This:
In its decision regarding Community Service Flights, CASA failed to show that valid and appropriate means of evaluating risk were adopted. Two known incidents did not validate CASA's outcome. There was no logical, coherent argument to show convincingly that changes to minimum standards were required or justified. Rather than writing more words into an Act which will be consistently over-ridden by the primacy of 'the safety of air navigation', of more import for legitimate outcomes would be a requirement that CASA must provide an evidence-based safety case for proposed changes and must demonstrate that proposed changes are proportionate to any risk.
Well said, JJ.
I understand, from watching Estimates on 22 Feb, that CASA is reconsidering of the ‘ban’ on the use of rotary wing aircraft in community service flights. But that raises the question: What was the basis of the ‘ban’ in the first place? I’m guessing it’s the same basis as time-based engine overhauls and so much of CASA’s other decisions: Intuition rather than evidence.
I wonder whether CASA will now revisit the requirement for time-based piston engine overhauls in charter operations. The evidence shows that the requirement results in charter passengers and others being exposed to risks that are easily avoidable. If CASA’s “mandate” is - as Mr Carmody said at Estimates on 22 February - to make certain these operations are as safe as possible, CASA shouldn’t be forcing operators to do something that increases risk.
But I wouldn’t be betting on that changing any time soon. I’m guessing there’ll be some sophistry dressed up in some high sounding empty rhetoric that includes “the safety of air navigation” to justify the status quo.