Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Senate Estimates - 2017-18.
(05-20-2017, 12:18 PM)thorn bird Wrote: A little piece of historical fluff.

Senate debates
Thursday, 14 November 2013
Adjournment – Aviation

6:52 pm

I come to the Senate following a career largely in the military and aviation over a number of hears. Having flown aircraft ranging from the venerable DC3 or C47 Dakota through to the most modern military helicopters and GA aircraft and flown all around this country, I am aware of the importance of aviation to Australia and to Australia’s community.

In South Australia alone there are some 400 regional airports and airstrips enabling passenger transport, freight and important services such as the Royal Flying Doctor Service to communities. Mount Gambier in South Australia, for example, is one of our busiest regional airports. It directly affects the employment of over 230 people and contributes some $29.7 million to the gross state product. Adelaide Airport employs over 16,500 people and adds $1.6 billion to the GSP. Nationally, the impact is even greater: some $13.5 billion directly to the economy, some 149,000 jobs, a further $11 billion into the economy because of the supply chain and another 97,000 jobs through that. So it is a significant contributor to our economy and to the way our society runs.

But it is a sector that is under some stress at a range of levels. Certainly for the larger operators—the high-capacity regular public transport operators—the global factors are having a huge impact. We have seen just this week, in fact, Qantas making decisions about maintenance that have affected many people here in Australia and also affect our sovereign capability to retain an engineering capability in country. Domestically we also see pressures—and not only upon the GA sector. You need to realise that aviation is a broad scope of people from your ag operators who spray crops to your aerial firefighters; your rescue services and air ambulance operators; the people who do the coast watch operations, the mail runs, the bank runs—there are a whole range of people who contribute to our society through aviation.

Many of them are under significant pressure, whether that be through excessive regulation or through the application of regulation that makes life difficult for them. Significantly, we saw that earlier this year with the release of the report into the Pel-Air accident at Norfolk Island, where we saw a number of issues with the regulator and ATSB that need to be addressed.

So it is a vital part of our economy, and I am pleased to say that the coalition has been listening to industry both prior to and post the election. We have had a number of meetings with industry, ranging from the one-man workshops through to larger engineering firms, smaller flying operations and large corporate organisations, to understand the pressures on them and how we as a government can try to take some of those pressures off. In the aviation policy put forward by the coalition there are a number of points that go to this. Certainly the topic of this week has been a lot about the abolition of the carbon tax and its impact on aviation fuels and businesses—and we are talking hundreds of millions of dollars of impact on the aviation sector here in Australia—but some of the other key points in the policy include looking at establishing a high-level external review of aviation safety and regulation in Australia which closely maps one of the recommendations coming out of the Pel-Air report. There is support for regional aviation, including new and better targeted en-route rebates. There is also an increased focus on recognising the importance of airports in Australia. Not only do we have to focus on things like Sydney’s second airport; but the government is also very aware of the fact that the airport infrastructure we have has its primary use as an airport. Whilst the commercialisation and leasing of some of the secondary airports has meant that there are non-commercial activities there, the key focus must remain on the aviation capability that that represents and the potential for that to grow to meet future demand in coming years. The government also has a priority on revitalising the general aviation sector through an action agenda and making sure that things like security measures, which can be an onerous imposition on airlines and airport operators, are in fact risk based and only to the extent necessary.

There are other aspects to the policy, but one of the key ones has been the review of regulation. I am pleased to report to the Senate that today the Deputy Prime Minister and the Minister for Infrastructure and Regional Development, the Hon. Warren Truss MP, who has responsibility for aviation, announced the independent review of aviation. He announced the terms of reference and the expected outcomes as well as the panel.

I want to pick a few of the outcomes that this review seeks to achieve and to deliver to the sector. The review will examine and make recommendations as required on the aviation safety roles of CASA, the Australian Transport Safety Bureau and other agencies. It will examine and make recommendations on the appointments process and criteria applied for key aviation safety roles within CASA and ATSB, again stemming back from some of the recommendations coming out of the Pel-Air report about making sure we have the right people with the right competence. That is task-specific competence. People may be very good and very competent, but for a particular task they need both qualifications and experience in that task to do the role.

It is also looking to review the implementation of the current aviation regulatory reform program, which has been going on an awful long time and has been creating much uncertainty in the sector. In South Australia, for example, as operators for the state government’s emergency medical service contract look to bid for that new tender, they are uncertain which rules they need to bid for. If the state government is not going to allow for regulatory change as part of the contract, it makes it very difficult for a company to bid—not knowing the standards to which they have to provide aircraft, numbers of aircrew, rosters et cetera.

The review will also look at the cost impacts on industry. That is one of the most important points. The government is looking to make sure that the aviation industry is not just safe but sustainable—that it is a viable industry sector for the future of Australia. Importantly, the review will also provide options to government for improving the oversight and enforcement of aviation regulations, including the rights of review, because we do see cases—some running right now—where companies have been shut down and, months after that, are yet to have their opportunity in the Administrative Appeals Tribunal to put their case as to why they believe that decision was unfair. So there is a requirement to make the application of regulation appropriate.

The government’s whole focus on deregulation means that we have the regulation we need to be safe but that we make sure that it is quality, that it is informed by people who understand the industry so that it is best practice and, importantly, that its application not only maintains safety but also makes sure that, where there is an equal safety case but one has a more commercially viable application, that is the one that the regulator should be looking to implement so that the industry is sustainable.

I am pleased that Mr David Forsyth AM is going to be chairing the review panel. He is well-known in the aviation industry in Australia as the chair of Safeskies and the former chair of Airservices Australia and has some 30 years experience in safety management. He will be joined by Mr Don Spruston, a former Director-General of Civil Aviation at Transport Canada and Director-General of the International Business Aviation Council and Mr Roger Whitefield, former Head of Safety at British Airways, adviser to Qantas and former UK Civil Aviation Authority board member.

