Truss: Aviation Safety Regulation Review
MMSM: While SC is away AK comes out to play!!
Put it in context Creamy...
SC from the Oz is silver tailing it with IATA...meanwhile his fill in AK steps up to the plate...
CASA faces change as it loses trust
The Australian |
June 04, 2014 12:00AM
Anthony Klan
THE nation’s air safety regulator is set for the biggest overhaul in decades after a government review found that relations between it and the airlines had soured to the point that safety improvements were being stifled.
The Aviation Safety Regulation Review, conducted by aviation veteran David Forsyth, has called for sweeping reforms of the Civil Aviation Safety Authority, claiming the regulator’s “hard-line approach” to enforcement was inappropriate and had led to a lack of trust between it and operators.
Federal Transport Minister Warren Truss said government would now review the 37 recommendations of the report, which would probably see a large-scale overhaul in aviation safety.
“It looks like this will be a pretty fundamental restructuring of the safety regulations and if these 37 regulations are *accepted then clearly it will be the biggest shake-up in decades,” Mr Truss told The Australian yesterday. “We are looking for a quick resolution to these issues so that we can start rebuilding trust and confidence in the aviation *sector.”
Key among the recommendations was providing operators with “plain English” regulations, that CASA’s board exercise “full governance control” and the regulator change its organisational structure to a “client-*oriented output model”.
The review, commissioned by the federal government last *November, found the relationship between CASA and the industry had failed to a level which was “cause for concern”.
“In recent years the regulator has adopted an across-the-board hard-line philosophy, which in the panel’s view, is not appropriate for an advanced aviation *nation such as Australia,” the *review said.
It said the present “adversarial relationship” between regulators CASA and the Air Transport Safety Bureau, and industry, meant the “fundamental principle” of sharing safety data openly was not occurring.
Mr Truss said the replacement of current CASA head John McCormick — who will not be seeking to renew his contract which expires in coming weeks — and the creation of two new board positions would herald a “new start” for CASA. “We will deal with the recommendations in the context of the personnel who will be taking up positions over the next few months.”
CASA declined to comment on the report. (No surprises there...
)
MTF...
Here you go Creamy put it on the record:
SC from the Oz is silver tailing it with IATA...meanwhile his fill in AK steps up to the plate...
CASA faces change as it loses trust
The Australian |
June 04, 2014 12:00AM
Anthony Klan
THE nation’s air safety regulator is set for the biggest overhaul in decades after a government review found that relations between it and the airlines had soured to the point that safety improvements were being stifled.
The Aviation Safety Regulation Review, conducted by aviation veteran David Forsyth, has called for sweeping reforms of the Civil Aviation Safety Authority, claiming the regulator’s “hard-line approach” to enforcement was inappropriate and had led to a lack of trust between it and operators.
Federal Transport Minister Warren Truss said government would now review the 37 recommendations of the report, which would probably see a large-scale overhaul in aviation safety.
“It looks like this will be a pretty fundamental restructuring of the safety regulations and if these 37 regulations are *accepted then clearly it will be the biggest shake-up in decades,” Mr Truss told The Australian yesterday. “We are looking for a quick resolution to these issues so that we can start rebuilding trust and confidence in the aviation *sector.”
Key among the recommendations was providing operators with “plain English” regulations, that CASA’s board exercise “full governance control” and the regulator change its organisational structure to a “client-*oriented output model”.
The review, commissioned by the federal government last *November, found the relationship between CASA and the industry had failed to a level which was “cause for concern”.
“In recent years the regulator has adopted an across-the-board hard-line philosophy, which in the panel’s view, is not appropriate for an advanced aviation *nation such as Australia,” the *review said.
It said the present “adversarial relationship” between regulators CASA and the Air Transport Safety Bureau, and industry, meant the “fundamental principle” of sharing safety data openly was not occurring.
Mr Truss said the replacement of current CASA head John McCormick — who will not be seeking to renew his contract which expires in coming weeks — and the creation of two new board positions would herald a “new start” for CASA. “We will deal with the recommendations in the context of the personnel who will be taking up positions over the next few months.”
CASA declined to comment on the report. (No surprises there...
)MTF...
Here you go Creamy put it on the record:
The Deputy Prime Minister has invited public and industry views on the recommendations of the report, prior to the finalisation of the Government response. Public and industry comments are being sought by close of business Monday 30 June 2014. Comments can be sent to the Department on the attached comment form.
That’s not the attitude, 004.
The government hasn’t conducted nearly enough inquiries and hasn’t received nearly enough submissions.
