Originally Posted by
thunderbird five
The letter writing has been going on for three and a half years now. Obviously it has had no effect.
Definition of insanity - doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result?
Is it not time change to change tack completely?
Yep.
As we have already seen from the Robodebt Royal Commission hearings so far, the only thing that eventually stopped the unlawful juggernaut was litigation commenced by victims. Up until that point, the bureaucracy actively avoided opportunities to bring on litigation to have the lawfulness of the scheme tested in court. That's because all of the bureaucracy's legal advice was to the effect that the methodology used for 'raising' the 'debts' was unlawful (other than an advice that was deliberately sought on the basis of a number of assumptions that were not valid, to get the answer they wanted).
That's how the bureaucracy works. CASA is part of the bureacracy.
Everyone knows that Glen was led up the garden path by CASA through its approval of variations of APTA's AOC to cover numerous 'bases'. CASA's claim that some fundamentally new information about the structure of which it was not aware came to CASA's attention in 2018 is a convenient invention to confuse folks like the Ombudsman and Ms Spence. If that information was actually relevant, CASA should have found out about it during the earlier variation assessment processes.
I suspect the claim is about the "complete control of your business" statement on APTA's website. However, if there were no financial viability issues and APTA had control over matters determining regulator regulatory compliance -
both of which issues should have been assessed by CASA during each and every variation process - the way in which money moved around and business decisions within the structure are irrelevant to regulatory compliance. And CASA's statement about Parts 141 and 142 being drafted on the basis that all of an operator's personnel would be in all respects agents of the operator is wrong on the face of the legislation and in general agency law.
But CASA's not going to admit to any of that, unless dragged before a court. Glen would have to be the purest of purest optimists to believe that any bureaucracy is going to 'do the right thing' without being forced to do so. It's no longer in the bureaucracy's DNA.