The Phelan legacy.

It is quite probable that many, particularly our overseas readers will ask 'who was Paul Phelan'. The answer is provided - HERE -.

The Phelan legacy.

It is quite probable that many, particularly our overseas readers will ask 'who was Paul Phelan'. The answer is provided - HERE -.

The article in Australian Flying, while being a quality sketch and nicely done, cannot possibly encapsulate 'the man' - that would take many, many pages. Those of us who knew Paul (a.k.a. Fearless) can each provide, with suitable libations (in quantity) anecdotes from as far back in a time when the Earth was soft and the sky was misty. Indeed, Paul is a regular 'guest' (in spirit) at the BRB and IOS indaba.

Personally, I liked him very well indeed; friend, mentor, fiend from the sixth Hell when syntax, grammar or 'point' was not up to standard. Anyway, mawkish irrelevant thoughts aside - we have a job to do.

Paul, like Sandilands and Spiers before him was always 'ahead' of the game; for example, this submission  - HERE - made in 2008 still, to this day, stands valid. The bulk of his work meets the same test, take a little time to read "Birds? what Birds" as a classic example.

But, I ramble. PAIN, through the Aunt Pru forum have inherited Paul's published work;  we are making some modifications to allow easy access to the Phelan Papers through the AP website; a duty of care and responsibility to all thinking aviation participants who actually care to consider and study the blighted history of our 'unique' methods of aviation governance.

Safe home Paul; blue skies and tailwinds; the Scotch is where it always is.



What has changed??

Via the #SBG: 

(02-13-2022, 05:48 AM)Sandy Reith Wrote:  269 the number of the Iron Ring??

“..a cool 269 pages..” That is a number, and in that number a treatise of such detail, an incredible justification of the unjustifiable. Part of the game, crafting answers to the whole sorry story by an author who’s made a career out of writing clever inventions to give undertaker like cosmetics on the body of General Aviation.

But the number 269, same number of submissions to the Government’s 2014 Forsyth inquiry into the diseased body of GA, a body succumbing to Casarisis. (Ref link: )

Was that number unconsciously inscribed into the brain of our author? Did that number of GA submissions, representing the enemy having expended much of its remaining force, shock his sensibilities?

No, It gave him a challenge to relish knowing that he would overcome that barrage of pleadings and fairly well deplete the last of rising hopes. Correctly as it has turned out, refer Ms Dolittle’s excuse for doing nothing to help GA. She decided to hold yet another inquiry (Senator McDonald’s two year, yes two weary years, drawn out GA inquiry, the RRAT, designed to finish just as the maelstrom of election frenzy hits). She had to plead for more submissions from the GA community. So much so she reprimanded us for lack of submission numbers. 

And now to quiet the fainter cries for help from the wheezing Casarisis riddled body of GA a new Statement of Expectations. Like a pillow presented for comfort but placed on the face not under the head. The SoE is so full of contradictions it can be whatever you power it to be and we still have nothing.

P2 addition, via ProAviation:

Quote:[Image: proaviation.jpg]

ProAviation comments on ASRR report – July 30, 2014


ProAviation further submits that notwithstanding any of the Panel’s recommendations, the new national aviation authority’s title should not include the word “safety,” which as far as we are aware is not part of the title of any other NAA in the world. This would therefore be in conformity with other NAAs, and would remove yet another aberration that is perceived as “uniquely Australian.” It is an embarrassment to an industry whose cornerstone is its safety culture, and the continued over-use of the word in the authority’s title and in its public affairs is an ongoing insult to the intelligence of the public, the Parliament and the industry both domestically and globally.

At this time, as amply confirmed by the ASRR’s observations, the interaction between the authority and industry renders their differences unacceptable, and even with a new chief executive and an enlarged board, the endemic problems, many identified in the review, cannot be resolved without major cultural change. This is a cultural issue and the leadership has gone to great lengths to inculcate this corruptive “them and us” mindset.

The Civil Aviation Act should be amended to give effect to a USA style of mandate for its Federal Aviation Administration where the FAA is responsible to “promote” aviation in every possible manner within its safety obligations.


