Of Mandarins & Minions.
One way debate…

“Perhaps we should not upset the pollies too much” says the quiet voice of reason at the back of the room.

“Upset ‘em, bugger that, I’d like to run half of ‘em out of town, tarred and feathered” says a louder voice of fury, from much nearer the front. “Hear hear” chants the crowd in unison.

“But it don’t pay to get ‘em off side”

“Bollocks, we’ve played nice, provided information, talked and, done meetings, pulled our weight and been a polite as hell – sod that – it didn’t work, not for thirty bloody years – time to tell ‘em what think of their pathetic performances”. “Hear hear” chants the crowd in unison.

So much for the democratic system at work, Oz style.






Now, in some democratic countries, when a Senate inquiry is called things happen – when that Senate report and recommendations are issued – things happen and things change and things get done; if not why not?  With trouble following – should the answers be unacceptable.

Not so in the Antipodes, nope. We call an inquiry, spend the national budget of a small nation on it, provide miles and miles of solid evidence that change is required, spend weeks considering that evidence, issue a whole pile of serious ‘recommendations’ for change, then down tools. “Then what” the children ask – Sweet sod all is the answer. The Senators are politely told to shove their ‘recommendations’ where the sun don’t shine, and they meekly oblige. Imagine running an aircraft operation like that – it don’t bear thinking about.

Mind you, the Senators ain’t quite as piss weak as the ministers. Take a long hard look at the last couple; or, even Chester for the short of memory. Theres a fellah who revelled in the title, the kudos and the power (not to mention the dollars) and the chance to become a nation’s leader (not to mention the dollars). Here’s an unqualified (no formal training as a minister) Muppet who takes the prestige, the power, the hand-outs, the huge salary, the pension, the travel allowance, the rent allowance and any other perk which may be wrung from the system  but will do nothing to assist a failing industry within his portfolio. Don’t upset him? – I’d like to kick his sorry, shiny arse down the main street – and probably back again.

Aviation history shows better than any ‘report’ the state of the nations well being. It is always the first to suffer when a recession occurs and always last to get going when the crisis is over. It staggers back to its feet as the economy improves, desperately trying to put some money in the tin as a hedge against the next cycle. The industry does this despite the ever increasing cost, the ever increasing raft of pointless incomprehensible regulation and the real threat of a criminal record for the most trivial of ‘offences’ in the face of some of the most despicable ‘over-sight’ aberrations known – outside of a third world dictatorship.

Successive governments have not failed this industry; politicians have failed to master the ministry and have, happily, become willing accomplice’s to the current anathema. Useless ministers have become sycophantic catamites to the CASA; and the Senators get their bottoms smacked every time they meekly try to make sense of it all.

Not upset the poor Pollies? Why ever not?  The beggars have bloody well upset me.

Toot toot.

Full steam Skipper? – Not yet; but soon. Half steam will do for now – I do miss our dearly departed Gobbledock; he always kept the boilers at just the right temperature, ready to rock ‘n roll. Aye well – Godspeed and tailwinds mate.
Reply
In 3,2,1..........

Dearest Ferryman,

Do not fret. The Gobbledock has returned. You may call me the prodigal son of aviation. Where have I been you ask? Well some rumours were that I was now reading news segments on The Project! Not true. Other rumours had me had me deep sea diving off Norfolk Island with Dolan taking tourists for visits to the reef and rusting Pel Air aircraft! Not true.  Well look no further than the Styx River Houseboat. I have overhauled the steam engines from top to bottom. A ground up restoration that includes additional horsepower and fuel efficiency and some environmentally friendly improvements. The old girl is in good condition, steam engines primed and fires stoked. All she needs now is her Captain to give the command and it’s all systems go......I eagerly await the Ferrymans signal....

Tick Tock Bureaucratic dross.



Reply
NEW THREAT TO AVIATION - FOUNTAIN PENS!!!!

Oh Christ, here we go. Let’s now watch Dutton’s mob and the Office of Transport Stupidity introduce even more draconian regulations and thrust additional tick n flick audits upon poor airlines and airports because of one fuckstick with a fountain pen in Asia! No doubt tens of millions of more dollars will now have to be spent ‘enhancing and upgrading’ airport security to help counteract this horrible new aviation threat??? FFS!

http://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2018-04-15...en/9660906
Reply
The Heff: "Ignore Senate inquiry recommendations at your peril!" Rolleyes

Via the Land:

Quote:Beef senate inquiry value questioned
[Image: w100_h100_fcrop.jpg]
Shan Goodwin @shangoodwinbeef

23 Jan 2018, 2:30 p.m.
Beef

[Image: r0_209_3622_2245_w1200_h678_fmax.jpg]
Former senator Bill Heffernan says governments and industry ignore senate inquiry recommendations at their peril.

Key recommendation of beef senate inquiry ignored.

THE decision by Cattle Council of Australia (CCA) to walk away from efforts to reform producer representation via a new organisation has raised big questions about the value of senate inquiries.

Australia’s beef industry has been subject to 13 senate inquiries in the past 17 years and two Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) examinations.

These investigations have become increasingly high-profile and criticised for bringing economically-significant industries into unfair disrepute.

Now, with a key recommendation from the past two beef senate inquiries around grassfed cattle producer representation being ignored by both industry and government, they are being labelled irrelevant.

The 2014 grassfed cattle levy inquiry’s recommendation for a new producer-owned body established by legislation with the authority to receive and disperse transaction levy funds found no political appetite.

The recommendation late last year from the latest beef inquiry, into red meat processing, seeking to replace CCA with a “transparent and accountable producer-owned body” has now been shunned by CCA and state farming organisations.

Of course, senate inquiries are conducted with the understanding they have an advisory function only.

However, given the cost of conducting these inquiries to the taxpayer, where recommendations go nowhere it seems fair to ask what is the point?

Plenty, says former Liberal Party senator and Junee livestock and grain producer Bill Heffernan, former star of the senate standing committee for rural and regional affairs and transport, which handles agriculture.

Ignore senate inquiry recommendations at your peril, he warns both industry and government.

There are many differences between a bureaucratic brief and the paddock and senate inquiries had proven that time and again, according to Mr Heffernan, who retired in 2016.
They were perhaps the best tool available for taking an objective, commonsense approach to looking at a particular industry’s problems and what solutions were possible, he said.

Their successes had made a big difference, he said, citing protected biosecurity status of Australian primary industries and systems like traceability in beef that have provided enormous marketing advantages.

There were also many examples, he said, of where the warning had been sounded via a senate inquiry and ignored – to great cost.

One of those was with white spot disease in the prawn industry.

“The bottom line is a senate inquiry is not some political BS exercise,” he said.

“We don’t play politics, we do what is right for the industry. The expose of the strengths and weakness of an industry is accurate. A senate inquiry tells it as it is.”

Who is in government should be of no consequence and if the recommendations are knocked back, it was up to senators to “jam it up them,” according to Mr Heffernan.
“Make a fuss and follow up because history has shown us the dire consequences of not listening to the outcomes of these inquiries,” he said.

The most outspoken senators during the latest beef inquiry, including Senator Barry O’Sullivan, Bridget McKenzie and Glenn Sterle, have not made a comment in the wake of CCA’s decision to resign from the implementation committee setting up a new producer advocacy model.

New Agriculture Minister David Littleproud sent Fairfax Media a statement saying the Coalition Government had contributed $500,000 to towards a transition, however it was a matter for the cattle industry to determine what organisational structure was best to represent a united voice for farmers to government.

How much did the last beef senate inquiry cost?

BEEF industry sources estimate the cost to conduct the senate inquiry into the effect of market consolidation on the red meat processing sector, which handed down recommendations late last year, was more than half a million dollars.

Secretary of the senate standing committees on rural  and regional affairs and transport Dr Jane Thomson said it was difficult to provide a cost for individual inquiries.

