[thorn bird]

The attitude of filing differences with ICAO only highlights to other NAAs the inability of government to meet its obligations under this treaty. We need an Act that commits government and CASA to implement global standards into the aviation system. Most ICAO standards can be written as a PBR. - Absolutely spot on KC.. However the trouble is no-one, including ICAO & several successive Australian governments, seems to give a fig...

There is another problem P2,

CAsA are won't to crow about compliance with ICAO necessitating some onerous imposition, think the Coober Pedy runway width issue which nearly cost the town its RPT service.
ICAO must set standards that cover the whole world. Runway width requirements must take in such places as far North Europe where ice and snow covered runways are a winter norm, hardly appropriate for a town in the middle of a desert where even rain is a rarity, besides it wasn't exactly 747's operating there. That is where non compliance with ICAO is appropriate, which most countries recognise.

CAsA often uses ICAO compliance as an excuse for a lot of "Issues" with industry.
For example ICAO may call for "A Check" of something, CAsA mandates four, then claims it is only complying with ICAO.

This is why Australia's compliance costs have gone through the roof.

Chatting with a private owner the other day who flies his 172 about a hundred hours a year. He maintains that compliance costs, and all the other charges by various parasitic entities, who feed off the industry, make up over 60% of his operating costs.

If that is indeed true for a private operator what on earth is it for a commercial business?