ProAviation historical context cont/-

Quote:Trust restoration checklist

An impressive number of industry’s elder statesmen attended the rally at Tamworth on May 6, and witnessed the growing concern that only deeds, not words, can set aviation back on the long track towards a restoration of some of the mutual trust that has been squandered over the past 26 years.

A simple and condensed “CHART” checklist that was available at Tamworth, offers a framework checklist for anybody who is interested in the restoration of genuine and lasting trust.

Readers might care to compare the CHART checklist with the charter letter from our most effective recent minister, John Anderson, to (then) incoming CASA CEO, Bruce Byron. The high-quality letter could easily have been drafted by somebody like Mr Shane Carmody, who rejoined the Department on April 1 as Deputy Secretary, Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development, with what the Department describes as “broad overarching responsibilities in aviation.”

Here’s the CHART guide to re-establishing working relationships:

[Image: CHART-624x904-1.jpg]

And 11 years earlier:

Mr Bruce Byron
Chief Executive Officer
Civil Aviation Safety Authority
GPO Box 2005
25 NOV 2003

Dear Mr Byron

I am pleased to provide you with a new Charter Letter setting out strategic directions for the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) as it enters a new era of enhanced governance arrangements based upon direct and appropriate lines of authority between myself, as the responsible Minister, and you, as the Chief Executive Officer of CASA.

This Charter Letter is also intended to provide CASA with a better understanding of the broader Government policy framework in which it must operate. You should consider my views as strategic direction as you commence your work. I urge you to take full account of the points made in this Charter Letter; to reflect on how your role relates to CASA’s new operating environment; and to share the Government’s vision with the staff of CASA.

Under the Civil Aviation Act 1988, as amended, the CEO will be particularly responsible as the Director of Aviation Safety, for CASA’s safety regulatory functions and the associated management responsibilities. With the new designation of Chief Executive Officer (CEO), you take on a greater leadership role for the Authority than was previously the case. You will have additional management functions; you will be the sole Director of CASA for the purposes of the Commonwealth Authorities and Companies Act 1997; and you will be directly accountable to me as the Minister. While I will have an increased role in CASA policy setting and organisational performance, it is important that you retain your independence as Director of Aviation Safety responsible for managing CASA’s regulatory function.

I would like also to emphasise the greater role that will be played by the Portfolio Secretary in our future dealings. While I consider you responsible, as the CEO, for delivering CASA’s overall work plan in accordance with the views expressed below, I will be looking to the Secretary for advice across the Portfolio on aviation generally and aviation safety policy issues in particular. It is therefore important to me that you and CASA continue to develop and improve the relationships that CASA has with the Department.

It is also essential that CASA has a positive working relationship with the Australian Transport Safety Bureau (ATSB), our transport safety investigator. I wish to see a co-operative working relationship between the three bodies in the best interests of aviation safety in Australia.

A similar working relationship on matters of aviation security will also be essential in the national interest, notwithstanding the exclusion of CASA from security aviation matters in its legislation. I am aware that there are a variety of safety matters, such as pilot training and licensing, that have important implications for the regulation of some aspects of aviation security and I look forward to active co-operation on these matters.

I will be convening planning and reporting meetings at least every two months between you, the Secretary and myself and believe these will go a long way towards ensuring a good working relationship.

Against world standards, Australia’s aviation safety reputation is exemplary. It is my expectation that CASA, as Australia’s aviation regulator, should also aim for world’s best practice and I look to you to help achieve this goal.

Government Policy

The Government’s vision is for Australia to have a world class safety regulatory environment, including regulations that are simple to follow and reflect world’s best practice. I have also previously spoken of the importance of having a modernised certification system, which will serve to encourage Australian aircraft manufacturers.

I am pleased to acknowledge that CASA has delivered a modern certification system but I do believe there is some way to go to achieving a simple to follow regulatory system. I shall have more to say about regulatory reform later in this letter.

Its vision for CASA is of a firm but fair regulator which focuses on core safety related functions in a way that ensures that industry meets its safety obligations, but at the same time permits development and growth in Australian aviation.