One of the important things that we are aware of is that aviation is not just the large airlines and the high-capacity operators. It also includes, as I said before, people right through the gamut of aviation. So I am very pleased to see that Mr Phillip Reiss, President of the Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association, will be involved in the review to make sure that the views of the general aviation sector are going to be taken into account.

The panel will be providing its report to the minister in May 2014, and there are opportunities for the industry at all levels to make submissions. I am pleased to see that the minister’s release talks about the fact that, while the review will seek the views of the CASA board and senior management staff, they will consult closely with industry. I encourage anyone involved in the aviation industry to take this opportunity to have their say to shape the future for a viable and safe aviation industry for Australia.

Check the date, then ask yourself the question:

WHAT'S HAPPENED?? Anything? Anything at all? Even a hint of anything?
(05-19-2017, 11:42 AM)Peetwo Wrote: Senate Estimates: Daily program & ANAO into M&M's stable - Rolleyes

[Image: IMG_0066.JPG?as=1&mh=600]

Here is the link for next week's RRAT Committee Budget Estimates.. Wink :

Quote:Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport (PDF 136KB)          
Infrastructure and Regional Development: Monday, 22 May and Tuesday, 23 May 2017
Agriculture and Water Resources: Wednesday, 24 May and Thursday, 25 May 2017
Cross-portfolio Murray-Darling Basin Plan matters: Friday, 26 May 2017        

miniscule 6D Chester's aviation portfolio agencies are appearing on Tuesday, starting straight up with Murky's Aviation & Airport minions at 9am and finishing with Hoody and his ATCB from 4:30 pm till the dinner break at 6pm:
Quote:[Image: RRAT-Estimates-23-May.jpg]
Hmm...ANAO at 11:15 am ? OMG! Confused  - Murky has added the ANAO to his department?? - We're all doomed... Big Grin

MTF...P2 Tongue

Update: 23/05/17

Slight change in today's proceedings with AMSA appearing first before Murky's Aviation & Airports division - PDF 57KB .

Also  Barry O'Braces will be back in the Chair today after being absent in the abbreviated (adjourned by 2045) departmental session yesterday. So other than the AMSA change it is all systems go by 0945 this AM... Wink

MTF...P2 Cool
Off track PNR - OTS at Estimates 23/05/17. - Confused

Remember this? Senate Inquiry: Airport & Aviation Security MKII
Quote:Video two probably should have the heading 'money talks' when (about 02:30) AK reveals that the reason his 2nd report was also rejected, by the customs airport manager at Sydney airport...

[b]"..We were told, quite simply, that the commercial costs involved in complying with the Customs Act would be onerous..(sic), too onerous for the now privatised airport corporation (i.e. SAC)..."[/b]  

"That was all she wrote"...  -The final video signals the end of the public part of the hearing and this was due in large part because Barry-O (with the braces on  ) began to 'mechanically' ask for name, rank and serial numbers...

You know there is trouble afoot when Barry-O goes (01:42)...

"..let me place on the record my interest..(sic)..I am so disturbed by the evidence of this witness.."  

Okay now reflect on the following video segments from the OTS evening appearance at Estimates on 23/05/17:


To make matters even worse this, hole in the mouldy security Swiss cheese, was reported on in the Oz today:

Quote:Manchester attack: security flaw ‘risks new jet tragedy’
[Image: 7d8d8f6765018b0b7575f8d4dba520db?width=650]
Debris from crashed Russian Metrojet in the Sinai in October 2015.

The Australian

12:00AM May 25, 2017

[Image: joe_kelly.png]
Political reporter


Coalition senators have sounded the alarm on a security flaw that could expose passengers to a ­repeat of the incident that downed a Russian Metrojet flight over Egypt in 2015 killing 224 people.

The vulnerability in Australia’s border security regime was exposed by the Office of Transport Security that confirmed there was nothing to stop people with drug or organised crime convictions from working at airports or ports.
“At this stage our legislation precludes us from taking into ­account those issues,” OTS ­executive director Sachi Wimmer told a Senate estimates hearing on Tuesday night.

Ms Wimmer confirmed that only some criminal convictions would prevent individuals from being granted an aviation or maritime security identity card. The card allows unescorted access to sensitive areas of transport hubs.

Some of the adverse offences include murder, kidnap, hostage taking, aggravated assault, treason, terrorism, espionage as well as hijacking and destruction of an aircraft. But Ms Wimmer confirmed there was no legislative barrier to stop security cards from being granted to those with drug or organised crime convictions.

“The eligibility criteria around criminality is limited and so it very much depends on the offence,” she said. “If we had an offence that had been through a court and there was a conviction and it included organised involvement in some kind of criminal activity we think that would be a sensible thing to capture.”

About 30 holders of the ID cards would no longer be eligible to work in sensitive areas if the Senate passed amendments to close the loophole.
Ms Wimmer said a decision to cancel the card of a convicted drug smuggler had been overturned by the Administrative Appeals Tribunal in 2014. “The criminal history included convictions with significant terms of imprisonment for offences involving ... the production, possession and supply of a narcotic substance and also related to the importation of a significant quantity of cocaine using airfreight,” she said.

Liberal senator David Fawcett told The Australian the evidence highlighted a vulnerability in Australia’s national security framework. He said the “strong assumption” behind the Metrojet disaster was someone with privileged access at Sharm el-Sheikh airport had “bypassed the security and put a device on the plane”. “Clearly that is a risk,” he said.

Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport Legislation Committee chairman Barry O’Sullivan said it was harder to get work at a day care centre than as a baggage handler at one of the nation’s key airports. “The standards there are 10 times higher than for an individual who wants to wander into the most secure areas of our airports and ports generally,” the Queensland Nationals senator told The Australian. “The risk is superhigh. This parliament needs to step up and for once do what is as bloody plain as the nose on our face and belt this out of the park.”

The government’s legislation to close the security loophole is yet to pass the Senate but it has struggled to reach agreement with Labor on the wording of its amendments to reduce criminal influence at the borders.

The OTS told Senate estimates that, if the government’s tougher rules were adopted, there would be greater scrutiny of applicants.

Oh no miniscule 6D_NFI_Chester, yet another potentially embarrassing clusterduck which falls within your area of remit ...  Blush   

TICK TOCK miniscule!

MTF...P2 Cool
Let me explain the security farce if I may

A Gobbledocks lament;
The security discussion in the Senate, and elsewhere, is a waste of time and breath. Everyone knows that the OTS do their little annual audits of airlines and airports and look at bullshit such as 'incorrectly coloured maps', spelling mistakes and incorrect page numbers in an Operators TSP, check whether the retarded hamburger flipper in the airport taxi rank Macca's has received 'security training' and can answer the question; what does the acronym 'ASIC' stand for. Then they, the OTS, sneak steak knives, buttplugs and other assorted 'trickery' into carry-on baggage and attempt to fool the security screeners in a never ending game of cat and mouse. But wait there is more - they, the OTS, hide their ASIC in their top pocket and wander around airside hoping they won't be 'challenged' by the myriads of busy baggage handlers, pilots, engineers and refuellers busting their asses to get the plane out on time due to the immense operational pressure that greedy aviation bonus hungry CEO's who couldn't give a flying fuck about aviation security and safety put on their people!! At last they, the OTS,  can finally issue a NCN to the poor Caterer up to his elbows in salad rolls and past use-by-date orange juice who is walking up the aircraft stairs and whom didn't question Inspector Plod about his 'ASIC that was not visible'. As if there isn't enough bullshit that we have to endure just to pay the mortgage and remain employed in a once grand but now rooted industry! With the never ending and constantly growing long list of mind numbing, irrelevant,  taxpayer wasting complete and utter bullshit security regulations it's no wonder everyone is pissed off. Especially when all of our major airports sit on the coastline and any half baked semi connected criminal could sit in a Tinnie out on the bay with one of the thousands of 'hot' RPG or SAM's that can be purchased. Hell, you could sit in the same Tinnie in Botany Bay with a frickin slingshot and hit some of those aircraft as the barrel over your head at 50 ft AGL.

Security? Security my hairy ass. It too is a complete joke. Hundreds of millions of dollars spent each year to keep the dopey Stockholm syndrome public feeling safe and comfortable. Hell I'm sure even 6D - the perfectly manscaped king of dopiness, is even fooled by this 'comfort blanket' crap called aviation security.

Tick 'security checks' Tock
Worthwhile or Inutile – can’t decide.

My tote board has Carmody at odds on to inherit the Dorian Gray portrait; he seems to want it, although only he and the gods know why. A fully fledged bureaucrat; from boot straps to bow tie at least will not need a crash course on ‘system’ or status quo and have to become a part of the ‘establishment’; he has the ‘T’ shirt, cap and complementary coffee mug. There is a strange wait and see expectation over this man’s tenure and there are some ‘better’ indications of intent than one could expect, but then after that Flash-git (whatshisnanme) almost anything would be an improvement.   

Carmody does well at Estimates; the exchange on the drones topic being a good example. He most certainly stood rock solid on the classic CASA approach to all things – more regulation and prosecution, determinedly refusing any general responsibility while building a wall of steel around any possible come back on CASA from the operations they manage. O’Sullivan and Sterle both arced up, I just wonder though, was that sheer frustration at the standard CASA stone wall tactics rather than 100% anger caused by the drone situation. Carmody was, to me at least, making a good case for the below 2Kg being a public safety and security case, rather than purely a CASA responsibility. It was a good point, well made and intelligently argued. He may well have scored better, rather than infuriating the Senators had he left the grey ghost in the box. A classic error made by every DAS in living history – believing that they actually need Aleck. Carmody could do himself, industry and the RRAT a great favour by simply firing this man. Carmody ain’t dopey, but letting Aleck get a toe into the waters of his administration would be an error – fair warning, say no more about it.

Quote:P2_edit: Some words & pictures which IMO more than adequately highlight why Carmody should note the "K" fair warning above: (Ref: CASA Hansard see HERE.)

P2 comment: The manic Dr A said: "...The need to act in a precautionary manner, as Senator O'Sullivan will know because we have dealt with this in other contexts, is very important..."  - The part in bold is (I believe) a direct reference to the CASA (Dr A) attempted embuggerance of Jabiru  - when Sen O'Sullivan  stepped into advocate on behalf of Jabiru (see HERE).  Like his continued influence with the DJ embuggerance - HERE - this again highlights how nasty & vindictive this Iron Ring parasite truly is... Dodgy

Because of the exchange above, Carmody saw the need to step in and try to put out the spot fire being fanned merely by the presence of Dr (Evil) A. However as you will see there was no placating the good Senator Sterle... Rolleyes :

P2 comment - Bring in the DAMP Man: Is it just me or does Dr A look like he just snorted the world's biggest line of coke? Perhaps Sen. Lambie's call for pollywaffle drug tests should be extended to shiny bum bureaucrats - Big Grin   

There are two very big ticks and one small one on the Carmody score sheet; the first being his approach to cabin staff reduction. Industry has been trying for – what twenty years – to adopt international standard numbers. Carmody gave it the nod; good stuff. The second is the ASRR has finally been acknowledged as being just a bit more than ‘an opinion’. I’d bet good ale that the good Rev. Forsyth and Carmody do not see eye to eye on every point; that is to be expected; but and hallelujah the ASRR is ‘live’ and there are discussions. If these two sane, experienced men can find a way to make the recommendations happen then Carmody will have done well for industry, his department and minister. The small tick is the CVD discussion with Fawcett. Carmody lost that round, Fawcett on points, by a long chalk. That said, you do get a glimmer of hope for the CVD troops. Lets hope common sense and solid evidence prevail – it should – but this is still the CASA we have all come to know so well.