The submissions to the Air Accident Investigation inquiry weren’t enough.
The Report and Recommendations from the Aviation Accident Investigation inquiry weren’t enough.
The submissions to the ASRR Panel weren’t enough.
The Report and Recommendations of the ASRR Panel weren’t enough.
Submissions now need to be made on the Report and Recommendations of the ASSR Panel.
Then there will be a Report and Recommendations made about the submissions made on the Report and Recommendations of the ASSR Panel.
Then submissions will need to be made on the Report and Recommendations made about the submissions made on the Report and Recommendations of the ASSR Panel.
It makes perfect sense.
The government hasn’t conducted nearly enough inquiries and hasn’t received nearly enough submissions.
The submissions to the Air Accident Investigation inquiry weren’t enough.
The Report and Recommendations from the Aviation Accident Investigation inquiry weren’t enough.
The submissions to the ASRR Panel weren’t enough.
The Report and Recommendations of the ASRR Panel weren’t enough.
Submissions now need to be made on the Report and Recommendations of the ASSR Panel.
Then there will be a Report and Recommendations made about the submissions made on the Report and Recommendations of the ASSR Panel.
Then submissions will need to be made on the Report and Recommendations made about the submissions made on the Report and Recommendations of the ASSR Panel.
It makes perfect sense.
Last edited by Creampuff; 4th Jun 2014 at 07:09.
Dougy's week
My week
04 Jun 2014
Doug Nancarrow
No prizes for correctly guessing what’s getting all the attention this week. The report from the Regulatory Review (Forsyth) panel hit the streets Tuesday and the reaction since then has been interesting, to say the least.
By now everyone will have digested at least the Executive Summary and the 37 recommendations.
But there’s a lot more in the Report itself.
It’s worth noting that we’ve already had the 2007 Hawke Report, the 2008 Senate Committee Inquiry and the 2009 Aviation White Paper dealing with issues with and within CASA – and some of that is repeated in this latest report; eg Industry dissatisfaction with, and alienation from, CASA.
What’s new are the specifics around the appointment of a new Director of Air Safety and governance of CASA going forward. A lot of that relates to producing a more accessible regulatory authority and it’s hard to argue against that.
It was interesting too to see that the Department of Infrastructure (Aviation) came in for a little bit of stick, with the recommendation that it should play a stronger policy role. But there was no take up of industry clamour for a separation of the rule-making and enforcement roles.
The suggestion that CASA should re-establish offices out there at the coal face (something worked exceptionally well back in the days of the CAA) is particularly welcome.
There’s no doubt this is a very good report and that the recommendations are constructive. No, they’re more than that, they are the recipe for a fully effective CASA , engaged productively with industry.
If the government fails to do anything less than drive full implementation of these recommendations then we could well be looking at yet another inquiry into our regulatory regime five years down the track.
This report provides an opportunity to restructure CASA and its relationships with the other associated entities in a way that will work better than anything we’ve had before.
Let’s not screw it up.
The other DF's...MEDIA RELEASE
04 Jun 2014
Doug Nancarrow
No prizes for correctly guessing what’s getting all the attention this week. The report from the Regulatory Review (Forsyth) panel hit the streets Tuesday and the reaction since then has been interesting, to say the least.
By now everyone will have digested at least the Executive Summary and the 37 recommendations.
But there’s a lot more in the Report itself.
It’s worth noting that we’ve already had the 2007 Hawke Report, the 2008 Senate Committee Inquiry and the 2009 Aviation White Paper dealing with issues with and within CASA – and some of that is repeated in this latest report; eg Industry dissatisfaction with, and alienation from, CASA.
What’s new are the specifics around the appointment of a new Director of Air Safety and governance of CASA going forward. A lot of that relates to producing a more accessible regulatory authority and it’s hard to argue against that.
It was interesting too to see that the Department of Infrastructure (Aviation) came in for a little bit of stick, with the recommendation that it should play a stronger policy role. But there was no take up of industry clamour for a separation of the rule-making and enforcement roles.
The suggestion that CASA should re-establish offices out there at the coal face (something worked exceptionally well back in the days of the CAA) is particularly welcome.
There’s no doubt this is a very good report and that the recommendations are constructive. No, they’re more than that, they are the recipe for a fully effective CASA , engaged productively with industry.
If the government fails to do anything less than drive full implementation of these recommendations then we could well be looking at yet another inquiry into our regulatory regime five years down the track.
