CASA Deed of Agreement

[turboplanner]

All deadlines passed without delivery.No milestones met.

SMS education/assisted introduction - zero.

 

The report card is not good!

 

It will be interesting to see what milestones and deadlines will be set in the next Deed.

 

RAAus is not in a good negotiating position.

 

At least we (the members) will now be aware of what RAAus is expected to achieve - and when.

 

DWF

I notice no announcements of new Executive positions or the SMS either. It's beginning to look like all the noise was just to do a hatchet job on Ed and Myles.

 

 

[Keith Page]

Ah lowering yourself to unintelligent name calling won't get us far either Andy..I hope I don't get to sit next to you on the board!...Excuse me if I'm disappointed ........Maj...

Maj.

If ever I get on the board I would love to sit beside him.

 

Regards,

 

Keith Page.

 

 

[turboplanner]

Andy was just presenting facts; they might have seemed complicated, but we do consist of six Countries each with a Head of State and two territories who all agreed, after 50 years of debate to be members of a Commonwealth. It does get frustrating when you post facts and people ignore them.

 

 

[Guest Maj Millard]

Andy, I agree, and I also feel that it is partly because of RAA 'slackness'. This does need to be corrected in the near future, as it is a major downfall in the area of safety within our ranks..................Maj...

 

 

[Guest Maj Millard]

Andy was just presenting facts; they might have seemed complicated, but we do consist of six Countries each with a Head of State and two territories who all agreed, after 50 years of debate to be members of a Commonwealth. It does get frustrating when you post facts and people ignore them.

It gets very frustrating also when people make a storm out of a teacup, when really all they are expounding is nothing but a personal opinion or bias............Maj...

 

 

[Guest Andys@coffs]

It gets very frustrating also when people make a storm out of a teacup, when really all they are expounding is nothing but a personal opinion or bias............Maj...

There isn't anything in what I've said in this thread that is personal opinion or bias, (other than the one post that offended) can you show me what you believe is "personal opinion or bias"? If needed I'm sure Turbo and I can dig out the appropriate legislation and identify it for you?

 

Andy

 

 

[Guest Maj Millard]

Major your understanding of the heirarchy of responsibility is wrong. To simplify that Federal trumps State is simply wrong.If what you say were true then reforms such as disability schemes and Gonski school reforms would not require the negotiation and the state based, in some case, current refusal to accept, rather it would simply require the fed gov of the day to say, screw it, we are out of time, you the states are having this........

 

That will not happen and cannot happen under the Australian Constitution. If you think the states are digging their heals in over education and health of a smaller subsection of society (which says nothing of their IMHO obvious disadvantage) then watch what happens when the Feds try and drive policing in a specific direction.

 

Its right and proper IMHO that the Australian constitution forces tension into the management of the relationships of State and Federal Governments.....what wasn't envisaged at the time was the power of the federal government today and the ability it now has to coerce States to their point of view by having become the majority source of state revenue..... In the begining the Federal governemnt was very much smaller than the states.......quite the reverse of what it is today...

 

Andy

Andy, this whole post appears to me to be really one mans' opinion......in fact you even use the term IMHO.....like huh ?...Maj...

 

 

[turboplanner]

Well Major, you're free to actually look at the legislation, that would be a good idea.

 

 

[Guest Maj Millard]

Turbs, frankly I'd rather go for a nice fly, which is Probabily what you and Andy should do also.......the WX is beautifull up here.....Maj...

 

 

[Yenn]

Has anyone here put in an incident report? and if so was there any obvious follow up by RAAus? I put one in years ago about supposedly U beaut plastic fuel line which fell apart within about 3 months. Never heard a dickie bird about it from RAAus.

 

In my opinion it was a severe flight hazard and I think I posted it on this forum.

 

 

[damkia]

In terms of jurisdiction I believe there may yet be another thorn in the side of "going it alone" separate from ATSB.

 

RAA is incorporated in ACT and actually has its regulations based there. If an accident occurs in another state, does it ever have the authority to demand anything from the legal system of what has been described as "another country", given its own legal boundaries? I fail to see how other than out of courtesy, any reports of incidents the 3rd party investigations done by the coroner/police could be gained.

 

ATSB is the only way forward, even if it is going to cost more in fees. They have the authority to investigate and subpoena other investigations and evidence collected for full examination.

 

 

[Gibbo]

I'm sorry if you were offended....I feel I'm talking but you aren't listening.....Your responses aren't even in response to the points I make. for example CASA may well have SAFETY in its name but it DOESNT EVEN DO any investigation of ANY Crashes that's the role of ATSBWhat Turbo and I have provided is simply the legislative basis for how things are today (facts!) .....Should they continue that way? IMHO No absolutely not......Is it simple to change.....you say it is (NOT a fact, but a supposition), yet the reality is that so far nothing has changed in many years, apparently despite an appropriate way to solve the legislative issues being put forward by ATSB to RAAus some years ago. Is that because its hard, or because RAAus is slack! I'm having an each way bet on that. (except for the opportunity put in our lap those years past where it was in my opinion 100% slackness)

 

As I've already stated I would like things to change and as I see it there are only 2 possible ways forward:-

 

1) We get under the same legislative umbrella that ATSB (Not CASA) exists under that covers GA/RPT/All other major forms of mass transportation.