There are whispers and indications that some of the dead wood is being slowly cleared away, the board seem to have paled into insignificance and to all intent and purpose Carmody seems to have the job by the throat. Well, if we are to be stuck with him at least we have an idea of pedigree and character. Pure, unadulterated ministry man, top flight bureaucrat  without a drop of aviation blood. Aye well, better the devil you know.

BRB 87% in favour of a watching brief and a little latitude without Aleck. 38% in favour of ‘watch only’, zero latitude with Aleck; 62% simply want an industry oriented reform DAS.

There are some interesting passages of play which I intend to study; the O’Sullivan/Sterle “no faith” being of great interest. Not certain if that was pure frustration with ‘CASA’ the outfit or Carmody as CEO. I’ll get to it when Hansard is published – words and music so to speak. Life would be so much simpler if the board had settled on Mike Smith – we could all just put our feet up and watch real reform take place; not the Rev. v the Establishment round 16.

Aye well; there it all stands, unresolved, irresolute and trapped within a device of it’s own making with the Pel-Air scandal looming ever closer and the shredders needing overhaul. Shane Carmody may well be the new public face of Dorian Gray – but the painting remains. A new DAS does not mean a new CASA and Carmody has already established a track record for ignoring history and refusing to correct the wrongs which still rankle and fester. A shining knight perhaps; but his horse is knackered.

Toot - toot.

P2 comment: Taking in all of the above, it is interesting to note the following exchange between the Chair and the ANAO's Ms Mellor... Confused

Quote:(Ref: ANAO 2nd segment Hansard)

CHAIR: Our committee, without going into detail, is contemplating reaching out to the ANAO to look at something else—a matter completely unrelated to Airservices. I just want to try to establish the parameters of what you do, particularly in light of some of the evidence today. If we have an agency or a government department about which we think there is a body of evidence that suggests they have failed in their primary function: that is, that all the glasses of water are full by eight o'clock in the morning—I do not mean glasses of water, but I think you know what I mean—is it within your power to examine that on our behalf? Would you accept such a request?
Update: Hansard & tabled docs etc.

Via the Parlinfo webpages:

Quote:Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport Legislation Committee
(Senate-Tuesday, 23 May 2017)
Or:  [Image: pdf.gif]Download PDF  
And from the RRAT Estimates webpage:

Quote:Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development

Index of Questions on Notice: (to be uploaded when available)
Answers are due 7 July 2017.

Tabled Documents
View File

Tabled Document No.1

Infrastructure spending by state 2013-14 to 2019-20, Question on notice from Additional Estimates 2016-17, received from the Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development, on22 May 2017.
(PDF 1014KB)

Tabled Document No.2

List of projects, received from Mr Mrdak, Secretary, Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development, on 22 May 2017.
(PDF 1249KB)

Tabled Document No.3

Opening statement, received from the Australian National Audit Office, on 23 May 2017.
(PDF 3806KB)

Tabled Document No.4

Correspondence from Dr Gate to Mr Carmody, Acting CEO of CASA, dated 20 March 2017, received from Senator Xenophon, on 23 May 2017.
(PDF 701KB)

Tabled Document No.5

Correspondence from Dr Gates to Mr Carmody, Acting CEO of CASA, dated 20 April 2017, received from Senator Xenophon, on 23 May 2017.
(PDF 1105KB)

Tabled Document No.6

Correspondence from Mr Carmody, Acting CEO of CASA to Dr Gates, dated 8 May 2017, received from Senator Xenophon, on 23 May 2017.
(PDF 826KB)

Tabled Document No.7

Opening statement, received from Mr Hood, Chief Commissioner of Australian Transport Safety Bureau, on 23 May 2017.
(PDF 1634KB)

MTF...P2 Tongue
The ABC is continuing to do aviation proud; the reporting and coverage of ‘matters aeronautical’ deserves our recognition and thanks.  The real truth is a shocker and it costs Australia a fortune. There may even be a few spare choc frogs about the place.

Nice one.
In regards to our alphabet soup aviation agencies, Sen Fawcett goes on record;

Senator Fawcett says that is disappointing, but not surprising.
"ATSB and CASA, time and again, in the face of quite specific and damning evidence that was drawn from their own records and their own internal documents, have essentially said nothing to see here, move on," he said.

People should sit up and take notice when Sen Fawcett speaks. He is a man who knows aviation. He also knows politics and he understands the void of bullshit that sits in between both. It is a tricky path for any mortal to navigate. But the man is on the right track, he has well and truly picked up on a poo scent and he is tracking it back to its Aviation House source!

I hope that one day in the future I can sit with Senators Fawcett, Xenophon, Braces, Sterle and others and raise a glass and finally offer up a toast to reform. We got there! But my fear is that we will be sitting in a dark pub drowning our sorrows over warm beer over which we have lost our 'thirst' Due to the announcement of a major Australian smoking hole on Australian soil. I hope I am wrong. I really do. Don't worry though, Barnaby and NFI 6D won't be aware it happened as they will be in a different pub celebrating their lobotomies and taking selfies of each other 'skinning the rabbit' at the urinals!

