Glen Buckley and Australian small business -V- CASA
Thread Starter
Hopefully Ms Spence has more integrity than Mr Aleck
Dear Ms Spence, CEO of CASA
I am sure you will agree that in order for the Ombudsman Office to arrive at the correct determination it is highly dependant on CASA providing truthful information.
I had been providing a multi base, multi entity style flight training delivery with CASAs full knowledge since 2011 when I took over operational control of AV8 in Darwin, and other bases including TVSA, Learn to Fly and Avia. Each of these bases underwent a formal CASA process.
Mr Jonathan Aleck the Executive Manager of Legal, International and Regulatory Services had misled the Ombudsman’s Office to be of the view that CASA first became aware of this structure six years later, just prior to October 2018, which is clearly not factual/truthful.
Can you confirm that CASA has now corrected this falsehood directly with the Ombudsman’s Office, or has CASA chosen to standby the assertion made by Mr Aleck, that CASA first became aware of the structure in October 2018.
An answer to this query will be integral to the investigation. I need to know whether this is a matter I need to prove to the Ombudsman’s Office. I apologize for involving you in this, but as I allege that Mr. Aleck has been dishonest in his dealings with the Ombudsman’s office, you are the most appropriate person in the Organizational Structure to approach on this matter, and to confirm CASAs position.
Yours thankfully, Glen Buckley
I am sure you will agree that in order for the Ombudsman Office to arrive at the correct determination it is highly dependant on CASA providing truthful information.
I had been providing a multi base, multi entity style flight training delivery with CASAs full knowledge since 2011 when I took over operational control of AV8 in Darwin, and other bases including TVSA, Learn to Fly and Avia. Each of these bases underwent a formal CASA process.
Mr Jonathan Aleck the Executive Manager of Legal, International and Regulatory Services had misled the Ombudsman’s Office to be of the view that CASA first became aware of this structure six years later, just prior to October 2018, which is clearly not factual/truthful.
Can you confirm that CASA has now corrected this falsehood directly with the Ombudsman’s Office, or has CASA chosen to standby the assertion made by Mr Aleck, that CASA first became aware of the structure in October 2018.
An answer to this query will be integral to the investigation. I need to know whether this is a matter I need to prove to the Ombudsman’s Office. I apologize for involving you in this, but as I allege that Mr. Aleck has been dishonest in his dealings with the Ombudsman’s office, you are the most appropriate person in the Organizational Structure to approach on this matter, and to confirm CASAs position.
Yours thankfully, Glen Buckley
Thread Starter
Misleading the Ombudsman
09/01/22
Dear Ms Spence, CEO of CASA,
In your recent correspondence to me, you stated the following: “We do treat your allegations very seriously and if you have new information or evidence to support such an allegation it is appropriate that it be provided to the Ombudsman so that it can be included in their review. Until that review is completed, it is not appropriate that we comment or interfere with the independent process in place.”
I agree that it is not appropriate that you “interfere” with the independent process in place. I do however feel that as the CEO of CASA you are compelled to ensure that truthful and factual information is provided to the investigation being conducted by the Ombudsman’s Office. Mr. Aleck in his role as the Executive Manager of Legal International and Regulatory Affairs has clearly provided untruthful advice to the Commonwealth Ombudsman’s Office. I am fully satisfied that Mr. Aleck has provided that untruthful advice in order to pervert the outcome, and to cover up his misconduct.
As the CASA Organisational Chart indicates that Mr Aleck is a direct report to you in your position as the CEO, you are the most appropriate person to write to on this matter, and to ensure that any misconception manufactured by Mr. Aleck is clarified with the Ombudsman’s Office. As you are aware I have made allegations of misfeasance in public office by Mr. Aleck, before Parliament to Senator Susan McDonald. I encourage you not to be complicit in covering up that misconduct and to take appropriate action and act with integrity commensurate with your position.
Mr Aleck has led the Ombudsman to be of the view that CASA does not and has not ever permitted multiple entities to operate under a single AOC which is blatantly not the truth.
Whilst I can only draw on the 25 years that I have been involved in the industry, throughout that entire period CASA consistently permitted this arrangement. Whilst there is an overwhelming body of evidence, can I draw your attention to this very clear demonstration that supports my assertion.
