LeadSled, I'm not an apologist for CASA, rather a realist.
I do know and respect Mark Skidmore, though, and to see the long bows being drawn by some in regard to his statement I feel the need to try to redress the balance somewhat.
Jumping up and down about whether safety should be stated as the first, second or last priority for CASA is ineffectual, as is ranting and raving about whether the new rules and DAS are likely to be any good or not - they're here, like it or not, so we have to work with them.
What would you have in place of S3A and S9 that would make any real difference? CASA, under any name or guise, will still be responsible for regulating aviation with the stated aim of keeping it safe, because any government making laws about aviation will have that as a priority.
Mark Skidmore closes his statement by saying he wants to see as many people flying as possible - I believe he actually does, and would also be aiming to fix what's wrong with the organisation he's now responsible for.