As well as a rocket, CASA need a leash.
IMHO, the biggest issue is that CASA are legislated to provide safety functions for civil aviation in Australia. Nowhere are they mandated to foster / support / promote aviation.
There are numerous other industries that have government support to promote the industry (tourism and the arts immediately come to mind, but there must be others) as the cost of the administrative function is outweighed by the benefit the industry provides in jobs, money and other intangibles.
As much as I hate administratium, there needs to be an Aviation department within the Bureau of Infrastructure, Transport and Regional Economics. Its mandate must be to grow the industry to provide more job opportunities, particularly in remote areas, to provide business with more cost and time efficient means of moving people and goods around the country and to promote training and upskilling opportunites for workforce. It must report to the Minister, and CASA and ASA must report to it. ATSB must report direct to the minister. This would help the incestuous relationship between ATSB and CASA. Ideally the AAT would be removed from the picture and replaced by a board within my hypothetical new Aviation department. This board would provide a more balanced view of aviation, although strict liability would remain an obstacle to natural justice in many cases.
The terms of reference for the announced review of safety regulation are for safety related functions. I do hope that there is sufficient latitude within the review for a means to balance the terrible injustices occasionally perpetrated by CASA to better support the Aviation industry. There is tremendous opportunity for the industry if CASA could be curtailed.