But Leaddie me ol’ quince, in the Singapore aviation rules everything’s a strict liability offence with a penalty more than the equivalent of 50 Australian penalty units. The only exceptions have higher penalties/prison.
How can Singapore possibly function as an aviation nation?
In the ‘what I don’t like about strict liability’ thread, I asked about the number of people of which posters were aware who have been prosecuted for strict liability offences. I think on last count we were up to 2 (two).
Do you know what happens in the NZ rules Leaddie? Are you
sure ….
It now seems to be the practice with draft CASRs, that the designated penalty is 50 points, no matter how serious or otherwise the importance of the infringement. This was an issue brought up at the last CASA SCC meeting --- I got the impression that the CASA upper management didn't even know.
That just confirms that regulatory reform in Australia is still the blind leading the deaf leading the delusional, resulting in an increasingly ugly and out of control Frankenstein.
Do you know anyone – any person on the planet – who would behave differently on the basis that the penalty for an offence is 10 penalty units rather than 50 or 18.935?
“What ho, Squiffy! I was about to take off without my charts because I thought the penalty was only 10 penalty units, which, when one takes into account the fact that the specified penalty is merely a maximum and an infringement notice would only be 1/5th of that, isn’t that much. But jigger me with a bargepole if I wasn’t flicking through my copy of the regulations when I discovered the penalty is now 18.935 penalty units! Damn it man, get me those charts!”