You need to be pushing the "jobs, investment and growth" buttons as justification for change with every sentence. Agree with Wren, asking for "consensus" is the first trap as is asking for the members of the aviation community to be consulted. All it takes then is for a few big egos (eg Gaunty of criminal strict liability fame) to deliberately throw their weight around and consensus vanishes. The Minister can then let his Department "interpret' all the screeching and we end up with a rewrite that either changes nothing or is even worse.
I commend to you the FAA mission statement. "Being the most efficient Aerospace sector in the world" encompasses everything succinctly because that word "efficient" has a concrete meaning (ie.: use of resources to produce biggest bang for a buck) and that includes regulations, enforcement, standards, airports, RA, AOPA,, parachutes - everything, and efficiency can be measured.
P.S. That is why the CASA mission doesn't use "efficient" - it is subject to measurement. They instead talk about being "effective" which is meaningless. Words matter.