Airspace Directorate to be formed.

[triadic]

MEDIA RELEASE
The Hon John Anderson MP
Deputy Prime Minister
Minister for Transport and Regional Services
Leader of The Nationals

01 April 2004
A45/2004

Joint Media Statement
The Hon John Anderson MP
Deputy Prime Minister
Minister for Transport and Regional Services
Leader of The Nationals Senator Nick Minchin
Minister for Finance and Administration

CHANGES TO AIRSPACE REGULATION IN AUSTRALIA

New arrangements for the management of Australian airspace were jointly announced today by the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Transport and Regional Services, John Anderson, and the Minister for Finance and Administration, Senator Nick Minchin.

"“The transfer of the airspace regulatory function to an Airspace Directorate within the Department of Transport and Regional Services is another step in a process of regulatory reform that has already occurred in the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA)," Mr Anderson said.

Mr Anderson said it was not appropriate for a commercial service provider such as Airservices to also have a regulatory role, particularly when its decisions about the designation of air routes and the classification of airspace could have profound effects on the costs borne by users of our airspace.

"This will complete the separation of regulatory functions from operational activity begun with the creation of Airservices and CASA in 1995.

"The new Airspace Authority, to be created within the Department of Transport and Regional Services, will concentrate on safe and efficient use of airspace in the context of a safety regulatory regime established by CASA. That safety regime, CASR Part 71, is in the process of finalisation and its coming into force will determine the timetable for the actual transfer of the regulatory function from Airservices.

"Enabling legislation will also be required and this will be introduced into the Parliament as soon as possible. In the meantime, Airservices will continue to perform the airspace regulatory function, but will establish internal procedures to ensure that its regulatory activities are clearly separated from its operational air traffic control activities," Mr Anderson said.

The Minister for Finance and Administration, Senator Nick Minchin, noted that the separation of the regulatory function would permit Airservices to concentrate on its primary role, the safe and effective provision of air traffic control and aviation rescue and firefighting services for Australia.

"The focus of Airservices on its prime responsibilities will be further assisted by the Government's decision to designate Airservices as a Government Business Enterprise (GBE)," Senator Minchin said.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Media Contacts
Paul Chamberlin ( Minister Anderson's Office ) 02 6277 7680
Jennifer Eddy ( Senator Minchin's office ) 02 6277 7400


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------






URL: http://www.ministers.dotars.gov.au/ja/releases/2004/April/a45_2004.htm

[tobzalp]

Cliff's notes



Airservices can now cut all the corners they want and blame someone else for not stopping them.

[Capn Bloggs]

So, yet another patch-up job to fix what you-know-who has done to our industry. And how much will this little exercise cost us?

Why on earth should the Dept of Transport, who arguably know nothing about aviation (evidenced by their spectacular flop on 27 Nov), now be entrusted with the design of our skies? Why don't you bite the bullet, John, and give airspace design and regulation back to the people who are the experts: CASA.

As the airspace saga lurches from one farce to another, the man who has caused it all (over the last 15 years!!), should be made to pay. How is it possible that governments of both persuaions can be hijacked by the aspirations of one individual? Will it really take a midair with a RPT jet to finally stop him?

[cogwheel]

The idea of an airspace directorate is not new and was in fact discussed widely by CASA/airservices/RAAF and the RAPACs/NAPAC as long ago as 1997 or thereabouts.

It has the potential to sort out a lot of the problems, provided the right people are employed therein and it has appropriate powers. That will be the interesting thing to watch.

Under the present Minister it may well turn into a political tool and achieve little except for those with egos and self interest.

[skylane]

I suppose Mr Smith will be the director of the directorate to ensure airspace design will be in accordance with Mr Smiths ideas.

I wonder who is going to pay the costs of all these failed airspace concepts. I bet you all a jar of peanut butter that it will be the RPT industry and ultimately their customers, rather than AOPA members or Mr Smith.

If I was a resident of Tasmania, I would be asking the elected reps to find out from Mr Andrson why they are regarded as second class citizens, being exposed to E airspace outside of radar coverage. The intended mickey mouse radar only proves that the concept of E airspace is wrong and needs to be ended now, not next month or next year.

[Creampuff]

And why not go the whole hog and get CASA out of the service provision business?

[Time Bomb Ted]

Sure sounds like AirServices have been kicked into touch. It always used to seem a bit like letting Local Councils set the fines for people who ignore parking signs....then fine them for ignoring them.......No Wait...That may have been a bad analogy.

TBT

[dingo084]

I need some help here.

There is much hand wringing and tut tutting going on in this thread about who is going to make up the "Airspace Directorate'

I have been unable to locate any 'official' notification of its make up yet it appears some here know better. Or, are they making assumtions based on their own personal bias' and agendas.

Bloggs, DOTARS may in your opinion know nothing of matters aviation, but, they do happen to have the legislative authority as the Government Department responsible for Transport.

In the same breath you credit CASA with actually knowing something about Safe Civil Aviation, get real, you can't have it both ways.


Thanks to the Tonka boy for the link to Civilairs (a lobby group)political responce to an operational matter.

The help I am seeking is how do I seperate the supposition, assumption, personal bias and hand wringing from the truth of the matter.

Oh well, I shouldn't really worry, this is a rumour place anyway and any similarity between the truth and what is posted is coincidental and unintentional.

ding:ok:

[tobzalp]

Explain to me how Civil Air is a lobby group.

[Time Bomb Ted]

Lobby Group : A group of persons engaged in trying to influence legislators or other public officials in favor of a specific cause.

Isn't that what Civilair do when they send out media releases and gets Ted's face on the box?

Isn't trying to get the government to backdown on NAS Lobbying?

Don't blame me, blame the drugs.......

[CaptainMidnight]

If either of the Smiths have any involvement with running the Airspace Directorate, anyone with real airspace design expertise will not join the organisation.

[AirNoServicesAustralia]

Yep, Civilair may be a lobby group. But read their releases and they are lobbying to return Australian airspace to a safe and unconfusing place to fly. How dare they!!!

And can you blame them (and most on here) for being skeptical of Anderson and his directorate. They will consult with the industry as they have before ie. This is the airspace change, and we know best, now ****** off. and bring in the best and the brightest airspace experts for the job ie. Smith and Smith and a few puppets to do the talking, and it will be rolled out as an impartial and independant unit able to concentrate on making sure Private pilots can fly where they want when they want and pay nothing.... oops I mean... on making sure Australian Airspace is safer for all.

[4Greens]

It should be remembered that since the formation of Airservices and CASA, the regulatory function was always with CASA. Not easy initially as they were short on expertise.

This means that the Directorate is taking on CASA functions and not Airservice functions.

[OzExpat]

The timing of this announcement from Anderson and DOTARS smacks of moving the goalposts to push NAS through at any cost.

AirServices blinked - rightly so - so they have been removed from the equation.
No, definitely not true. As was pointed out earlier in this thread, the idea was first publicised many years before NAS got any sort of guernsey. I've spoken to a few folk in CASA who believe that it will be a step in the right direction and I tend to agree - subject, of course, to the acquisition of the right sort of people.

And, no, IMHO Dick isn't one of those.

The real problem, since the time when the Regulator was separated from the service provider/s, has been the issue of airspace control. It is demonstrably wrong for airspace management to be in the hands of an organisation (AsA) that could be seen to have a conflict of interest.

My only question, for now, is... why ahs it taken this long to try to fix that?

[triadic]

4Greens


It should be remembered that since the formation of Airservices and CASA, the regulatory function was always with CASA. Not easy initially as they were short on expertise.

This means that the Directorate is taking on CASA functions and not Airservice functions.



Not quite so. The responsibility for Airspace has been that of Airservices since the split.
CASA set and regulate the standards but ASA have the power to establish/cancel etc airspace, controlled, PRD etc.
Under the AD I would expect the ASA role to move to the AD and the CASA role to stay with them (give or take a bit)

[Annex 11]

The following extract comes from the ICAO Air Traffic Services Planning Manual. It was adopted as reasonable practise for many years by the ATS provider in its many guises.

I'm confident that the new Airspace Directorate will again adopt the guidance as reasonable practise and that the powers delegated to that Directorate will not be abused.

"In planning the organization of the airspace, the first point to be made is that none of those laying claim to its use should attempt to exploit his advantages because he finds himself momentarily in a position of strength (be it political or numerical) when compared with that of other parties. Experience has shown that, over a longer period, such positions tend to change with the effect that, when they do, others will then exploit their temporary advantages, thus setting the stage for a course of events which, in the long run, is damaging to all parties concerned and to the air traffic services (ATS) system of the States concerned."