Stick:
CASA is not adopting a ‘risk-based’ approach (particularly with regard to reducing regulatory burden), and assumed I was guilty without adequate information.
CASA
is adopting a risk based approach - minimising the risk to their careers, not the general public. I don’t blame them for this.
Under current law and regulation, there is no upside for them in allowing you to fly. Period.
On the other hand, if you crash an aircraft and injure a passenger or bystander, and it can be alleged by the newspapers that alcohol abuse played ANY role in the accident, then the CASA staff who let you fly have lost their jobs if it can be shown that they should have detected your drinking history.
You have to be fair to CASA AVMED, they are only trying to keep their jobs. They have no choice. When you tell them something, they HAVE to act or they risk losing their jobs!