This fax is going to the 338 Foundation Members of AIR SAFETY AUSTRALIA on 8th and 9th June 2001.

Thank you for joining AIR SAFETY AUSTRALIA. ASA's presence in Parliament will ensure that we 20,000 or so Australians who fly because they love it do not get trampled on any more.

Our national office is now up and running and you can contact the office by phoning Jim "Chainsaw" Dawson on 08 8276 4600, fax to 08 8276 4666 or at e-mail jdawson@airsafety.com.au Contact with Boyd is via e-mail bmunro@airsafety.com.au or at fax 08 8276 4666. Remember, it's YOUR office.

Because we are an open and inclusive organization we welcome YOUR help. If you know of an issue or have information on a search or a crash then please share it with us. We would love to see every newspaper article you read about aviation. Fax it to us or drop it in the post to P.O. Box 172, UNLEY 5061 Help US to help ALL of US.

I would like to say a special thank-you to Neil Hoffensetz of Ayr, Queensland. Neil is the top recruiter for AIR SAFETY AUSTRALIA, having recruited 4 new members. Great work, Neil.

An absolute bombshell was dropped during some Senate hearings on March 2nd 2001 when Mr. Spencer Ferrier, a lawyer practicing in aviation law, stood up representing AOPA, and therefore its members, and called for laws to make aircraft owners liable for accidents

even where they are not at fault, and COMPULSORY INSURANCE to cover them against this additional liability. This is to apply to ALL private aircraft in Australia!

The effect will be to make aircraft owners liable to passengers for accidents in aircraft they own even if they are not at fault. The effect will be a very large increase in our liability and thus in the cost of insurance.

Had the lawyer said he was representing the Lawyers Association or the Institute of Insurers then our politicians would have clearly understood the real agenda. But he did not do that. He stood up purporting to represent aircraft owners and pilots. YOU and ME, and yet we were NEVER ASKED if we wanted this. We all know what our politicians now think!

This was just the latest in a long list of examples of AOPA advocating things that are against the interests of its rank-and-file members. That is why I formed AIR SAFETY AUSTRALIA - so that the genuine views of Australia's pilots get through to Parliament.

This is the first of our Member Ballots. Why a ballot? ASA does things this way because it is the proper democratic way to find out how ALL our Members feel about issues that affect ALL our Members. Where possible, and if someone is prepared to write it, we will always show you the alternative view so that the process is always open and inclusive..

CASE FOR COMPULSORY NO-FAULT INSURANCE

No-one responded to my invitation to write the case FOR compulsory no-fault insurance. I recommend that you read the Hansard of what the lawyer told the Senate on 2nd March - see www.airsafety.com.au/nofault.htm Be aware that this is very different from what he told the AOPA AGM on 26th May. Parliament knows nothing of the AOPA AGM and will naturally assume that AOPA's official line is what appears in Hansard - Parliament's official record.

Firstly, Compulsory No-fault Insurance is … COMPULSORY. I cannot conceive of circumstances where rank-and-file pilots would call for themselves to be compelled to do something.

Secondly, the proposed change in the law will make aircraft owners liable for accidents where they are not at fault.

Thirdly, there has been no attempt to persuade aircraft owners to take out no-fault insurance voluntarily.

Fourthly, if you want an idea of how much this insurance will increase 3rd party premiums, ask your insurer to give you a quote for no-fault third-party insurance instead of the with-fault insurance you now carry. I asked my insurer that question a good while ago, and in my case it would have increased my premium ten times.

Just think about this. You own an aircraft. You put it on line with an operator. The operator hires it out to a pilot who behaves irresponsibly and crashes, injuring three passengers.

Today, you have no liability in that situation because you are not at fault. Under the no-fault proposal, you will be liable. What is more, you will be compelled to insure yourself against this new liability which today you do not even have.

Fifthly, the lawyer justifies his call for COMPULSORY NO-FAULT INSURANCE because Travis Scott, who was injured in an accident, did not get any damages (see www.airsafety.com.au/aeronca.htm ). The proposal is that the owner of the aircraft which crashed should be made liable even though he was not at fault. It goes on to say he should then be compelled to insure himself against this liability. But this proposal was made just 14 days before one of our biggest insurance companies, HIH, went bust. What happens next?

Does the aircraft owner still have to pay up, even though the insurance he was compelled him to buy turned out to be worthless? If not, then how is Travis Scott helped because he still gets no money?

Send a fax or an e-mail to AIR SAFETY AUSTRALIA no later than 21st June, stating your name and postcode, and saying "I Vote FOR compulsory no-fault insurance" or "I vote AGAINST compulsory no-fault insurance". You may add any comments you wish, but make sure that your opening sentence states very clearly which way you are voting. Only members of AIR SAFETY AUSTRALIA may vote, and you may vote once only. Your vote is NOT secret, and any comments you make may be put before the Parliament.

AIR SAFETY AUSTRALIA WELCOMES THE RE-APPOINTMENT OF MICK TOLLER AS DIRECTOR OF CASA

We welcome the re-appointment of Mick Toller at the end of his initial three-year term. Let me explain why. Calls for Mr. Toller's scalp overlook the crucial question of who his replacement would be.

The Minister for Transport makes this appointment. If the present Minister, John Anderson, had appointed a new Director there is no doubt the appointee would have been a career bureaucrat who, above all, did not fly 'planes. In Mr. Toller we have a person who was until recently an airline pilot with a major airline, and a person who still flies light aircraft.

Mr. Toller has been accused of various aviation "offences" such as flying a Cessna Caravan without a Type Rating. How trivial. I hold an Australian Type Rating for the Caravan, but not an American one because there is no such thing. The Caravan is a very simple, forgiving aircraft.

It does not even have a retractable undercarriage! Unless you had been brought up in Australia, it just would not occur to you that a Type Rating was needed. Mr. Toller's trivial offences should be seen for what they are - a damned good defence for others who are threatened, by CASA's officers, with ferocious punishment for similarly trivial offences.

The problem with CASA is the laws under which it operates - laws which give it far too much arbitrary power and allow its officers far too much discretion. We cannot blame CASA officers for using the powers that our own Parliament has given them. We have only ourselves to blame for allowing Parliament to pass those laws.