Senate Estimates.

Albo/Bandt Coalition vote down supporting GA industry?? Dodgy

Yesterday in Senate Committee business, the following motion was put for RRAT Committee Inquiry:

Quote:Reference

[Image: image]

Senator RICE (Victoria) (16:39): I move:

That the following matter be referred to the Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport References Committee for inquiry and report by 8 October 2024:

The impact and mitigation of aircraft noise on residents and business in capital cities and regional towns, with particular reference to:

(a) the effect of aircraft noise on amenity, physical and mental wellbeing and everyday life of residents;

(b) the effect of aircraft noise on small business;

© any proposals for the mitigation and limitation of aircraft noise, including flight curfews, changes to flight paths and alternatives to air travel;

(d) any barriers to the mitigation and limitation of aircraft noise; and

(e) any other related matters.
 

To this motion Senator McKenzie put forward this amendment:

Quote:[Image: image]

Senator McKENZIE (Victoria—Leader of the Nationals in the Senate) (16:39): by leave—I move an amendment to business of the Senate notice of motion No. 1, as circulated in the chamber:

Omit all words after "That", substitute "the following matters be referred to the Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport References Committee for inquiry and report by 8 October 2024:

(a) The impact, regulation and mitigation of aircraft noise on residents and business in our communities, including the impacts of aircraft noise on amenity, physical and mental wellbeing and everyday life of affected communities; and

(b) Australia's airspace management, operation and regulation to ensure the safety, efficiency and sustainability of the aviation industry, with particular reference to:

(i) the adequacy and effectiveness of Australia's airspace management operation and regulation in meeting the needs of the aviators and communities,

(ii) skills shortages, job vacancies and access to skills training in the aviation sector,

(iii) aircraft noise management practices and their effectiveness in mitigating impacts on communities,

(iv) factors contributing to on-time performance issues across Australian airspace,

(v) the safety and reliability of airspace management across rural and regional Australia, and

(vi) any other related matters".
 

The amendment was then put to a 'division' and was unfortunately voted down  Undecided

Division: NOES 35 (6 majority) AYES 29 PAIRS 0 - See HERE for all the reasons why the GA industry is doomed under the Albo/Bandt Coalition... Angry

MTF...P2  Tongue
Reply

AQON finally complete; & Additional Estimates program released? Rolleyes

Some kudos to Betsy and his nearly 2,000 minions, they have successfully answered all but 3 of the 456 listed Supp Estimates QON - see HERE if interested... Rolleyes 

Next I note that the Additional Estimates program has been tabled:

Quote:2023-24 Additional estimates

Program


Monday, 12 February 2024
Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development, Communications and the Arts, excluding Communications and the Arts

Tuesday, 13 February 2024

Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry

Program (PDF 151KB)

[Image: RRAT-6.jpg]

[Image: RRAT-6-1.jpg]

Airservices up early (1245)? Don't believe that's a good sign for Harfwit and his fellow exec trough swillers... Shy

MTF...P2  Tongue
Reply

https://auntypru.com/forum/showthread.ph...3#pid14153- MKII  Dodgy

Yesterday in Senate Committee business, the following motion was put for RRAT Committee Inquiry:

Quote:Reference

[Image: image]

Senator RICE (Victoria) (16:39): I move:

That the following matter be referred to the Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport References Committee for inquiry and report by 8 October 2024:

The impact and mitigation of aircraft noise on residents and business in capital cities and regional towns, with particular reference to:

(a) the effect of aircraft noise on amenity, physical and mental wellbeing and everyday life of residents;

(b) the effect of aircraft noise on small business;

© any proposals for the mitigation and limitation of aircraft noise, including flight curfews, changes to flight paths and alternatives to air travel;

(d) any barriers to the mitigation and limitation of aircraft noise; and

(e) any other related matters.
 

To this motion Senator McKenzie put forward this amendment:

Quote:[Image: image]

Senator McKENZIE (Victoria—Leader of the Nationals in the Senate) (16:39): by leave—I move an amendment to business of the Senate notice of motion No. 1, as circulated in the chamber:

Omit all words after "That", substitute "the following matters be referred to the Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport References Committee for inquiry and report by 8 October 2024:

(a) The impact, regulation and mitigation of aircraft noise on residents and business in our communities, including the impacts of aircraft noise on amenity, physical and mental wellbeing and everyday life of affected communities; and

(b) Australia's airspace management, operation and regulation to ensure the safety, efficiency and sustainability of the aviation industry, with particular reference to:

(i) the adequacy and effectiveness of Australia's airspace management operation and regulation in meeting the needs of the aviators and communities,

(ii) skills shortages, job vacancies and access to skills training in the aviation sector,

(iii) aircraft noise management practices and their effectiveness in mitigating impacts on communities,

(iv) factors contributing to on-time performance issues across Australian airspace,

(v) the safety and reliability of airspace management across rural and regional Australia, and

(vi) any other related matters".
 

