[P7_TOM]

Aw: - not fair boys.

For Wombat, FWIW - the rumoured, without a shred of evidence version as told in the pubs.

Back in the dark ages there arrived a family from (take your pick) an 'Eastern Bloc' nation - here begins the tale of one Peter Illich of dubious origins; most believe Mother Russia - others tell it differently. The story goes that some form of 'legal' qualification was obtained and a position of 'Parliamentary Draughtsman' was obtained. A secondment to the then (possibly CAA) aviation authority was authorised, the purpose to assist with the 'drafting' of the regulations. From there on in, I regret, there is nothing but here say, rumour and a bad smell attached to the name. How much of it is factual is an unknown.

However the legend has grown and been embellished so much now that it is almost impossible to separate cold hard fact from fiction. Some say the foundations of the 'Iron Ring' were laid by Illich; some say he had a hand in winning the hearts and minds of 'Legal' and was instrumental in the 'legal' ascendancy over 'operational' philosophy. Others have it that he was instrumental in the demise of Byron and Vaughan and the death knell of FAA/ ICAO compliance. Then, there is the tale of his being unceremoniously 'slung out' of CAA and relegated back to parliamentary drafting of some kind; and, warned off 'matters aeronautical'.

How much is true, how much is idle gossip, how much is sour grapes or even Canberra fairy tale is a mystery. There are those who possibly know the 'facts' - but they won't speak; well not in public anyway.

So there you have it - a name used to scare the children. A bogey-man lurking, influencing and manipulating the way CASA legal does business. A shadow cast over our regulatory philosophy. True or not? - I have NDI. But the legends live on as fireside yarns and have as much intrinsic or practical value as those yarns do.

That's it.

[Wombat]

Would eating garlic protect us from CASA?

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

[thorn bird]

Provided you also carry a crucifix, mirror and be a sharp Stake(holder). Oh! and also only fly in daylight VFR.

[Sandy Reith]

Department of Infrastructure Secretary to underling, “CASA wants a new SOE, quickly”

Five minutes later, “found the last one added a couple innocuous words and the date change, all done!”

“Any specifics?”….”No, same again.”

“Ok send it immediately to Mick, good work.”

[Kharon]

Hoodoo v Voodoo.

There have been some great suggestions for a fancy dress BRB indaba; provided we can ever get a crew together again. Aye, hope springs infernal. But first we must find a way to be rid of the resident evil entrenched within industry. Now, the Bell, book and candle method sent shivers down the spines of 'evil-doers' - well, most of 'em anyway - with the odd glint of motivational truth demonstrated:-

"Bell, book, and candle shall not drive me back, When gold and silver becks me to come on."

But we must consider an appropriate way to dump the cloves of garlic, sharp stake- holders, blades of silver and all the claptrap associated with the ritual cleansing of daemons from our world. One potential method which could work, if the ritual was properly executed originates in the temple of Senate. I note a series of 'meeting' is scheduled to once again bear witness to the huge pile of previous evidence, reiterated  countless times over decades now. Why? Surely, by now, even the densest politician must be aware of the 'resident evil' inflicted, without relief on the aviation industry. Fair dinkum; how much more 'evidence' do they need, before they throw the book, ring the bell and light the bloody candle?

I cannot see any justification for McDolittle burning up any more Senate time and public resources; the 'facts' have been clearly provided for many years, by many people; all singing from the same hymnal. Shirley says, could that time and money be better spent correcting the blindingly obvious, clearly demonstrated, consistently proven ailments. Its all there, mouldering away in the basements - industry submission by the shed load, recommendations by the truck load; a huge stack of unassailable logic, common sense and genuine grievance. The tiny wee pile parked next to this veritable mountain of 'evidence' is the positive action for remedy from government; and, in a shoe box, the short list of positive actions achieved by government to set matters aeronautical to rights.

We do not need to have McDolittle et al plodding their way through yet another iteration of the same old - same old, to add to the big pile in the basement. Time to stop the tea and sympathy - the problems are clearly enunciated - what we need to hear and see in action are the 'solutions'. A clearly defined Statement of Expectations, from the minister based on industry demands would set the wheels in motion and save the nation another three decades of huge cost, for a negative outcome. The facts are there, writ bold and large. Time to stop the rhetoric - and get on with it. For pities sake.

Aye well; Steam off - but seriously, how much longer can we prevaricate and dance around the edges of a clearly defined failed system; particularly when the solutions make practical, intrinsic and international good sense.

Toot - (poor old keyboard) - toot.

[Peetwo]

Dear BJ - L&Ks The IOS

Via the AP blog: https://auntypru.com/sbg-8-08-21-ill-lug...hbor-room/ 


Plus via the AP email chains:

And thou shalt settle with Glen Buckley within 30 days. 


And thou shalt, 30Days, 

1.  Remove the restrictions on Angel Flight.

2.. Remove Cessna SIDs. 

3.  Allow instructors to independently instruct the ICAO and standard industry syllabus in accordance with DoT/ CAA Publication 45, in any design features they themselves are qualified, and remove the Class 1, 2, 3 system plus an add on IFR teaching grade, same as USA. 70% of USA pilots trained by independent instructors (Dick your valuable information, letter from John King).

4.  Advise government on the detrimental alienation of airport land on the safety of takeoff and landing at government owned airports, and cause leaseholders to revert to lease requirements maintaining the primary use. 

5. Ken Cannane’s recommendations for the alignment to USA recognised standards for aircraft maintenance, manufacturing and harmonisation leading to trading benefits and mutual maintenance qualifications between the USA and Australia. 

At the same time the Minister should require his Department of Infrastructure to amend the Civil Aviation Act to reword the Act’s purpose to include efficiency and growth for our aviation sector with safety in accordance with risk management with an emphasis on free enterprise. 

