Kharon:
Oleo – I can't see Barsch in the hot seat, that would be a bit like putting Hempel in charge of an A380.
Couldn’t agree more and not to mention the grey area associations he has with PA/Rex and some of the individuals listed as industry expert advisers on his website.
Not that I really have any idea about how to go about lancing the boil and then cleaning/disinfecting the pus and corruption (sounds like that’s more Sunny’s bag). However maybe it should be broken up into team A, clean up crew, and team B whose responsibility is to clean the slate and simplify the system with experts that have no personal self interest or ties to the past i.e. fresh new start.
Team A: An individual who has no affiliations what so ever with industry or DOIT and their agencies should head up team A. This person would have a background/reputation in the corporate world as a clean up CEO/Director, with experience in auditing and receiverships, whose sole purpose was to reconfigure a struggling company back to the path of profitability within a limited timeframe. Also this person should be capable of discovering and zipping up all the loopholes that Sunny warns of:
Be very careful what you wish for. Yes, it appears that house cleaning is necessary, but before that you must make up a big red rubber stamp saying " not to ever be employed as a consultant".
Furthermore, watch out for "outsourcing" deals with the aforesaid "retired" employees.
Team B is more my bag and is IMHO a lot more interesting.
“K” shines the way
..."I would like to see someone like the ex ICC Hart (spell check) supported by Cook, Aherne and Hood look-alike competition winners; get some sanity, humanity, common sense and an ability to assess into the mix."
And that is where ‘in touch with the industry’ organisations like AMROBA come in, here’s a couple of quotes from Sub15:
AMROBA does not believe that Australia & CASA, under the current system of regulatory development, will ever meet ICAO critical elements, as attached, in the same manner as, for example, Singapore has achieved full compliance with the ICAO critical elements. This will not happen until the government of the day takes legislative action to completely overhaul the aviation legislative framework.
Singapore and other Asian countries are leaving Australia behind in relation to aviation business because they have a modern aviation legislative framework. Even New Zealand has a better and more modern legislative framework than Australia.
Over time, the Australian legislative framework has ended up with the wrong mix of requirements in the various Acts and Regulations. Singapore completely restructured their regulatory framework so that the right details are in the right Acts, Orders and Civil Aviation Authority Singapore (CAAS) issued Requirements.
And then this:
The ideal regulatory framework for Australia is one that harmonises in all aspects with NZ so that a full Australasian open aviation market could exist – full recognition of aviation licensed personnel, operators and organisations including aircraft and operational and maintenance standards. Singapore has demonstrated how making Acts that comply with ICAO, instead of being politically amended to meet the pressures of the day, work and creates a safe environment for their communities and industry.
Which would appear to coincide with number one on Kharon’s wish list…“On my wish list – bring in the Kiwi's to square off the benighted regulations – please”…
Hmm “K” for team B perhaps? 