Apropos of SFA.

Had a chat with a BRB fellah who is ‘into’ politics – see’s the bigger picture and is able to explain to a political dunderhead the what and why for of what appear to strange things. He’s also not too bad at seeing the ‘big picture’; so an educational, entertaining coup[le of hours well spent. A lot of it don’t signify, but discussion of the transport ministry, the minister and associated always gets my attention. Seems that the government is up to it’s collective in alligators, the smallest of which is the aviation one. Many other significant problems, mostly of a true ‘political’ nature and to do with re-election occupy much time and demand much effort. Which leaves aviation short, add that to a minister who could not give a rats arse and you end up with the situation we have at present.

Yet there are some serious political points to be scored – and the ideal man to regain lost political ground is sitting about doing not too much. BarmyBaby could dig Daren 6D and the Nats out of a bad position into a starring role, simply by asking Fawcett to manage matters aeronautical for a while – Junior minister – that sort of thing. Even if it was just to get things back on track, that would free up the minister to do whatever it is he do do and gain some kudos for digging the Australian aviation reputation out of the crap it’s buried in. With a stroke of the pen – light from darkness and credit all around. I don’t know a lot about politics, but I do know that the light reflected from a golden ‘win’ shines on all. Makes perfect sense to me – more sense than being photographed in the loo, pissing on an industry’s concerns. There is a perfectly serviceable expert right there in the Senate, why not use him, to the betterment of all?  

Aye; when you need heart surgery, you don’t call in a plumber.

Toot toot -
Senators back to work: "A rolling stone gathers no moss" - Rolleyes

An oldy but a goldy "K" and definitely well worth regurgitating... Wink

Quote:Senate Committee releases damning report into Australia's aviation authorities
By Naomi Woodley

Thu 23 May 2013, 9:24pm

[Image: 4709746-3x2-340x227.jpg]

Photo: Pilot Dominic James was praised as a hero but later largely blamed for the crash in an ATSB report (Supplied)

Related Story: Report raises concerns over aviation bodies' competency
Related Story: Pilot 'a hero' for emergency ocean landing
Related Story: Six rescued after plane ditches into sea

A Senate Committee inquiry has cast serious doubt on the standard of Australia's air safety regulators, warning of systemic failures.

The committee has been examining the way the Australian Transport Safety Bureau (ATSB) conducts its investigations, and works with other safety agencies.

The inquiry was set up in the wake of a highly criticised report by the ATSB into the ditching of a medical evacuation plane in November 2009.

The flight, operated by Pel Air, ditched into the ocean off the coast of Norfolk Island after repeatedly trying to land in bad weather.

Remarkably, all six people on the Pel Air flight survived the crash, including the patient being taken from Samoa to Australia.

Captain Dominic James was initially praised as a hero, but after taking three years to complete, a report by the ATSB largely blamed him for the crash.

"It was quite unexpected to see that the focus of the investigation was solely upon me," Mr James said.

The Senate Committee has now delivered its own scathing assessment of that investigation.

It found there was little solid evidence to support the view that Mr James was to blame.
Independent Senator Nick Xenophon says the inquiry has found there were two internal reports by the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) showing it knew about broader safety and management problems at Pel Air.

The inquiry says the reports should have been provided to the ATSB, but were not.

"If they've stuffed up in relation to this, where else are they going wrong, because this raises very serious systemic issues," Senator Xenophon said.

"This report must not, cannot be ignored because the issues it raises are simply so serious."

Australian Broadcasting Corporation ...         
Audio: Senate scathing of air safety regulators (PM)

Liberal Senator David Fawcett says that has been referred to the Federal Police for further review.

"CASA actually have an obligation to make the ATSB aware that documents exist that are relevant to the investigation and to provide those documents," he said.

He and Senator Xenophon agree that the ATSB's report was seriously deficient.

"By ignoring all of the systemic issues, the role of the company, the role of the regulator, you get things like fatigue - by not covering those issues, there are very few if any safety lessons that came out of this report for industry," Senator Fawcett said.

"And it's those safety lessons that actually help prevent future accidents and those who are completely absent from this process."

The inquiry has made 26 recommendations, including redrafting the information sharing agreement between CASA and the ATSB, and re-opening the Pel Air inquiry.

The crash, and subsequent 90 minutes in the water left the flight nurse on board, Karen Casey, with serious nerve damage, psychological trauma, and unable to work.
She says the report must be acted on.

"It seems to be quite clear that there are big problems in our aviation industry," she said.

"The truth has finally been revealed."

Wider problems?

Mick Quinn, a former senior executive at CASA and an air safety expert, says the problems with the Pel Air investigation point to wider systemic failures.

"If we know there are problems with oversight of a particular operator, there's highly likely to be problems with oversight of other operators also," he said.

"So what don't we know - that's the major issue, and that affects everyone, not just Pel Air."

But Senator Fawcett says travellers on big commercial airlines should not be alarmed.

"But I do believe that there are significant improvements we could be making in other areas, where passengers such as people who travel on aircraft as an emergency patient or an air ambulance transfer could have much higher standards and I think industry have a role to play with CASA in determining how those standards should be derived and then enforced," he said.

The report does not vindicate the pilot of the medivac flight, but Mr James says the findings are still a relief.

"There were things I wish I did better on the night, but I don't believe that I operated in a vacuum and the Senate committee also feels the same way," he said.
Both the ATSB and CASA are standing by their actions.

Senator Fawcett says that is disappointing, but not surprising.

