Re-Joyce or Repeat?
#95

[Image: DmFkCEYVsAEYmMS.jpg]

Will Albo's Leopard change it's spots??  

Last week Albo had a pretty ordinary week in electioneering terms... Blush

Via PML on Youtube:



However the one Albo faux pas that caught my attention was when he walked out in the middle of politically sensitive questioning in a daily press conference:

(From 2 min 13 seconds):


This reminded me of when Albo escaped out the back door when questioned by 7news Chris Reason (unfortunately I can't find the footage -  Rolleyes ) on the Government non-response to the very damning Senate AAI inquiry (Pelair) report, with the excuse that the Labor government had entered 'caretaker' mode. This was despite being briefed/advised by Mrdak and the Dept, McCormick and CASA, Dolan and the ATSB, on or around the 5th of June 2013.

From Hansard 18th November 2013:

Quote:Senator FAWCETT: The last time we met in estimates, you were anticipating giving a brief to former minister Albanese about the Senate report into air accident investigations. You anticipated giving that to him, I think, within 10 days of the date of the estimates. Could you confirm what date the department did provide that brief for action to the minister?

Mr Mrdak : Following our conversation at the 29 May estimates, I provided advice to the minister on 5 June 2013.

Senator FAWCETT: Did that have recommendations for a response to the Senate report?

Mr Mrdak : It provided advice on the Senate report, including options for handling of the Senate inquiry report, yes.

Senator FAWCETT: Did it flag the fact that there were safety implications raised in the Senate report?

Mr Mrdak : It certainly drew to the minister's attention the findings of the Senate committee report.

Although I don't have the footage of Albo dodging the questioning on the PelAir report by Chris Reason I do have two damning blog pieces (from the time) by two former legendary aviation tendentious bloggers Sandilands and Phelan (may they both rest in piece - Angel )... Rolleyes : Ref - Pprune: https://auntypru.com/forum/showthread.ph...7#pid12767

Quote:Pel-Air on prime time TV snares Minister’s false statement

The Minister for Transport Anthony Albanese was caught out on 7 News tonight in a report by Chris Reason on the festering sore that is the proven hush up by CASA and the ATSB of all of the circumstances that were relevant to the crash of a Pel-Air operated air ambulance flight near Norfolk Island in 2009.

Albanese said he was unable to take action over a damning Senate committee report on lies and deceits of Australia’s two air safety authorities because parliament went into caretaker mode.

Minister, this is total unmitigated rubbish. Caretaker mode began on 5 August.

On 29 May after consultation with your department Plane Talking published this story as to the urgency with which you and your departmental head Mike Mrdak (http://blogs.crikey.com.au/planetalking/...h-urgency/) were claimed to be responding to the unanimous report of the Senate Committee inquiry into aviation safety investigations with particular reference to the performance of the ATSB (the safety investigator) and CASA (the safety regulator).

At that inquiry the Director of Safety at CASA, John McCormick, admitted to withholding an internal audit by CASA that found that the accident was preventable if CASA had actually carried out its duties and obligations in law in relation to the oversight of Pel-Air.

Mr McCormick also apologised for his actions, which the committee has referred to the Australian Federal Police to resolve whether or not it was action that constituted an offence under the Transport Safety Investigations Act of 2003. (If the words in the act mean what they say, McCormick broke the law.)

The committee went on to devote an entire chapter of its report into its lack of confidence in the testimony given by the chief commissioner for the ATSB, Martin Dolan. The committee’s findings, made by a panel drawn from Labor, the Coalition and the Greens, was unanimous in its findings.

It also recommended, among other things, that the ATSB reconsider its final accident report and in the process retrieve the data recorder from the wreckage of the jet, which lies at a recoverable depth on the sea floor near Norfolk Island where it came to rest after being ditched immediately before it ran out of fuel. (All six persons on board were subsequently rescued by a fishing boat in the middle of the night).

The ATSB has deliberately chosen not to recover the data, which carries the distinct possibility of proving that the pilot did not receive correct meteorological information before flying the jet to a position where it could no longer divert to an alternative airport in Noumea or Fiji should it be unable to land at Norfolk Island for a refueling stop.

The ATSB failed to honor its international obligations to make safety recommendations in relation to the failure on board the ditched jet of all of the safety equipment to perform as intended. It regarded the eventual discovery that CASA had found Pel-Air to be in breach of dozens of safety requirements at the time of the crash as ‘immaterial’, and it framed its final report to visit the entire blame for the accident on the captain Dominic James, who was central to the 7 News report, which should be readily found by a search query on the internet later tonight.

