Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > PPRuNe Worldwide > Australia, New Zealand & the Pacific
Reload this Page >

The Regulatory Reform Program will drift along forever

Australia, New Zealand & the Pacific Airline and RPT Rumours & News in Australia, enZed and the Pacific

The Regulatory Reform Program will drift along forever

Old 22nd Feb 2007, 07:53
  #81 (permalink)  

Don Quixote Impersonator
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Australia
Age: 73
Posts: 3,404
I might be missing something here, but could it be that the SCC is in fact the problem.
gaunty is offline  
Old 22nd Feb 2007, 08:12
  #82 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Salt Lake City Utah
Posts: 3,052
In my experience, any deliberative, decision-making or project-management body with more than 7 people is doomed either to get nowhere or produce a god-awful mess.

The SCC: QED.
Creampuff is offline  
Old 22nd Feb 2007, 12:05
  #83 (permalink)  

Don Quixote Impersonator
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Australia
Age: 73
Posts: 3,404
Creampuff

Mate, make that more than 2 at a stretch 3 and you've won me.
gaunty is offline  
Old 22nd Mar 2007, 22:14
  #84 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Salt Lake City Utah
Posts: 3,052
Senate Question on Notice No. 2722 has been answered at page 95 of the Proof Senate Hansard of 21 March 2007 (here: http://www.aph.gov.au/hansard/senate...s/ds210307.pdf)

Note especially the (non)answer to the question as to what Mr Byron's 'specific deadlines' are, and that no one knows how much this journey in circles has cost or will cost:
Civil Aviation Safety Authority: Regulatory Reform Program

(Question No. 2722)

Senator O’Brien asked the Minister representing the Minister for Transport and Regional Services, upon notice, on 10 November 2006:

With reference to evidence by the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) Chief Executive Officer, Mr Bruce Byron, to the Senate Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport Legislation Committee on 13 February 2006, that he had ‘set specific deadlines and introduced a new approach to the management and delivery of the regulatory reform program’.

(1) Can the Minister outline the: (a) specific deadlines; and (b) new approach to the management and delivery of the program.

(2) When did the regulatory reform project commence.

(3) What has been the cost of the project to date, by year.

(4) What outcomes can be attributed to the project to date.

(5) Has the CASA restructure announced in February 2006, enhanced or diminished CASA’s capacity to meet Mr Byron’s specific deadlines for the regulatory reform project.

(6) What is the estimated total cost of the project.

Senator Ian Campbell—The Minister for Transport and Regional Services has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question:

(1) (a) The maintenance suite of regulations, the rules relating to aerial work application and the sports aviation suite will be progressed during 2007, along with rules relating to aerial application work and the sports aviation suite. Work on the Operational rules (Parts 91, 121, 135, 119) will also continue through 2007.

(b) In November 2005 CASA established the Planning and Governance Office (PAGO), which is responsible for coordinating and communicating CASA’s corporate and operational strategies and plans. PAGO includes a Regulatory Development Management Branch which is responsible for managing the Regulatory Reform Programme (RRP). The Branch is also responsible for managing consultation with the aviation industry on regulatory development proposals through the issue of Discussion Papers (DPs), Notices of Proposed Rule Making (NPRMs) and Regulation Impact Statements (RIS). The Branch also liaises with the Office of Best Practice Regulation (formerly the Office of Regulation Review) in relation to new regulatory proposals.

Prior to the establishment of PAGO, the RRP was managed through the Aviation Safety Standards section of CASA.

To develop safety regulations under the RRP, CASA forms small combined industry/CASA teams to establish the direction of the regulations and their detail. Wherever appropriate, these new rules are to be based on overseas regulations to ensure harmonisation and Australian competitiveness. These new rules will be written expressly to address safety outcomes.

(2) The RRP was initiated in December 1999 and was launched at the beginning of 2000.

(3) RRP costs cannot be distinguished from other costs associated with the CASA area responsible for the activity.

