If this is correct then it confirms that the AG's Dept has little knowledge of our industry and indeed is not promoting safety.
Triadic,
The penalty points are set by CASA, not the AGs.
The offenses that are strict liability are set by CASA, not the (now) Office of Parliamentary Counsel, OPC ---- all matters legislative drafting are no longer handled by OLDP/A-Gs.
The impenetrable drafting style is to the instructions of the customer agency, ie: CASA, don't blame the OPC. Have a look at a lot of other Commonwealth Legislation to see examples that look absolutely nothing like aviation regulation, indeed, to see real "plain English" and outcome based. You will also find lots of examples of civil law, the whole aviation book does not have to be criminal law, that it is is, once again, CASA choice.
It is said that making every offense 50PP is to maximize the fines under the administrative penalty scheme, one fifth the maximum.
In the dim distant past a joint CASA/Industry body recommended penalty points, based on the agreed importance of the alleged offense -- I know, I sat one one for flight operations ---- the original Part 91. Such cooperation with industry has been barred for the last 6/7 years --- after Byron went.
I certainly do not support your argument that by adding "absolute" or "strict liability" as a adjunct to any section of the CAA or CAR adds to the "size" of it.
Weapons Grade,
Of course it does, a common and far better way is to have a separate Part with all the penalties listed, but Commonwealth policy and the Criminal Code now precludes that. As of the rest of your post, you would make a great recruit to CASA --- penalties are the answer to air safety, more penalties make more safety --- whatever the heck "more safety" means.
.it is largely why Australia could not just adopt the FARs as-is...
Awqward,
That is not legally true, either, CASR Part 21 is FAR 21 modified (originally more flexible than FAR 21, but the CASA of recent years have "fixed" that) CASR 23-35 are FAR 23-35 by reference. Far more efficient would be to adopt the NZ regs., which can largely be characterized as the FARs cleaned up, with a lot of accumulated rubbish removed.
Tootle pip!!
PS: The Commonwealth of Australia has a long and generally satisfactory history of adopting legislation by reference, with only minor changes, we have been doing it since 1901.