Folks,
A little more about ANR 203 exemptions ---- when a large proportion of the ANRs were repealed, including 203, with the establishment of the CAA Act 1988, it was all very rushed, there was intended to be a ANR 203 replacement regulation to complement the new CAR 206, to cover all the quasi-"regular/scheduled" services, particularly the mail runs in remote Australia.
As so often happens, this was never completed.
In the reforms of the late 1990s, it was intended that a Part 135 would include a provision for "scheduled air taxi", in aircraft less then 10 seats, as per the then FAA Part 135.
The existing Regional Airlines Association howled down the proposal.
After a big meeting in Sydney, one of the smarter of the then operators remarked that he thought they had all collectively shot themselves in the foot, demanding "higher standards in the name of safety", when what they really meant was that the supposed higher standard was a way of keeping competition out.
Wind the clock forward to the era of Mick Toller, and "all of a sudden", all the mail runs up the Cape, in WA etc. were "discovered" by CASA HO, and "low and behold", they were all decreed as RPT without a license, and show cause notices showered from the heavens.
Then we wound up with a new mishmash of "rules" for a quasi-RPT in small aircraft, but still without proper legislative definition, ie; What should have been completed 15 years before.
In all the nonsense that went on in the early '90s, rural, regional and remote Australia was shafted again.
The Lulu was the Draft Part 21B, which (amongst reams of total nonsense) would have prohibited ANY public transport operation ( charter and RPT) on any airfield that was not licensed and big enough to take a -8, which, for example, left a total of 14 places in the whole of Queensland, where you could conduct any form of "air transport", even in a C 206 etc.
So, years more pass buy, still no Part 91/125/125 etc., and we are still living with the incomplete changes of 1988, and the establishment of the CAA. When what we had in 1964 worked perfectly well.
We certainly can't be accused of rushing reform in aviation in Australia, and it is the bush that always suffers the most.
All very sad. For any of you who might be in the firing line of the new policy, it is a policy, it is not law, but if you want to challenge it, the number of lawyers competent to mount such a challenge is very small.
Tootle pip!!