(4) During the period 2000 – 2006:
• 15 Civil Aviation Safety Regulations (CASR) Parts were made and commenced: CASR Parts 11, 13, 39, 45, 47, 60,
65, 67, 92, 101, 139, 143, 171, 172, 173.
• 57 Advisory Circulars were issued.
• 9 Manuals of Standards (MOS) were issued.
Examples of secondary outcomes are aircraft registrations, aerodrome certification/registration, navigation approvals granted and airworthiness directives issued as a result of the CASR Parts being made under the RRP.

(5) PAGO provides a focal point for coordination and project management of the RRP but relies on subject matter experts from other CASA offices for the policy and regulatory development work to be completed on a timely basis. The RRP under PAGO should be more successful than under the old Aviation Safety Standards section but progress will depend on the availability of subject matter experts from other parts of CASA.

(6) See (3).
So: don't know how much it's cost or is going to cost, and don't know how long it's going to take. What superb project management!
Creampuff is offline  
Old 23rd Mar 2007, 04:12
  #85 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Salt Lake City Utah
Posts: 3,052
It's public knowledge that Bruce Gemmell is 'looking for new challenges'. Is there any one else you had in mind, JOK?
Creampuff is offline  
Old 23rd Mar 2007, 05:34
  #86 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 1,135
I have ....

The principles of Project Management Objectives:

They must be:

Specific & Stated
Measurable
Achievable
Realistic
Time-based
peuce is offline  
Old 23rd Mar 2007, 08:22
  #87 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Salt Lake City Utah
Posts: 3,052
PAF:

I’m merely an acne-stippled, wheelchair-bound geek from Hicksville USA.

But even acne-stippled, wheelchair-bound geeks from Hicksville USA know that if a project has no time or cost parameters, the project is:

- not being managed by anyone; and

- doomed to meander around indefinitely.

The aviation regulatory ‘reform’ ‘project’: QED.

JOK:

I’m also pretty thick, so I don’t get the subtle hints.

Is Bruce Byron on the way out? Granted, he’s:

- way past the average ‘use by’ date of his predecessors, and

- been spectacularly average in his performance,

but I haven’t heard any rumours of his imminent demise.
Creampuff is offline  
Old 10th Apr 2007, 03:19
  #88 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Salt Lake City Utah
Posts: 3,052
So who’s actually supposed to be driving the train?

Mr Vaile’s ‘Aviation Regulation Review Taskforce’ election stunt was right on cue - it will keep Dick safely distracted for at least 6 months and, depending on the outcome of the election, maybe a year.

I was intrigued by Mr Vaile’s press release. It says, among other things that:
Following discussions with Mr Byron, I have decided to establish the Aviation Regulation Review Taskforce to assist me guide the CASA regulatory reform programme to a successful conclusion.
I thought Mr Byron was being paid to ‘guide the CASA regulatory ‘reform’ programme to a successful conclusion. Now it appears Mr Vaile is going to drive the train.

The scene: A smoking, mangled mess of twisted metal, barely recogniseable as railway track, rolling stock and engines. Mr Byron and Mr Vaile survey the wreckage, scratching their heads.

Mr Vaile: Geez Bruce, what happened?

Mr Byron: Well Mark, I was at the front of the train, issuing directives and restructuring the crew, when the next thing I know, we’re bearing down on the back of our own train! We wuz going around in circles!

Mr Vaile: Geez Bruce, why were you going in circles?

Mr Byron: How would I know? I don’t know how to drive one of these things mate. Sure, I’ve been on some expensive trips to see how they drive these things overseas, but geez Mark, these things are complicated and dangerous!

Mr Vaile: Geez Bruce, if you weren’t driving this thing, who was?

Mr Byron: Buggered if I know Mark. Wasn’t it you?

Mr Vaile: Geez Bruce, you’re in charge. You were supposed to be driving for the last 3 years!

Mr Byron: Sure Mark – pull the other one, it plays Jingle Bells!

Mr Vaile: Whadda we do now?

Mr Byron: What are you trying to achieve?