This report provides an opportunity to restructure CASA and its relationships with the other associated entities in a way that will work better than anything we’ve had before.
Let’s not screw it up.
The other DF's...MEDIA RELEASE
"I encourage the aviation industry and others interested in this report to make their thoughts known to the Minister," Senator Fawcett said.
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Downunda
Posts: 562
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Raise a glass - which one is your choice!
A glass half full kind of guy (5 years);
And glass half empty kind of guy, me;
Taking September 2014 as a 'month of change' - No more Skull or Beaker, I give it 24 - 36 months before another inquiry commences. A smoking hole should have occurred, rise in incidents, the cries of the IOS howling for a completion of the regulatory non reform program to finish, more departmental shenanigans, a damning ICAO or FAA audit will have taken place, maybe a Pot Plant revolt could have occurred or an Executive gets caught with a goat! Either way, the tautological Australian aviation game of 'round the garden' shall continue!
TICK TOCK
If the government fails to do anything less than drive full implementation of these recommendations then we could well be looking at yet another inquiry into our regulatory regime five years down the track.
Taking September 2014 as a 'month of change' - No more Skull or Beaker, I give it 24 - 36 months before another inquiry commences. A smoking hole should have occurred, rise in incidents, the cries of the IOS howling for a completion of the regulatory non reform program to finish, more departmental shenanigans, a damning ICAO or FAA audit will have taken place, maybe a Pot Plant revolt could have occurred or an Executive gets caught with a goat! Either way, the tautological Australian aviation game of 'round the garden' shall continue!
TICK TOCK
Oz Aviation...
ASRR calls for cultural and structural change at CASA
Item by australianaviation.com.au at 5:29 pm, Tuesday June 3 2014
A federal government-commissioned report into aviation safety regulation in Australia has called for substantial cultural and structural changes at the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) and for better leadership of and coordination between Australia’s aviation safety agencies.
The long-anticipated Aviation Safety Regulation Review (ASRR)’s report, released by Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Infrastructure and Regional Development Warren Truss on Tuesday, makes 37 recommendations, noting that while Australia has an “excellent” airline safety record and an “advanced” aviation regulatory system, that “there are opportunities for the system to be improved to ensure Australia remains a leading aviation state”.
Those opportunities revolve primarily around improving the relationship between the regulator – CASA – and the aviation industry, which it describes as, “in many cases, adversarial”.
“Leading regulators across the world are moving to performance-based regulation, using a ‘trust and verify’ approach, collaborating with industry to produce better safety outcomes and ensuring the regulator stays in touch with rapidly advancing technology and safety practices,” the report’s executive summary reads.
“Due to the present adversarial relationship between industry and CASA, Australia lacks the degree of trust required to achieve this important aim. Sharing safety data is a fundamental principle of good safety management.”
The report sees the recruitment of a new head of CASA – current Director of Aviation Safety (DAS) John McCormick is standing down at the end of August – as an opportunity to reform the culture of the organisation. It notes: “Many have argued that the DAS should be a pilot, or at least experienced in aviation operations, suggesting this experience is necessary to understand the industry. The Panel, however, is of the opinion that the most important qualification for the DAS is leadership and management experience and capabilities in cultural change of large organisations.”
The ASRR also calls for structural change at CASA to “align its organisation with CASA”.
"Countries such as Canada and New Zealand have largely structured their safety oversight program to align with the industry, and have specific groups dedicated to industry sectors (eg GA, airlines, aircraft certification, maintenance, airports and air navigation services),” the report says. It recommends that CASA should adopt a “client-orientated output model” organisational structure similar to that used by the New Zealand CAA.
“Many variations of such a model are possible, and the proposal is not prescriptive. However, the key intention is to clarify accountability and improve the points of contact for the aviation community.”
As for CASA’s ongoing Regulatory Reform Program, which “has led to widespread ‘reform fatigue’ within the industry”, the report recommends the adoption of “a more manageable (but regular) process of periodic maintenance”. It also recommends “returning to a third tier of regulation, removing as much detail as possible from regulations, and using plain language standards in the third tier.”
Other recommendations for CASA include re-establishing small offices at major airports, developing an industry exchange program, that the CASA complaints commissioner report to the CASA board, and publishing key performance indicators for service delivery functions.
More broadly the report calls a more active role in aviation safety policy from the Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development, noting that: “No single agency is responsible for the overall performance and health of the aviation safety system.
“ It recommends that the ICAO-mandated State Safety Program (SSP) be used as the basis for a strategic plan for aviation safety in Australia.
