Any comments by any pilots or pilot associations stating that traditional auditing has been abandoned is a load of crap.
Why would the inspectors be saying it if it was not true? Nor have the reports of abandonement of traditional oversight been limited to inspectors, pilots and pilot groups, but have also been heard from our AMEs/AMOs, smaller operators - and others.
In actual reality,TC made mistakes initially with the implementation process of SMS by jumping the gun and implementing SMS without adequately trained Inspectors/resourcing.The Auditor Generals report gave TC a bit of a hiding for this,but as with any new process or act of legislation,there is always a few teething issues.
And yet, they cancelled the Frequency of Inspection Policy AFTER the AG's report and prior to implementing SMS in all sectors (now delayed) ... It may have been replaced with the Surveillance Policy, but that applies to companies with an SMS - so what instruction for the inspectors of non-SMS companies? The rush to implement SMS in Canada has had serious results - witness at least three known TSB reports that implicate TC's version of SMS.
IMHO, this was/is more than teething issues. While I agree that there has been a lot of fear and misinterpretation of what SMS is supposed to be (a good thing - also agreed - especially the appointing of an accountable executive bringing aviation more in line with the Canada Labour Code Part 2 and related amendments to the Criminal Code in 2005), that in itself can be attributed, at least in part, to the errors TCCA made in implementation (think lack of information and industry consultation). The new DGCA has a great deal of work to do to fix the system.
One more thing, if I may. Through delegation of authority to industry (as TCCA is encouraging through the Safety Partnership Program), SMS in Canada is also about transfer of costs and liability.
As TC were the forerunners of SMS oversight implementaion, can we expect this kind of debate worlwide as other states catch up?
One can hope that other states will take heed of the errors made by Canada, so that debate will take place before implementation rather than after.