As Mick Quinn, the former deputy chief executive officer of CASA told Chris Reason on 7 News tonight, this corrupted and untruthful circus performance by the safety bodies in relation to the Pel-Air investigation has destroyed Australia’s reputation as a first class nation when it comes to the administration of air safety.

Minister, you are personally responsible for this. You allowed commitments to be made on your behalf, which were not honoured, and you have demonstrated contempt for the Senate of Australia by not responding to the committee’s recommendations within 90 days.

This means you have not acted in a timely manner to correct or restore the integrity of the aviation safety authorities, and that means the safety of Australian air travellers, and those of foreign airlines and their passengers using our air space and airports, is no longer a given.

On 30 May Plane Talking reported on the intention of the department of Infrastructure and Transport to ‘ride out’ the controversy (http://blogs.crikey.com.au/planetalking/...r-scandal/) over the disgraceful report issed by the ATSB into this accident.

Minister, surely you are not a party to ‘riding out’ critically important air safety issues? The world is unlikely to let Australia get away with such a poor attitude, as explained in this more recent report (http://blogs.crikey.com.au/planetalking/...sk-to-all/).

If the Minister can say so during caretaker mode, what was he thinking when he gave his misleading answer about his inability to repond to these matters in the Chris Reason interview?

Was it amnesia? Or did he think no one would notice that what was broadcast tonight was in conflict with his position at the end of May?

Courtesy Phearless Phelan, via proaviation.com.au :

Quote:Election squabbling buries air safety recommendations

Liberal Senator David Fawcett says Transport Minister Anthony Albanese has failed to respond to the damning findings of the Senate Inquiry into the ATSB’s and CASA’s responses to the Norfolk Island ditching on November18 2009.

ATSB today confirmed that there would now be no action on the critical recommendations until after the election.

The Senate Committee’s report with 26 safety-related recommendations was released on 23 May, 2013. It highlighted serious concerns with the processes and conduct of both government agencies, and its recommendations were aimed at rectifying what it described as “the serious deficiencies that the committee had identified.”

Senator David Fawcett 02b
Senator Fawcett

The committee’s first recommendation was that the ATSB retrieve the accident aircraft’s flight data and cockpit voice recorders “without delays.”

The report said: “The committee understands that retrieval of the recorders would be particularly useful in this instance [and] that the ATSB has certain responsibilities, set out in ICAO Annex 13, when it comes to retrieval of aircraft involved in accidents. It is an assumption throughout Annex 13 that, where a FDR [flight data recorder] exists, the accident investigation body will prioritise its retrieval.”

Air safety specialists believe that the aircraft’s flight data and cockpit voice recorders could be recovered with relative ease, saying they do not understand why this recommendation is being ignored, especially as further delay might damage the equipment.

Also recommended were a reopening of the original investigation with a focus on organisational and systemic issues, a drastic rearrangement of the structures within which ATSB and CASA operate, the establishment of an ICAO Annex 13 independent panel to oversee ATSB investigations and reporting, and a referral to the Australian Federal Police to investigate whether CASA breached the Transport Safety Investigation act by withholding critical documents during the investigation.

During estimates hearings in May this year, Senator Fawcett specifically highlighted the risk of Government inaction before the caretaker period began, causing an unacceptable delay to implementing the recommended aviation safety reforms.

When asked during Estimates on May 29 if the department’s brief to the Minister would occur in sufficient time so that Mr Albanese could respond before the caretaker mode, Department Secretary Mike Mrdak replied:

“We already have officers in the department – and clearly me and senior officers – who have carefully read the report now. I have had discussions with my senior officers. We envisage being in a position to provide some initial advice to the minister, I expect, certainly within the next week to 10 days in relation to it. I envisage having conversations with the Civil Aviation Safety Authority CEO and the head of the Australian Transport Safety Bureau in the coming days to ascertain their views, to enable me to provide a comprehensive view to the minister, I would hope by the end of next week.” [two months ago.]

Senator Fawcett points out that the report was tabled on May 23, allowing the Minister a three month window to respond and that given its damning findings Minister Albanese should have made this his top priority, particularly given his promise that ‘nothing is as important as aviation safety.’