“Over time the Department’s policy coordination role and policy leadership authority has either eroded or not been utilised to its full potential, and as a consequence, its governance and policy responsibility needs to be re-established and reinforced. The Panel considers this could be done under the authority of a reinvigorated forward-looking SSP.”
Such an SSP, the report says, should be developed as a “strategic plan for the aviation safety system”.
In releasing the report Minister Truss says the “government will commence consideration of the report in detail without delay.”
The report’s release has been welcomed by the aviation industry, but at least one figure has warned that the report must now be followed up by action.
“The key issue will be Minister Truss’s response, which looks like it may take some time,” a senior industry figure has told Australian Aviation.
“We will have a closer look at the detail of the report – but at the end of the day it is just a report – until Truss acts.”
Minister Truss has invited industry and public feedback on the review by June 30. The report, which was authored by former Airservices chairman David Forsyth, Don Spruston, former Director-General of Civil Aviation at Transport Canada, and Roger Whitefield, former Head of Safety at British Airways, can be downloaded from the Department of Infrastructure’s website.
FNQ Wazza on the ASRR..
Writing on the wall for CASA ineptitude
Posted on Tuesday, 3 June, 2014
LEICHHARDT MP Warren Entsch has welcomed the findings of a review into Australian aviation safety, saying it has put the spotlight on CASA’s “toxic and vindictive” culture and practices.
“It’s the best report relating to CASA that I’ve seen in a long time,” Mr Entsch said.
“I congratulate David Forsyth and the panel that reviewed this because I see this as the first opportunity we’ve had to really lift the veil of CASA and deal with the inappropriate practices, the vindictiveness and the bloody-mindedness of those within the organisation.
“There’s going to be a level of accountability that I suspect is going to send a bit of a shiver down the spines of some of those CASA officers.”
Mr Entsch said that most of the 37 recommendations related to the Civil Aviation Safety Authority and were common-sense – from CASA needing to have a more collaborative approach to regulatory oversight, to recommending that non-executive directors possess a background in aviation and safety management.
“In addition, the new Director of Aviation Safety will have to take a leadership role and have management experience and capabilities in cultural change at a large organisation like CASA. These recommendations are really no-brainers.
“I’m also pleased to see the recommendation that CASA conduct surveys every two years to assess their relationship with industry – at this stage I would have to say their relationship is toxic and non-existent, so it can only improve from here.
“These are absolute fundamentals, but are things that CASA has been missing for a long time. It’s because of this you have fabulous general aviation businesses like Barrier Aviation driven to the wall.
“It’s very good to see that the review panel has had the courage to state things as they are and I’m certainly looking forward to seeing these 37 recommendations implemented.”
Item by australianaviation.com.au at 5:29 pm, Tuesday June 3 2014
A federal government-commissioned report into aviation safety regulation in Australia has called for substantial cultural and structural changes at the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) and for better leadership of and coordination between Australia’s aviation safety agencies.
The long-anticipated Aviation Safety Regulation Review (ASRR)’s report, released by Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Infrastructure and Regional Development Warren Truss on Tuesday, makes 37 recommendations, noting that while Australia has an “excellent” airline safety record and an “advanced” aviation regulatory system, that “there are opportunities for the system to be improved to ensure Australia remains a leading aviation state”.
Those opportunities revolve primarily around improving the relationship between the regulator – CASA – and the aviation industry, which it describes as, “in many cases, adversarial”.
“Leading regulators across the world are moving to performance-based regulation, using a ‘trust and verify’ approach, collaborating with industry to produce better safety outcomes and ensuring the regulator stays in touch with rapidly advancing technology and safety practices,” the report’s executive summary reads.
“Due to the present adversarial relationship between industry and CASA, Australia lacks the degree of trust required to achieve this important aim. Sharing safety data is a fundamental principle of good safety management.”
The report sees the recruitment of a new head of CASA – current Director of Aviation Safety (DAS) John McCormick is standing down at the end of August – as an opportunity to reform the culture of the organisation. It notes: “Many have argued that the DAS should be a pilot, or at least experienced in aviation operations, suggesting this experience is necessary to understand the industry. The Panel, however, is of the opinion that the most important qualification for the DAS is leadership and management experience and capabilities in cultural change of large organisations.”
The ASRR also calls for structural change at CASA to “align its organisation with CASA”.
"Countries such as Canada and New Zealand have largely structured their safety oversight program to align with the industry, and have specific groups dedicated to industry sectors (eg GA, airlines, aircraft certification, maintenance, airports and air navigation services),” the report says. It recommends that CASA should adopt a “client-orientated output model” organisational structure similar to that used by the New Zealand CAA.