Department of Infrastructure to advise local governments on the benefits of promoting General Aviation, and a management plan for Commonwealth owned airports to include freehold blocks to be sold to private owners, initially for the conduct of aviation related purposes. 

Freehold is the only way to fully realise the potential of GA to compete and grow securely based on an equal footing with all other types of Australian businesses. Huge potential to create aviation jobs and businesses, including education, manufacturing and flying services in a post COVID Australia. 

This latter concept can be created by assisting the establishment of private airports (advise State governments) and public airports which would hold and maintain the airside, like public roads, while creating freehold blocks on the landside. Existing aviation business leaseholders would be given preferential treatment. 

Sandy Reith 

PS No more inquiries - ACTION 

---

Request Home Affairs to remove the ASIC Pilot requirements in line with the Forsyth report. 

Sandy

Finally via KC and AMROBA...  

 

MTF...P2 

[Wombat]

Too late! She cried. We have an election coming and it will be a minimum of 12 months before any action could be taken if the Libs and Barnaby are returned. If Labor is returned, there will be no action at all except to sacrifice what’s left to the Greens on the altar of climate change.

[Kharon]

Just a stray thought; FWIW.

I wonder if 'we' are are barking at the wrong gate? The dire need for change is clearly seen, across the spectrum, by industry - from Big Q down to Joe's flight school based in Kickinatinalong.

What if the CASA board could be persuaded to adopt and foster the changes? If the board presented the minister with a plan to 'sanity' I wonder if the minister would not sign off, tell 'em "go to it" and show 'em the door saying thank you for solving a major headache.

Joyce may not be persuaded by a rabble - but; big BUT - if CASA declared that the way to prosperity and peace was to embrace 'world best practice' - perhaps, maybe the prayed for changes would happen.

Yes, yes I know - dream on fool.

Toot - toot......

[thorn bird]

Nice thought K, but history shows the board is as much "Captured" by the iron ring, as is the Minister, as is the CEO, who incidentally plays the roll of "bandmaster" deciding which tune the board will play.

Who sits on the board? Do we even know when they meet? Do we know what they discuss?

They are largely political appointees, being rewarded no doubt for past favours, the Mandarins would never allow them to ever consider anything of consequence. Think of Buckly, he tried to approach the board, but Saint Commode firmly slammed the iron door in his face.

We've really only had one industry appointee, who we had great hopes would influence true reform. A mouse that roared, he appeared to made a start with all guns blazing, but was quickly corralled by the iron ring and castrated, capitulating with barely a squeak.

The board are mice, only there for the cheese, the fat cats keep them firmly in their place.

[Wombat]

The Board aren’t going to do anything, ever, their job is to be another. layer. of fireproof insulation between the. Minister and the inevitable accident.

[thorn bird]

Agree Wombat. Its galling to know they get paid a poultice for doing bugger all, Covid or no covid.

As Arfer once said "what a nice little earner"

[Peetwo]

KC's 11 Commandment suggestions for BJ -   

Via the AMROBA RRAT submission: https://auntypru.com/wp-content/uploads/...n-8-21.pdf 

List of recommendations contained in this submission:

Recommendation 1. Short term: The Minister include in his Statement of Expectation to the CASA Board to place a high priority on compliance with the Convention Annexes. Long term, Amend the Civil Aviation Act to require compliance with the Annexes to the ‘highest degree of uniformity in regulations, standards, procedures, as possible.

Recommendation 2. Short term: The Minister include in his Statement of Expectation to the CASA Board to ensure that CASA engineering/inspection staff are qualified to perform regulatory product certification and manufacturing approvals. Long term, Amend the Civil Aviation Act to require technical staff members hold international recommended qualifications standards.

Recommendation 3. Short Term: The Minister include in his Statement of Expectation to the CASA Board a direction to comply with COAG’s General Competition Principles in reviewing all current regulations and proposed regulations. Long term, Amend the Civil Aviation Act to require application of COAG’s General Competition Principles to all current aviation regulations every 10 years and to any proposed regulations.

Recommendation 4.     The Minister direct his portfolio department to create a working group of government and industry representatives to legislative review the Civil Aviation Act and other associated Acts to enable the Australia civil aviation sectors to comply with international standards, recommended practices and procedure to enable global recognition.

Recommendation 5. The Minister must include in his Statement of Expectation to the CASA Board that there must be a “parallel pathways’ for any person that does not want to join a CASA approved private business (Part 149) providing regulatory benefits to its members. In addition, the standards that apply to the CASA approved business must be the same standards that are applied to the person that is not a member.

Recommendation 6. The Minister direct the portfolio Department to open discussion with other government Departments to allocate responsibilities to the applicable government department and/or agency to actively pursue bilateral aviation agreements (free trade agreements) of mutual benefits to each country.

Recommendation 7. The Minister direct the CASA Board to re-visit the recommendations of the ASSR and open dialogue with the authors and industry representatives to discuss implementation and benefits to the civil aviation industry.

Recommendation 8. The Minister direct the Board to consult with commercial, industrial, consumer and other relevant bodies and organisations on matters relating to what is needed to be included in the regulatory development program, especially to enable participation in the global aviation market.

Recommendation 9. The portfolio Department (DITRDC) review the applicable Act or Acts so government, whether it is a department(s) or agency be legislated and properly funded to open foreign markets.

Recommendation 10. Amend and re-align CASR Part 21 with FAR Part 21 from where it was adopted in 1998. FAR Part 21 was heavily amended to clarify FAA & Industry responsibilities to assist in meeting global standards. Part 21 underpins the “Australia – USA Bilateral Aviation Safety Agreement.”

