LB:
But being a pilot or an engineer does not confer experience relevant to the management of a government regulatory authority and administration of a regulatory system. Being a pilot or an engineer might make you more efficient at "it", but "it" involves skills that no amount of flying or engineering will ever confer.
With the greatest respect LB this is completely and utterly wrong. The entire essence of Weberian bureaucracy as applied in the Westminster system is a rigid system of procedures and authorities that is transparent and designed to be strictly followed by a public servant with very limited discretion. There is no formal "training" to be a public servant - anyone can do it, just follow the instructions on the packet.
Even me, Sunfish, passed as a credible public servant for Two years, and I was initiating, handing out, and managing Government grant money in the hundreds of thousands. All you do is follow the written procedures to the letter!
This very issue is at the core of my disbelief in the incompetence of CASA when I first heard of it - multiple interpretations of the regulations by sundry CASA staff, capriciously applied. I couldn't believe what I was reading! There is no room for "nuance", "art", or "divination" in the application of bureaucratic principles. To allow such nonsense is what causes the capriciousness and maybe corruption within CASA!
There needs to be simple rules like the FAA set which anyone with the basic training of a common policeman, pilot or engineer can safely interpret and apply. Public service is not rocket science!
Of course at Ministerial level it is a different game - Sir Humphrey does exist, and there is a need for highly trained generalists to design policies and systems but for the folk in the trenches, they should be following simple procedures and instructions.
Designed by genius for execution by idiots as the saying goes.