Mr Vaile: I want to retire quietly with my snout snugly in the public trough.

Mr Byron: You need a ‘taskforce’ mate.

Mr Vaile: A ‘taskforce’? What’s that going to achieve?

Mr Byron: Nuthin. But we’ll both be long gone before the voters realise just how big this mess is. Now let’s get out of here.

Mr Vaile: Which way is out?

Mr Byron: Just sneak past that confused and angry pack of aviators who were on the train, wade through that quagmire of regulations and orders, then climb over that mountain of manuals of standards, and you’re there.

Mr Vaile: Geez Bruce, what are our chances?

Mr Byron: Don’t worry Mark, I’ll issue a directive and we’ll be right.
Creampuff is offline  
Old 25th May 2007, 10:08
  #89 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: Queensland
Posts: 2,404
Would it not be factual to suggest this statement:

"The RRP was initiated in December 1999 and was launched at the beginning of 2000."
Is a decade out?
Torres is offline  
Old 25th May 2007, 21:40
  #90 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Salt Lake City Utah
Posts: 3,052
Yes. This farce started years before 1999, it’s nowhere near complete, and the current status is a camel that’s 4 times the size and has many more humps than what they started with.

Meanwhile, the important work of the task force (keeping Dick distracted during the lead up to the election) has begun. It’s had a meeting!
Senator O’BRIEN—What will the reporting relationship be between the task force and CASA?

Mr Mrdak—Mr Byron is a member of the task force. The task force will report to the minister. Mr Byron, as a member of the task force, will have a part to play in its advice.

Senator O’BRIEN—Has the task force met yet?

Mr Mrdak—Yes, it has.

Mr Ford—The task force has had one meeting. It was on 14 May.

Senator O’BRIEN—A week ago. Does it have terms of reference?

Mr Mrdak—Yes, it does.

Senator O’BRIEN—Are they public?

Mr Mrdak—They are not. I can take that on notice. The minister has written to the chair of the task force setting out his expectations and the area he wishes to have the task force cover. I will take that on notice to see if that can be made available to the committee.

Senator O’BRIEN—Thank you for that. Do you know if it has yet established a work program, who it will consult and when it will report?

Mr Mrdak—The initial meeting of the committee last week did establish a meeting schedule and initial areas of focus for its work—initially looking at parts of the civil aviation regulations which are under development, particularly, and I will check this with Mr Ford, part 91.

Mr Ford—Yes, it is part 91. The task force has decided to focus initially on some high priority areas of the regulatory framework. Part 91 is one of those.

Senator O’BRIEN—Remind me what is in part 91.

Mr Mrdak—It principally covers general flying rules and procedures.

Senator O’BRIEN—What is the term of the appointments of the members of the task force?

Mr Mrdak—They have been asked to provide a report to the minister by December this year.

Senator O’BRIEN—Are sitting fees paid to members of the task force?

Mr Mrdak—Terms and conditions are yet to be settled. It is yet to be finalised what remuneration will be made available to the task force. We are currently working through that.

Senator O’BRIEN—But some will?

Mr Mrdak—We are looking at options to do that, yes. It is envisaged that there will be some remuneration for their time involved or at least a meeting of their costs.

Senator O’BRIEN—Is there a standard fee for the chair of such a task force? Mr Mrdak—There are provisions through the Remuneration Tribunal for such special purpose tasks, and we are currently doing some work with the rem tribunal to ascertain what is the most appropriate remuneration for the task force chair and the members.

Senator O’BRIEN—Will you take it on notice to supply the committee with those details when they are established, or do I have to do it through another process?

Mr Mrdak—I would be happy to advise the committee when those arrangements are finalised and established.
Hopefully the first meeting was taken up with the important work of setting an action item to develop a plan to forward to the minister about when they plan to have their report to the minister, and that the action item will hopefully be completed in the next couple of months.

