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

Senate Inquiry into CASA.

Old 19th Jul 2008, 05:25
  #201 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 1998
Location: Planet Earth
Posts: 607
Arrow

Torres.........

We have inappropriate and appallingly drafted aviation legislation, incompetent and untrained regulatory staff, ineffective management, managed by series of deplorably incompetent Ministers - including the current CEO and Minister.
Good call Torres, but I think you forgot to include the Department Secretaries in your list. It was a BIG loss when Alan Hawke left the Department, and the Secretaries since Dr Hawke's departure wouldn't warrant p1ssing on if they were on fire!

Mind you, that's entirely my opinion, however I'm glad to say I wholeheartedly agree with your view of the current CEO and the Minister!
SIUYA is offline  
Old 19th Jul 2008, 07:35
  #202 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: Queensland
Posts: 2,403
"According to CASA's own evidence to the Senate Inquiry (see page 120 of the transcript for 2 July 2008), CASA has spent at least $140 miilion dollars on the reform program since 2002/03:"
clapton. When you first mentioned a couple of hundred million I was mildly skeptical. But $140 mill for 2002 to 2007 only???

So the "process" from 1988 to 2008 would have cost far more than $200 million??

And at the current rate of regulatory reform, Australia is probably another two decades and another $300 to $400 mill plus away from a new, complete set of workable regulations?

Unbelievable!!
Torres is offline  
Old 19th Jul 2008, 09:05
  #203 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 1998
Location: Planet Earth
Posts: 607
So to put it into context Torres, a total of about >30 years and possibly >$600 million for the 'package' by the time it's (hopefully) completed?

OUCH!

The respective Ministers, Secretaries, CEOs, Managers etc who have been individually and collectively responsibe for the totally incompetent debacle so far ought to bloody-well hang their heads in shame!

And Rudd needs to now make sure that the current Minister gets off his bum and to start doing something constructive to begin to repair the damage that's already been done by the lunatics who've been running the asylum..........however given the present Minister's pathetic track-record so far, I won't be holding my breath waiting for THAT to happen though!

Last edited by SIUYA; 19th Jul 2008 at 10:33. Reason: typo......ggrrrrrr!
SIUYA is offline  
Old 19th Jul 2008, 09:16
  #204 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 478
Yes Minister comes to mind.
Bob Murphie is offline  
Old 19th Jul 2008, 11:26
  #205 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: Queensland
Posts: 2,403
Yes SIUYA. But it's not their money.

It's just tax money, just our money.....

And there is every probability the regulations Australia ends up with will be just as ambiguous as the present regulations.

Torres is offline  
Old 19th Jul 2008, 22:29
  #206 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 1998
Location: Planet Earth
Posts: 607
Angry Taxpayers money NOT at work!

Torres...........

It's just tax money, just our money.....
Yes, I totally agree!

But if we are now at a point where 20 years down the track and with over $200M of OUR money having been more or less totally wasted with absolutely f#ck-all result, then it can really only be described as government maladministration at its worst!

Perhaps it's time that we as an industry called for help from the Government Ombudsman to bring a stop to this digraceful state of affairs?
SIUYA is offline  
Old 19th Jul 2008, 23:19
  #207 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Salt Lake City Utah
Posts: 3,052
Me, 16 March 2005:
The overarching and chronic problem here is that the political cycle is simply too short, and its influences simply too self-interested, for the regulatory reform process to be commenced, managed objectively and in the public interest, then completed, before the use-by date of the person in charge of the process.
I should add that since then Iíve come to the realisation that there is actually no one in charge of the process. That doesnít help either.
Creampuff is offline  
Old 19th Jul 2008, 23:22
  #208 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Oz
Age: 73
Posts: 590
Booooooooooooom!!!!!

Just joking. Makes absolute sense to me. To my simplistic view, as the Regs have grown they have been interwoven and exemptions included etc etc to the stage where trying to fix the mish-mash is so complicated it would be better to phase in a new suite.

There are probably all sorts of legal and regulatory considerations but your point is well made that it is highly unlikely a raft of Boards, execs, people, and committees have all been duds.

If what you are doing isn't working, time to try something different.

(Stands back with fingers in ears with 88 awaiting loud explosion)!
james michael is offline  
Old 19th Jul 2008, 23:50
  #209 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: Queensland
Posts: 2,403
I can't help but feel all the industry consultation and consensus, vested interest lobbyists, submissions etc, is akin to letting prisoners run the goals or the Police taking referendums on speed limits.

It needs a Minister with the guts to set time limits and direct CASA to complete the job; a CASA CEO to manages the task; delegation of an accountable manager as per Creamie's comment and a will within CASA to urgently develop regulations appropriate to Australia's needs.

Propjet, it is a big task, but is it a twenty years, $200 million task - and the job still no where near finished???

CASA's procrastination is obvious.
Torres is offline  
Old 20th Jul 2008, 00:30
  #210 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 1998
Location: Planet Earth
Posts: 607
Propjet..........

I don't think that '...most of the correspondents...' have implied that the RR process is easy. What they are implying though is perhaps the annoyance that I expresssed in my previous posts about the huge amount of time and money that's been wasted in getting to the point where we are now at in the RR process, ie., in reality, back where we started!

And there can really only be two reasons for that:
1. the process has been ill-defined and poorly conducted to date, and
2. no-one's actually been in charge of the process as correctly identified by Creampuff!

Your suggestion of adopting the NZ regs (and I presume you also want the Act in there too) is sensible. As I understand it, PNG have adopted the NZ regulations, and they are apparently also intended to be the model regulations for PASO. So, yes, it does seem to make good sense for Australia to 'harmonise' with the aviation regulations other regional countries.

