An aviation researcher, writer, aviation participant, pilot & agricultural researcher. Author of over 35 scientific publications world wide.


Good reads

Oil Prices


Regulatory reform? CASA costs $250 million so far

From the Senate inquiry in 2005, a pprune post says the following, which indicates that it was all done – What did happen CASA??:

11th Nov 2013, 18:13   #262 (permalink)
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Go west young man
Posts: 1,034
Here you go Creamy!


I can’t take credit for those words. They were in fact used by Senator Mark Bishop during the Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport Legislation Committee hearings of 14 Feb 2005 (from the Proof Senate Hansard of, pages 124/5, at: 404 Page not found – Parliament of Australia

Bit of an assist Creamy…

RRAT LEGISLATION COMMITTEE 14/02/2005 Civil Aviation Safety Authority

And to put it in context:

Senator MARK BISHOP —No, that is fine, Mr Byron. CASA has been engaged in recent years in reforming the regulatory environment and regulations to get better outcomes for industry, as well as for safety. Page 20 of the 2003-04 annual report gives as a highlight this fact:
The Regulatory Reform Program was refocused on quality rather than timely completion.
When did the regulatory reform program begin and when was it originally scheduled to conclude?

Mr Byron —The regulatory reform program commenced—and I might need to take advice from Mr Gemmell, who was in CASA at the time—in about 2002.

Mr Gemmell —The regulatory reform program in various guises has been going for many years. The last formal kick-off for the current program was 1999. It was reviewed in 2001, a review done by me—in fact, I was newly joined to CASA—and we set ourselves a target of completing it by December 2003. Mr Byron joined as CEO on 1 December 2003, and it was at that point it was refocused from the time to the quality.

Senator MARK BISHOP —Had you, by and large, concluded your work when Mr Byron joined CASA in December 2003?

Mr Gemmell —We had done an enormous amount of work. We were close to completing where we were. We were probably about to put a lot of material to the minister, but it was felt it was not of the right quality. We were rushing—pushing to meet the timetable—and industry was a bit disturbed by that, I guess. It was decided it would be appropriate to take more time, to get the quality right.

Senator MARK BISHOP —Now that it has been refocused away from a timely conclusion, what is the new completion date and how is it proposed to stop it drifting along forever?

Mr Byron —We do not have a firm completion date at this stage, but we should be able to generate that fairly soon. Mr Gemmell mentioned the refocus, I suppose, that I imposed on the organisation in late 2003-04 on getting the rules right and getting the quality. I found it necessary late last year to articulate in a bit more detail some guiding principles about how I wanted that done and who I wanted to be involved in the process.
I have issued some guiding principles on the formulation of new regulations and, if necessary, manuals of standards that accompany them. I have, I suppose, imposed on the system an additional layer of consultation, to assure me that the final draft rules that I send to the minister for consideration by the parliament are the right ones and that they address very carefully risks that are real and necessary issues that must be picked up by regulations. I felt it was necessary to do that to make sure that I have the right rules. I am not going to put my signature to anything that I do not think adequately addresses safety issues.

Senator MARK BISHOP —When do you think those regulations will go to the minister?

Mr Byron —I anticipate we would start sending some of them from about the middle of this year. I do not see this delaying the overall program excessively. We have an action item to develop a plan to forward to the minister about when we plan to have them to the minister, and I assume that plan would be done in the next couple of months. I would be hopeful that it would not be long after early 2006 that most of the draft rules are delivered to the minister.

Senator MARK BISHOP —The Financial Review carried an article on 26 November reporting the rapid departure of a number of senior managers—Sue-Ellen Bickford, Bill McIntyre and Ray Comer. I understand Mr McIntyre was heavily involved with the regulatory reform program. Is that correct?

Mr Byron —He was the executive manager of the standards division, which had carriage of the working level development of the rules, yes.

Senator MARK BISHOP —Were the other two persons involved?
Mr Byron —Not directly in the standards function, no.

Senator MARK BISHOP —Were they involved with other functions within the regulatory reform program?

Mr Byron —Peripheral to that, in that they had financial/human resource functions, but support areas primarily of CASA’s operations.

Senator MARK BISHOP —I understand. Does the loss of Mr McIntyre have an impact on the future of the program?

Mr Byron —No.

Sarcs is online now Report Post Reply



This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.