Latrobe Valley Aero Club operated under the AOC of Bairnsdale Air Charter. When Latrobe Valley Aero Club transferred from Bairnsdale Air Charter to my business APTA under the identical arrangement, CASA determined my business unlawful and closed my business down, at a personal cost to me of several million dollars, and significant “fallout” to employees, customers, and other businesses.
My assumption is that Mr Aleck will continue to propagate falsehoods to protect his position. I appreciate that you are relatively new to the position, and it is not reasonable to expect you to be a Subject Matter Expert on this particular topic. May I suggest that you establish contact with Flight Operations Inspector, Mr Naomichi Nishizawa. In his position he was overseeing both Bairnsdale Air Charter and my organisation and could be considered a Subject Matter Expert on this particular topic. He would be able to bring clarity to the matter. Mr Nishizawa has a well established reputation in the industry achieved after many years as a CASA employee demonstrating the very highest levels of integrity and professionalism.
Can I ask that you confirm to me that you will clarify the truthful situation with the Ombudsman Office or if you choose to support Mr. Alecks assertion, so that I can consider what action I should take.
I apologise for involving you in this matter, although I am sure you appreciate the substantive nature of my allegations.
Respectfully, Glen Buckley
Dear Ms Spence, CEO of CASA,
In your recent correspondence to me, you stated the following: “We do treat your allegations very seriously and if you have new information or evidence to support such an allegation it is appropriate that it be provided to the Ombudsman so that it can be included in their review. Until that review is completed, it is not appropriate that we comment or interfere with the independent process in place.”
I agree that it is not appropriate that you “interfere” with the independent process in place. I do however feel that as the CEO of CASA you are compelled to ensure that truthful and factual information is provided to the investigation being conducted by the Ombudsman’s Office. Mr. Aleck in his role as the Executive Manager of Legal International and Regulatory Affairs has clearly provided untruthful advice to the Commonwealth Ombudsman’s Office. I am fully satisfied that Mr. Aleck has provided that untruthful advice in order to pervert the outcome, and to cover up his misconduct.
As the CASA Organisational Chart indicates that Mr Aleck is a direct report to you in your position as the CEO, you are the most appropriate person to write to on this matter, and to ensure that any misconception manufactured by Mr. Aleck is clarified with the Ombudsman’s Office. As you are aware I have made allegations of misfeasance in public office by Mr. Aleck, before Parliament to Senator Susan McDonald. I encourage you not to be complicit in covering up that misconduct and to take appropriate action and act with integrity commensurate with your position.
Mr Aleck has led the Ombudsman to be of the view that CASA does not and has not ever permitted multiple entities to operate under a single AOC which is blatantly not the truth.
Whilst I can only draw on the 25 years that I have been involved in the industry, throughout that entire period CASA consistently permitted this arrangement. Whilst there is an overwhelming body of evidence, can I draw your attention to this very clear demonstration that supports my assertion.
Latrobe Valley Aero Club operated under the AOC of Bairnsdale Air Charter. When Latrobe Valley Aero Club transferred from Bairnsdale Air Charter to my business APTA under the identical arrangement, CASA determined my business unlawful and closed my business down, at a personal cost to me of several million dollars, and significant “fallout” to employees, customers, and other businesses.
My assumption is that Mr Aleck will continue to propagate falsehoods to protect his position. I appreciate that you are relatively new to the position, and it is not reasonable to expect you to be a Subject Matter Expert on this particular topic. May I suggest that you establish contact with Flight Operations Inspector, Mr Naomichi Nishizawa. In his position he was overseeing both Bairnsdale Air Charter and my organisation and could be considered a Subject Matter Expert on this particular topic. He would be able to bring clarity to the matter. Mr Nishizawa has a well established reputation in the industry achieved after many years as a CASA employee demonstrating the very highest levels of integrity and professionalism.
Can I ask that you confirm to me that you will clarify the truthful situation with the Ombudsman Office or if you choose to support Mr. Alecks assertion, so that I can consider what action I should take.