Recommendation 11. Review and amend the Airports Act using California’s Airport legislation as a model before these airports eject all aviation.

MTF...P2 

[thorn bird]

"Ah McCannane you've done it again"

Once again AMROBA delivers succinct and sensible suggestions for regulatory reform.

It beggars belief the political class can go on ignoring common sense.

[Peetwo]

KC & PH with a dose of reality and commonsense for BJ -   

Via the latest AMROBA newsletter:

Where is the Government’s Future GA Plan?

The CAA(UK) has a General Aviation Roadmap with a Vision we hope the Australian Government would adopt and implement:

CAA(UK) “We want the UK to be seen as the best place in the world for aviation and this starts at the grassroots. It provides the entry point for careers in aviation, as pilots, engineers, scientists and other highly skilled professions; includes a number of vital businesses and services that are vital to the aviation sector; and is an enabler of innovation. We want GA to be a flourishing, wealth generating and job producing sector of the economy.”

Look back at past Minister’s Statements of Expectations to CASA over decades and ask where are the CAA(UK) expectations to (1) reduce the costs to aviation by implementing outcome based regulations; (2) delegate CASA functions where possible to industry; (3) create aviation business hubs at airports; (4) create direct aircraft related civil aviation jobs; (5) make Australia into a major civil aviation pilot and maintenance training hub; and (6) open foreign civil aviation markets to Australian aviation manufacturers and maintenance services.

You can research Minister’s statements, department/agencies annual reports, previous Inquiries, all stating similar points but they just do not convert into a regulatory framework that would encourage investment, jobs, domestic/international trade and growth.

This is what the regulatory framework should achieve. Why does a government produce a guide to be followed by Departments and Agencies but not apply it to civil aviation regulatory development. The government’s Regulator Performance Framework guide, when applied to CASA’s performance, has not, from an industry viewpoint, met these principles:

Government’s Regulator Performance Framework .

“The Framework will encourage regulators to minimise their impact on those they regulate while still delivering the vital role they have been asked to perform”. Signed Josh Frydenberg.

“Regulatory costs do not just come from the design of the regulations. Poorly administered regulation can impose unnecessary costs that reduce productivity. These costs inevitably flow through to business more widely and to the community even where their initial impact is on a particular business. These costs may negatively impact the viability of domestic businesses, especially those exposed to overseas competition.”

How true, how true, Josh – tell it to the Department/CASA.

CASA self-assesses whether they achieve these KPIs and reports annually. Would industry agree?
AMROBA impression is there is none that could have a yes against it.



After more than 30 years of regulatory framework reform, the system is still not performance based, cost effective, efficient or economic, let alone be safety based.
Is the public service of the opinion that our safe aviation is an unsafe industry? It appears so.

Hawke Report, 2007
“Recommendation 1: The Minister and CASA commit to achieving completion of the development of the priority Regulatory Parts by submitting all drafting instructions to OLDP by the end of 2008 and full implementation of these Parts by 2011”. (A decade later and still not done)
“Recommendation 15: The Taskforce agreed that Australia should continue to benchmark and harmonise with other leading aviation countries in relation to new technologies, subject to risk and cost-benefit considerations. Consideration should also be given to the ability of operators to absorb the costs associated with these technologies and what initiatives might be available to minimise cost impacts.” (Not Harmonised and industry cannot absorb the costs)
So why is the US FAR system so cost effective and safe?
Why won’t CASA adopt the FAR System?

And from Phil Hurst and the AAAA's, yet another dose of reality and commonsense, via the McDolittle GA inquiry today:

Ref: 12.1 Supplementary to submission 12 (PDF 461 KB) & Today's NT GA inquiry Public Hearing in pictures.

MTF...P2 

[Peetwo]

Please Sir - A GANDER AT THE GAAN??

Ref: 12.1 Supplementary to submission 12 (PDF 461 KB) & Today's NT GA inquiry Public Hearing in pictures.

...You were part of the GAAN report, and I appreciate you can't speak specifically to it. We're going to ask CASA to provide a copy of that report to this committee. Were there recommendations around the regulatory burden that came out of that report? Can we hope to see those sorts of recommendations there?

Mr Hurst : Certainly; there were, from memory, about 10 or 11, or maybe a dozen, recommendations that came with that report. Some of the work that underpinned that final report is already public, because the GAAN made a submission to the inquiry on the future of aviation that the department of infrastructure and transport was running. It certainly covered the issue of CASA. You have to talk about the elephant in the room—that is, a dysfunctional regulator...

...The issue is how long it's going to take and the methodology. We actually think taking that role out of CASA—perhaps giving it to the department with oversight or even using the GAAN, the General Aviation Advisory Network, as a vehicle to do some of this work, at least at the high-level policy and principle end—would probably get us quicker results than we're going to get otherwise.

For now the GAAN report is yet to be tabled...(sigh - )...but perhaps we can make some conclusions from the hinted at GAAN submission to the FAASIP (Future of Australia's Aviation Sector Issues Paper)??

Consistent with its more recent practice, GAAN members have recently completed a Policy Note document outlining a strategic approach to a simplified Classification of Operations, which is linked to the development and implementation of Sector Risk Profiles for different types of general aviation operations. A simplified Classificaton of Operations would deliver greater regulatory efficiency, clarify priorities and enhance safety outcomes, whilst lowering the costs of compliance and barriers to entry.

In addition, GAAN members are currently preparing two further Policy Note documents. One will deal with airspace classification and management, while the other will provide a condensed strategy for the sector's ongoing viability. It is currently anticipated that both documents will be completed towards, or soon after, the end of calendar year 2020.

