Most of the ‘recommendations’ will fade away into the sunset as they will be forgotten, stonewalled, twisted, ignored, laughed at or if implemented we will have to wait another 22 years. I have listed some of the recommendations below. The bolding and italics are mine.
Recommendation 4*
2.281* The committee recommends that Civil Aviation Safety Regulation
(CASR) Part 61 ensure that all prospective regular public transport (RPT) pilots be required to complete substantial course-based training in multi-crew operations and resource management (non-technical skills) and human factors training prior to, or in reasonable proximity to, initial endorsement training; the committee recommends that the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) expedite, and assign the highest priority to, the implementation of CASR Part 61.*
Answer:
‘Expedite’ is not a term that CASA is either capable or willing to accept. The only ‘expediting’ you will find with this mob is in the areas of lynching minor operators, jacking up executive salaries or booking business travel to the next ICAO junket.
Recommendation 5*
2.282* The committee recommends that the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) ensure that Part 61 of the Civil Aviation Safety Regulations currently being reviewed place sufficient weight on multi-engine aeroplane experience as opposed to the current recognition of glider and ultra-light experience.*
Answer:
This recommendation if acknowledged by CASA and the government requires a definitive time frame be attached. If the regulator exceeds the agreed review time frame then they must answer to the Senate, not directly to the Minister who is incapable of tying his own shoe laces let alone ‘keep CASA honest’. It is time that accountability is brought against the lazy incapable regulator.
Recommendation 6*
2.283* The committee recommends that the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) be required to undertake a risk assessment of current simulator training to assess whether the extent, aims and scope of such training is being utilized to achieve optimum safety outcomes rather than minimum compliance objectives.*
Answer:
Slight problem here. The majority of their decisions are weighted against ‘taking the easy path’ or ‘how do we make a decision or recommendation while avoiding being accountable’. Also, the Senators should have asked CASA to produce detailed, concise and thorough copies of risk assessments conducted on previous decision making processes. Why? They would likely find that they virtually do not exist. CASA decisions are based more upon bureaucratic reasoning, avoiding accountability and ‘how do we undertake the risk assessment without blowing this month’s budget’.
Recommendation 7*
2.288* The committee recommends that the Civil Aviation Authority (CASA) expedite, and assign the highest priority to, the implementation of Civil Aviation Safety Regulations (CASR) Part 141 'Flight Training Operators' and Part 142 'Training and Checking Operators'.*
Answer:
Review my comments for Recommendation 4, the same applies.
Recommendation 10*
3.146* The committee recommends that the Minister for Infrastructure and Transport provide a report to Parliament every six months outlining the progress of the Civil Aviation Safety Authority's (CASA) regulatory reforms and specifying reform priorities, consultative processes and implementation targets
for the following 12-month period.*
Answer:
Ring Ring. Did somebody call in the consultants and spin doctors?? I smell $$$$.
This will be a nice earner for some additional mates and bureaucrats compiling fancy charts and wank statements. Anyway, a throrough detailed analysis and dissection should take place every 6 months to review not only what is yet to be completed but also a detailed analysis of what has been completed. Included should be actual financial records (unadulterated), timeframes, targets and detailed reports. In other words, 22 years+ of regulatory reform is an embarrassment, a sham, an uncontrolled process and massive hole in the taxpayer’s wallet. OUR taxpayer money should be spent and/or used as if it belonged to a conservatively run business. No more carte blanche pissing away taxpayer money without, you guessed it, accountability.
I imagine this is where the Board and the rats that have hidden within the CASA castle for the past decade or two will be most annoyed at the possible prospect of their uselessness being exposed. Time will tell, don’t hold your breath folks.
Recommendation 11*
3.147* The committee recommends that the Government undertake a review of the funding to the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) to ensure that there is sufficient specific funding to support an expedited regulatory reform process.*
Answer:
The term ‘funding review’ in this instance is too vague. In CASA dialect it means ‘we might get another huge pot of taxpayer funds to spend on mates, consultants, a few more layers of executive management, more ollie jollies to overseas destinations and the opportunity to schmooze with equally inept international regulators and more importantly more bureaucrats’. It is time to ‘remove the snouts from the trough’.
Recommendation 12*
3.149* The committee recommends that, as an ongoing measure, the
Government provide the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) with specific funding to enable it to offer salaries that are competitive with industry; in addition, or as an alternative, the Government should consider implementing formal mechanisms for the sharing of expertise between industry and CASA.*
Answer:
The red headed clown's government is broke. I would like to see the reality of how this will work. Besides, the only ‘competitive salaries’ offered will be within the executive management group. Perhaps an industry committee or panel (which excludes bureaucrats and other leeches) should be set up to help determine what a ‘competitive salary’ is, and that it is commensurate with the specific role? It would remove some power from CASA HR of which I understand run the entire organization.
Recommendation 19*
The committee recommends that, in order to enhance 'just culture' and open reporting of incidents, aviation operators should ensure that their relevant managers are adequately trained in procedural fairness.*
Answer:
Yes, ‘just culture’ rears its head. Unfortunately it is hypocritical to recommend practices such as just culture, reporting without fear of retribution and procedural fairness when the regulator is famous for applying none of these items themselves. Perhaps if the cloak of protection – ‘the eternal bucket of money called taxpayer funds which pays for the most expensive lawyers’ was taken away from CASA and its employees and accountability for personal actions was introduced then you might amazingly see just culture and procedural fairness take hold within CASA ?