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

CASA Legislation Must Be Fixed First

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

CASA Legislation Must Be Fixed First

Old 4th Mar 2014, 00:06
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 4,153
CASA Legislation Must Be Fixed First

I see an ever increasing amount of whinging that CASA has reverted to days similar to those of the old Department during the “Two Years in the Aviation Hall of Doom”. There seem to be constant complaints that there appears to be a gradual increase in regulation and, therefore, in cost.

As I point out in the attached letter to the Minister (see HERE), this is because CASA staff are simply following the legislation as it has been set by Parliament.

Unless we can have a brave Minister to amend the Act so it reflects what happens in reality, I am afraid general aviation is going to be “runed”.

Last edited by Dick Smith; 4th Mar 2014 at 00:31.
Dick Smith is offline  
Old 4th Mar 2014, 00:30
  #2 (permalink)  

Victim of a bored god

Join Date: Jan 1996
Location: Australia
Posts: 6,325

If it takes twenty six years and $250 million plus - so far - to "fix" the Regulations, how many decades and fortunes will it cost if CASA is let anywhere near the Act and other civil aviation legislation?

There is also a valid argument generally that excessive regulation can be detrimental to safety.
tail wheel is offline  
Old 4th Mar 2014, 00:34
  #3 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 4,153
I am not suggesting CASA amend the Act. Would never happen. It's up to a progressive Minister to do it. Will need lots of support from the industry. I won't hold my breath!
Dick Smith is offline  
Old 4th Mar 2014, 00:37
  #4 (permalink)  

Victim of a bored god

Join Date: Jan 1996
Location: Australia
Posts: 6,325
It's up to a progressive Minister to do it.
I suspect Minister Truss will be as proactive, dynamic and progressive as his predecessors, Ministers Anthony Albanese and John Anderson?

But I'm with you - rational, sane regulation to preserve a practical and acceptable level of air safety.
tail wheel is offline  
Old 4th Mar 2014, 00:57
  #5 (permalink)  
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 435
Will be...or has been?

Unfortunately, its probably already too late.

I've been doing some GA flying in NZ recently.

In comparison, General Aviation in this country is ALREADY ruined.

Popgun is offline  
Old 4th Mar 2014, 01:00
  #6 (permalink)  
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: New Zealand
Age: 66
Posts: 278
Truss is too busy feathering his nest and formulating his retirement plans to be bothered with silly aviation matters. But the reality is that the system is close to imploding so at some stage in the near future they will be left with no choice but to face the beast head on. The verdict is in, it was in long ago. The recent inquiries plus the current review is all the evidence they need to commence immediate change. Rolling McComick and 'hard questioning' Dolan is not enough. Does Australia really need a downgrade in its safety rating to wake up the muppets at the wheel?

Mr Truss, wash your hands clean now, appoint Senator Fawcett as Junior Minister for aviation and let him get on with the job. Minister, you can then blame all and sundry - the current aviation climate, a changing industry, previous Labor shenanigans, hell even blame El Niño and climate change if you must, but now is the time for action. Fawcett is the right man for the job, with the right support and actual transparent oversight of aviation I am certain things could be turned around for the better. But the clock is ticking.
Paragraph377 is offline  
Old 4th Mar 2014, 01:41
  #7 (permalink)  
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Hole in road
Posts: 110

I am not sure your (our) vision fits with that of government, the concept of increased light aircraft density within our skies probably sends a chill up a politicians spine. They believe aviating is, and needs to be a complex and sophisticated process and that the concept of increased participation by anyone less than the most bright and dedicated will be fraught with menace.

What is a politicians vision for the future?

If the steady tick tock of history is anything to go by it certainly doesn't fit with the image our forebears had. Did they ever espouse a utopian vision of the populous crammed head to toe within high density cities or 350m2 suburban blocks. While the natural environment is clear felled for food and fibre production to every last corner and the oceans denuded, all to cater to a globally swelling population. While all this is encouraged by successive government as economic growth. A growth which is as non negotiable as air is to breathing and an ever increasing population is fuel to the engine.

No Siree....my granddad never told it to me like that.

Government will undoubtedly poo poo such cynisism but it is hard to hear the words they speak for the noise of their actions.

Nicely paved streets named after trees with efficient feeder routes from our "off the plan housing" direct to our offices, in fact do away with the car to many parking and infrastructure issues, an efficient public transport system, and the masses can pay for it.

Dreams of unfettered flight are simply dreams of folly, if your are lucky the current government might tell you what they doing or about to do, but I doubt it.

As always money solves most problems, consider yourself blessed.

.........regulatory reform you say........well here you go.......25 years......yes, well it was tricky, expensive too.......so what would you like us to do next?.........

Obidiah is online now  
Old 4th Mar 2014, 05:15
  #8 (permalink)  
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Australia
Age: 68
Posts: 372

Nothing will change until CASA Officers are made personally liable for their actions.

If personal liability was in place pulling AoCs at 4.59pm on a Friday wod be a thing of the past.

Companies would have redress financially if CASAs actions were deemed inappropriate.

Also a simpler appeals system NOT the AAT would go a long way to assisting the industry.

But the above is just a dream
dhavillandpilot is offline  
Old 4th Mar 2014, 05:16
  #9 (permalink)  
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Sydney NSW Australia
Posts: 3,049
the fix, disband CASA immediately, ask the USofA for a copy of the FAA regs, paste over the FAA parts with CAA (civil aviation association), problem solved.
Ultralights is offline  
Old 4th Mar 2014, 05:19
  #10 (permalink)  
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Salt Lake City Utah
Posts: 3,052
I suspect Minister Truss will be as proactive, dynamic and progressive as his predecessors, Ministers Anthony Albanese and John Anderson?
You left a couple of Mr Truss’s proactive, dynamic and progressive predecessors off the list, tail wheel.