"ATSB and CASA, time and again, in the face of quite specific and damning evidence that was drawn from their own records and their own internal documents, have essentially said nothing to see here, move on," he said.

But both agencies say they will give the Senate inquiry due consideration.

Reading that makes you realise how little has changed since the damning findings of the Senate committee were first released - quite depressing really... Undecided  

Anyway on a positive note I see the RRAT committee have not wasted time getting down to business. Yesterday in the Senate at 1 minute past prayers it was tabled and agreed on:

Quote:Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport Legislation Committee—private briefing during the sitting of the Senate today, from 4.30 pm.

Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport References Committee—public meeting during the sitting of the Senate today, from 3.30 pm, to take evidence for the committee's inquiry into use of the Flag of Convenience shipping in Australia.

The PRESIDENT (12:31): Does any senator wish to have the question put on any of those proposals? There being none, we will proceed.

At about the same time the RRAT committee Secretariat announced on their inquiry webpage that there will be two public Senate Inquiry hearings to be held this Friday in Melbourne... Rolleyes
Quote:16 June 2017
Hmm...interesting, Sterlo & Barry O have been busy - TICK TOCK 6D... Rolleyes

MTF...P2 Tongue
IOS & BRB wish list

(06-14-2017, 08:03 AM)kharon Wrote: Apropos of SFA.

Had a chat with a BRB fellah who is ‘into’ politics – see’s the bigger picture and is able to explain to a political dunderhead the what and why for of what appear to strange things. He’s also not too bad at seeing the ‘big picture’; so an educational, entertaining coup[le of hours well spent. A lot of it don’t signify, but discussion of the transport ministry, the minister and associated always gets my attention. Seems that the government is up to it’s collective in alligators, the smallest of which is the aviation one. Many other significant problems, mostly of a true ‘political’ nature and to do with re-election occupy much time and demand much effort. Which leaves aviation short, add that to a minister who could not give a rats arse and you end up with the situation we have at present.

Yet there are some serious political points to be scored – and the ideal man to regain lost political ground is sitting about doing not too much. BarmyBaby could dig Daren 6D and the Nats out of a bad position into a starring role, simply by asking Fawcett to manage matters aeronautical for a while – Junior minister – that sort of thing. Even if it was just to get things back on track, that would free up the minister to do whatever it is he do do and gain some kudos for digging the Australian aviation reputation out of the crap it’s buried in. With a stroke of the pen – light from darkness and credit all around. I don’t know a lot about politics, but I do know that the light reflected from a golden ‘win’ shines on all. Makes perfect sense to me – more sense than being photographed in the loo, pissing on an industry’s concerns. There is a perfectly serviceable expert right there in the Senate, why not use him, to the betterment of all?  

Aye; when you need heart surgery, you don’t call in a plumber.

Toot toot -

No.2  Dear Senators can we have one of these please? Rolleyes

Quote:thorn bird - From the magazine "flying".

Amazing difference between the US and Australia.

Wink In the US legislating to guarantee aviation growth.

 Dodgy In Australia legislating to guarantee Aviations decline.

Quote: Wrote:Senate Introduces Flight Act of 2017

Sen. James Inhofe spearheads the GA-friendly bill as experts point to $100 billion in needed airport infrastructure improvements in the next five years.

By Jake Lamb 17 hours ago

[Image: jim-inhofe.jpg?itok=mNq682Oa&fc=50,50]Sen. Jim Inhofe (pictured in 2016) spearheaded the Flight Act of 2017 in support of general aviation airports and other aviation factors.
James Inhofe/Facebook

Infrastructure investments at U.S. general aviation airports may become a lot more flexible thanks to a bipartisan bill introduced by Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.) and Sen. Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.).

S.1320, the Forward Looking Investment in General Aviation, Hangars, and Tarmacs (Flight) Act of 2017, among other things, moves to reform Non-Primary Entitlement (NPE) funding, cut red tape for environmental reviews for GA airport projects, and designates certain airports across the country as “Disaster Relief Airports.”

Inhofe, a member of the Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee and a certified pilot with over 11,000 hours, boasted many positive reasons for the legislation.

“Our general aviation airports are vital to aviation safety and positively impact the efficiency of large commercial airports, emergency medical operations, law enforcement activities and agriculture and small businesses activities throughout the United States,” Inhofe said in an announcement on his website. “These airports also manage military-related air operations, which directly supports the readiness of our armed services. To enjoy these benefits, it is vital that our GA airports are equipped to handle their day-to-day demands.

“Oklahoma is home to 96 GA airports, which will need $303 million in critical infrastructure updates over the next five years. As a pilot myself, I know first-hand the needs of the GA community and the Flight Act makes a number of needed reforms to facilitate GA airport infrastructure investment. The Flight Act allows GA airports more FAA funding flexibility, expedites the environmental review process and incentivizes public private partnerships. This legislation builds upon past Congressional efforts to support GA airports and will ultimately grow the positive impact GA airports have on the larger airport ecosystem.”

Duckworth, who is also a pilot, said he also understands why small airports are a benefit.

“As a general aviation pilot, I know how important small and rural airports are to communities across the state of Illinois,” said Duckworth. “That’s why I’m proud to help introduce this bipartisan legislation with Sen. Inhofe to ensure these airports have the resources they need to support local job growth and economic development.”

Most see it as a step in the right direction because of how crucial infrastructure improvement is at GA airports.

"With U.S. airports in need of $100 billion in infrastructure improvements in the next five years, the Flight Act is a positive step forward in helping general aviation airports better serve their communities,” said Kevin Burke, president and CEO of Airports Council International-North America (ACI-NA).

The bill also received positive feedback from AOPA President and CEO Mark Baker and others.