The amendment was then put to a 'division' and was unfortunately voted down  Undecided

Division: NOES 35 (6 majority) AYES 29 PAIRS 0 - See HERE for all the reasons why the GA industry is doomed under the Albo/Bandt Coalition... Angry


Ref: SBG 11/02/24

MTF...P2  Tongue

PS: Watch Estimates here:

12/02/2024 9:00AM - 11:00PM AEDT Senate, Rural, Regional Affairs and Transport Legislation Committee (Senate Estimates) 
Reply

RRAT Committee Additional Estimates: 12/02/24

Waiting on Hansard but in the meantime here is some pics to review... Wink






Finally, Popinjay actually gets asked a question (on behalf of ONSR)... Blush


MTF...P2 Tongue
Reply

Hansard published - Rolleyes

Via APH website:

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

PDF version: https://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/dow...tion%2Fpdf


Quote:Senator FAWCETT: Ms Spence, could I just point out the logic fault in this. The position Australia adopted in February 2020 was aligned with the FAA and with the New Zealand authority. Do you know how many licensed pilots are flying in America?

Ms Spence : We've got two issues.

Senator FAWCETT: Ms Spence, sorry—I'm asking you a question.

Ms Spence : No, I don't.

Senator FAWCETT: There are around 620,000—about 110,000 commercial pilots. They've had the system operating for a number of years with no incidents. Yet the assertion here is that because Australia has done this for a couple of years without incident, we must be on the wrong path. The US has been doing it for years, so I'm saying that the whole premise behind this paper is based on flawed logic.

Ms Spence : That paper is not the basis on which we are going forward. The issues that we raised—which we briefed you on separately—were the issues that we had with the operationalisation of the OCVA and what we are trying to do to address that. I might refer to my colleague.

Mr Marcelja : One of the things that we have really taken very seriously is the instability and the uncertainty about how this issue has been treated. To avoid the situation that you are recounting, where changes were made from different areas perhaps in an unstructured way, we are proposing to settle the policy forward through a regulatory process that actually puts a position out for consultation over the next probably six weeks and create a legislative instrument that captures how we treat colour vision in a way that is transparent and open and subject to review and scrutiny, so that we do not end up in the situation that you were talking about where people have instability and uncertainty.

As Ms Spence said, the paper that you have in front of you is not CASA's position. That is an internal discussion paper that some members of our medical community might have had. But we are taking it forward from a whole-of-CASA perspective that includes inputs from our operational areas, our flying standards areas and our medical areas. We intend to consult publicly to create stability.

Senator FAWCETT: I'm pleased to hear that. This may have only been a discussion paper, but it did start, until October last year, to have material impact on pilots and their professions and their ability to operate, because it was starting to be operationalised clearly without an internal review and approval process.

Ms Spence : And we are addressing that now, Senator.

Senator FAWCETT: I accept what you are saying and I welcome that—a good strong process—but I want to go back to the basis of principle. The whole discussion started with the fact that you believed that the operational test was a valid way to move forward as a third level of testing. Both you, I believe, and Dr Manderson made the comment that, should a pilot pass that operational test without any issues, they would be issued an aviation medical certificate without condition, note, restriction, endorsement et cetera. Is that still your principled position that you are seeking to find the evidence to work towards?

Ms Spence : We are working our way through that, and it will be the basis for a discussion paper, as Mr Marcelja mentioned. That is the intention. I don't think we have moved away from that, but we just need to make sure that we can actually turn the principle into a deliverable outcome.

Senator FAWCETT: You have highlighted in the evidence you have provided that there has been close dialogue with both the New Zealanders and the FAA. Have they indicated that they will change their position if you don't believe that you can reach that point?

Ms Spence : I think our issue is more around how we come up with a repeatable test. At this stage, we haven't had any conversations with the FAA or New Zealand to suggest that they would move away from their positions. But, again, we can take on notice if there has been any feedback along those lines.

Senator FAWCETT: If you don't believe that you can come up with a repeatable operational test that satisfies your safety requirements, does that mean that there will be a flow-on impact where you will stop any pilots that are licensed by the FAA?

Ms Spence : You are asking us to make assessments about something that hasn't actually happened yet. So I would rather let us get through the process that we are working through before we guess what happens after that.

Senator FAWCETT: It is the logical extension of your argument, though.

Ms Spence : I'm talking about what we are actually going to be consulting on. If, as a result of the consultation, we find ourselves unable to progress the way that we have been discussing, we will be open and transparent about what our next steps are. I don't know what other countries will do in response to anything that we do, either.


Quote:Ms Spence : Sorry, I'll have to take that on notice. I don't have the information in front of me. Apologies.

Senator ROBERTS: So, presumably, the answer, presumably from CASA, says that four of the five incidents—they say in brackets afterwards, 'this event has now been reported'. So at the time it wasn't.

Ms Spence : Sorry, I genuinely don't have that document in front of me so I can't—

Senator ROBERTS: I'm telling you what the document says.

Ms Spence : I know. And it's very difficult for me not having it in front of me to be able to explain what the context was.

Senator ROBERTS: Would you like to make a copy of this?

Mr Marcelja : Sorry, I'm just looking for it as well.

