Pel-Air, party donations, and air safety. An inexplicable coincidence?
Conditional kudos to The Australian today for bringing something that might seem inexplicably coincidental in terms of political donations and hitherto secret lapses in the public administration of air safety in this country into the national mainstream media.
The story, by Anthony Klan, is invisible actually quite hard to find on the newspaper’s site, but has been shared on Google+ so here is the gist.
LISTED airline Rex has been unable to explain why it made unprecedented, massive donations to political parties two years ago, at the same time as an investigation into the crash of one of its aircraft was being conducted.
Last month, Deputy Prime Minister Warren Truss called for the reopening of an investigation into the ditching of a Pel-Air plane carrying six passengers into the ocean near Norfolk Island in 2009, after systemic “errors” were found in the initial report. Pel-Air is a fully owned subsidiary of Regional Express, or Rex.
The investigation into the crash, which involved one serious injury, took the Australian Transport Safety Board almost three years to complete but did not mention 57 breaches or “serious deficiencies” at Pel Air found by regulator the Civil Aviation and Safety Authority.
Until 2012, the only political donation Rex had made was $3486 to the ALP in the year to June 2004. Then between July and November 2012, the company donated $250,000 of shareholder funds to the federal ALP, $95,700 to federal Nationals and $40,000 to the Liberal Party, marking it as one of the biggest political donors in the nation.
Rex spokeswoman Alicia Chapple refused to comment yesterday when asked why the airline had made the donations, whether they were related to the Pel Air investigation, or whether Rex welcomed the reopening of that investigation.
The donations have raised additional question marks because Rex has repeatedly described the airline industry as being in crisis, stating it was “beyond crisis”, and highlighting the “graveyard” of collapsed rivals in its last annual report.
It was unclear why it had donated $250,000 to the federal ALP when shortly afterwards, ahead of the 2013 federal election, the group warned the aviation industry would struggle if the ALP were re-elected.
While the story has been circulated today to an apparently select group of recipients, it may have been first published late last year.
However when stories by Mr Klan are searched for they lead to this page, which is a mixture of old and recent, none by Mr Klan, although further adventures with Google turned up this article, about political and community donations by Rex and its failed competitor in Queensland, Skytrans, dated yesterday 19 January and quoting the same figures for Rex donations as the invisible hard to find story shared on Google+.
(Finding what you really want on The Australian’s cutting edge website is journalism’s equivalent to searching the southern Indian Ocean for MH370. You just know it’s there, somewhere.)
Should we be able to find it, any subsequent Rex response to the story about its generosity to a Labor party which was hell bent on driving rural aviation into ruin together with the live beef export industry will of course be published here.
In the meantime, and that could be a long time, let’s assume that this astonishing outbreak of political generosity was just a brain fade on the part of the airline, or that a data input error turned $2.50 into $250,000.
Please login below to comment, OR simply register here :
Thank you for registering, we have just sent you a confirmation email, which includes your new password to be entered below.
As the saying goes: Follow the money trail.
Political donations are a legal form of corruption. Doesn’t everyone agree?
It’s morally corrupt for a company to be handing wads of money to the political party that is supposed to be investigating it.
Wasnt those years a time when the passenger subsidies for regional routes being dropped or scaled back ?
I imagine the local airlines are looking at the $2.5 bill subsidy given to city and regional train services and want only $10 million or so ?
Hypothetically there could have been pressure to make a donation or else face bigger financial penalties. Either way there’s a smell of off fish in the air
There is no valid reason to have political donations at all.
Companies sending copious amounts of money to politicians can never be good.
If these ‘donation’ payments were banned, then the politicians would have to revert back to the old way of campaigning… at a grassroots level.
But for Rex airlines to be sending suitcases worth of cash to politicians who are supposed to be investigating it is sickening.
….quelle surprise! Who says the country is not in need of an ICAC at the Federal level?
Well,
No real surprises there then.?
This adds a financial aspect to the many other factors highlighted on these pages, both by Ben & other contributors,
relating to REx, Pel-Air & various Government & military agencies.
