[Wombat]

In my opinion, the CASA culture is easily explained by a very  well studied phenomenon: Noble cause corruption".

From Wiki: " Noble cause corruption is corruption caused by the adherence to a teleological ethical system, suggesting that people will use unethical or illegal means to attain desirable goals,[1] a result which appears to benefit the greater good. Where traditional corruption is defined by personal gain,[2] noble cause corruption forms when someone is convinced of their righteousness, and will do anything within their powers to achieve the desired result. An example of noble cause corruption is police misconduct "committed in the name of good ends"[3] or neglect of due process through "a moral commitment to make the world a safer place to live."[4]

Conditions for such corruption usually occur where individuals feel no administrative accountability, lack morale and leadership, and lose faith in the criminal justice system.[5] These conditions can be compounded by arrogance and weak supervision.[6] "

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noble_cause_corruption

It is not too much to postulate that CASA  sees itself as being the high priest of a religion of safety, the keeper of sacred knowledge that no one else has and that the pursuit of safety nirvana requires the absolute obedience of every participant to the minutest detail of CASA's pronouncements. Not only that, but the participants must never go against Gods word by querying the actions or intent of the CASA safety Church because that act - questioning CASA, is heresy and as we have seen time and again, heresy is always punished.

It is important to stress that this is the unspoken culture model. CASA appears on the surface to be a model regulator, it talks the modern talk and espouses the latest values, slogans and buzz words but when the chips are down it reverts to type.

We get occasional glimpses of CASA culture and values = what comes through very strongly is the religious nature of the culture:

- The most telling = the absolute belief in Original Sin - "all pilots are uncaught criminals" - they really believe that. That is why the regulations are embedded in the criminal code not administrative law. They really believe it. In their model without the constant supervision of CASA with whip and cattle prod, pilots will immediately revert to criminal behavior and destroy safety. CASA sees itself as standing between civilisation and anarchy.

- The sin of Heresy. What is Glen Buckleys crime except the sin of heresy? He challenged CASA by building a training and safety model far superior to the teachings of CASA. CASA set out to destroy him and may yet succeed.

- Belief they hold secret knowledge kept from the rest of us;

1) The absolute, bare faced, suppression of Angel Flight community service flights without one single shred of valid statistical evidence to support their case.  There is a comment somewhere on the web that CASA said in response to a lack of evidence: "We don't need to wait for evidence before acting otherwise someone else will be killed".

2) The re emergence of color vision discrimination despite the verifiable fact that CASAs  mumbo jumbo was decisively destroyed by the courts, yet two years later, without a skerrick of evidence they wheel it out AGAIN.

3) The absolute refusal of CASA to adopt ICAO mandated statistical risk management principles in evaluating the need for and content of regulations - religion trumps science.

And finally, the continued use of dirty, underhand, despicable and dishonest methods of enforcement every day. They justify this because it is in the service of the greater good. The Spanish inquisition used the same justification.

Folks, add your own examples if you like.

CASA culture cannot be changed. You are dealing with a religion. Legislators need to understand this before acting.

[Peetwo]

Albo's (Great White Elephant Paper) contribution to the decimation of GA industry??

Ref: If Albo gets in the GA industry is doomed

In the piece, King also pledged to commission a new white paper “to take a detailed and coordinated look at our national aviation policy framework”.

“It will address aircraft noise and airport planning, but also the future of general and training aviation and help set the sector up for a new era of competition and prosperity,” King said.

“In the absence of leadership from the current government, an Albanese Labor government will step up to work with the local community, enable their voices to be heard and chart a better future for Australian aviation,” she concluded.

So effectively Albo's aviation policy (if he manages to win the election) will be to bring back his GWEP (Great White Elephant Paper)...

