Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > PPRuNe Worldwide > The Pacific: General Aviation & Questions
Reload this Page >

Who represents GA to government in Australia?

The Pacific: General Aviation & Questions The place for students, instructors and charter guys in Oz, NZ and the rest of Oceania.

Who represents GA to government in Australia?

Old 15th Nov 2013, 11:13
  #61 (permalink)  
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: New Zealand
Age: 67
Posts: 305
Thorny, it doesn't show our pollies ignorance, it shows up our pollies continuation of the previous governments approach to hiding, distorting and avoiding the truth. They hire a Casasexual to review CASA! Jeez, I wonder how that will turn out! Oh how AOPA fans would have enormous chubby's about now? All that experience in slapping together their little rv6's and making CASA breakfast in the morning has paid off!
This decision from the Ministers department basically lets industry and the IOS know early on in the peace what the Liberal government intent is in relation to Australian aviation safety, so I guess in some ways it is good that we know now. I hope all the mum and dad frequent flyers are watching this space. The government you voted for are hell bent on ensuring that the massive decline in aviation safety which has been spiralling for a number of years now continues on its merry spiral into the ground.

Dear Senators, are you watching this? It would seem all your good work has been pissed against the fire, naughty naughty Ministers office. Anyway, your services will be called upon once again in the near future as it is inevitable, based upon what has taken place with Transair, Pel Air, Canley Vale etc etc that the clock keeps on ticking, the incidents keep occurring with frequency, and a giant smoking hole becomes more inevitable.
Paragraph377 is offline  
Old 15th Nov 2013, 21:24
  #62 (permalink)  
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: dans un cercle dont le centre est eveywhere et circumfernce n'est nulle part
Posts: 2,606
I think you are giving the Minister credit for thinking that he isn't capable of. He is simply not that devious to plan to thwart the IOS and Industry, (although by and large they are one in the same), so one can only imagine this happened by accident.

One hopes we are not hinting CASA suggested this turn of events to the Minister.

Shirley not?

Last edited by Frank Arouet; 15th Nov 2013 at 21:24. Reason: Incorrect spelling of Casa.
Frank Arouet is offline  
Old 16th Nov 2013, 19:02
  #63 (permalink)  
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Sydney
Posts: 379
Has anyone given Mr Truss another option? Is there any other body that DOES represent GA?

Refer HBLs original question…

What's the option GA?

Do you now band together, put aside your differences, bitching and bickering or do you take it, well let's just say as it's dished out. Your cries of TREACHERY! and SHAFTED AGAIN! and HE'S A NO HOPER! are most likely falling on deaf ears. Government doesn't actually have a vision for GA, nor should it.

If there was a remote possibility of an organisation forming to truly represent GA I would even probably put aside my anti-aero club attitude and join.

I'd even pay.

Hate to say it but GA needs a lobby group that is united and focussed on a group of directives. It must be:

1. Capable of communicating with EVERY aviation professional in this country
2. Capable of producing a clear set of objectives for GA in Australia
3. Capable of representing GA to the Government
4. Capable of presenting GA to the media
5. An AUTHORITY on all issues that affect GA
6. Able to command respect from its members
7. Capable of representing GA to the public
8. Capable of directly affecting the Ministers Review
9. Capable of representing GA to the point of NO CONFIDENCE motion to the government

It needs someone to be able to say to the Attorney General: "Your new rules and regs have failed their original intent and need to be scrapped"

Its members must give their representatives a clear mandate and charter and then allow them to fulfil these.


It also needs to be THE organisation to PROMOTE, FOSTER, and DEVELOP aviation in Australia.

It needs to have administrative, legal, financial, public relations and lobbying muscle.

It needs to be led by a visionary that has the capacity to embrace all of the above effectively. This can be an individual or a group.

GA needs a leader.

Just some thoughts on a reflective morning reflecting on the fact we are not here for a long time…

It is interesting to note that most of the issues the Review is dealing with relate to GA and small RPT ops. The three that are to do the report are all ex-executive airline material….

The Terms of Reference are not bad. Who will make sure the outcomes GA needs are presented?


Last edited by sprocket check; 16th Nov 2013 at 19:28.
sprocket check is offline  
Old 16th Nov 2013, 19:53
  #64 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: NSW Australia
Posts: 2,364
Thanks Sprocket,

I am heartened somewhat that the conversation has occasionally referenced the original question.

More concerning is the way in which several of the usual suspects immediately descended into squabbling over historical deeds, misdeeds and wrongdoings.

