The Regulatory Reform Program will drift along forever
Thread Starter
We can work out what ‘shortly’ means, by a process of elimination
July 2012: Civil Aviation Safety Authority - July 2012
That was 5 months ago.
So we now know that, in CASA-speak, ‘shortly’ does not mean ‘within 5 months’.
We’ve also worked out that, in CASA-speak, ‘not be long’ means ‘at least 8 years’.
Any decade now, we’ll find out the precise meaning of those terms.
CASA will have the remaining new parts of the Civil Aviation Safety Regulations made as law shortly, bringing an effective end to the regulatory reform program.
So we now know that, in CASA-speak, ‘shortly’ does not mean ‘within 5 months’.
We’ve also worked out that, in CASA-speak, ‘not be long’ means ‘at least 8 years’.
Any decade now, we’ll find out the precise meaning of those terms.
Last edited by Creampuff; 20th Dec 2012 at 09:32.
The more CASA changes, the more it stays the same!
Leay's cartoon in the Courier Mail newspaper 23 April 2001, eleven years ago.
(Thanks and acknowledgement of another PPRuNer for the cartoon.)
Leay's cartoon in the Courier Mail newspaper 23 April 2001, eleven years ago.
(Thanks and acknowledgement of another PPRuNer for the cartoon.)
'somewhat delusional' as somebody was in a recent senate estimates.
The good Senators of the RRAT chose to assume that the CASA DAS/CEO was referring to them.
The exculpatory explanatory elucidatory epistle by the Acting Director, in the Director's absence, is worth reading.
Tootle pip!!
Thread Starter
When CASA said this in July 2012, I was pleasantly surprised:
I was pleasantly surprised, because there’s not much wriggle room there.
CASA “will have”. Not ‘intends to have’ or ‘will try its best to have’. No ‘ifs’ or ‘buts’: CASA will have.
CASA will have “the remaining new parts of the CASRs”. Not ‘some’ of them or ‘most’ of them. All of the remaining new parts.
Even the word “shortly”, though not precise, left little wriggle room. “Shortly” means ‘almost immediately’, ‘rapidly’, ‘quickly’, ‘before ‘long’, ‘presently’, ‘in a little while’, ‘in next to no time’.
But, over 6 months later, nothing’s happened and the weasel words are back. The January/February 2013 Australian Flying quotes the head of CASA as saying this, among other statements, about the completion of the regulatory reform program:
So if we assume the interview occurred before Christmas, “next year” is 2013.
In that case, the statement: “I could say to you that they’ll all be done next year, but it is not practice to make new regulations and have a long delay before they are implemented”, implies that not all of the new regulations will be made in 2013. That interpretation is supported by the subsequent statement about “one year or two makes no difference”.
It was with considerable trepidation that I first posted this statement in this thread:
The ‘decade’ to which I referred ended two years ago.
I post, again, the quote of the statement made by the (then) CASA CEO to the Senate Committee, eight years ago, and contained in the first post in this thread started eight years ago:
155 pages of regulations replaced with 1,500 so far, and apparently they’re not even “on the home straight” yet.
For some reason the word “knackery” leaps to mind.
CASA will have the remaining new parts of the Civil Aviation Safety Regulations made as law shortly, bringing an effective end to the regulatory reform program.
CASA “will have”. Not ‘intends to have’ or ‘will try its best to have’. No ‘ifs’ or ‘buts’: CASA will have.
CASA will have “the remaining new parts of the CASRs”. Not ‘some’ of them or ‘most’ of them. All of the remaining new parts.
Even the word “shortly”, though not precise, left little wriggle room. “Shortly” means ‘almost immediately’, ‘rapidly’, ‘quickly’, ‘before ‘long’, ‘presently’, ‘in a little while’, ‘in next to no time’.
