[Peetwo]

6D obfuscates PelAir cost QON...


References courtesy the PelAir MK II thread:

D-D-D-D-D-Darren?? - Your shout mate!

Reference: The raiders of the shrinking ATP trough..

Perhaps this should really be a task for the Senate Estimates crew but at post #50 from the Comardy HR thread "K" asks some very interesting QON of 6D and the government that begins with trying to calculate the total cost to ATPs of the PelAir cover-up saga...

---

...PelAir re-re update -

Would of missed this if I hadn't of been looking...

Via the PelAir re-re-investigation webpage:

Updated: 26 June 2017
The ATSB has released its confidential draft investigation report (AO-2009-072) into the reopened investigation of the 2009 ditching of a Westwind 1124A near Norfolk Island to Directly Involved Parties on Friday 23 June 2017. Directly Involved Parties (DIPs) are those individuals or organisations that were directly involved in the accident or who may have influenced the circumstances that led to the accident and/or whose reputations are likely to be affected following the release of the final investigation report.

The DIP procedure is an important process, consistent with International Civil Aviation Organization standards and recommended practices, which provides an opportunity for natural justice for DIPs, and also serves to ensure factual accuracy of the report. The draft report has been released under s26 of the Transport Safety Investigation Act 2003, which includes significant protections to ensure confidentiality. Under Section 26, the report may only be copied and disclosed prior to its public release for the purpose of taking safety action or providing comment to the ATSB.  Disclosure of this report in any other circumstance prior to its public release date may constitute a criminal offence.

DIPs have been given until 31 July 2017 to provide the ATSB with any comments on the draft report, including factual information in support of any changes that may be sought.

Given the complexity and size of the draft report, which is over 500 pages long, -  UDB! - it is possible that DIPs may seek an extension beyond that period. Once the DIP period has closed and the extent of comments and the likely time needed to give them appropriate consideration is known, the ATSB will be better placed to advise a likely release date for the final report.

&..

P2: PS. Shirley, there must be some 'in the know' bean counter out there that could give us a rough Estimate on the total cost to date of the Pel-Air re-re-duck-up - anyone?

Bloody good question.

I don’t know what ‘we’ pay a Senator or, if there is an additional cost to the public purse for having them ‘sit’ on committee. The same can be said for the secretariat, the ATSB and CASA officials – witnesses are voluntary. The cost of Mrdak – per hour – or per diem; if you like and the ‘other troops, hanging about away from work to attend a ‘hearing’ is not too hard a number to get close to – man hours – by hourly rate will get you close. That children is just to manage a rough guess at the cost of the Senate Inquiry; stand alone alone.  

When you start breaking it down into component parts – it becomes a really big number; before the cost of ministerial hours, the Forsyth panel, the TSBC peer review and the ‘other’ elements are included. This before the cost of the re-re – rewrite and ‘re-view’.

FWIW; the BRB are running a competition to see who can justify the number they entered onto the beer mat estimates, made at the last indaba. I have to say the spreadsheet software has been running hot for a while now. The final ‘cost’ per page of this 500 page redraft is starting to look like a big number. I’ll keep you posted as things progress; but, on present indications, considering the state of the economy – lets say that on a cost per page basis; no one at CASA or ATSB who was involved should be paid for about two years.

PAIN associates competing need to have their final ‘estimates’ in before Manning let’s this thing go public – we have a final estimate for the final report which will not quantify any work done on ‘demanded’ changes to the draft. Why? Well that ain’t going to happen. The Terms of Reference for the competition can be found in the AP (PAIN) library. Closest wins the Tim Tam.

Toot – that’s all – toot.

Well apparently Kaz Casey has not given up on trying to extract the answer to her original QON but is still coming up against a miniscule (plus M&M's department) hell bent on covering his (& M&M's) backside(s) and shirking the issue till the next election at least...

Email chain reference:

Sent: Monday, 26 June 2017 5:10 PM
To: minister.chester@infrastructure.gov.au
Subject: Pel Air 2009 Cost
 
Minister Chester,

I recently submitted an FOI regarding the total cost of the Pel-Air ditching from 2009 to the current date addressed to the department of infrastructure.

The response is attached.

A response which raises many questions regarding the transparency of money (tax payers) spent over the duration of this investigation.

A copy of the FOI will be sent to the Australian Information Commission for further investigation.
 
Extracting honest information over the past seven years from the agencies has been met with a stonewall.

It is abundantly clear that the Pel-Air ditching was a consequence of complete incompetence on many levels.
 
I am confident in saying that the government, the department of infrastructure, failed to protect my safety whilst working as a flight nurse. No regulatory underpinning for flying adhoc missions at the time of the ditching. My life was in the same category as agricultural spraying. How insulting and disappointing. Unsafe is an understatement. If I knew this, I would not have flown. I trusted the authorities to maintain safe, robust regulations for international air ambulance flights. A very noble profession which I worked extremely hard for as it was my passion was taken in a split second. A preventable accident.
 
I understand that extraordinary efforts were taken to avoid acknowledgement of the systemic failures of not only the operator, but the agencies involved pre and post ditch . Ignoring the ASRR recommendations, Senate recommendations, commissioned reports and the unexplainable length of time. The aberration of a report into Australia's first international aviation accident.
 
Transparency for the cost of this unfortunate accident seems a reasonable request. Assessment of the cost in comparison to the lessons of safety issues that have been actioned.


Kind Regards,

Karen Casey

---

...I spoke to Ministers office on Monday. Also spoke with AIC & Att General office. The Ministers office called back concerned about me contacting the AIC & said they spoke with DC, he said to give the FOI info directly to him to check if he could find that information. I said he should already know that, it's his budget! Secondly, I do not trust that this will be done with integrity, history proves, therefore the Aust Info Commish will be receiving the FOI complaint regardless....

 
Go you good thing...

MTF...P2