It starts to make the suggestions that the FDR’s on the Pel-Air Westwind have already been removed (& possibly replaced with faked-up substitutes) seem almost plausible…..?
QLD is a State where anyone old enough is quite used to “brown paper bags” changing hands.(See Annastacia Palaszczuk’s ALP Campaign Speech)
The fact that Rex was recently given QLD intra-state air routes leading to the demise of a Qld based airline, Skytrans,and the loss of 63 jobs in Cairns will raise no eyebrows amongst we QLD cynics. The fact that Premier Newman is also riding around QLD in a REX Saab while campaigning simply adds to the speculation.
No this is not an ALP advertisement, we note that the majority of the REX donations went to the ALP.
For those who have been following PelAir saga you maybe interested in this from P9:
24. Jan, 2015
Back in the day.
The commendable last minute Hitch articles in Australian Flying are always worth the time, the last published 23/01/15 very neatly sums up the re opening of the Pel-Air investigation. The analogy of a ‘Fisher King’ wound is apt, but IMO stops just of the approaching the ‘big’ issues, for it will not only be the GA sector which suffers. The Pel-Air story will become another toxic, festering wound in the moribund remains of Australian aviation and international credibility. The story of flight nurse Karen Casey will shortly come into the public domain and present an almost unbelievable, but sadly true picture to the world of the depraved practices eschewed by the legal, regulatory and accident investigation systems. The Senate inquiry clearly, unequivocally identified the collusion between the regulator (CASA) and the investigator (ATSB), the cynical disregard for ICAO Annexe 13 reflected in the 1700 registered differences; the open disdain for the condition imposed by an Act of parliament; but worst of all; denied the world the lessons to be learnt from the accident.
The failure of the life vests still remains on the shelf, gathering dust. You do realise that the failed life vests almost caused the deaths of all; had it not been for the unselfish actions of the Norfolk Islanders and a large dollop of luck all could have perished that night. Inconveniently they did not.
What the wider world will make of this and how it will, ultimately affect Australian international credibility remains to be seen; on thing is certain, the Indonesian investigation of the Air_Asia has declined to enlist the assistance of the traditional ally, in no uncertain terms.
It has been suggested (by the wise owls) that many of the international readers may not fully understand precisely why the Pel-Air story is so desperately important to the health and well being of not only aviation in Australia but to that of the region. As the PAIN story teller and yarn spinner in chief, the job has been handed to me. In an attempt to get the message through I reckon one more attempt cannot hurt. But I must start at the beginning. So, are you sitting comfortably?; good, then I’ll begin. As all good tales begin with once upon a time and far be it from me to break with tradition:-
Once upon a time. Chapter 1.
It is uncertain when the blight first descended upon the Australian shores, some say ’twas always so, others have their own favourite version; you may go back as far as the DC 9 incident -(DC9)- or be as modern as the Pel-Air event, some favour the devastating Lockhart River crash, for others it was the Seaview event – no matter; they all have a common thread.
My own personal favourite is the Lockhart River tragedy; I have borrowed from the PAIN archives a summary report -(LHR)- which, operationally at least, begs many of the questions which remain unanswered. To emphasise that the Australian treatment of this and many other fatal accidents I have appended the brief analysis of Coronial inquest into fatal accidents -(CFA)-which pretty much sum up, for the wide awake student, what the Australian industry has been battered into grovelling acquiescence. In short, as a friend described it – total embuggerance, of the first water.
Did I mention a common thread? Ah yes, there it is. In any of the many fatal accidents and nearly all of the damn near fatal ones, the pug marks of the Civil Aviation Authority (CASA) beast may be seen, going in both directions; both toward and away from the event. “Bollocks” cries the crowd, but children I can assure you, ’tis all true. Do the homework I have set, then think on the DC9 incident, which is as good a place as any to start a general discussion.