The following are some extracts from a tabled parliamentary paper titled - Aviation white paper: an overview

On GA:

Regional aviation and general aviation

Regional aviation is assisted by several schemes. The white paper proposes rationalising these schemes. Under the scheme titled the Payment Scheme for Airservices Australia Enroute Charges, the Commonwealth refunds, in full, enroute navigation charges incurred by eligible regional aircraft operators across their entire networks. The scheme was introduced in 2002 as a temporary measure following the collapse of Ansett Airlines, in order to assist Ansett subsidiaries and other regional airlines to continue services. The retention of the scheme has thus become increasingly anachronistic. In the 2008–09 Budget, the Government announced that the scheme would end in 2012.[6] However, the Government has since decided to target assistance to routes that service remote towns and communities rather than entire networks.[7] This should see funds directed to areas most in need of subsidy.

There are currently four other programs for remote aviation services and infrastructure—the Remote Air Services Subsidy Scheme, the Remote Aerodrome Inspection Program, the Remote Aerodrome Safety Program, and the Remote Aviation Infrastructure Fund. The white paper proposes to consolidate these into one program.[8] This should rationalise use of funds.

General aviation has had varied fortunes of late with a flat business and private flying sector, while pilot training and recreational activity have grown. While the Government believes that no case has been made for it to intervene directly in the replacement of ageing aircraft fleets, it has introduced accelerated depreciation rates for aircraft.[9] The sector should benefit from appropriate airport development restrictions, new airspace policy and continuing regulatory reforms.

On safety:

Safety

The white paper mentions safety as of prime importance in aviation, but the subject itself is not covered until the middle of the text.[18] While the white paper concludes that safety levels have not dropped, recent events would suggest otherwise. Principally, the International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO) reviewed Australia’s aviation safety system in February 2008 and found that there is room for improvement in specialist skill areas and maintaining expertise.[19] This is despite the fact that the majority of technical areas are well above the global average. In 2008, a major Australian airline featured prominently three times in world aviation safety reports which, despite the remonstrations of the airline and regulators concerned, must inevitably raise questions about the state of the air transport industry here.[20]

Among initiatives to address safety issues, the Government has established the Australian Transport Safety Bureau (ATSB) as a statutory agency, governed by a commission, to provide greater independence to the ATSB. The commission is responsible for the functions of the Transport Safety Investigation Act 2003 and exercising the ATSB’s investigative powers into safety events.[21] The ATSB was previously a unit within the Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government.

Air Traffic Management (ATM) is a focus of the white paper, which discusses harmonisation of civil and military air traffic control (ATC), as well as moving airspace administration into closer alignment with the ICAO’s airspace system.[22] New ATM technologies and procedures are under investigation and have been used in trials. A new Australian Airspace Statement became effective on 1 January 2010 with a focus on regular public transport service safety.[23] Ongoing requirements are proposed for civil aviation developments that may affect airspace or radar. The Government is to maintain Airservices Australia as the lead ATM and ATC agency.

The Government has announced long-term funding principles for the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) but will require it to cap its direct regulatory service fees for at least five years. The current aviation fuel levy used to help fund CASA will remain in place. The white paper announced an extra $3.8 million for CASA to recruit additional specialist technical staff.[24] This may be seen as a positive response to the ICAO safety review recommendations. The long-ongoing CASA regulatory reform program is now set to end in 2011 with licensing and flight operations requirements to be finalised by the end of 2010. The Government has already established an expert board for CASA and strengthened the Authority’s powers. A new Sports Aviation Office will be established to serve the sport and recreational sector. Government oversight of CASA activity and performance should continue to be strong.

