Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > PPRuNe Worldwide > Australia, New Zealand & the Pacific
Reload this Page >

Glen Buckley and Australian small business -V- CASA

Australia, New Zealand & the Pacific Airline and RPT Rumours & News in Australia, enZed and the Pacific

Glen Buckley and Australian small business -V- CASA

Old 22nd Nov 2020, 19:18
  #1361 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: melbourne
Age: 55
Posts: 592
22/11/20



Allegations that Mr. Carmody, CEO of CASA provided misleading information to the RRAT inquiry



Dear Mr. Carmody, the RRAT Committee, the Commonwealth Ombudsman’s Office, and the CASA Board.



I would like to bring some clarity to a matter of significant disparity between what I advised the RRAT Committee and the misleading information that Mr. Carmody in the role of the CEO of CASA provided. I believe that Mr. Carmody was deliberately misleading the RRAT inquiry. This matter is significant as I am claiming that CASA was frustrating my efforts to arrive at a resolution.



In the RRAT inquiry, Senator Sterle queries why I did not pursue legal action earlier. The following correspondence may bring some clarity to that.



Prior to engaging a lawyer, I felt that I should exhaust all opportunities at following due processes i.e. approach the Board who are responsible for the good governance of CASA.



Refer to the attached clip from the RRAT Senate Estimates on 20/11/22 Rural & Regional Affairs & Transport - 20/11/2020 08:49:59 ? Parliament of Australia



Please listen to the recording from the 4 hours 30 minute mark, where I made, in part, the following statement to the Senate Estimates Committee.



“I wrote to Mr. Tony Mathews, the Chair of the CASA Board for 6 months before I went public with this……….. 6months…….. had he acted within an appropriate timeline I probably wouldn’t be where I am now…”



The attached emails, clearly support my contentions. CASA initiated the restrictions on the business's ability to trade on 23/10/18. I initially wrote to the CASA Board on 02/01/19. I first went public with my allegations 6 months later on 06/04/20 by making my very first post on PPRuNe and that link follows as evidence of my claim. The post that I made can be found here. Glen Buckley and Australian small business -V- CASA - PPRuNe Forums.



At the 4 hours and 35-minute mark, Mr. Carmody the CEO of CASA, summarised and refuted my statement in the following way, “Mr Buckley says the CASA Chair had ignored him, well the CASA Chair met face to face with Mr. Buckley, a fact which he conveniently omits”.



I make note of his very emotional tone suggesting that CASA had perhaps embraced my offer to meet, when in fact it was clearly being resisted.



I have attached emails that relate to the chronological listing below, and clearly support the truthful contention that I did on fact write to the Board repeatedly over a period of 6 months, and was ignored.

· 2nd January 2019 I wrote to the Board of CASA raising substantive allegations regarding unlawful conduct by CASA personnel. I sought the Boards direction on what action needed to be taken. I also pointed out the commercial impact of CASA actions.My request was not responded to.

· 2nd April 2019. I wrote to the CASA Board raising substantial allegations regarding unlawful conduct by CASA personnel and making myself available to meet with any TWO Members of the CASA Board. I made myself available to travel to any location in Australia at any time that CASA could facilitate my request

· 22nd May 2019, I wrote to the CASA Board yet again

· 28th May, the CASA board responds by assuring me that the ‘Board is abreast” of the situation and I was not able to meet with CASA.

· 5th June 2019, I made a further request to meet with the Board, and highlighted how Mr. Crawford had written to me and advised a meeting would not be facilitated with the Board.

· 11th June request to meet with the Board.

· 14th June, CASA advise the possibility of a meeting. Note that this is 6 months after I had made my initial request

· 28th June CASA advises a meeting is available on 19th July 2019.

· 19th July 2019, meeting proceeds more than 6 months after the initial request.

For clarity. I absolutely maintain that I did write to the CASA Board for 6 months on multiple occasions raising substantive allegations. My reasonable requests were not met, and more than 6 months after my first request, I did have a meeting with the Chair of the Board of CASA.



