The more things change, the more they stay the same.
Seriously, why are we spending all this money on regulation reform when CASA changes it back again as soon as no-one is looking?
This is basically identical to how it was when I learned to fly in the seventies. In the eighties, pilots were credited with having some brains and it was relaxed to the current situation.
For most GA pilots, who cares? The prudent pilot still works to 45 minutes. In fact, I use 45 min plus 15% for my PRIVATE flying. But for some areas of aviation this is not sensible and probably reduces safety.
Aerobatic flights that are typically about 15 minutes and directly above an airfield is one. Carrying an additional 45 minutes for a 15 minute flight is just plain dumb and blind bureaucracy and the additional fuel mass under a 8-10g load is significant.
I can imagine parachute dropping might be another where the additional weight of fuel might be a performance issues. I'm sure there are many more.
I see that the preamble says that this is due to recent fuel related accidents. When were fuel related accidents ever not a major cause of accidents (if not THE major cause)? If CASA was competent, it would show an analysis of fuel related accidents before and after the previous rule change. The supporting documentation for this proposed rule change does not contain any objective reasons why there is a need for the rule change.
The other justification is alignment with ICAO. Frankly, I'm sick of hearing this and I don't believe it. I have pilot licences in 3 other countries and no one else seems to be slavishly aligning with ICAO like CASA does. I'm suspicious its just a motherhood reason to avoid scrutiny of the changes they want to make for CASA's own benefit.
Interestingly, the area with the greatest change seems to be operation to remote Islands. I wonder if the real motivation is butt covering after Norfolk Island that they are trying to hide with an overall re-write.