In 2010, the Government will develop and implement a State Safety Program for oversight of safety management systems within the aviation industry. ICAO has mandated that aviation operators implement such systems.[25] A wider Aviation Safety Framework underpins the complex interactions between the various parties in the aviation sector.[26]

 

In relation to the regulator funding (mentioned above) this is what occurred last time as a direct result of Albo's WEP and both the ICAO and (more importantly) FAA audit (read text insert): 



However by far and away Labor's (and it's coaltion party the Greens) most important priority, when it comes to aviation policy is contained in the following extract:

Airport planning and noise

Responding to issues concerning inappropriate building around airports, the Government is to strengthen planning arrangements, including coordination between different levels of government, and require greater transparency on intended land uses and developments at airports.[31] Planning Coordination Forums will be established for each capital city major airport.[32] Major airports will be required to establish Community Aviation Consultation Groups to enable greater local participation in airport planning and operations. Airport Master Plans will be required to focus on aviation development at secondary airports.[33] There is to be a new requirement for developments with significant community concern to pass through a Major Development Plan assessment process involving the Commonwealth.[34] There are ongoing measures with respect to wildlife and wind turbine hazards, as well as aircraft noise.

Aircraft noise over populated areas is a focus of the white paper, which mentions best practice with respect to housing policy and aviation policy to ensure that new developments near airports and under flight paths are compatible with future airport operations. This outcome does not necessarily preclude the controversial Tralee development near Canberra from proceeding, despite opposition from that city’s airport operator. Airservices Australia is to conduct a review of ways to minimise noise impacts.[35] The Government will also act to phase out older noisy aircrafts, such as ageing Boeing 727 freighters.[36] The existing curfews will remain at Sydney, Adelaide, Gold Coast and Essendon airports, but the Minister has committed to a periodic review of the need for a Brisbane curfew.[37] Airservices Australia is to have an Aircraft Noise Ombudsman to review independently public noise complaint handling procedures and the organisation’s consultative arrangements.[38] The Government will develop a framework for an industry-funded program for civil airports to ensure future insulation projects will be assessed and delivered against world’s best practice noise attenuation initiatives.[39] Despite the institution of noise insulation programs around Sydney and Adelaide Airports, and moves for a similar program in Perth, no specific initiative is mentioned.

Hmm...much, much MTF - 

[Peetwo]

Albo's historical culpability on destroying an industry? -   

Reference from Dots-n-dashes thread 30/01/2018:

---

Three-peat: The Empire (CASA Iron Ring) strikes back.

To follow on from my last with a few more breadcrumbs of intrigue and wonderment..

Referring to the PDF link & excerpt pic from this week's SBG: Lost – perhaps in translation.

...Rather than ramble on, for the serious student I shall provide just one, solitary link. Fair warning, there are some 37 pages to digest – however; the first dozen or so may be skipped past as they are the written Questions on Notice (QoN) and are repeated as part of the intriguing answers. The questions, standing alone, are incisive; IMO the answers are incredibly revealing...

---

 

From two posts above, you may recall that another significant event also occurred on 7 December 2009:

7 December 2009: FAA/ICAO brief on 'next steps' after poor results/findings in the ICAO USOAP 2008 Australian audit. (ref links - #53 & WikiLeaks cable PDF: http://auntypru.com/wp-content/uploads/2...ileaks.pdf

  
And prior to that date and also in relation to the FAA audit, the Iron Ring (et.al powers to be) successfully managed to muzzle the minister of the Crown responsible for the oversight of aviation safety. The effective muzzling of Albo was only revealed when WikiLeaks leaked the following US Embassy cable nearly 2 years after the event:

http://wikileaks.redfoxcenter.org/cable/...A1040.html

¶2.  (SBU) Terry Farquharson, head of the host delegation from
the Australian Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA),
alerted Econoff November 25 that the office of Minister
Albanese (Minister for Infrastructure, Transport, Regional
Development and Local Government, which oversees CASA) had
decided, against CASA's recommendation, to carry out a press
release regarding the upcoming FAA assessment.  In the coming
day, CASA will post the statement (a draft of which
Farquharson read to Econoff) on its website and will conduct
an interview with a reporter, with a strong possibility that
an article may appear in the aviation section of "The
Australian" newspaper's Friday edition.  It should be noted
that the draft release did not contain anything controversial
and points out that the assessment visit is being conducted
at the request of CASA.