Ms Spence : I know the document you're talking about, but I genuinely thought it was—

Mr Marcelja : A bit further back.

Ms Spence : My recollection was that you raised a list, and we said we thought most of them would have been covered. The reason we took it on notice was to test which ones we were aware of and which ones we weren't aware of. And the ones that—

Senator ROBERTS: I'll remind you that I asked you if you'd seen these incidents on the document. Without looking at the document, you said, 'No, these are not on the document.'

Ms Spence : I doubt very much—

Senator ROBERTS: Then I said, 'Would you please look at the document before answering?' How can you have any credibility with me?

Ms Spence : Obviously I don't.

Senator ROBERTS: No, you don't. You don't have a lot of credibility with many pilots either.



Senator ROBERTS: Okay. Let's move on. Do you believe that senior leadership of the agency that is meant to be regulating aviation—that's your agency—having access to the exclusive Qantas Chairman's Lounge and Virgin Beyond Lounge creates a conflict of interest?

Ms Spence : No.

Senator ROBERTS: Not even as a potential perceived conflict of interest?

Ms Spence : No.

Senator ROBERTS: In the May 2022 Senate estimates your evidence was that all gifts and benefits were listed on your website under the gifts and benefits register. That wasn't true, was it?

Ms Spence : I thought that they all were on the list. I haven't deliberately misled the committee. If something wasn't included, I apologise. But everything is certainly on the register now.

Senator ROBERTS: Now?

Ms Spence : And has been for some time.

Senator ROBERTS: If you put it on the register, that means you think it was a gift. But you told me it wasn't a gift.

Mr Marcelja : We were pretty clear in our written response that those memberships predated people joining CASA. We clarified that.

Senator ROBERTS: I'll get to that. That's clarified in your opinion, but it doesn't clarify it so far as the Public Service Association is concerned. Senior members of the aviation regulator had been given access to exclusive airline clubs that aren't available to the public, and this was kept a secret from Australians. Yet you maintain that this doesn't create even a potential conflict of interest.

Ms Spence : I don't accept the premise that it was kept a secret.

Senator ROBERTS: We'll get to that one too. This explanation from the Australian Public Service Commission is very important:

… Public confidence in APS agencies and the APS more broadly can be damaged when gifts and benefits that create a conflict of interest are accepted or not properly declared. The appearance of a conflict can be just as damaging to public confidence in public administration as a conflict which gives rise to a concern based on objective facts.

Having gifted access to exclusive aviation lounges is obviously a conflict of interest when you are the aviation regulator—the aviation regulator.

Ms Spence : No, we're the aviation safety regulator.

Senator ROBERTS: This is regardless of whether the benefit predates the official's employment, and this was not declared.

Ms Spence : I genuinely don't recall us not being on the register—of me having Chairman's Lounge and Virgin Beyond lounge membership. When I was in the department and first received those invitations to join those, it's always been something that I've declared in any of my potential conflicts of interest. Notwithstanding that, I genuinely don't believe it creates a conflict of interest.

Senator ROBERTS: Let me continue. It's very concerning to me that you try to tell this committee that all benefits were declared on the gift register at a time they clearly were not. You made no mention of the fact that you had updated the register with these gifts—

Mr Marcelja : Senator, we—

Senator ROBERTS: Mr Marcelja, I'm trying to talk!

Ms Spence : Just—

Senator ROBERTS: You just quietly updated the webpage and tried to act like those things had been there properly for the entire time, and that's not the case, is it? The gifts weren't on the register at the time you gave evidence to this committee that they were.

Ms Spence : Senator, I'll have to take that on notice. I genuinely thought that they were always on the register. If they weren't, they're certainly on there now and it has never been a secret that I've had those lounge memberships.

Senator ROBERTS: Ms Spence, it seems that it's contemptuous of this committee for you to try and just quietly update this information in the secretive manner that you have. Why not alert the committee that the previous evidence was incorrect and issue a clarification, which is what most honest public servants do?

Ms Spence : As we said in our response to your question, nothing was declared on the CASA gifts and benefits register as no lounge access had actually been provided to CASA executives or board members as a result of their roles in CASA.

Senator ROBERTS: That's a furphy, Ms Spence! They have done—

Ms Spence : It's not a furphy, Senator!

Senator ROBERTS: You're making out that they had them before they joined CASA.

Ms Spence : They did—I did.

Senator ROBERTS: They still have them—

Ms Spence : Yes.

Senator ROBERTS: and they weren't declared. Then, when you updated it to declare them, you didn't advise the committee. You just did it quietly.

Ms Spence : I'm genuinely sorry that you feel that I've misled the committee—

Senator ROBERTS: It isn't my feelings that matter! It's the facts that matter—

Ms Spence : Well, I apologise to the committee unreservedly, but there was never any intention to mislead. As I said, the issue, as far as I can recall, was because you list things as they're provided to you, and because they were already in the possession of myself and some of our board members prior to them actually being on the board they must not have been listed originally. They're on there now, and I have nothing else I can say.

