CASA Senate Hearing:
Maybe we should do some more soul searching Frank. It was cold today and I looked at the 1995 hearings summary. I had only just begun an involvement in the industry in 1994
Maybe the Senate should look at the findings and ask CASA as to the actual progress - 2011 sounds just the same.
http://www.aph.gov.au/house/committe...1995_PP480.pdf
Part of the summary is as follows:
This report is a first report of what has been the most comprehensive inquiry conducted by the committee in the 37th Parliament.
The next report will cover unfinished matters including flying training, sports aviation and ultra lights, Section 20A of the Civil Aviation Act 1988 and the impact of government charges on air safety.
The inquiry has been characterised by personality conflict, unsubstantiated allegations, a venom and viciousness not experienced by committee members in previous inquiries.
The catalyst for the inquiry was the report from the Bureau of Air Safety investigation on the Monarch Airlines crash in June 1993. Since then the Civil
Aviation Authority, its successor the Civil Aviation Safety Authority and air safety have been the subject of constant media attention.
The period of the inquiry saw significant changes to air safety regulation in Australia. Foremost was the decision to establish a new authority, the Civil
Aviation Safety Authority. The committee examined its enabling legislation and made several recommendations to improve the quality of the legislation
which were accepted by the government.
The report reveals a regulator at war with itself and under constant attack from vested interests within the general aviation and commuter industry.
Ensuring safe air travel must be the first priority of all participants in the industry as well as the regulator. This will require a major change of attitude
and culture by many in the industry.
Conduct of the inquiry and preparation of this report would not have been possible without the consistent support of my committee colleagues Stewart McArthur, Deputy Chair, Gavan O'Connor and John Sharp.
Other committee members participated from time to time despite their workloads.
I thank each of them. I thank also all those who made submissions, who attended public hearings and responded to our requests for additional information.
The committee made heavy demands on CAA and CASA often at short notice. We appreciate their efforts and the time they gave to committee requests.
The Bureau of Transport and Communications Economics assisted the committee again. We thank them for the advance copy of their study on general aviation.
Similarly the Department of the Parliamentary Library provided valuable assistance to the committee.
I especially thank Denis James for his support in the analysis of statistical and economic/financial data relevant to aviation.
The committee expresses special appreciation and thanks to our advisers Trevor Thomas and Robert McBride, committee secretary Malcolm Aldons and
committee officer June Murphy of their hard work and support throughout the inquiry.
Much of this report deals with the Civil Aviation Authority. However the committee stresses that the Civil Aviation Safety Authority should not be
judged by the performance of its predecessor.
The committee's recommendations are constructive and are intended to make the Civil Aviation Safety Authority a more effective regulator.
The committee expects industry, trade unions and others to be similarly supportive of the Civil Aviation Safety Authority.
The safety of the traveling public demands no less.
PETER MORRIS
Chairman
1 December 1995