¶3.  (SBU) CASA's view is that the press exposure may
unnecessarily complicate the conduct of the assessment, given
that at its core, the assessment is an attempt to clear the
record from a previous audit in which several shortcoming
were identified (see reftel).  The Ministry's office
preferred to carry out the release for the sake of
transparency and in order to preempt after-the-fact
questioning of what the Minister knew or did not know prior
to the FAA teams arrival.

¶4.  (SBU) Comment:  We are in close contact with both FAA and
CASA and are facilitating final coordination of the visit.
We do not anticipate this media release will become a
problem, but do expect questions from the press.  We would
appreciate press guidance from the Department and/or FAA.

 
Therefore IMO it would be safe to expect that, as a topic of conversation at least, the very troubling revelation that Australia was (at that point in time) 3 steps away from possibly losing it's Category 1 IASA rating should have figured somewhere in the meeting agenda:

1. (C/NF) Summary: The FAA team concluded their audit (reftels) and gave a brief assessment of preliminary findings. While the team recognized improvements on previous shortcomings and commended many areas, a few problems remain. Australian officials seem committed to overcoming the shortcomings before a second and final FAA visit within the next three months, but the possibility of a category downgrade does exist and is being taken seriously. The team outlined the sequence of events going forward and agreed to work closely with Embassy Canberra. End Summary.

  
Now apparently the whole purpose of the CASA Board is to provide independent, effective governance of CASA (the agency) and therefore provide oversight of the administration of aviation safety regulation in Australia. With that in mind you would have thought with the seriousness of the situation, the Board might just have made a press statement in regards to the FAA findings?

Passing Strange - However to this point in time I have not been able to find any evidence that the CASA Board was even aware that the FAA had conducted and completed an audit of CASA 3 days before the 7 December 2009 Board meeting...

And despite mentions in dispatches by former DAS McCormick in his 2009-2010 AR review...

(ref: Pg 10-14)

Technical training was identified as an issue by the International Civil Aviation
Organization (ICAO) in its 2008 audit and in the US Federal Aviation Administration’s International Aviation Safety Assessment (IASA) audit. We have responded by developing a comprehensive technical training and professional development program to enhance staff capability in areas such as leadership, regulatory skills and technical expertise.

---

&..

An audit of Australia’s air safety system by the US Federal Aviation Administration’s IASA program confirmed that Australia has retained its Category 1 IASA rating. The FAA was invited by Australia last year to conduct the audit of aviation safety regulation and oversight. Australia’s overall system of aviation safety oversight was found to meet applicable international standards.

...it was not once touched on in the 'message from the Chair', by then Chair Allan Hawke.

Although he did mention the extra funding facilitated by government in the 2010-11 Budget by gouging an extra 4 cent per litre fuel levy from industry, supposedly provided to fix the FAA issues. 

Extract from Hawke's message (note the 'cop out' Bureaucratese weasel words - ) :

..The Board of CASA has now been in operation for the full year covered by this report. Appointed by the Minister and charged with the principal responsibility of ensuring that CASA conducts its business in a proper, effective and efficient manner, I believe that the Board has partnered and supported the CASA executive team and staff to deliver the
demanding agenda set for the Board by the government.

While CASA’s functions are specified in the Civil Aviation Act 1988, its direction has been set by the 2009 National Aviation Policy Statement (the White Paper) and the 2010
Australian Airspace Policy Statement. The White Paper makes the explicit statement that: ‘…the government is committed to ensuring that it [aviation] remains as safe as it can be. Safety remains the number one priority of the government in aviation’. The Board has therefore approached its tasks mindful not only that safety is the paramount aviation priority of the government, but that the industry must also have this priority as the foundation of their sustainability and future growth.