But maybe we are naive in thinking that government would or could contemplate taking such a simple, pragmatic and (what seems to be) sensible solution to the existing debacle and in so doing stop any further unnecessary waste of taxpayers' money?
SIUYA is offline  
Old 20th Jul 2008, 09:51
  #211 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: Queensland
Posts: 2,403
SIUYA.

Your suggestion of adopting the NZ regs (and I presume you also want the Act in there too) is sensible. As I understand it, PNG have adopted the NZ regulations, and they are apparently also intended to be the model regulations for PASO. So, yes, it does seem to make good sense for Australia to 'harmonise' with the aviation regulations other regional countries.
Interestingly, funding for Papua New Guinea to adopt the NZ regs, was courtesy of the Australian tax payer!

In view of the trans Tasman agreements, adoption of the New Zealand regs may be the only way Australia gets new regs, in reasonable time and at significant cost saving.
Torres is offline  
Old 20th Jul 2008, 22:34
  #212 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Queensland Australia
Posts: 103
There are also a lot of frustrated CASA people over Reg reform. An attempt to simplify regs. being torpedoed by interest groups and the legislation drafting a'-h'-s. who want to put all the complication back in just in case the guilty until proven innocent, dangerous aviation industry might get off prosecution, which of course is the aim of all regulations isn't it.

Reg reform must be taken away from CASA domination (i.e veto). Political will and a minister who knows something about aviation is required, not just PR. The inevitability of this Senate 'enquiry' not achieving anything is most frustrating.
bilbert is offline  
Old 21st Jul 2008, 00:24
  #213 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 769
The aim of all regulation should be the establishment of good behaviour, not compliance by prosecution, that should be a last resort.

If CASA keeps going along its current path soon we will see the death penalty for breaches.
T28D is offline  
Old 21st Jul 2008, 01:53
  #214 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Salt Lake City Utah
Posts: 3,052
How many pilots and LAMES were prosecuted for offences under the civil aviation law, last year?

Round figures to the nearest 10 will do.
Creampuff is offline  
Old 21st Jul 2008, 02:52
  #215 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Alice Springs
Posts: 1,744
Yes

T28D you have it right.
The real purpose of CASA is to protect the federal government from legal liability arising from any aviation related matters. They have tried to do this by insisting that pilots, engineers and operators spend hours and hours documenting everything they do, and keeping these records for a long period, in case CASA wishes to prosecute them. It does not make sense to see a LAME sitting at a desk doing paperwork most of the time. They are so pedantic that they have lost the respect of the industry.

It appers they also believe that they have the right to manipulate the industry by using (or misusing) the pedantic rules to affect parts of the industry commercially.
There are lots of dispensations, exceptions, approvals stc.
We have rubbery rules.

T28D has it right. Australia's reasonable air safety record has been achieved because it is too costly to have a prang, and those organisations that do usually go out of business. Safety is achieved by the peolpe who work in the industry doing their jobs well. You cannot "regulate" safety.

We are all part of one big team, and for good healthy, safe operation we must all work closely together, with two way communication and co-operation. This has not been happening for some time. I believe we should have a bulletin board similar to PPRuNe for pilots, engineers operators,CASA, ATSB etc to talk to one another, informally
Maybe PPRuNe is as close as we can get.

I wonder if CASA is a suitable organisation to supervise and co-ordinate this. In it's present state it probably is not.The word "Authority" should be removed from it's title, as this generates the wrong type of thinking that is more appropriate for the military. It should be replaced by the word "service" which is what the industry needs.
Maybe the "Civil Aviation Service" could do it better.

Last edited by bushy; 21st Jul 2008 at 07:51.
bushy is offline  
Old 21st Jul 2008, 03:16
  #216 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 309
If CASA keeps going along its current path soon we will see the death penalty for breaches.
This already happens!

Di
Diatryma is offline  
Old 21st Jul 2008, 04:11
  #217 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: Queensland
Posts: 2,403
"Has enybody heard them takeing on the big guys I know of no such case, if they did I bet they did not win."
Yes, the two pilot who allegedly departed Launceston with the runway lights extinguished. That was a looong time ago and still hasn't seen it's day in Court. CASA conveniently blame the procrastination on the Tasmanian DPP.

"Maybe the "Civil Aviation Service" could do it better."
"Service"??? You jest!!

How about something original and appropriate - like the "Department of Civil Aviation?"
Torres is offline  
Old 21st Jul 2008, 06:28
  #218 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 769
Come back Sir Donald Anderson, all is forgiven.We need you !!!!!
T28D is offline  
Old 21st Jul 2008, 08:08
  #219 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: THE BLUEBIRD CAFE
Posts: 60
Yo . . .. Bushy


The word "Authority" should be removed from it's title, as this generates the wrong type of thinking that is more appropriate for the military. It should be replaced by the word "service" which is what the industry needs.
Maybe the "Civil Aviation Service" could do it better.
You've read Doc Fenton who called them the Uncivil Aviation Branch.

And his telegram to them way down in Melbourne, upon informing him he was grounded.


THEY'RE ROUND AND THEY BOUNCE. SIGNED FENTON.
Fantome is offline  
Old 21st Jul 2008, 09:22
  #220 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: australia
Age: 68
Posts: 80
In the Brisbane Courier Mail today " Dick Smith said we need more Airtraffic Controllers " Isn't he the one who wanted to get rid of all the ATC and replace them with pilot's sorting out their own separation's ??????
StallBoy 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.