Cream Puff
There is a regulator for the regulator.
All of the avenues you suggest do exist.
Are you aware of any direct result from the Commonwealth Ombudsman with regard to CASA?
The AAT merely is the "Video Referee", it reviews and either upholds the on-field referee's decision, or dismisses it.
The AAT does not send anyone to the "Sin Bin".
The Minister has been involved, but only on the sidelines.
He directed, via parliamentary action,
that a stalled process (23 months to approve a check list for a simple GA Cessna) be actioned.
The local member has been involved in every instance of misconduct.
Whilst his intentions are good and he does go into bat,
it appears that for some reason he is not taken seriously by the Minister
and consequently doesn't seem to have many runs on the board.
It is also possibly his last term in office prior to retirement.
That still leaves some avenues, but the report already at hand alleges "No Problem",
and making it precarious grounds to revisit.
Despite all this, BB is actually astute enough to realise what is really happening
and will initiate appropriate strategies that will transparently remedy the problems that don't exist.
The need for transparency is essential to maintain the proper image of the regulator,
so people will just quietly move on, be transferred, pensioned off, even resign with subtle pressure.
Sackings are too obvious and present the avenue of vicarious culpability to an aggrieved litigant.