  1. An order quashing the Instrument.
  2. A declaration that the making of the Instrument was not authorised by regulation 11.068 of the CASR.
  3. A declaration that the Respondent denied the Applicant natural justice by failing to provide an opportunity to be heard in relation to:
    1. the restriction in relation to passengers imposed by clause 7(1)© of the Instrument as made, which did not appear in the draft instrument published for the purposes of consultation in December 2018; and
    2. the changes to “Aeroplane maintenance requirements” from those contained in the draft instrument published for the purposes of consultation in December 2018 to those contained in the Instrument as made.

Hmm...what a lovely howdy doo for the useless NFI miniscule to take through to the election - err NOT! Blush

MTF...P2  Tongue
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)