That meeting finally occurred on 19th July 2019, 6 months after multiple requests were made. I had requested to meet with any two Members of the Board to ensure integrity. That request was never facilitated and still has not been.



I did meet with Mr. Tony Mathews and instead of a second member of the Board as I had requested, Mr. Mathews elected to be accompanied by the CASA Region Manager, Mr. Jason McHeyzer.



Interestingly It was Mr. Mc Heyzer the CASA Region Manager that wrote to my Employer on 27th August 2019 ( a little over one month after the meeting), directing that my continuing employment was “untenable based on comments that I was making publicly”, and I was terminated.



I hope that this correspondence supports my contention and brings clarity to any misunderstandings that may have arisen from Mr. Carmody's misleading response.



Respectfully, Glen Buckley

Attached Files
glenb is offline  
Old 22nd Nov 2020, 21:03
  #1362 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: melbourne
Age: 55
Posts: 592
23/11/20



Correcting Mr. Carmody's allegations to the Senate RRAT that I have posted on “almost every other website”





Dear Mr. Carmody,



Whilst I do somewhat apologize for the repeated correspondence, I am merely trying to correspond on one matter per piece of correspondence to bring additional clarity to what is a difficult subject.



As you are aware, I believe you have not acted without ethics or integrity, and in fact, attempted to mislead the current Senate inquiry.



In your recent presentation to the RRAT, you made the following comment at the 4 hours and 38-minute mark;



Mr Buckley has harassed my staff on PPRuNe and almost every other website Rural & Regional Affairs & Transport - 20/11/2020 08:49:59 ? Parliament of Australia



The truth is that I have only ever made comments on one website, so your assertion “almost every other website” could perhaps suggest to the RRAT that I am a “trouble maker” going to multiple websites and making allegations against CASA. If my intention was to cause mischief I would have pursued my case through a more public forum such as Facebook etc, rather than the industry website PPRuNe.



For clarity and to ensure that the truth prevails.



I have posted on only one website and that is PPRuNe. The link is attached. Glen Buckley and Australian small business -V- CASA - PPRuNe Forums



I have not posted on “almost every other website” and Mr. Carmody was fully aware of that when he made the misleading comment.



Mr. Carmody, could I respectfully request that you identify to myself and the Senate RRAT, any other websites that I have made comments on.



Thank you in anticipation of you clarifying this matter and ensuring that truthfulness prevails.



Respectfully, Glen Buckley



P.S. On post 33, on the PPRuNe website, I made the following post which I feel is pertinent.



“Dear Moderator,
I appreciate that you are currently reviewing the contents of a letter I wish to publish. Let me be very clear. I fully stand behind anything I say and will be prepared to defend it with evidence. The issue is significant. The fact is that CASA do engage with Industry, and often that manner is inappropriate. My concerns are in the public interest, and in the interests of safety. I prefer this forum as it is appropriately discrete. I am not trying to cause mischief, I would use another social network for that. I am trying to communicate with my industry peers via the only forum available to me. My issue, in my opinion, is pertinent to all business operators in the GA industry. My phone number is 0418772013 if you wish to talk to me. I need guidance from my industry peers and am seeking it through here. Thank you for your consideration.”

glenb is offline  
Old 22nd Nov 2020, 22:16
  #1363 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: West of SY OZ
Posts: 79
CASA Board

Glen, Your experience is not unusual as the casa Board is well captured by the CEO.

A person I know well, has a matter that the required Board intervention and he spent 2 years asking for a meeting.

Finally, the person had a promise from Geoff Boyd [as the chair at the time], to meet with the Board. in a regional setting. That was not facilitated, so he traveled to Canberra [where the next Board meeting was being held]. Geoff Boyd told him he didn't want the person to contact him again [The person had known Geoff since 1994 and Boyd did LAME work on his aircraft at the time].