“This is partly because the costs are not limited to expenditure by the senate committee office but also include the time devoted to the inquiry by senators and their staff, the costs of travel undertaken and the costs of other parliamentary services such as broadcasting,” she said.

“It would also include the time and resources that submitters and witnesses put into providing evidence to the committee which is something that would be extremely difficult to calculate.”

The cost of the senate committee office in 2016/17 was $10.6 million but, again, that would be impossible to break down to the individual inquiry level with any accuracy.

“As a general rule, the committees that we support table more than 100 substantive reports each year. In 2016-17, this figure rose to 158 reports,” Dr Thomson said.

Story originally appeared on Farm Online. 

I vote that we bring back the Heff - Wink


MTF...P2 Tongue
Reply
Viva la Revolución - Part II

References - Let the viva la revolución begin & While the cat is away the mice will play

(04-19-2018, 06:45 PM)Peetwo Wrote: The Heff: "Ignore Senate inquiry recommendations at your peril!" Rolleyes

Via the Land:

Quote:Beef senate inquiry value questioned
[Image: w100_h100_fcrop.jpg]
Shan Goodwin @shangoodwinbeef

23 Jan 2018, 2:30 p.m.
Beef

[Image: r0_209_3622_2245_w1200_h678_fmax.jpg]
Former senator Bill Heffernan says governments and industry ignore senate inquiry recommendations at their peril.

Key recommendation of beef senate inquiry ignored.

THE decision by Cattle Council of Australia (CCA) to walk away from efforts to reform producer representation via a new organisation has raised big questions about the value of senate inquiries.

Australia’s beef industry has been subject to 13 senate inquiries in the past 17 years and two Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) examinations.

These investigations have become increasingly high-profile and criticised for bringing economically-significant industries into unfair disrepute.

Now, with a key recommendation from the past two beef senate inquiries around grassfed cattle producer representation being ignored by both industry and government, they are being labelled irrelevant.

The 2014 grassfed cattle levy inquiry’s recommendation for a new producer-owned body established by legislation with the authority to receive and disperse transaction levy funds found no political appetite.

The recommendation late last year from the latest beef inquiry, into red meat processing, seeking to replace CCA with a “transparent and accountable producer-owned body” has now been shunned by CCA and state farming organisations.

Of course, senate inquiries are conducted with the understanding they have an advisory function only.

However, given the cost of conducting these inquiries to the taxpayer, where recommendations go nowhere it seems fair to ask what is the point?

Plenty, says former Liberal Party senator and Junee livestock and grain producer Bill Heffernan, former star of the senate standing committee for rural and regional affairs and transport, which handles agriculture.

Ignore senate inquiry recommendations at your peril, he warns both industry and government.

There are many differences between a bureaucratic brief and the paddock and senate inquiries had proven that time and again, according to Mr Heffernan, who retired in 2016.
They were perhaps the best tool available for taking an objective, commonsense approach to looking at a particular industry’s problems and what solutions were possible, he said.

Their successes had made a big difference, he said, citing protected biosecurity status of Australian primary industries and systems like traceability in beef that have provided enormous marketing advantages.

There were also many examples, he said, of where the warning had been sounded via a senate inquiry and ignored – to great cost.

One of those was with white spot disease in the prawn industry.

“The bottom line is a senate inquiry is not some political BS exercise,” he said.

“We don’t play politics, we do what is right for the industry. The expose of the strengths and weakness of an industry is accurate. A senate inquiry tells it as it is.”

Who is in government should be of no consequence and if the recommendations are knocked back, it was up to senators to “jam it up them,” according to Mr Heffernan.
“Make a fuss and follow up because history has shown us the dire consequences of not listening to the outcomes of these inquiries,” he said.

The most outspoken senators during the latest beef inquiry, including Senator Barry O’Sullivan, Bridget McKenzie and Glenn Sterle, have not made a comment in the wake of CCA’s decision to resign from the implementation committee setting up a new producer advocacy model.

New Agriculture Minister David Littleproud sent Fairfax Media a statement saying the Coalition Government had contributed $500,000 to towards a transition, however it was a matter for the cattle industry to determine what organisational structure was best to represent a united voice for farmers to government.

How much did the last beef senate inquiry cost?

BEEF industry sources estimate the cost to conduct the senate inquiry into the effect of market consolidation on the red meat processing sector, which handed down recommendations late last year, was more than half a million dollars.

Secretary of the senate standing committees on rural  and regional affairs and transport Dr Jane Thomson said it was difficult to provide a cost for individual inquiries.

“This is partly because the costs are not limited to expenditure by the senate committee office but also include the time devoted to the inquiry by senators and their staff, the costs of travel undertaken and the costs of other parliamentary services such as broadcasting,” she said.

“It would also include the time and resources that submitters and witnesses put into providing evidence to the committee which is something that would be extremely difficult to calculate.”

The cost of the senate committee office in 2016/17 was $10.6 million but, again, that would be impossible to break down to the individual inquiry level with any accuracy.

“As a general rule, the committees that we support table more than 100 substantive reports each year. In 2016-17, this figure rose to 158 reports,” Dr Thomson said.

Story originally appeared on Farm Online. 

I vote that we bring back the Heff - Wink





[Image: 231a1936b990a920988dd62eb0bb7c87?width=1024]

Election a choice between terrible twins - Bill Shorten and ...

Herald Sun
The contest so far seems to be between a Tweedledum and a Tweedledee.




Mainly due to being constantly exasperated with the current toxic self-serving - Tweedle-dum, Tweedle-dee - pollywaffle world in Can'tberra, I must admit to switching off the leftist leaning Barry Cassidy and the Insiders program in recent years... Dodgy  

However for once I have to admit that the craggy-faced Cassidy actually nails it... Wink





Unfortunately  it would appear that this 'rule but don't govern' status quo will continue... Undecided

If you wanted a clear example that the aviation industry once again has a 'do nothing' MIA ('miniscule in absentia') oversighting the aviation safety bureaucracy, then go no further than reviewing the McComic weasel worded delivery to the press club 2 days ago: National Press Club Address




Don't blink but here is the token bollocks gesture to industry from the MIA McComic... Dodgy     

"..Now, I look forward to working with all parts of Australia's aviation industry on implementing real reforms, real reforms to drive productivity and enable the growth of this important sector..."
  
Hmm...I wonder if Dick &/or AOPA Oz have sent out an invite for the Acting PM and MIA McComic to attend next week's Dick Smith presentation at Wagga? Big Grin


MTF...P2 Cool
Reply
Beef and Bull-dust.

Do we have a beef? – Damn right we do.

Do we have bull-dust?– By the bloody cartload.

Why?

Heff “However, given the cost of conducting these inquiries to the taxpayer, where recommendations go nowhere it seems fair to ask, what is the point?”

It is ‘difficult’ we are told (by expert advice) to arrive at even the basic ‘cost’ of a day’s Estimates hearing, let alone ‘an inquiry’. So, readers will forgive a little poetic license in the forthcoming analysis of ‘exactly’ what is the cost, to the public purse, of every Hansard page provided. You see, Bull-dust costs significantly more than the ‘facts’. It’s true. The cost of ‘obfuscation’, to questions on notice and the time to ‘study’ the response; and the almost non event of ‘examining’ the response, followed by no response to the QoN is worthy of mention. The ‘answers’ are, indeed, eventually, provided and immediately accepted as Gospel by the committee asking. Goal 1 for the government opposition (if they had a functioning brain),

Heff - “[They] were perhaps the best tool available for taking an objective, common-sense approach to looking at a particular industry’s problems and what solutions were possible,” etc.

“They were” is a very significant couple of words – “were” being the give away. The O’Sofullame committee don’t seem to have any function except the blatant desire to shut it all down, deny the factual, empirical evidence, roll up the carpet; and, determinedly, ignore the plain facts. And - we pay good, hard earned for this bollocks, spoon fed to the public so they do not ever realize that CASA costs about three times it’s (intrinsic and practical) worth. That the present Senate committee are not only clueless, but gullible – and not in any sort of a hurry is but one chunk of ‘the problem’.

