Aus & NZ to live in Sin rather than the full Garden Wedding
Thread Starter
Aus & NZ to live in Sin rather than the full Garden Wedding
It seems that Australia and NZ are set to co-habitat rather than the full blown wedding with a surname change for one party. Welfare, legal systems, banking all have or are being harmonized. The only impediment is the status of the distant relos to the north east.
So how would that leave the Aviation regulators. The NZ CAA does seem to be making a better fist of regulating their patch, at least thats how it appears from this side of the ditch. I put it to a CASA FOI recently that the NZ CAA should take over matters regulation in a merger. His reaction was to turn a dark shade of purple and start frothing at the mouth. My boy he thundered, "NZ regulations don't conform to Australian legal drafting standards'. That's got me beat, I do confess, the NZ Part 61 is much easier to read and understand, and it's only 99 pages to boot.
Would the NZ CAA do a better job than CASA, could they do it?
The pollies have been talking about common border for ages, as far back as 1992. As recently as 2012 out Foreign Minister said it was 'immenent".
So how would that leave the Aviation regulators. The NZ CAA does seem to be making a better fist of regulating their patch, at least thats how it appears from this side of the ditch. I put it to a CASA FOI recently that the NZ CAA should take over matters regulation in a merger. His reaction was to turn a dark shade of purple and start frothing at the mouth. My boy he thundered, "NZ regulations don't conform to Australian legal drafting standards'. That's got me beat, I do confess, the NZ Part 61 is much easier to read and understand, and it's only 99 pages to boot.
Would the NZ CAA do a better job than CASA, could they do it?
The pollies have been talking about common border for ages, as far back as 1992. As recently as 2012 out Foreign Minister said it was 'immenent".
Guptar,
Just have a look at the Trans Tasman Mutual Recognition Treaty section of the Australian Civil Aviation Act 1988, versus the NZ equivalent, to see how much legislative work CASA has put in, to make certain that the benefits of the TTMRA are not enjoyed by the Australian aviation sector.
Also, recall that, at the behest of the unions, Keating as PM (yes, the TTMRA is not "new") the TTMRA was, aviation-wise, virtually unilaterally suspended until 1996 (Howard government) but such is the power of "the mystique of aviation safety", that well known CASA political security blanket, that the promise of the TTMRA in the Australian aviation sector has never been realised, and is not likely to be.
The NZ approach to regulation of aviation has been an outstanding success, to the degree that it has been copied by a number (rising) of smaller nations, with very great success.
The NZ aviation sector, compared to Australia, is booming, including international contract MRO, which, thanks to CASA, has almost all been driven off-shore in Australia. And don't anyone come the raw prawn about "it all labor costs", unless you can convince me the Germany is a low wage country.
In the MRO sector, it is CASA rules in practice that completely stifle productivity compared to NZ (and almost anywhere else). That is the basis of the biggest cost difference between Australia and NZ, and makes Australia hopelessly uncompetitive.
CASR Part 61 is putting what remains of the contract airline pilot business out of business.
Tootle pip!!
Just have a look at the Trans Tasman Mutual Recognition Treaty section of the Australian Civil Aviation Act 1988, versus the NZ equivalent, to see how much legislative work CASA has put in, to make certain that the benefits of the TTMRA are not enjoyed by the Australian aviation sector.
Also, recall that, at the behest of the unions, Keating as PM (yes, the TTMRA is not "new") the TTMRA was, aviation-wise, virtually unilaterally suspended until 1996 (Howard government) but such is the power of "the mystique of aviation safety", that well known CASA political security blanket, that the promise of the TTMRA in the Australian aviation sector has never been realised, and is not likely to be.
The NZ approach to regulation of aviation has been an outstanding success, to the degree that it has been copied by a number (rising) of smaller nations, with very great success.
The NZ aviation sector, compared to Australia, is booming, including international contract MRO, which, thanks to CASA, has almost all been driven off-shore in Australia. And don't anyone come the raw prawn about "it all labor costs", unless you can convince me the Germany is a low wage country.
In the MRO sector, it is CASA rules in practice that completely stifle productivity compared to NZ (and almost anywhere else). That is the basis of the biggest cost difference between Australia and NZ, and makes Australia hopelessly uncompetitive.
CASR Part 61 is putting what remains of the contract airline pilot business out of business.
Tootle pip!!
Man Bilong Balus long PNG
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Looking forward to returning to Japan soon but in the meantime continuing the never ending search for a bad bottle of Red!
Age: 69
Posts: 2,969
Received 96 Likes
on
55 Posts
Australian legal drafting standards'
LeadSled; Just have a look at the Trans Tasman Mutual Recognition Treaty section of the Australian Civil Aviation Act 1988, versus the NZ equivalent, to see how much legislative work CASA has put in, to make certain that the benefits of the TTMRA are not enjoyed by the Australian aviation sector.
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: sydney
Posts: 1,469
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"To be fair, I suspect there's some in Australia outside of CASA who don't want TTMRA to work as it should and are quite happy with CASA's efforts"
err your not really being serious are you? Can you name any of them?
Obviously you didn't see the Forsyth report.
err your not really being serious are you? Can you name any of them?
Obviously you didn't see the Forsyth report.
Moderator
Actually, 27/09 is not far off the mark, several "interested" unions have fought tooth and nail, that's why Keating acted --- all in the interests of air safety, you understand, to keep the K1W1's out of Australia, bodies raining from the sky, and all that sort of thing.
Multi-skilling in the hangar causes the wings to fall off, I'll have you know.
Tootle pip!!