The GAAN's plan for general aviation has the following ten strategic initiatives:

1. Economic review of the sector to identify its value to the economy, look behind frontline participants to the users of, and demand for, general aviation services and to stimulate investment in fleet renewal and sector expansion;
2. GA's relationship with CASA and others, to address cultural, systemic and practice-based issues;
3. Review of the Civil Aviation Act 1988 to make the law fit-for-purpose, remove irrelevancies, promote international harmonisation, serve as a head of power for ongoing reform, improve CASA's governance and reduce the potential for impediments to innovation and economic harm;
4. Airspace for GA operations, to address equitable airspace access and support for new technologies; and airports and infrastructure facilities and policy to support general aviation flight and ground-based activities for all aspects of the sector;
5. Adoption of a simplified Classification of Operations;
6. Application of Sector Risk Profiles (in conjunction with a simplified Classification of Operations and consistent with the above);
7. Cooperative regulation principles, to leverage industry expertise for shared safety outcomes;
8. Reform of GA-specific parts of the regulatory set, to repair recently­ introduced obligations on industry that have increased costs and complexity in several parts of the GA sector;
9. Improved management of CASA, directed to continuous improvement, quality assurance, complaints handling, engagement and decision making; and
10. Training pathways to assure the ongoing availability of skills and competencies for the sector, by dealing with student support programs, duplication between government agencies, for better outcomes for trainees and reduced cost and complexity for industry.

As the GAAN continues to develop these policy recommendations, it will observe its operating protocols and so report directly to the Minister.

Hmm...in the context of that ToR and given the evidence put forward by the cross industry respected AAAA's CEO Phil Hurst, it is worth remembering that this report, in company with KC's AMROBA submission to the RRAT,  is currently being reviewed by BJ's Office Department minions and will by necessity require a response from BJ well before the next election...

MTF...P2 

[Peetwo]

While the PM is away BJ is in charge - 

Slight thread drift away from matters aviation but the following are takes from Barnaby being in charge (while the PM is away) and IMO provides confidence that BJ (unlike his predecessor) has the right amount of leadership chutzpah, political intelligence and integrity to give perhaps some hope for positive engagement by BJ on matters aeronautical?? 

Ref: https://minister.infrastructure.gov.au/j...o-national

HAMISH MACDONALD: Barnaby Joyce is the Nationals leader and the Acting Prime Minister, a very good morning to you.

BARNABY JOYCE: Good morning, Hamish, how are you? And good morning listeners.

HAMISH MACDONALD: I'm very well, thank you. Do you agree with everything Josh Frydenberg is saying, do you support Australia moving to net‑zero by 2030 ‑ 2050 rather?

BARNABY JOYCE: I think we are already wishing to be there, even earlier. I think that's the statement of the Prime Minister. We have to be very mindful, especially of what's happening in England, a six‑fold increase in the last year. I think we've had 250 per cent increase in gas prices in the last 12 months. We've had 13 energy companies collapse since 2020. And to quote The Guardian, so people know where my sources are, they say that they're now having to switch on coal fired power stations at a great cost to cover the energy shortfall. This was after a long winter in England last year, in the United Kingdom, and it goes to show that the consequences now are on jobs, are on agriculture, even the capacity to feed themselves, and this is not just in England, it's across Europe. It's something we should be aware of. Now why should we be aware of it? Because we've got to make sure in any decision we make that we don't replicate the mistakes of England, of the United Kingdom, suffer the consequences of what's happening in Europe or the consequences will be ours. We've got to make sure we maintain sovereignty in our capacity to finance the issues, which are our largest export in our nation, largest export in our nation are fossil fuels. If you don't want them you must, to be responsible, go through and decide which issues, which services, which pensions, that you also acknowledge you don't have the capacity to finance as you once did. Now –

HAMISH MACDONALD: I do want to get to the finance thing because that's what Josh Frydenberg is talking about today. But just to be clear for our listeners, you do support net‑zero by 2050?

BARNABY JOYCE: I've got no problems with any plan that does not leave regional areas hurt. I have to explain, as do my colleagues have to explain, that we make sure we don't have net‑zero losses in regional areas, that we don’t have net‑zero losses in Muswellbrook, in Central Queensland, and that we don't put our economy at threat, we don't tip our capacity to pay for the substantive service such as the ABC by putting ourselves in the position, which is not fanciful. It is where England is right – it's where the United Kingdom is right now.

HAMISH MACDONALD: Sure.

BARNABY JOYCE: And that should be also a section for one of your programs to investigate exactly what happened there, because the investigation into renewables is not only –

HAMISH MACDONALD: I think there's a separation between the Government and what the ABC does in terms of its investigations, Deputy Prime Minister.

BARNABY JOYCE: Not really, we have to pay for you and that's a substantive part of the budget.

HAMISH MACDONALD: I think we all know there's editorial independence. Australia's interests lie in our markets functioning effectively the Treasurer is saying today, so that the financial system remains stable, investors are able to make informed and timely decisions and capital can be accessed at the lowest possible cost. Regional areas need that too, don't they?

BARNABY JOYCE: Well capital should be also accessible without the imposed views of certain people within that organisation. Remember the heads of superannuation funds are not there because they own the money, they administer other people's money by reason of being a very good applicant of the job interviews, as is the case ‑‑

HAMISH MACDONALD: But we're not just talking about super funds, we're talking about the imported capital that Australia relies on for our economy to function.

BARNABY JOYCE: Yes, and that's precisely right, Hamish, for our economy to function. You have hit the nail right on the head. We have to make sure our economy can function. We have to make sure that we earn the money. I know people have very strong views, I understand that, and we've got to make sure that we do what we can to deal with those views and to placate those views and to deliver on those views. But we also have to make people very aware, very aware of the consequences of getting it wrong. Now what happened in the United Kingdom was renewables were not able to fill the void and now, as I said, reading The Guardian this morning, they're having to fill the void by opening up formerly closed coal fired power stations.

