I'm always interested in these threads, being a CPL FI myself.
I don't think that a reduction in fuel tax will improve the pay/conditions for flying instructors. What it would do is to allow the various schools to compete for custom at a lower price level. The students would likely benefit from slightly cheaper flying, I expect.
My school operates at around £115-ish per hour (dual), I think. Now, the fuel consumed averages at 32litres per hour. I would guess that its cost is something like £1.20 per litre. How much of this is a tax on aviation, I wonder?
Anyone out there enlighten me?
In any case, why should any aviation fuel be tax exempt?
As to the CPL question. I think that, by and large, the person who has attained the greater level of qualification is most likely to be the better pilot. Bear in mind that piloting has relatively little to do with handling skills (flame suit ON!)
An argument which proposes that PPL FIs would be as competent as CPL FIs, must be applied to all walks of life if it is to be consistent. Would it hold water if it was applied to Doctors, Solicitors or members of any other professional body?
Would you rather have a surgeon who had learned by observation only, rather than one who had received a formal academic training? They may both have excellent "hands", but the educated one is more likely to have a more complete comprehension of his task, I suspect.
More importantly, when the educated one encounters a problem which he has not experienced previously, he has an academic background which he can interrogate in order to arrive at a sensible solution. If that academic background is not available, the surgeon is left with nothing but experience....and in a novel situation he has no experience.
For my money, the perfect flying instructor has a fulsome meld of experience and qualification....both having been demonstrated regularly by test.
The underlying issues, though, are pay and conditions....at least, that's how I construe things. The industry' goal seems to be simply to coerce instructors into working as cheaply as possible. Flying schools are generally profit-driven...I've seen little evidence of any drive for quality. Why? 'Cos it costs money and there is a supermarket mentality which is prevalent.
Very many of my students cannot afford to fly. So, they scrape through a PPL and rapidly drift away. It's probably the same at your school.
I don't buy any argument that smacks of "instructing for the good of the student/light aviation". Flying is an industry and I can't imagine anyone instructing for free, unless they're desperate for flying hours, or perhaps need a hobby.
I know that, if I was instructing pro bono, there'd be a sight fewer pupils with whom I was prepared to persevere. You all must have encountered students who are not temperamentally suited to flying....ones that you wish would simply quit. Sensible ones self-select, of course, but there's always a few who persevere with flying training beyond the bounds of decency. They're hard work and I certainly wouldn't fly with these people for a hobby.Would your unpaid FI put up with these, I wonder?
Time for me to quit, I'm rambling.
Bogbeagle