Senate Inquiry into CASA.
Torres.........
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!
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.
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!
"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:"
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!!
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!
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!
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.
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.
Taxpayers money NOT at work!
Torres...........
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?
It's just tax money, just our money.....
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?
Me, 16 March 2005:
I should add that since then I’ve come to the realisation that there is actually no one in charge of the process. That doesn’t help either.
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.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Oz
Age: 77
Posts: 590
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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)!
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)!
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.
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.
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?
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.
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.
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.
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.
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Queensland Australia
Posts: 103
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
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.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 768
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
If CASA keeps going along its current path soon we will see the death penalty for breaches.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Alice Springs
Posts: 1,744
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
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.
"Has enybody heard them takeing on the big guys I know of no such case, if they did I bet they did not win."
"Maybe the "Civil Aviation Service" could do it better."
How about something original and appropriate - like the "Department of Civil Aviation?"
Yo . . .. Bushy
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.
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.
Maybe the "Civil Aviation Service" could do it better.
And his telegram to them way down in Melbourne, upon informing him he was grounded.
THEY'RE ROUND AND THEY BOUNCE. SIGNED FENTON.
Join Date: May 2008
Location: australia
Age: 71
Posts: 80
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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 ??????