Whilst CASA should perform its functions consistent with its obligations under the Chicago convention, I accept that there will be times when Australia will need to have differing regulations owing to the uniqueness of the Australian aviation environment. When Australian regulations vary from ICAO standards and recommended practices CASA should notify the differences to ICAO.

More broadly, in very recent times the Government has begun to implement quite major aviation reforms, including of CASA itself and in relation to lower level airspace. The rationale for pursuing these reforms is the desire on the part of the Government to foster a safe, strong and active aviation sector. While CASA’s primary concern must always be with safety, it must not operate in a vacuum, without having regard to the Government’s broader aviation policy agenda. Rather, it should maintain a high level of awareness of the Government’s aviation reform agenda and be in a position to respond fully to Government policy directions and decisions.

CASA as Safety Regulator

It is my view that a good regulator will exhibit specific behavioural attributes and these can best be summarised as follows. A good regulator will communicate and consult extensively with stakeholders. Its decisions will be consistent and predictable, based on transparent processes. A good regulator will demonstrate fairness, good judgement, and be flexible and responsive to the changing environment in which the aviation industry operates. It will be effective, efficient and timely in its operations and it will be accountable for its actions. In the provision of regulatory services CASA must provide a high level of client service and treat clients with consideration and courtesy. Finally, it will be independent, enforcing civil aviation regulations, as it deems appropriate, while bearing in mind these expected standards of behaviour.

Above all a good regulator should command the trust and respect of those it regulates. It should act as a facilitator for those who are genuinely trying to do the right thing while retaining the ability to act swiftly and decisively against those who deliberately flout aviation safety regulations. You may have heard me use the friendly bobby on the beat analogy to illustrate this point.

These are characteristics which I want to see systematically entrenched in CASA and exhibited by staff at all times. Combined, they represent a commitment to high quality delivery of CASA’s regulatory functions in a manner structured to engender the confidence and support of the aviation industry and the wider community. The challenge for all CASA personnel is to balance the responsibility for compliance and enforcement with the role of educator and facilitator.

Two particular initiatives I would also like to see introduced are a comprehensive and publicly transparent complaints handling mechanism and a system to encourage internal reporting of organisational shortcomings while ensuring the necessary protection for all CASA personnel.

I appreciate that much of the criticism directed at CASA may be misinformed. It is nevertheless essential for the Authority to have a visible and accessible complaints handling mechanism for the purposes of fairness and accountability, particularly where the livelihood, financial security and personal reputation of individuals may be on the line.

Reform Implementation

The Civil Aviation Act 1988, as amended, has facilitated substantial changes to CASA governance. It has broadened the range of enforcement measures, while at the same time enhancing procedural fairness without in any way restricting CASA’s ability to take appropriate safety action. You are well aware of these changes.

I expect that the implementation of these new measures and processes, along with those proposed under the CASA regulation reform process, will be preceded by comprehensive education and communication initiatives. CASA staff must be well prepared to implement and administer the new arrangements with consistency and fairness and industry must be well briefed as to how these measures will impact on their day-to-day operations and provided with information to assist with their compliance.

It is important that CASA make productive use of the new tools that have been made available to it such as the demerit points scheme which can be appropriately used for more minor breaches of the regulations where traditionally a heavier handed approach may have been used.

I would also like to see a broadening of focus beyond just the criminal offences and penalty provisions. The use of education and monitoring powers by regulatory personnel will go a long way to contribute to a culture of increased safety compliance within the industry, particularly in the general aviation sector. I appreciate the challenge facing CASA staff in balancing the requirements of regulator with that of educator and look to you to ensure the appropriate support and training is available to assist regulatory staff with this transition.

I would like to discuss with you appropriate administrative measures that will assist you with the continuation of the CASA reform agenda, the further development of a simple-to-follow regulatory system and the establishment of a new and improved organisational culture. The future role of the Standards Consultative Committee and the Aviation Safety Forum will be important and we need to examine if any other advisory body or mechanism will be required to take this agenda forward.

