In regards to part132 experimental this is from the regulator CASA not warbirds
Buck,
With all due respect, you do not seem to have any more understanding of the rule-making process than nonosense, and you certainly seem to have little understanding of how the present rules came into being ---- as a matter of Government policy and actions, NOT CASA.
It is Government that make the rules, not departments and statutory authorities, who only propose rules to government ---- haven't you ever heard of lobbying, when a segment of the community disagrees with proposals for legislation? Think the Rudd mining super profits tax, or the present threats to free speech.
Why do you think all the other sub-parts of Part 132 have disappeared (you can read that much on the CASA web site, Ozbusdriver put up the link) leaving only the Warbirds bit --- lobbying.
Or, perhaps, you agree with the oppressive limitations inherent in the changes to Part 21 and the new Part 132.
I repeat again, the Government policy, that has served Australia well, since 1998, is:
The aviation community in Australia should have the same rights and freedoms as the USA.
Put another way:
The Australia aviation community should NOT be saddled with all sorts of Australian unique RESTRICTIVE rules and regulations that have no genuine demonstrated and cost/benefit justified safety basis.
What is the problem you have with this concept of rights and freedoms, that you are apparently prepared to just sit back and "cop it", as they are whittled away.
This applies to the whole aviation community, not just the very small segment involved here.
The operators of Australian registered large airline aircraft were the immediate beneficiaries of the 1998 changes, there was a major boost to international competitiveness.
What is being proposed here (but is a long long way from becoming law) is completely contrary to the spirit and intent, now in present law, of that Government policy.
If you want to believe that wanting to preserve the present rights and freedoms of the aviation community is just somebody exercising a "big jet ego", so be it.
However, give the whole of the AWAL membership the right to decide, after they are
properly informed about all sides of the argument, not just "Dispatches" that are little more than value free propaganda.
I suggest you forget playing the man, and play the ball. You never know, if you are an AWAL member, it could be in your own personal interest, have you though of that??
Hey, as a member of AWAL, I'm interested to understand what parts of Corporations Law the Association is actually in contravention of?
Crush depth,
Hasn't anybody from AWAL board or management ( except for the President, Kim Rolph-Smith, at his own expense) told you?
As has been stated here, several times, the finding of the Supreme Court of Queensland was re. S.173 of the Corporations Act 2001. You can look it up on ComLaw. While you are there, have a look at Part 2D.1, regulations S.179 through 189.
Tootle pip!!