Glen Buckley and Australian small business -V- CASA
Hi again, Clare
As I’ve said in another thread, AVMED is now in my opinion a force inimical to the interests of aviation safety. They seem to me to be on an inferiority complex-driven crusade to prove their expertise, but achieve the opposite. The widespread practise is now to tell them nothing. That’s what 1a meant by playing the game. In order to survive in the real world of GA, people just nod and smile and pretend to take CASA seriously so as to avoid the consequences of attempting to engage them with reality. Unfortunately, as you and Glen and many others have found out, the damage is sometimes unavoidable.
As I’ve said in another thread, AVMED is now in my opinion a force inimical to the interests of aviation safety. They seem to me to be on an inferiority complex-driven crusade to prove their expertise, but achieve the opposite. The widespread practise is now to tell them nothing. That’s what 1a meant by playing the game. In order to survive in the real world of GA, people just nod and smile and pretend to take CASA seriously so as to avoid the consequences of attempting to engage them with reality. Unfortunately, as you and Glen and many others have found out, the damage is sometimes unavoidable.
Good luck with your fight against CASA, however as stated you will need deeper pockets than anything.
If this is turning into an industry best for you to win then why not look at a go fund me page?
Many many many moons ago I started a fight against the evil empire only to realise I was on a hiding to nothing, even though clearly in the right. Ahhh if knew what I knew now.....
If this is turning into an industry best for you to win then why not look at a go fund me page?
Many many many moons ago I started a fight against the evil empire only to realise I was on a hiding to nothing, even though clearly in the right. Ahhh if knew what I knew now.....
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: sydney
Posts: 1,469
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Global,
as a famous person once said,
"There are no "knowns." There are things we know that we know. There are known unknowns. That is to say there are things that we now know we don't know. But there are also unknown unknowns. There are things we do not know we don't know."
Pretty much describes CAsA, its attitude and the industries perception of how it all works, I think.
as a famous person once said,
"There are no "knowns." There are things we know that we know. There are known unknowns. That is to say there are things that we now know we don't know. But there are also unknown unknowns. There are things we do not know we don't know."
Pretty much describes CAsA, its attitude and the industries perception of how it all works, I think.
Thread Starter
Meeting with Chair of CASA Board
In Posts 147 and 148, I published the letter that I sent as a follow up to my meeting with the Chairman of the CASA Board held at Melbourne Airport on 19/07/19
In that letter, I asked for a response by Friday August 2nd.
That date has past, and I have heard nothing.
Sadly, I cant say im truly surprised.
In that letter, I asked for a response by Friday August 2nd.
That date has past, and I have heard nothing.
Sadly, I cant say im truly surprised.
Thread Starter
RNAC shuts down
Sadly I read that RNAC has shut down temporarily. Taking the politics out of it, as both the CFI/HOO and Aero Club have a good reputation. This only highlights CASAs outrageous stance towards APTA. In fact, when I owned APTA I had discussions with RNAC, but CASA would not permit me to proceed with them joining.
The fact is that all regional locations will have difficulty attracting and retaining suitably qualified senior and experienced personnel, and this will impact on continuity of operations.
Had CASA permitted me to proceed, this may well have been a viable option, and operations could have continued. After all, that is the EXACT model that I built with CASA until some personnel within CASA decided to manage a complete change of direction.
Lets hope that it end well, but I fear a challenge ahead.
The fact is that all regional locations will have difficulty attracting and retaining suitably qualified senior and experienced personnel, and this will impact on continuity of operations.
Had CASA permitted me to proceed, this may well have been a viable option, and operations could have continued. After all, that is the EXACT model that I built with CASA until some personnel within CASA decided to manage a complete change of direction.
Lets hope that it end well, but I fear a challenge ahead.
Join Date: Apr 2019
Location: Australia
Posts: 358
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Crowd funding for a legal case & approaching the media with these regulatory failures should be high on anyone's agenda if unfairly treated by any government agency.
Industry needs to rally behind cases like Glen's, all influence counts towards mounting pressure for a commission to investigate the regulator thoroughly. It can't keep going on.
Industry needs to rally behind cases like Glen's, all influence counts towards mounting pressure for a commission to investigate the regulator thoroughly. It can't keep going on.
Thread Starter
Is the ICC process any good?
I will let you be the judge on this one, although I will reverse engineer it. After 7 months I received the final report (attached).
As time permits over coming days, I will post my complaints. You can read the complaint and see if the attached report attended to my complaints, as I post them.
