[Peetwo]

 FER-balls & ADS-Bollocks -

Supp QON cont/-

18.

Corporate Services Division

Sterle

Functional and Efficiency Review
At the previous Estimates in May the Secretary outlined some of the recommendations of the Functional & Efficiency Review conducted into the Department by KPMG:

Can you update on what has happened with that review since May?

Are you able to indicate if Cabinet has concluded its consideration of the report?

Have any of the 18 recommendations referred to last time been accepted by Government?

If yes,

which ones?

do any recommend outsourcing of existing Departmental functions? Details?

do any recommend insourcing of existing outsourced functions?

What has happened with the Airservices recommendations?

Are there any recommendations that relate to the Australian Rail Track Corporation?

If yes, do any relate to changed ownership structures? Details?

Are there any recommendations that relate to Infrastructure Australia?

If yes, does that relate to the governance structure of IA?

What other recommendations are there?

What is the expected timeframe around decisions by Government from this review?

&.. CASA QON 143-145 - ADS-B:

Senator XENOPHON: I am. I am very close. Can I just say that if aircraft fly below cloud cover, visually—if aircraft do not have ADS-B, they have to fly visually—correct?

Mr Carmody: Yes, they have to fly visually. That is correct.

Senator XENOPHON: The point that Dick Smith has made to me just again today is that that poses a risk to pilots. There has never been a case of a mid-air collision in this country involving aircraft in clouds—is that right?

Mr Carmody: I did see a quote to that effect. I assume it is correct; I have heard that.

Senator XENOPHON: He has expressed a concern previously and again today that requiring pilots who cannot afford to install ADS-B to fly visually below clouds itself is problematic from a safety point of view. Is that something you have assessed?

Mr Carmody: Not to my knowledge. I can take that on notice and see whether we have. I do not know the answer to that, I am sorry.

---

Senator XENOPHON: My final question is a follow-up. The base of your assertion is that it might be more expensive in a few years time, and that did not work for flat screen TVs or other technology.

Mr Carmody: Different technology. But that is just an assertion in the same way as it is an assertion that it will get cheaper, if I may, by AOPA.

Senator XENOPHON: And that generally happens with new technology?
Mr Carmody: It might.

Senator XENOPHON: Could you get back to me on that. Thank you, Chair, for your patience.

---

NX Written - 28/10/16: What empirical or other data does CASA have to ground the claim that that ADS-B prices will go up as a function of time? Please table this data.

ASA QON 159 - ADS-B:

Senator XENOPHON: How many general aviation aircraft have complied with the ADS-B to date?

Mr Harfield: I cannot tell you exactly. What I can give you is the statistic that for all IFR flights 87 per cent have been equipped and, for those that are operating below 10,000 feet, 60 per cent or 6 out of 10 aircraft have already equipped. VFR aircraft do not have to comply with the mandate—380 of those have actually self-equipped because of the benefits associated with it. As we approach the mandate, we have talked to the 70 top GA fleet that have not equipped and by that stage we are expecting to have 92 per cent equipped. Out of 931 airframes that are yet to equipped with ADS-B 50 per cent of those airframes do less than two IFR flights per month. If the 200 most active of those equip we will have 99 per cent of all flights ADS-B equipped by February.

Senator XENOPHON: That does not take into account all of the GA IFR aircraft at all, does it?

Mr Harfield: No, it is not saying that is all of them. I am saying they are the statistics that include GA IFR aircraft.

Senator XENOPHON: We do not know at this stage what percentage of GA aircraft have got ADS-B?

Mr Harfield: We do. I can provide that to you.

MTF...P2