The Regulatory ‘Reform’ Program - Mr Carmody’s turn to insult our intelligence
Thread Starter
The Regulatory ‘Reform’ Program - Mr Carmody’s turn to insult our intelligence
Just as the querulous buzz of a blowfly is a portent of summer’s arrival, and just as an empty stunt to try to trick Dick Smith is a portent of a Federal election, I’ve realised that a prediction by a Director of Air Safety as to the completion of the aviation regulatory reform hoax is a portent of his departure to cosy, tax-payer funded retirement.
At Estimates on Friday 22 February Mr Carmody said:
NOTE: I just transcribed that from the video rather than copied it from Hansard. I’ll post the link to the Hansard when it’s published.
Even if it’s true that CASR is 95% complete - a number that I don’t believe for a second because Mr Carmody seems to be labouring under the misconception that the number of Parts of CASR determines the percentage of work it takes to complete each Part - it does not follow that the time it will take to complete the program will be only 5% of the duration of the whole program. And he seems to be labouring under the misconception that once CASR is complete, the regulatory reform program will be complete as promised.
If we take a nice conservative, round number, the process has taken over 20 years so far. If 5% of it is remaining and the time it will take to complete that 5% is 5% of the duration of the whole program, it follows that it will take around only a year to complete. There is no way that the regulatory dog’s breakfast could be turned into a pig’s ear much less a silk purse in a year.
Maybe Mr Carmody is suggesting that once a nice bow is tied around CASR, that plus CAR plus CAOs plus exemptions plus directions plus approvals plus permission plus every other bandaid and piece of sticky tape that’s necessary to keep the dog’s breakfast together is what was promised to be delivered? Perhaps his use of the term “regulatory development program” rather than “regulatory reform program” is an attempt to use weasel words to confuse and provide plausible deniability as to what he was actually predicting. I can’t believe someone from CASA would do that.
It seems like only yesterday - but it’s now been over thirteen years since - one of Mr Carmody’s many predecessors said this:
Reviewing this thread makes me sick to the stomach: The Regulatory Reform Program will drift along forever
At Estimates on Friday 22 February Mr Carmody said:
Significant progress has been made on finalisation of the Civil Aviation Safety Regulations. ... There are only three regulations to go before we call an end to the regulatory development program. Put another way we’re 95% complete.
Even if it’s true that CASR is 95% complete - a number that I don’t believe for a second because Mr Carmody seems to be labouring under the misconception that the number of Parts of CASR determines the percentage of work it takes to complete each Part - it does not follow that the time it will take to complete the program will be only 5% of the duration of the whole program. And he seems to be labouring under the misconception that once CASR is complete, the regulatory reform program will be complete as promised.
If we take a nice conservative, round number, the process has taken over 20 years so far. If 5% of it is remaining and the time it will take to complete that 5% is 5% of the duration of the whole program, it follows that it will take around only a year to complete. There is no way that the regulatory dog’s breakfast could be turned into a pig’s ear much less a silk purse in a year.
Maybe Mr Carmody is suggesting that once a nice bow is tied around CASR, that plus CAR plus CAOs plus exemptions plus directions plus approvals plus permission plus every other bandaid and piece of sticky tape that’s necessary to keep the dog’s breakfast together is what was promised to be delivered? Perhaps his use of the term “regulatory development program” rather than “regulatory reform program” is an attempt to use weasel words to confuse and provide plausible deniability as to what he was actually predicting. I can’t believe someone from CASA would do that.
It seems like only yesterday - but it’s now been over thirteen years since - one of Mr Carmody’s many predecessors said this:
I would be hopeful that it would not be long after early 2006 that most of the draft rules are delivered to the minister.
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: sydney
Posts: 1,469
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quote:
Significant progress has been made on finalisation of the Civil Aviation Safety Regulations. ... There are only three regulations to go before we call an end to the regulatory development program. Put another way we’re 95% complete.
Yup, all finished after nearly thirty years and half a thousand million dollars, just in time to declare?
"Australian Aviation regulations are out of date, no longer fit for service, and are not comparable with world standards. Therefore CAsA is embarking on a major rewrite of Australian rules to align them with our major trading partners and bring them into line with current ICAO standards"
Self licking Ice cream comes to mind.
Significant progress has been made on finalisation of the Civil Aviation Safety Regulations. ... There are only three regulations to go before we call an end to the regulatory development program. Put another way we’re 95% complete.
Yup, all finished after nearly thirty years and half a thousand million dollars, just in time to declare?
"Australian Aviation regulations are out of date, no longer fit for service, and are not comparable with world standards. Therefore CAsA is embarking on a major rewrite of Australian rules to align them with our major trading partners and bring them into line with current ICAO standards"
Self licking Ice cream comes to mind.
because he's a long term bureaurat of diverse departments who has learnt the PS survival skills of double-speak, saying what he thinks people want to hear, with bs padding thrown in as required..
Thread Starter
This jumped out at me while reading an article by Arthur Moses, SC, in a weekend newspaper:
It is simply impossible to know what the current dog’s breakfast of legislation means, given that the dog’s breakfast of exemptions and instruments and permissions and authorisations and directions must be known in order to try to make out what the dog’s breakfast of legislation means.
Dog’s breakfast times dog’s breakfast = just make **** up as you go along.
Brilliant. Just brilliant.
One tenet of the rule of law is that legislation must be knowable and able to be obeyed.
Dog’s breakfast times dog’s breakfast = just make **** up as you go along.
Brilliant. Just brilliant.