“Many variations of such a model are possible, and the proposal is not prescriptive. However, the key intention is to clarify accountability and improve the points of contact for the aviation community.”
As for CASA’s ongoing Regulatory Reform Program, which “has led to widespread ‘reform fatigue’ within the industry”, the report recommends the adoption of “a more manageable (but regular) process of periodic maintenance”. It also recommends “returning to a third tier of regulation, removing as much detail as possible from regulations, and using plain language standards in the third tier.”
Other recommendations for CASA include re-establishing small offices at major airports, developing an industry exchange program, that the CASA complaints commissioner report to the CASA board, and publishing key performance indicators for service delivery functions.
More broadly the report calls a more active role in aviation safety policy from the Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development, noting that: “No single agency is responsible for the overall performance and health of the aviation safety system.
“ It recommends that the ICAO-mandated State Safety Program (SSP) be used as the basis for a strategic plan for aviation safety in Australia.
“Over time the Department’s policy coordination role and policy leadership authority has either eroded or not been utilised to its full potential, and as a consequence, its governance and policy responsibility needs to be re-established and reinforced. The Panel considers this could be done under the authority of a reinvigorated forward-looking SSP.”
Such an SSP, the report says, should be developed as a “strategic plan for the aviation safety system”.
In releasing the report Minister Truss says the “government will commence consideration of the report in detail without delay.”
The report’s release has been welcomed by the aviation industry, but at least one figure has warned that the report must now be followed up by action.
“The key issue will be Minister Truss’s response, which looks like it may take some time,” a senior industry figure has told Australian Aviation.
“We will have a closer look at the detail of the report – but at the end of the day it is just a report – until Truss acts.”
Minister Truss has invited industry and public feedback on the review by June 30. The report, which was authored by former Airservices chairman David Forsyth, Don Spruston, former Director-General of Civil Aviation at Transport Canada, and Roger Whitefield, former Head of Safety at British Airways, can be downloaded from the Department of Infrastructure’s website.
FNQ Wazza on the ASRR..
Writing on the wall for CASA ineptitude
Posted on Tuesday, 3 June, 2014
LEICHHARDT MP Warren Entsch has welcomed the findings of a review into Australian aviation safety, saying it has put the spotlight on CASA’s “toxic and vindictive” culture and practices.
“It’s the best report relating to CASA that I’ve seen in a long time,” Mr Entsch said.
“I congratulate David Forsyth and the panel that reviewed this because I see this as the first opportunity we’ve had to really lift the veil of CASA and deal with the inappropriate practices, the vindictiveness and the bloody-mindedness of those within the organisation.
“There’s going to be a level of accountability that I suspect is going to send a bit of a shiver down the spines of some of those CASA officers.”
Mr Entsch said that most of the 37 recommendations related to the Civil Aviation Safety Authority and were common-sense – from CASA needing to have a more collaborative approach to regulatory oversight, to recommending that non-executive directors possess a background in aviation and safety management.
“In addition, the new Director of Aviation Safety will have to take a leadership role and have management experience and capabilities in cultural change at a large organisation like CASA. These recommendations are really no-brainers.
“I’m also pleased to see the recommendation that CASA conduct surveys every two years to assess their relationship with industry – at this stage I would have to say their relationship is toxic and non-existent, so it can only improve from here.
“These are absolute fundamentals, but are things that CASA has been missing for a long time. It’s because of this you have fabulous general aviation businesses like Barrier Aviation driven to the wall.
“It’s very good to see that the review panel has had the courage to state things as they are and I’m certainly looking forward to seeing these 37 recommendations implemented.”
Last edited by Sarcs; 4th Jun 2014 at 08:17.
If only Mr Entsch, Mr Truss, Senator Fawcett, Senator Heffernan, Senator Nash, Senator Macdonald etc were members of the government. They could pass legislation to give immediate and substantial effect to their strong opinions and the recommendations of the Review.
If only they were in government...
If only they were in government...
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Downunda
Posts: 562
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From Wazza the FNQ Hog rider;
Tease!!! Really? Have I missed something? Has accountability been incorporated overnight into CAsA's framework?
“There’s going to be a level of accountability that I suspect is going to send a bit of a shiver down the spines of some of those CASA officers.”
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: No fixed address
Posts: 163
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Do the math!