But, over 6 months later, nothing’s happened and the weasel words are back. The January/February 2013 Australian Flying quotes the head of CASA as saying this, among other statements, about the completion of the regulatory reform program:
We’re just about on the home straight at the moment. … [Creampuff pauses to vomit …]
I could say to you that they’ll all be done next year, but it is not practice to make new regulations and have a long delay before they are implemented. So we will make the new regulations and implement them in a sensible and measured way. …
Whether the new regs come in one year or two makes no difference to some companies; …
I could say to you that they’ll all be done next year, but it is not practice to make new regulations and have a long delay before they are implemented. So we will make the new regulations and implement them in a sensible and measured way. …
Whether the new regs come in one year or two makes no difference to some companies; …
In that case, the statement: “I could say to you that they’ll all be done next year, but it is not practice to make new regulations and have a long delay before they are implemented”, implies that not all of the new regulations will be made in 2013. That interpretation is supported by the subsequent statement about “one year or two makes no difference”.
It was with considerable trepidation that I first posted this statement in this thread:
It is patently obvious that CASA no longer has the corporate competence to fix the regulatory trainwreck this side of the end of the decade, if ever, and no longer has the corporate integrity to be honest about it.
I post, again, the quote of the statement made by the (then) CASA CEO to the Senate Committee, eight years ago, and contained in the first post in this thread started eight years ago:
I would be hopeful that it would not be long after early 2006 that most of the draft rules are delivered to the minister.
For some reason the word “knackery” leaps to mind.
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: dans un cercle dont le centre est eveywhere et circumfernce n'est nulle part
Posts: 2,606
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Even the dumbest Appointee is aware of the fact that Legal Aid don't back two horses in the same race.
"knackers" comes to my mind as does your description. Perhaps given recent events, race fixing could be tolerated to a degree?
"knackers" comes to my mind as does your description. Perhaps given recent events, race fixing could be tolerated to a degree?
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Victoria
Posts: 80
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Shooting the messenger by Paul Phelan
Unfortunately for those who consider CASA to be a disfunctional organisation, Paul Phelan's article "shooting the messenger" proves the opposite.
https://senate.aph.gov.au/submission...7-e114756fe994
If only it had some connection with flight SAFETY!!!
47 years, 24,000 incident free hours don't count for much ?
Thanks again Paul.
https://senate.aph.gov.au/submission...7-e114756fe994
If only it had some connection with flight SAFETY!!!
47 years, 24,000 incident free hours don't count for much ?
Thanks again Paul.
Thread Starter
Let’s review some recent statements made by CASA about completion of the regulatory reform, on Mr McCormick’s watch.
July 2012:
November 2012. CASA said this in a submission to the Senate Committee Inquiry into the Pel-Air ditching:
That’s about 30 working days from now.
January/February 2013 Australian Flying
It is patently obvious that CASA still lacks the corporate competence to fix this regulatory trainwreck this side of the end of the decade, if ever, and still lacks the corporate integrity to be honest about it.
July 2012:
CASA will have the remaining new parts of the Civil Aviation Safety Regulations made as law shortly, bringing an effective end to the regulatory reform program.
5.3.5 CASA is finalising the new Civil Aviation Safety Regulations and expects these will be completed and made by the end of the first quarter 2013.
January/February 2013 Australian Flying
We’re just about on the home straight at the moment. …
I could say to you that they’ll all be done next year, but it is not practice to make new regulations and have a long delay before they are implemented. So we will make the new regulations and implement them in a sensible and measured way. …
Whether the new regs come in one year or two makes no difference to some companies; …
I could say to you that they’ll all be done next year, but it is not practice to make new regulations and have a long delay before they are implemented. So we will make the new regulations and implement them in a sensible and measured way. …
Whether the new regs come in one year or two makes no difference to some companies; …
Creamy here’s a bit more of the same from the recently completed answers to QONs from the Sup estimates Oct 2012
:
How FF can continue to keep answering questions like this just shows their complete arrogance and contempt for the Senate committee estimates system, Creamy is so right in saying that apparently ‘no one is responsible’ or accountable! 
Pg 69 of the ‘White Paper’ to which Senator Nash refers says amongst other things
:
Being as we are now in the longest election campaign in Oz history maybe we should start assessing the Ginger Ninja’s government ‘Aviation White Paper’ and highlighting the broken promises within!