“Even the announcement today of an external review of the ATSB by the Canadian Transportation Safety Board (TSB) was not made by the Minister but by the agency in question, said Senator Fawcett, referring to ATSB announcement on August 2 that the transportation is safety board of Canada (TSB) will conduct an independent external review of the ATB’s investigation processes and publish the results. The review was announced jointly by TSB Chair Wendy Tadross and ATSB chief commissioner, Martin Dolan.

Sen Fawcett remains unimpressed: “This raises serious concerns about the efficacy of any resulting report unless the Minister ensures that the terms of reference (ToR) and Australian management of the audit are transparent and independent.”

We asked the ATSB whether a decision been made on recovery of the flight data and cockpit voice recorders of the Pel-Air aircraft, whether recovering the recorders would be an ATSB or departmental decision, and whether the investigation will be reopened as recommended in recommendation 9. We also asked if the Canadian review was a part-response to the Senate recommendations.

The ATSB would not comment on the recorders or reopening the investigation, but a spokesman said: “We’ve been in discussion with the Transportation Safety Board of Canada for some time, and it’s about benchmarking and comparison of our systems of investigation. This is an initiative of the ATSB’s chief commissioner and the TSB’s Chair, and the TSB has agreed that their benchmarking review will have regard to the Senate committee’s findings, so we’ll take those into account.

“In regards to your specific questions, it is the responsibility of the Government to respond to the recommendations of Senate committees. The ATSB has provided input to the preparation of a government response. The caretaker conventions that are now in place mean that a government response will not be finalised until after the federal election.“

Senator Fawcett again called on Minister Albanese to ensure that this review of the ATSB has the confidence of the aviation industry and the public by adopting Recommendation 8 of the Senate report:

8.        The committee recommends that an expert aviation safety panel be established to ensure quality control of ATSB investigation and reporting processes along the lines set out by the committee.

“While the engagement of the Canadian TSB is welcome, the gravity of the issues raised in the Senate report means that the Minister should be overseeing the review with the support of an expert panel rather than the ATSB,” Senator Fawcett said.

“It is critical that this review of the ATSB is allowed to examine all sensitive areas of the ATSB investigation orocesses as identified in the Senate report including the Canley Vale accident.”

