[Peetwo]

Pilot's concern for changes to the Act

From Ironsider, via the Oz:

Pilots fear new laws put money ahead of safety



Some argue new rules advantage big airlines over general aviation operations. Picture: iStock

• ROBYN IRONSIDE
  AVIATION WRITER
  @ironsider
  
• 12:09AM SEPTEMBER 20, 2019
  
• 4 COMMENTS
  

Pilots are making a last-ditch bid to change the path of new civil aviation laws being debated in federal parliament to ensure cost considerations don’t come ahead of safety.

The Civil Aviation Amendment bill has been listed for debate in the House of Representatives this week after being passed by the Senate.

The legislation has bipartisan support and seeks to strike a balance between risk and regulation.

Deputy Prime Minister Michael McCormack said the legislation would ensure the Civil Aviation Safety Authority considered the economic impact on aircraft operators and communities when developing legislative aviation safety standards.

But the Australian Federation of Air Pilots’ safety and technical director, Stuart Beveridge, said members were concerned they were not consulted on the changes.

“CASA needs to consider three things when formulating aviation regulation — risk, cost and a system of safety,” Mr Beveridge said.

“We need all three of those elements to form an adequate regulatory framework and we don’t think this bill gives enough weight to aviation as a system of safety.” He said the apparent oversight by the federal government was like “leaving the wheel off an aeroplane”.

“The other two wheels still work but you need the third wheel for the whole system to run successfully,” Mr Beveridge said.

Aviation veteran and former CASA chairman Dick Smith also expressed his concerns about the bill which he said would disadvantage general aviation and favour large airlines.

Mr Beveridge said AFAP would call for the appropriate Senate committee to review the legislation as soon as it passed.

“Essentially we realise that the chances of an amendment at this late stage are zero but what we would like to see is a commitment to a review and we would also like a much stronger ministerial directive from the Transport Minister (Mr McCormack), in terms of taking into account systemic safety considerations as well as cost and risk,” he said.

Pilots feared the legislation could have immediate implications given the shift to new fatigue risk management regulations.

“If it is written in legislation that CASA can’t impose costs ever on the industry, than we’re in a much more difficult position to have meaningful change to improve safety like fatigue,” he said.

---

Argus

13 HOURS AGO
(Edited)
Speaking personally, I have never been happy about listening to squealing from the individuals or groups impacted by legislative or regulatory change. As a passenger who has been watching the regulatory failure of the 737Max as a consequence of accreditation being dominated by industry pressures rather than independent regulators. I am much more comfortable with an independent regulator setting standards for public health and safety and requiring the industry to comply.

And in reply to Argus...

David

2 HOURS AGO

So long as that regulator doesn’t cause the eradication of one sector such as general aviation in Australia, which at the moment CASA seems determined to achieve

Personally I think the current proposed changes to the Act are all 'fluff with no puff' but if the knock on effect is to lead to real reform then bring it on quickly before the industry really goes tits up...  


MTF...P2