I think the point Chug makes is self-regulation is fine so long as one implements the regs properly. MoD has admitted it doesn't, a simple verifiable fact.
Thanks for covering for me tuc, but in all honesty I must nail my colours to the mast. It is my belief that self-regulation is never fine. It is a very British tradition practised by the Legal and Medical Professions among others, the purpose of which is to protect the professions rather than those seeking redress, IMHO. I see similarities in the MOD's process of self regulation regarding Airworthiness Provision to the military airfleets. The point isn't the discharge of responsibilities by particular organisations or individuals, the point surely is the actual quality of Airworthiness Provision by the MOD. Given the three threads running concurrently on this Forum concerning the Nimrod, Hercules and Chinook fleets and the serious Airworthiness shortcomings revealed therein, it seems to me that, for whatever reasons, the system is plainly dysfunctional and unfit for purpose, as are many of the aircraft it purports to protect. Put bluntly the proof is in the pudding, and I find this one well beyond its sell by date and a definite health hazard!