HAMISH MACDONALD: What do you want in order to agree to this target? Are you saying that unless we commit to more coal fired power stations, unless we keep the ones that we have open long‑term, you're not going to agree to this? Is that the sum total of what your argument is?

BARNABY JOYCE: No, no, no, not at all. I mean that's a simplistic analogy of something for a rhetorical point.

HAMISH MACDONALD: No, I'm trying to unpick the riddle.

BARNABY JOYCE: It's not unpicking the riddle at all. What I'm saying on that issue is we've got to have a holistic understanding of the experience overseas of what happens if you get this wrong. We have to clearly understand the economics of our nation. We don't make money from pharmaceuticals. We don't make money from selling planes or computers. We don't make money from selling motor cars. We make money, our biggest export earner is the sale of fossil fuels, and for coal, we're selling more at a higher price than before. I imagine that's because Europe is terrified of exactly what happens as they go into a European winter. First and foremost, they need to keep their people employed, keep their people fed and keep their people warm. Any plan we have, it's got to look at the holistic economic, industrial, the capacity of people to be left in the same standard of living as what you had before. That's one of the things I'll be looking at. Of course I'll also be conveying, which is incredibly important, with my colleagues in the party because they may have views, they may have views that are slightly different to my own, but they are certainly entitled to the discussion and that's what we'll be doing as well.

HAMISH MACDONALD: On the submarine deal that has been announced, the Prime Minister's obviously overseas at the moment, there's a lot of talk of charm offences, we're dispatching military chiefs to calm some of our allies. We can't get a phone call with the French President Emmanuel Macron. One would have thought this could have been done better. Why has Australia bungled this announcement and upset so many friends in doing it?

BARNABY JOYCE: Well we haven't bungled the announcement, first and foremost, and with the Prime Minister's lead made sure we can defend our nation with the most competent deterrent, which is this platform. Things have changed in the last short period of time, short years, and we have to change to reflect that. We have to get ourselves, it's not just submarines, the AUKUS arrangement goes across multiple platforms and brings into play a stronger working relationship in the defence of our nation with partners who have the same views as us.

HAMISH MACDONALD: Sure, but –

BARNABY JOYCE: And the same views as France and the same libertarian, egalitarian, fraternity, the views of France as well. I'm sure that the French, as it sits at the core of what that nation believes in, understands that of course Australia is going to look to the issue of the defence of their people first and foremost. That was an issue and I hope it remains bipartisan with the Labor Party, it's a decision that had to be made.

HAMISH MACDONALD: Deputy Prime Minister, this should have been a good news story for countries like Indonesia and Malaysia who similarly feel some concern about the rise of China and its increasing military presence in the region, but instead of them seeing this as a positive thing that might lead to benefits for them, they're very upset. Was that really necessary?

BARNABY JOYCE: I know that yes, they do have concerns about exactly where our region, it's no longer Europe, it's not the turmoils of Europe, it's now the issues of our region, and we'll be working incredibly closely with the Indonesians and the Malaysians. Obviously, we see the Quad in work with the Indians and the Japanese and the United States of America again, not to pick a fight. The last thing we want is a war. We want peace. Now that is our primary motivation. To do that you must have the capacity of a formidable deterrent, an interoperability with Australia and the United States and the UK and the closer mechanism is a huge asset to that deterrent. Providing peace and be underpinning peace in our region is the best win for the economies of our region. It is the best win, to be honest, for China. It is the best win that takes us all ahead economically with the incredible economic gains that's been experienced in our region over the last couple of decades, lifting millions, hundreds of millions of people out of poverty. That is success, but it's underpinned by peace, and to have peace, and this has been the issue right back to Roman times, I think about 384 when Vegetius said, you know, si vis pacem para bellum. On the decline of the Roman Empire, he clearly understood that one of the reasons for that was their incapacity to formidably defend themselves.

HAMISH MACDONALD: All right. I think the conversation's gone a bit further back in history than I'd anticipated, Barnaby Joyce, thank you very much indeed.

BARNABY JOYCE: Always a pleasure, Hamish. Good morning listeners.

HAMISH MACDONALD: That's the Deputy Prime Minister there.

 Plus from the ABC Insiders today, via Youtube:

Hmm...(hey "K") love the historical quotes...

MTF...P2 

[Peetwo]

EWH catching up (sort of) -   

Via this week's LMH: http://www.australianflying.com.au/the-l...te%20Hitch

...The bedrock seems unsteady; imperceptibly shifting. No earthquake Victoria-style, but a tremor that hints that our world could be changing shape. Cracks are appearing in walls. The epicentre appears to be Canberra, where a shift in attitudes towards general aviation are becoming apparent. Although not monumental, GA advocates are telling me that there is "a real appetite for reform" within the Department of Infrastructure and Transport, backed up by some whitehats within CASA tired of the hard-nosed bureaucrats who are embedded in an historical culture of inertia like Easter Island statues. This week the department announced that they wouldn't be increasing the no-approval investment threshold at federally-leased airports despite the demands of leaseholders. In the past, a threshold increase would probably have been rubber-stamped through like most other deviations from the original lease agreements have been. And there are other signs, many of which have to stay under wraps until they have been nurtured enough to present to the world. The evidence is not so much in what is being said, but rather who it is that is saying it. Some of general aviation's most pessimistic trumpets are sounding more optimistic, which I will admit is a fanfare that I never expected to hear. Some attribute the shift to the new minister Barnaby Joyce; others to new CASA DAS Pip Spence. There are quite a few impressed with the appointment of former CASA board member Anita Taylor as the minister's aviation advisor. People who are singing praises now would have been throwing brickbats two years ago, and that's a change in itself...