I apologise for involving you in this matter, although I am sure you appreciate the substantive nature of my allegations.
Respectfully, Glen Buckley
Dear Ms Spence, CEO of CASA
I am sure you will agree that in order for the Ombudsman Office to arrive at the correct determination it is highly dependant on CASA providing truthful information.
I had been providing a multi base, multi entity style flight training delivery with CASAs full knowledge since 2011 when I took over operational control of AV8 in Darwin, and other bases including TVSA, Learn to Fly and Avia. Each of these bases underwent a formal CASA process.
Mr Jonathan Aleck the Executive Manager of Legal, International and Regulatory Services had misled the Ombudsman’s Office to be of the view that CASA first became aware of this structure six years later, just prior to October 2018, which is clearly not factual/truthful.
Can you confirm that CASA has now corrected this falsehood directly with the Ombudsman’s Office, or has CASA chosen to standby the assertion made by Mr Aleck, that CASA first became aware of the structure in October 2018.
An answer to this query will be integral to the investigation. I need to know whether this is a matter I need to prove to the Ombudsman’s Office. I apologize for involving you in this, but as I allege that Mr. Aleck has been dishonest in his dealings with the Ombudsman’s office, you are the most appropriate person in the Organizational Structure to approach on this matter, and to confirm CASAs position.
Yours thankfully, Glen Buckley
I am sure you will agree that in order for the Ombudsman Office to arrive at the correct determination it is highly dependant on CASA providing truthful information.
I had been providing a multi base, multi entity style flight training delivery with CASAs full knowledge since 2011 when I took over operational control of AV8 in Darwin, and other bases including TVSA, Learn to Fly and Avia. Each of these bases underwent a formal CASA process.
Mr Jonathan Aleck the Executive Manager of Legal, International and Regulatory Services had misled the Ombudsman’s Office to be of the view that CASA first became aware of this structure six years later, just prior to October 2018, which is clearly not factual/truthful.
Can you confirm that CASA has now corrected this falsehood directly with the Ombudsman’s Office, or has CASA chosen to standby the assertion made by Mr Aleck, that CASA first became aware of the structure in October 2018.
An answer to this query will be integral to the investigation. I need to know whether this is a matter I need to prove to the Ombudsman’s Office. I apologize for involving you in this, but as I allege that Mr. Aleck has been dishonest in his dealings with the Ombudsman’s office, you are the most appropriate person in the Organizational Structure to approach on this matter, and to confirm CASAs position.
Yours thankfully, Glen Buckley
CASA had an awareness of the APTA business model for a significant period of time prior to its compliance with regulation being called into question. In changing its position so drastically, the circumstances were such that CASA’s actions weren’t fair, given APTA’s likely to have relied on CASA’s failure to highlight any concerns when conducting its operations and planning.
Last edited by Flaming galah; 9th Jan 2022 at 00:50.
My guess is that ‘CASA’s’ explanation - i.e. Dr Aleck’s explanation - will in effect be that all those drones working out in the regions and interacting with the GA industry aren’t ‘CASA’. They don’t understand the regulatory framework and don’t make decisions as to CASA’s position on regulatory requirements. Only ‘CASA’ - i.e. Dr Aleck - does.
That’s why the email from Mr White to Glen setting out ‘CASA’s’ view on the requirements of Parts 141 and 142 was, in effect, Dr Aleck using Mr White as a glove puppet. “Dr Aleck says and I agree with him…”. I also note that the ‘requirements’ set out in the email were invented by someone who evidently doesn’t understand the law of agency and hasn’t read Parts 141 and 142.
That’s why the email from Mr White to Glen setting out ‘CASA’s’ view on the requirements of Parts 141 and 142 was, in effect, Dr Aleck using Mr White as a glove puppet. “Dr Aleck says and I agree with him…”. I also note that the ‘requirements’ set out in the email were invented by someone who evidently doesn’t understand the law of agency and hasn’t read Parts 141 and 142.
