We are currently having a discussion on the Civilair members site about the pros and cons of fully privatising ASA a la UK NATS, and the ability of CASA to then regulate properly, in that it wouldn't essentially be one government owned agency, saying that the other government owned agency is doing nothing wrong, it is safe to have TIBA, it is safe not to have duty times for ATC,etc,etc.
The argument was that ASA are bonus driven now ,what would happen if they were fully privatised.
I threw in there seemed to be the same perception of Qantas(privatised) and CASA, i.e. CASA saying everything is OK, Qantas are looking after it and we are keeping a close eye,blah,blah,blah.
This got me to thinking (theres some big holes in this I know , but might foster discussion) that maybe the one to PARTIALLY privatise would be CASA. Bring in the bonus system for when they successfully prosecute an infringement or create a JUSTIFIABLE safe practice,etc. (Later on I will tell you who is doing the judging)
That would move them to wrap up their regulation reform and get moving. Also to have a good look at the big end of town, they wouldn't 'waste' resources on 'dubious' claims against small operators that they had slim chance of winning, but sending the poor bugger broke in the meantime, just to say they tried for a scalp.
Big scalps means big bucks, and might cause to temper the bonus driven culture of those they are supposed to be regulating.
e.g. Chairman to CEO "Your 'inventive' way of shaving the safety margin to the bone cost us $X, its coming out of your pocket, and every bonus down the line". This $X dollars then goes into a fund to pay bonuses for CASA.
We then create an Aviation Ombudsman ( Yes, I know more bureaucracy )who is an INDEPENDENT third party.
At the moment CASA is policeman, and pretty much judge and jury. Appeals are through the courts, going through CASA is like complaining to your mother-in-law about your wife.
This Ombudsman would be legislated as separate from CASA, and take complaints and input about, contentious regulations or practices, disputed hearings, etc, direct from the public,industry employees, flying Associations , etc and give directions to CASA to justify decisions and regulations, investigate practices etc. They would set timeframes for CASA to investigate and report back with PENALTIES for non-compliance. These penalties would come out of the CASA bonus pool of money quoted above. The Ombudsman WOULD NOT make or suggest regulations, it would be up to concerned people to ask the Ombudsman. The Ombudsman could ,may be, appointed after Senate hearings like they do in the USA when handing out contentious jobs, and voted on in a bipartisan way. Try to avoid political flunkeys.
I just thought that with a bonus driven culture for a profit driven industry that may 'shave' safety to save a buck , that maybe it was time for a bonus driven safety culture. Nothing else seems to be prodding some of these buggers along.
P.S. If this gets up I want a bonus.