Agree with a lot of what's been said - but maybe we're jumping at shadows here. CASA are unlikely to allow to much 'spread' of flight instruction because it will simply be uncontrollable, and where then the FOI's job?
Agree that FI experience standards should rise.
Agree that real flying schools should employ,and pay, real commercial instructors. This will only happen when CASA stop handing out AOC's to anyonewith a plausible story and a few quid.! I think that anyone wanting to progress above PPL would then attend these really top flight schools by choice.
But why can't we have non AOC instruction available, paricularly in the country, where a higher proportion of people are learning to fly for private operations, ie business and pleasure. Currently, they are forced through the procedurally correct, but somewhat irrelevant current PPL. These people need a more life-saving skills oriented PPL, not how to beg for a clearance into CTR!
This sort of training is well within the abilities of a very experienced, and so inclined PPL. As well, there are quite a few older CPL's and FI's living in regional Australia who would do this work - if it wasn't for the AOC. This would also provide an essential service to country pilots looking for their AFR/BFR. These PPL's baulk at having to fly hundreds of miles to be treated like lepers by a city flight school. Endorsements and recurrant training should also be available via these non-AOC instructors.
Under the proposed regs, much of this should be possible, providing that it's not destroyed by the fine print.
Country Australia is poorly served insofar as flying instruction, and it's no surprise, because small country schools are struggling to survive. If we went to a non AOC structure for the PPL, and streamed the CPL aspirants to the city schools, I think things could be changed for the better.
cheers,