The Minister has made it clear that CASA needs to be a firm, fair and effective regulator. The announcement of additional funding in the May 2010 Budget was welcome and will be used to strengthen oversight of the industry. CASA’s organisation is now settled and aligned more closely with the Civil Aviation Act and the Board is satisfied that resources are appropriately directed toward CASA’s core functions. The Board has also noted that through the leadership of the Director of Aviation Safety and his executive team, there are now improved governance arrangements designed to provide the foundation for more consistent action and advice to industry concerning the
interpretation and application of legislation...

A subject that I wish to highlight this year is CASA’s achievement in regulatory development. Australia already has exacting aviation regulations, but these must be
continually reviewed, refined and enhanced. This year the Board has reported substantial progress to government in a number of regulatory areas, including the requirement for safety management systems, human factors training for regular public transport operations, drug and alcohol management plans, and the preparation of a new suite of maintenance regulations. We are pleased with these achievements but also aware that the task of ensuring that Australia’s aviation regulations are relevant, effective and aligned with international best practice is an enduring and challenging responsibility. What we consider to be the optimum means of achieving the best possible safety outcomes today will no doubt be succeeded by better approaches in the future...

And an extract from Albo's speech:  http://anthonyalbanese.com.au/category/m...hes/page/9

---

...CASA, the nation’s independent aviation safety watchdog, will recruit almost 100 additional frontline staff with the $89.9 million in new funding provided by the Budget. This extra investment in safer skies will be funded via a small increase in the aviation fuel excise, from 2.8 cents per litre to 3.5 cents per litre. The Government considers this to be a reasonable and responsible step considering the industry’s continued growth depends on the public’s ongoing confidence in its safety standards. Following the ICAO and FAA audits this investment in CASA’s staff and training is critical, and will strengthen the organisation’s oversight of the industry. Aviation safety should be bi-partisan, and the Government puts the safety of passengers ahead of other interests...

---

Reading that load of old codswallop and keeping in mind this extraordinary 'power shot' statement from McCormick in the (above) No.27 AQON...

"...Consistent with the functions of the Board and it's relationship with the Director of Aviation Safety, who has statutory responsibility for all regulatory decision-making, at subsequent Board meetings the Director has continued to keep the Board informed of the high-level changes and internal reforms he had initiated, or intended to initiate, to address operational and organisational improvements, including those cited in the answer to question 25..."  

...you begin to get an impression of the untrammelled power that both the Board and the Minister had gifted McCormick, all apparently in the pursuit of achieving the government policy of 'all care but no responsibility' for aviation safety...

Now fast forward to 'here & now' with a different government, a new minister and a professional bureaucrat for a CASA CEO.

Q/ Then ask the question what has changed? Answer: Not much -

Q/ Now ask what happened to the money ($89.9 million back then) that was gouged and continues to be gouged (reportedly +$120 million & climbing) from industry, supposedly to fix the deficiencies discovered in the FAA IASA 2009 audit?

Hmm...sounds like a question for Senate Estimates...

---

Now remember it was Albo that brought back the CASA Board and made the ATSB an independent statutory authority...  

Finally remember these excerpts from the Pelair timeline of embuggerance?? 

27 May 2010: The Hon Anthony Albanese MP and former Minister for Infrastructure, Transport & Regional Development  officially opens the REX Australian Airline Pilot Academy. (ref link - #97)  

And then this:

July-Aug 2012: REX Airlines declares political donations of 250K to the ALP; 95.7K to the Nationals; & 40K to the Liberals (ref link - http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-10-24/ae...le/7959394 & #94)

..Of particular interest was Rex’s $250,000 donation to the federal ALP given the airline was a highly vocal critic of the Labor government.


In 2013 Rex publicly said the ALP was “hellbent” on destroying regional aviation and “along with it pretty much the rest of the economy”.


Mr Xenophon said it appeared to defy reason why Rex would donate heavily to a government it would shortly afterwards describe as “destroying its industry”.


“Perhaps Rex had a case of Stockholm syndrome?” he said.


In 2009 a Rex aeroplane — operated under the group’s Pel-Air brand — ditched into the ocean with six passengers on board, badly injuring one.


