Bit of an update for some of our more vocal IOS protagonists...
From Ken & Co the following from the latest AMROBA newsletter (see
here) certainly keeps the fire lit under the miniscule and reflects several of the concerns coming from the more high profile publicly available WLR submitters..
:
Increasing Regulatory Impost
This government was elected, from our aviation participants’ perspective in particular, to make radical changes to lower regulatory costs, reduce red and green tape and support aviation, especially rural aviation.
These are their key points.
To support the growth of our aviation industry, the
Coalition will:
- abolish the carbon tax and its insidious impact on
- aviation fuels and aviation businesses;
- establish a formal Aviation Industry Consultative Council to meet regularly with the Minister;
- establish a high level external review of aviation safety and regulation in Australia; [happening]
- ensure that the Australian Transport Safety Bureau is adequately resourced;
- reform the structure of the Civil Aviation Safety Authority;
- focus on the better utilisation of Australian airspace;
- support regional aviation by introducing a new and better targeted En Route Rebate Scheme;
- recognise the importance of Australian airports to the economy;
- revitalise the General Aviation Action Agenda;
- continue to promote aviation liberalisation;
- enhance aviation skills, training and development;and
- ensure that aviation security measures are risk based.
The Coalition will ensure Australia has a safer and more competitive aviation sector.
Our vision for aviation in Australia is to help the industry grow in an environment that is safe, competitive and productive.
Everything in the Government Policy is consistent with the hopes of the aviation industry.
Back in September last year, this government election policy also included a pledge to reduce the ever increasing government red tape so businesses can get back to doing business.
More than 6 (six) months since the election and we wonder when will CASA get the message? Don’t we all…
At the last CASA SCC Operations sub-committee, we were promised a lot more regulatory packages that are so big, they will be submitted to parliament in 2 separate bundles.
Under this government and their policies, they should and must be totally rejected.
The Government’s Guide to Good Regulation states:
1. What is the problem you are trying to solve?
The RIS requires you to explain the problem — and your objective — simply and clearly.
A crisply defined problem offers scope for innovative, non-regulatory thinking.
The problem is that CASA’s leadership is hell-bent on creating Parliamentary Regulations which are excessively prescriptive to support a safe and potentially growing aviation industry. Where is the non-regulatory thinking?
In the late 1980s, the government started the process to amend regulations to reduce regulatory burden on the aviation industry — the only area that has been successful is CASA issuing Type Acceptance Certificates based on aircraft Type Certificates from recognised countries.
Certification teams no longer go overseas to type certificate aircraft from recognised countries.
CASA administrative processes are growing immensely and impose more costs than equivalent NAAs.
Since the start of the 1990s, the growth in government burden, aviation incurred, has drastically reduced rural communities aviation service providers.
In the last decade there has been no “innovative, nonregulatory thinking” from CASA.
The whole regulatory approach is contradictory if the Australian government wants an aviation industry to grow, especially in rural Australia.
With our climatic conditions and geographic size, the aviation industry should be continually growing and ought to be utilised more than it was in the 60s and 70s.
The ASRR Report must recommend radical change for aviation, outside major airlines, to grow. It will need a radically different CASA culture and structure for the aviation industry to trust and respect.
Most mature aviation regulators have a better relationship with their industry that enables both the regulator and the regulated to work together to improve safety.
Safety needs a combined approach that fosters safe growth and a ‘just culture’ by all in this industry.
Keeping with AMROBA & their mutual alliance with TAAAF..
According to RR from AHIA there was another
behind closed doors..
meeting held on the 8 April in Sydney (courtesy of
Bladeslappers forum):
AHIA attended TAAAF meeting at which Warren Truss was guest speaker.
On Tue 8 Apr ’14, AHIA President, Peter Crook and Company Secretary, Rob Rich attended a meeting of the Aviation Associations Forum (TAAAF), in Sydney. The TAAAF is a co-operative group made up of Australia's peak aviation bodies designed to give the industry coherence when dealing with government and regulators. The members of TAAAF are:
• Aerial Agriculture Association of Australia
• Australian Association of Flight Instructors
• Australian Business Aviation Association
• Aviation Maintenance Repair and Overhaul Business Association
• Regional Aviation Association of Australia
• Royal Federation of Aero Clubs of Australia
TAAAF Chairman Chris Manning welcomed the AHIA and said three members of the HAA attended the first TAAAF meeting in 2008.
Although we are not allowed to comment in detail on the Deputy Prime Minister's informal discussions, it was encouraging to note the government is taking care to action the pre-election promises. In fact, some are significant projects which by their very nature will be hard to undertake; the second Sydney Airport decision is probably their greatest challenge.
It is no secret that most of the associations present were looking for an update on the review of CASA, due to be completed in May and hopefully changes announced in June/July 2014. In particular, the non-acceptance of the current new EASA based rules by most reflected the concern at the damage being caused by complex, verbose and legalized worded texts written by lawyers for lawyers in the Crimes Act format.
During the final discussions, the AHIA explained both aeroplane and helicopter flight schools are facing expensive changes to be compliant; however, no safety case from CASA has been sighted. The helicopter industry, unfortunately, is facing the greatest impost and some observers suggest about one third of our schools many stumble after September when CASR Par 61 becomes effective.
In reply, Warren Truss asked that we wait for the review process to be completed; however, his comments were worded in such way it appeared the industry may have their concerns addressed in a satisfactory manner.
The last part of the RR post is interesting and perhaps reflects a certain naivety in regards to the AHIA agenda:
Bladeslappers who want to keep up with the debate on the troublesome changes heading our way should go the http://www.aopa.com.au and read their submission to the review committee. It is well written, concise and covers the future needs of our industry.
Students of history can see a wealth of CAA/CASA history at http://www.proaviation.com.au It is good to see how the EASA process started and the reason why there was so much debate amongst CASA heavies – most now retired or resigned. You just have to be patient with the sometimes biased comments; but overall it is good debate from both sides.
We are doing our best to help you guys trying to earn a buck with wobbly wings.
Rob Rich AHIA
Maybe RR needs to reflect on the Aerialag's (AAAA) limited success with the 'tea & biccys' conciliatory approach to dealing with FF.
I also query AHIA hitching their horse to the 'No Hoper' wagon...
One week to Mayday...TICK TOCK miniscule!
More to follow...
