PDA

View Full Version : Caa Fee Increases: Beyond The Hue And Cry


trevorkd
30th Jul 2002, 21:38
Trevor Abrahams
Chief Executive Officer
South African Civil Aviation Authority


“Tell no lies. Claim no easy victories”
Amilcar Cabral, Guerrilla Leader, Guinea Bissau


The recent CAA notice of its intentions to increase the fees for the services and products provided by the CAA has understandably evoked considerable debate. It has unfortunately given rise to more vitriolic, misrepresentations and downright dishonesty than would allow for a constructive engagement on the issue. The reality is somewhat further from the “facts” which some have been pandered in the name of awakening the industry to challenge the actions of the CAA.

There can be no questioning the difficult trading conditions, which confront the industry as a whole and the potential threat that escalating costs across the board will decimate if not deal a deathblow to general aviation. The CAA has no such intention and the circulation of the discussion document on fee increases was intended to evoke a constructive debate rather than the tirades which obscure real issues and opportunities for reaching a common understanding and approach to these challenges. We remain committed to finding a working solution to obtaining adequate funding for an effective CAA from whatever plausible source we are able to identify.

“The past is malleable and flexible, changing as our recollection interprets and re-explains what has happened.” Peter Berger

The CAA was established in October 1998 as a self-financing autonomous regulator WITH the explicit support of the industry. Who may you say is the industry? I certainly met with industry representatives from CAASA, Aeroclub, AOPA, ALPA, etc., in the September 1998 CARCOM where I not only confirmed progress in establishing the CAA, but obtained approval for the new fees which were to be introduced in January 1999. Moreover, I personally met with these elected representatives and presented a 5-year budget (based on annual fee increases) to all these industry representatives, some of them now leading the charge against the CAA.

The forecast income from user fees and levy charges (fuel and passenger levies) do not differ significantly from what we are now proposing (see data below). Surprisingly, I did not get any petition or angry letter then from these leaders. Not only was the concept of an autonomous CAA funded by the industry supported by the industry leaders, but the estimated costs and consequent fee increases were shared with them without any of the rushing to the trenches, which we have recently seen in some quarters. These increases included a clear three-year staffing plan increasing the 104 staff from the DCA who moved over to the CAA to 265 in year three. These staffing levels were based on international comparisons given the deficiencies in the oversight exercised by the DCA as identified by ICAO in their assessment in 1997.

As the change from the virtual subsidy for our licenses, AOC’s, etc. by the taxpayer under the DCA to the industry funded autonomous CAA was extremely large, the government agreed to a declining subsidy phased out over three years, i.e. ending March 2002. While the initial 5-year financial model was based upon annual fee increases to make up for the declining state subsidy, no fee increases have been implemented since the fees published in 1998.

“The future has a way of arriving unannounced”. George F. Will

Notwithstanding the fact that the CAA remains understaffed (180 at present compared to the revised target of 251 for an industry as at present in RSA), the current situation as a self-funded organization is clearly unsustainable.
· There is no longer any government subsidy.
· There has been no increase in user fees since 1998 (look at what has happened to other fees since then).
· There has been no increase in the fuel levy (R0.015 per litre applicable to all non-scheduled aviation) since 1998.
· CAA staff levels have increased since 1998.
· The cumulative impact of inflation alone has increased costs to the CAA by approximately 33% since 1998.
So how do we meet our legislative and ICAO obligations with declining revenue in real terms? What did the industry leaders agree to in the course of the establishment of the CAA?

More: Click on headline banner "CAA FEE INCREASE: BEYOND..." and read further (www.caa.co.za)

Gunship
30th Jul 2002, 23:19
No problem 4 me ... but lotsa problems for guys like Coco Sali to renew their licences Trev ...

Last renewed my PPL in '79 ! :rolleyes:

freightboss
31st Jul 2002, 08:34
Being involved in the industry and more specifically in Africa, where ever increasing numbers of SA operators and ZS-registered aircraft appear, raises a question in my mind.

Not all operators active in Africa, are inspected (saving them a lot of money). Very little surveillance is currently being done on ZS registered aircraft in Africa, except in the case where the operator is known to the CAA, or the owner makes a disclosure to the CAA.

That this type of surveillance is long overdue, is certain, but who will foot the bill, in order to root out these operators, owners and whoever else is involved?

Surely the participants in industry that already pay the correct fees, and carry the cost to move flight operations and airworthiness inspectors into the field to carry out the inspections, cannot be burduned with the cost of this also?

That I would like to see all those unscrupulous operators/owners taken to task is for sure, as they certainly give the legit operator/owner a bad name in Africa where in itself, it is extremely difficult to cultivate and maintain good relationships.

The CAA has my support (and I have received nothing but support and help in the quest to "get it right") and I would venture to say, the support of all those operators/owners who are trying their best to stay within the regulations, in their effort to trace these type of guys, but who is going to pay?

SortieIII
31st Jul 2002, 09:41
Two comments:

1. I feel some sort of government subsidy is needed for the CAA. User pays is great when you have a large user- base, but won't work here unless you make the fees high. High fees will drive people away = catch 22!

2. Why were there no graduated fee increases since 1998? Surely this is the reason for the huge initial proposed increases, which were met by such howls of protest?

maxrated
1st Aug 2002, 20:57
I think its truly progressive that we have access to the SA CAA chief through this forum.

Further to Trevors initial posting, could someone from SA CAA, possibly tell us what exactly will we be getting in terms of services for the extra money proposed to be charged by CAA for licence fees and renewals.

I dont mind paying for good services if they are value for money.

What do we get out of it , that we dont already get at the current prices that we pay, apart from the new-look licence format that are now being issued ( which are really nice mind you, but not alone worth the new propsed fee increases ) .


On another point entirely, fellow ppruners should be aware that almost all CAA related expenses are tax deductable at your end of year assesment. For the past 4 years all my CAA/DCA expenses including cost of ATP exams, renewals and ratings and medicals were claimed back from SARS on my IRP 5 assesment. Any half decent accountant should be able to do this for you providing that these expenses are required to maintain you in your normal course of work or income.
So if you're a comm pilot or own an aircraft that you use for bussiness purposes all of your CCA fees and medicals, can be claimed back from the government as legitimate bussiness expenses.