A lengthy Australian Transport Safety Board investigation blamed the Pel-Air pilot involved in the crash but failed to mention 57 breaches or “serious deficiencies” at Pel-Air.

Mr Xenophon headed a Senate committee inquiry into that botched investigation, which led to the federal government last month calling on the ATSB to reopen the investigation...

MTF...P2 

[Sandy Reith]

History well worth knowing. As the saying goes those who don’t know their history are more likely to repeat the mistakes of the past.

A very well put together reminder of the awful results stemming from the wrong model of governance, the independent corporate body without practical and commonsense political oversight by a responsible Minister.

[thorn bird]

Who could we designate as being the most disastrous for the demise of General aviation in Australia?

Perhaps DAS McCormick?

The ego driven big R regulator, with a history of sociopathic behaviour. Think of the 49ers many of whom would dearly like an encounter with him in a dark ally in down town Kowloon.

Think the part 61 debacle, his branding the industry as the IOS (Ills of society)

Perhaps Minister McCormack?

Responsible for allowing development sharks to circumvent the law and intent of the airports act and the requirements of airport leases, thus turning airports into industrial estates by pricing GA off their airports in favour of industrial development.

Dr Voo Doo?

The puppet master in the back room, quietly manipulating regulation to ensure complete lack of transparency and liability for CASA and the minister (government).

I could go on but the list would be long.

[Wombat]

I draw your attention to our new Ministers First speech. It is axiomatic that this represents the underlying beliefs of the new member. A lot of people will be reading this today.

https://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/sea...13/0028%22

Commitment to regional concerns and a fair go jump out of the page.

"As the representative of a regional electorate, I will give particular attention to those issues that impact on Australians living outside the metropolitan cities. I am passionate about good regional policy and will not join city based journalists and academics in a damaging discussion about rural and regional decline. Regional communities do face significant challenges; population change, withdrawal of government services, and the provision of employment and education opportunities are matters to which regional community leaders and policy makers must turn their minds. But the real story in regional Australia is how small communities are facing up to these challenges and not just surviving but thriving."

Are you listening Angel Flight?

"I joined the Australian Labor Party for one reason and one reason alone—only Labor is committed to a fair go for all Australians."

Do you think one day Glen Buckley and hundreds of other victims might get a fair go????

Do we have anything in common with the gold miners of the Eureka rebellion? Or are we "uncaught criminals"?

"The failure of the colonial government to heed the diggers' desire for a say in their governance and the imposition of an inequitable licence fee led to the Eureka rebellion of 1854. It was a rebellion that helped crystallise the very meaning of our democracy— the right of every citizen to representation. Ballarat's Eureka spirit is not just a matter of 19th century history. The people of Ballarat were keen supporters of Federation and also played a significant role in the labour movement's fight for an eight-hour day. "

I also note who is now head of PM&C. From my perspective a distantly familiar figure and a good choice. I wonder what he might make of our situation although it is far beneath him? Compared to the devious, intricate and highly creative machinations of University Faculties, I wouldn't give CASA much of a chance.

[Kharon]

Just a stray, idle first coffee thought re B. Joyce Esq, now in opposition. It is fairly certain that had Joyce retained the transport job, as minister then his SoE had a fighting chance of creating some reform within the CASA, the intention was clear enough and (IMO) there was the horsepower available to make those changes. Dead in the water now; or is it?

We need another useless to industry 'white paper' in the same way as we need another DFO built into a runway. But I wonder, can/ will Joyce use his SoE and proposed reform notions as a weapon against the inevitable lack of any action from the other side; if for no other reason than scoring the odd point or two? Got no idea - but soon we'll have to begin a new chapter on a new minister - taking bets now on how long it will be before the downgrade to minuscule begins and how much damage Joyce can do. The tote is open.

By the by - 'White paper' comes in two flavours - 'Government' version and the 'real world' one; same - same in my book.

