[M]y interest/concern in this topic has only developed due to the fact they HAVE been falling out of the sky, for similar reasons, over the last 10 years or so.
I do despair.
"Falling out of the sky"? You should be a journalist.
There have been aircraft commanded by CPLs with IFR ratings "falling out of the sky", over the last 10 years, too. And they've killed more people than have died in the course of community service flights over the same period.
But in any event, your 'bottom line' is minimum CPL and current IFR. That's a regulatory option, and I respect your view that those minimums are an appropriate regulatory option to pursue.
Next task: Define community service flights in such a way as to clearly distinguish them from other flights. (You'll note that I use the term "community service flights" rather than "Angel Flights". That's because the organisation Angel Flight is just a 'clearing house' to connect people in need of a flight for non-urgent medical reasons with pilots who are willing to volunteer to fly them. These arrangements could still be made, even if AF shut its doors tomorrow.)
What is/are the objectively-ascertainable characteristics of community service flights that distinguish them from other passenger-carrying operations that are appropriately characterised as private? When the FOI lobs in to do a ramp check, what will the FOI look at and ask so as to distinguish between the two?
The
last thing Australian aviation needs is another lump on the regulatory camel that is the classification of operations regime.