Heff - “There were also many examples”, he said, “of where the warning had been sounded via a senate inquiry and ignored – to great cost.”

For thirty years now and counting ASA, ATSB and CASA, through ‘ministers’ abrogating their responsibility have been taking the Mickey Bliss and, making our ‘law makers’ look ridiculous. Had Fawcett weighed in, perhaps – things may have been different. Rumour has it that far from becoming involved – he is said to have stated openly, that ‘aviation’ was not in his future; and, that he not only declined to be the only parliamentary ‘expert’ on the no vote winning matters aeronautical topic but calmly strolled away. –Aviation made him what he is – in the non spiritual world. Yet he will not risk his standing to defend this industry – for even a half year – to straighten it all out. He’s yet another who seems prepared to leave aviation to bureaucratic lunacy and let it rot rather than take a half year position to earn a ‘ministerial’ tag. If that’s true, is this what we can expect from today’s officers and leaders of men? –I wonder what may we expect if the proverbial ever hits the windmill? Have words like duty, honour and responsibility lost all meaning?

Heff - “Who is in government should be of no consequence and if the recommendations are knocked back, it was up to senators to “jam it up them,” according to Mr Heffernan. “Make a fuss and follow up because history has shown us the dire consequences of not listening to the outcomes of these inquiries.” Hear, Hear!.........

You may, if it’s you’re bent, go back thirty years to find a contradictory analysis – and good luck with that. There is but one answer – someone, somewhere, some time has to call a halt – and mean it – on the ministers who take the money for the responsibility but allow an out of control juggernaut to persist in raping and pillaging the general populace in the name of safety. One day, it will come back, like the Hamlet ghost’ to haunt and harry them.

Well done 'the Land', (always a good read)  well said Heff – not that it will make one iota of difference; nobody cares - but thank you anyway.

Selah.
Reply
SENATE INQUIRIES; ENJOYABLE TO WATCH, ROBUST ENTERTAINMENT.....COMPLETE PONY POOH.

I am a fan of Senate inquiries. They air the dirty linen, it provides an opportunity for us, the viewer, to have a giggle watching the bureaucratic dross squirm and wriggle while sweating under the spotlight. But let’s face it, let’s be brutally honest, it’s smoke and mirrors. When have you seen a DAS or alphabet soup agency Exec get rolled? When have you seen a Miniscule rolled? When have you seen real measurable change? All we have seen is this;
- 30 years of a regulatory reform program and half a billion dollars later and it isn’t finished, in fact it is still utter shit.
- General Aviation is now almost a distant memory of a once great industry and is fondly remembered because it pretty much no longer exists.
- Unworkable regulations, growing compliance requirements, unreasonable costs and downright stupidity by the government aviation oversight organisations has killed everything aviation.

No, sorry, all the enquirers in the world have achieved little. Even when there are recommendations the Government ‘accepts’ them, but doesn’t commit to any actual change. Yep, it’s all just a big game.

P.S The photo of the Heff, wow, the man looks nice and relaxed. It doesn’t suit him. The bulldog needs to be brawling! C’mon Heff, come back to the Senate mate, still lots of big fish to fry!
Reply
Playing against a stacked deck.

GD – “Yep, it’s all just a big game.”

Concur – now, as of last Estimates it is a not even a fair game. The committee is not even ‘fair-game’. Sitting ducks all under the O’Sofullame fluttering hands; (I’d love to play poker with him). The committee is so different now – for example. I had the pleasure of talking with Glenn Sterle one time – he said, straight up, that he didn’t understand a thing, so I explained it, he got it, said thank you and used the information to great effect. Top bloke, (politics aside) true blue and dinky-di. Now he ‘get’s it’ and ‘see’s’ the problems. He worked hard in harness with the Heff’ and, admittedly they didn’t quite mange to ring the changes; but they did ring the bell and never, not ever, did ASA, ATSB or even the mighty CASA manage to wipe the toilet bowl with them.

Last Estimates – ATSB blatantly took the Mickey out of the committee; and, they were allowed to exit, without a shot being fired over the SS Pel-Air as she steamed away from trouble. O’Sofullame is purported to be an ex copper; must be true – he was certainly caught ‘flat-footed’ last time out of the gates- the opposition gleefully romped away, not truly believing a whole Estimates committee had swallowed the bait. This would have been acceptable provided it was ‘fresh meat’, but it wasn’t. The vomitus part is that there was a carefully prepared, fully documented briefing transported to Canberra – at the committee’s request mind you – on the ATSB report and the Pel-Air debacle. I’ve rarely seen The Old man (TOM) as cranky as he was after that complete waste of time. The thumb drive containing the research came home with him; the Estimates went on without that information – the rest is history.

Then, to add insult to injury; we all sat through the CASA version of the Falcon’s story. What a disgusting exhibition that was. The CASA construct was smoke and mirrors, with some very shaky stage scenery; had O’Sofullame been ‘receptive’ and read the offered briefing – he and his committee could have moved the mirrors, turned off the smoke and revealed the tawdry production for the deception it was.

For years now, I have tried to understand why politicians are afraid to take on the aviation agencies – its not as though they would be unsupported, by the big end of town. Take Qantas for example – how much would they benefit from a reformed ‘rule set’ – just in compliance costs alone; the passengers may not see a reduction in prices but the reduction in compliance costs alone would raise a cheer from their investors.

Were it not for a few notable exceptions, you’d be forgiven for rating the senate estimates committee along side the CASA board; an expensive rubber stamp, without the prerequisite knowledge, or backbone, to put a stopper in the ATSB/ CASA bottle of slow poison. P7 is still wondering why O’Sofullame went to work, without the toolkit and sat around all day, doing SFA and claimed the pay for doing so. “Is he part of the problem?” this is being discussed in great detail at our own ‘esi-mates’ meetings. Ayup, ‘tis entertaining enough until you see the destruction and count the cost; then it becomes a never ending black comedy, bad enough when the good guys are in opposition; pathetic when the 'good guys' are aiding and abetting the sting.

Toot toot.

P2 edit - speaking of stacked decks? Tongue

QON (see pic):

[Image: Jerry_Nelson_Mr_Johnson.jpg]
Reply
Choc frog, Tim Tam and Gold star. Well done Dick; well done indeed.



Reply
Changing the Act: Consensus debate heats up?

Because this is much bigger than AOPA Oz, who IMO it would appear (after an excellent lead up - see HERE) have dropped the ball literally metres from the touch line, I have dragged this debate on to this thread... Undecided

"...With respect to the proposed changes, the Minister has called for general aviation consensus, to assist the government in this process.

The AOPA Australia through our Australian General Aviation Alliance will now hold a General Aviation Summit in Wagga Wagga on the 4th to 6th June 2018, inviting representatives from all general aviation associations to participate.

The purpose of the Summit will be to develop a consensus proposal for the government on the issue of change to the Civil Aviation Act..."
.

There are indeed several points of debate on this - example via the AOPA thread:
 

Sandy - I regret to say that AOPA should not have agreed to obtaining a “consensus” before the promise of reform, inferred by the Minister, has any solid shape whatever.
 
 The Ministers plain duty is to resolve disparate views in the National interest.
 That reform is urgent has already been proven and the turnout to Dick Smith’s Wagga meeting endorsed this fact. So why more meetings that can only be attended by essentially the same people? Those retired GA types who don’t have to be struggling under the weight of the expensive and impossible strict liability criminal sanction rules of the implacable regulator.