"White papers are often written as sales and marketing documents to entice or persuade potential customers to learn more about or purchase a particular product, service, technology, or methodology. They are designed to be used as a marketing tool before a sale, and not as a user manual or other technical document developed to provide support to the user after making a purchase."

Toot - toot.

[Peetwo]

To BJ with love. Comment to his FB post

Sandy's reply to this BJ FB post:

Barnaby Joyce

The problem with trying to get ahead in our electorate of New England and Australia today is that government are far from helping and is so often the greatest impediment.

In Bingara, there was an investor trying to build a new greenhouse for leafy green vegetables including tomatoes. This would have employed many locals as well as supplying food for Australians. The bigger the supply of food the lower the price for your grocery bill, but that was until government green tape came into play.

To clear 20 hectares of rubbish black pine country was going to incur a bureaucratic charge called the Environmental Biodiversity Offset, and the cost? Six and a half million dollars! So you don’t have to be Pythagoras to work out what happened, the developers said forget it.

In another area, just for this local council, an acquisition to secure land for a road bypass has hit its own roadblock of 19 Native title land claims instantaneously being lodged on the small parcel of land, with some claims from as far away as Western Australia.

Does anyone ever sit back in government and call rubbish on these excesses? Do people realise how difficult it is to expand the economy and create jobs, as you hear so often in pious narrations by Ministers of expanding the economy, providing new economic opportunities, and increasing wages, when they are the same body that created the hurdles to stop precisely that.

And then of course there is the power price fiasco as we close coal fired power stations and replace them with wind factories. Minister Chris Bowen is pythonesque saying that he is bringing down power prices with renewables when the reality is the pain in your power bill. It is going through the roof.

How do we say we are going to increase manufacturing jobs when we can’t afford to manufacture?

"..Barnaby, with respect and appreciation for your contribution to our country, the same situation and bureaucratic madness is found in General Aviation (GA) and you were the Minister but chose not to make the real reforms that are plainly required. I personally spoke to you about the problems, and wrote via my MP many times. 
 
You did make some recognition of the numerous problems of GA by issuing a more detailed Statement of Expectations. to the (Un) Civil Aviation Safety Authority. 
 
Like all of your predecessors, since Gareth Evans persuaded Parliament to create an independent corporate to administer civil aviation, you went along with the “hands off” system that relieved you of that direct responsibility. That being a denial of the Westminster system where our elected representatives take responsibility for the various arms of government through traditional Departments of Government. 
 
Unfortunately your last SoE was only a nudge in the right direction and with change of government CASA is dragging its feet as usual. 
 
As far as land use controls by government over private property are concerned, there’s not one government, or political party, in Australia that’s working towards giving back real property rights and ownership by any fundamental change to our debilitating land use and heavy zoning controls. 
 
Today ownership is not much more than a token allowance and any change of use is an immediate call to the bureaucracy to impose all kinds restrictions and take fees and charges to themselves and their ‘consultant’ friends, often former colleagues. 
 
How did we get here? All governments love their land zoning powers, these powers have been approved in principle by all parties including the National Party. 
 
Not one government in Australia is going to propose a no land zoning free enterprise system where your ownership really means something. 
 
Take no zoning Houston Texas for example, a very prosperous (low mortgage load) and growing community, property values are not bloated and distorted by artificial ‘planning’ schemes (same as Australia pre 70s). 
 
You can’t have the efficiencies and the prosperity that comes with our freedom without people being able to use their land as they see fit. 
 
You can still have your EPA standards and governments can control all of their own very large holdings. 
 
A friend was just asked for $12,000 to cut down a gum tree so he could build a shed on a 70 acre wooded farm, the trend to a truly socialist, and a relatively weaker and poorer Australia, has been going on for years and this has much to do with the fact that our major political parties maintain their liking of government zoning and ‘planning’ controls over private property.."

L&Ks Sandy...

MTF...P2