I don't care how many tiers there are as long as there's a tier that explains the rules plainly.
Arm,
Wonderful idea, we could have four, five, six levels of legislation.
Say:
Act,
Regulations,
Manuals of Standards,
Statutory Interpretations of the Act, Regulations and MOS,
Plain Language (according to lawyers) Explanatory Guidance of Statuary Interpretations.
Then,
Temporary Guidance Documents:
to tide us over, while Explanatory Guidance of the Statutory Interpretations of the Act, Regulations and MOS are run through "the system", at each amendment of the Act, Regulations and MOS.
Clarification and explanation of Temporary Guidance Documents.
and so on.
Just think of the additional employment opportunities in CASA and the Office of Parliamentary Counsel.
Or, we could do what the Government intended and commenced in 1996, harmonise with the rest of the world, but particularly US and NZ.
The savings in forests being turned into paper, alone. would be worth it.
EASA and supporting general Aviation with outcome based regulations? Which EASA are you reading?
Eddie,
Aviation regulation, it seems to me, is a bit like religion, the basic texts are fairly simple, but after the bureaucracy has got at it, whether it be clerical or "public servants", the outcome bears little or no relation to the best of intentions.
Tootle pip!!
PS1:Arm, sorry, if you find my tone patronising, but in my view you clearly do not understand the root cause of the regulatory problems Australian aviation suffers.
PS2: With apologies to EASA, the above is very roughly based on the JAA/EASA tiers/mountains of paperwork.