(05-02-2018, 08:47 AM)Gobbledock Wrote: LIGHTS, CAMERA, ACTION.....
In essence I understand Sandy’s point and don’t disagree - we’ve had more than enough waffle, conversations, meetings, talk fests, wank fests and in the words of Seinfeld; ‘yada yada yada’. That being plainly obvious, Sandy said;
“So why more meetings that can only be attended by essentially the same people”
With all due respect Sandy, the same people may attend these meetings, but the scope and direction of the meetings are changing. Dick, Ben and Mark aren’t attending just to air their grievances, they are pushing for the public to see that that our industry is dying and successive Governments, Ministers and their agencies are the ones responsible and need to be brought to account openly and publicly, even if that means targeting marginal seats and applying pressure and having their sorry asses kicked out. The situation is now critical and the muppets in fairlyland Cant’berra can’t see beyond their comfy offices and superannuation accounts. The public meetings and forums need to continue to shift from a ‘how do we fix this problem’ approach to a ‘you will fix this problem approach and if you don’t or won’t then we will publicly push for and support any politician who will fix the problem’.
The only way to force change, other than by means of a smoking hole with a Roo tail sticking out of it, is to target politicians, their seats, their comfy disconnected existence and careless attitude towards aviation constituents they are paid to represent....
TICK TOCK

Sandy also took up his dismay, on the AOPA announcement, over on Facebook:

Quote:[Image: IMG_2635.jpg]
[Image: IMG_2636.jpg]
[Image: IMG_2637.jpg]

Now I totally commiserate with both sides of the argument but history is very much against Ben Morgan and AOPA Oz. Like a broken record, the following is a post that I made just 3 short months ago: http://www.auntypru.com/forum/showthread...82#pid8282



(02-01-2018, 06:38 AM)Peetwo Wrote: [Image: AMROBA-GA-Meeting.jpg]



Dear Sandy - Wink

I agree about the Parliamentary inquiries and government reviews. The effectiveness of such inquisitions is completely undone by bureaucratic obfuscation and procrastination, all designed of course to wait out and wear down the significance and urgency of the current inquiries/reviews latest findings and recommendations.



[Image: Untitled_Clipping_013118_093436_AM.jpg]



However I believe if the minister/government had the political will to cauterise the CASA Iron Ring and it's malevolent loyal lieutenants, then I think some kind of Judicial inquiry will be required to build a legal case for prosecution of what amounts to decades of ingrained bureaucratic malfeasance that has cost 100s of millions of dollars for no discernible safety benefit to either industry or the air traveling public.

Of course such an inquiry would still take time and money but it is probably a necessary evil if you are to ensure the cancer within has been fully cauterised. After all isn't that exactly what the Kiwis did?  

From P7 on the AMROBA thread: post #95

Quote:ATSB and CASA must be disbanded; the Kiwi’s did it very neatly and have never looked back. They reformed the regulator; then the regulations and have set an enviable bench mark for sanity, economy and a way forward ever since. Can anyone see CASA agreeing to that?


&..

Quote:But at the end of the shift – you still have to convince a basically uninterested politician to tangle with CASA and make some radical changes. That politician must be persuaded that ‘the Act’ as it stands is unconstitutional; that CASA is an escaped lunatic and that the blood is not on his hands.

And from your post in response Sandy:

Quote:Secondly it behoves all of us to share and refine our thoughts on what is wrong and to reach some consensus on the method of reform. To this end it is clear that only by a change to the Act can reform occur. In the variety of diverse opinions about specifics, one would be hard pressed to obtain clause by clause complete agreement. Therefore the focus must be on the necessity for legislative change by demonstrating that the current trajectory is one of failure.

Because such an inquiry is being conducted does not mean that the legislative solution (that most believe is required) could not be acted on by the government and parliament, as such legislative changes are a parliamentary process and not subject to Judicial review or the ultimate findings of such an inquiry.


MTF...P2  Cool


 

After listening several times to the excellent Dick Smith oratory, I never thought I'd say it, but I would be more inclined to believe the veracity of the Albo offer of genuine discussion on changes to the Act... Rolleyes


MTF...P2  Cool
Reply
Ah, yes, but….

Sandy – “I regret to say that AOPA should not have agreed to obtaining a “consensus” before the promise of reform, inferred by the Minister, has any solid shape whatever.”

The minister has handed over a powerful weapon – if the ‘industry’ can figure out how to use it. Despite the ‘differences’ and differing agendas and ‘needs’ – of the various organizations, and I do include the big operators; they all have one thing in common. All, from Qantas to the smallest insignificant group of aviation enthusiasts would benefit from the two things they all want – an Act which directs the ‘Authority’ to act in a manner which is beneficial and sanity in the rule set. NZ, UK and the USA are world leaders and Europe is catching up fast – they have a ‘reasonable’ Act and workable rule sets.

I reckon if the various representative voices could all, just for even a short period, agree that these two essential elements must be provided, it would be a great thing for this nation. Once the changes have been made, they can return to their own agenda, protect their rice bowls and squabble all they like. Win the first round, the rest will follow as a matter of course..

All it would take is one simple statement:-

Dear Minister.

The IOS support the call for a reformation of the Air Navigation Act and the adoption of the (FAA/UK/EASA/NZ – insert one) rule set.

Luv and kisses

IOS.

There, easy as pie – then the minister would be obliged to honour his promises; that, standing alone would be a fine thing. A politician's promise kept ! hell I’d pay good money to see that happen.
Reply
Fort Fumble simplifies fee gouging - Rolleyes



(04-10-2018, 04:25 PM)Peetwo Wrote: Welcome to the Bureaucratocracy of Australia -  Dodgy

Quote:jonkster:

1. A regulation rewrite by a government body that has taken decades longer than anticipated and is still ongoing (and NZ who did similar achieved and implemented decades faster). At what cost? To achieve not a simpler system but a more arcane one.

2. An aviation industry that is struggling to survive. Closures of maintenance, charter and training organisations across the country. Loss of facilities, skills, corporate knowledge. Loss of public benefit that having a viable GA industry provides.

3. A shortage of pilots in the airlines. Australian flying schools disappearing and talk of having to get overseas pilots to fill vacancies because we are not able to train our own. We used to train not just our own pilots but large numbers of overseas pilots.

4. Regional aviation industries, jobs and services disappearing. Higher costs to regional residents for transport and closures of local business and loss of employers.

5. The body responsible for overseeing the industry keeps growing larger and is imposing more and more onerous restrictions on the industry and there is much doubt within the industry about the actual safety value of those restrictions.

6. Huge antipathy and distrust between the regulatory body and the industry it serves.

7. An industry in crisis that wants a regulatory body that includes in its charter some responsibility for assisting maintain the viability of the industry it serves instead of its current narrow focus on imposing regulation without any need to consider the practical impact of those regulations on the viability of the industry.

8. An industry whose health and viability depends on maintaining a high level of safety but that feels it is having onerous and often poorly thought out regulations imposed on it that are not so much about practical safety outcomes as the appearance and ease of enforcement by the regulator.

9. Governments over decades that have washed their hands and allowed the regulator to continue to act without regard for the viability of the industry because they are too scared to make decisions that may impact safety (or the perception of safety).

10 Handing over of commonwealth aviation assets that have served a vital role in the aviation industry (and its benefit to the community) to private hands who then develop and those assets to maximise their profits in ways that reduce or remove aviation from the facility.

Surely this would make for a great 4 corners program. Particularly close to an election.

Speaking of 4 corners, have just read the transcript from last night's 4C program 'Mongrel bunch of bastards'...


[Image: 9635028-16x9-thumbnail.jpg?v=2]



Those 'standard garnishee notices' and the 'cash grab' statement sound a lot like the many suspicions and hard evidence of 'cost recovery' through 'fee gouging' by CASA ... Huh

The following is a de-identified email correspondence to CASA from an operator trying to renew an expired exemption instrument:


"...Thanks (CASA Officer),

I’m sure you get push back on this stuff a lot, I recall a similar amount the last time I applied, and I recall the exact reaction the last time I applied.

