Albo....didn’t do nothing
 

Busdriver, certainly Albo did nothing to arrest the severe decline of GA, you could argue that he hastened the process by being talked (by CASA) into a one off, four years only, increase in the fuel levy. This levy was expected to raise $89.9 million for special safety studies or, my take,‘some such’. ‘Some such’ probably to fund (consultants?) a bunch of remedies to sort the CASA messups that the FAA had uncovered which was threatening to downgrade our international aviation status and burst onto the public consciousness. Wiki- Leaks for info on that one.
Then what? Trust Troglodyte Truss, rolled it over after the four years and its still there in general revenue, one count a couple of years ago upwards of $127 million and counting.
Mid 2009 Albo shoved off the ATSB out of his responsibility to be yet another ‘independent’ statutory Commonwealth corporate body to operate willy nilly like CASA, AirServices and many others outside aviation. ATSB CASA personnel interchange, Rex’s PelAir ditching late that year, Rex’s mighty political donations; all for consideration by timelines and probity.

Regarding the Dick Smith article, Quote:-
“The spokeswoman noted that CASA already had a requirement that its regulatory approach must consider the economic and cost impacts on individuals, businesses and the community.”

This comment as reported from the new Minister in charge of aviation, Mr. McCormack, does not bode well, the drawbridge is up already.

The facts are there for all to see; the ruination of General Aviation, not only because the Act needs to be rewritten with safety as an outcome of a healthy industry, but because the present model of governance, some 30 years on, has patently failed.
Without a return in some form to Ministerial responsibility the present independent corporate structure cannot deliver rational or efficient management of civil aviation in Australia. Virtually the only political input from us the public, through our elected representatives, is an occasional Ministerial Statement of Expectations.
This farcical excuse for Ministerial control has proven to be totally useless and the regulator CASA continues to waste a perfectly good industry while feathering it’s own nest. A make work salary factory that has made rewriting the rules, for 30 years and umpteen hundreds of $millions still not finished, into an art form. Inventing new permissions requiring enormous fees being one method to bolster it’s budget.

Every time a Minister abrogates his responsibility by hiving off part of his portfolio by creating a new Commonwealth corporate, to administer and regulate, the excuse is that an independent umpire is desirable. Unfortunately government is not a sport and the corporate naturally looks after itself and salaries reflect ‘commercial’ rates.

Goodbye responsible government, hello waste, mismanagement, hubris, ego and internal power plays unchecked.

Accountability is lost in a sea of independent bureaucrats, Can’tberra of 403,000 people on salaries much higher than the national average, home to 1200 Commonwealth instrumentalities. The APS, if you can call it a ‘service’ because it is now regarded as the Public Sector, is 157,000 and includes an Ombudsman for just about everything in place of your Parliamentary Representative.

The only hope for Australian aviation is continuous publicity adverse to government. Thanks to the Oz; being the only media outlet that can at least see the tip of the iceberg.

DS never held that much power, he was not ‘the Government’ nor the Minister.
As a GA business and aircraft owner operator, and as CFI, CP plus running charter training and low capacity RPT I can assure you that during DS tenure, at what is now CASA, was the only time that some daylight appeared at the end of the long dark bureaucratic tunnel

Please, TBM and Jay, tell us what powers the Chairman of the CASA Board has.

Please.

Thorn Bird,
Absolutely correct, after all, CASA Parts 23-35 already are the FAR equivalents by reference, but CASA glosses over this fact, and the rest of the aviation community seems to suffer willful blindness that this has be the case since mid-1998.

CASA Part 21 was largely FAR 21 with a number of industry generated (forced) changes, that all proved to be good, but over the years CASA have been allowed to reverse almost all those beneficial changes, by a succession of Ministers who only "hear" CASA.

The thing about the NZ rules is that they are the FARs, with a good deal of US "political" bumpf edited out, the NZ rules have become the model for a range of countries.

As I have said, time and again, but it never seems to register on the collective psyche of the Australian community, aviation or otherwise, but Australian foreign aid paid for the NZ rules to be installed in PNG, because the (then) Australian rules were not "fit for purpose".

The current Australian rules are immeasurably worse.

Tootle pip!!

Furthermore, and thanks to Bruce Byron who tried
 

At least we have a free press and thanks to Andrew Burrell and several other reporters and editors from the the Australian for keeping this glaring failure of government in the public eye. The rot is exposed and that is the only hope to stop the loss of General Aviation jobs, businesses and services, not to mention home grown airline pilots.

Having led a deputation thirteen years ago to Mr. Warren Truss, the then Minister and leader of the National Party, pleading for reform was like talking to a stone wall in the wilderness. Amazing lack of action or concern when considering that the regions and those Aussies living in remote areas are hardest hit with shrinking air services and loss of General Aviation. Astonishing, vagrant carelessness towards the Nats own constituency.

Will McCormack act? On the past performance of the Nats not without pressure like never before. Past Leader Barnaby Joyce had plenty of time to order Dapper Darren into motion, he acknowledged to my face 12 months ago that action was needed and suggested to me that we needed a Minister for Aviation. Could have had things moving. But now expect little of substance without continued publicity and so far the Oz is the only mainstream media that’s appreciated the disaster area we know as General Aviation, what’s left of it.