If there’s any substantive output from this before the election, I’ll run nude through the Tabernacle.
Creampuff is offline  
Old 30th Sep 2007, 21:39
  #91 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Salt Lake City Utah
Posts: 3,052
Bruce Byron, 14 February 2005:
I would be hopeful that it would not be long after early 2006 that most of the draft rules are delivered to the minister.
Bruce Byron 12 February 2006:
I have also set specific deadlines and introduced a new approach to the management and delivery of the regulatory reform program.
A CASA press release issued around 16 February 2006:
Regulatory reform program refined

During 2006 the maintenance suite of regulations will be finalised, along with rules relating to aerial work application and the sports aviation suite. The majority of the remaining rules will be completed next year.
SCC Meeting 3 May 2006:
The CEO stressed priority would be applied in particular to CASR Parts relating to sport and recreation aviation operations, 103, 105, 115 and 149; the maintenance suite alignment to the EASA rule set, Parts 43, 145, 66, 147, 144, 183 and Subparts M to 91, 121, 135, 133, 132; and CASR Part 137 (Aerial application operations) for completion in 2006.
21 March 2007:
Senator O’Brien asked the Minister representing the Minister for Transport and Regional Services, upon notice, on 10 November 2006:

With reference to evidence by the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) Chief Executive Officer, Mr Bruce Byron, to the Senate Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport Legislation Committee on 13 February 2006, that he had ‘set specific deadlines and introduced a new approach to the management and delivery of the regulatory reform program’.

(1) Can the Minister outline the: (a) specific deadlines; and (b) new approach to the management and delivery of the program.
…the dissembling answer to which appeared to be:
In November 2005 CASA established the Planning and Governance Office (PAGO). … PAGO provides a focal point for coordination and project management of the RRP but relies on subject matter experts from other CASA offices for the policy and regulatory development work to be completed on a timely basis. The RRP under PAGO should be more successful than under the old Aviation Safety Standards section but progress will depend on the availability of subject matter experts from other parts of CASA.
[bolding added]

It’s now 4th quarter 2007. Tomorrow’s the 13th anniversary of Seaview.

This process goes in endless, expensive circles, so I might as well recycle my own material:
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.
Creampuff is offline  
Old 30th Sep 2007, 23:30
  #92 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: Queensland
Posts: 2,404
Civil Aviation Regulations: Start Date 30/06/1988.

Nineteen years, three months since the process began. Drift along forever? Don't think so - more like a ship wreck!

From memory, Canada and New Zealand achieved the same complete regulatory reform process in less than five years.
Torres is offline  
Old 14th Nov 2007, 23:23
  #93 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Salt Lake City Utah
Posts: 3,052
The 'Meeting Record' of the 25 July 2007 SCC meeting has still not been published. Perhaps the SCC needs to include an action item to apply the 'fast track' methodology to the publication of 'Meeting Records'.

I wonder how the 'SCC efficiency' item went at the 25 July and 14 November meetings of the SCC.

2008 will be here soon. The 'new' 'simple' 1998 regulations will be 10 years old, and nowhere near completion.

Meanwhile, the Aviation Regulation Review Taskforce has produced nothing, or at least nothing it is prepared to make public. According to the April press release, the Deputy Prime Minister asked that the Taskforce 'report back to him by December 2007.' Methinks that no matter what the outcome of the election is, the Taskforce won't be producing anything of substance before December. But, as always, I live in hope.
Creampuff is offline  
Old 15th Nov 2007, 22:54
  #94 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 97
And the latest is Part 119 as an appendix to CAO82.

But only the major tuff - SMS and accountability!
What a joke, we will now be getting regulation by CAO, all touch and feely mumbo jumbo works and no substance so it will be up to the individual CASA inspector to "Interpret" as he sees fit! All done to "Risk Management" science!
We already have 2 areas that don't work.

1. Fatigue Management, non descriptive, some work, most don't, but CASA and the Uni of SA still say it is better because it has Science behind it. Risk Managemnet "Science" is a bit like statistics, it can be made to fit an outcome!