As time permits over coming days, I will post my complaints. You can read the complaint and see if the attached report attended to my complaints, as I post them.
Thread Starter
Is the ICC process any good?
By the way, here is the Preliminary report. This obviously came out before the final report. Interestingly many of the commitments made by the ICC were not met in the final report, but I will provide more on that later.
Crowd funding for a legal case & approaching the media with these regulatory failures should be high on anyone's agenda if unfairly treated by any government agency.
Industry needs to rally behind cases like Glen's, all influence counts towards mounting pressure for a commission to investigate the regulator thoroughly. It can't keep going on.
Industry needs to rally behind cases like Glen's, all influence counts towards mounting pressure for a commission to investigate the regulator thoroughly. It can't keep going on.
Confucius gave some good advice, "He conquers, who conquers himself." And so did Sun Tzu in "The Art of War", a war tactics manual written a few hundred years before Christ landed that's still studied by most ranking military officers in the world today. He advised, "The art of war is deception", and the supreme art of war is to subdue the enemy without fighting. In simple terms, we don't know the enemy or ourselves fully, and that's why we keep losing.
Global,
as a famous person once said,
"There are no "knowns." There are things we know that we know. There are known unknowns. That is to say there are things that we now know we don't know. But there are also unknown unknowns. There are things we do not know we don't know."
Pretty much describes CAsA, its attitude and the industries perception of how it all works, I think.
as a famous person once said,
"There are no "knowns." There are things we know that we know. There are known unknowns. That is to say there are things that we now know we don't know. But there are also unknown unknowns. There are things we do not know we don't know."
Pretty much describes CAsA, its attitude and the industries perception of how it all works, I think.
The unknown unknowns about CASA, indeed Govt, is inferred by the literal meaning of Government Department. Govern = Control, ment = mind, and Depart = leave, ment = mind. There it is, hidden in plain sight. Government Department is Mind Control designed to make us take leave of our senses, but since it's hidden in plain sight, no-one really paid any attention to it, looking instead for rhyme and reason in their words and actions.
The question then, is why? Why is Government so intent on controlling our minds and making us take leave of our rational senses? That's an interesting one, and not so easy to comprehend. The question then is, do you really want to know?
This seems to me to be sophistry:
If the ICC has ‘jurisdiction’ to draw conclusions about the comparative legality of two different CASA approaches, the ICC has ‘jurisdiction’ to draw a conclusion about the legality of the current approach in isolation. It’s patently clear that the substance of Mr Buckley’s complaint is that he should be able to continue to do what he was encouraged by CASA to believe was a lawful activity. And in true CASA tradition, who’s blamed for the outcome? The complainant.
The ICC is just a hurdle to getting immediate access to the Ombudsman. Not surprisingly, the Ombudsman describes CASA as being amongst the Ombudsman’s ‘frequent flyers’ i.e. the agencies against whom many complaints are made.
... One reason for the broad conclusion is your specific request that I not review the actions or decisions of the CMT APTA was previously oversighted by, who you commended for their professionalism. Respecting that request means it’s impossible for me to draw any conclusions about which approach to the APTA business model is more likely to be legally correct.
The ICC is just a hurdle to getting immediate access to the Ombudsman. Not surprisingly, the Ombudsman describes CASA as being amongst the Ombudsman’s ‘frequent flyers’ i.e. the agencies against whom many complaints are made.
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Melbourne Australia
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Absolutely agree with Stickshift 3000, on following this detailed tread it reminded me of the much quoted saying “The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men should do nothing.” Guess the concept of "evil" can also apply to a Government Department acting unconscionably, unethically and perhaps illegally; so Glen, get a good Aviation Specialist QC and put CASA's actions under the microscope. Most likely there will be hundreds, if not thousands, of disgruntled CASA constituents in aviation circles for you to be very successful in raising a large sum of money for a legal war-chest harnessing Crowd Funding!!
The burden " to have CAsA under a microscope " should NOT be GB's alone.
And it should be with a JI or RC and CAsA examined, chewed over and spat out ...and then some
With CAsA like the "Naked City" there are a million stories out there of bureaucratic buggery, dishonest, overzealous and illegal employees , all protected and enjoying the taxpayer trough....while the fcuk an industry.
And until that happens, we are stuck with it. A VERY sorry state of affairs, to our detriment and to that of the 'common wealth'
And it should be with a JI or RC and CAsA examined, chewed over and spat out ...and then some
With CAsA like the "Naked City" there are a million stories out there of bureaucratic buggery, dishonest, overzealous and illegal employees , all protected and enjoying the taxpayer trough....while the fcuk an industry.