I think we should all write to our local members asking for this proposed change to be continued with. I'll certainly write to mine.

Costs of regulatory reform or costs of regulatory change and mal administration
 

Good question Pete, and others have given ball park figures for the direct costs of what changing the rules has cost so far, the never ending story. Preferring ‘change’ terminology rather than reforming because reform can denote enlightened progression. Certainly migrating the rules into the criminal code being utterly unjustifiable, incomprehensible, counterproductive and backward is change not reform. Making all sorts of new strict liability criminal offences for ‘offences’ that don’t even get a mention in other jurisdictions. Altering and adding to the rules making the most arduous, complex and contradictory set of unworkable aviation law in the developed world is what CASA has been beavering away at for 30 years.
By far and away the biggest costs are not that of bureaucracy, for a calculation of cost to community one would need a dedicated statistician.
No doubt the loss of businesses, the unseen consequences from the last 30 years would run to many $billions or more. Lost opportunity costs are obviously difficult to estimate but let no one be in any doubt that the abject failure of government to properly discharge it’s duty has cost us all dearly, many times more than the direct government costs.

Write to MPs
 

I’ve sent my email, with a copy of the image off the Oz with the proposed changes, to my MP and a few others. Been at this for 30 years, need numbers, there’s certainly a lot more interest now. Love to see the momentum translate into real reform, probably die of shock but would go with a smile.

If the proposed changes to the act were only presented in January this year it was being extremely optimistic to think we would see any progress within 18 months. As someone who had a far more compelling case for a relatively simple change to regulations I can say with experience that the wheels turn very slowly in this regard.

YPJT. Why does it take so long?

When I was Chairman of CAA and Ron Cooper was in charge of Standards Development we could get changes through within months.

Dick, I wish I knew why it took so long. it's frustrating

It took hardly any time for Hawke to amend immigration rules which allowed foreign pilots to live and work in Australia in place of pilots who resigned in the great “Dispute” of 1989. Governments can move quickly if they have motivation, and at that time I’ve no doubt that the CASA of those days (CAA) speedily facilitated the entry of foreign pilots at the behest of the Hawke government.

Change legislation? Are you guys kidding? Years ago a friend of mine re-wrote the Fijian flight and duty times regs on his own in a day. Our heros Casa have had hundreds of people on it for five years and got, just glancing through it, nowhere. Rewrite the Act? Ha! They would want fifty thousand people and fifty thousand years.

TFX,
The Flight and Duty Times rewrite has, in fact, been going since at least 1967, when a joint working group, including DCA, major airlines and AFAP, was established.
In various disguises, it has been meandering along ever since.
Tootle pip!!

PS: How do I know -- because I was put on the working group by the AFAP/OSB.

Cost of the regulatory rewrite? Many years ago I heard a relatively reliable report of the cost at $300 million. Assuming that figure is correct and extrapolating to 2018, the total cost would now be north of $400 mill.

An economist with involvement in aviation suggested the impact of the regulatory rewrite on the aviation and airline industry would be approximately four times the cost to CASA.

You do the sums.

Did some work with an organisation using US registered aircraft. The US regs are brilliant, simple to apply and very clear. They are a perfect
model for Australia.

If we bring back Flight Engineers and Radio Operators we could really increase employment in aviation. That would be a start.

I'd love to know what other things Dick has in mind? What if for example drones take over all of powerline checking, crop spraying, SAR operations, bank runs.....should we outlaw them because of the job losses?

Sherm,
And where, my dear chap, has Dick Smith suggested that, or any other silly regression.

What is absolutely vital is that CASA be forced to illustrated the "safety issue" any proposed change is designed to address, and be required to benefit/cost justify (not cost/effectiveness justify) the proposed change.
Or, put another way, make the relevant Productivity Commission/Office of Best Practice Regulation Guidelines mandatory by amendment to the Civil Aviation Act 1988.

In late 1996, we conducted a major study on a section of the engineering "rules", within CASA, and with the very reluctant forced participation of the Airworthiness Branch. For risk assessment, the basis was the then current AS/NZ 4360 standard for Risk Management, and the then Productivity Commission framework for benefit/cos analysis and determination.

The outcome, about 80% of those "rules" should not have been regulation at all, but just outcome based advisory documents.

The great majority of Part 61/141/142, that has imposed huge initial and ongoing costs on the aviation industry, have any basis beyond bureaucratic micro-management. None, and I do mean none, of these additional "requirements" imposed have been the answer to a "safety" ( ie: a real and identified and quantified risk) problem, much less the benefit/cost justified answer.

Dick wants to simplify and reduce cost and complexity --- do you disagree with that aim??

Tootle pip!!

Captains Courageous
 

I concur completely with Lead Sled, well said.
The writing has been on the wall for GA for at least 30 years. It is a continuing disappointment that so few airline crew, but acknowledging a handful of outstanding individuals, ever bothered to join with the reform movement, a necessity if airlines are to recruit locally trained pilots, let alone a nod to future young Aussies who want to follow their flying ambitions.
Where are the airline pilots deputations to the Ministers? Where’s the campaign from the airline unions?
“She’ll be right mate” .....except it isn’t.

Ain't that the truth, and for aircraft maintenance and all involved, the situation is already immeasurably worse.

Tootle pip!!