I want to make it very clear that the Government remains committed to the timely implementation of the regulatory reform program. However, we must also take care not to squander the unique opportunity we have to get right the key aviation safety regulations that will be with us for decades to come. Meeting deadlines alone will serve little purpose if we do not achieve CASA” aim of safety through clarity and moreover if we do not end up with a world’s best practice regulatory system. Therefore I would urge you to strongly not treat regulatory reform as a case of “don’t get it right, get it written”.

I would also like to take this opportunity to make the point that it is important that the aviation safety regulations target known safety risks and are supported by credible and appropriate safety analysis. While safety must remain CASA’s primary preoccupation, it is important that regulation does not unnecessarily inhibit the dynamism and vibrancy of the aviation industry – ie without a solid and credible safety foundation. I would therefore urge you to ensure that proposed regulations address known risk factors for the various levels of operation, while also having regard to any issues that may be unique to Australian circumstances such as the often large distances between towns and the corresponding reliance, particularly in regional areas, on air transportation.

Funding Issues

CASA funding and financial management remains an issue. It is essential that CASA has a rigorous strategy in place that will ensure greater certainty in CASA’s underlying financial position. Funding must be more closely linked with activity levels. Any long term funding strategy must be supported by efficient and effective fiscal management and an increase in cost consciousness by all in the Authority.

Organisational Performance

It is important that CASA not only be able to claim a high level of performance, but that the organisation’s performance be measurable and able to be benchmarked. I envisage the behavioural concepts I have set out, together with my specific reform measures, meshing neatly together so that CASA’s performance can be measured in key areas. In particular, I draw your attention to the areas where I see CASA being able to demonstrate its performance during the course of the coming year.

Communication and consultation – CASA has seen an improvement in this area largely due to the appointment of an industry advocate and a maturing of the Standards Consultative Committee. I note the recent inclusion of Departmental officers on critical advisory subcommittees and commend this development as a practical step towards streamlining CASA’s relationship with the Department as a key stakeholder.

It is important to build on this improvement. Valuing stakeholders, by developing a culture of trust and cooperation between all areas of CASA and the industry is paramount. A focus on improving performance in this area and upholding standards in a fair and responsive way will engender a better relationship with industry.

CASA must honour its commitment to working cooperatively with the aviation industry to maintain and enhance aviation safety. There is a strong need for CASA to strengthen stakeholder relationships, not just through formal consultative mechanisms, but in the day-to-day dealings with industry participants, particularly in the general aviation sector. CASA should provide relevant information and documentation regarding the decision in question in a timely manner, and provide the opportunity for industry to raise issues of concern, and participate in discussions about those issues.

Consultation involves more than a mere exchange of information although engaging in a process of consultation does not mean that the parties must necessarily reach agreement in relation to each issue. However, where consultation with industry results in a divergence of views I would ask you to ensure that the final decision by CASA is made at an appropriate level within the organisation.

Consistency and predictability – this has been an area of contention over the years. The new enforcement regime, particularly the introduction of the demerit points scheme for individual authorisation holders, should give more consistency and predictability for the aviation industry. CASA needs to exercise good judgement in the use of the tools available under the enforcement regime including how they can be used with education and liaison, particularly in the initial stage of the implementation.

It is crucial that CASA staff deliver a consistent message to industry on safety and regulatory matters and it is important that appropriate training and monitoring of staff performance is in place to achieve this aim. Such consistency is essential to an efficient and respected regulatory agency and will help limit the level of complaint on this issue particularly from the smaller operators.

Flexibility – is about setting the boundaries without being too rigid. The aviation industry is dynamic and diverse and CASA must have the capacity to respond to this diversity while, as aviation safety regulator, maintaining consistency and accountability. The ‘one size fits all’ solution is not always appropriate. It is CASA’s role to take into account all relevant considerations and only those relevant considerations, while acting with integrity and impartiality.

Effectiveness and efficiency – the safety of the fare paying passengers cannot be compromised. As CASA is funded by industry and the Australian taxpayer, it has a responsibility to ensure the efficient and effective use of resources. CASA must always be conscious of the potential adverse impact of organisational inefficiencies and must avoid any unnecessary cost implications for industry, while maintaining its strong focus on aviation safety.

