[Peetwo]

Courtesy KC & AMROBA...

Via the AP emails:

Aviation Regulatory Reform – Convention Obligations and Responsibilities


I, and many ex-regulators, cannot believe the unique state of compliance with the Convention Annexes text that aviation requirements contrast so much from the global civil aviation language. It is almost though regulatory reform no longer considers Australia’s obligations under the Chicago Convention; an international treaty ratified by Australia before many participants were born.

Looking at the differences lodged, there is a constant theme that government is unwilling to adopt the global civil aviation language, abbreviations, definitions that manufacturers and other NAAs include in their documentation that Australian aviation participants use daily. 

Excerpts from AG presentation at a seminar on treaties

“A treaty is an international agreement concluded in written form between two or more States (or international organisations) and is governed by international law. A treaty gives rise to international legal rights and obligations.

·       By ratifying the Convention (treaty), Australia voluntarily accepts legal obligations under international law.

·       Australia must implement parts of treaties in domestic law to ensure they can meet their treaty obligations.

·       A failure to get it right domestically is no defence internationally.

·       One method is to give the force of domestic law to the actual text of the treaty or the operative parts of the treaty.

·       Another method of implementing treaties by statute is to include a fairly short provision along the lines that the statute is subject to Australia's obligations under international law, including those under treaties to which Australia is a party.

This is a subject which will only grow in importance as treaties are used to create international regimes and standards on an expanding range of matters, which in turn will need to be implemented by Australia.”

Under Article 37, Australia is obliged to “collaborate in securing the highest practicable degree of uniformity in regulations, standards, procedures, and organization in relation to aircraft, personnel, airways and auxiliary services in all matters in which such uniformity will facilitate and improve air navigation.”

ICAO, in 1948, made a resolution, supported by Australia, to draft all Standards and Recommended Practices so member States could adopt straight into legislation.  This was re-supported by Australia in 1992.

• The AG Department presentation above stated this in one option.
  

Using this AG policy to use the actual treaty Annex text to fulfil our treaty obligations, how hard is it to adopt the SARPs without lodging any differences with ICAO?

If the actual text was used, our differences would be minimal.

To check this concept we compared CASA & FAA differences lodged for:

Annex 6, Part II General Aviation,

Annex 6, Part III Helicopters and

Annex 8,

Text of each Annex is available from the following site.

Annex 6, Part II, General Aviation Aeroplane Operations select and read text.

Annex 6, Part III, Helicopter Operations select and read text.

Annex 8, Airworthiness of Aircraft select and read text.

As anyone will understand if they read the treaty annexes, they are minimum safety standards, not maximum, written in plain English, easy to adopt.

 

Regulaty reform simplified process:

1. Adopt Convention text
   
2. Review to ensure not in conflict with other Australian laws.
   
3. Amend to harmonise with other Australian laws.
   
4. Submit for consulation.
   

 

Ken Cannane

Executive Director

AMROBA

Phone: (02) 97592715

Mobile: 0408029329

www.amroba.org.au

Safety All Around.

MTF...P2