Hmmm...much, much MTF - P2  Tongue
Reply


Messages In This Thread
Re-Joyce or Repeat? - by Kharon - 06-24-2021, 07:01 AM
RE: Re-Joyce or Repeat? - by Peetwo - 06-24-2021, 09:19 AM
RE: Re-Joyce or Repeat? - by thorn bird - 06-24-2021, 11:09 AM
RE: Re-Joyce or Repeat? - by Peetwo - 06-26-2021, 10:48 AM
RE: Re-Joyce or Repeat? - by Peetwo - 06-29-2021, 11:10 AM
RE: Re-Joyce or Repeat? - by Kharon - 06-30-2021, 07:10 AM
RE: Re-Joyce or Repeat? - by P7_TOM - 07-20-2021, 08:42 AM
RE: Re-Joyce or Repeat? - by Peetwo - 07-24-2021, 01:26 PM
RE: Re-Joyce or Repeat? - by P7_TOM - 07-25-2021, 08:02 AM
RE: Re-Joyce or Repeat? - by Peetwo - 07-27-2021, 11:37 PM
RE: Re-Joyce or Repeat? - by Kharon - 07-29-2021, 08:15 AM
RE: Re-Joyce or Repeat? - by Peetwo - 07-29-2021, 11:22 AM
RE: Re-Joyce or Repeat? - by Kharon - 08-03-2021, 06:53 AM
RE: Re-Joyce or Repeat? - by Peetwo - 08-05-2021, 06:02 PM
RE: Re-Joyce or Repeat? - by Sandy Reith - 08-05-2021, 09:02 PM
RE: Re-Joyce or Repeat? - by gizmoe - 01-28-2022, 12:37 PM
RE: Re-Joyce or Repeat? - by thorn bird - 08-06-2021, 02:53 PM
RE: Re-Joyce or Repeat? - by Wombat - 08-07-2021, 09:25 PM
RE: Re-Joyce or Repeat? - by thorn bird - 08-08-2021, 12:18 PM
RE: Re-Joyce or Repeat? - by Wombat - 08-08-2021, 11:05 PM
RE: Re-Joyce or Repeat? - by Kharon - 08-09-2021, 08:07 AM
RE: Re-Joyce or Repeat? - by P7_TOM - 08-09-2021, 09:59 PM
RE: Re-Joyce or Repeat? - by Wombat - 08-10-2021, 06:31 AM
RE: Re-Joyce or Repeat? - by thorn bird - 08-10-2021, 01:32 PM
RE: Re-Joyce or Repeat? - by Sandy Reith - 08-11-2021, 07:07 AM
RE: Re-Joyce or Repeat? - by Kharon - 08-12-2021, 07:12 AM
RE: Re-Joyce or Repeat? - by Peetwo - 08-13-2021, 08:46 AM
RE: Re-Joyce or Repeat? - by Wombat - 08-13-2021, 10:01 PM
RE: Re-Joyce or Repeat? - by Kharon - 08-14-2021, 07:35 AM
RE: Re-Joyce or Repeat? - by thorn bird - 08-14-2021, 08:11 AM
RE: Re-Joyce or Repeat? - by Wombat - 08-14-2021, 08:42 AM
RE: Re-Joyce or Repeat? - by thorn bird - 08-14-2021, 05:59 PM
RE: Re-Joyce or Repeat? - by Peetwo - 08-15-2021, 10:45 AM
RE: Re-Joyce or Repeat? - by thorn bird - 08-15-2021, 06:25 PM
RE: Re-Joyce or Repeat? - by Peetwo - 09-07-2021, 08:23 PM
RE: Re-Joyce or Repeat? - by Peetwo - 09-13-2021, 09:46 PM
RE: Re-Joyce or Repeat? - by Peetwo - 10-19-2021, 11:18 AM
RE: Re-Joyce or Repeat? - by Peetwo - 09-26-2021, 09:26 PM
RE: Re-Joyce or Repeat? - by Peetwo - 10-08-2021, 11:52 PM
RE: Re-Joyce or Repeat? - by Peetwo - 10-19-2021, 05:57 PM
RE: Re-Joyce or Repeat? - by Sandy Reith - 10-19-2021, 07:42 PM
RE: Re-Joyce or Repeat? - by Kharon - 10-20-2021, 06:15 AM
RE: Re-Joyce or Repeat? - by Peetwo - 11-03-2021, 08:38 AM
RE: Re-Joyce or Repeat? - by Kharon - 11-05-2021, 07:01 AM
RE: Re-Joyce or Repeat? - by Peetwo - 11-20-2021, 10:19 AM
RE: Re-Joyce or Repeat? - by Peetwo - 12-04-2021, 07:35 PM
RE: Re-Joyce or Repeat? - by Wombat - 12-05-2021, 06:09 AM
RE: Re-Joyce or Repeat? - by Plane Fixer - 12-05-2021, 08:42 AM
RE: Re-Joyce or Repeat? - by thorn bird - 12-05-2021, 11:50 AM
Plane Fixer - by Plane Fixer - 12-05-2021, 07:40 PM
RE: Re-Joyce or Repeat? - by thorn bird - 12-09-2021, 10:14 AM
RE: Re-Joyce or Repeat? - by Wombat - 12-09-2021, 05:59 PM
RE: Re-Joyce or Repeat? - by Peetwo - 12-09-2021, 08:11 PM
RE: Re-Joyce or Repeat? - by Peetwo - 12-16-2021, 11:37 AM