There is absolutely no way that it could take 2 hours to prepare this 1 sentence letter or that the ‘cost’ is $160 per hour… this is a money grab far beyond the ‘cost’ to prepare.

This hourly rate implies the total cost to employ someone in CASA is $1.6m per annum, I hope you’re getting your fair share! How is this possible? As a tax payer I actually want to know the answer to this…

I hate to imagine what the regulatory cost is for commercial operators with more complex unique circumstances. They should be putting more money into maintenance and pilot training than this crap.

The impact is the opposite to what CASA sets out to achieve, I will not be renewing..."




Via the Oz today:

Quote:CASA to overhaul costs recovery
[Image: cc340dbb997ea1403c6d1ec5cfe61a80]12:00amANNABEL HEPWORTH
The Civil Aviation Safety Authority is poised to overhaul its cost recovery arrangements. 


Number of fees to be cut in CASA cost recovery revamp

The Civil Aviation Safety Authority is poised to overhaul its cost recovery arrangements.

The Australian has confirmed that CASA is rationalising the number of fees for regulatory services.

Under the plan, some 360 different fees would be slashed to about 100, and “as many as possible fixed so that industry will have clarity around the charges they would expect to pay to CASA for regulatory services,” a CASA spokesman said.

CASA will consult with the public on any changes through its Cost Recovery Implementation Statement, due out later this year.

CASA expects revenues of $13.9 million in 2017-18 from its existing cost recovery arrangements, which cover service fees and the issue and renewal of aviation identification cards. This rises to $16.5m for 2018-19.

Last year’s landmark general aviation study produced by the Bureau of Infrastructure, Transport and Regional Economics pushed for an “examination” of aviation safety regulatory fees, “including a review of the number of hourly rates used by CASA relative to the number of fixed fees and possible removal/­reduction of certain fees for GA”.

However, the government has kept CASA’s current funding ­arrangements in place for 2018-19. In doing so, it cited “increasing pressure on CASA’s budget with the demands arising from the growth of new inter­national and low-cost carriers, together with the continued rapid growth and complexity of drones”.

“These pressures will need to be monitored,” the budget papers say.

As well as the regulatory service fees, CASA receives funds from government coffers and from a 3.556c-per-litre excise on aviation fuel used by domestic aircraft.



& a Dear Annabelle from Sandy... Wink

Annabelle thank you for the information, in particular for highlighting cost increases. The independent Commonwealth corporation CASA is out of control, a 30 year failed experiment of regulatory governance. Cost recovery used to be called ‘user pays” and CASA has created the worst, unworkable and costly rules which are killing GA (General Aviation). Many unnecessary permissions have been invented which require swingeing upfront application fees. One flying school applicant known to me, a senior instructor, paid $8000 upfront two years ago, still nothing.

Successive hands off Ministers, hiding behind the CASA corporate structure, have done nothing to halt the slide of a once vibrant GA industry.

The irony of cost recovery (fee gouging) by the make work salary factory of CASA is that the loss of tax revenue to government would far outweigh the scroungings out of a bureaucratically crushed industry.

It seemed that Barnaby Joyce was, at long last, going to do something about it, agreeing with Albo to a simple amendment, adding industry sustainability, to the  Civil Aviation Act. Too bad the ‘holier than thou’ mob got the upper hand, new Minister McCormack is the usual do nothing ‘let’s have consultations and I want concensus from industry’ type.

Alex in the Rises.


MTF...P2  Tongue
Reply
Lead, or follow, just don't get in the way.

Hitch - "So how do we decide which one to follow?"

Baa, baa – Bah!~ bollocks - “We” don’t need to be following anyone. It may have escaped Hitch’s notice but the great majority of aviation folk are independent types; flying is a solitary task and most aviators must be able to think for themselves – they ain’t great ‘followers’. That said, they do have tribal loyalty and an inherent ability to follow and understand regulation. This they happily do until its time to call bull-pooh. They may remain with a rubbish company until they can move on, they may work within a rule set which drives them to distraction, this is simply because once the pettifogging happy horse shit on the ground is behind them, they are released to where independent, self reliant, disciplined ‘thinking’ is the name of the game.

No matter which tribe an aviator belongs to, since Pontius, pilots bitch, whinge and moan about everything – from the dunny paper to the boardroom buscuits  – this is indicative of an ‘independent’ mind at work. Some, probably many, hold very strong views and will actively, often vocally express those views, not through civil disobedience or to the point where a group or a company can be ‘embarrassed’ but they are active.

Almost every aviator follows the rules – company, government, manufacturer and even some folk law – all set down in stone, without too much deliberate intent to step outside those rules. This is also part of the mind set, indicative of a self sustaining, disciplined balance.

Scratch the crust off any of the pilot unions and you’ll find some pretty clever cookies who understand their members very well; they have a fairly good system which mostly works. It would be a simple matter for those unions to ask the membership if they support a change in ‘the Act’ or not. A change in the Act would lead to a change in the rules which could, with patience and persistence, remove so many of the more ridiculous demands those rules impose. What kind of a union would, for example, allow criminal charges to be brought and supported on a whim? A short, to the point letter from each of the unions and ‘Alphabet groups’ to the ‘minister’ indicating support for a change to the Act would be a great and wonderful thing.

Remember; the rules don’t just apply to GA. Airlines and operating companies all work under the same rule set – the cost of compliance with the current lunacy is staggering, the cost of producing the enshrined lunacy is mind blowing and increasing; the cost of doing business is prohibitive and the system drives away investment faster than a temperance league raid on the local cat house.

So, no mindless ‘following’ – make your own up; ‘tis a simple question. “Do you support a change to the Act?” Tick a box and send the answer back to your ‘leaders’ of choice. Ten seconds of your life, a one line e-mail - to change aviation for the better and make your life a little more secure, seems like a fairly small, low cost imposition to me.

This is the first and probably the last minister in history who has given this industry one shot at bringing some sanity to matters aeronautical. Don’t be a follower – don’t sit on the side lines, make this thing happen – or quit bitching. There, simple enough; - ain’t it?

"I support a change to the Act". Copy, past – send.

Toot - toot.
Reply
Totally agree with your take on the individual aviator’s MO but cannot find a reason to support the notion that we have a Minister who is giving us anything, let alone a one shot at causing reform. It will not matter how many ‘Change Act’ messages he receives, except at the margins of a total political pressure.
Concensus; on what? Has he put the wording he wants agreement about? Has he specified the groups that must all agree? If indeed that is his definition of the word ‘concensus’. Perhaps put it to a vote? Why not? isn’t that called democratic? Why should everyone agree? Certainly that is not the test for government as we know it. A simple majority is sufficient to make law in this country.
McCormack is stalling, there is nothing until action, and action will not occur until there’s sufficient pressure, a sustained public campaign is the only hope.
Reply
Well then– find the solution.

Sandy - Consensus; on what? Has he put the wording he wants agreement about?

Well Sandy, of course he hasn’t; but he has at least noticed the door is open a fraction. Had Barnaby kept his gig; and, Albo remained ‘deceived’ then the scribes would be putting words to paper for consideration; not to be. But – I can’t remember a minister ever even entertaining a change to the Act for more than the time it took for the backroom whispering crew to call “courageous decision” or make it clear that ‘the blood will on the ministerial hands’.

So there is a shot at change – if every one associated with aviation, just once, got together and shouted a robust YES please, it would be very hard to ignore such a ‘consensus’. There cannot possibly be a ‘safety case’ against – the USA and the UK and NZ are streets ahead; in all area’s with an Act that actually helps aviation become safer, just through reduced compliance cost alone; not to mention the huge cost of litigation our rule set burdens the industry with..

Where you’ll find your remedy of “except at the margins of political pressure” I’ve no idea. But I do believe that if everyone got behind the push for a reformed Act – something may just get done for once; instead of a continuing 30 year chain of bitter disappointment and endless complaint to deaf ears......