When the person went to the public area in Aviation House - Furner Street and asked for Mr. Boyd, as Boyd was in the building at the time. There was no response from Boyd or the Board to facilitate a meeting. Instead Jonathon Hanton the ICC arrived and spoke to the person saying that a meeting was being refused. The ICC did arrange a meeting with the FOI officer for a matter that was being requested. The FOI officer was not allowed to speak to the person without Adam Anastasi - casa legal - being present. A breach of the FOI process.

Not to be put off after a 3000km trip, the person came back even earlier the next day to see if he could get lucky as the Board members arrived. The person made the same request as the day before, from the public area. Again the ICC staff came to see him.

An obnoxious "security officer" came downstairs while he was having a private meeting with the ICC. The security officer carried a direct threat from Carmody that they were calling the police to have the person arrested if he did not leave the building.

Good try Carmody.

Threat, public area, improper process, intimidation, stand-over tactics and more.

Why does the aviation community know that Glen is telling the truth.
advo-cate is offline  
Old 22nd Nov 2020, 23:20
  #1364 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: New Zealand
Age: 68
Posts: 130
The Senator is sniffing around Essendon Fields

Senator McDonald is also pushing for a deeper review of airport infrastructure particularly concerning the Essendon Fields crash. The scary thing is that the Essendon Fields executive team has basically no aviation experience, except for one individual, a so-called expert who has left a trail of destruction behind him at little airports. Airport management are all commercial people and are still completely obsessed and focused with retail development, office space leasing and putting little thought or care into safe airfield operations. Hopefully the Senator carves open the blatant folly of the ATSB investigation which is a standing joke within industry. Again, another CASA airport debacle that was swept under the carpet.
Paragraph377 is offline  
Old 23rd Nov 2020, 21:16
  #1365 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Australia/India
Posts: 3,336
My apologies for the (slight) thread drift, Glen.

On the subject of the allegations by Mr Carmody against the pilot of an aircraft whose “instruments”, according to Mr Carmody, “say he was at one hundred and twenty five feet”, I’m following with interest a thread on another aviation forum about a pilot who says Flightaware always shows his altitude as 300’ below that indicated on the aircraft’s altimeter, not explicable by differences in QNH. Some very interesting information linked in that thread.

The difference between Height-Above-Ellipsoid versus Height-Above-Geiod in the Geometric Altitude parameter in ADS-B is fascinating. And wouldn’t it be funny (not for the pilot concerned) if the 125 number cited by Mr Carmody is actually a parameter expressed in metres rather than feet...


Lead Balloon is offline  
Old 23rd Nov 2020, 21:29
  #1366 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: New Zealand
Age: 68
Posts: 130
Originally Posted by Lead Balloon View Post
My apologies for the (slight) thread drift, Glen.

On the subject of the allegations by Mr Carmody against the pilot of an aircraft whose “instruments”, according to Mr Carmody, “say he was at one hundred and twenty five feet”, I’m following with interest a thread on another aviation forum about a pilot who says Flightaware always shows his altitude as 300’ below that indicated on the aircraft’s altimeter, not explicable by differences in QNH. Some very interesting information linked in that thread.

The difference between Height-Above-Ellipsoid versus Height-Above-Geiod in the Geometric Altitude parameter in ADS-B is fascinating. And wouldn’t it be funny (not for the pilot concerned) if the 125 number cited by Mr Carmody is actually a parameter expressed in metres rather than feet...
Mr Carmody is not an Aviator, nor does he understand aviation processes or procedures, and neither do most of his minions, therefor that may be the reason that the emotionally challenged Mr Carmody speaketh bulls#it to the good Senator.

Now, had Mr Carmody been asked to explain the procedures and processes pertaining to spin, deflection and obsfucation, middle aged manopause and the emotional toll on the male mind, and perhaps Government perks and financial benefits for Career bureaucrat office workers, he would have done extremely well in the Senate and he would not be in a position where he is now being ‘called out’ for making himself and his organisation and the Minister look like a bunch of complete arseclowns.

