The Reform Plate.
The entries for the Reform Plate hurdles marathon are starting to roll in – a long journey, big hurdles, muddy track and some serious contenders. The BRB decided to field a couple of runners, the trick was deciding which; so we had an Indaba….
It was a strange BRB indaba last evening; I only say strange because for once there was no ‘debate’. Usually there are at least two teams – often three when something is being discussed, the subject gets kicked around, thrashed out and a consensus reached. Not so this time – all on the same page and no dissent: changing the Act – and everyone nodding. Then some bright spark popped up with “OK – so what do we want changed?”
Dead silence for a beat. Then pandemonium; every thing from ‘burn the ducking thing’ to ‘only a word or two’ were ‘suggested’ as cures. So much for a quiet chat over a glass or two and a game of darts. P7 was in the chair and quickly brought the meeting to order (threatened to have the beer turned off). Eventually though a unanimous agreement was reached, on several topics, with surprisingly little fuss.
Even more surprising was the cost effective elegance and simplicity of the solution – I was impressed. So – FWIW and for the little good it will do, herewith – the BRB resolutions:-
Two changes to the Act. (i) Adopt either the UK (preferred) or the USA clauses which release CASA from the iron chains which bind them to ‘safety’ regardless of cost.
UK - “...provide air transport services which satisfy... public demand at the lowest charges consistent with a high standard of safety... and an economic return to efficient operators... ” British CAA Act (2012)
Our CASA is bound hand and foot by the risible
“CASA must seek to achieve the highest level of safety in air
navigation that is consistent with:
This statement must be struck out, by doing this it will allow CASA some wriggle room to draft sensible regulations which achieve the same ‘efficiency’, safety and ease of compliance both the UK and the USA enjoy.
Secondly – the Act should allow Australia to adopt the NZ regulations or even the USA systems. Those rules have produced a fine ‘safety’ record and assisted an industry to flourish. Australia has spent almost half a Billion over thirty odd years on reformed regulation and has not only failed to improve ‘safety’ but strangled an industry in the process.
There was an objection or two to this proposal – based on implementation. P7 came up with the solution and the objections dissipated. A simple two step plan which would, within 18 months see the industry enjoying the benefits and massive saving under a clean, concise, compliance friendly rule set. (i) Tell the industry that the NZ regulations will be in force 2020. (ii) Allow a 12 month to prepare revised expositions; train CASA staff during this period to the new rule set – then use the following half year to have the expositions approved. Sure, everyone will be flat out, but it is do-able. Must be done if matters aeronautical are to improve. Once it is done – another twelve month will see the loose ends tucked away – tidy and the system running as smoothly as it ever does.
Item next was ministerial ‘responsibility’. Unanimous – CASA cannot and must not be allowed to operate without supervision, that has been a disastrous experiment. It imperative that CASA be accountable and responsible for their actions and the massive amounts of money they plough their way through. Control, checks and balances - either the Senate RRAT committee or the minister; two choices, no options.
A big ticket item was the decriminalization of the regulations and removal of strict liability. This is an essential item. The department (CASA) elected to make the regulation so; this was not a legal obligation, but their choice. There are clearly defined guidelines for deciding what is ‘criminal’ or 'serious' and what is not. There are many ‘strict liability’ offences which may be successfully defended- if the option was there. It is not. Simple things – like pilot log books, many, myself included keep a small pocket diary to jot down flight and duty times, these transcribed into the log book once home after a tour of duty, when convenient. This constitutes a criminal offence of strict liability and a criminal record. Discussion of this topic inevitably led to the despised ‘Enforcement manual’ and the CASA ‘Ethics committee’. If ever a minister or a Senator wanted to understand why CASA is distrusted, disliked and disrespected – take a look at the preface to the EM then examine some of the Ethics committee decisions – it will disgust them as much it does industry. A shoddy, unworthy disgrace to this county? 100% agreement.
Those were the major points covered. There was a strong call for industry expertise to replace the often stumbling, fumbling antics and pipe dreams of those who ‘work’ (and I use the term loosely) for the ‘authority’. This would be a fine thing and the ministers name would go down in aviation legend as the man who saved an industry; jobs, revenue, national pride and the sanity of those involved in matters aeronautical.
That’s it (abridged version) from the BRB/IOS indaba – it usually takes a day or two for the e-mail returns to come back from the various loops; but, my short priced favourite is ‘Total support’ with Self Interest and Dissenters out of the running. Aye, place your bet here minister – I’ll take your money; then I’ll use it to buy an air ticket for whichever of your political opponents decides a trip to Wagga will score the most points and make you look disinterested and gutless. Hey, maybe Barnaby will come along – now that would be nice.
