Bloggs,
Actually, if you were to be a little more accurate (if you even know), the Qantas I worked for introduced DME based NPA AND PA approach profiles on its company tailored Jepp. charts long before the tables, to which I assume you refer. I believe I can justly claim to have played a small part in that effort ---- right back to the late 1960s.
Jepp. also produced other specific charts to our specification to assist pilots monitoring radar vectors descent clearances in areas where there was a long history of scrap aluminium scattered around the local hills. A very comforting innovation.
Think Manila, Bali and Tehran, to name several that come to mind.
If you had the wit to understand, it is nothing to do with chips on shoulders, and everything to do with a well developed Australia propensity to re-invent the wheel, and wind up with said wheel having five corners.
For foreign crews operating in and out of Australia, just trying to understand all the ICAO differences listed for Australia in the Jepp WW Text (or whatever flight deck documentation they carry), all operationally meaningless from a safety point of view, are examples of "Australia does it differently". Why?? Because they can. ICAO harmonization, wots that???
The latest scandal is the "proposed" joint civil/military ATC system, a grand reinvention of the five sided wheel, AUD$50M spent over four years to get to the stage of calling for expressions of interest --- preliminary tenders. The initial proposal has been knocking around for about 15 years from the time of the first Ministerial level agreement. Glacial?? it only took five years or so to fight WWII !!!
Whether you like it or not (the statistics are clear), Australia does not have a very good safety record, and we should look at why, having discarded our "Made in Australia" rose coloured glasses.
Australian regulatory standards are a mess, perhaps even you understand that, the relevant Senate Standing Committee does, several ICAO and FAA audits have illustrated comprehensively Australia's problems.
The most telling commentary on the real FAA view (very undiplomatic) comes from diplomatic cables from the US Embassy in Canberra, thanks to Wiki-leaks.
Possibly even you can understand what a commercial disaster awaits the Qantas group and Virgin if Australia downgraded from Cat.1 ---- just for starters they have to drop all code shares with US carriers.
Given you long history of assertions generally justifying what I, and most of my foreign going peers, regard as totally unnecessary, it is a pity you apparently have little real experience outside Australia.
If you had such experience you might understand why Australia is out of step with the rest of the aviation world.
You might even ask yourself why near neighbors who previously used rules sets based on Australia aviation legislation have abandoned that format, and adopted the NZ approach. Even the new Canadian rules (and the old ones weren't bad) will look awfully like the NZ rules.
You might even ask yourself why Australia is out of the MRO business now, unless the Australian company has EASA and/or FAA certification, because Australian release certificates are no longer recognized as coming from a system with adequate standards.
I could go on and on, and it is nothing to do with chips on shoulders, and everything to do with the steady destruction of large segments of the Australian aviation industry ----- and the fundamental reason why this is happening, compared to, say, the relative robust health of the whole NZ aviation sector.
Open your eyes!!