Sprocket has provided the exact requirements for a GA professional body.

Every time there is a defence scandal or policy announcement the media go to Neil James of the Defence Force Assoc. He provides a clear and concise reply. Why is there no voice for us?

The General Aviation Assoc needs to be re-born and afilliated with RAAA. It needs a clear vision, a strong voice, and freedom from the issues of the past which have diverted the original point of this thread.
Horatio Leafblower is offline  
Old 16th Nov 2013, 21:17
  #65 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: NSW Australia
Posts: 2,364
Perhaps we need someone who is better at manipulating the facts?
Horatio Leafblower is offline  
Old 16th Nov 2013, 21:33
  #66 (permalink)  
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Under a wing
Age: 57
Posts: 724
GAA.... A great idea.
Would it be modeled along lines of the AAAA's? Where do we sign?
185skywagon is offline  
Old 17th Nov 2013, 00:22
  #67 (permalink)  
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Sydney
Posts: 379
It is occasionally (often) disheartening to see such fractures within the GA community that you could swallow up the Grand Canyon in them.

Most, if not all professional occupations have a body that represents the interests of their, well professionals.

Aviation has none. Aviation seems to be, in my limited understanding of the system, in the clutches of an organised syndicate that plays the role of lawmaker, policeman, judge, jury and executioner.

If the same requirements as for flying an aircraft were applied to driving a car just in terms of being required to know and comprehend the raw legislation, which is still written in legalese and not plain English, itself a complete failure of the original intent behind the re-write - there would be no cars on the road.

HLB is spot on. The GA representative has to make more noise and have a smarter PR and a better face on TV than CASA and shout the woes of GA not just across the reverberant halls of the dominion but from every mountain top, at every accident, from every trig station and every news cross.

It also needs to be pre-emptive rather than just responsive, it needs to dictate the agenda rather than follow. Pro-active rather than re-active. It needs to be telling the community at large how fantastic a job its members are doing, from saving lives to pretty pictures to traffic reports, to training the finest of their young, etc. Bring some joy back into the business!!
sprocket check is offline  
Old 17th Nov 2013, 02:56
  #68 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: NSW Australia
Posts: 2,364

I wonder if a successful TV campaign could be mounted? There must be TV/Sound production people involved in Aviation... somewhere?

General Aviaiton Industry Association.. GAIA... hmmmm
Horatio Leafblower is offline  
Old 17th Nov 2013, 15:59
  #69 (permalink)  
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 4,942
Sprocket Check,
Dream on --- multiple GA outfits on the one airfield can't unite in their mutual interests --- unite across the country??
Tootle pip!!
LeadSled is offline  
Old 17th Nov 2013, 20:35
  #70 (permalink)  
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Salt Lake City Utah
Posts: 3,052
Leaddie is correct.

AOPA Australia and the type-specific clubs in Australia would achieve a lot more if they were merely affiliates of, and under the direction of, the US equivalents. Organisations like AOPA USA have professional lobbying expertise. Glorified social clubs don’t.

The important question is not: “Who represents GA to government in Australia?”

The important questions are: “To whom and how should representations be made to achieve beneficial change for GA in Australia?”

I can tell you at least two wrong answers to those questions: Making a “submission” to a government “review”.

Last time I’ll say it: The only glimmer of hope is professional lobbying of the people who will be non-major party aligned Senators with effect 1 July 2014.
Creampuff is offline  
Old 18th Nov 2013, 01:01
  #71 (permalink)  
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 1,660
So then, who will represent GA at the next gummint sponsored circus?
The real sadness is that it needs anyone. That government AND the public service are so removed from their constituents that they need someone to interpret for them. If they were doing their collective jobs, they'd know.

Why is GA treated as a special thing? The equivalent discussion of this does not seem to occur with road vehicles, or boats, or motorbikes, or most other endeavours that have a business / private mix.

Aviation is so over-regulated that we don't even know what it should look like anymore.

Road transport can mix road trains to light trucks, to tractors, motorbikes, private cars and historic vehicles all within the same regulator at a fraction of the administrative cost. Why can't aviation?

I can drive a 20t truck on a photo ID licence that I pay a couple of hundred bucks for every 10 years with no medical requirement. But to fly a 1 tonne aeroplane I need an annual medical, annual flight check and biannual security check. The combined annual cost of this probably approaches $1000. Really?

My guess is that the ministerial review is really about trying to decide what to do with the Senate hearing and about getting CASA / AsA & ATSB to play well together.

