A stunned silence – opinion

Aviation Industry “disappointment” is quickly morphing into outrage over what many stakeholders now see as the government’s lethargic reaction to the “Forsyth Review” which has clearly ex-posed a need for major organisational changes to various aspects of the way the regulator goes about its business.
They are alarmed at the lack of any visible response from Deputy PM and Infrastructure Minister Warren Trusswho although he has acknowledged the Air Safety Regulation Review’s (ASRR) recommendations, does not appear to have set out an urgent plan of action for their adoption. There also hasn’t been any visible response from CASA or Mr Truss’s Department. The Australian Aviation Associations Forum, representing several major and diverse industry groups, has been seeking a meeting with the Minister for several days but without success.
The situation has created a perceived void of policy that is now affecting the futures of individuals, manufacturers, AOC holders and MRO (maintenance, repair and overhaul) certificate holders alike.
Many believe that the Minister now finds himself isolated in a very awkward situation, with the report he commissioned having been entirely at variance from what he may have anticipated. But they remain adamant that “The ASRR’s report must not be allowed to die.”
The more pivotal of the review’s findings made it quite clear that industry distrust has trashed CASA’s ability in its present form to deliver on its obligations, and that the government and the regulator must now introduce new, positive and safety-effective processes; while also restructuring regulations that have become ineffective, and in some cases close to unintelligible. At the same time the regulator (if the ASRR recommendations are to be adopted) must design and implement a new, binding and auditable strategy to restore industry trust and cooperation. It would be naive to expect that could be achieved without facing down the stolid resistance of entrenched opponents to reform at almost all levels within CASA, many of whose talents may need to be diverted into more appropriate fields of endeavour. The quality of their replacements will rely heavily on improved selection, training and direction, which will be a further ongoing challenge to any new management.
Some stakeholders believe that individuals working within the regulatory reform program (RRP) have simply been appointed without adequate training, backgrounding and direction, and that re-training could be part of the RRP solution when those deficiencies have been addressed.
Several have also expressed surprise that the role of CASA’s legal department in regulatory development and in adversarial regulatory conduct appears to have escaped the scrutiny of the ASRR and other analyses.
Reporting on the newly-presented report on June 3, ProAviation commented that:
The remaining challenge for the Minister will be to protect the ASRR recommendations from the watering-down that was inflicted on the Pel-Air/ATSB/CASA investigation.”
“Watering-down” now appears to describe exactly what is happening. Asked in mid-June when the government’s response would be presented, the Ministers office told ProAviation, “The gov-ernment expects to finalise its response to the report in the spring 2014 sittings of Parliament.”
Unfortunately that timeframe means “some time in the period between August 26 and December 4,” the latter being the date that marks the commencement of a lengthy period of parliamentary and public service disengagement. This is a popular time of year to make such announcements because they are unlikely to see effective public scrutiny until mid-February at the earliest.
The Minister’s more recent update of the government’s intended response was “before the end of the year” which, we are told is political language for “in the period between December 25 and January 1.”
Industry Concerns are further heightened by the vacuum of information and the confusion sur-rounding the selection and appointment of new Board members (although everybody knows who they are) and of CASA’s new CEO. Some sources believe the CEO selection has narrowed down to two applicants, at least one of them from overseas and neither from an aviation background.
It is impossible to visualise how an incoming CEO from overseas, entrusted with the task of sorting out an organisation that is already shown to be dysfunctional, can be expected to determine with certainty who is competently addressing the problem and who is part of it.
Minister Truss’s June 3 statement to Parliament which repeated the word “safety” 16 times in CASA’s well-known style, did absolutely nothing to reflect the urgency that industry believes must now attach to implementing the ASRR’s 37 recommendations. In the understatement of the year the Minister only acknowledged that the report “also recognises that there are opportunities for the system to be improved to ensure Australia remains a global aviation leader.”
The opportunities have already been accurately identified in the ASRR’s recommendations, which are accompanied by ample analysis to identify viable solutions.
The urgency of improving the system was further highlighted by the regulatory ructions over the highly controversial flight crew licensing legislation known as the “Part 61 suite.” Having already deferred its implementation on December 12, 2013, CASA dumped the revised version on the industry’s doorstep the day after former CASA CEO John McCormick’s departure, along with a truckload of amendments and a maze of explanatory material explaining what the confusing amendments were claimed to have achieved.
“Does this tell you something about the standards within the original legislation and the compe-tency of those who produced it?” queries a retired CASA executive.
ProAviation suggests that the elements in government aviation-related agencies targeted by the incisive analysis, comments and recommendations of the ASRR, will have been far from idle since the release of the review. Industry cynics believe they will be planning rearguard strategies in the intervening time, producing reams of vigorous ‘safety’ based objections to the analysis and its recommendations.
A well-known (but unidentified) Internet commentator encapsulates industry concerns:
“We are watching a classic case of a bureaucratic fighting retreat. The Iron Ring will write a volume on why each of the recommendations is flawed and unsafe. They will simply wear Truss and the new DAS down with paper. That is why you need someone from PMC [Prime Minister & Cabinet office] to head this mess – they understand about file stuffing and other tricks. Truss and his staff do not. A PMC person needs to send the Iron Ring packing on day one. If that isn’t done, the embuggerance will continue unabated.)
(The ‘Iron Ring’ is one of several popular industry epithets covering the cadre of mostly faceless anti-reform activists that help populate the regulator’s mid-level and higher ranks.)
Added to industry concerns over the ASRR response are similar issues related to the ATSB’s and CASA’s responses to the Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport References Committee in-quiry into aviation accident investigations, tabled in May 2013. Senator David Fawcett’s speech on the AAI Report in June 2013 and the dialogue between Senator Nick Xenophon and Mr Bryan Aherne, an independent air safety and investigation specialist, will reassure readers that at least some parliamentarians are maintaining their strong awareness on these critical matters.
The aviation community is happier for knowing those two senators will be keeping an eye on the ball,  especially when everybody settles down to study the impacts of what a phone caller has just described the new Part 61 as  “The greatest debacle in regulatory implementation in my last 30 years of dealing with aviation regulation.”
More soon.