“The Flight Act addresses the growing needs of our nation’s system of airports by providing the FAA with long overdue flexibility it needs to fund important projects,” said Baker. “Maintaining and upgrading runways, taxiways, and aprons and meeting the need for new hangars, helps keep airports and communities vibrant and competitive. This bill also takes a critically important step in recognizing the vital role that reliever airports play in natural disaster relief efforts.”

“We commend Sen. Inhofe’s unwavering commitment to general aviation as the Flight Act — among other things — will reinvest much-needed funding into non-primary airports across the country,” said Mark Kimberling, president and CEO of National Association of State Aviation Officials. “We look forward to continuing our work with the Senator and his colleagues throughout the legislative process and beyond to ensure that our national network of general aviation airports remains the envy of the world.”

Details of S. 1320, the Flight Act:
  • Reforms Non-Primary Entitlement (NPE) funding by giving GA airports more time to accumulate FAA funding for projects and ensures available discretionary funding originally set aside for GA airports remains available for projects at GA airports through a nationally competitive process.
  • Improves Project Delivery by extending to GA airport projects the same expedited and coordinated environmental review process used for projects at large congested airports. These reforms would empower GA airports with flexibility to devote needed resources to improving their infrastructure.
  • Establishes a pilot program for Public Private Partnerships at GA Airports to attract private sector investment for the construction of private hangars, business hangars or investments in other facilities so general aviation airports can grow as hubs of economic activity and job growth.
  • Designates certain airports across the country as “Disaster Relief Airports” and provides access to funding set aside for airports to use for required emergency planning activities, equipment, or facilities. This provision would help designated airports that lack the resources and personnel to adequately prepare for responding to disasters.
  • Clarifies Aeronautical Activity at Airports by ensuring that the construction of recreational aircraft is an aeronautical activity at airports.
TAGS: [/size]

P2 - Excellent catch Thorny how about we share it around... [Image: wink.gif]


The Alphabets, IOS, PAINCorp and other assorted GA Retrobates, tendentious bloggers etc. Wink
Estimates & drone inquiry update... Rolleyes

RRAT Budget Estimates report released:  

Quote:Budget Estimates 2017-2018 (May 2017)

View report - (PDF 250KB)

Aviation and Airports Division

2.21      The committee began by pursuing questions regarding pedestrian and cycling access to Brisbane Airport. Senators expressed an interest in ensuring that employees have safe access to the workplace via these lanes.[37]

2.22      The committee was advised that the Aviation and Airports Division is working closely with the ATSB and CASA to address any concerns about the use of drones. The committee was particularly interested in the use of drones in the vicinity of other aircraft and airports, the level of training provided to recreational drone pilots, and a prospective safety review of drones to be conducted by CASA.[38]

2.23      The committee inquired into the third runway being constructed at Tullamarine Airport and the extension of an existing runway. Officers of the department informed the committee that under the current master plan, 'everything will be in place around 2022' which includes the third runway running east-west and the extension of the current east-west runway.[39]

2.24      The committee also sought information on the construction of Western City Airport. The committee was advised of the tender process and prequalification details that would allow small companies to tender for aspects of the construction. Comparisons were drawn to the Wellcamp airport development and construction.[40]

Australian National Audit Office

2.25      The committee called the ANAO to estimates assist with its inquiries into the performance of Airservices Australia (Airservices). The ANAO conducted three pieces of audit work in relation to Airservices with its most recent Audit Report No. 46 of 2016–17 concerning the Conduct of the OneSKY Tender. The audits were undertaken following correspondence from the committee in the 44th Parliament raising concerns about the performance of Airservices. Immediately following the appearance of the ANAO, the committee called Airservices. The committee then called the ANAO back to clarify evidence before returning to Airservices.

Airservices Australia

2.26      The committee focused on the most recent OneSKY tender process and the ANAO's observations about Airservices' evaluation process which resulted in a higher price outcome.[41] In particular, the committee sought information about the ANAO's audit conclusions that the 'evaluation of tendered prices against the cost criterion was not conducted in a robust and transparent manner'.[42] According to the ANAO, it was 'not clearly evident that the successful tenderer offered the best value for money'.[43]

2.27      The committee pursued these matters with Airservices. It examined the phases of the evaluation process and the five criteria used by the tender evaluation working group to evaluate the proposals.[44] It considered conflict of interest issues and questioned Airservices about the role of the International Centre for Complex Project Management (ICCPM), the subject of a previous performance audit by the ANAO.[45]

2.28      Other matters raised with Airservices by the committee included the 38 international air traffic controllers residing in Australia who are currently on 457 or other visas. The committee sought information on the impact of recent visa arrangements on those personnel and was informed that Airservices was working with them individually.
[46] The committee questioned Airservices about aircraft noise monitoring as well as community consultation processes undertaken regarding aircraft noise including the regular airport and noise forums.[47]

Civil Aviation Safety Authority

2.29      The committee focused its attention on the safety of remotely piloted aircraft systems (RPAS) and amendments to part 101 of the Civil Aviation and Safety Regulations 1998 which commenced in September 2016.[48] The committee was informed that since September 2016, the CASA received 5,428 notifications from small commercial operators intending to undertake RPAS operations.