Last edited by Paragraph377; 23rd Nov 2020 at 23:01.
Paragraph377 is offline  
Old 23rd Nov 2020, 22:56
  #1367 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Australia/India
Posts: 3,336
Again, my apologies for the slight thread drift, Glen.

From AC 20-165B here: https://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/...AC_20-165B.pdf

Geometric Altitude.

Ensure the geometric altitude provided by the position source is based on Height-Above-Ellipsoid (HAE) instead of Height-Above-Geoid (HAG). Do not interface a position source that provides HAG or Mean Sea Level (MSL) altitude to the ADS-B equipment unless the ADS-B equipment has the ability to determine the difference between an HAG and HAE input, and the ADS-B equipment has demonstrated during design approval that it can properly convert HAG to HAE using the same model as the position source. It would also be acceptable to demonstrate that the error due to conversion of HAG to HAE does not cause the GVA to be exceeded.
From here https://www.esri.com/news/arcuser/0703/geoid1of3.html with my bolding:
GPS has transformed how altitude at any spot is measured. GPS uses an ellipsoid coordinate system for both its horizontal and vertical datums. An ellipsoid—or flattened sphere—is used to represent the geometric model of the earth.

Conceptually, this precisely calculated ellipsoid, called an oblate ellipsoid of revolution, was intended to replicate the MSL as the main geodetic reference or vertical datum. If this ellipsoid vertical datum is used, height above the ellipsoid will not be the same as MSL and direct elevation readings for most locations will be embarrassingly off. This is caused, in part, because the GPS definition of altitude does not refer to MSL, but rather to a gravitational surface called the reference ellipsoid. Because the reference ellipsoid was intended to closely approximate the MSL, it was surprising when the two figures differed greatly.
Good luck prosecuting someone for low flying on the basis of the output of 1013-referenced SSR transponder or the geometric altitude parameter output of a GPS!

Would be fascinating to find out to what “instruments” Mr Carmody referred.
Lead Balloon is offline  
Old 24th Nov 2020, 20:50
  #1368 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: sydney
Posts: 1,454
Isn't it an "Offence" to give false or misleading information to a senate inquiry? or does that only apply to the great unwashed?
thorn bird is offline  
Old 24th Nov 2020, 23:17
  #1369 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Australia/India
Posts: 3,336
The Parliamentary privilege resolutions agreed to by the Senate on 25 February 1988 say, among other things:
...
3 Criteria to be taken into account when determining matters relating to contempt

The Senate declares that it will take into account the following criteria when determining whether matters possibly involving contempt should be referred to the Committee of Privileges and whether a contempt has been committed, and requires the Committee of Privileges to take these criteria into account when inquiring into any matter referred to it:
...
Offences by witnesses etc.

(12) A witness before the Senate or a committee shall not:

(a) without reasonable excuse, refuse to make an oath or affirmation or give some similar undertaking to tell the truth when required to do so;

(b) without reasonable excuse, refuse to answer any relevant question put to the witness when required to do so; or

(c) give any evidence which the witness knows to be false or misleading in a material particular, or which the witness does not believe on reasonable grounds to be true or substantially true in every material particular.
...
That’s a very (very) high threshold to meet.

I have no first hand knowledge, but I suspect that, in the case of the allegedly low flying pilot, Mr Carmody would simply say that he was told by one of his staff that the aircraft’s “instruments” said the aircraft was flying at one hundred and twenty five feet and, accordingly, it is true that he was told that and he has no reason to believe the statement to be false or misleading. Of course, whether the aircraft was in fact flying at one hundred and twenty five feet is a related but entirely different question.

But it was in my view a very (very) big call by Mr Carmody to flatly assert that Glen has stalked and assaulted CASA staff. Effectively, Mr Carmody seems to me to have asserted that Glen has engaged in criminal acts. I reckon Glen would have reasonable grounds to take those allegations up with the Senate Standing Committee of Privileges.