And until that happens, we are stuck with it. A VERY sorry state of affairs, to our detriment and to that of the 'common wealth'
This seems to me to be sophistry:If the ICC has ‘jurisdiction’ to draw conclusions about the comparative legality of two different CASA approaches, the ICC has ‘jurisdiction’ to draw a conclusion about the legality of the current approach in isolation. It’s patently clear that the substance of Mr Buckley’s complaint is that he should be able to continue to do what he was encouraged by CASA to believe was a lawful activity. And in true CASA tradition, who’s blamed for the outcome? The complainant.
The ICC is just a hurdle to getting immediate access to the Ombudsman. Not surprisingly, the Ombudsman describes CASA as being amongst the Ombudsman’s ‘frequent flyers’ i.e. the agencies against whom many complaints are made.
The ICC is just a hurdle to getting immediate access to the Ombudsman. Not surprisingly, the Ombudsman describes CASA as being amongst the Ombudsman’s ‘frequent flyers’ i.e. the agencies against whom many complaints are made.
Never let easily verifiable facts get in the way of a good argument.
It’s always good when the newbies turn up to run interference. Number of posts: 1. Welcome aboard, ‘Flaming galah’.
More sophistry.
First: Why don’t you educate us all and define the phrase “within jurisdiction” and the bases upon which the Ombudsman decides to investigate or not to investigate. Even a first time interference poster wouldn’t be stupid enough to suggest that each year there are only single digit figures of people - or even zero - who have complaints about CASA.
One of the marvellous consequences of the creation of the ICC is that poor bastards who used to be able to reach out to the Ombudsman directly can no longer do so. They have to go through the ICC process first. That’s why the ICC was created. Lots of people are ground into despair by dealing with CASA and then the ICC. The prospect of dealing with yet another government bureaucracy that could be as awful as CASA is often enough to deter complainants.
Secondly: The 2015/16 numbers you quoted are bull****. I know it, first hand. Let me stress that I’m not suggesting that you’re making it up. After all, a first time poster would only post material in good faith. I’m asserting that the Ombudsman received at least one “within jurisdiction” approach about CASA during 2015/16, and investigated. It may well be that the Ombudsman didn’t report it as such. That outcome would, sadly, be yet another manifestation of the general degradation of government integrity.
And... what are the figures for 2014, and 2013, and 2012....
I could be wrong. It could be that everyone is a now very happy with CASA’s behaviour and the number of legitimate complaints about CASA each year these days can be counted on the fingers of one hand. And pigs might fly.
Enjoy the pieces of silver.
More sophistry.
First: Why don’t you educate us all and define the phrase “within jurisdiction” and the bases upon which the Ombudsman decides to investigate or not to investigate. Even a first time interference poster wouldn’t be stupid enough to suggest that each year there are only single digit figures of people - or even zero - who have complaints about CASA.
One of the marvellous consequences of the creation of the ICC is that poor bastards who used to be able to reach out to the Ombudsman directly can no longer do so. They have to go through the ICC process first. That’s why the ICC was created. Lots of people are ground into despair by dealing with CASA and then the ICC. The prospect of dealing with yet another government bureaucracy that could be as awful as CASA is often enough to deter complainants.
Secondly: The 2015/16 numbers you quoted are bull****. I know it, first hand. Let me stress that I’m not suggesting that you’re making it up. After all, a first time poster would only post material in good faith. I’m asserting that the Ombudsman received at least one “within jurisdiction” approach about CASA during 2015/16, and investigated. It may well be that the Ombudsman didn’t report it as such. That outcome would, sadly, be yet another manifestation of the general degradation of government integrity.
And... what are the figures for 2014, and 2013, and 2012....
I could be wrong. It could be that everyone is a now very happy with CASA’s behaviour and the number of legitimate complaints about CASA each year these days can be counted on the fingers of one hand. And pigs might fly.
Enjoy the pieces of silver.
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: australia
Age: 81
Posts: 207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A minor point but I would expect a senior Government Official to ensure that at least a communication of this importance was in correct English rather than this sample.
Having reviewed APTA’s submissions in response, I believe I have insufficient information to change my provisional view. I therefore conclude didn’t act CASA unlawfully, or unreasonably fail to provide information.
Join Date: Jul 2019
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What is less clear to me, though, is what happens to the other APTA schools? Others still seem to be going about their daily business without restrictions which begs the question (and perhaps yours too): why action taken against MFT specifically? One would expect that by bringing APTA down, all the schools would be somewhat affected to a similar extent.