:
Part of Q141:
Topic: Aviation White Paper
Proof Hansard Page/s: Written
Senator NASH asked:
3. Completing the CASA regulatory reform program by 2011 (page 69): in relation to the White Paper commitment to complete the CASA regulatory reform program by 2011:
(a) I understand that as at July 2012 this process still isn’t complete. Do you have a revised completion date?
(b) What remains to be finalised?
(c) Why has this taken 12 months longer than outlined in the White Paper?
Answer:
3. Work on the Flight Crew Licensing and Training Suite of the Civil Aviation Safety Regulations (CASRs) is complete and it is expected those regulations will be made in the near future. The remaining regulations to be completed are the Operational Suite, as well as phase two of the Maintenance Suite for charter, aerial work and private operators, both of which are expected to be finalised in 2013.
Topic: Aviation White Paper
Proof Hansard Page/s: Written
Senator NASH asked:
3. Completing the CASA regulatory reform program by 2011 (page 69): in relation to the White Paper commitment to complete the CASA regulatory reform program by 2011:
(a) I understand that as at July 2012 this process still isn’t complete. Do you have a revised completion date?
(b) What remains to be finalised?
(c) Why has this taken 12 months longer than outlined in the White Paper?
Answer:
3. Work on the Flight Crew Licensing and Training Suite of the Civil Aviation Safety Regulations (CASRs) is complete and it is expected those regulations will be made in the near future. The remaining regulations to be completed are the Operational Suite, as well as phase two of the Maintenance Suite for charter, aerial work and private operators, both of which are expected to be finalised in 2013.
Pg 69 of the ‘White Paper’ to which Senator Nash refers says amongst other things
:
The Government will support the industry’s future development by:
Ø confirming its commitment to the continued operation of secondary capital city airports, vital to general aviation;
Ø ensuring airport master plans maintain a continued focus on aviation development at secondary airports and not allowing non-aeronautical uses to compromise future aviation activity;
Ø issuing a new Australian Airspace Policy Statement, effective from 1 January 2010, confirming the safety of public transport services as the first priority in airspace administration;
Ø setting out a road map for future infrastructure and technology policy directions for air traffic management to enhance air traffic safety, including a range of infrastructure, systems and technology initiatives;
Ø giving effect to further flexible use airspace proposals which will build on recent initiatives by Defence to reduce the number of twenty four hour restricted areas from 81 to 15;
Ø finalising the suites of CASA’s regulations on licensing and flight operations by the end of 2010;
Ø completing the remainder of the CASA regulatory reform program by 2011, providing additional resources to expedite drafting of new regulations;
Ø continuing programs of support for essential airport infrastructure and air services in remote areas;
Ø ensuring CASA places a high priority on supporting safety and increased professionalism in the sector through the establishment of a sport and recreational policy and strategic framework and a Sport Aviation Office;
Ø capping any further increases in CASA regulatory service charges on the sector at Consumer Price Index levels for at least five years;
Ø recognising Australia’s important aircraft and component manufacturing industry by continuing with CASA’s efforts to establish mutual recognition arrangements with key trading partners to lower the regulatory burden for Australia’s aircraft and parts exporters; and
Ø continuing Government support for exporting companies through the Export Market Development Grants scheme.
Ø confirming its commitment to the continued operation of secondary capital city airports, vital to general aviation;
Ø ensuring airport master plans maintain a continued focus on aviation development at secondary airports and not allowing non-aeronautical uses to compromise future aviation activity;
Ø issuing a new Australian Airspace Policy Statement, effective from 1 January 2010, confirming the safety of public transport services as the first priority in airspace administration;
Ø setting out a road map for future infrastructure and technology policy directions for air traffic management to enhance air traffic safety, including a range of infrastructure, systems and technology initiatives;
Ø giving effect to further flexible use airspace proposals which will build on recent initiatives by Defence to reduce the number of twenty four hour restricted areas from 81 to 15;
Ø finalising the suites of CASA’s regulations on licensing and flight operations by the end of 2010;
Ø completing the remainder of the CASA regulatory reform program by 2011, providing additional resources to expedite drafting of new regulations;
Ø continuing programs of support for essential airport infrastructure and air services in remote areas;
Ø ensuring CASA places a high priority on supporting safety and increased professionalism in the sector through the establishment of a sport and recreational policy and strategic framework and a Sport Aviation Office;
Ø capping any further increases in CASA regulatory service charges on the sector at Consumer Price Index levels for at least five years;
Ø recognising Australia’s important aircraft and component manufacturing industry by continuing with CASA’s efforts to establish mutual recognition arrangements with key trading partners to lower the regulatory burden for Australia’s aircraft and parts exporters; and
Ø continuing Government support for exporting companies through the Export Market Development Grants scheme.
Being as we are now in the longest election campaign in Oz history maybe we should start assessing the Ginger Ninja’s government ‘Aviation White Paper’ and highlighting the broken promises within!
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Holland
Age: 60
Posts: 560
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CASA executives simply cannot achieve the task they have been set. Get rid of them.
The Skull is the patsy, the other 3 have been there between 12 - 20 years. They may try to spin their way out of accountability but regardless of their roles back then you can be sure they DID have influence in decisions made or discussed. You don't get a gig at ICAO by being 'hands off' at CASA.
Year after year of empty promises and blaming predecessors is unacceptable. Go get them Senators! These people do not care about lives or safety, if they did they would step up to the plate, prove they have testicles and put their hands up and say 'yep, we haven't got it right, we want to fix the problems and are going to do it'. But oh no, not CASA. Its about protecting self interest and lucrative salaries rather than lives. No souls and no conscience.
The Skull is the patsy, the other 3 have been there between 12 - 20 years. They may try to spin their way out of accountability but regardless of their roles back then you can be sure they DID have influence in decisions made or discussed. You don't get a gig at ICAO by being 'hands off' at CASA.
Year after year of empty promises and blaming predecessors is unacceptable. Go get them Senators! These people do not care about lives or safety, if they did they would step up to the plate, prove they have testicles and put their hands up and say 'yep, we haven't got it right, we want to fix the problems and are going to do it'. But oh no, not CASA. Its about protecting self interest and lucrative salaries rather than lives. No souls and no conscience.
Last edited by my oleo is extended; 9th Feb 2013 at 22:48.
Thread Starter
Thanks Sarcs. Here’s the amended list:
July 2012- CASA made this public statement:
October 2012- CASA said this in response to a Senator’s QON:
November 2012- CASA said this in a submission to the Senate Committee Inquiry into the Pel-Air ditching:
That’s about 30 working days from now.
January/February 2013 Australian Flying- CASA is quoted as saying this, among other things:
July 2012- CASA made this public statement:
CASA will have the remaining new parts of the Civil Aviation Safety Regulations made as law shortly, bringing an effective end to the regulatory reform program.
3. Work on the Flight Crew Licensing and Training Suite of the Civil Aviation Safety Regulations (CASRs) is complete and it is expected those regulations will be made in the near future. The remaining regulations to be completed are the Operational Suite, as well as phase two of the Maintenance Suite for charter, aerial work and private operators, both of which are expected to be finalised in 2013.
5.3.5 CASA is finalising the new Civil Aviation Safety Regulations and expects these will be completed and made by the end of the first quarter 2013.
January/February 2013 Australian Flying- CASA is quoted as saying this, among other things:
We’re just about on the home straight at the moment. …
I could say to you that they’ll all be done next year, but it is not practice to make new regulations and have a long delay before they are implemented. So we will make the new regulations and implement them in a sensible and measured way. …
Whether the new regs come in one year or two makes no difference to some companies; …
I could say to you that they’ll all be done next year, but it is not practice to make new regulations and have a long delay before they are implemented. So we will make the new regulations and implement them in a sensible and measured way. …
Whether the new regs come in one year or two makes no difference to some companies; …
Last edited by Creampuff; 9th Feb 2013 at 22:29.
Creamy there is also this in regards to the Maintenance regs:
I'll leave those qualified to comment and analyse this spin!
By the way here's a link for the just released AQONs from the RRAT Sup Estimates Oct 2012(originally due 7th December 2012):Senate Committees – Parliament of Australia
Question no.: 150
Program: n/a
Division/Agency: (CASA) Civil Aviation Safety Authority
Topic: Maintenance Regulations
Proof Hansard Page/s: Written
Senator NASH asked:
1. Can the department clarify whether the new regulations, and specially those contained in CASA Part 21, Subpart M, applies to the General Aviation industry?
2. Did the department adequately consult with all key stakeholders, including the AMROBA (Aviation Maintenance Repair and Overhaul Business Association), as to the scope of these changes and to which sectors of the industry they will apply before enacting the changes?
3. If so, can the department explain why there is so much confusion surrounding the impact of these new regulations?
4. Has the department sought to clarify, beyond the statement released by the Director of Aviation Safety, the effect of the new regulations on the industry since its implementation?
5. How advanced is the department in its steps to introduce new regulations relating to maintenance standards for the rest of the industry if the General Aviation industry is not covered by the changes recently implemented?
Answer:
1. Civil Aviation Safety Regulation (CASR) Part 21 Subpart M has application to all sectors of the aviation industry. Of the other maintenance regulations:
• CASR Parts 42 and 145 which cover the continuing airworthiness and approval of maintenance organisations only apply to Regular Public Transport operations.
• CASR Parts 66 and 147 apply to the licensing of maintenance personnel and approval of maintenance training organisations across the industry.
2. Yes. CASA consulted on the maintenance regulations with a broad range of stakeholders including AMROBA.
3. The new suite of maintenance regulations that came into effect in late June 2011 only applies to operators and maintainers of regular public transport aircraft. At the time CASA clearly and publicly stated: “Revised maintenance regulations for other sectors of aviation such as charter, aerial work and private operations will be developed at a later date, after wide consultation with these sectors.”
4. CASA has made a number of announcements and has undertaken discussions with the aviation industry.
5. CASA has been working, in conjunction with representatives from the aviation industry, on proposals for new maintenance regulations for the general aviation sector. These will be subject to a consultation process which will include the release of discussion papers, notices of proposed rulemaking and draft regulations and which will give industry ample opportunity to comment.
Program: n/a
Division/Agency: (CASA) Civil Aviation Safety Authority
Topic: Maintenance Regulations
Proof Hansard Page/s: Written
Senator NASH asked:
1. Can the department clarify whether the new regulations, and specially those contained in CASA Part 21, Subpart M, applies to the General Aviation industry?
2. Did the department adequately consult with all key stakeholders, including the AMROBA (Aviation Maintenance Repair and Overhaul Business Association), as to the scope of these changes and to which sectors of the industry they will apply before enacting the changes?
3. If so, can the department explain why there is so much confusion surrounding the impact of these new regulations?
4. Has the department sought to clarify, beyond the statement released by the Director of Aviation Safety, the effect of the new regulations on the industry since its implementation?
5. How advanced is the department in its steps to introduce new regulations relating to maintenance standards for the rest of the industry if the General Aviation industry is not covered by the changes recently implemented?
Answer:
1. Civil Aviation Safety Regulation (CASR) Part 21 Subpart M has application to all sectors of the aviation industry. Of the other maintenance regulations:
• CASR Parts 42 and 145 which cover the continuing airworthiness and approval of maintenance organisations only apply to Regular Public Transport operations.
• CASR Parts 66 and 147 apply to the licensing of maintenance personnel and approval of maintenance training organisations across the industry.
2. Yes. CASA consulted on the maintenance regulations with a broad range of stakeholders including AMROBA.
3. The new suite of maintenance regulations that came into effect in late June 2011 only applies to operators and maintainers of regular public transport aircraft. At the time CASA clearly and publicly stated: “Revised maintenance regulations for other sectors of aviation such as charter, aerial work and private operations will be developed at a later date, after wide consultation with these sectors.”
4. CASA has made a number of announcements and has undertaken discussions with the aviation industry.
5. CASA has been working, in conjunction with representatives from the aviation industry, on proposals for new maintenance regulations for the general aviation sector. These will be subject to a consultation process which will include the release of discussion papers, notices of proposed rulemaking and draft regulations and which will give industry ample opportunity to comment.
By the way here's a link for the just released AQONs from the RRAT Sup Estimates Oct 2012(originally due 7th December 2012):Senate Committees – Parliament of Australia
Thread Starter
Open Question to Mr McCormick, DASR
From the page 4 of the Proof Committee Hansard of the 15 February 2013 hearing of the Senate Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport Reference Committee inquiry into aviation accident investigations:
[Bolding added]
Mr Cormick,
Your reasoning appears to be that if different answers are given to the same question, it necessarily follows that at least one of them must be a lie: that is, a deliberate incorrect statement.
In that case….
Over the past decade and a half or so CASA has given, not 3, but closer to 30, different answers to the question: When will the regulatory reform program be completed? This thread contains some of the differing answers, quoted from primary materials.
Let’s focus on the most recent answers, given on your watch and, indeed, by you personally or authorised by you, if the source documents are accurate.
July 2012 - CASA made this public statement:
October 2012 - CASA said this in response to a Senator’s QON:
November 2012 - CASA said this in a submission to the Senate Committee Inquiry into the Pel-Air ditching:
January/February 2013 Australian Flying - CASA is quoted as saying this, among other things:
Aside from those statements being patently irreconcilable, the one made in the submission to the Senate Committee Inquiry in November 2012 is worth repeating: CASA is finalising the new Civil Aviation Safety Regulations and expects these will be completed and made by the end of first quarter 2013.
The last working day of first quarter 2013 is today.
When it’s patently obvious, to anyone with even a superficial understanding of the rate of progress and the work yet to be done on the regulatory reform program, that the work could not have been completed between November 2012 and the end of first quarter 2013, it seems to me there can only be one of three explanations for a CASA statement that it expected completion within that timeframe:
1. The maker of the statement is a dullard.
2. The maker of the statement is a liar.
3. The maker of the statement is an innocent patsy being manipulated by someone who is a dullard or a liar.
When I apply your reasoning it seems to me the only question we have to ask is: which one is correct? Are you a dullard, a liar or an innocent patsy being manipulated by someone who is a dullard or a liar?
Mr McCormick … In this particular case of Mr James and the amount of rest he achieved, I think there were three different answers—four hours, eight hours and a couple of hours—to the Four Corners interview. I do not know to this day how much fatigue was induced in Mr James by that operation; only he will know. And so far, with three different answers, the only question we have to ask is which one is correct and which two are the lies.
Mr Cormick,
Your reasoning appears to be that if different answers are given to the same question, it necessarily follows that at least one of them must be a lie: that is, a deliberate incorrect statement.
In that case….
Over the past decade and a half or so CASA has given, not 3, but closer to 30, different answers to the question: When will the regulatory reform program be completed? This thread contains some of the differing answers, quoted from primary materials.
Let’s focus on the most recent answers, given on your watch and, indeed, by you personally or authorised by you, if the source documents are accurate.
July 2012 - CASA made this public statement:
CASA will have the remaining new parts of the Civil Aviation Safety Regulations made as law shortly, bringing an effective end to the regulatory reform program.
3. Work on the Flight Crew Licensing and Training Suite of the Civil Aviation Safety Regulations (CASRs) is complete and it is expected those regulations will be made in the near future. The remaining regulations to be completed are the Operational Suite, as well as phase two of the Maintenance Suite for charter, aerial work and private operators, both of which are expected to be finalised in 2013.
5.3.5 CASA is finalising the new Civil Aviation Safety Regulations and expects these will be completed and made by the end of the first quarter 2013.
We’re just about on the home straight at the moment. …
I could say to you that they’ll all be done next year, but it is not practice to make new regulations and have a long delay before they are implemented. So we will make the new regulations and implement them in a sensible and measured way. …
Whether the new regs come in one year or two makes no difference to some companies; …
I could say to you that they’ll all be done next year, but it is not practice to make new regulations and have a long delay before they are implemented. So we will make the new regulations and implement them in a sensible and measured way. …
Whether the new regs come in one year or two makes no difference to some companies; …
The last working day of first quarter 2013 is today.