If McComic is ‘stalling’ then it’s time we pushed the stick forward a bit; or or a crowd to move forward and moved the CoG in the right direction. We can’t just sit about snivelling over the words used. There’s a shot – we should take it – now; or be forever happy in our self imposed silence. He ain’t ‘giving us anything’, nor will he - unless we ask for it, loud, long and very clearly enunciated. Don't ask him - just tell him, in no uncertain terms.

End of mini rant.....
Reply
As the bubbles burst.


Quote:ADELAIDE Tuesday May 15, 2018
Govt scrambles for answers after defiant Rex cuts SA flights

The Marshall Government is seeking an urgent explanation from Rex Airlines, the provider of the state’s only air service between Adelaide and Mount Gambier, after its extraordinary move to scale back flights after "unfair" complaints about the service.

Finally; the turgid, foetid bubble of foul smelling gas, trapped deep within the swamps of Sleepy Hollow is rising to the surface. Both passengers and politicians waiting in terminals around the country notice the stench as the 11Am service from Piddlemore to Big Smoke fails to turn up and the sweet young thing behind the counter says “Sorry folks – your flight has been cancelled” then races back behind the security door before the message is fully understood. It is then the passengers start looking for the company telephone number and kick up a fuss.

Not one of the shiny brochures or flash magazines claiming all manner of ‘care’ for the stranded passengers will abate the anger – not even for the first time it happens, let alone the fourth time in a month. People get really pissed off when an air service fails to materialize. That is when they start ringing the local politician.

Rex airlines is copping a fair bit of flack at the moment – the good folk of Mt Gambier and Canberra are hacked off, playing merry hell about cancelled flights etc. and want something done, now - now. This of course galvanizes (gooses) the local MP and the Pooh starts hitting the Rex front door. It ain’t Rex’s fault of course, but nonetheless it is the airline which will cop the drubbing. Not fair folks – nowhere near fair at all.

An outfit like Rex is as much a victim of ‘system’ as the irate passengers and to imagine that Rex would deliberately set out to sully their good name, piss passengers off and enjoy loosing the revenue a flight produces is just nuts. The company is suffering due to their willingness to comply with some of the most ridicules rule sets ever written. I shall try to explain it, bear with me, it ain’t simple.

At the beginning of a long chain is the certification required to operate scheduled air services. Any proposed air service operation is subject to an incredibly expensive, complex, time consuming process. Thousands of legally binding pages must be produced, covering everything from paper clip distribution to the onerous responsibility placed on the CEO. In order to gain ‘operational approval’ and begin services; many compromises must be reached and, under the pressure of time and money – the company accept changes to their proposed system and procedures, for no other reasons than expediency and gaining that approval before everyone goes mad. They go along to get along – no option – it’s just the way things are. Once the certification is gained – the next hurdle is keeping it. No easy task – serious amounts of money are invested in not only ‘compliance’ but in being seen to be compliant. In short, by pandering to the whims and dictates of the local CASA office, a company ends up with a huge, complex operating ‘manual’, supporting all manner of trivia, which must be complied with – or else…

This becomes apparent a company needs to recruit aircrew – the sheer cost - which the passenger fare structure must pay for – of clearing a new pilot to line is a big number to begin with – before all the ancillary whistles, bells and gold plating are added. The infrastructure required to place a pilot in the cockpit is not only large, but it costs money, real money to support. In the real world CASA would be told to go and boil their bottoms and take their self opinionated clap-trap with them. Not in Australia though; the mandatory requirement to Kow-Tow to the CASA ‘expert’ rules supreme. Everyone bitches and moans about the imposts – but no one dare speak. They all just plod through the system – as approved – knowing full well that to even bark about it will bring the wrath of the CASA demi-gods (recruited from local flying schools) down around their corporate ears.

Even so, they struggle through – until one day an outfit like Qantas or Virgin decide they need more crew. The AUD$70, 000 it has cost Rex to put a pilot on the flight line is written off to experience with one phone call: “Start on Monday” says the Qantas HR lady and poof – a Rex pilot vanishes. Can’t blame the pilot, it’s a career dream come true: Saab to Bathurst or 777 to LA – no brainer. Which puts poor old Rex in a spot – what to do? They are now not only facing the horrendous costs of ‘compliance’, hidebound by the system they had to have, they must now dig deep and train another pilot. And so it goes, until the point where there ain’t any more pilots and flights must be cancelled. Strict flight and duty rules prevent ‘over time’, long winded check and training systems cannot provide fresh bodies to the system in time and ties up line pilot availability in C&T duties. This is where the inflexible, narrow view of the regulations really bites deep, at the coal face.

Some folk are jumping up and down about the lack of flight schools and the demise of many of these establishments and it is true that the regulations have forced many to close down. It is fair beef and a simple enough case for politicians to understand, hell they may even get something done about it – in time. But it will be way to little and a decade late. The problem is here – now and very, very real. It is but the visible tip of a huge, CASA generated iceberg. Never before has there been such a demand for pilot training, flying schools are flat out everywhere – except Australia – trying to meet the demand. By the time Australia catches up – the bubble will have burst and the revenue gone overseas. Great stuff and well done successive governments who have not only abrogated responsibility but rubber stamped this complete cock up into existence and spent upwards of $400 000, 000, over three decades to produce it. All in the name of ministerial ‘safety’.

The cost of compliance with the current rule set is the radical cause of passengers left stranded in Mt Gambier – not Rex Airlines; they do the best they can, with what they’ve got and what they are saddled with. The government could turn this all around within 18 months; the big question is will they?

Gentlemen, the grand experiment has failed; time to bring in a rule set which allows aviation to flourish. New Zealand is a mere two thousand miles and many light years away; ask ‘em nicely, they may give us their rule set – if not the Bledisloe Cup.

Toot toot.
Reply
More on REX Mount Gambier hissy fit -  Confused

Via the other Aunty... Wink

Quote:Regional Express reduces services to Mount Gambier after 'unfair criticism levelled at it by local officials'
ABC South East SA 
By Lucy Robinson and Selina Green

Posted Wed at 6:00pm
[Image: 733362-3x2-340x227.jpg]
PHOTO: Rex will cut five weekly return flights between Mount Gambier and Adelaide until further notice. (Supplied: Rex)
RELATED STORY: Unreliable, unaffordable flights affecting health care in Mt Gambier: experts
RELATED STORY: Airport upgrade plans lead Regional Express airline to remove services
RELATED STORY: Concern for Broken Hill's economy as airline confirms price hike

Regional Express (Rex) has confirmed it will scale back flights between Mount Gambier and Adelaide after threatening the move in response to criticism.

The airline flagged the plans earlier this week as a way to "better utilise scarce resources", hitting back at what it described as "unfair criticism levelled at it by local officials" and accusing some of targeting Rex for "political grandstanding".
Details released by the company today show it will immediately cut five weekly return flights until further notice.

Rex flights to be cut include:
Monday to Thursday
  • 6:55am from Adelaide, arriving 8:05am at Mount Gambier
  • 8:25am from Mount Gambier, arriving 9:35am at Adelaide
[size=undefined]
Wednesday, Thursday and Friday[/size]
  • 5:10pm from Adelaide, arriving 6:20pm at Mount Gambier
  • 6:40pm from Mount Gambier, arriving 7:50pm at Adelaide

In a statement, the airline said there would still be 36 flights per week between Mount Gambier and Adelaide.

"[This] will provide approximately 61,000 seats per year which will be more than sufficient to cater to the 47,000 annual passengers on the route," the company said.

Rex's announcement follows a number of submissions from individuals and groups in the south-east to a Senate inquiry into regional flight prices that claimed unreliable and unaffordable air services were adversely affecting health care in the Mount Gambier area.

