Thursday, 17 October 2019
Regulations and Determinations
Civil Aviation (Community Service Flights — Conditions on Flight Crew Licences) Instrument 2019; Disallowance
What I hear with people standing up are nice, kind words—everyone feels good—but it's not leadership. If CASA comes to this place and proposes a regulation, what I would see is absolute fear in exercising a judgement as to whether or not that creates an imposition on general aviation that is not worthy—that doesn't increase safety.
There's no question, no question at all, that if this instrument stands as it is at the moment there will be additional costs. There is no question about that. But no-one in this place will stand up and say that there will be an accident because of it, because no-one can make a link between the additional maintenance requirements that have been imposed by CASA and the safety of Angel Flight flights. It just doesn't exist. In fact, Senator Birmingham has suggested that there has been no impact.
I have been informed that, just on account of the fact that the ATSB now says that Angel Flight flights are seven times more likely to have an accident than a private pilot, than a private operation, that has caused Angel Flight's insurance companies to contact them indicating a significant increase in premium. That will have an effect on that operation. So to stand and say there has been no impact—there has been no impact as a result of the instrument; there has been no impact as a result of the ATSB report—is simply wrong. It's ill-informed. Again, I urge—