When it’s patently obvious, to anyone with even a superficial understanding of the rate of progress and the work yet to be done on the regulatory reform program, that the work could not have been completed between November 2012 and the end of first quarter 2013, it seems to me there can only be one of three explanations for a CASA statement that it expected completion within that timeframe:
1. The maker of the statement is a dullard.
2. The maker of the statement is a liar.
3. The maker of the statement is an innocent patsy being manipulated by someone who is a dullard or a liar.
When I apply your reasoning it seems to me the only question we have to ask is: which one is correct? Are you a dullard, a liar or an innocent patsy being manipulated by someone who is a dullard or a liar?
Last edited by Creampuff; 28th Mar 2013 at 10:52.
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Styx Houseboat Park.
Posts: 2,055
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tick, all of the above.
Great post Creamie. 
For me, it's not the bluff, not the puling rhetoric, not even the endless wait and costs; it's the pure cynicism of the exercise. CASA don't want a change of regulation: they like things just as they are. Unlimited power, dark grey areas which can be manipulated to suit almost any purpose, miles and miles of wriggle room and an 'A Deo rex, a rege lex' attitude which allows the GWM, with impunity, to do exactly as they please. ("The king is from God, the law from the king")
CASA options are all 'win-win'; the new regulations are a draconian rehash of the old. Punitive, prescriptive, complex, expensive and 'difficult' to comply with and have very little to do with safe, efficient, compliant operations, now where's the fun in that??. Industry complaints, tough titty. You wanted reform, we have given you reformed law, deal with it. Yes Minister, we did our bit but the industry can't agree, can't use them, can't comply, we asked them before making the rules for their opinion; there were no serious objections raised. No, no it's not our fault; you want we should jail a few, just to show that we can? The GWM must be laughing their collective socks off.
For me, it's not the bluff, not the puling rhetoric, not even the endless wait and costs; it's the pure cynicism of the exercise. CASA don't want a change of regulation: they like things just as they are. Unlimited power, dark grey areas which can be manipulated to suit almost any purpose, miles and miles of wriggle room and an 'A Deo rex, a rege lex' attitude which allows the GWM, with impunity, to do exactly as they please. ("The king is from God, the law from the king")
CASA options are all 'win-win'; the new regulations are a draconian rehash of the old. Punitive, prescriptive, complex, expensive and 'difficult' to comply with and have very little to do with safe, efficient, compliant operations, now where's the fun in that??. Industry complaints, tough titty. You wanted reform, we have given you reformed law, deal with it. Yes Minister, we did our bit but the industry can't agree, can't use them, can't comply, we asked them before making the rules for their opinion; there were no serious objections raised. No, no it's not our fault; you want we should jail a few, just to show that we can? The GWM must be laughing their collective socks off.
Last edited by Kharon; 28th Mar 2013 at 20:26.
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Australia
Age: 53
Posts: 547
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It could have been as simple as
casa Part 145
For detail see current easa Part 145,
Should never have tried to mix easa and FAA rules!
One example:
Easa don't recognize pma whereas our part 21 they are an important part. Hence much tweaking to easa based 145 to accept pma etc.
casa Part 145
For detail see current easa Part 145,
Should never have tried to mix easa and FAA rules!
One example:
Easa don't recognize pma whereas our part 21 they are an important part. Hence much tweaking to easa based 145 to accept pma etc.
Last edited by halfmanhalfbiscuit; 28th Mar 2013 at 20:33. Reason: Easter wabbits
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Holland
Age: 60
Posts: 560
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Iron Man to the rescue?
Don't worry halfmanhalfregulation, the A/g EM Operations, aka 'Iron Man' (because he puts on his robust suit before smashing into industry) will have some ideas on how to complete the reform program (which by the way is nearing 25 years in production, happy birthday!!!).
It is somewhat amusing reading the transcript of old senate estimate material on Hansard or even just perusing CASA's published statements over the past 10 years of 'we are in the drafts final stages', 'we should have it finished next year', 'we almost have it over the line' and 'we are on the home stretch now' is great for a laugh. 25 years my friends, what a lamentable joke. $200 million and counting, billions of frequent Montreal flyer points and enough troughs that combined would equal Sydney Harbour. And what do we have? Correct, bollocks!