CHAIR: Senator Roberts, does this—

Senator ROBERTS: It's my last question. This brings much of the evidence that you've given to this committee into question, Ms Spence, if this is how you deal with answers that you later find are incorrect. We wouldn't even know this unless someone had trawled back through the internet archives. You have apologised; is there anything else you need to apologise for in our exchanges?

Ms Spence : No, Senator.

Senator ROBERTS: I don't see you as a credible witness with your evidence, Ms Spence.

CHAIR: What I might do, Senator Roberts, due to the hour, is this. I have kept saying all day that we have that report about behaviour—you know what it is—and you have made your point. Ms Spence, it is sloppy—

Ms Spence : Yes.

CHAIR: Let's get over it. The behaviour of politicians in this building over the last few years is pretty questionable too—but anyway! Senator Roberts, do you have further—

Senator ROBERTS: I have finished my questions, thank you, Chair.

Hmm...talking of conflict of interest and transparency, perhaps Su_Spence should be revisiting her non-declaration of the Croc Wrangler joy flight... Huh



Senator McKENZIE: We had some evidence from Airservices Australia this afternoon about chronic anxiety about safety. I think there's chronic anxiety about the performance of Airservices Australia, frankly. Have you or your organisation ever expressed concerns regarding the safety or the management of airspace, particularly in the last few years?

Ms Spence : It's certainly an issue that we're monitoring very closely, as the CEO of Airservices Australia indicated. From our perspective, the safety issue is addressed by the impact on the efficiency of the airspace. You can limit the number of aircraft that are operating in airspace and that therefore means you don't have a safety issue. But you certainly have an efficiency issue.

Senator McKENZIE: So you have an expressed concern about the way the airspace is managed?

Ms Spence : We've expressed concerns about the way in which Airservices is relying on contingency arrangements to manage airspace, but I wouldn't say that's a safety issue; it's the impact on the system that's concerning.

Senator McKENZIE: You're the regulator for air traffic controllers. How many air traffic controllers do you license currently?

Ms Spence : I'd have to take the exact number on notice, sorry.

Senator McKENZIE: What role do you play in the ongoing monitoring of safety regarding air traffic control?

Ms Spence : We undertake surveillance activities on Airservices; we issue safety findings—

Senator McKENZIE: How regularly? We're really pushed for time.

Ms Spence : I have to—

Senator McKENZIE: We've got a lot of agencies and I have a series of questions, so I just need the answer.

Ms Spence : Every month we look at a different unit.

Senator McKENZIE: Great, and you randomly pick units or is there a program?

Ms Spence : It's a mix of the two.

Senator McKENZIE: Given the latest cultural report on ASA, are you confident that air traffic controllers are reporting either mental or physical illness?

Ms Spence : I couldn't comment on that, I'm afraid. I don't have a view on that.

Senator McKENZIE: You license them and you monitor them, but you don't have a view on—

Ms Spence : Their mental health—their capacity.

Senator McKENZIE: Have you seen the reports?

Ms Spence : Yes, I have.

Senator McKENZIE: Right. What's CASA's view of the appalling reports?

Ms Spence : Obviously, we are concerned about the ability for Airservices to address the issues that we see around unscheduled absences and the challenges they've got around having staff in place. Not having staff there means that they haven't been able to deliver services to the regulatory standards. But in terms of—

Senator McKENZIE: What do you do then, Ms Spence? Everything you're saying is true. Today we shut down half the country because two people didn't come into work at Sydney. There are contingency arrangements that ASA has in place that our own airlines won't use, which means it's null and void to actually deal with the issue. You've got aircraft communicating into airspace rather than through air traffic controllers, and they're not prepared to do that. What does CASA do, other than express concern?

Ms Spence : Whenever Airservices need to put a TIBA in place we restrict the airspace so that anyone who wants to enter the airspace—

Senator McKENZIE: How do we change it, Ms Spence?

Ms Spence : We're monitoring and working with Airservices on their 'get well' plan, which will ensure they get the right number of staff in to be able to meet the services.

Senator McKENZIE: In the interest of time, do you have any control over or influence on Airservices Australia?

Ms Spence : Yes, we do.

Senator McKENZIE: How are you using that, given the appalling reports of their service delivery? What have you done in the last three years?

Ms Spence : As I said, we've done surveillance, we've identified issues that they need to address and we work with them as they address those findings.

Senator McKENZIE: On notice, I would like to know the number of issues you've formally addressed with Airservices Australia, what the actual issue was and what the outcome is. There are a lot of vagaries, but I want some practical examples. Thank you so much. That's it for CASA.

CHAIR: Ms Spence, thank you very much. We'll let you get away and just keep going.



Quote:Senator McKENZIE: Qantas, in their submission to the government's white paper, said:

Airservices … has not provided consistent services and was responsible for close to 20 per cent of delays at the country's four biggest airports in financial year 2023.

…  …  …

The inconsistency of service is demonstrated by the concerning increase in … events.

…  …  …

Generally, it is used in countries with significant challenges providing air traffic control (for example, Afghanistan …).

