[P7_TOM]

Well – I had to answer the question.



Honour demands it, so here we go.  Do you know, apart from Qantas, there actually other airlines which fly internationally? Well there are; and, I miss their crews attendance at the BRB meetings – however – there are such things as 'E-mail' and (recently discovered) a thing called 'Skype'. I was amazed – a guided tour of a busy base, far, far away, with deep snow, engineers working, pilots flying - and wildlife ambling about the place – all in a telephone call. Wow!.



Anyway; the point of the call was to ask a simple question. The man who asked it is an AOPA (USA) member (just a bit). “WTD are AOPA (Aus) playing at”?



We chatted while I had the guided tour – then, pushed, the short answer, I have NFI – not having watched the session, what AOPA was about. But, I have now. In fact, I have now spent a good part of a day of my life, listening to the entire thing; while fixing 'K's' dodgy joint (properly).



There was only one passage of play which mattered – it was the only one on which the Senators 'acted' – not reacted – but immediately saw the lunacy and took a hand. Ayup, the Chopper 'part 61' mandated check flight. Which, stand alone, is a bollocks and anyway. But 'act' they did. Why, well and IMO, the CASA mandate was not only deeply flawed, but ridiculous, in the extreme. The simple disparities alone were more than enough for 'lay' folk to see and ring the changes. The 'Chopper' case was 'clearly defined', in straight forward terms; easily understood. Bravo – well done Senators.



But, to the point we must go. Morgan had two very valid points available. The 'big' one should have been the focus of his 'informal' (no submission) chat with the Senate panel. It is an easy, no brain required glaring disparity. The 'medical'. There is evidence, out the ying-yang, that for private flying the RA Oz medical standard is not only safe, but generates 'flying'. The same 'flying' under the CASA 'system' demands all manner of 'other' expensive parameters to be met (for similar aircraft) and even then; there is no certainty. A clearly deformed system which penalises one group and let's the other romp away – unfettered by huge medical bills. Not mentioned in any serious way by AOPA (Aus). The USA boys got it stopped in almost a heartbeat – unacceptable- end of....



I seriously question WTD Morgan thinks a Senate committee would care if he slept or not (on Hansard FDS) has, world wide, made AOPA look like a bunch of bleeding heart amateurs. Waffle, will never, not in a million, ever replace 'fact'. Fact is, a large proportion of Australian 'private' pilots are subject to an inequitable system of medical certification. It ain't fair, and, had 'the man' been up to snuff – then he too could have had a win – instead of embarrassing himself, his 'followers' and the international people who would, whole hearted, supported his call for medical parity. That call was never made. What we had was someone clearly unable to match the professionalism, expertise of others, and provide a simple explanation of a gross 'injustice'. A proven winner. But no.

Keith Page “What was being hidden in the medical issue?”



Morgan had video and a clearly defined 'cause and case' to present – but, instead he wasted Committee time rambling on about how 'he' (as if it mattered) had not slept. As if, really?



To my friends and colleagues in Alaska and Canada; I can only apologise. But, you do understand that we hold no sway within your cherished AOPA. - Few of us depend on a PPL, even fewer ever go 'flying' for fun. Had they put Shaun Kelly up to speak – stuck to the medical inequity – then thing's may have turned out differently. Alas....



There: I have, as honestly as I can, answered the questions posed and have posted a short version in an attempt to explain where (as 'we' see 'em) AOPA's Australian problems lay. Now, it's time for an Ale, a quiet smoke, alone, on the verandah, while I gaze at a clear sky and blow cigar smoke at it.