The CAA Flight Operations Inspector (FOI) absolutely insisted that the aircraft be stalled, which you’ll admit was a bit rich. Why did the pilots simply refuse? the old pro’s cry, well in truth, they did, loud, long and hard; but in the end it was not only their approval as check airmen on the line, it was also their careers. Management never argued back or supported the crew, why? you ask. Well that is a good question, but basically it was because that was commercial suicide under the age old threat of ‘tough love’ audits. And so, one of the traditional management edicts was issued “Just get it done this once, shut them up and get them off site, fast as you can”. So it came to pass, that with beating hearts and bated breath, our stalwart crew DC9 crew ‘got it done’.
Ignore the fact that they all came whisker close to death, ignore the fact that the aircraft was almost destroyed, ignore the fact that two candidates for Check and training disregarded every sensible tenet in the book and ignored the AFM; just remember that the FOI not only kept his job, but was promoted and ‘moved’ to quieter pastures. Such is the power of the Australian regulator. Not only was there never a formal inquiry or report, but the company assisted, hushing up of the entire story, repairing a badly damaged aircraft and keeping quiet; all in order to protect their operating certificates.
Now if you do your homework, I shall read the next chapter or two of the CASA saga next time we meet.
Thank you for coming today, please do not make any noise on the way out and leave your chocolate frogs in that old hat, by the door. Tomorrow, we shall attempt to unravel more of the mystique of the great Australian air safety smoke and mirrors saga.
You can of course get the whole story from the unspeakable Pprune. But you need to start at page 1.
Toot – toot….
http://auntypru.simplesite.com/413916860/2472067/posting/back-in-the-day
cont/- You can also see here that Ben & other members (PAIN included) of the IOS (Ills of society) may have actually struck a nerve:
The Skygods are bored??
——————————————————————————–
Apparently the regular Skygod readers had become bored with the Merged: Senate Inquiry thread & therefore the powers to be have decided to shut it down… Now this was despite the thread being currently the most popular on page one (active) of the ANZ&P forum and from my estimates (if the counter had been working) would have surpassed 800k views in recent days… Oh well PPRuNe is entitled to do what they must do…
However in the interest of some continuity and without upsetting (hopefully) the Skygods or the mods and as the PelAir insanity is really a GA issue the BRB (and some members of the IOS) have asked me to continue the Senate thread here…so here goes (big breath..) the last page of the 2nd infamous Senate Inquiry thread…
#2681 – Mooted messages?
#2682
#2683
#2684 – Episode 316: Beaker’s spin recycle machine.
#2685 – The Dolan prophesy.
#2686 – Episode 317: The lone muppet mission.
#2687 – What is that awful smell?
There is a definite odour of cynicism toward Australian involvement in the MH 370 affair creeping into the international press, previously only visible on Bloggs. The bloggers caught on early and responded cynically to the Dolan involvement. I wonder what they will make of it once Pel-Air becomes the international yardstick against which any ATSB involvement, no matter how far removed, will be measured in the future.
The steaming pile Muscles McComic and Doolally Doolan have left behind for the rest to clean up will take a while to shift. Even when it’s moved away the stench will linger despite the best deodorising efforts of the Word Weasels, spin doctors and the like. No matter, ATSB will investigate the ATSB, a clean sheet will be provided and all will be well once more. It’s a first class move as CASA gets to slither off the hook and out the back door – once again.
Then children, you shall see a lengthy queue forming around the block of all the regulators in the known world patiently waiting to buy their signed, Senate supported copy of Part 61 and the Beyond All Reason method of air crash investigations.
Absolutely stellar Australia; just ducking wonderful.
… ……….
#2688 – Feeling the PAIN!
Quote:
Absolutely stellar Australia; just ducking wonderful.
Exactly Ferryman what an embarrassing smear on the good people at the coalface that were initially involved with the surface search; & now with the underwater deep sea search; not to mention the huge waste of taxpayer funded resources if it all ends up for nought, especially if it comes out that we have either been misled or are in collusion with the Malaysians…
If that were to transpire then indeed the parallels with the PelAir cover-up would be complete…
While on the subject of the PelAir debacle I noticed the following has been posted courtesy of Australian Flying online – ATSB to feel PAIN over Pel-Air Investigation
Quote:
A confidential group known as the Professional Aviators Investigative Network (PAIN) has raised concerns over the ATSB review of the Pel-Air ditching report.