Specialists and patients had reported having flights cancelled, affecting their ability to attend medical appointments.

Rex claims criticism 'unfair'

The airline said it was dealing with a worldwide pilot shortage, but claimed it was the most reliable regional carrier with a cancellation rate almost half that of other major regional carriers.

Is it cheaper to fly overseas than get out of Alice Springs?

[Image: factcheck-image-data.png]

An ABC Fact Check investigation finds this claim is a fair call.


"Rex is undeniably the best regional carrier in Australia with its network average fare rising by only 1.1 per cent per year over the past 15 years and with its reliability being consistently one of the best — even during challenging periods like what we are experiencing right now," the company's statement read.

"In spite of this, local officials continue to target Rex whenever they feel the need for political grandstanding.

"Given the amount of unfair criticisms levelled at Rex by local officials, Rex has decided to scale back its services between Mount Gambier and Adelaide to better utilise the very scarce resources."

Local politicians 'disappointed' by move

The Federal Liberal Member for Barker, Tony Pasin, said he had contacted Rex and asked to speak with its board.

"I'm incredibly disappointed that we've got to this point," Mr Pasin said.

"Quite frankly I don't think it's a good approach to have the community at loggerheads with such a significant and important service provider.

Quote:
"I'm not happy with the circumstance we find ourselves in. I think it speaks to a lack of maturity on the part of the proponents to this point.

"But we need to sit down with Rex and ask them if this is the right approach."

[Image: 9768538-3x2-700x467.jpg]PHOTO: Rex says a global pilot shortage has caused disruption across the entire aviation industry. (ABC South East SA: Stuart Stansfield)

The independent Member for Mount Gambier, Troy Bell, denied Rex airlines had been unfairly targeted for criticism and said he was disappointed by its response.

"Reliability and price have been major issues for a long time now," Mr Bell said.
"Many leaders in the community actually want to work with Rex to improve the service.

Quote:
"It shouldn't be seen as an overly negative thing if people are raising concerns. This is actually an opportunity to improve in areas where customers are giving feedback."

Mr Bell said he had offered last year to sit down for discussions with the airline, but Rex had not taken up the offer.


MTF...P2  Cool
Reply
(05-17-2018, 07:00 AM)kharon Wrote: As the bubbles burst.


Quote:ADELAIDE Tuesday May 15, 2018
Govt scrambles for answers after defiant Rex cuts SA flights

The Marshall Government is seeking an urgent explanation from Rex Airlines, the provider of the state’s only air service between Adelaide and Mount Gambier, after its extraordinary move to scale back flights after "unfair" complaints about the service.

Finally; the turgid, foetid bubble of foul smelling gas, trapped deep within the swamps of Sleepy Hollow is rising to the surface. Both passengers and politicians waiting in terminals around the country notice the stench as the 11Am service from Piddlemore to Big Smoke fails to turn up and the sweet young thing behind the counter says “Sorry folks – your flight has been cancelled” then races back behind the security door before the message is fully understood. It is then the passengers start looking for the company telephone number and kick up a fuss.

Not one of the shiny brochures or flash magazines claiming all manner of ‘care’ for the stranded passengers will abate the anger – not even for the first time it happens, let alone the fourth time in a month. People get really pissed off when an air service fails to materialize. That is when they start ringing the local politician.

Rex airlines is copping a fair bit of flack at the moment – the good folk of Mt Gambier and Canberra are hacked off, playing merry hell about cancelled flights etc. and want something done, now - now. This of course galvanizes (gooses) the local MP and the Pooh starts hitting the Rex front door. It ain’t Rex’s fault of course, but nonetheless it is the airline which will cop the drubbing. Not fair folks – nowhere near fair at all.

An outfit like Rex is as much a victim of ‘system’ as the irate passengers and to imagine that Rex would deliberately set out to sully their good name, piss passengers off and enjoy loosing the revenue a flight produces is just nuts. The company is suffering due to their willingness to comply with some of the most ridicules rule sets ever written. I shall try to explain it, bear with me, it ain’t simple.

At the beginning of a long chain is the certification required to operate scheduled air services. Any proposed air service operation is subject to an incredibly expensive, complex, time consuming process. Thousands of legally binding pages must be produced, covering everything from paper clip distribution to the onerous responsibility placed on the CEO. In order to gain ‘operational approval’ and begin services; many compromises must be reached and, under the pressure of time and money – the company accept changes to their proposed system and procedures, for no other reasons than expediency and gaining that approval before everyone goes mad. They go along to get along – no option – it’s just the way things are. Once the certification is gained – the next hurdle is keeping it. No easy task – serious amounts of money are invested in not only ‘compliance’ but in being seen to be compliant. In short, by pandering to the whims and dictates of the local CASA office, a company ends up with a huge, complex operating ‘manual’, supporting all manner of trivia, which must be complied with – or else…

This becomes apparent a company needs to recruit aircrew – the sheer cost - which the passenger fare structure must pay for – of clearing a new pilot to line is a big number to begin with – before all the ancillary whistles, bells and gold plating are added. The infrastructure required to place a pilot in the cockpit is not only large, but it costs money, real money to support. In the real world CASA would be told to go and boil their bottoms and take their self opinionated clap-trap with them. Not in Australia though; the mandatory requirement to Kow-Tow to the CASA ‘expert’ rules supreme. Everyone bitches and moans about the imposts – but no one dare speak. They all just plod through the system – as approved – knowing full well that to even bark about it will bring the wrath of the CASA demi-gods (recruited from local flying schools) down around their corporate ears.

Even so, they struggle through – until one day an outfit like Qantas or Virgin decide they need more crew. The AUD$70, 000 it has cost Rex to put a pilot on the flight line is written off to experience with one phone call: “Start on Monday” says the Qantas HR lady and poof – a Rex pilot vanishes. Can’t blame the pilot, it’s a career dream come true: Saab to Bathurst or 777 to LA – no brainer. Which puts poor old Rex in a spot – what to do? They are now not only facing the horrendous costs of ‘compliance’, hidebound by the system they had to have, they must now dig deep and train another pilot. And so it goes, until the point where there ain’t any more pilots and flights must be cancelled. Strict flight and duty rules prevent ‘over time’, long winded check and training systems cannot provide fresh bodies to the system in time and ties up line pilot availability in C&T duties. This is where the inflexible, narrow view of the regulations really bites deep, at the coal face.

Some folk are jumping up and down about the lack of flight schools and the demise of many of these establishments and it is true that the regulations have forced many to close down. It is fair beef and a simple enough case for politicians to understand, hell they may even get something done about it – in time. But it will be way to little and a decade late. The problem is here – now and very, very real. It is but the visible tip of a huge, CASA generated iceberg. Never before has there been such a demand for pilot training, flying schools are flat out everywhere – except Australia – trying to meet the demand. By the time Australia catches up – the bubble will have burst and the revenue gone overseas. Great stuff and well done successive governments who have not only abrogated responsibility but rubber stamped this complete cock up into existence and spent upwards of $400 000, 000, over three decades to produce it. All in the name of ministerial  ‘safety’.

The cost of compliance with the current rule set is the radical cause of passengers left stranded in Mt Gambier – not Rex Airlines; they do the best they can, with what they’ve got and what they are saddled with. The government could turn this all around within 18 months; the big question is will they?

Gentlemen, the grand experiment has failed; time to bring in a rule set which allows aviation to flourish. New Zealand is a mere two thousand miles and many light years away; ask ‘em nicely, they may give us their rule set – if not the Bledisloe Cup.

Toot toot.

Shannon Wells contribution to the debate - Wink

Via the Oz today:

Quote:New regulation is make or break

[Image: 0e6ed4dbdd93b816fe6f51c8794f286d]SHANNON WELLS
If the regulators set the bar too high, general aviation may well be finished. Set it right and airlines could return to regional towns



CASA’s new regulation could make or break general aviation


Australia has long had a love of aviation. We have an aviation pioneer on our $20 note. We recently celebrated the first direct commercial flight from Australia to London by Qantas, and on a per capita basis, we are one of the highest users of air travel in the world.