Thread Starter
Ms Pip Spence response to my request
There is no doubt in my mind that there is a "cover up" of this matter. How is it that CASA would be prepared to present a "story" to the Ombudsman and refuse to share that "story" with me. If there was any doubt in my mind that Mr Alecks misconduct is being covered up at the very highest levels, that has been completely removed. Fortunately, Im a tenacious little devil, so have no option but to write directly to Mr Barnaby Joyce and call on him to direct CASA to encourage CASA to act with resaonableness and integrity. I must say, im extremely disappointed with Ms Spence.
Dear Mr Buckley,
Thank you for this email and the email you sent at 2.55pm on Friday, 7 January.
The independent review being undertaken by the Ombudsman on how CASA handled its engagement with you will examine the specific issue that you have raised.
I will pass on to the Ombudsman’s office your concerns about Dr Aleck, as well as drawing to their attention that Flight Operations Inspector, Mr Naomichi Nishizawa is a subject matter expert on this matter.
Yours sincerely
Pip
Dear Mr Buckley,
Thank you for this email and the email you sent at 2.55pm on Friday, 7 January.
The independent review being undertaken by the Ombudsman on how CASA handled its engagement with you will examine the specific issue that you have raised.
I will pass on to the Ombudsman’s office your concerns about Dr Aleck, as well as drawing to their attention that Flight Operations Inspector, Mr Naomichi Nishizawa is a subject matter expert on this matter.
Yours sincerely
Pip
Last edited by glenb; 10th Jan 2022 at 05:10.
Thread Starter
The response to the response.
Dear Ms Spence,
With the greatest of respect to your position.
Over 12 months ago, before Parliament and directly to Senator Susan McDonald, I made an allegation of Misfeasance in Public Office. I made that allegation against Mr Jonathan Aleck, the CASA Executive Manager of Legal, International, and Regulatory Affairs. A substantive allegation. One that I stand 100% behind and can support with an overwhelming body of evidence.
For complete clarity, I am alleging that CASA has misled the Commonwealth Ombudsman Office in its current investigation and has done so with the intention of perverting the outcome of that investigation.
I have provided you with an opportunity to rapidly determine whether Mr Alecks Office has in fact misled the Ombudsman’s Office.
The Ombudsman’s Office appears to be of the view that, CASA was not integral in the design and approval of the APTA business model, and that CASA only became aware of the APTA business model just prior to reversing it approval without warning in October 2018.
That CASA position is the complete opposite of the truth.
CASA was integral in the design and approval of the APTA business model and was fully aware of the structure for 2 ½ years before they claim that they first became aware.
You suggested in your previous correspondence, that the Ombudsman could contact Flight Operations Inspector Mr. Naomichi Nishizawa. My suggestion is that you personally establish contact with your employee and put the question directly to him.
Ask him the following.
Unlike CASA, my intention is not to “blindside” anybody. My request is entirely reasonable. Should you choose not to avail yourself of the opportunity, it then becomes a matter of Governance, at which stage I will, write with my request, directly to the CASA Board, and consider my option of contacting Mr Barnaby Joyce. Although Mr Joyce, was not the responsible Minister at time, and is relatively new to the role, I would urge him to draw on the knowledge of the previous Deputy PM, Mr McCormack who has extensive knowledge of this matter, and would be considered a Subject Matter Expert (SME).
For your information I will be appearing on an AOPA Facebook live conference at 7PM and would encourage you to view that program when time permits.
Respectfully, Glen Buckley
With the greatest of respect to your position.
Over 12 months ago, before Parliament and directly to Senator Susan McDonald, I made an allegation of Misfeasance in Public Office. I made that allegation against Mr Jonathan Aleck, the CASA Executive Manager of Legal, International, and Regulatory Affairs. A substantive allegation. One that I stand 100% behind and can support with an overwhelming body of evidence.
For complete clarity, I am alleging that CASA has misled the Commonwealth Ombudsman Office in its current investigation and has done so with the intention of perverting the outcome of that investigation.
I have provided you with an opportunity to rapidly determine whether Mr Alecks Office has in fact misled the Ombudsman’s Office.
The Ombudsman’s Office appears to be of the view that, CASA was not integral in the design and approval of the APTA business model, and that CASA only became aware of the APTA business model just prior to reversing it approval without warning in October 2018.
That CASA position is the complete opposite of the truth.
