Pilots, experts call out push to make CASA weigh costs of safety
Patrick Hatch
4-5 minutes
Small aircraft operators who claim their industry is being strangled by onerous regulation and safety compliance costs lobbied deputy prime minister and transport minister Michael McCormack heavily for the change.
"Safety needs to be the primary and overriding consideration," said Simon Lutton, executive director of the Australian Federation of Air Pilots, which represents commercial airlines pilots.
We need to have an independent regulator whose role it is to enforce that safety - not be compromised or confused by cost considerations.
AFAP's Simon Lutton
“We have an excellent safety record in Australia and we need to have an independent regulator whose role it is to enforce that safety - not be compromised or confused by cost considerations.”
Aviation expert Neil Hansford, from Strategic Aviation Solutions, said the FAA's biggest concern last week appeared to have been "the Boeing share price and jobs in America".
“To commercialise the implementation of safety and operations regulations is not sound and could lean to the problem we have in the United States," he said.
He said that having to take into account the fact that "some people are going to go broke" as a result of necessary new safety rules "totally negates" the reasons of making the new rules in the first place.
The United States was the last major country to stop all Boeing 737 MAX jets from flying after the plane was involved in its second deadly crash in five months.
The changes have been designed to appease the general aviation industry - which includes including charter, pilot training, recreational and agricultural operators - which says it is being strangled by over-regulation.
Royal Flying Doctor Service chief executive Martin Laverty, who leads the minister's general aviation advisory group, said the change was a "step in the right direction".
“We at the Flying Doctors put safety above all else. We also have to be cost efficient in our flight operations. Legislative change to have the air regulator weigh cost whilst retaining safety as its key concern is a good step forward," he said.
Related Article
Ben Morgan, chief executive of the Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association, which represents about 4000 members in the general aviation including about 750 business owners, said the industry was in dire straits and that Mr McCormack's amendment did not go far enough to change that.
“Anyone who says they’re not on board with making aviation safety regulation affordable... is privy to signing a suicide note to our entire industry," said Mr Morgan.
“We’ve watched thousands in our industry go broke in the past 30 years for no reasons other than the minister won’t stand up and do his damn job."
CASA would also take into account the differences in risks that apply to different sectors of the aviation industry under Mr McCormack's proposed changes.
Geoffrey Dell, an air crash investigation expert and associate professor at Central Queensland University, said part of the reason CASA was formed in 1995 was to address conflicts between safety and commercial interests inside the transport department.
“It’s a huge step backwards and sadly we keep forgetting the lessons of the past," Dr Dell said.
"It’s just an additional layer of white noise that potentially prevents safety corrective actions being taken promptly. You don’t know how much safety costs until you have an accident.”
A spokesman for Mr McCormack said aviation safety would always be the government's top priority and it had consulted industry before introducing the bill.
“This has no bearing on immediate safety issues, where CASA will continue to be able to act in the interest of safety," he said.
A spokesman for Labor's shadow transport minister Anthony Albanese declined to comment on the bill.
Qantas, Virgin Australia, the Australian Airports Association and the General Aviation Advisory Group were all consulted on the changes and did not raise any concerns, according to the bill's explanatory memorandum