Folks,
Time for a reality check.
CASA and its predecessors must be the most investigated Government body of all time.
I haven't checked the latest figures, but, up to about 2003, there had been something like fourteen inquiries in the previous twenty years.We have had a few since. You can get a complete list from the Parliamentary library, which also lists the precipitating reason the the inquiry.
This includes the "Morris" inquiry, the longest in Commonwealth, with something over 300 sitting days.
There were almost always some short term changes to address finding, before the "iron ring" got control again.
The first inquiry, in which I took a real interest, was the Lane Report of the mid 1980s, but the first recommendation I read about regulatory reform (recommending we move to a close approximation of the FARs) was in 1966.
Unfortunately, as time goes by, memories "fade", and the recommendations of some significant inquiries are significantly misrepresented. A very good example is the Seaview Inquiry, which CASA continuously misquotes to justify "one standard for public transport", because that was the recommendation adopted by Government.
Except that, that WAS NOT what was recommended at all, by the Seaview inquiry, and adopted by Government in 1996 !!!
Right now, we have some "new CASA policies" that are going to cause mayhem in maintenance, and a huge increase in costs. It's about CAR 42V. After years of having a legislative instrument automatically allowing an AC (by whatever name) from an NAA to automatically be "approved data", we are going back to the bad old days where the use of an AC (for example, the FAA AC on corrosion detection and control --- the bible on the subject) will, once again, be subject to specific CASA approval on application to have such AC's "approved" by CASA. Indeed, I have been advise CASA are considering making it apply only to individual aircraft, not to CAR 30/CASR 145 workshops, so, if you have a line of 5 C-172 at your flying school, you will have to have 5 approvals. In short, anything that is not in the Manufacturer's Maintenance Manual will require CASA individual approval before you can use, as a matter of course.
This will be a great jobs and cash generator for CASA, as well as a fruitful source of delays --- that is if CASA will "approve" and not make you pay $$$$ for an "approved design organisation" or a "delegate of CASA" to approve a custom document that only replicates what you can download free from the FAA (or other NAA) website.
We don't need any more inquiries, we need action, but given the lack of interest by politicians, what do we have to do to get real change, and bust the "iron ring" for all time.
And that, ladies and gentlemen, is the question. How??
Tootle pip!!