 

2) We go it alone and try and set up something with every individual state based police force/coroner

 

Its my belief that 2) wont ever work (practically it might but we are then legally exposed and that's just as untenable) , and 1) is most likely and the best legal position to be in (practically and legally)

 

Is it simple.........well only time will tell....Good luck!

You missed a third option - 'friend of the court'. You would be amazed what you could achieve with a couple of phone calls. I have the contact details of a high (state) level coroner if u would like it. Hell.. They never say now to a free coffee.

 

 

[turboplanner]

There are a few like that Gibbo, one in Victoria used to attend our transport association meetings and give us excerpts from some of his cases. One I remember was a guy who stood between his van and its hydraulic tailgate, and the stop cable on the remote control had pulled out. He was able to get the manufacturer to redesign the handpiece.

 

 

[Guest Maj Millard]

Has anyone here put in an incident report? and if so was there any obvious follow up by RAAus? I put one in years ago about supposedly U beaut plastic fuel line which fell apart within about 3 months. Never heard a dickie bird about it from RAAus.In my opinion it was a severe flight hazard and I think I posted it on this forum.

Yenn, I have filed many over the years as a member and L2. Some have made the magazine in modified form, many have not. Don' t really know why they are so selective , but by all means keep filing them if you feel they are important to safety....Maj...

 

 

[Gibbo]

I remember my sparky teacher was a 'friend'. Awesome photos of what not to do nearly every lesson.

 

Next door neighbour was a 'friend' for the logging industry here in Victoria. Same sort of deal with call outs at all sorts of hours.

 

A fair few of the unions also have a sanctioned investigator.

 

Anything can be achieved if someone actually just does something...

 

 

[Guest Andys@coffs]

Andy, this whole post appears to me to be really one mans' opinion......in fact you even use the term IMHO.....like huh ?...Maj...

Ok....Let me take the opinion out and repost the fact. I can point you to the Federal constitution and the relevant sections that specify what states are responsible for and what the federal government is responsible for....You tell me if the modified post reads substantively differently:-

 

Major your understanding of the hierarchy of responsibility is wrong. To simplify that Federal trumps State is simply wrong.

 

If what you say were true then reforms such as disability schemes and Gonski school reforms would not require the negotiation and the state based, in some case, current refusal to accept, rather it would simply require the fed gov of the day to say, screw it, we are out of time, you the states are having this........

 

That will not happen and cannot happen under the Australian Constitution. If you think the states are digging their heals in over education and health of a smaller subsection of society (which says nothing of their IMHO obvious disadvantage) then watch what happens when the Feds try and drive policing in a specific direction.

 

Its right and proper IMHO that the Australian constitution forces tension into the management of the relationships of State and Federal Governments.....what wasn't envisaged at the time of federation in our constitution was the power of the federal government today and the ability it now has to coerce States to their Federal Governments point of view by having become the majority source of state revenue..... In the beginning the Federal government was very much smaller than the states.......quite the reverse of what it is today...

 

Andy

 

P.S Id love to go flying....but my 3300A is in pieces on Keith Rules desk being reconditioned....due low leakdowns in 2 of the 6 cylinders........<sigh!> $$$$$$

 

 

[Guest Maj Millard]

Doesn't the responsibilities of State and Federal governments change with whoever is in the big office in Canberra, or have I had my eyes closed for the last 50 years ??.............Maj...

 

 

[turboplanner]

No Major, you sure your breakfast wasn't loaded with pepper this morning?

 

 

[Guest Andys@coffs]

Doesn't the responsibilities of State and Federal governments change with whoever is in the big office in Canberra, or have I had my eyes closed for the last 50 years ??.............Maj...

No....its all very clearly set out in the constitution. a PDF version of the document is here:-

 

http://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Senate/Powers_practice_n_procedures/~/media/1A31A695333A450AA8A5641B6969AE12.ashx

 

with regard to the specific obligations for Federal vs state, see chapter 1 part V) titled "Powers of the parliament" The constitution very clearly identifies what the feds are responsible for and what the states continue to be responsible for (prior to federation there were only the states and their laws already existed. So Policing for example was a pre-existing state requirement and Chapter 5 clearly identifies that it continues to be so...

 

It may look like an imposing document, but its my belief that every Australian should have had a quick scan through it. It will help people understand how our Federal Government was intended to work, and why there are 2 houses and separate and distinct ways of allocating house of reps and the senate numbers etc.

 

Without this understanding (and the non-existent schooling around this when I went through (70's and 80's) ) it must all seem like a great big soap opera!