However, a Senate inquiry into the regulation and funding of air route service delivery to rural, regional and remote communities is showing not all is going well with aviation outside of the major cities. Consumers are reporting high airfares, meaning they can’t travel, council-owned regional airports say they are losing money, and many air routes have been abandoned or are heavily subsided by government.

The reasons for this are multifaceted, including the lack of pilots, excessive and expensive regulation, relatively high airport charges and ageing aircraft.

General aviation traditionally has been the breeding ground for training and employment of new pilots. This is because general aviation has been responsible for the operation of low-capacity airline routes, charter, freight and other essential services, mainly for remote and regional communities. However, the recent approval of 457 visas for pilots, primarily to fly larger aircraft, has left many in the industry dumbfounded and goes to demonstrate the perilous state the aviation training sector is in.

Given that Australia has a highly educated population, vast and generally (outside capital cities) uncongested airspace, many airports and a good variety of weather, it seems Australia should be an ideal location to not only train enough pilots for our own industry, but to be a training platform to help ease the growing international shortage of pilots, particularly in the Asia-Pacific.

While there are many reasons for our industry failing to meet demand, one suggestion is that it is problematic for a small general aviation company to comply not only with Civil Aviation Safety Authority regulations, but also the Australian Skills Qualification Authority regulations, should they wish to issue a Diploma of Aviation, attract international students or pursue the Vocational Educational Training Student Loans scheme.

Flying training by its nature is expensive; courses can cost over $100,000. Without becoming a Registered Training Organisation, thus reporting to two federal regulators, there are limited options for a student to obtain a loan to pay for their aviation education.

In addition to flying training, the other backbone of general aviation is charter services in smaller aircraft (that is, 10 seats or less). For the nearly 30 years, CASA has been discussing the merger of two distinct regulation types, passenger air charter and regular public transport services, into one, namely “passenger transport”(Part 135).

The problem is that regulations for regular public transport services are relatively strict and costly when compared to charter. Several additional staff are required to operate the airline, such as safety managers, quality managers, and continuing airworthiness managers. RPT aircraft are maintained differently, with more costly regulations applying.

Should the new Part 135 rules follow the highest RPT rules that apply now, then I would suggest many charter operators would simply shut down.

CASA has announced that the new regulations are coming in June/July this year, which is good to hear.

However, I firmly believe that this legislation has the potential to make or destroy the general aviation industry. If the regulations set the bar too high, general aviation may well be finished. Set it right and local airlines could return to regional towns, giving greater benefits for everyone in the community.

We all agree that aviation needs to be safe. However, the regulator and the government need to have a greater appreciation on what their decisions can do to organisations other than the major airlines.

The new minister, Michael McCormack, needs to appreciate that general aviation is the breeding ground for the next generation of aviation, supports regional Australia and we can’t afford to be ignored for much longer.

Shannon Wells is the managing director of Airlines of Tasmania (Par Avion), a RPT and Tourism charter business based in Hobart.


MTF...P2 Tongue
Reply
OF AIRING DIRTY LINEN.....

The argument by airlines and airports over fees and charges was always going to go pear-shaped. Both parties have valid points to argue, both parties are under pressure to turn a profit for their shareholders/string pullers, and both parties outlay a lot of money for an often meagre or modest return. But to air it all in the Senate is dangerous. And this example of REX and Mt Gambier at war is a classic example of how not to behave and why not to air your linen publicly. The inquiry will ultimately fuel the bad blood between airlines and airports. Airlines by nature are arrogant and selfish and only care for the bottom dollar and CEO bonuses, regional airports are mostly owned and managed by redneck Councils and farmer plod Mayors who have not a single clue of how an airport runs.

The gloves are off, the claret is being spilled, and we are only at Round 1. Ding ding ding.....

“Unsafe senate stoush for all”
Reply
Duck it.

Being Evil has price…..

 
Warning - A ramble – feel free to ignore my out loud thinking; or, listen and read.
 
Have you ever noticed how ‘good music’ be it from Beethoven or Queen or even Heavy Young Angels stands out from the nearly, but not quite sets; it does. There is a certain texture and a clarity of sound which somehow, magically, separates it from the not quite so talented. Some paintings have it, some literature has it, even some aircraft have ‘it’. Some politicians definitely have ‘it’. Alas, many do not. It is with those unfortunate’s with whom we must concern ourselves, for a short while at least, this Sunday. Sorry and all that, but it must be done. Why? Howls the multitude. Why, is indeed a good question, to be sure.




 
In my own whimsical way I often wonder about the waft and weave of the fabric which makes our world today – it is crazy, ain’t it. How a once proud, vibrant, entrepreneurial, world changing, war winning, life shaping wonder thing like an aircraft became mundane, treated with the same indifference as a supermarket trolley, or a political party’s promises. Brought low by the same common usage; just another tool in a busy life. It is worse for the politicians of course; flight at least still holds some glamour and a sense of wonder; despite the best efforts of bureaucracy to strip that away and kill the very spirit of enterprise. But the poor old political party hack has not even the remnants of this glory. Yet they hold the very keys to the chains which bind enterprise, freedom and progress in their small, fat, greedy fingers. But, they are afraid; āfǣred of the ‘safety’ bogey-man. This fear has sweet Fanny Arbuckle to do with aircraft smashing into buildings, killing and maiming and burning the voters; no Sir. Their fear is rooted in a much shallower soil, they are scared almost (mostly) witless by those who claim that any blood spilled will be on the hands of those who dared to gainsay the very expensive ‘advisors’ employed by a department which will; carry all the responsibility – unless they can blame some hapless oaf who just happens to have crawled, crept and bull-shitted his way into a position  for which the law demands ministerial responsibility is taken. Aye well, ‘tis almost Sunday and I am allowed the odd ramble. Quality, that certain ‘it’ has been missing within our political leadership for so long now; I’ve almost forgotten the sound of it. Unless I’m driving the Styx ferry boat – then I hear a lot of the same old excuses, the weeping, the wailing and the 'why me'  boo-hooing etc. it's always about them, never about the unholy mess they leave behind. Sorry too much Fellahin – too little, too late: even so; you still pay the time honoured (no GST) fare to Perdition junction. Of course I let GD play with ‘em – as an introduction to the upcoming events. (Oh, I never watch – just steer the ferry).
 
So much for whimsy into ramble. It often happens when I’m sat alone, in the stable late at night, while trying to make sense of the past week’s events, or lack thereof. Never certain whether the quotes which come to mind are reflections of; or, reactions to events (or lack thereof). Take today’s AOPA indaba with Albo for an example of why it is easier to run a tote odds board than second guess the result. Here lays my challenge:-
 
Albo to the rescue – what odds on a serious challenge to Status Quo/
 
Albo all piss and wind – what odds on a backbone being grown?
 
Albo realizing that McConvict played him for a fool and an epiphany?
 
I could, I expect rattle on for a while longer, but you get the picture; the Wagga running of the Reform Plate is almost upon us. The big question is, does this industry really want to be rid of the hand outs from CASA, the un-constitutional Act, the criminal liability and flourish; or, stick with what they have been allowed by a department without accountability, conscience, duty care; or, any responsibility whatsoever? Ayup; ‘tis indeed time gentlemen to piss on the pot – or; get off it.
 
There – ramble over and me knocked off until Sunday comes around. (Whisper for AP viewers only) take a flutter on Albo Odds on favourite tonight– watch this space and the Reform Plate as the drama unfolds. Yes there will be some, of the high flown variety.

Best guitar riff in history - right here, right now playing really loud, at my place.




 
Toot toot.

Unless of course you need a classic to go with that last drink. For TOM...



Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)