2. NAS, non descriptive and no one has any idea what the other aircraft is doing. Prediction: The first mid air involving an RPT aircraft will be in Kununurra! No "Risk Management" involved in the design, only, if it works in the US, then it must be safe! The only "Risk Management" was if it differed from the US design, not the Australian design. I have still not seen any US or freign aircraft flying around Australia for as PVT ops!

This then bring up the question of Cabin Safety. No "Risk Management" science from this department of CASA, just the fundimentalist written word of CAO20.11

Its a wonder they have not mandated fires to be lit inside an aircraft for every candidate on every 20.11 renewal!

CASA cannot get its own house in order, one would have thought that would be its major priority!

5 years ago we had to do everything in line with the new regs!, Well the new regs never eventuated. Now we will have to re-write everything to 119 by CAO.

New people come into CASA from all parts of the world and they wonder why the hostility and dought from the industry. We have heard it all before
Niles Crane is offline  
Old 16th Nov 2007, 02:17
  #95 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Salt Lake City Utah
Posts: 3,052
And the latest is Part 119 as an appendix to CAO82.
The regulatory camel sprouts another hump!
Creampuff is offline  
Old 28th Nov 2007, 00:03
  #96 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: Queensland
Posts: 2,404
Mr Rudd

I trust you will bring this thread and the nineteen years of CASA "regulatory reform", to the attention of your new Minister for Transport?

Or will it also continue to drift along forever on your watch?
Torres is offline  
Old 28th Nov 2007, 08:47
  #97 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Salt Lake City Utah
Posts: 3,052
My prediction for the next 2 years:

Review

Restructure

Lots of motherhood statements

Camel sprouts more humps
Creampuff is offline  
Old 28th Nov 2007, 10:20
  #98 (permalink)  

Don Quixote Impersonator
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Australia
Age: 73
Posts: 3,404
Creamy me old: 'twas ever thus.


Tomorrow, and tomorrow, and tomorrow,
Creeps in this petty pace from day to day,
To the last syllable of recorded time;
And all our yesterdays have lighted fools
The way to dusty death. Out, out, brief candle!
Life's but a walking shadow, a poor player
That struts and frets his hour upon the stage
And then is heard no more. It is a tale
Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury
Signifying nothing." — Macbeth (Act 5, Scene 5, lines 17-27)
gaunty is offline  
Old 16th Jan 2008, 09:18
  #99 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Salt Lake City Utah
Posts: 3,052
It’s only been 5 months since the meeting ….

The ‘final record’ of the SCC’s 27 July 07 meeting was finally published on 11 January 2008: http://www.casa.gov.au/newrules/scc/...C27_record.pdf

Executive summary: lots of activity and little productivity, as usual.

I note that:

- the ‘SCC efficiency’ action item has been airbrushed out of history

- the drafter of the minutes has the grammatical skills of a Year 10 dropout – perhaps a pilot drafted them.

- CEO Directive 16/2004 “had recently [back then] been repealed and replaced with CEO Directive 1/2007 which included ‘provisions to ensure unnecessary cost burden is not placed on industry, as well as greater harmonisation with international standards’”.

No doubt there will have to be a complete review of the ‘new’ and ‘developing’ regulations, to make sure they comply with the 2007 directive rather than the 2004 directive. (Doesn’t time fly? The poor buggers only had a couple of years to complete the 1998 regulations in accordance with the 2004 directive, and now there’s a new, superseding directive.)

Perhaps a program of training on what the new directive means is in order.

Even better: Australia should produce some 2008 regulations which, in conjunction with the existing 1998 and 1988 regulations, plus Civil Aviation Orders, will constitute world’s bestest-practice, harmonisedest, simplest, clearest, cheapest-to-implement-and-comply-with rules ever! In other words, Australia should produce a mess that looks like a freight train full of dog food that’s hit a herd of camels at high speed!

Go Australia! Go!
Creampuff is offline  
Old 16th Jan 2008, 13:52
  #100 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Back again.
Posts: 1,140


Oh dear! CASA can't get its own house in order. What chance does it have trying to regulate others?
Lodown is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.