It is said that achieving long term cultural change requires 1/3 of the management to change. I can't see this will happen in the shelter of public service land in Canberra. So, we will continue to tinker at the edges and wonder why the end result doesn't vary much.
Old Akro is offline  
Old 18th Nov 2013, 09:11
  #72 (permalink)  
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Sydney
Posts: 379
Creammie and Leaddie:

I am not suggesting a social club.

And I agree that there needs to be a strategy as to how and to whom as you say representations, lobbying, etc are made.

But to do that effectively you need a backbone and you need smarts and most of all the support of the industry at large.

Individual lobbying might get a couple of questions thrown in at Senate Estimates. Organised action that is constant and consistent will stir the pot.

The questions Old Akro asks need to be made public, need to be made a point of so strongly that it embarrasses the PTB and exposes the mockery of the system.


Yes, a successful and effective campaign can be done. There is a plethora of social media, TV, radio, etc that can be utilised and there are people we all know that are excellent at it. That is one of the great things about aviation-it attracts all those kinds of people, capable, intelligent and even willing.

The issue is there is no one willing to stand up and lead.
sprocket check is offline  
Old 18th Nov 2013, 11:22
  #73 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: NSW Australia
Posts: 2,364
What a pity.

Oh well. we're buggered then.

If only Dick would actually listen to the industry, instead of fighting us all the time and telling us what we want.

I might give him a call tomorrow, I still have his number from last time he threatened to sue me for something I said on PPRuNe
Horatio Leafblower is offline  
Old 18th Nov 2013, 12:52
  #74 (permalink)  
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Sydney
Posts: 379
Don't waste your time.

Dick is not a likely leader, he is an entrepreneur and as such has nothing to gain from a professional association unless he gets financial reward in some sense out of it. Being a private pilot it's of no interest to him. Just my view based on very little other than a few comments on PPRuNe and observing him since I was about 13.

Further, it seems there are too many chips on shoulders between the industry and the man.

You either want someone like General Tito who unified the Balkans into Yugoslavia, kept the Russians out and the Croats, Serbs and the rest at peace with each other. And kept the country in pretty good prosperity, certainly relative to other former Eastern Bloc countries. Except that Tito is dead a long time now.

Or someone less military but more intellect.

Yes, aviation is pretty buggered, in the true sense of the word.

The regulations are unworkable.

Hands up the pilot that hasn't committed an offence against the regulations that carries an offence of strict liability?

Criminals, every one.

Why would anyone risk their lives, in every sense, in pursuit of giving other people, SLF usually, the benefit of easy and fast and safe transport?

Maybe these kinds of questions need to be asked those that want to be flown?

From Wiki (a succinct version)
In law, strict liability is a standard for liability which may exist in either a criminal or civil context. A rule specifying strict liability makes a person legally responsible for the damage and loss caused by his or her acts and omissions regardless of culpability (including fault in criminal law terms, typically the presence of mens rea). Strict liability is prominent in tort law (especially product liability), corporations law, and criminal law.
sprocket check is offline  
Old 18th Nov 2013, 23:24
  #75 (permalink)  
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Sydney
Posts: 14
Just for the record, the introduction of Part 61 is set to be delayed until September 2014! You saw it here first!
Guilders is offline  
Old 18th Nov 2013, 23:27
  #76 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: NSW Australia
Posts: 2,364
Yeah Sprock you're right about Dick. Obviously inhaled too much MEK while in the hangar yesterday
Horatio Leafblower is offline  
Old 19th Nov 2013, 18:31
  #77 (permalink)  
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Styx Houseboat Park.
Posts: 2,053
Seek'n Yeeshall

It's to be hoped that the 'big end' of industry have been looking hard at either adopting new the rule set and jacking up prices to cover the impost; or, more sensibly bugging out and moving shop to a sensible regulatory regime. In a honest attempt to answer HLB question, been poking about to see 'who' is doing the heavy lifting on behalf of the 'lighter' end of the industry.

The two standouts both have their roots in engineering, Jeff Boyd (-RAAA-) and Ken Cannane (-Amroba-). Seems to me a lot of trees could be spared by simply providing an individual statement supporting their efforts. The amount of 'front of house' work done is impressive, but the work done 'back stage' is truly remarkable. Well done both and thank you.

The rest just seem to be like those 'nodders' you always see stood behind some windy polly; nodding away furiously at their masters words, which is (IMO) no way to represent industry.
Kharon is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

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