Login / Join
Immigration Daily News Australia's Border Protection operation needs auditing and reviewingAustralian Immigration Daily News
Breaking Australian immigration news brought to you by Migration Alliance and associated bloggers. Please email help@migrationalliance.com.au
- Font size: Larger Smaller
- Hits: 3810
- 5 Comments
Australia's Border Protection operation needs auditing and reviewing
Links to evidence and copies of documents, letters and briefings to MPs that relate to this story can be located at the bottom of this page.
Recently Migration Alliance has been approached by a retired pilot (14,000 hours+) who is now working as a Registered Migration Agent. Let's call him Agent X.
Most of Agent X's flying was involved with maritime airborne surveillance, the majority of which was involved with customs interdiction.
To cut a long story short, Agent X has had a pretty frustrating time attempting to get the current contractors (let's call them Contractor C) and Border Protection (Michael Crawford), to even listen to some more advanced, more effective, more cost effective radar search techniques.
In so doing Agent X has also identified a serious lack of core surveillance knowledge by Contractor C.
Agent X says:
I think it might be the old old story in aviation. The less the contractor has to pay to train its crews the more profit/flying hour they make.
Agent X has sent presentations and briefings to Border Protection. Scarily, Border Protection's evaluation of the ideas was made on the basis of a 30 minute telephone call. They subsequently told Scott Morrison (we have a copy of the letter) that the ideas had been ' fully and carefully evaluated'.
There is little doubt in Agent X's mind that a very expensive government contract should be getting a much better 'bang for the buck'. Agent X has sent the briefing and suggested letter to Sean Conway – who is Dennis Jensen’s senior electoral officer. Agent X will check on today, Monday, whether they have actually sent the letters.
We would like to reinforce that despite many letters, briefings and 4 power point descriptions of the various techniques available, the Minister was told that all had been analysed carefully. The truth is that Agent X had no face to face meeting. Their decision to, effectively do nothing, was based on a 30 minute phone call.
Further during that phone call there were alarming gaps in core knowledge shown by the so-called experts.
Even now they are refusing face to face meetings with a federal MP (if accompanied by me) to discuss the proposals in depth.
Here's a summary of the fascinating and yet scary scenario which has been reported first-hand to Migration Alliance:
At other end of the telephone call at Border Protection there were 2 people. One was the expert in airborne surveillance techniques. She is the person ultimately evaluating my ideas and had spent many years working for Contractor C as an observer.
Often it is the detail that counts. It may not seem a lot to most readers, but one way to find out exactly the level of core knowledge (of maritime airborne surveillance) is to ask whether you should plan a radar search at endurance speed (longest time on task for fuel used) or range speed (cover most distance for fuel used).
If you ask this question of a novice (or one who does not understand) almost invariably the answer will come back endurance.
That is the answer she gave, " because you want to stay on task as long as possible".
When I told her that is wrong because what you need is for the radar search annulus to cover the maximum amount of sea for the amount of fuel used the response was:
"So I got it wrong Agent X"
I am afraid yes, I said. "But in your position you should not have".
Not, by any means, her fault, but an indication of what must be an abysmal lack of training standards of the airborne observers. It is only a suspicion but I have come to believe that this contract is being driven not by the contractee (Border Protection) but the contractor (Contractor C).
Look again at the above example. What is better for Contractor C commercially; To charge for hours with a relatively low fuel usage, or charge for less hours at a higher fuel usage?
The whole operation needs auditing and reviewing.
Briefing-Dr-Jensen_20150324-013021_1.pdf
Comments
-
Tuesday, 24 March 2015
NEW INFORMATION JUST IN: "I think that the operation has been been set up by the contractor and that nobody in the DIBP has the knowledge to standardise and supervise it" says a specialised search coordinator from British Air Force, who served with the Airforce for 21 years. This included 3 years on exchange in Australia. This person says he then went on to fly for Cobham UK as a pilot and search coordinator. This means that he is qualified as a pilot and observer. He applied to Cobham Australia as both a pilot and observer on numerous occasions and did not even get an interview.
Are Cobham frightened of someone getting in there and finding out just how basic the operation is? -
Tuesday, 24 March 2015Whislt I can't provide a comprehensive response to the issue raised, only just quickly skimmed through the docs, two things come up immediately:
On the issue of making a full assessment based on a 30 minute conversation - we know that the department (along with its border protection counterparts now) is willing, able and poised to make life-changing refugee status decision through a short phone call, followed by a longer phone call if they it's appropriate and deserving - what makes us think that a 30 minute, decision-making phone call in the context of border surveillance is going to achieve a different outcome?
The second point is the notion that ''Operational AND security constraints means they've reached the limit to their ability to discuss things any further''. that is, 'thank you for your concern but there we can't talk about it, it cannot be discussed any further and that's the end of it - comforting? not really - more like a reflection of incompetence, political expediency and an overwhelming sense of doon...
This is the modus operandi of a system which is dysfunctional, of a government which feels threatened and passes laws to stop ANY challenge to its decisions and the authority to make them, to maximise secrecy and minimize leaks of any nature on the basis of national security, AND they're in dissarray - they need to look tough in a highly militarised and secretive way "...this is no longer JUST the orderly movement of people in and out of Australia, this is the protection of our BORDERS; thank you for your concern; we're on top of it...'
Frightened, dazed and confused are the three words that come to mind... I'm sure we'll hear more on this as days pass and hopefully we can make a positive contribution to the Office of the Assistant Minister - or perhaps we'll receive a notice to mind of our business - who knows how these games are being played? other than they are beginning to look (and smell like) a perpetual dog's breakfast...
As an industry and as practitioners we need to be assured that there is a timely and transparent scrutny of such issue so that the system is able to respond appropriately, but it worries me that these and many other equally important issues could be passing us by if we weren't as vigilant as we are... Thank God for all Agents "x" out there and MA - lots of work to be done yet. -
Tuesday, 24 March 2015
Let us not forget that despite all the 'fuss and bother" at the moment there are some very good people crewing these aircraft, who can and will be able to do a much improved job with the excellent machines and equipment they have - providing that they get the training they deserve.
-
Monday, 13 November 2017
The saga rumbles on. Border Force still have not bothered to listen to and evaluate the advanced and proven techniques.
The contractor has not even granted me an interview for a job as a search coordinator on the SAR aircraft on emergency standby at Perth airport - no more than 20 minutes from my home.
This despite some 14000 hours of mostly surveillance flying during which I was involved in numerous SAR missions. When asked why? The Contractor's HR manager cited an imperfect computer screening system and that I was at a disadvantage because I was qualified in 2 aircrew surveillance roles (Pilot and observer/navigator) rather than just the one!!!??
Immigration blog
The latest news on this is that Agent X has already spoken to Sean Conway and Dennis Jensen is now in the process of arranging meetings and discussions with Senator Cash. Agent X is told that Senator Cash 'will now take a serious interest'.