Bills Digest 1 1996-97
Civil Aviation Amendment Bill 1996
WARNING:
This Digest is prepared for debate. It reflects the legislation as introduced
and does not canvass subsequent amendments.
This Digest was available from 12 July 1996
CONTENTS
Date Introduced: 22 May 1996
House: House of Representatives
Portfolio: Transport and Regional Development
Commencement: Royal Assent
To increase the maximum size of the Board of the Civil Aviation Safety
Authority (CASA).
CASA, together with Airservices Australia, was formed in 1995 from the
previous Civil Aviation Authority (CAA). The creation of CASA was the
result of concerns raised over safety regulation following the Monarch
and Seaview fatal accidents (for more information on the formation of
CASA, refer to the Digest for the Civil Aviation Legislation Amendment
Bill 1995, which is available on the ISR database).
CASAs main function is to conduct the safety regulation of Australian
aviation through the development and enforcement of standards; the issue
of certificates, licences and permits; industry surveillance; and the
monitoring of safety related trends. CASAs senior management, the Board
of CASA, consists of a Chairperson, the Director of Aviation Safety and
between one and three other members appointed by the Minister. The
Civil Aviation Act 1988 (the Principal Act) sets no prerequisites
or qualifications for those who may be appointed to the Board. The grounds
on which members of the Board may have their appointment terminated are
listed in section 42 of the Principal Act and relate to:
- the member becoming bankrupt;
- a full time member, other than the Chairperson, engaging in paid employment
that the Minister considers to be in conflict with the performance of
the duties of the member;
- a full time member being absent, without being granted approval, from
3 consecutive meetings;
- the Minister being of the opinion that the performance of the member
has been unsatisfactory for a significant period of time; or
- the Chairperson engages in paid employment without the Ministers approval
or is absent, except on leave, for 14 consecutive days or for 28 days
in any year.
The Principal Act also provides that if the Minister is of the opinion
that the performance of the Board or CASA has been unsatisfactory for
a significant period of time the Minister may terminate the appointment
of all, or specified, members of the Board (section 42).
The Board of CASA currently comprises:
Chairperson - Mr Justice Fisher, President of the NSW Industrial Relations
Commission;
Director of Aviation Safety - Mr Leroy Keith - 31 years of experience
with the US Federal Aviation Authority;
Members - Captain Geoff Molloy, former 747 captain and Flight Safety
Manager with Qantas;
Dr Clare Pollock, expert in system safety and human factors; and
Mrs Gabi Hollows, consumer representative.
There have been two recent disputes between the government and CASA,
relating to Emergency Locator Transmitters (ELTs) and the decision of
the Board not to resign when requested by the Minister to do so.
ELTs
ELTs transmit location signals in the advent of an aircraft emergency
and are principally of use when an aircraft has crashed. ELTs can facilitate
the location of a crashed aircraft, leading to quicker rescue for survivors
of a crash and a consequential reduction in the cost of a search. In January
1996, CASA announced that it intended to require most aircraft to be equipped
with a fixed ELT that conformed to certain requirements, with a sturdier
ELT being required to be fitted in most cases. CASA estimated the cost
of the requirement would be approximately $6.5 million. CASA also stated:
'The proposed legislation mirrors United States Federal Aviation Regulation
91.207, with some minor exemptions'.(1) The recommendation followed significant
consultation with industry and other groups, which commenced in 1992,
with over 800 submissions received on a Discussion Paper distributed on
the matter.(2)
The proposal for mandatory fixed ELTs was opposed by the Airline Owners
and Pilots Association (AOPA) which campaigned for portable ELTs, which
could be activated in the event of an emergency. AOPA argued that fixed
ELTs were likely to be destroyed in a crash and would be ineffective in
locating survivors in the event that an aircraft crashed into the sea,
survivors left the aircraft and it subsequently sank. Contrary arguments
were that the newer, sturdier ELTs would be able to survive most impacts,
an injured or shocked survivor may not be able to activate a mobile ELT
and that a small proportion of accidents were likely to occur over the
sea. It may also be noted that the mobile ELT proposed by AOPA costs significantly
less than the sturdier type of fixed ELT recommended. Media reports suggest
that a mobile ELT would cost approximately $300, while the recommended
fixed ELT would cost approximately $2000 including fitting costs.(3)
It is reported that the then Opposition spokesman for aviation supported
AOPAs arguments and promised that if elected the requirement for fixed
ELTs would not be implemented.(4) In June 1996, the Minister announced
that CASAs recommendation regarding fixed ELTs would not be accepted and
that portable ELTs would satisfy the regulatory requirements.