MTF...P2 

[Peetwo]

Please Sir - A GANDER AT THE GAAN??

Ref: 12.1 Supplementary to submission 12 (PDF 461 KB) & Today's NT GA inquiry Public Hearing in pictures.

...You were part of the GAAN report, and I appreciate you can't speak specifically to it. We're going to ask CASA to provide a copy of that report to this committee. Were there recommendations around the regulatory burden that came out of that report? Can we hope to see those sorts of recommendations there?

Mr Hurst : Certainly; there were, from memory, about 10 or 11, or maybe a dozen, recommendations that came with that report. Some of the work that underpinned that final report is already public, because the GAAN made a submission to the inquiry on the future of aviation that the department of infrastructure and transport was running. It certainly covered the issue of CASA. You have to talk about the elephant in the room—that is, a dysfunctional regulator...

...The issue is how long it's going to take and the methodology. We actually think taking that role out of CASA—perhaps giving it to the department with oversight or even using the GAAN, the General Aviation Advisory Network, as a vehicle to do some of this work, at least at the high-level policy and principle end—would probably get us quicker results than we're going to get otherwise.

For now the GAAN report is yet to be tabled...(sigh - )...but perhaps we can make some conclusions from the hinted at GAAN submission to the FAASIP (Future of Australia's Aviation Sector Issues Paper)??

Consistent with its more recent practice, GAAN members have recently completed a Policy Note document outlining a strategic approach to a simplified Classification of Operations, which is linked to the development and implementation of Sector Risk Profiles for different types of general aviation operations. A simplified Classificaton of Operations would deliver greater regulatory efficiency, clarify priorities and enhance safety outcomes, whilst lowering the costs of compliance and barriers to entry.

In addition, GAAN members are currently preparing two further Policy Note documents. One will deal with airspace classification and management, while the other will provide a condensed strategy for the sector's ongoing viability. It is currently anticipated that both documents will be completed towards, or soon after, the end of calendar year 2020.

The GAAN's plan for general aviation has the following ten strategic initiatives:

1. Economic review of the sector to identify its value to the economy, look behind frontline participants to the users of, and demand for, general aviation services and to stimulate investment in fleet renewal and sector expansion;
2. GA's relationship with CASA and others, to address cultural, systemic and practice-based issues;
3. Review of the Civil Aviation Act 1988 to make the law fit-for-purpose, remove irrelevancies, promote international harmonisation, serve as a head of power for ongoing reform, improve CASA's governance and reduce the potential for impediments to innovation and economic harm;
4. Airspace for GA operations, to address equitable airspace access and support for new technologies; and airports and infrastructure facilities and policy to support general aviation flight and ground-based activities for all aspects of the sector;
5. Adoption of a simplified Classification of Operations;
6. Application of Sector Risk Profiles (in conjunction with a simplified Classification of Operations and consistent with the above);
7. Cooperative regulation principles, to leverage industry expertise for shared safety outcomes;
8. Reform of GA-specific parts of the regulatory set, to repair recently­ introduced obligations on industry that have increased costs and complexity in several parts of the GA sector;
9. Improved management of CASA, directed to continuous improvement, quality assurance, complaints handling, engagement and decision making; and
10. Training pathways to assure the ongoing availability of skills and competencies for the sector, by dealing with student support programs, duplication between government agencies, for better outcomes for trainees and reduced cost and complexity for industry.

As the GAAN continues to develop these policy recommendations, it will observe its operating protocols and so report directly to the Minister.

Hmm...in the context of that ToR and given the evidence put forward by the cross industry respected AAAA's CEO Phil Hurst, it is worth remembering that this report, in company with KC's AMROBA submission to the RRAT,  is currently being reviewed by BJ's Office Department minions and will by necessity require a response from BJ well before the next election...

GAAN review finally published...  

A New Strategy for the Australian General Aviation Sector

Executive Summary and Synopsis

Consistent with its role and through its regular meetings, the GAAN has developed this strategic
paper to assist government in its consideration of General Aviation issues and opportunities, on
behalf of the sector as a whole, in order to frame and communicate its recommended strategy for
the sector’s success.

The GAAN’s vision for General Aviation in Australia is as follows:

A critical aviation sector contributing to the national economy, job creation and the well-being of
communities, strengthened by government policies and cooperative regulation underpinned by
deep engagement with industry, that is fair, risk-based, responsive to cost and innovation and
which promotes the value of the sector.

In order to attain this vision, the unique characteristics of the General Aviation sector are examined,
identifying wide diversity, limited political influence, high sensitivity to market influences, overregulation
and lack of incentives to investment.

The extensive economic, environmental and social benefits to the Australian economy have been
listed with a view to further study and analysis. Nevertheless, it is clear from the listing provided
that General Aviation is an over-achiever in terms of national contribution, yet too-often ill considered
in national policy formulation and related settings.

The strategic position of the General Aviation sector as an enabler of many national benefits is
considered and from these, eight strategic initiatives are derived. These initiatives condense the ten
point plan made by the GAAN in its submission to the Australian Government’s Future of Australia’s
Aviation Sector - Issues Paper1 , which calls for input to a five-year aviation industry plan.

