Uh, while you're up there on your high horse, Aussie, you might want to use that view to have a look at the FAA head office structure and compare it to CASA's org chart. Drill down a bit to account for the size and additional responsibilities of the FAA (Commercial Space Transportation probably not taking up vast amounts of CASA's time) and they aren't too dissimilar. Wouldn't be at all surprised if that's where the bare bones of the CASA restructure were sourced.
As for the oft heard complaint that too many CASA staff don't have actual aviation backgrounds, how many would be enough? A third? One half? All of them? Should the DAS' executive assistant have a ATPL?
Fact is, the majority of government departments and authorities are staffed by a lot of people that aren't, and never have been, in the jobs of the people they serve. The Department of Agriculture isn't completely staffed by farmers. The Department of Education isn't full of teachers. And I have it on good authority that the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet DOESN'T HAVE ONE SINGLE FORMER PRIME MINISTER WORKING IN IT!
You don't need most of the people in a government authority to have experience working in the industry they serve. Just the right people. In the right jobs. And THAT's what CASA seems to have been lacking for some time now. The Government takes the advice of the regulator - that's what the regulator is there for - unless it has been demonstrated that that advice is poor. Seems like we haven't managed to do that yet.
It's going to be an interesting few months.