Non-resignation of the Board
In its Aviation policy released before the 1996 General Election, the
Coalition stated: 'We will appoint Board members who are competent, and
who have practical aviation industry experience'. The policy also promised
to 'investigate the establishment of a Board Appeals Committee, which
will act as a readily accessible appeals tribunal for cases concerning
the suspension, variation, or cancellation of licences and certificates'.(5)
It is reported that in early April 1996 the Minister approached members
of the Board asking them to resign to enable people with more experience
in the aviation industry to be appointed to the Board and, at the same
time, the Minister expressed support for the Director of CASA. It is also
reported that the Board members refused to resign and threatened legal
action if measures were taken to dismiss members of the Board other than
in accordance with he Principal Act.(6) The Minister is quoted as saying
that the Director:
needs a Board that can give him 110 per cent support, that can help
him implement change in his organisation. To do that, we have got to have
people who can talk the language of the people in the organisation, who
understand the issues, who understand the history, who understand the
personalities of CASA and the broader aviation community.(7)
The Board's reported response to the Minister centred on the past composition
of the Board of the CAA and the degrading of safety that occurred in the
past. The Minister is quoted as saying:
He [the chairperson] highlighted (the fact) that the CAA had been
run by people with aviation experience in times past and it had got into
a mess.(8)
Later in April 1996, the Minister addressed the prospect of the Board
members refusing to resign, stating:
There are certain powers that are available to the Minister to terminate
their appointment. I don't choose to do that at this stage.(9)
The next step in the dispute occurred in late April 1996 when the Chairperson
issued a statement to various media outlets. It is reported that the statement
accused the Minister and the president of AOPA, Dick Smith, of destabilising
the Board. It was also reported that the statement alleged the Ministers
actions were to repay a political obligation to AOPA.(10)
The next major step in the dispute occurred on 25 June 1996, when the
Minister made a statement to the House of Representatives on Aviation
Safety Regulation. In the Statement, the Minister affirmed the governments
view that the Board did not contain sufficient members with expertise
in the aviation industry and noted that the non-executive members of the
Board had failed to comply with the request that they resign. The Minister
then stated:
In putting their own interests ahead of the need to have the best
available people with appropriate expertise and qualifications, the board
members were effectively putting their own needs ahead of aviation safety.
The Chairperson's response to the Statement are contained in a Media
Release dated 26 June 1996, the main points of which alleged:
- that the part of the Statement relating to Board members putting their
own interests ahead of safety was defamatory, unworthy and unsupportable
and should be withdrawn; and
- that CASA was in a rebuilding process and staff needed support to
achieve the rebuilding.
The Media Release also states:
The Minister was not given power [by the Principal Act] to dismiss
the Board except on an attenuated basis not suggested to be available
here. The responsibility for conducting safety regulation is vested in
CASA as a separate statutory authority, not the Minister.
The Minister's response was released on the same day, 26 June 1996,
and, after stating that the Chairpersons public comments were 'definitively
disloyal', continued:
The Board is responsible to the Minister and Mr Justice Fisher [the
Chairperson] should clearly understand that, not withstanding his statutory
duties as Chairman, he is in the exercise of them responsible to the Minister.(11)
Items 3 and 4 of the Schedule to the Bill will amend section
33 of the Principal Act to provide for a Deputy Chairperson to be appointed
to the Board and to increase the maximum number of members that may be
appointed to the Board from 3 to 4.
(1) CASA, Media Release, 15 January 1996.
(2) Ibid.
(3) The Australian, 16 January 1996.
(4) The Canberra Times, 16 January 1996.
(5) Soaring into Tomorrow, 13 February 1996, p. 4.
(6) The Australian, 18 April 1996, The Sydney Morning Herald,
19 April 1996.
(7) The Australian, 19 April 1996.
(8) The Australian, 20 April 1996.
(9) The Australian Financial Review, 25 April 1996.
(10) The Australian Financial Review, 29 April 1996, The Canberra
Times, 2 May 1996.
(11) Media Release, 26 June 1996.
Chris Field Ph. 06 277 2439
11 July 1996
Bills Digest Service
Parliamentary Research Service
This Digest does not have any official legal status. Other sources should
be consulted to determine whether the Bill has been enacted and, if so,
whether the subsequent Act reflects further amendments.
PRS staff are available to discuss the paper's contents with Senators
and Members and their staff but not with members of the public.
ISSN 1323-9032
© Commonwealth of Australia 1996
Except to the extent of the uses permitted under the Copyright Act
1968, no part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted
in any form or by any means, including information storage and retrieval
systems, without the prior written consent of the Parliamentary Library,
other than by Members of the Australian Parliament in the course of their
official duties.
Published by the Department of the Parliamentary Library, 1996.
This page was prepared by the Parliamentary Library, Commonwealth of
Australia
Last updated: 1 July 1996
|