One of Mr Truss’s predecessors was none other than Mr Truss, who first seved as Minister for Transport and Regional Services in between John Anderson and Mark Vaile. (Mr Vaile also had two goes, the first before John Anderson.)
Creampuff is offline  
Old 4th Mar 2014, 07:40
  #11 (permalink)  

Victim of a bored god

Join Date: Jan 1996
Location: Australia
Posts: 6,325
Yes Creampuff. They were all proactive, dynamic and progressive Ministers, totally committed to fostering and expanding aviation in Australia.

I was simply singling out those who really excelled as Minister for Transport in recent years, in the hope Minister Truss can strive to achieve the same benefits for the aviation industry and Australian air travellers.

By all accounts he is working very hard to equal the achievements of Messrs Albanese and Anderson.
tail wheel is offline  
Old 4th Mar 2014, 10:57
  #12 (permalink)  
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: YMML
Posts: 2,466
For a start, to template our regs on EASA will guarantee the demise of aviation. The FAA regs are far easier to implement, far more user friendly and...dare I say it...proven.
OZBUSDRIVER is offline  
Old 4th Mar 2014, 11:34
  #13 (permalink)  
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: sydney
Posts: 1,383
"The FAA regs are far easier to implement, far more user friendly and...dare I say it...proven."

Yup, which was why those clever Kiwi's used them as a template for their reg's,
which is why their airline is ...dare I say it.... making a "profit" while our airlines make a.....errr, and their GA industry is thriving and our GA industry is errr...
Well we shouldn't complain, Australia is headed for a 100% safety record in aviation, not even the Americans can boast that, mind you they actually fly aircraft over there....lunatics!

Last edited by thorn bird; 4th Mar 2014 at 11:55.
thorn bird is offline  
Old 4th Mar 2014, 11:59
  #14 (permalink)  
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 4,868
Poor stupid Mongolia, (actually a very go ahead country with a rocketing GNP) without the "facts" known to CASA, (see. Mr. McCormick in Hansard) has adopted the NZ rules.

We all remember, don't we, that the poor bleeding Australian taxpayers paid for the PNG Balus program, which installed the NZ regs. in PNG, because the Australian rules were no longer considered useable. Needless to say, the PASO uses NZ rules.

It looks like several of the CIS states and a couple of Caribbean states will follow,

Rather puts Mr. McCormick's public statements about the NZ rules in perspective, doesn't it.

Tootle pip!!

Last edited by LeadSled; 4th Mar 2014 at 12:39.
LeadSled is online now  
Old 4th Mar 2014, 12:10
  #15 (permalink)  
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: rangaville
Posts: 2,283
Dick, first of all thanks for writing that letter secondly, do you reckon there's any chance of change?
Jack Ranga is offline  
Old 4th Mar 2014, 20:55
  #16 (permalink)  
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: in the classroom of life
Age: 50
Posts: 6,879
Creamie and I discussed the solution last Saturday, it does require a firm, almost dictator like stance by someone with the ability to pull it off.

Plus some legislation changed to allow the alternative to work.

If I could explain that in legal terms, like I can things in Newtons and PSI etc I would.

Over to you Creamie
Jabawocky is offline  
Old 4th Mar 2014, 22:07
  #17 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 4,153
Jack. I am not sure however I am convinced that if the Act is not changed no real cost reductions can take place.

I will advise when I get an answer from the Minister. If it's a typical missive with bureaucratic mumbo jumbo the industry is doomed .
Dick Smith is offline  
Old 4th Mar 2014, 22:34
  #18 (permalink)  
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: somewhere in Oz
Age: 49
Posts: 911
How about a bit of self-regulation? After all there's a lot of self-interest at stake with aviating, unlike many other commercial and recreational activities.

There's enough accepted practice out there to show everyone how it's done and a dose of unlimited legal liability would also concentrate the mind...
Andy_RR is offline  
Old 4th Mar 2014, 23:05
  #19 (permalink)  
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 1,652
I think the first issue has got to be to get the lawyers off the board and get a broad range of people with aviation experience. THE AMSA board looks like a good model. An enlightened board and a diligent CEO could make a significant difference in a small number of years by simply picking off the relatively small number of recurring complaints.

The proper way to do it, is to throw it all out and start again. The vast majority of aircraft (airline & GA) are made in the US. Nearly all avioinics are made in the US. Most maintenance schedules are devised in the US. Most of aviation legislation around the world is based on the 1944 Chicago (US again) convention. It would seem to make sense to use the FAA regulations as a starting point.

20 years ago when the Victorian Gas utilities were privatised it was all done by the law firm Freehills as a outsourced deal with the Victorian Government. It was regarded as the benchmark for privatisation. We hear a lot about issues with the electricity privatisation, but I can't recall anything negative about gas.

So, the other option would be to create a couple more millionaires at law firms and outsource the whole job. It would probably be overall 1/4 the cost of having CASA in house lawyers do it and 4 times faster. The hard part for public servants is that large chunks need to be simply deleted. We are regulating things with legislation that do not need to be regulated at all.
Old Akro is offline  
Old 4th Mar 2014, 23:32
  #20 (permalink)  
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: YMMB
Age: 54
Posts: 697
If an in-house lawyer costs $100 an hour, a law firm will charge $600 for the same level of professional.

A good Victorian Legal Aid lawyer can represent someone in the Magistrates Court at a cost of a couple of hundred bucks. A private lawyer might charge $5,000 for the same work.

Law firms are sales-focused and driven by budgets. Once they find a good trough to plant their noses in, you can't pry they out with a crow bar. They will "gouge". "gold plate" and "fully service" until the well is dry.
peterc005 is offline  

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.