 

Please spend an hr or 2 and read it, I cant guarantee it will be the best 2hrs of your life (in fact pretty sure it wont be...) but well worth the time. I had to read it when I did the "idiots guide to law" at Uni. I really enjoyed it.

 

Andy

 

 

[Guest Nobody]

You must know that no state has any durasdiction over federal aviation activities, it is a Federally regulated entity. They may have a bit to do with airports and noise abatement / flight paths etc, but it is the Feds that regulate airspace and air activities in this country , last time I checked..............Maj...

It's a bit more complicated than that. The 1937 referendum failed to pass so the federal government do not have constitutional authority over aviation. Casa only exit until one of the states goes to the high court....

 

 

[turboplanner]

I've spent 40 years dealing with 8 sets of road transport regulations multiplied by 2 - an imperial and a metric system multiplied by a few more regional regulations, such as Queensland's novel; Pi$$ing regulation where an extra 3 tonnes of cattle could be loaded on to a truck on the grounds that they would pi$$ the weight on top the road as the truck went along.

 

So to design truck for a national fleet was a very complex matter in terms of suspension design, power and driveline.

 

This is because the States were always influenced by greedy operator and the States would agree with each other, and on top of that there were interpretations, so for example in Albury/Wodonga, one metropolis one Wodonga operator would pull out for Melbourne with one tonne more than one Albury operator, and another Albury operator would pull out with half a tonne less than the first Albury operator, and all these trucks had to be designed dynamically stable.

 

The federal Government doesn't have the power to set a national standard, so we are on the way to achieving one by the States agreeing that one of them, Queensland, would be designated the "lead state" for regulations, it would legislate for Queensland, and when it did the other States would all mirror the legislation. To discuss and co-ordinate the regulations they set up a National heavy Vehicle Regulator, which already has around 300 staff, based in Brisbane.

 

It would become very interesting if Australians passed a resolution to become a republic, because six Heads of State would be sitting in their Government Houses fuming, and I'd exp[ect at least one or two States to jack up. I don't think the republicans have fully thought through the politics there.

 

 

[kaz3g]

Teckair, what has been said, over and over on threads here is that police will not release their briefs to the general public, or organizations, and have no obligation to, and in some cases very good legal reason not to.It would be nice if we could get them, and when one is rarely made public, as in a bus crash in Queensland many years ago, the details were excellent.

 

But it's a closed story to us.

Hi Turbs, Maj, Andy and All

 

Have moved to a new home in Shepp and have virtually no wireless Internet coverage...hence mt silence for a while.

 

Maj, s109 of the Constitution of the Commonwealth says that where there is inconsistency between State legislation and Commonwealth legislation, the Commonwealth prevails and the State's is invalid to the extent of the inconsistency. But the Commonwealth's power to legislate is also constrained by the Constitution and it must have a head of power such as International Conventions under the external affairs power. This is where the Commonwealth gets its ability to legislate in respect to aviation.

 

The DoA between CASA and Raaus is not "legislation" and does not give the latter any power to investigate air accidents at all. Police won't release their briefs because there is no provision for them to do so without opening the prospect of litigation for negligence, defamation, etc ahead of any Coroners investigation and report.

 

I did hear only recently that ATSB will now investigate all fatal air crashes.

 

It would be more productive for RAAus to negotiate with ATSB for an official interchange with their investigators in my view.

 

Kaz

 

 

[kaz3g]

You missed a third option - 'friend of the court'. You would be amazed what you could achieve with a couple of phone calls. I have the contact details of a high (state) level coroner if u would like it. Hell.. They never say now to a free coffee.

Gibbo

 

You need " standing" to be amicus curiae, a friend of the Court... Effectively, this means a legal qualification. You can be an "intervener" but you need to demonstrate that your rights are personally affected by the litigation.

 

Kaz

 

 

[kaz3g]

It's a bit more complicated than that. The 1937 referendum failed to pass so the federal government do not have constitutional authority over aviation. Casa only exit until one of the states goes to the high court....

Hi NB

 

The High Court has upheld the validity of Commonwealth legislation based on the external affairs power for a long while now...Tasmanian Dams Case, etc. the Corporations power has been used extremely broadly in recent times, too and the High Court seems to have taken a view that we are one country and not merely an aggregation of individual states so need to act like one.

 

Kaz

 

 

[Guest Nobody]

Hi NBThe High Court has upheld the validity of Commonwealth legislation based on the external affairs power for a long while now...Tasmanian Dams Case, etc. the Corporations power has been used extremely broadly in recent times, too and the High Court seems to have taken a view that we are one country and not merely an aggregation of individual states so need to act like one.

 

Kaz

Yes that is true. There are two questions that then become relevant.

Is the regulation of ultralight activity necessary to fulfill a treaty obligation?

 

Does "external affairs" apply to a power that has been explicitly not given by the people at a referendum?