Odgers says this at page 536, with my bolding, about witnesses whose evidence reflects adversely on another person:
Evidence which reflects adversely on another person, including a person who is not a witness, must be made known to that person and reasonable opportunity to respond given. The committee must consider whether to hear the evidence, publish it, and seek a response to it from another person. These rules, in Resolution 1(11) to (13), do not define the meaning of evidence which reflects adversely on another person. However, certain general principles of interpretation apply.

Evidence given to a committee encompasses written statements or submissions accepted by the committee as well as oral presentations at hearings. The rules do not apply to evidence merely on the basis that it is contrary to other evidence. For the purposes of its inquiry, a committee will seek as many considered views on the subject matter as is reasonably possible. In many cases, the views offered will, and should, differ, contradicting each other and criticising the rationality, accuracy or acceptability of alternative or competing opinions. Thus, evidence adverse to another witness’s case does not fall within the application of the rules. The rules deal with adverse “reflections”, that is, evidence which reflects adversely “on a person” (including an organisation) rather than on the merits or reliability of an argument or opinion. To bring the rules into operation, a reflection on a person must be reasonably serious, for example, of a kind which would, in other circumstances, usually be successfully pursued in an action for defamation.
It seems to me that if Mr Carmody had asserted, to the public and not under parliamentary privilege, that Glen had stalked and assaulted people, Glen would have grounds to pursue defamation action against Mr Carmody. I certainly would, in equivalent circumstances.
Lead Balloon is offline  
Old 25th Nov 2020, 02:27
  #1370 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: New Zealand
Age: 68
Posts: 130
Chapter 18 of the CASA play book

Mr Carmody, as the Executive Officer of CASA, has been a complete embarrassment. His emotional rant in the Senate, his disrespect towards Senator McDonald and his deep seeded vitriol and potentially libellous statements against Mr Buckley are representative of who CASA are and how they operate. He acts like a spoilt child who has been caught red handed throwing its broccoli in the rubbish bin. Wha wha wha sniffle sniffle. A stamp of the feet and the cursory ‘NO NOT’ screamed out in between tears.

And the DAS might be the head of CASA, but Dr Aleck is the head that turns the neck. Or if you like - the gloved hand that turns the puppets head. What a performance in the Senate, as always - the little old bearded man quietly, gently and calmly speaking. Oh so innocent, helpful and sweet. A couple of ‘confused looks’ with the odd stammer or two while giving the appearance of a little old innocent man that you would spot sitting on a park bench feeding hot chips to seagulls while muttering to himself. But no not this bloke, he has spent many years throwing herrings at the Senators and appearing to be this little innocent old bookworm peering above his law books while he throws bulls#it to the Senators while muttering about ‘laws’, ‘policies’ and ‘intent’. Smart survivor that one. He has outlived many a DAS from Dick Smith to the Screaming Skull and beyond. But behind the scenes he is an angry, vitriolic vindictive human being who actually enjoys steamrolling innocent people and cheering from the sidelines as people’s personal lives, businesses and way of life burn to the ground. CASA fosters bullies, sociopaths and narcissists.

The only way forward to dismantling the CASA Frankenstein is to;
  • hold a Royal Commission into it
  • gut the organisation starting at the top tier, and;
  • adopt and implement the NZ Regulations.
Paragraph377 is offline  
Old 25th Nov 2020, 03:40
  #1371 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: australia
Posts: 1,416
Right on Para 377...in a big nut shell !!
You got it, we get it, most pollies dont get it, Waggaly Mc Do Naught hasnt the brains to get it ! CAsA is THE GREATEST NATIONAL CLUSTERFCUK in the country., and buggered the GA Industry in the process Get it ?
Hopefully the good Senator McDonald, Sterle and Co will seriously pick up on the call by many for a Royal Commission or a Judicial Inquiry* ( which is LNP qld policy* ) Is 'hope' entirely dead??