CASA was integral in the design and approval of the APTA business model and was fully aware of the structure for 2 ½ years before they claim that they first became aware.
You suggested in your previous correspondence, that the Ombudsman could contact Flight Operations Inspector Mr. Naomichi Nishizawa. My suggestion is that you personally establish contact with your employee and put the question directly to him.
Ask him the following.
- When did CASA first become aware of APTA?
- How involved was CASA in the design and approval of CASA?
- Why would CASA permit Latrobe Valley Aero Club to operate under Bairnsdale Air Charter but not under APTA?
Unlike CASA, my intention is not to “blindside” anybody. My request is entirely reasonable. Should you choose not to avail yourself of the opportunity, it then becomes a matter of Governance, at which stage I will, write with my request, directly to the CASA Board, and consider my option of contacting Mr Barnaby Joyce. Although Mr Joyce, was not the responsible Minister at time, and is relatively new to the role, I would urge him to draw on the knowledge of the previous Deputy PM, Mr McCormack who has extensive knowledge of this matter, and would be considered a Subject Matter Expert (SME).
For your information I will be appearing on an AOPA Facebook live conference at 7PM and would encourage you to view that program when time permits.
Respectfully, Glen Buckley
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: New Zealand
Age: 71
Posts: 1,475
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Glen, Ms Spence is following the government manual entitled; “Mandarin Deflection Protocols For Career Bureaucrats’”. All agency heads have to study and apply the protocols contained within this manual when dealing with industry stakeholders, e.g Glen Buckley. Ms Spence is well versed in the procedures contained within the mandarin manual, particularly the chapters dealing with how to deny, deflect, obsfucate, divert, and cover up. You don’t become a Secretary, COO, CEO or any other fancy Department title without having proved yourself capable of engaging in the aforementioned protocols over an extended period of time.
Glen, for over 20 years the Loyola Lawyer has been able to crush and remove obstacles to CASA (people like yourself) by drawing on his narcissism, ego and pride, and of course his unique ability to write weasel words and ‘CASA get out of jail free cards’ into the regulations. He has made sure that he, as a public serpent, has an endless bucket of taxpayer money, access to a long list of high-end Barristers, and of course the naivety and stupidity of a list of former (and current) dopey CEO/DAS’s. He has the perfect work environment for a little old man with small cojones to work in.
Ms Spence will stay for a few years, then move on to another department. She will swan around the cafe scene of Can’tberra for a few more years yet, pick up her OAM, fill the superannuation account with many taxpayer dollars and then tootle pip off into the sunset. At that point, the game begins again……and again and again.
As always, I wish you the best in your endeavours Glen. Keep up the good work and may 2022 be the year that the thorn in CASA’s flesh be embedded deeper.
Glen, for over 20 years the Loyola Lawyer has been able to crush and remove obstacles to CASA (people like yourself) by drawing on his narcissism, ego and pride, and of course his unique ability to write weasel words and ‘CASA get out of jail free cards’ into the regulations. He has made sure that he, as a public serpent, has an endless bucket of taxpayer money, access to a long list of high-end Barristers, and of course the naivety and stupidity of a list of former (and current) dopey CEO/DAS’s. He has the perfect work environment for a little old man with small cojones to work in.
Ms Spence will stay for a few years, then move on to another department. She will swan around the cafe scene of Can’tberra for a few more years yet, pick up her OAM, fill the superannuation account with many taxpayer dollars and then tootle pip off into the sunset. At that point, the game begins again……and again and again.
As always, I wish you the best in your endeavours Glen. Keep up the good work and may 2022 be the year that the thorn in CASA’s flesh be embedded deeper.
Last edited by Paragraph377; 11th Jan 2022 at 01:18.
Thread Starter
Paragraph. You were spot on.
Dear Mr Buckley
Thanks for your follow up email
Just to be very clear, the issues you have raised are the issues I am expecting to be addressed in the Ombudsman’s independent review.
I am committed to supporting the ombudsman in their independent review and see that as a more appropriate path than undertaking an internal exercise that you are suggesting.
Yours sincerely
Pip
My Response
Dear Ms Spence,
Understood. I will contact the CASA Board.