Hell, even a young Creampuff was still in primary school when the reform program commenced!
Anyway, let us all wait with baited breath as Iron Man Campbell is sure to deliver a show stopper......
It is somewhat amusing reading the transcript of old senate estimate material on Hansard or even just perusing CASA's published statements over the past 10 years of 'we are in the drafts final stages', 'we should have it finished next year', 'we almost have it over the line' and 'we are on the home stretch now' is great for a laugh. 25 years my friends, what a lamentable joke. $200 million and counting, billions of frequent Montreal flyer points and enough troughs that combined would equal Sydney Harbour. And what do we have? Correct, bollocks!
Hell, even a young Creampuff was still in primary school when the reform program commenced!
Anyway, let us all wait with baited breath as Iron Man Campbell is sure to deliver a show stopper......
Last edited by my oleo is extended; 1st Apr 2013 at 12:33. Reason: Nervously watching the sky and awaiting Iron Man
Iron Man Campbell
Can anybody contribute a reasonably comprehensive CV for this Mr. Campbell, particularly his aviation flight operational and/or engineering experience??
Tootle pip!!
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Styx Houseboat Park.
Posts: 2,055
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Shame on you Leadsled; shame, shame, shame. There are very strict rules related to giving small children sharp implements, fireworks and firewater. But, check your PM's anyway: by the way – it's spelled AIRCRAFT (no Y), just for the sake of technical accuracy.
Tootle pip.....
Tootle pip.....
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Holland
Age: 60
Posts: 560
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Leadie, I don't have a copy of Herr Campbell's CV on hand, however I can list some of the 'must haves' for managers who slot into the salary level 'Band D' (around $190k starting point) and of course from there it goes all the way to DAS (around $500k) etc. Perhaps some of the below points appear on his CV, I'm not sure.
P.D's generally include:
- Must be disconnected from industry by having minimal qualifications in real aviation. (E.g has nevergotten ones hands dirty before)
- Must have experience in being a 'yes man' and licking ones way through ones career
- Must have exceptional skills in bullying, spin and nepotism. A willingness to proudly wear the jackboots publicly is highly favoured amongst executive peers.
- Must have a proven track record of climbing over others, shafting good staff, pinching others work and selling it off as your own to gain the accolades etc. (you know the type, they demand your project work in 'word format' so they can cut and paste their name into it)
- Be passionate about indulging in the public purse at any given opportunity and to levels that taxpayers would be appalled at
- Must have previous experience in listening to and considering your underlings and technical staffs (so naive, bless their hearts) ideas enthusiastically, then when the meeting concludes quickly selling those ideas as your own to those higher up the food chain.
Leadie, if you consider these and I am sure numerous other criteria that will possibly assist you.
Tootles
P.D's generally include:
- Must be disconnected from industry by having minimal qualifications in real aviation. (E.g has nevergotten ones hands dirty before)
- Must have experience in being a 'yes man' and licking ones way through ones career
- Must have exceptional skills in bullying, spin and nepotism. A willingness to proudly wear the jackboots publicly is highly favoured amongst executive peers.
- Must have a proven track record of climbing over others, shafting good staff, pinching others work and selling it off as your own to gain the accolades etc. (you know the type, they demand your project work in 'word format' so they can cut and paste their name into it)
- Be passionate about indulging in the public purse at any given opportunity and to levels that taxpayers would be appalled at
- Must have previous experience in listening to and considering your underlings and technical staffs (so naive, bless their hearts) ideas enthusiastically, then when the meeting concludes quickly selling those ideas as your own to those higher up the food chain.
Leadie, if you consider these and I am sure numerous other criteria that will possibly assist you.
Tootles
Last edited by my oleo is extended; 3rd Apr 2013 at 20:49.
A good article by Paul Phelan on the reform problems here.
Well worth a read and highlights the unwavering power of CASA's OLC and SDB to frustrate real reform and spend vast sums of our money.
Well worth a read and highlights the unwavering power of CASA's OLC and SDB to frustrate real reform and spend vast sums of our money.