Late last year, the ATSB agreed to review the report into the 2009 ditching of a Pel-Air aeromedical flight at Norfolk Island, after a Canadian review highlighted anomalies with the investigation report.
In a submission to the Senate Standing Committee on Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport (RRAT) written in December, the group has criticised the ATSB’s decision to use one of their own people to lead the review.
“… the ATSB [has] elected to utilise Dr Michael Walker of the ATSB to lead the investigation,” the PAIN submission points out. “We believe that to be effective, any investigation should be conducted independently and not involve ATSB, the commissioners or staff if only to preclude any suspicion of ‘internal’ influence or external bias being raised.”
PAIN is also concerned that the terms of reference announced by General Manager Aviation Safety Investigations IanSangston do not go far enough.
“The terms of reference cited by Mr Sangston are narrow and only mention the ‘report’ itself. Whilst the industry acknowledges that the report was substandard, there is little doubt that the investigators conducted their work with integrity and within the prescribed guidelines. Indeed, the early stages of the ATSB report were exemplary and clearly directed toward serious safety recommendations being made.
“We believe little will be gained by utilising scarce resources re-investigating the original ATSB investigative ‘reports’.”
Instead, PAIN points the finger of blame for the original Pel-Air investigation report squarely at the both CASA and the ATSB and hints at deeper issues.
“Our greatest concern is that a deliberate, calculated manipulation of the national aviation safety system was attempted. It is not a ‘one off’ aberration. We firmly believe that the subsequent actions of both the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) and the ATSB were proven, by the AAI [RRAT inquiry] committee, to grossly pervert the conclusions of the ATSB investigation to suit a clearly predetermined outcome, thus denying industry valuable, safety related knowledge and information.
“It is the process by which these subsequent events occurred which demands an independent investigation conducted transparently in public. We believe the Senate Committee is the right reporting and oversight platform for that investigation. The committee Senators are well briefed, informed and have a firm, current understanding of what transpired during the events subsequent to the Pel-Air aircraft ditching off Norfolk Island.
“Further, the Estimates committee is very clearly ‘awake’ to the machinations of the various aviation oversight bodies and will not easily be misled or confounded by ‘technical’ issues.
“We submit that any other form of investigation will not withstand the scrutiny of industry experts; as the initial premise is fatally flawed
Well done PAIN… Hmm…perhaps more IOS members should follow the PAIN initiative??
I’ll be back…
http://www.pprune.org/pacific-general-aviation-questions/468378-norfolk-island-ditching-atsb-report-32.html#post8832324
I am an enormous fan of the pprune bloggers and of Ben in particular so my aim is simply to project my experience – which may not agree with some of the posted info / opinion.
I, and I suspect others raised the issue of lifejackets with the ATSB during the investigation but from my perspective the issue was not with failure but with the lack of provision, or access or use – I do not know which aspect failed but I am convinced that each of the three lifejackets in use that night inflated as intended and continued to support the lucky three. I have no firm recollection or opinion on the issue of the battery operated light but I thought they operated as they should have.
For me the problem was that 6 people survived with only 3 lifejackets in use – this point was ignored by the ATSB despite my submission highlighting this and for me, was symptomatic of the way in which it appeared that the ATSB conducted their investigation – or at least reported the findings. Blindingly obvious problems – comprehensible even to a layman were ignored – training of pilots, RVSM, never mind the issues later revealed by the 4Corners program.
It was apparent even to me early in the proceedings that the investigation was going awry. I can only imagine the frustration of the regular pprune contributors who exhibit a far more detailed understanding of the issues. So while the problem of lifejackets is only a relatively minor one – unless you happen to find yourself paddling in shark infested waters 6 km off Norfolk Island – it has pointed the way to the ultimate question, posed repeatedly by the pprune contributors – WHY? Karen, through FOI, I think, has found the reason – the reason why the investigation was conducted Beyond Reason – by following the money trail.
the Senaate committee -clearly experienced in getting to the bottom of air safety issues now needs to complete their work
Please login below to comment, OR simply register here :
Thank you for registering, we have just sent you a confirmation email, which includes your new password to be entered below.