Senator FAWCETT: In broad terms, dealing with the regulation that CASA oversights specifically, particularly in the context of a regulatory process that has now stretched over a decade, and with changes of CEOs or directors of aviation safety there has been quite a change in approach to that, not just the current but previous. I am looking to understand what strategic guidance, as in long-term vision, comes from the policy area of your department, Mr Mrdak, that guides the people who are involved in regulatory reform in how the government wishes that go forward? Which stakeholders are involved? Can you talk me through how you set the policy directions for that?
Mr Mrdak : The first priority of the aviation white paper is to bring a lot of that regulatory reform process to a conclusion. You are absolutely right, it is a process which started almost a decade and a half ago with various guises. It has been through various iterations. The white paper actually set out an intention to bring some of the key suites of regulatory documents to a close. What we have been involved with is trying to do that.
The stakeholders involved are diverse depending the regulatory package involved be it maintenance, pilot licensing or whatever. There has been a diversity of industry interest. The big elements like the maintenance suite for the heavy end of the industry will come into play on 1 July with the changes. There are other suites which will come together.
The drafting process is nearly complete for just about all of the packages now. We threw additional resources to pay for drafters and the legal processes to expedite that. I think the bulk of the package is now due to be completed by the end of this calendar year. They have been through various consultative processes.
You are right, what we have tried to do is get a suite of modern regulations that get the right balance for CASA in terms of industry behaviour and the like. We try to be prescriptive where we need to be but less prescriptive wherever we can. We certainly involve ourselves in that element. Much of our work over the next two years has to be trying to keep that suite of regulatory reform documents coming to a conclusion.
Senator FAWCETT: One of the issues we have seen is that under Mr Byron, for example, there was very much an approach saying industry are the current practitioners and they probably know best so let them bring forward a solution. If CASA has a safety case as to why that should not be adopted then they can argue that out. It appears now from feedback we are getting from industry that that focus has swung more to 'we will consult but at the end of the day CASA will do what it sees fit'. That is a fairly substantial change in direction. I am wondering was that direction set by policy from your level or was that left largely to the discretion to the director of aviation safety?
Mr Mrdak : To be honest I suspect some of the change of focus has come through industry consultation. I know in some of the regulatory suites certain segments of industry have sought greater certainty including in the maintenance suite. They were looking for much more prescription around some of the elements to end what they saw as some uncertainty for them in how the regulations will be implemented. I think that process has come from industry feedback from certain parties about what they want to see in the regulatory focus. The simple adoption of a safety management system approach in certain areas was not going to meet the needs of some levels of the industry.
Senator FAWCETT: The concern, though, is what I am hearing from certain sections of the industry—and EMS is one, on the rotary side. I did not get time to confirm this with Mr McCormick today, but my understanding is that the person in CASA who is writing the regulatory reform has a general aviation fixed-wing background and a light helicopter conversion, but no experience in multi-engine IFR helicopters or in the EMS industry, and yet is now trying to tell operators throughout that industry what their future regulations and operating standards are going to look like. They are very unhappy with that. So my question comes back: why has there been this change to basically have CASA dictating what is going to occur as opposed to constructively engaging with industry? Is that a policy that has come from government or is it something that has just evolved with changes of personality?
Mr Mrdak : I do not know the specifics of that particular regulatory regime. I am just not familiar with that level of detail. I would have to seek advice from Mr McCormick in relation to that matter. I would say it is problem in more likely to be the latter. It probably has evolved as the circumstances of the consultation, industry views and CASA views have formed. But I cannot comment on that specific example, I am sorry.
Senator FAWCETT: What role do you see for the board of CASA between yourself and the policy level of the department and the actions of CASA? Do you see that they should be setting strategic direction and guidance for the CEO?
Mr Mrdak : Very much, and that is their role. The board is there to provide advice to the director of aviation safety to complement his skill set and to provide strategic direction for the organisation. That is the role of the chair and the board members.
Senator FAWCETT: Have they had an active role in this issue of the emphasis and direction of regulatory reform?
Mr Mrdak : I could not comment. I certainly believe that they have been a very active board, but I do not have a level of detail in relation to specific regulatory measures to give you a comprehensive answer on that.
Senator FAWCETT: What level of oversight do you then exercise over the board of CASA in terms of the appointment and the performance of that group of people as a board?
Mr Mrdak : We certainly provide advice to the minister in relation to the key documents the minister deals with: corporate plan, statement of expectation, statement of intent—we provide advice to the minister in those matters. We certainly provide advice to the minister in relation to the composition of the skills of the board, and the minister will make decisions on appointments. We certainly do provide advice to the minister on how we think the organisation is travelling in terms of meeting its performance indicators. But, at the end of the day, it is a independent statutory body that reports directly to the minister through the board in relation to the discharge of their responsibilities. We provide advice to the minister on what we believe are some of the directions that are being followed by the organisation.
Senator FAWCETT: When can the parliament expect to see some of the updates that you have been saying the minister has been getting about the various implementation of the white paper?
Mr Mrdak : We can certainly provide you some advice on the status of the measures. They range, as I said. We have been implementing many measures, such as our approach to bilateral negotiations, right through to the suite of regulatory measures and NASAG. There is a lot. I think today legislation was introduced to the House of Representatives concerning particular elements of protection of assets and the like. A range of legislation has been introduced. We are well progressed in most elements of the white paper. Also, the real achievement of the white paper was to bring together for the first time the comprehensive policy positions around the full suite of industry measures covering aviation and provide a range of objectives going forward. That is where the white paper has served a very good purpose.
Senator FAWCETT: Certainly, either individually or as a committee member, I would welcome a more detailed update or briefing.
Mr Mrdak : We would be happy to do that for you.