In posts 2256 and 2316, I had asked Ms. Spence to retract what i claim to be false allegations of stalking and assault made by the previous CASA CEO, Mr Carmody.
I sent that on 01/08, and had not received an aknowledgement of receipt, so followed up on 04/08 (refer those posts).
At 3PM on 04/08 i sent this"Dear Ms Spence,
My preference is to wait for a well-considered response, so please feel under no pressure to reply at this stage other than to confirm that you have received my email of Monday 01/08/22.
Respectfully Glen Buckley."
At 8.45 AM on 16/08 I sent this follow up
16/08/22
Dear Ms Pip Spence, CEO of CASA,
Please note that I have included the Board, and the Office of the Hon Catherine King MP as the Minister for Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development, and Local Government, in this correspondence.
I sent you correspondence on August 1st , requesting that you publicly correct what is clearly false and misleading information provided by Mr Carmody, your predecessor, to the Senate. For your reference, I have also included a copy of that correspondence below.
“Dear Ms Spence,
My preference is to wait for a well-considered response, so please feel under no pressure to reply at this stage other than to confirm that you have received my email of Monday 01/08/22.
Respectfully Glen Buckley”.
Fourteen days have now passed. I am not seeking any answer to my request, I am simply seeking a confirmation that you have received my fair and reasonable request.
Respectfully, Glen Buckley.
Approximately 1 hour later i received this from Ms Spences Office
Dear Buckley
Thank you for your emails to CASA CEO Pip Spence.
We are looking into the matters you have raised and will come back to you as soon as possible.
Kind regards
Rosie
Then shortly afterwards i received this again
Dear Mr Buckley
My sincerest apologies for not addressing you correctly in my acknowledgement that we have received your emails to Ms Spence.
Kind regards
Rosie
My response
Hi Rosie,
You shouldn’t have said anything, I didn’t notice, but appreciate the gesture, cheers. Glen
My follow up sent to Ms Spence earlier today
17/08/22
Dear Ms Pip Spence, CEO of CASA,
I understand that you are in the process of considering my request for CASA to publicly retract the allegations of Stalking and Assault that I am alleged to have committed against CASA employees.
As you will appreciate this matter in its entirety, is about “intent,” and the nature of that intent i.e. well intentioned or not well intentioned.
It’s not really about any safety concerns, regultory breaches, degraded quality outcomes, nor any examples offered by CASA that are indicative of any lack of operational control.
If I am to be believed, it’s a matter of a single CASA employee engineering a process to bring harm to me personally, and as you are aware I am fully satisfied that process was engineered by Mr Aleck. Mr Alecks conduct was facilitated by Mr Shane Carmody, the CASA CEO at the time.
It is fact, Mr Carmody’s statements made to the Senators, that I am asking you to retract or substantiate.
Mr Carmody’s presentation was “littered” with information that was clearly false and misleading. It was what can only be described as a character assassination on me, made with Parliamentary Privilege.
As you know, my opinion is that, if you determine that I had in fact stalked and assaulted CASA employees, it was incumbent on CASA to take measures to protect those employees, and that would involve a complaint to the police. That would allow me procedural fairness, and for the allegations to be fully investigated, and resolved. As the nature of the allegations is so substantial, I insist on that process being initiated, if it has not been commenced previously, and CASA chooses not to retract that false and misleading statement.
These are all matters that you are aware of.
In Mr Carmody’s presentation I have noted that he has provided false and misleading information on nine other occasions apart from the false and misleading statement that I had “stalked and assaulted CASA employees”.
Rural & Regional Affairs & Transport - 20/11/2020 08:49:59 - Parliament of Australia (aph.gov.au)
I would like to draw your attention to one other false and/or misleading statement. At the 13:27:50 mark of the presentation Mr Carmody refers to me as me “describing the experience as a very pleasant journey over a number of years designing his future.”
Mr Carmody was obviously inferring a smooth journey, most likely initiated by me to secure my financial security.
The intent of his comments is obvious.
Mr Carmody chose to mislead the senators.
Mr Carmody failed to mention that the new regulations that applied to all of Australia’s 350 flight training organisations was the largest project ever undertaken by the flight training industry in Australia.
The new legislation presented me with three options.
-
- Cease trading on September 1st 2017
- Continue trading but my business would be unable to continue delivering its current courses. This would result in a reduction of revenue of over 90%, effectively making the business unviable.
- Invest many hundreds of thousands of dollars upgrading all systems and procedures via a rigid CASA procedure to the far more burdensome legislative requirements in order to continue operating as the new category Part 142 School.
I chose option C, and began a two year process requiring an enormous investment of both time and money to be one of the very small minority of flight schools that was ready for the deadline of September 1st 2017.
After assurances from CASA that the legislation was proceeding, as planned on September 1st 2017, I activated my new Part 141/142 compliant multi base structure that I had been using for many years, in April 2017, approximately 6 months before the deadline.
Weeks after I activated that structure fully compliant to the new regulations, CASA reversed their decision, and postponed the introduction of the legislation. This reversal by CASA cost me several hundred thousand dollars.
The truth is that it was path I was forced down by CASAs legislative changes, that required an enormous investment.
Mr Carmody’s comments about me describing the experience as “pleasant” are not only insulting to me personally, but I am sure they would be insulting to the highly professional CASA employees that had put so much of their time into the very substantial project.
Ms. Spence, please appreciate that this is not about the semantics. It is about a very carefully engineered process by a small number of current and past CASA employees.
It is about the “intent”. The intent of Mr Carmody’s presentation was not well intentioned. It was false and it was presented to mislead the Senators.
As I have advised, I am not seeking a prompt response from you. I am seeking a well-intentioned, and well considered response.
If you feel there would be some benefit in me addressing all 10 false and/or misleading statements prior to CASAs formal response, please advise and I will respond within 48 hours with that completed document.
I thank you in anticipation of your well-intentioned response,
Glen Buckley.
P.S. Whilst I am not apologising, I do acknowledge that you are relatively new to the position, and were not involved in the “problem”, although the burden of the “solution” has become yours.