Timeliness – I acknowledge the good work CASA has done recently to streamline its processes and require continued work to ensure approvals, authorisations, certificates and other responses are completed in a timely manner. Prompt attention to these matters is both highly desirable and conducive to building a stronger relationship with CASA’s stakeholders.

Accurate and timely advice to me as the Minister, on key aviation safety and regulatory issues, is also essential to ensure the Government is best placed to respond promptly to matters arising in the aviation industry.

Accountability – the reform of CASA will see the Agency directly accountable to me. This requires a strengthening in the corporate planning processes within CASA to ensure that programs are strategically focussed, integrated, achievable and subject to performance and financial indicators, which enable the Government and CASA’s stakeholders to clearly assess the degree of achievements against corporate targets.

Transparency – the setting of rules that maintain or enhance safety that are clear, concise and unambiguous is essential. Transparency in all CASA’s regulatory and management processes provides a good background for governance. The ability to uphold standards fairly, a meaningful and consultative approach to stakeholder interaction and an ability to deliver and measure results without compromise are essential to CASA’s transparency.

Independence -the reform of CASA will allow me to set policy directions and performance standards but remain at arms length from day-to-day operations, as is quite proper. CASA will continue to be able to carry out its enforcement activities independently, thereby building on procedural fairness while maintaining powers to take appropriate action.

It is your legislative responsibility to develop CASA’s objectives, strategies and policies and I expect you to formalise long-term plans consistent with the Government’s policy and bring them forward for approval in the context of the CASA Corporate Plan. Supporting this, I intend to negotiate with you a Performance Agreement covering the performance of CASA’s functions and the exercise of CASA’s powers as specified in the new legislation.


CASA plays an essential role in Australia’s participation in the activities of the International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO). Key to the contribution made by CASA is the responsibility that it accepts, within the overall portfolio effort, for a number of ICAO Annexes. This responsibility requires a commitment by CASA to the provision of technical expertise for ICAO Panels and other relevant activities. CASA is required to maintain its commitment under the Memorandum of Understanding between the Department, Airservices Australia and CASA, to assist in administering Australia’s ICAO responsibilities.

It is important that Australia maintains the level and quality of its contribution to ICAO and the Government expects CASA to continue its commitment appropriate to its functions, in the national interest, and to assist CASA to keep fully abreast of international developments.


CASA must be fully responsive to Government policy directions and decisions. The recent reforms introduced by me in the Civil Aviation Act 1988, as amended, included a series of considered measures aimed at improving CASA’s accountability, enhancing their consultation with industry and building greater fairness, flexibility and strength into its enforcement processes. As the CEO, I look to you to ensure these outcomes are delivered.

In summary, I wish to see CASA demonstrate world’s best practice in the area of aviation safety regulation. In its daily dealings, CASA must exhibit those behavioural attributes of a good regulator including consistency, accountability, fairness, flexibility and efficiency. The CASA reform process must be taken forward to achieve the Government’s aim of a simple-to-follow regulatory system and a new and improved organisational culture. These objectives must be accompanied by explicit benchmarks and a capacity within CASA to demonstrate in a measurable and accountable way how and when these objectives will be met. This Charter Letter will be reviewed with you after six months and revised as necessary.

I am confident that the strategic direction I have provided will not only increase the safety of air navigation but assist CASA in becoming a highly respected and best practice regulator and I encourage all CASA personnel work together to achieve this shared vision.

Yours sincerely

John Anderson

Then back to 2014:

Quote:Paul Phelan. Dec 08, 2014

Input from general aviation identities isn’t exactly brimming with relief at the government’s response to the ASRR Panel’s detailed study and recommendations – and it’s easy to understand why. Here’s a comment from veteran airport, charter and training operator Sandy Reith, who no longer operates an aviation business and has no personal axe to grind. Sandy is down to just one private aeroplane (although a remarkable one to be sure) but still cares about what is and what is not happening.

The letter was originally from Sandy to former AOPA Chair Phillip Reiss in response to Phillip’s circular to AOPA members, and was also widely circulated to interested parties including the media. It reminds us that a great deal more needs to happen before all that mistrust can be expected to start dissolving.


