[Peetwo]

Dear Pip - L&Ks CM..

Via the AP email chains:

Sent: Friday, January 19, 2024 2:29 PM
To: 'Spence, Pip' <Pip.Spence@casa.gov.au>; 'Marcelja, Andreas' <Andreas.Marcelja@casa.gov.au>
Subject: FW: Webform submission from: Freedom of information request > Page components top [SEC=OFFICIAL] 

Dear Ms Spence and Mr Marcelja 

I write in my personal, private capacity.    

Attached is the response I received to an FOI request I submitted to get access to documents identifying the individual who authorised the addition of the question about ethnicity to the questionnaire to be completed by applicants for medical certificates.   (That FOI request, as with all of my FOI requests, are submitted in my personal, private capacity.) 

I should have learnt – long ago – not to be surprised at the many and varied ways in which CASA AvMed demonstrates that it is blissfully unaware of or insouciantly indifferent to the basic concepts of governance and accountability in the performance of the duties of public officials in a Commonwealth agency.    It turns out that - at least according to AvMed - no official authorised the addition of the question and thus there are no documents identifying that individual.   It was instead “a consensus decision made by the Senior Medical Officers (SMOs) at their annual meeting in February 2023”.       

It is therefore little wonder to me that AvMed-related documents are published and amended without your knowledge and without any record of what individual official authorised that action.   (As you should by now be aware, my application for access to the document evidencing the current determination of the CAD as a ‘third tier’ colour vision test returned no results, as did my application for access to documents identifying the official who authorised, and the official who actioned the decision to authorise, a particular change to the disgraceful, now-withdrawn Form 420.   Perhaps those decisions were made by a vote and communicated for action, orally.)     

I will now make an FOI request for the agenda/minutes/records of the 2023 annual meeting of the SMOs.   I note that less  CASA time and effort would have to be diverted to dealing with AvMed-related FOI requests if AvMed was subjected to proper governance, such that members of the public could ascertain, on the face of AvMed-related documents, who authorised the publication of the content, what changes have been made to the document and on whose authority, and when those changes were made and why.    That would obviate some FOI requests, either because the information sought by the FOI applicant would already be public or because the governance process would ‘trap’ actions that would otherwise end up precipitating controversy.   People’s interests are directly and profoundly affected by the bright ideas AvMed foists on them from time to time.    

That said, the primary purpose of my email is to deal with a substantial safety issue.   

Given the legion of studies which have produced data showing that sexual minority groups are at greater risk of suicidality than heterosexuals, when will CASA add questions about an applicant’s sexual preferences and gender identity to the medical certificate application questionnaire?   Just as cardio-vascular risk is relevant to the safety of air navigation and a candidate’s ethnicity is relevant to the assessment of that candidate’s cardio-vascular risk, suicidality is relevant to the safety of air navigation and a candidate’s sexual preferences and gender identity are relevant to the assessment of that candidate’s suicidality risk.   Consistency and the safety of air navigation demand the addition of the questions.  

Regards 

Clinton McKenzie  

FOI Decision PDF

MTF...P2