|
LB
The requirement "... the arrangements made for designation of airspace and provision of services within airspace in which may Civil Aircraft operate" will impact on the Airspace Act. Might be necessary to acknowledge the need for consequential amendment. |
Not correct. Section 9A is not the source of any power. Section 9A is a requirement imposed on the exercise of CASA’s powers and the performance of CASA’s functions - whatever they happen to be from time to time. To the extent, if any, to which CASA has powers or functions that relate to the designation of airspace etc, the considerations will apply to the exercise of those powers and the performance of those functions. Those powers and functions wax and wane as the interminable ping pong match of airspace-related responsibility allocation continues. |
I found this old article by accident this morning. There are parallels to what is transpiring at the moment. The election was held 2 days after this publication, 10th November 2001, which the Howard Government was successful in being re-elected. The tough talking from Labor disappeared for successive elections. Lets see what the election commitments are from the Liberal and Labor camps this year. Is the past really the future? There are so many representative bodies attending this event, where will they get the time to extract the 'Good Oil' from all the input?
https://cimg7.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.gmf...ac8affd896.png |
For the avoidance of doubt, Government attendees numbers 7 to 11 (two from the Department, one each from CASA and AsA) are all that matter in this project because they are going to write the Government response to what you ask for. Probably the youngest will be doing most of the work. They make it all happen....or not. |
For once you have tasted flight you will walk with eyes forever skyward toward section 9a and the bold world of modern Aussie aviation:)
|
Where's Shane? Probably overseas at a conference, signing some innocuos MOU to justify the 20K cost in travel. And the retention of Platinum FF status
|
And what happened to that other CASA guy. What was his name. Was it Jeff somebody? |
And of course where are all the ex-CASA guys and former consultants who have all the answers?
|
Folks,
I hear on the grapevine that changes have been made in the AvMed branch, quite unexpected changes. Anybody else have any confirmation. Tootle pip!! |
My undetstanding was that AOPA discussions were banned here. Also, discussions at 100 posts were locked too. Is this no longer the case?
|
Originally Posted by Lookleft
(Post 10191960)
And of course where are all the ex-CASA guys and former consultants who have all the answers?
Haven't you noticed? :) |
So let me see if I understand your and LL’s reasoning: It’s OK for the people who are currently paid to do the job to be missing in action, because the people who aren’t currently paid to do the job aren’t doing the job. Just goes to show the depth of the gene pool in Australian aviation. :ok: |
Some of them seem to be here, doing the same. |
Let me put that another way LB.The people with the most to say have the least to offer. |
And you do have lots to say... |
Yep I have said plenty in support of the summit. |
Me too, although more aimed at maximising the chances of substantive government action out of the summit. But as a wise old engineer said to me once: Leaddie, you can lead a horse to water but you don’t have to suck through its arse to make it drink. |
Very magnanimous of you. I am sure that AOPA has access to lawyers with similar experience and knowledge to you. The difference being of course that they are in the room having the discussions, |
I’ll bet leftie that the lawyers in the room haven’t spent much time, if any at all, in the room with OPC. Otherwise the product would not have been what it is. But I’ll be very happy to be proved wrong, and will happily stand corrected publicly, when the amendment to 9A gets up in the terms proposed at the Summit. Standing by ... |
I doubt that you would be happy at all to stand corrected publicly as it is not in a lawyers DNA! As it is now the evening of the 10th any further comment on this thread is irrelevant. Not having the last word though is also not in a lawyers DNA. |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 14:56. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.