This is our largest airline saying that the way you run your business, on behalf of us, is akin to how air traffic control is worked in a country like Afghanistan. What is your response to Qantas?

Mr Harfield: My response to Qantas is that is completely inaccurate and actually misleading.

Senator McKENZIE: Please explain.

Mr Harfield: Maybe 20 years ago, in the way that we may have handled a service variation, there would have been the same protocols that may have been used in Afghanistan at that particular time, but that is not what occurs today. Fortunately, Qantas operations do understand, but maybe other parts of Qantas don't. The situation that occurs when—

Senator McKENZIE: It's pretty serious to put in a white paper document—

Mr Harfield: That's Qantas's opinion, but it's not backed up by fact.

CHAIR: Can I clarify something, please. When did the quote from Qantas come out and do you have a copy of that for the rest of the committee?

Senator McKENZIE: It is in the Qantas submission to the white paper. I think it is public. Everyone is nodding. My staff can send me the page number.

CHAIR: I am not running a protection racket for Qantas. I fault Qantas more than anyone in this building, apart from Senator Sheldon.

Senator McKENZIE: Oh, don't you do that.

CHAIR: If anything came under Mr Joyce's fingers it would be very questionable anyway. Let's just find out.

Senator McKENZIE: You still all vote against bringing Alan Joyce before the Senate to answer questions.

CHAIR: Not me. I don't get a vote. I don't even like the man.

Senator McKENZIE: We're on a unity ticket there. Has any other department, agency or authority ever expressed concerns regarding safety in relation to the serious lack of air traffic controllers and increasing the number of traffic information broadcast by aircraft events?

Mr Harfield: Before I answer, I want to correct that last bit that you said. The traffic information broadcast by aircraft is an additional protocol that we put into place when we have a service variation in order to ensure safety is always maintained, because we actually set up what we call a temporary restricted area around the area to help protect. I want to make that clear. Going back to your original question, places like CASA always make sure, with the oversight, about any concerns they have; therefore we need to ensure that we provide the relevant information to show—

Senator McKENZIE: I know you have a lot of technical language, but the reality—what we're talking about, these types of events—is where pilots of the aircraft are no longer talking to the air traffic control tower; they're just talking to each other.

Mr Harfield: That is not correct, Senator.

Senator McKENZIE: Are you sure?

Mr Harfield: Absolutely.

Senator McKENZIE: Why don't you explain what you are talking about?

Mr Harfield: When we have a service variation in en-route airspace—it is not necessarily the tower—where we don't have the qualified air traffic controller to provide the service, we set up what is called a temporary restricted area. We have a person to sit there, an operational person, who monitors the airspace and decides whether somebody can enter the airspace or not, and manage. At the same time they provide a flight information service, which is no different. We add an additional protocol, which is the traffic information broadcast by aircraft. That means that the aircraft need to broadcast their position, no different to when they are flying into class G or some regional ports. It means there is an extra layer of safety because instead of the air traffic controller, the person, being the only person who knows what's going on, it's making sure that everyone—

Senator McKENZIE: Mr Harfield, let's be honest: the aircraft is saying, 'Cooee, I'm in this space.' Other aircraft are going, 'Oh, better not fly over there; there's another plane'—

Mr Harfield: But they're not allowed to.

Senator McKENZIE: They refuse to fly under those conditions; isn't that correct? You've set up a system that our airlines refuse to fly under.

Mr Harfield: In some cases they make the decision, and it's the operational decision of the airline where they do. Some airlines, and aircraft, do fly through. It's their choice.



Senator McKENZIE: Mr Harfield, I have one final section of questions. I know other senators are keen to get on with it. We have traversed today's failure, which has effectively shut the country down, as no-one can get in or out of Sydney airport because two people didn't rock up for work today. We have the ongoing issue over multiple reports of the culture of bullying and harassment in your organisation. You trot in here and give us the same lines year in, year out. We have the training debacles. For how long have you been CEO?

Mr Harfield: About eight years.

Senator McKENZIE: Eight years. What is your remuneration?

Mr Harfield: I refer you to our annual report because it is reported in there. It is in the order of $950,000 total remuneration.

Senator McKENZIE: I think you will find it is over a million dollars.

Mr Harfield: No, it is not what is reported.

Senator McKENZIE: It might not be what is reported but—

Mr Harfield: No, it's not.

Senator McKENZIE: Are you going to quibble with the committee the difference between getting paid a little over a million dollars and a little under a million dollars? That is incredible because, Mr Harfield, you are overseeing an absolute—

CHAIR: Shambles.

Senator McKENZIE: An absolute shambles of a show, and you are being paid in excess of a million bucks. That is double what Prime Minister Albanese is being paid. It is akin to what Mr Moriarty is paid, the head of the Department of Defence. My point is: this guy cannot get one KPI right. The Australian public is forking out just over a million bucks a year for the privilege of this disaster. Given the performance of your organisation over recent years, how would you rate your own performance?