2.30      The committee sought an update on the review of aviation safety regulations in relation to the operations of drones announced by the Minister for Infrastructure and Transport on 10 October 2016. It was informed that the review was yet to start as the terms of reference were still being developed.[49]

2.31      The committee pursued questions about the safety of recreational drone use and sought information on the education program undertaken by CASA to target recreational users.[50]

2.32      Questions were asked by the committee about public safety zones around airports. CASA informed the committee that it is engaged in the National Airports Safeguarding Framework public safety zone discussions.[51]

Australian Transport Safety Bureau

2.33      The committee sought information on recent investigations, including in relation to the Pel-Air VH‑NGA accident off Norfolk Island in 2009. The committee was informed that the investigation will be concluded and the report released at the end of September 2017.[52]

2.34      Other questions related to the ATSB's A safety analysis of remotely piloted aerial systems report and the dangers of flying drones in the vicinity of other aircraft. Inquiries were also made into the investigation of the Essendon airport crash. The committee was advised that investigations are ongoing.[53]

Office of Transport Security

2.35      The committee sought information on the requirements needed to qualify for an Aviation Security Identification Card (ASIC) or a Maritime Security Identification Card (MSIC). The committee was informed of a number of qualifying requirements, particularly regarding previous criminal offences and the lack of discretionary powers to prevent those with a criminal record from obtaining a licence.[54]

2.36      The committee inquired into security designations at airports. The committee expressed concerns about the security risks posed by flags-of-convenience shipping and sought information on the lower threshold required to obtain a maritime crew visa (MCV) rather than a MSIC. It requested information and expressed concern over different agencies regulating the two qualifications.[55]

2.37      The committee was informed about new procedures at airports regarding electronic devices in carry-on luggage and additional screening at domestic and transiting airports.[56]

For those interested Hansard for last Friday's drone inquiry hearing: 16 Jun 2017 Melbourne, VIC (HTML & PDF)

Quote:CHAIR: Tell us all about that. You can come out swinging if you want to. I understand you are employed by Air Services Australia—they are good mates of ours! Let's get that out of the way. We had Senate estimates two weeks ago, and CASA was there. CASA's leadership have this view—I am going to be really careful and bite my tongue, here—along the lines of: bird strikes are a problem but it takes a lot of birds to give us a problem. They really did not coat themselves in any glory, in my humble opinion—in fact, my opinion is not humble; it is straight out there. Tell us all about what happened last week and similar events, because there is this view out there of 'she'll be right; don't worry about it.'

CHAIR: Thank you. I will go to Senator Back because of the firefighting aspect, but I just want to say this first. This committee is absolutely aware of the importance of RPAS for our nation—of everything that you have mentioned. But I want to put something in your minds, because you probably do not sit back and think, 'I will read Senate estimates Hansard because I am bored and I will find a spark there.' The new executive director of CASA, Mr Carmody, sat in front of us two weeks ago and tried to insult this committee, that we should not be worried about drones because we have not had a strike so far, and what is the big deal. Those are my words; you can check it out. I have no faith in him and he needs to get off his shiny backside with his high pay and start listening to people like you. This committee will not take a backward step. If he wants to roll up his sleeves and have a box, I will too! While CASA is full of some fantastically hardworking and committed people, I have no faith in the top end of that organisation's view of the world. I have got that off my chest now. Mr Carmody is going to hear more from us anyway, so do not worry. It will be reported back to him. I am sure he will be listening. He knows how to get hold of me. Do you get the impression I am not impressed with Mr Carmody?

Senator O'SULLIVAN: He can get on to you but not get on with you!

Gold, pure gold Sterlo.. Wink

MTF...P2 Tongue
Update: Drone Inquiry public hearings

Today's hearing has been cancelled:
Quote:23 Jun 2017 Cancelled [Image: pdf.png] [Image: pdf.png]

However the committee will not be resting on their laurels... Wink
Quote:26 Jun 2017 Sydney, NSW [Image: pdf.png] (program) [Image: pdf.png] (submissions)

[Image: program-26-June.jpg]

28 Jun 2017 Brisbane, QLD [Image: pdf.png] (program) [Image: pdf.png] (submissions)

[Image: program-28-June.jpg]

MTF...P2 Tongue
Budget Estimates QON index & AQON due 7 July - Rolleyes

Via RRAT Committee Budget Estimates webpage: Budget Estimates 2017-18
Quote:Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development
Index of Questions on Notice: PDF 661KB
Answers are due 7 July 2017.
MTF...P2 Tongue
(07-05-2017, 06:24 PM)Peetwo Wrote: Budget Estimates QON index & AQON due 7 July - Rolleyes

Via RRAT Committee Budget Estimates webpage: Budget Estimates 2017-18
Quote:Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development
Index of Questions on Notice: PDF 661KB
Answers are due 7 July 2017.

Update: AQON processed so far.  

Via email:
Quote:..Thank you for your email. We have now published all answers to the QONs that we have received, including some from the aviation safety agencies and the Department’s Aviation and Airports division. Please note, we are still awaiting responses for a number of the QONs within these divisions...

AQON so far:
Quote:1-5 Corporate Services

6-13, 166 Australian Rail Track Corporation

14-23 Infrastructure Australia

24-82, 167-170 Infrastructure Investment
PDF 490KB*

83-85 Policy and Research

86-90, 171 Australian Maritime Safety Authority
PDF 406KB*

91-100 Aviation and Airports

101-116 Airservices Australia

117-126 Civil Aviation Safety Authority

127-128 Australian Transport Safety Bureau

129-130 Office of Transport Security

131-149,172 Surface Transport Policy
PDF 296KB*

150-153 Local Government and Territories

154-160 Western Sydney Unit

161 National Capital Authority

162-165 Executive

*Incomplete, awaiting additional responses.

I have thanked the RRAT Secretariat for their efforts to process the available AQON in a timely manner. In my memory of published AQON from M&M's department this is by far the most AQON forwarded to the Secretariat by the due date.

However I do question the delay within the aviation safety divisions, I mean how hard is it to answer the bloody QON... Dodgy


MTF...P2 Cool

Forum Jump:

Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)