VOCA

An aviation researcher, writer, aviation participant, pilot & agricultural researcher. Author of over 35 scientific publications world wide.

Categories

Good reads

Oil Prices

#ozaviation

casa and the National Audit Office – Safety Compliance???

Question is, has #casa met this, particularly the relationship to the FAA/ ICAO audit in 2008 and now the 2013 ASRR audit.

That is the big question and the #casa corporate plan and it’s KPI’s, which do not have a metric to give them credibility and usefulness when measured against the #asrr recommendations.


 

4th Apr 2012, 11:42   #1 (permalink)
Join Date: May 2010
Location: More than 300km from SY, Australia
Posts: 823
casa and the National Audit Office – Safety Compliance???

This makes for a good read and what improvements have actually been made between the release of this report in 2002 and 2012.Aviation Safety Compliance Follow-Up Audit

I have extracted just a principle recommendation:

Quote:
Casa and surveillance – Aviation Safety Compliance Follow-up Audit by Australian National Audit Office in 2002.

The objectives of this follow-up audit were to determine, in respect of the issues addressed by the 1999 audit recommendations, whether:
• CASA has made satisfactory progress to improve its aviation safety surveillance and compliance activities; and
• the introduction of new strategies for further improvement is being appropriately managed.
Due to the scale of the changes to CASA’s Aviation Safety Compliance activities since the 1999 audit, the ANAO adopted an issues-based approach and incorporated the 1999 audit recommendations into five main themes: risk identification; surveillance; enforcement; resources; and corporate governance.
As was the case with the 1999 audit, the follow-up audit focused on the surveillance and compliance of organisations that CASA has certified to:
• operate aircraft for prescribed commercial purposes (Air Operator’s Certificates (AOC) operators); and
• maintain, design or distribute aircraft and their components (Certificate of Approval (COA) operators).
The follow-up audit methodology included consultations with a range of key personnel in CASA’s Head Office in Canberra and at its various locations throughout Australia; consultations with the Department of Transport and Regional Services (***ARS); examining comments made by members of the Aviation Safety Forum; and examining documentation held by CASA concerning its surveillance and compliance activities.

Overall conclusions

Overall, CASA has improved its management of aviation safety compliance since the 1999 audit, particularly in areas such as the identification of risks at the operator level; the frequency and coverage of surveillance; and enforcement of the Act. CASA has adequately addressed the majority of the recommendations from the 1999 audit and has partially implemented the remaining relevant recommendations.

Risk identification

CASA has improved its means of identifying and prioritising risks to aviation safety at the operator level. The Safety Trend Indicator (STI) is a useful tool for doing this. It will improve further with the introduction of STI version 2.
Recognising the potential increased risk to safety posed by financially marginal operators, CASA has targeted its financial viability assessment (FVA) process according to the areas of perceived greatest financial risk.

Summary

However, the ANAO considers that CASA has not improved its means of identifying and prioritising risks to aviation safety at the sector or industry level.
Progress with the development and implementation of the Safety Intelligence System (SIS) has been overly protracted. There is much that CASA can do to improve its analysis of aviation safety data to help to identify emerging risk issues and trends; And to apply the results to CASA’s strategic decision-making about where to best allocate its resources to achieve required performance.

Again – WELL Mr. casa???

Up-into-the-air is online now Report Post Edit/Delete Message Reply
Old 4th Apr 2012, 12:39   #2 (permalink)
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Alabama, then Wyoming, then Idaho and now staying with Kharon on Styx houseboat
Age: 52
Posts: 1,437
ANAO, ANAL, CASA?

Quote:
However, the ANAO considers that CASA has not improved its means of identifying and prioritising risks to aviation safety at the sector or industry level.
Progress with the development and implementation of the Safety Intelligence System (SIS) has been overly protracted. There is much that CASA can do to improve its analysis of aviation safety data to help to identify emerging risk issues and trends; And to apply the results to CASA’s strategic decision-making about where to best allocate its resources to achieve required performance.

What a shock, not. Not a lot of change in 10 years!! No surprise, the same spin doctors are there hiding in the cracks still spinning, recycling spin and then spinning again!.
I would like to have a look at this (SIS). Can anybody provide a link to it, or evidence that it even exists? Most likely whatever it was it would have been shelved once the ANAO left the building. Then down the track when they get pinged again out it comes, rebadged with a new name!

Quote:
CASA has improved its means of identifying and prioritising risks to aviation safety at the operator level. The Safety Trend Indicator (STI) is a useful tool for doing this. It will improve further with the introduction of STI version 2.

Again, sounds like an interesting sort of tool/matrix perhaps, especially STI Version 2? Does it or did it ever exist? If so I would love to take a look. Anybody got any links or anything?

Maybe Senator X can request a thorough and comprehensive review of STI and SIS? Or at least request some historical data produced by these systems along with statistical proof they work? Have these systems been risk analysed as an effective regulatory tool – surely they would have, and the results maintained on file for compliance and accountabity purposes? Certainly an ‘operator would be expected to do so??

And speaking of spin (aka pony poo), I really enjoyed the government response to recomendation 10 of the senate inquiry last year:

Quote:
Recommendation 10
Quote:
The committee recommends that the Minister for Infrastructure
and Transport provide a report to Parliament every six months outlining the progress of the Civil Aviation Safety Authority’s (CASA) regulatory reforms and specifying reform priorities, consultative processes and implementation targets
for the following 12-month period.

Response

The Government does not support this recommendation.
The Government notes that progress with the regulatory reform
program is already reported to Parliament through various forums
including CASA’s annual report, briefing and information provided at Senate Estimates hearings and through CASA’s regular meetings with industry stakeholders. Regulatory reform activities, including consultation undertaken, are detailed on the CASA website and in the Explanatory Statements and Instruments registered
on the Federal Regsiter of Legislative Instruments.

I rest my case. The Minister does not want to be personally involved nor share in any ‘accountabilty’ for this mob of ratbags, and the ratbags likewise do not want to share or accept any accountabilty.

This picture describes the lot of them:

TICK TOCK


Last edited by gobbledock; 4th Apr 2012 at 12:52.

gobbledock is offline Report Post Reply
Old 4th Apr 2012, 14:43   #3 (permalink)
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Permanently lost
Posts: 1,652
Given that the shambles that CASA appears to have become has occurred over the lifetimes of several parliaments of differing persuasions I don’t expect anything of significance to change or, despite the attempts by Sen. Xenophon, anything will be raised in this parliament.

In other words, both sides of politics have aviation skeletons in their closet.

Gobbledock, please understand the first duty of any public servant is to protect their minister from ever having to take personal responsibility for anything that may occur on their watch. However, the responsibility for allowing this situation to be case rests entirely on the public for we haven’t demanded any personal responsibility from our ministers for years. We blindly accept the current situation rather than attempting to do anything about it.

PLovett is offline Report Post Reply
Reply