Having been the recipient of the evil, very long term bearded one, Dr Smart Aleck, his behaviour means he should follow Carbody out the door " Wait not upon the manner of your going, but go at once ! " (WS)
No slimy phrases, no weasel words , not legal acrobatics and more excuse wriggles than a smelly tin of bait worms... FFS JUST GO.!! And put GA out of the results of your misery.
aroa is offline  
Old 1st Dec 2020, 19:09
  #1372 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: melbourne
Age: 55
Posts: 592
This is what accountability looks like

Guernsey's civil aviation director removed over conduct - BBC News
glenb is offline  
Old 1st Dec 2020, 23:11
  #1373 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: melbourne
Age: 55
Posts: 592
Letter to CASA Board requesting retraction and apology

Request by Glen Buckley for retraction of the allegation of assault and stalking.



Dear Mr. Colin MacLachlan, Chair of the Board of CASA, and all Board Members.

Please note that I have included other Parties in this email.



In Senate Estimates on 20/11/20, Mr. Carmody, the CEO of CASA raised allegations of criminal conduct against me, when he said the following.“He has assaulted my staff, he has stalked my staff.



I absolutely refute those allegations. These are significant allegations and impact on my reputation. I would like to provide Mr. Carmody the opportunity to fully retract his statement and unreservedly apologize for it.



If Mr. Carmody refuses to fully retract that statement and publicly apologize, I will refer this matter to the Senate Standing Committee of Privileges. There are rules associated with adverse reflections on a person, and I feel Mr. Carmody's comments have clearly breached these.



As this matter should be easily attended to, I request that this matter be finalized by way of a retraction and published apology by 5 PM on Tuesday 8th December 2020.



Respectfully, Glen Buckley
glenb is offline  
Old 1st Dec 2020, 23:46
  #1374 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Perth, WA
Age: 60
Posts: 9
I feel there may be a 'stress related' leave application being submitted soon.
sagesau is offline  
Old 2nd Dec 2020, 00:25
  #1375 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: about there
Posts: 66
If Mr Carmody has made false allegations then that is incredibly poor form from a government bureacrat. We do not tolerate Chy-na posting a false image of an Australian soldier holding a knife to a child’s throat.

Last edited by Blueyonda; 2nd Dec 2020 at 02:54.
Blueyonda is offline  
Old 2nd Dec 2020, 06:19
  #1376 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: sydney
Posts: 1,454
"If Mr Carmody has made false allegations then that is incredibly poor form from a government bureacrat."

Standard form for Mr Carmody. His appearances at estimates are better defined by what he doesn't say rather than what be says. Its all about Politics, which is derived from the word Poly, meaning many and Ticks, meaning blood sucking parasites.
thorn bird is offline  
Old 2nd Dec 2020, 07:44
  #1377 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Australia/India
Posts: 3,336
Originally Posted by Blueyonda View Post
If Mr Carmody has made false allegations then that is incredibly poor form from a government bureacrat. We do not tolerate Chy-na posting a false image of an Australian soldier holding a knife to a child’s throat.
It would be incredibly poor form on anyone’s part. It would also be incredibly stupid form on the part of a bureaucrat. But the key word is “false”. That involves knowledge of inaccuracy and intent to make the allegations nonetheless.

I have no first-hand knowledge of the circumstances, but if I had to speculate I’d say Mr Carmody’s explanation will be that some of CASA’s staff ‘felt uncomfortable’ or ‘felt stressed’ when dealing with Mr Buckley, and that when Mr Carmody tried to summarise that in the short time available on 20 Nov he “inadvertently chose words that some might consider inaccurate” because of his “unwavering commitment to and focus on providing a safe workplace for staff”. That, or some equivalently exquisite sophistry to downplay the seriousness of what the words meant and to put in a good light the motivation for using them.

(As an aside, I’d confidently predict that Mr Buckley would prefer to have had zero dealings with CASA staff and instead have been able to just get on with APTA’s business. The frequent interactions with CASA staff were necessitated by the requirements imposed by CASA! I’d be ‘bothering’ CASA frequently and insistently, if my business survival depended on getting ‘ticks’ in numerous CASA-imposed ‘boxes’, particularly if I was paying fees for the exercise.)