Toot - toot.
The entries for the Reform Plate hurdles marathon are starting to roll in – a long journey, big hurdles, muddy track and some serious contenders. The BRB decided to field a couple of runners, the trick was deciding which; so we had an Indaba….
It was a strange BRB indaba last evening; I only say strange because for once there was no ‘debate’. Usually there are at least two teams – often three when something is being discussed, the subject gets kicked around, thrashed out and a consensus reached. Not so this time – all on the same page and no dissent: changing the Act – and everyone nodding. Then some bright spark popped up with “OK – so what do we want changed?”
Dead silence for a beat. Then pandemonium; every thing from ‘burn the ducking thing’ to ‘only a word or two’ were ‘suggested’ as cures. So much for a quiet chat over a glass or two and a game of darts. P7 was in the chair and quickly brought the meeting to order (threatened to have the beer turned off). Eventually though a unanimous agreement was reached, on several topics, with surprisingly little fuss.
Even more surprising was the cost effective elegance and simplicity of the solution – I was impressed. So – FWIW and for the little good it will do, herewith – the BRB resolutions:-
Two changes to the Act. (i) Adopt either the UK (preferred) or the USA clauses which release CASA from the iron chains which bind them to ‘safety’ regardless of cost.
UK - “...provide air transport services which satisfy... public demand at the lowest charges consistent with a high standard of safety... and an economic return to efficient operators... ” British CAA Act (2012)
Our CASA is bound hand and foot by the risible
“CASA must seek to achieve the highest level of safety in air
navigation that is consistent with:
This statement must be struck out, by doing this it will allow CASA some wriggle room to draft sensible regulations which achieve the same ‘efficiency’, safety and ease of compliance both the UK and the USA enjoy.
Secondly – the Act should allow Australia to adopt the NZ regulations or even the USA systems. Those rules have produced a fine ‘safety’ record and assisted an industry to flourish. Australia has spent almost half a Billion over thirty odd years on reformed regulation and has not only failed to improve ‘safety’ but strangled an industry in the process.
There was an objection or two to this proposal – based on implementation. P7 came up with the solution and the objections dissipated. A simple two step plan which would, within 18 months see the industry enjoying the benefits and massive saving under a clean, concise, compliance friendly rule set. (i) Tell the industry that the NZ regulations will be in force 2020. (ii) Allow a 12 month to prepare revised expositions; train CASA staff during this period to the new rule set – then use the following half year to have the expositions approved. Sure, everyone will be flat out, but it is do-able. Must be done if matters aeronautical are to improve. Once it is done – another twelve month will see the loose ends tucked away – tidy and the system running as smoothly as it ever does.
Item next was ministerial ‘responsibility’. Unanimous – CASA cannot and must not be allowed to operate without supervision, that has been a disastrous experiment. It imperative that CASA be accountable and responsible for their actions and the massive amounts of money they plough their way through. Control, checks and balances - either the Senate RRAT committee or the minister; two choices, no options.
A big ticket item was the decriminalization of the regulations and removal of strict liability. This is an essential item. The department (CASA) elected to make the regulation so; this was not a legal obligation, but their choice. There are clearly defined guidelines for deciding what is ‘criminal’ or 'serious' and what is not. There are many ‘strict liability’ offences which may be successfully defended- if the option was there. It is not. Simple things – like pilot log books, many, myself included keep a small pocket diary to jot down flight and duty times, these transcribed into the log book once home after a tour of duty, when convenient. This constitutes a criminal offence of strict liability and a criminal record. Discussion of this topic inevitably led to the despised ‘Enforcement manual’ and the CASA ‘Ethics committee’. If ever a minister or a Senator wanted to understand why CASA is distrusted, disliked and disrespected – take a look at the preface to the EM then examine some of the Ethics committee decisions – it will disgust them as much it does industry. A shoddy, unworthy disgrace to this county? 100% agreement.
Those were the major points covered. There was a strong call for industry expertise to replace the often stumbling, fumbling antics and pipe dreams of those who ‘work’ (and I use the term loosely) for the ‘authority’. This would be a fine thing and the ministers name would go down in aviation legend as the man who saved an industry; jobs, revenue, national pride and the sanity of those involved in matters aeronautical.
That’s it (abridged version) from the BRB/IOS indaba – it usually takes a day or two for the e-mail returns to come back from the various loops; but, my short priced favourite is ‘Total support’ with Self Interest and Dissenters out of the running. Aye, place your bet here minister – I’ll take your money; then I’ll use it to buy an air ticket for whichever of your political opponents decides a trip to Wagga will score the most points and make you look disinterested and gutless. Hey, maybe Barnaby will come along – now that would be nice.
Toot - toot.