I have to say that even cynical ol’ me is starting to believe the government is going to have little choice but to take real action in response to all this.
There appear to be too many people with too much credibility using too much blunt language. A wet lettuce response is unlikely to be tolerated by lots of people who have to date been prepared to tolerate lots.
My main point of disagreement with the gist of AAAA’s proposal is that I don’t believe the (reinstated) Board makes much of a difference, whether or not it’s stacked with people with ‘industry experience’.
The fundamental constraint that ‘outsiders’ overlook is that the CASA Board can’t make or unmake decisions to e.g. refuse, suspend or revoke an AOC. The CASA Board can’t direct a delegate to make or not make a regulatory decision.
A CASA Board could have prevented some of the output of the regulatory reform Frankenstein that successive governments have allowed CASA to create. But a properly qualified and experienced CEO and executive team could have prevented the same outcome without the benefit of a Board’s guidance.
Whatever the reasons, the regulatory reform Frankenstein exists, and the review panel, at least, can’t ignore the mayhem left in the monster’s wake.
Interesting times.