So the ASRR makes 37 recommendations and the Senate AAI makes 26. Most of which are significant. 63 serious safety recommendations regarding a goverment safety system in one year!!!! How many safety recommendations by the ATSB.....?
If you Google "ATSB Safety Recommendations" it comes up with "no results"!
63 reasons for serious concern. Senators Fawcett and X need to stay strong on the case.
IOS, don't give up hope. Write to Truss again. Patience is a virtue!
If you Google "ATSB Safety Recommendations" it comes up with "no results"!
63 reasons for serious concern. Senators Fawcett and X need to stay strong on the case.
IOS, don't give up hope. Write to Truss again. Patience is a virtue!
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: No fixed address
Posts: 163
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CoB
A new DAS! How about a new Chairman of the Board?? Not discussed?? Is he part of the CBR gentleman's cigar club?? Get rid of the Board! Massive cost saver. There is no legal reason why CAsA needs a board. Good Riddance!
Folks,
For the total number of inquiries, judicial inquiries, Royal Commissions and what have you into CASA and its predecessors, you need to go to the Parliamentary web site. From memory, adding the latest two, you will find close to 30 over the last 30 or so years, including the Morris Inquiry, the longest running inquiry since Federation.
The significant fact is, little has changed, the iron ring has never been seriously breached.
The two matters that will make certain that the present inquiry will have no long term serious impact is:
(1) No changes to the Act, including no change to S.9
(2) No commitment to up front cost benefit justification, risk management based, as required by the "guidelines" of the Office of Best Practice Regulation, and more recent policy of the present government. The report only mentions the RIS, that comes at the end of the process, as CASA does it, not the front.
Given those two, the rest hardly matters.
No matter how good a new CEO and Board might be, if they seriously start to make change, the CEO will be set up by the "iron ring", just as Leroy Keith was set up.
I sincerely hope all the above turns out to be wrong, but the odds are against change.
Tootle pip!!
PS:
CASA's very expensive vacant secure office at YSBK looks like it is still vacant, how many times will this be now, move from the city to the airports, then move from the airports to the city, cycle after cycle.
For the total number of inquiries, judicial inquiries, Royal Commissions and what have you into CASA and its predecessors, you need to go to the Parliamentary web site. From memory, adding the latest two, you will find close to 30 over the last 30 or so years, including the Morris Inquiry, the longest running inquiry since Federation.
The significant fact is, little has changed, the iron ring has never been seriously breached.
The two matters that will make certain that the present inquiry will have no long term serious impact is:
(1) No changes to the Act, including no change to S.9
(2) No commitment to up front cost benefit justification, risk management based, as required by the "guidelines" of the Office of Best Practice Regulation, and more recent policy of the present government. The report only mentions the RIS, that comes at the end of the process, as CASA does it, not the front.
Given those two, the rest hardly matters.
No matter how good a new CEO and Board might be, if they seriously start to make change, the CEO will be set up by the "iron ring", just as Leroy Keith was set up.
I sincerely hope all the above turns out to be wrong, but the odds are against change.
Tootle pip!!
PS:
CASA's very expensive vacant secure office at YSBK looks like it is still vacant, how many times will this be now, move from the city to the airports, then move from the airports to the city, cycle after cycle.
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Australia
Age: 53
Posts: 547
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm sure when the new DAS arrives people will start asking for their complaints to be re looked at. This might be the first and perhaps only opportunity to highlight the issues.
A couple maybe made sacrificial lambs?
Leadie, I love the move into city large offices, move back to airports, big R small r regulator, easa fan FAA fans, board no board. All gives the impression of change.
Doesn't casa own the Bankstown office ?
Quote:
“There’s going to be a level of accountability that I suspect is going to send a bit of a shiver down the spines of some of those CASA officers.”
“There’s going to be a level of accountability that I suspect is going to send a bit of a shiver down the spines of some of those CASA officers.”
Leadie, I love the move into city large offices, move back to airports, big R small r regulator, easa fan FAA fans, board no board. All gives the impression of change.
Doesn't casa own the Bankstown office ?
Last edited by halfmanhalfbiscuit; 4th Jun 2014 at 15:56. Reason: The more things change the more they stay the same.
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Styx Houseboat Park.
Posts: 2,055
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tea and biccy's with the Minister.
It seems to me that 'industry' has failed to see what Forsyth did. In part this is due to the submissions not being publicly available during the review. This has been remedied and with a little effort, the pieces of jigsaw puzzle can be fitted together and a clearer picture will emerge; the one the WLR panel sees. Much like the Senate inquiry, each piece of the puzzle does not make much sense, stand alone, but put it all together and a clear picture emerges.
