Surely we can copy something which is incredibly successful, adds to safety, and has no history of litigation. Alternatively, we can create problems which don’t exist and not benefit from this simple extra safety procedure.
God, why didn't I think of that? Just let me get it finally straight, because I'm a bit slow. We can put someone utterly unqualified into a position of giving information to a pilot, and if it all goes tits up there will be no litigation because there hasn't been in the USA?
Hang on, what's that? Not unqualified? Well, that's I was asking in my dim way; what sort of qualifications will they have?
If you ask a fellow pilot the conditions at a field he has just departed from he will give you facts based on his own observations. As a pilot he has to have passed basic or advanced tests on his knowledge of such things as meteorology, so he is entirely qualilfied to do so. But more importantly, he is
not being paid to provide that information. It is given on the basis of helping his fellow airman and implies no responsibility. So your analogy is untenable.
Far from introducing problems that don't exist into a simple situation, I am seeking answers to a few basic questions. Answer those questions then let's start to work out how we can achieve some results because believe it or not we share at least part of a belief that aviation is over-controlled in Australia. Saying in your usual simplistic manner that we will just copy the USA is avoiding the questions completely.
Again I reiterate my kind offer to use my very valuable time to travel at your expense to the US to do extensive research. Because that's just the sort of bloke I am.