Or maybe Mr Carmody will provide (1) details of when he and the staff concerned reported Mr Buckley’s behaviour to police and applied for AVOs, and (2) an estimate of when Mr Carmody understands prosecution action will likely commence. An unwavering commitment to providing a safe workplace for staff would, surely, involve at least reports to police and applications for AVOs if CASA staff are, in fact, being stalked and assaulted.

Lead Balloon is offline  
Old 2nd Dec 2020, 10:15
  #1378 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: about there
Posts: 66
Originally Posted by Lead Balloon View Post
It would be incredibly poor form on anyone’s part. It would also be incredibly stupid form on the part of a bureaucrat. But the key word is “false”. That involves knowledge of inaccuracy and intent to make the allegations nonetheless.

I have no first-hand knowledge of the circumstances, but if I had to speculate I’d say Mr Carmody’s explanation will be that some of CASA’s staff ‘felt uncomfortable’ or ‘felt stressed’ when dealing with Mr Buckley, and that when Mr Carmody tried to summarise that in the short time available on 20 Nov he “inadvertently chose words that some might consider inaccurate” because of his “unwavering commitment to and focus on providing a safe workplace for staff”. That, or some equivalently exquisite sophistry to downplay the seriousness of what the words meant and to put in a good light the motivation for using them.

(As an aside, I’d confidently predict that Mr Buckley would prefer to have had zero dealings with CASA staff and instead have been able to just get on with APTA’s business. The frequent interactions with CASA staff were necessitated by the requirements imposed by CASA! I’d be ‘bothering’ CASA frequently and insistently, if my business survival depended on getting ‘ticks’ in numerous CASA-imposed ‘boxes’, particularly if I was paying fees for the exercise.)

Or maybe Mr Carmody will provide (1) details of when he and the staff concerned reported Mr Buckley’s behaviour to police and applied for AVOs, and (2) an estimate of when Mr Carmody understands prosecution action will likely commence. An unwavering commitment to providing a safe workplace for staff would, surely, involve at least reports to police and applications for AVOs if CASA staff are, in fact, being stalked and assaulted.
LB

Point taken on semantics of language.

Look at how smarting and pleased Mr Carmody appears to be with himself with what I perceive to be getting 1 up on senator McDonald around the 12.35 mark.


Blueyonda is offline  
Old 2nd Dec 2020, 10:33
  #1379 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Australia/India
Posts: 3,336
If Mr Buckley writes to the Senate Standing Committee of Privileges and that Committee decides to inquire into Mr Carmody’s allegations made against Mr Buckley under parliamentary privilege, it will be interesting to see if Mr Carmody is able to sustain his smug facade.
Lead Balloon is offline  
Old 2nd Dec 2020, 13:55
  #1380 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: New Zealand
Age: 68
Posts: 130
Shane ‘safety first’ Patrick Carmody

Originally Posted by Lead Balloon View Post
Or maybe Mr Carmody will provide (1) details of when he and the staff concerned reported Mr Buckley’s behaviour to police and applied for AVOs, and (2) an estimate of when Mr Carmody understands prosecution action will likely commence. An unwavering commitment to providing a safe workplace for staff would, surely, involve at least reports to police and applications for AVOs if CASA staff are, in fact, being stalked and assaulted.
Well Mr Carmody is a very safety focussed C-Level Executive, after all he ensured that ‘COVID Safety Signs’ were placed in and around CASA buildings and he increased the supply of hand sanitizer and available face masks. He has previously asked for more ‘slips, trips and warning signs and bollards’ too be placed in the wet areas or upon freshly mopped surfaces in many CASA buildings. And he has even supported the placement of ‘Dangerous Snake Warning Signs’ around numerous CASA buildings that sit within semi- rural retreat type parkland settings. And how could we forget his robust approval of building posters for PPE, ear plugs, hi-vis vests, hat and sunscreen use and the ‘please empty your desk bins daily to mitigate fruitfly signs’! Yes, Dear Shane is very very safety conscious.


Paragraph377 is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.