Mr Harfield: Looking at the overall performance of the organisation, I would give it a 'B'—considering that we are continuing to change the system to adapt to a different environment. It is about continuing to work through those issues.

Senator McKENZIE: Are any bonuses attached to that salary?

Mr Harfield: No, there are not.

Senator McKENZIE: What about clauses that reduce your package should you or your organisation not meet the KPIs and benchmarks that are frequently set?

Mr Harfield: No, there are not.

Senator McKENZIE: The minister cannot reduce your salary if you fail to live up to her statement of expectations?

Mr Harfield: No, because that would be a matter for the board. The board could make that decision. However, we removed any sort of incentive payments or bonuses as a result of changes to our remuneration structure a few years ago.

Senator McKENZIE: When is your job up for renewal?

Mr Harfield: Next month.

Senator McKENZIE: Have you had any conversations with the minister about reappointment?

Mr Harfield: No, because the board makes a determination and a recommendation to government in the cabinet process.

Senator McKENZIE: Has your chair, or your board, sent that recommendation to the minister?

Mr Harfield: That is my understanding, yes.

Senator McKENZIE: What is their recommendation to Minister King about your reappointment?

Mr Harfield: That is a matter for cabinet.

Senator McKENZIE: Well, it is not before cabinet. I am asking about a decision of the ASA board. What was the decision of the ASA board—

Mr Harfield: They made a recommendation to reappoint me.

Senator McKENZIE: Wow! Next time we will have to have the board here because you are taking the rope and running as hard and fast as you can with your million-dollar salary while you are presiding over an absolute shit show—let's be frank. And your board is reappointing you, despite the fact that, on every metric of what would be a successful chief executive officer's behaviour, you are failing. So that has gone up to Minister King?

Mr Harfield: My understanding is that it is in the cabinet process.

Senator McKENZIE: Minister Brown, do you think this guy needs to be reappointed? After everything you have heard, estimates in, and estimates out?

Senator Carol Brown: The government has made its expectations clear to Airservices Australia on the point. The government also expects it to ensure a safe working environment. We know that aviation has not been delivering the outcomes Australians expect, with higher cancellation rates and more delays to services. The position is now part of a cabinet process, and I cannot respond to that.

Senator McKENZIE: No. But you could tell your senior minister that you have been here, that you have seen what a debacle it is, and that she should not take the board's recommendation, or at least make the board attach improvements in KPIs to salary. Mr Harfield is on next to a million bucks. It is double the prime minister's salary, and the accountability just isn't there.

Senator Carol Brown: The Australian government has made their expectations clear to Airservices Australia. I cannot comment on your question; it is part of the cabinet process.

Senator McKENZIE: Can I get the chair from ASA here?

CHAIR: You certainly can, next time round. You have made your point clear. Senator Ciccone.




Quote:CHAIR: Let's go straight to Mr Mitchell. If you've got an opening statement, please table it. Let's go straight to questions.

Senator RENNICK: I want to ask this of the Office of the National Rail Safety Regulator, but I'll put it to you and if it's the wrong department, it's the wrong department. Between 2014 and 2022 there were 322 collisions between trains and cars, 49 serious injuries and 39 fatalities. I've been contacted by constituents who believe that trains should have better lighting, have you got a view on that? Can you give us an update?

Mr A Mitchell : We have a number of investigations regarding train fatalities: one that has been published and one that will be published later this week. We have a safety study which is specifically on heavy vehicles and train interactions, and there have been a number of fatalities there. That safety study has a number of recommendations and that's likely to be released within the next month. To your point, it will contain recommendations and also evidence based on some of the factors that we've seen that are consistent—visibility being one, and also the nature of the track with visibility lines et cetera. That will go to the safety study. It's due to be released within the next month or month and a half.

Senator RENNICK: And it touches on the lighting issue?

Mr A Mitchell : It does touch on the lighting issue. There has also been work done by ONRSR when it comes to lighting issues, which is perhaps best directed to Peter Doggett.

Senator RENNICK: Thanks for that, and I look forward to getting the report.


Quote:Senator CANAVAN: Section 66(1) of the Sydney Airport Demand Management Act 1997 says, ‘There is to be a Compliance Committee for Sydney Airport.’

Ms Werner : Yes.

Senator CANAVAN: But there isn’t one, and there hasn’t been one for nearly four years. How is the government in compliance with this act of parliament?

Ms Werner : The facts that you state are correct.

Senator McKENZIE: The question remains.

Senator CANAVAN: Has the department asked for any advice from the Attorney-General on this section of the act in the continuing absence of a compliance committee?

Ms Werner : I don’t think we’ve asked that specific question.

Senator CANAVAN: Maybe if you could take that on notice. This is an act of parliament, and your job is to implement acts of parliament. It doesn’t say the minister ‘may’ or ‘can’; it says, ‘There is to be a Compliance Committee for Sydney Airport.’ So what is the excuse for not creating a compliance committee?

Ms Werner : As I said, given that we are in the process of reforming what the compliance committee will do, it was considered appropriate to wait until that work is complete before reappointing the compliance committee.