So, here we have the minister tabling the WLR and releasing the submissions, then issuing an open, kindly invitation to 'have your two bob's worth' – before serious, long term measures are put in place. Will he do it?, keep the faith and make good on the promise?– well that's between him and his conscience – perhaps we and the Senate team can help him stay on the straight and narrow. (on the wagon as 'twere).
The WLR panel, with a complete picture have properly realised, that any regulatory reform, without a reformation of the CASA 'culture' will be, like it's predecessors, doomed. The WLR has gone to the radical value and recommended, not serious immediate changes to the 'law' as it stands, but to those responsible for administering it. In short they have correctly identified, exactly, the 'dogs breakfast' the current administration has become; and, provided government the tools to sort it out, before we pour another huge pile of money into the farce we have called - regulatory reform.
It's a good start, very good. But it's a long road back to a point where both government and industry may have faith in the regulator. Once this is achieved, true regulatory reformation may be considered with some confidence. The WLR (IMO) has provided a solid foundation for future building– one small, positive step at a time. Sort out the regulator, then sort out the regulations. Cause and effect if you will.
The WLR has identified some of the core issues relating to the abject failure of the regulatory reform saga and published them. Lead Sled and Creamy have already shown the way – they believe the Act needs some attention. No doubt those two fine gentlemen will, before the end of the month, make reasoned, sensible submissions. The immediate concern and I believe primary objective is to have the regulator 'back in it's box', so my submission will include the areas where (IMO) the WLR has missed some of the 'latitude' (wriggle room) allowed, which has been seriously abused in the past; then, I think it's absolute frog pooh to say that the NZ 'style' of regulation cannot be adopted; also, I hate the notion of a three tier system of legislation (sorry Ken) – but that's my two bob's worth. It's freely available to all and sundry in a very nearly democratic system. So, you get the picture.
We, the IOS should (must) accept the ministers kind invitation to tea; and, in a sane, rational, polite, professional manner put the icing on the offered cake. This game has just started, referee Forsyth has had the captains shake hands, blown the whistle and the ball is in play (the opposition have had one player red carded already). So get off your arses and in the words of bard – "don't screw it up".
Toot toot
So, here we have the minister tabling the WLR and releasing the submissions, then issuing an open, kindly invitation to 'have your two bob's worth' – before serious, long term measures are put in place. Will he do it?, keep the faith and make good on the promise?– well that's between him and his conscience – perhaps we and the Senate team can help him stay on the straight and narrow. (on the wagon as 'twere).
The WLR panel, with a complete picture have properly realised, that any regulatory reform, without a reformation of the CASA 'culture' will be, like it's predecessors, doomed. The WLR has gone to the radical value and recommended, not serious immediate changes to the 'law' as it stands, but to those responsible for administering it. In short they have correctly identified, exactly, the 'dogs breakfast' the current administration has become; and, provided government the tools to sort it out, before we pour another huge pile of money into the farce we have called - regulatory reform.
It's a good start, very good. But it's a long road back to a point where both government and industry may have faith in the regulator. Once this is achieved, true regulatory reformation may be considered with some confidence. The WLR (IMO) has provided a solid foundation for future building– one small, positive step at a time. Sort out the regulator, then sort out the regulations. Cause and effect if you will.
The WLR has identified some of the core issues relating to the abject failure of the regulatory reform saga and published them. Lead Sled and Creamy have already shown the way – they believe the Act needs some attention. No doubt those two fine gentlemen will, before the end of the month, make reasoned, sensible submissions. The immediate concern and I believe primary objective is to have the regulator 'back in it's box', so my submission will include the areas where (IMO) the WLR has missed some of the 'latitude' (wriggle room) allowed, which has been seriously abused in the past; then, I think it's absolute frog pooh to say that the NZ 'style' of regulation cannot be adopted; also, I hate the notion of a three tier system of legislation (sorry Ken) – but that's my two bob's worth. It's freely available to all and sundry in a very nearly democratic system. So, you get the picture.
We, the IOS should (must) accept the ministers kind invitation to tea; and, in a sane, rational, polite, professional manner put the icing on the offered cake. This game has just started, referee Forsyth has had the captains shake hands, blown the whistle and the ball is in play (the opposition have had one player red carded already). So get off your arses and in the words of bard – "don't screw it up".
"Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results". Albert Einstein.
Last edited by Kharon; 4th Jun 2014 at 20:37. Reason: In the county of Kerry, a farmer did dwell. He had a daughter and her name was Nell.