Related Posts

  • Comment - Paul Phelan, April 24 Minister for Infrastructure and Regional Development Warren Truss has provided an interim Statement of Expectations to the not-quite-finalised CASA Board, effective until June 30, 2017. A ring-around industry sources found everybody frankly pretty cheerless about the apparent lack of any urgency on some of…
    Tags: casa, aviation, safety, will, industry
  • The Aviation Safety Regulation Reform (ASRR) Panel delivered its report and recommendations on time at the end of some four months of exhaustive and far-reaching consultation with all aviation sectors. The Minister presented the Panel’s work for public review promptly, providing another 30 days for further comment, which expired on…
    Tags: will, casa, aviation, safety, industry, regulatory, minister, asrr, recommendations
  • An impressive number of industry’s elder statesmen attended the rally at Tamworth on May 6, and witnessed the growing concern that only deeds, not words, can set aviation back on the long track towards a restoration of some of the mutual trust that has been squandered over the past 26…
    Tags: casa, aviation, will, safety, industry
  • Trust restoration checklist An impressive number of industry’s elder statesmen attended the rally at Tamworth on May 6, and witnessed the growing concern that only deeds, not words, can set aviation back on the long track towards a restoration of some of the mutual trust that has been squandered over…
    Tags: casa, aviation, will, safety
  • Regulation of Australian General Aviation and Low Capacity Airline Transport Volume 1: Enforcement - Why is it failing? Paul D Phelan September, 2000 The original version of this analysis was circulated electronically to all members of Federal Parliament, industry identities, aviation writers, other selected media outlets, industry associations, CASA Board…
    Tags: casa, safety, aviation

One thought on “A stunned silence – opinion

  1. admin

    Letter to the Editor
    SHAME for Minister Truss
    When a safety management system receives a report or audit result, particularly one from the regulator, changes must be initiated. Any Request for Corrective Action or Non Compliance Notice must be given priority, actioned and acquitted by the regulator (although they are retained on file for regurgitation if there is further action against the certificate holder.) Should a company or an individual receive multiple NCNs or RCAs over a period of time – such as Barrier did, the company will be closed down, as Barrier was. CASA allows very little time to respond and even less for the discussion of issues; and none whatsoever, of whether the company will or will not accept the audit result.
    And yet the regulator seems impervious to external audit reports and will refute any unpalatable safety recommendation from the ATSB. There are literally thousands of pages which support the fact that despite all logic, CASA will not accept the recommendations of either coroner or the ATSB, but would rather spend time and money addressing and abrogating the identified area of responsibility, not with a view to improvement, but to reduction of ‘liability’ and responsibility.
    Surely it is time the travelling public was made aware of just how little the regulator values their lives and how their safety will be sacrificed in order to preserve the job security of the regulator’s officials.
    At the moment CASA is staring down a damning report from a Senate committee, which through the investigation of one small incident uncovered a nightmare web of deception, incompetence, ‘flexibility’ of standards and a total disregard of expert advice. Notwithstanding the flagrant disregard for due process, protocol and the law the most sinister aspect of CASA process was revealed – a willingness to cloud over or cover up the absolute shambles. There can, from the evidence provided, be seen a clear trail of collusion, second agenda and the absolutely crystal clear intention of the manager overseeing the process to manipulate the investigation to suit a predetermined outcome. On May 23, 2013 the Senate released a damning report which, supported by an acknowledged aviation expert, made 26 serious, far reaching recommendations for reform of the regulator, which have simply been ignored by the current Minister, the CASA board and CASA.
    The Senate AAI report prompted Minister Truss to order a further report to be conducted by three independent, acknowledged ‘safety’ experts; two from overseas. The ASRR although limited in scope was released on June 03, 2014. The shocked panel produced 37 further serious, far-reaching recommendations for reform of the regulator, which have simply been ignored by the Minister, the CASA board, and its management.
    This is a total of 63, serious, important recommendations, produced by expert, independent aviation specialists publicly demanding immediate, far reaching changes to the regulatory system and the regulator: IGNORED.
    This begs the questions; is the Minister deliberately misleading the public? And if so, why? If the publicly available documents indicate that 63 changes must be made, how many more have been concealed from view? And how many more could be identified by any adequately briefed Australian CEO who knows where to look?
    There can be no doubt the current situation if not addressed will impinge on public safety, just as surely as it is impacting on industry. Australian aviation is clearly unsafe and becoming less safe each and every minute that slips by, without the serious, clear and imminent danger being addressed.
    Shame on the Minister, shame on your sloth, obfuscation, lack of meaningful response or direction.
    Shame on the Minister for failing to act in 2008 and failing again in 2014.
    Shame on you Minister for denying your responsibility; the reports you ordered clearly indicate there are deep, significant flaws within the regulator, the abomination reflected in the toxic culture and abysmal, expensive and almost useless regulations, you claim will protect the Australian people; whom you, may I respectfully remind you; are sworn to serve.
    Shame on you Minister, you are rapidly becoming a cornerstone of the problem and being made fully aware of the problems. By denying their existence and failing to act, you become as culpable as those you are protecting.
    By shaming yourself, you demean every Australian.
    The writer’s name is withheld because he/she holds a CASA certificate and doesn’t trust them.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *