The NZ CAA allows colour defective pilots on a case-by-case basis
Slight thread drift away from Australia for a moment, but there is currently a review underway into CVD standards in NZ at present. Very interesting read below:
Colour deficient pilots: Is there light at the end of this tunnel?
What is interesting is that the restrictions which CASA are trying to reimpose here are the same as those currently applied to many NZ pilots. Just a coincidence that our PMO previously worked for the NZ CAA?
The Leader of the NZ First Party - Winston Peters - has also recently taken up the baton on this matter:
New Zealand Parliament - 6. Pilot Licensing?Colour Vision Requirements
6. Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Leader—NZ First) to the Minister of Transport: Why does Civil Aviation Rule Part 67 require that the applicant for a commercial or airline transport pilot licence have no deficit of colour vision to an extent that is of “aeromedical significance”?
Hon STEVEN JOYCE (Minister for Economic Development) on behalf of the Minister of Transport: Civil Aviation Rule Part 67 contains colour vision requirements that are designed to meet the standards set by the International Civil Aviation Organization—known as ICAO—in line with annex 1 of the Chicago Convention on International Civil Aviation. Annex 1 requires contracting States to the convention, of which New Zealand is one, to test applicants to ensure there is no colour vision deficiency that could interfere with the safe performance of a pilot’s duties. In practical terms, pilots need to be able to discern different colours used in aviation—for example, on navigation charts, in cockpit instruments, in airport lighting, and in air navigation lights.
Rt Hon Winston Peters: Is he aware that Australia’s implementation of the Aviation Colour Perception Standard enables pilots with all types and degrees of severity of defective colour vision to operate VH-registered aircraft across the globe, and that these operatives are flying planes into New Zealand?
Hon STEVEN JOYCE: The reality is, in relation to Australia, that New Zealand and Australia do apply the same standards, as required by the International Civil Aviation Organization—
Rt Hon Winston Peters: No, they don’t.
Hon STEVEN JOYCE: —well, just hear me out—and use the same primary screening method. However, in Australia’s case the Australian Administrative Appeals Tribunal has made some decisions on some individual cases that require the Civil Aviation Safety Authority Australia, which is the safety regulator there, to issue medical certificates to applicants with some colour deficiency. The authority endorses the individual’s medical certificate as not conforming with the requirements of annex 1 of the convention, and commercial pilots are limited to co-pilot duties only and, I understand, are not able to fly commercially into New Zealand.
Rt Hon Winston Peters: Is he aware that these colour vision defective pilots in Australia continue to meet the most stringent of operational training, testing, and ongoing review requirements imposed by the Civil Aviation Safety Authority Australia and their airline employers, and that these operatives have been for the last 25 years flying into New Zealand?
Hon STEVEN JOYCE: Well, I am advised that that is not the case. The Civil Aviation Safety Authority Australia requires pilots to get approvals from the regulator of the country that they are flying into. In the absence of any such approvals, the Minister is not aware of any Australian colour vision deficient commercial pilots flying in New Zealand.
Rt Hon Winston Peters: Is he aware that over the 23 years that Australia has followed this implementation of the Aviation Colour Perception Standard there have been no accidents or accidents reported in which the colour vision status of the pilot has been found to be implicated causally, so why is he insisting upon fictional standards unsupported by countries like Australia?
Hon STEVEN JOYCE: I am sorry, but that does not appear to be the case in relation to the matters that the member has raised.
Rt Hon Winston Peters: You don’t know what’s going on, that’s why.
Hon STEVEN JOYCE: No, you are wrong, Mr Peters. The reality of the situation is that the Chicago convention requires New Zealand to sign up to the same tests. Australia has the same tests, as I have explained to the member. It has an appeals tribunal that has allowed some pilots to fly, but with restricted practices. In terms of New Zealand’s standards relative to the rest of the world, we are seen as having standards that are more liberal than some countries and also slightly more requiring than others, but all are under the Chicago convention.
Rt Hon Winston Peters: Well, that is the point. I have done my homework and you have not.
Mr SPEAKER: Order!
Rt Hon Winston Peters: If there has not been one recorded aviation-related fatality anywhere in the world in which the colour vision of the pilot has been implicated causally, can he provide the evidence upon which the New Zealand Civil Aviation Authority continues to justify its implementation of the Aviation Colour Perception Standard, whereby New Zealand certified pilots with defective colour vision have imposed upon them restrictions so severe that they make a professional career—
Hon Member: Who wrote that question?
Rt Hon Winston Peters: I am able to write my own question, not like the bozo over there, all right? I am able to write my own question, not like the dumbo over there.
Mr SPEAKER: Order! That is not going to help the order of the House. It starts because of interjections from my right-hand side. Would the member please complete his question.
Rt Hon Winston Peters: So here we go—whereby New Zealand certified pilots with defective colour vision have imposed upon them restrictions so severe that they make a professional career in aviation a practical impossibility in their own country, and yet if they get a job in Australia, they could fly planes into New Zealand? How ridiculous is that?
Hon STEVEN JOYCE: First let me say that I think the House must admire the generosity of the member in bringing this issue up, because he is not known for colour blindness himself. But the reality—
Rt Hon Winston Peters: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker.
Mr SPEAKER: Is the member raising a point of order?
Rt Hon Winston Peters: Yes, I am, and it is that the Minister, as the Standing Orders require, should try to answer the question—he has never been much of a wit; in fact, he has been half of a wit most of the time—and get on with being a responsible Minister.
Mr SPEAKER: Would the Minister please just address the question to help the order of the House.
Hon STEVEN JOYCE: I suppose you could call that one all, but I do not think so. The reality of the issue that the member raises is a very important issue, because if you look at some of the examples—he asked whether it has ever effected any accidents anywhere in the world. There are actually two documented aviation incidents—
Rt Hon Winston Peters: No, there are not.
Hon STEVEN JOYCE: —and one accident in the United States where colour vision was seen as a contributing factor.
Rt Hon Winston Peters: No, that’s been contested—overruled.
Hon STEVEN JOYCE: Well, the member can say that, but, actually, the job of the air safety regulator is to ensure that it meets the international rules, and that is what it is doing in this case. If the member is saying that he knows better than the aeronautical regulator, that he should be trusted to make some judgments that, actually, our tests do not need to be as strong as they are internationally, well, he is fine to have that view, but the reality is that we trust our regulator every day to provide the sort of safety that New Zealanders depend upon. It is a serious subject, and, actually, we are required to sign up to the international regulations.