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Downunda
Posts: 562
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CAsA = good for the economy
I just realised that the recommendation to place CAsA folk at airports is brilliant!!! Can you imagine the boost to the economy as well as airport profits? We are talking about seasoned government employees with a penchant for bludging, drinking copious amounts of coffee and eating cucumber sandwiches and using the corporate credit card for 'entertaining business clients' over lunch. This is brilliant! Plus they will no doubt demand 'x' amount of carpark spots for their staff very close to the terminal, thus another opportunity for the airports to charge a hefty fee, to be absorbed by the taxpayer of course, this further boosting airport stakeholder profits.
Perhaps a 2% slice of this additional revenue could then be taken and invested back into GA?
$ Cha Ching $
Perhaps a 2% slice of this additional revenue could then be taken and invested back into GA?
$ Cha Ching $
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Styx Houseboat Park.
Posts: 2,055
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's probably worthwhile visiting – ProAviation – over the next few days. Just hope Phelan can manage to develop the whole story. There is a lot of tacit (and some not so tacit) support for the CASA board to resign. Anyway – FWIW today's offering – HERE -.
serious issues...
review recommendations ...not all the tough nuts have been cracked..
And many of the recommendations are not HARD enough.
NO mention about the compliance and enforcement MO now in use.... Bang yre dead. An AAT might resurrect you...but not if we can guide/help it.
The quality of some so called "investigators", makes CAsA a complete (bad) joke.
No way should CAsA even be in the "investigation" and prosecution business.
Its supposed to be a "regulator" ffs.
Breaches severe and deliberate should obviously dealt with, BUT by an independent agency and AFP...and all the other minor nit-picking things that have SFA to do with real safety should fall by the wayside. But that's the bread and butter for some of these investigator/tossers...whats to do then ??
At least there is an ask that CAsA persons will come under the APSC code of conduct does have criminal provisions. Unlike the current meaningless CAsA joke doc that nobody takes any notice of.
A get out of jail free card if ever there was one. Just ask the screamer
And many of the recommendations are not HARD enough.
NO mention about the compliance and enforcement MO now in use.... Bang yre dead. An AAT might resurrect you...but not if we can guide/help it.
The quality of some so called "investigators", makes CAsA a complete (bad) joke.
No way should CAsA even be in the "investigation" and prosecution business.
Its supposed to be a "regulator" ffs.
Breaches severe and deliberate should obviously dealt with, BUT by an independent agency and AFP...and all the other minor nit-picking things that have SFA to do with real safety should fall by the wayside. But that's the bread and butter for some of these investigator/tossers...whats to do then ??
At least there is an ask that CAsA persons will come under the APSC code of conduct does have criminal provisions. Unlike the current meaningless CAsA joke doc that nobody takes any notice of.
A get out of jail free card if ever there was one. Just ask the screamer
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: sydney
Posts: 1,469
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
An Interesting article in Wed Australian by Janet Albrechten that we could perhaps draw parallels with what is happening here in Australia.
It would seem that EU citizens are voting with their feet, because they are increasingly P..sed off with being "ruled by the regulator".
In Europe, much the same as here, Bureaucrats are circumventing the "Law" and ruling by regulation, in much the same manner as a dictator rules by decree.
When people start to realize that democratic processes are being bastardized by unelected bureaucrats the seeds are sown for revolution.
Not perhaps a "roll out the tumbrils" type revolution, although there are many here who would take up knitting if the Skull or Wodger were in the tumbril, but there have been calls for civil disobedience on these forums and as Aviation as a rule is terribly conservative there must something seriously wrong for anyone to suggest such a thing.
So perhaps our political masters should take heed of what has happened in Europe, push us too far and maybe Clive might end up PM.
It would seem that EU citizens are voting with their feet, because they are increasingly P..sed off with being "ruled by the regulator".
In Europe, much the same as here, Bureaucrats are circumventing the "Law" and ruling by regulation, in much the same manner as a dictator rules by decree.
When people start to realize that democratic processes are being bastardized by unelected bureaucrats the seeds are sown for revolution.
Not perhaps a "roll out the tumbrils" type revolution, although there are many here who would take up knitting if the Skull or Wodger were in the tumbril, but there have been calls for civil disobedience on these forums and as Aviation as a rule is terribly conservative there must something seriously wrong for anyone to suggest such a thing.
So perhaps our political masters should take heed of what has happened in Europe, push us too far and maybe Clive might end up PM.