Senator CANAVAN: Just to be clear: has the department advised the minister that it’s preferable not to-

Ms Werner : No.

Senator CANAVAN: So you’re not blatantly in breach of an act of parliament, because you have said a number of times that it was decided that it wasn’t worth establishing, or not appropriate to establish this committee, while this reform process goes on. Who made that decision?

Ms Werner : The department has made that decision.

Senator CANAVAN: Not the minister? The minister hasn’t said, ‘I don’t want’—

Ms Werner : No, not the minister.

Senator CANAVAN: How has the department taken upon itself to not do something that this parliament has said there must be? This parliament has said, ‘There is to be a Compliance Committee for Sydney Airport’. I don’t see how you’re not—

Senator McKENZIE: Under what power have you done that?

Senator CANAVAN: Yes.

Ms Purvis-Smith : I understand the question. I think, as Ms Werner explained, given the work undertaken in relation to reforming compliance and issues around this issue, decisions were taken not to instate the compliance committee. Also, there was a lot of feedback from previous members of the compliance committee that it wasn’t effective. So we are doing a lot of work to look at how it can be effective.

Senator CANAVAN: I don't think that helps; in fact, it makes the situation worse. It sounds to me that the department decided, 'This won't be a very effective body, so we just won't create it.'

Senator McKENZIE: 'We won't set it up.'

Senator CANAVAN: But the act of parliament says that there is to be one. It's not up to the department to decide that.

Ms Purvis-Smith : We are looking at ways of setting it up when we're looking at the compliance work that we're currently doing.

Senator CANAVAN: I think this is a matter that has to be looked at a bit more seriously by somebody. I don't think we should get in the habit of departments deciding they can ignore acts of parliament, as you clearly have in this case.

Senator McKENZIE: Have you let the minister know that this is the department's decision, Mr Betts?

Mr Betts : I think it's now on the public record, so this will be wrapped up in their wider consideration of the full process. - Confused

Senator Chisholm: Based on the timing, it did expire under the previous government if the dates were correct.

Senator CANAVAN: I'm making it very clear. I think, from the evidence we've received, that it doesn't sound like it's been an explicit decision of the minister—if we can trust the advice and evidence we've been provided with here. The department said they'd made the decision to not comply with this particular act. I just want to be very clear: has the department, at any time, advised the minister or written to this minister or a minister in the previous government—

Senator McKENZIE: Any minister—not Catherine King but the minister in the previous government.

Senator CANAVAN: to say, 'We know that section 66(1) of this act says "this", but we've decided "this".' Has that happened?

Ms Purvis-Smith : I'd have to take that on notice.

Senator CANAVAN: I definitely think this needs to be—sorry, I'm not making a political point. I think it's very important for the parliament to know that the laws we pass are implemented by the departments and agencies established for that purpose.

Senator McKENZIE: Just on that, I would like you to table or supply the committee with internal documents to the department showing when and how that decision to not comply with the act was made.

Ms Purvis-Smith : We'll take that on notice.

MTF...P2 Tongue
Reply

Senator Fawcett takes on top brass on Taipan bollocks decision. - Rolleyes

Courtesy Sen Fawcett YouTube channel... Wink


Quote:52,854 views Feb 27, 2024

Senator Fawcett questions the Department of Defence regarding the state of Australia's retired fleet of MRH-90 Taipans, which the Government has chosen to destroy instead of donating to Ukraine.


MTF...P2 Tongue
Reply

Additional Estimates - QON published??

According to the RRAT Committee Additional Estimates webpage, there are (so far) 281 QON published for Betsy's Dept and subservient Agencies: https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Bus..._estimates 

Here's the list of relevant QON for the DARD and agencies:

Airservices:

Quote:31 https://www.aph.gov.au/api/qon/downloade...onNumber31

32 https://www.aph.gov.au/api/qon/downloade...onNumber32

33 https://www.aph.gov.au/api/qon/downloade...onNumber33

34 https://www.aph.gov.au/api/qon/downloade...onNumber34

35 https://www.aph.gov.au/api/qon/downloade...onNumber35

36 https://www.aph.gov.au/api/qon/downloade...onNumber36

37 https://www.aph.gov.au/api/qon/downloade...onNumber37

38 https://www.aph.gov.au/api/qon/downloade...onNumber37

39 https://www.aph.gov.au/api/qon/downloade...onNumber39

40 https://www.aph.gov.au/api/qon/downloade...onNumber40

41 https://www.aph.gov.au/api/qon/downloade...onNumber41

42 https://www.aph.gov.au/api/qon/downloade...onNumber42

43 https://www.aph.gov.au/api/qon/downloade...onNumber43

44 https://www.aph.gov.au/api/qon/downloade...onNumber44

45 https://www.aph.gov.au/api/qon/downloade...onNumber45

46 https://www.aph.gov.au/api/qon/downloade...onNumber46

47 https://www.aph.gov.au/api/qon/downloade...onNumber47

48 https://www.aph.gov.au/api/qon/downloade...onNumber48

49 https://www.aph.gov.au/api/qon/downloade...onNumber49

126 https://www.aph.gov.au/api/qon/downloade...nNumber126

127 https://www.aph.gov.au/api/qon/downloade...nNumber127

128 https://www.aph.gov.au/api/qon/downloade...nNumber128

129 https://www.aph.gov.au/api/qon/downloade...nNumber129

130 https://www.aph.gov.au/api/qon/downloade...nNumber130

131 https://www.aph.gov.au/api/qon/downloade...nNumber131

132 https://www.aph.gov.au/api/qon/downloade...nNumber132

133 https://www.aph.gov.au/api/qon/downloade...nNumber133

Quote:Question

1. How many TIBA events occurred in the past five years?
2. Can you please provide the date, times (hours and duration) and locations of all TIBA events that occurred over the past five years?
3. Please provide the details of the number of services disrupted by each event.
4. Please provide the cumulative total of the hours of TIBA events for each calendar year for the last five years.

134 https://www.aph.gov.au/api/qon/downloade...nNumber134

135 https://www.aph.gov.au/api/qon/downloade...nNumber135

The DARD:

Quote:63 https://www.aph.gov.au/api/qon/downloade...onNumber63

64 https://www.aph.gov.au/api/qon/downloade...onNumber64

65 https://www.aph.gov.au/api/qon/downloade...onNumber65

66 https://www.aph.gov.au/api/qon/downloade...onNumber66

67 https://www.aph.gov.au/api/qon/downloade...onNumber67

68 https://www.aph.gov.au/api/qon/downloade...onNumber68

69 https://www.aph.gov.au/api/qon/downloade...onNumber69

144 https://www.aph.gov.au/api/qon/downloade...nNumber144

Quote:Question

The Slot Compliance Committee hasn't met since 2020 and the appointments have lapsed. Section 66(1) of the Sydney Airport Demand Management Act 1997 says There is to be a Compliance Committee for Sydney Airport. But there isn't one.

1. How is the Government in compliance with this act of parliament?
2. Why has the Department not established the Slots Compliance Committee in accordance with the requirements of the Sydney Airport Demand Management Act?
3. What authority does the Department have to not give effect to legislation of the Parliament?

CASA:

Quote:96 https://www.aph.gov.au/api/qon/downloade...onNumber96

Quote:Question

Senator FAWCETT: I accept what you are saying and I welcome that-a good strong process-but I want to go back to the basis of principle. The whole discussion started with the fact that you believed that the operational test was a valid way to move forward as a third level of testing. Both you, I believe, and Dr Manderson made the comment that, should a pilot pass that operational test without any issues, they would be issued an aviation medical certificate without condition, note, restriction, endorsement et cetera. Is that still your principled position that you are seeking to find the evidence to work towards?

Ms Spence: We are working our way through that, and it will be the basis for a discussion paper, as Mr Marcelja mentioned. That is the intention. I don't think we have moved away from that, but we just need to make sure that we can actually turn the principle into a deliverable outcome.

Senator FAWCETT: You have highlighted in the evidence you have provided that there has been close dialogue with both the New Zealanders and the FAA. Have they indicated that they will change their position if you don't believe that you can reach that point?

Ms Spence: I think our issue is more around how we come up with a repeatable test. At this stage, we haven't had any conversations with the FAA or New Zealand to suggest that they would move away from their positions. But, again, we can take on notice if there has been any feedback along those lines.

97 https://www.aph.gov.au/api/qon/downloade...onNumber97

98 https://www.aph.gov.au/api/qon/downloade...onNumber98

Quote:Question

Senator FAWCETT: [...] So my last question then is, can you please provide, on notice, details of your progression, leading to your legislative instrument, so that industry will have some understanding of the sort of time frame that we're talking about, given that this was supposed to be resolved last year and we're now pushing into 2024.

99 https://www.aph.gov.au/api/qon/downloade...onNumber99

100 https://www.aph.gov.au/api/qon/downloade...nNumber100

101 https://www.aph.gov.au/api/qon/downloade...nNumber101

145 https://www.aph.gov.au/api/qon/downloade...nNumber145

Quote:Janet Rice

Question

? General Aviation Maintenance (GAM) Group operates a Turbo Commander, a Grand Commander AC680, and Shrike Commander AC500S. Are these planes allowed to operate on a daily basis in Austtalia over heavily populated areas?
? Please provide the total number of aircraft using leaded fuel flying over Brisbane.
? How many piston engine aircraft using leaded fuel have used Brisbane and Archerfield airport in the last 12 months? Please issue a table with a weekly breakdown of numbers, movements, plane type, age, operator, and destination for the last 12 months.

146 https://www.aph.gov.au/api/qon/downloade...nNumber146

147 https://www.aph.gov.au/api/qon/downloade...nNumber147

211 https://www.aph.gov.au/api/qon/downloade...nNumber211

254 https://www.aph.gov.au/api/qon/downloade...nNumber254

255 https://www.aph.gov.au/api/qon/downloade...nNumber255

MTF...P2 Tongue
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 5 Guest(s)