Reply to Snarek
Snarek, you are right - it is getting a bit nasty but that is due to a large extent (in my opinion anyway) toBIK's penchant for "playing the man rather than the ball". I, like you, would like to see us focussing on the real issues at hand here, not the personalities.
Personally, I am supportive of the introduction of the majority of the elements of NAS, particularly those relating to improved access to airspace and procedures for VFR flights, subject to adequat safety assessment.
However, what I do not support is the concept pushed by some members of the ARG that every single aspect of the US airspace model can be (and will be) faithfully replicated here in Australia without proper, and formal, consideration of the safety or cost impacts on the Australian industry. I also believe that over the years, Australia (along with other nations) has developed some very innovative and useful procedures for enhancing aviation safety, based on years of hard learnt experience under Australian conditions. Do we really want to throw the baby out with the bath-water?
My vision for Australia is that we implement an airspace system that can responsively evaluate and accommodate the best that the world has to offer in terms of safety management and optimum cost; be it from NZ, the UK, South Africa, Germany or Canada; all systems that I have working experience with. A slavish replication of the US airspace model implies that that particular system has all the answers and effectively shuts the door on any other procedural innovation that may emerge in other countries.