These strategic initiatives are arranged in issues-solutions-actions themes to support practical
consideration. They are as follows:

1. Economic review of the sector to identify its value to the economy, looking behind frontline
participants to the users of, and demand for, GA services and to provide all levels of
government and industry with better information for supportive policy implementation;

2. Creating a world-class regulatory environment for General Aviation, to address cultural,
systemic and practice-based issues currently hampering GA’s relationship with and the
effectiveness of CASA through the adoption of a better Classification of Operations policy,
cooperative regulation principles, and the application of GA sector risk profiles, along with
the reform of GA-specific rulesets imposing unnecessary costs and red tape;

3. Review of the Civil Aviation Act 1988 to ensure that CASA and the regulations it creates do
not impose unecessary costs on industry while providing the capability for a modern
approach to regulation of General Aviation including harmonisation with best international
practice, outcome-based regulations, cooperation with industry to access expertise and to
drive continuous improvement, improve CASA’s governance and reduce the potential for
impediments to innovation and economic harm;

4. Training pathways to ensure the ongoing availability of skills and competencies for the
sector by dealing with student support programs, duplication between government
agencies, better outcomes for trainees and reduced cost and complexity for industry;

5. Airports and infrastructure facilities and policy to support General Aviation flight and
ground-based activities for all aspects of the sector;

6. Airspace for GA operations, to address equitable airspace access and support new
technologies, national security, safety and operational efficiency;

7. Aviation design, manufacture and export to capitalise on Australia’s proven innovation to
create jobs and compete in international markets by identifying and removing unecessary
red tape while championing the potential of the industry to grow significantly while
providing national capability enhancements and sustainable jobs; and

8. Early adoption of technology and a facilitation process to support, extend and leverage
Australia’s aircraft engineering, research and development capabilities, fostering innovation
and realising economic, environmental and social benefits that reach beyond the sector.

GAAN has addressed each of these issues with practical initiatives that will reposition General
Aviation to take advantage of its opportunities and to make an even greater contribution to the
Australian community and the national interest.

An Appendix is included, containing the Policy Note previously developed by the GAAN, directed to
the linkage between risk-based regulation and understanding of risk in various aspects of the sector.

MTF...P2 

[Peetwo]

Indiana Joyce and the Raiders of the Bottomless Trough -   

From the 20/20 thread:

---

Please Sir - A GANDER AT THE GAAN??

Ref: 12.1 Supplementary to submission 12 (PDF 461 KB) & Today's NT GA inquiry Public Hearing in pictures.

For now the GAAN report is yet to be tabled...(sigh - )...but perhaps we can make some conclusions from the hinted at GAAN submission to the FAASIP (Future of Australia's Aviation Sector Issues Paper)??

Consistent with its more recent practice, GAAN members have recently completed a Policy Note document outlining a strategic approach to a simplified Classification of Operations, which is linked to the development and implementation of Sector Risk Profiles for different types of general aviation operations. A simplified Classificaton of Operations would deliver greater regulatory efficiency, clarify priorities and enhance safety outcomes, whilst lowering the costs of compliance and barriers to entry.

In addition, GAAN members are currently preparing two further Policy Note documents. One will deal with airspace classification and management, while the other will provide a condensed strategy for the sector's ongoing viability. It is currently anticipated that both documents will be completed towards, or soon after, the end of calendar year 2020.

The GAAN's plan for general aviation has the following ten strategic initiatives:

1. Economic review of the sector to identify its value to the economy, look behind frontline participants to the users of, and demand for, general aviation services and to stimulate investment in fleet renewal and sector expansion;
2. GA's relationship with CASA and others, to address cultural, systemic and practice-based issues;
3. Review of the Civil Aviation Act 1988 to make the law fit-for-purpose, remove irrelevancies, promote international harmonisation, serve as a head of power for ongoing reform, improve CASA's governance and reduce the potential for impediments to innovation and economic harm;
4. Airspace for GA operations, to address equitable airspace access and support for new technologies; and airports and infrastructure facilities and policy to support general aviation flight and ground-based activities for all aspects of the sector;
5. Adoption of a simplified Classification of Operations;
6. Application of Sector Risk Profiles (in conjunction with a simplified Classification of Operations and consistent with the above);
7. Cooperative regulation principles, to leverage industry expertise for shared safety outcomes;
8. Reform of GA-specific parts of the regulatory set, to repair recently­ introduced obligations on industry that have increased costs and complexity in several parts of the GA sector;
9. Improved management of CASA, directed to continuous improvement, quality assurance, complaints handling, engagement and decision making; and
10. Training pathways to assure the ongoing availability of skills and competencies for the sector, by dealing with student support programs, duplication between government agencies, for better outcomes for trainees and reduced cost and complexity for industry.

As the GAAN continues to develop these policy recommendations, it will observe its operating protocols and so report directly to the Minister.

GAAN review finally published...   

A New Strategy for the Australian General Aviation Sector


Executive Summary and Synopsis

Consistent with its role and through its regular meetings, the GAAN has developed this strategic
paper to assist government in its consideration of General Aviation issues and opportunities, on
behalf of the sector as a whole, in order to frame and communicate its recommended strategy for
the sector’s success.

The GAAN’s vision for General Aviation in Australia is as follows:

A critical aviation sector contributing to the national economy, job creation and the well-being of
communities, strengthened by government policies and cooperative regulation underpinned by
deep engagement with industry, that is fair, risk-based, responsive to cost and innovation and
which promotes the value of the sector.

In order to attain this vision, the unique characteristics of the General Aviation sector are examined, identifying wide diversity, limited political influence, high sensitivity to market influences, overregulation and lack of incentives to investment.

The extensive economic, environmental and social benefits to the Australian economy have been
listed with a view to further study and analysis. Nevertheless, it is clear from the listing provided that General Aviation is an over-achiever in terms of national contribution, yet too-often ill considered in national policy formulation and related settings.

The strategic position of the General Aviation sector as an enabler of many national benefits is
considered and from these, eight strategic initiatives are derived. These initiatives condense the ten point plan made by the GAAN in its submission to the Australian Government’s Future of Australia’s Aviation Sector - Issues Paper1 , which calls for input to a five-year aviation industry plan.