I am sure that we are all gratified that at least, and at last, General Aviation industry ills have gained some recognition. Unfortunately the mooted remedies will fade away, whiteanted, delayed and ultimately lost from memory except for the few of us who have watched with dismay the destruction of what should be a vibrant and useful Australian industry. Younger GA participants could not imagine the dynamic growth of GA in the thirty years to, say, 1990.

The government’s response is full of ‘maybes’, ‘lots of work to assess’, ‘if resources can be found’, ‘may take some time’, ‘must check with ICAO’, ‘new board and CEO need to formulate strategies’ etc etc ad nauseam. Take as an example the agreement to consider the ASIC problem, the report finishes talking about just a possible change but in reality keeping this card. Thus the ‘agree in principle’ CASA modus operandi is writ large throughout the document. Soft soap from the experts.

Not a word about deleting the requirement for an AIr Operator Certificate for flying training, mentioned for further consideration by the Panel but not given as a recommendation. This would be probably the only measure that could quickly reinvigorate training. Flying training is the first and most urgent segment of GA that needs to be unshackled from the exceptionally onerous and expensive AOC system. In the USA some 70% of pilots are trained by individual instructors. VH (ie. mainstream GA aircraft) flying schools are now the rarest of animals, even the Nation’s capital lost its last school four years ago. This is a National disgrace. Nearly 400,000 Canberrans, of the wealthiest demographic and most influential have no flying school. Airline pilots are now on the 457 visa list.

The new CEO has a command pyramid type background, and no ‘coal face’ GA business experience. Minister Truss did nothing to assist GA when he was the Minister in the Howard government. I took a deputation to Mr Truss regarding reform during that time. Instead of listening to our suggested growth plans, he cut short our (concise) presentation and defended the decline in VH registered GA as being balanced with the growth in RAAus below 600 kg category. The low weight category in present form is extremely poor policy, encouraging thousands of flyers into, in many cases, unsuitable light weight aircraft hard up against the thoroughly unrealistic gross weight limit of 600 kg. That is often the combination of two people, engine, propellor and fuel and oil leaving not much for an airframe fit for purpose.

Unless the Minister makes fairly specific directions and imposes time limits, then the CASA juggernaut will roll on. Can anyone really believe that the authoritarian and make work CASA system and culture will now be turned into an enlightened and helpful regulator? I fully agree with your concerns in this regard. If real reforms were carried out half the CASA staff would be redundant, they know this better than anyone. Most of their work could be tendered out for a fraction of present cost, NZ CAA would be a prime contender.
What is it now? Twenty five years, hundreds of $ millions and still they have not finished the rule re-write. The system is broken and the Board, without Ministerial Direction and backup, will be impotent.

With respect, there is actually no firm result and little hope of timely meaningful reform. Platitudes and window dressing is about all we really have, until and unless Parliament finds the willpower and demands action. This will not happen unless we achieve the sympathetic attention of Federal MP’s. I have suggested that AOPA run a petition, one measure that might gain publicity. I would appreciate an answer or acknowledgment of that email.


Sandy Reith

&.. Not-so-great expectations?

Much..much MTF - P2  Tongue

Amongst the Phelan legacy this was perhaps one of the best and begs the question to the good senators, what has really changed since 2014? The only criticism I can imagine is it is far too long, given the attention span of a politician can be measured in Microseconds and is way beyond the intelligence level of a Politician to comprehend.

Its as valid today as it was then, with many subsequent "Events" to add to CAsA's damnation. Could I humbly ask the moderators to add a link to the archives so reasonable people can peruse it and draw their own conclusions.

I'd be very surprised if after reading Paul's material any reasonable person would come to the conclusion CAsA is corrupt to its core.

Submission to Aviation Safety Regulation Review
ProAviation, updated February 21, 2014

Phelan & Pro Aviation.

There is now a 'button' at the top of the AP forum page, same line as the search icon, which will take you directly to the 'Pro Aviation' pages and web site.

Nearly every article is a 'coffee' long read; remarkable for accuracy, relevance and clarity; still valid to this present day. The more things change, the more they stay the same.

Spend an idle half hour rummaging through Paul's writings; time well spent.

Toot - toot....

Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)