RE: Re-Joyce or Repeat? - by Peetwo - 12-21-2021, 10:00 AM
RE: Re-Joyce or Repeat? - by Sandy Reith - 12-21-2021, 10:14 AM
RE: Re-Joyce or Repeat? - by Kharon - 12-24-2021, 07:09 AM
RE: Re-Joyce or Repeat? - by Peetwo - 12-27-2021, 09:53 AM
RE: Re-Joyce or Repeat? - by Wombat - 12-28-2021, 06:51 AM
RE: Re-Joyce or Repeat? - by Kharon - 12-28-2021, 05:25 PM
RE: Re-Joyce or Repeat? - by Peetwo - 01-03-2022, 06:52 PM
RE: Re-Joyce or Repeat? - by Peetwo - 01-13-2022, 09:46 AM
RE: Re-Joyce or Repeat? - by Peetwo - 01-24-2022, 11:04 PM
RE: Re-Joyce or Repeat? - by Sandy Reith - 01-25-2022, 07:24 AM
RE: Re-Joyce or Repeat? - by Wombat - 01-25-2022, 09:32 AM
RE: Re-Joyce or Repeat? - by Sandy Reith - 01-26-2022, 08:56 PM
RE: Re-Joyce or Repeat? - by Kharon - 01-27-2022, 06:12 AM
RE: Re-Joyce or Repeat? - by Peetwo - 01-27-2022, 09:19 AM
RE: Re-Joyce or Repeat? - by Sandy Reith - 01-27-2022, 10:28 AM
RE: Re-Joyce or Repeat? - by Wombat - 01-27-2022, 02:44 PM
RE: Re-Joyce or Repeat? - by Sandy Reith - 01-28-2022, 04:57 AM
RE: Re-Joyce or Repeat? - by Kharon - 01-28-2022, 06:36 AM
RE: Re-Joyce or Repeat? - by Peetwo - 01-31-2022, 06:32 PM
RE: Re-Joyce or Repeat? - by Wombat - 01-31-2022, 09:15 PM
RE: Re-Joyce or Repeat? - by Kharon - 02-01-2022, 04:54 AM
RE: Re-Joyce or Repeat? - by Peetwo - 02-01-2022, 07:18 PM
RE: Re-Joyce or Repeat? - by Kharon - 02-02-2022, 05:47 AM
RE: Re-Joyce or Repeat? - by Peetwo - 02-05-2022, 08:06 AM
RE: Re-Joyce or Repeat? - by Peetwo - 02-10-2022, 09:27 AM
RE: Re-Joyce or Repeat? - by Sandy Reith - 02-10-2022, 11:35 AM
RE: Re-Joyce or Repeat? - by thorn bird - 02-10-2022, 04:15 PM
RE: Re-Joyce or Repeat? - by Kharon - 02-11-2022, 05:41 AM
RE: Re-Joyce or Repeat? - by gizmoe - 02-26-2022, 06:46 PM
RE: Re-Joyce or Repeat? - by Kharon - 02-11-2022, 05:44 AM
RE: Re-Joyce or Repeat? - by Wombat - 02-11-2022, 08:59 AM
RE: Re-Joyce or Repeat? - by Peetwo - 02-26-2022, 01:29 PM
RE: Re-Joyce or Repeat? - by Peetwo - 03-25-2022, 08:32 AM
RE: Re-Joyce or Repeat? - by Wombat - 03-25-2022, 07:43 PM
RE: Re-Joyce or Repeat? - by Sandy Reith - 03-25-2022, 01:47 PM
RE: Re-Joyce or Repeat? - by Peetwo - 04-05-2022, 08:02 PM
RE: Re-Joyce or Repeat? - by Sandy Reith - 04-05-2022, 10:46 PM
RE: Re-Joyce or Repeat? - by Wombat - 04-06-2022, 08:00 AM
RE: Re-Joyce or Repeat? - by Peetwo - 04-09-2022, 09:17 PM
RE: Re-Joyce or Repeat? - by Peetwo - 04-12-2022, 10:27 AM
RE: Re-Joyce or Repeat? - by Peetwo - 04-19-2022, 08:55 PM
RE: Re-Joyce or Repeat? - by Peetwo - 04-23-2022, 09:53 PM
RE: Re-Joyce or Repeat? - by Peetwo - 05-06-2022, 10:47 AM
RE: Re-Joyce or Repeat? - by Peetwo - 05-10-2022, 10:30 AM
RE: Re-Joyce or Repeat? - by Sandy Reith - 05-10-2022, 06:19 PM
RE: Re-Joyce or Repeat? - by Kharon - 05-11-2022, 07:53 AM
RE: Re-Joyce or Repeat? - by Wombat - 05-11-2022, 11:44 AM
RE: Re-Joyce or Repeat? - by Peetwo - 05-13-2022, 11:27 AM
RE: Re-Joyce or Repeat? - by Peetwo - 05-14-2022, 11:21 AM
RE: Re-Joyce or Repeat? - by Sandy Reith - 05-14-2022, 07:27 PM
RE: Re-Joyce or Repeat? - by thorn bird - 05-16-2022, 06:56 AM
RE: Re-Joyce or Repeat? - by Wombat - 05-31-2022, 10:09 PM
RE: Re-Joyce or Repeat? - by Kharon - 06-15-2022, 06:12 AM
RE: Re-Joyce or Repeat? - by Peetwo - 05-21-2023, 10:12 AM



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)