These strategic initiatives are arranged in issues-solutions-actions themes to support practical
consideration. They are as follows:

1. Economic review of the sector to identify its value to the economy, looking behind frontline
participants to the users of, and demand for, GA services and to provide all levels of
government and industry with better information for supportive policy implementation;

2. Creating a world-class regulatory environment for General Aviation, to address cultural,
systemic and practice-based issues currently hampering GA’s relationship with and the
effectiveness of CASA through the adoption of a better Classification of Operations policy,
cooperative regulation principles, and the application of GA sector risk profiles, along with
the reform of GA-specific rulesets imposing unnecessary costs and red tape;

3. Review of the Civil Aviation Act 1988 to ensure that CASA and the regulations it creates do
not impose unecessary costs on industry while providing the capability for a modern
approach to regulation of General Aviation including harmonisation with best international
practice, outcome-based regulations, cooperation with industry to access expertise and to
drive continuous improvement, improve CASA’s governance and reduce the potential for
impediments to innovation and economic harm;

4. Training pathways to ensure the ongoing availability of skills and competencies for the
sector by dealing with student support programs, duplication between government
agencies, better outcomes for trainees and reduced cost and complexity for industry;

5. Airports and infrastructure facilities and policy to support General Aviation flight and
ground-based activities for all aspects of the sector;

6. Airspace for GA operations, to address equitable airspace access and support new
technologies, national security, safety and operational efficiency;

7. Aviation design, manufacture and export to capitalise on Australia’s proven innovation to
create jobs and compete in international markets by identifying and removing unecessary
red tape while championing the potential of the industry to grow significantly while
providing national capability enhancements and sustainable jobs; and

8. Early adoption of technology and a facilitation process to support, extend and leverage
Australia’s aircraft engineering, research and development capabilities, fostering innovation
and realising economic, environmental and social benefits that reach beyond the sector.

GAAN has addressed each of these issues with practical initiatives that will reposition General
Aviation to take advantage of its opportunities and to make an even greater contribution to the
Australian community and the national interest.

An Appendix is included, containing the Policy Note previously developed by the GAAN, directed to
the linkage between risk-based regulation and understanding of risk in various aspects of the sector.

---

 
Comment in reply c/o Sandy...  

As addressed,


The GAAN report has much valuable information but with respect to the authors it doesn’t seem to have highlighted the root cause of the problem and therefore offers no clear and strategic pathway that will achieve the reset, stop the decline of General Aviation (GA) and grow our GA sector. 

The only sustainable way forward is for the administration of aviation to be placed in a Department of Government with a Minister at it’s head, i.e., change the Act. 

Without that structural change all the never ending inquiries, consultations and GAANs, AOPAs and ASAPs along with the numerous pronunciations from new CASA heads about how good changes will occur but never do and the decline continues. BITRE stats and graphs show decline but would look much worse if adjusted for population growth. 

The regulatory environment and costs just go up and up, Ministerial ‘motherhood’ statements about world’s best practice notwithstanding. World’s best practice? Internationally we are an embarrassment. 

The declining trajectory, the loss of hundreds of flying schools, charter and maintenance organisations with thousands of job losses all started when CASA was set sail by itself because without that crucial factor of responsibility and accountability to the voter through the ballot box we do not have that essential working element of the Westminster system. 

We vote for our leadership because rule by experts does not and cannot work. Experts are employed to give advice and our elected representatives decide how to proceed. 

With regard to regulations, there’s a relatively simple solution. Take up the USA regulations, simplified, as was partly done in the late 90s, and this proven suite will be updated from time to time keeping us harmonised for trade and exchange of business and personnel. Meanwhile the Minister to require some relief by way of some specific reforms. 

The GAAN Committee wants Government to quantify GA’s benefit to Australia, but this doesn’t estimate our potential and will take time. Time we do not have because we are losing businesses and people and even secondhand GA aircraft are being exported to the much stronger GA markets overseas. 

Sandy Reith. 

I totally agree with SR, we need some action and direction now from the Minister not in the never..never. Otherwise left to their own devices through the vacuous period of the election, with the possible threat of a change of government, the unelected trough feeding bureaucrats will simply bide their time and obfuscate any promised govt commitments until those promises get lost in the political never ever and the GAAN is shelf-wared in the 'just someone else's opinion' section of the trough feeder's archives...   

 
MTF...P2 

[Sandy Reith]

After 33 years of abject failure with the current structure the main change that’s necessary must be the exercise of Ministerial power. Wait for CASA? Forgot that, it could but it won’t and in a way it shouldn’t because its the Minister’s job.

Strategic initiatives? There’s not been the slightest change of course by the CASA juggernaut. In spite of utterance from Governments, Ministers, Forsyth recommendations, or any of the long, long list of alphabet bodies and many highly qualified individuals that have submitted reams and reams of strategic initiatives.

As rightly said, Xmas looms and so does election year, if nothing from Barnaby you can kiss GA sweet dreams as it slides further down the drain waiting for a Minister who may think it worthwhile to rescue what’s left of it. Could be years or never.

By then a few rich folk, some ag, some government contractors, some rotary wing and RAAUS with it’s tiny planes and CASA will be about all that’s left of a once exceptionally useful Aussie industry. Practically all our higher technical and support engineering will all be sourced outside of Australia. Airports we are losing, and no thought of GA and it’s airports as National security assets, and we’ll soon be turning again to import airline pilots.

I doubt that anyone in CASA is looking but I know we are exporting many of what’s left of our GA fleet. Bringing them back will cost us dearly, assuming it will be economically feasible.

There’s only one initiative worth anything, action now by Minister Barnaby Joyce.