JasonC wrote:
No Peter, but don’t use [removed] to help your case. There is clearly a problem here but try to keep some perspective.My point was to @flybymike who implied it was odd the CAA was a prosecutorial agency. In the UK there are many administrative bodies who prosecute.
I think the real issue is the lack of perspective from the CAA.
There is an lot of dicsussion about this on social media – and of course I dont mean just here. Things usually run a course, but his hasnt, it isnt showing many signs of gowing away. There is confusion and frustration. There is plenty of that on other matters as well, but safety actually does matter, not just as an excuse to help your cause at the time when it is conveneint and can be bent to your whim, but because it is genuinely important.
and yet in all this the CAA do nothing, they sit on their hands, doubtless read the discussion and yet dont make the effort to come forward and defend policy.
Why is this?
.. and I dont mean by posting here. They have the unique privilige of many routes for promulgating their message and yet they dont.
The answer is the policy is unjustified. it isnt about safety, its about one man’s personal crusade to placate NATS and carve out a very small niche in the bee hive which is all very well, but not when you are unwilling to listen to those you serve.
Off_Field wrote:
Just out of interest are there any that have the ability to stop your ability to use your own transportation? Car, aeroplane, boat, etc.
Maritime and coastguard agency.
I find it interesting in all this that if a pilot infringes and agrees to GASCo, his licence is not suspended. The CAA find that he is not a danger in the aftermath.
If he refuses to attend GASCo, and prefers to have the case examined by the courts, it would seem his licence is suspended.
Is it me, but the penalty is not based on whether or not he constitutes a viable risk to members of the public or other pilots, but whether or not he is compliant with the CAA’s policy.
Its a form of plea bargain, we wont suspend your licence if you agree to do what we ask of you, even if you think you arent guilty.
Its not remotely akin to the offer of a fixed penalty, because in these cases we are referring to a monetary inducement to avoid a lot of bother for all concerned and minimal other consequences. In this case we are dealing with a suspension of all priviliges for an undefined period of time.
It is indeed a cery strange policy to justify against the way in which justice in this country is usually dished out.
JasonC wrote:
Maritime and coastguard agency.
Can they really? I understood that no licence is required to captain your own boat. Wasn’t there a chap trying to sail around the UK or similar who was basically rescued by the lifeboats every time he went out.
Harbourmasters I thought had quite a bit of power but only when one is within their harbour.
JasonC wrote:
Maritime and coastguard agency.
In what context? Skippers of non commercial vessels are not licensed in the UK, so I am not aware of any basis on which their right command can be curtailed. You may be referring to commercial operations?
I think a harbour master is entitled to refuse a skipper entry potentially without explanation in the same way that an arifield operator can refuse a landing request from any pilot. In the same sense the owner is Master of his little domain, but there are very few true harbours in the UK which have this authority. Outside the few harbours which fall within this category, so far as I am aware a skipper of a private vessel is free to go or not go (anchor) as he pleases. The skipper is obliged to comply with various rules of the road in a similiar way to pilots, but the consequence of not doing so is prosecution, there is no licence to suspend or withdrawl of which I am aware.
Happy to be corrected.
For an individual (sailing / boating equiavelnt of ppl) I understand that If you’re not leaving the country, there is no requirement to have any papers or even register your boat. I do not see how they have any power to stop you operating the way the CAA has.
They have vast powers although you are right in the uk there is no licensing regime for private vessels. The point was that there are plenty of agencies that have powers beyond the CPS. In motor vehicles, the police for example.
Fuji_Abound wrote:
In what context? Skippers of non commercial vessels are not licensed in the UK, so I am not aware of any basis on which their right command can be curtailed. You may be referring to commercial operations?
Action can be taken against them by the MCA, PLA and the Environment Agency.
The police have no powers to suspend your licence.
I actually cant think of any authority, other than the CAA, which can suspend your licence without due process?
Certianly I am not aware that any of the professional bodies can suspend a licence to practice without a formal disciplinary hearing with the appellant having the right to be represented by Council.
JasonC, I agree, action can be taken, but the person’s licence cannot be suspended, the more so because they do not have one in the first place. The result “can” only be a monetary penalty, criminal inditement in the worst cases I guess, but no suspension of the rights to be the skipper either before, or after, the hearing.
I am not aware of any basis on which you could be banned from being skipper of a private vessel, short of being locked up, which would of course effectively prevent you doing so.
It is otherwise in many other countries, but then we are surrounded by sea and have a rather proud tradition of seafaring :-) Every skipper is highly skilled and if he can survive on the sea that is test enough.