Respectfully, Glen Buckley
Thanks for your follow up email
Just to be very clear, the issues you have raised are the issues I am expecting to be addressed in the Ombudsman’s independent review.
I am committed to supporting the ombudsman in their independent review and see that as a more appropriate path than undertaking an internal exercise that you are suggesting.
Yours sincerely
Pip
My Response
Dear Ms Spence,
Understood. I will contact the CASA Board.
Respectfully, Glen Buckley
Last edited by glenb; 11th Jan 2022 at 01:23.
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: New Zealand
Age: 71
Posts: 1,475
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dear Mr Buckley
Thanks for your follow up email
Just to be very clear, the issues you have raised are the issues I am expecting to be addressed in the Ombudsman’s independent review.
I am committed to supporting the ombudsman in their independent review and see that as a more appropriate path than undertaking an internal exercise that you are suggesting.
Yours sincerely
Pip
Thanks for your follow up email
Just to be very clear, the issues you have raised are the issues I am expecting to be addressed in the Ombudsman’s independent review.
I am committed to supporting the ombudsman in their independent review and see that as a more appropriate path than undertaking an internal exercise that you are suggesting.
Yours sincerely
Pip
Thread Starter
Postponed AOPA Facebook Live presentation
I have just been liaising with Ben Morgan from AOPA. We have delayed todays scheduled presentation at 7PM. I will get back to you as soon as i have the new date. Cheers. Glen
Thread Starter
AOPA Facebook conference
Have just been contacted by Ben Morgan of AOPA and we have rescheduled for 7PM tonight for the Facebook Live session. Cheers.
When talking about any Federal Government office or senior bureaucrat, it is wise to bear in mind what has been written by those in the know. In this case an article by Bruce Haigh a former diplomat in DFAT<https://brucehaigh.com.au> "A quarter-century of failure in foreign policy mars Australian credibility". 12 Jan 2022. He is talking about John Howard however his message applies to all Senior Executive Service (SES) appointees.
"At the same time, he [John Howard] politicised the public service, directly intervening or applying pressure with respect to senior appointments. Political loyalty trumped ability and experience. The change soon affected the middle ranks of the public service, fearless and honest advice became a thing of the past, as the nation witnessed with the Tampa affair, children overboard, refugees detained in concentration camps. It was an evil policy and an indicator of worse to come."
"At the same time, he [John Howard] politicised the public service, directly intervening or applying pressure with respect to senior appointments. Political loyalty trumped ability and experience. The change soon affected the middle ranks of the public service, fearless and honest advice became a thing of the past, as the nation witnessed with the Tampa affair, children overboard, refugees detained in concentration camps. It was an evil policy and an indicator of worse to come."
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: New Zealand
Age: 71
Posts: 1,475
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Glen, all levels of Government are now almost completely filled with parasites. From the lofty Ministers, the SES band, and down to the mid-tier and lower-tier managers. Departments filled with incompetent rule writers, filled with spin doctors and bull**** artists. They fill their days with long lunches, creating fancy pie charts and dazzling the public with an air of competence while in fact being complete idiots. They love to ‘promote’ diversity, create working groups that foster and implement meaningless bull**** into the Australian public service all at the expense of the taxpayer. The amount of actual time and money that CASA would have spent on the Glen Buckley saga would be mind boggling. A complete and utter waste of taxpayer money being used to ram the largest pineapple on earth up Glen’s ass. And why? Because some egos were bruised, some pride was dented, plus they have a handy bucket of endless taxpayer money that can be freely pissed against the wind.
Look around the world, in western nations. The people are restless, the troops are starting to revolt, society has had it up to their eyeballs with incompetent governments that seem to just keep on digging bigger holes to bury their citizens in. In future years there will continue to be a rise of independent politicians, of non-mainstream political parties, of smaller political groups with ideologies that match the current world scene.
Glen, keep up the fight and never waiver in quest to seek justice. If at the end of the day you expend every dollar you have and every drop of blood in your body, you will be able to sleep comfortably knowing that you did your very best. Only a few more months to go and you will have the creator of the aviation white paper, lickspittle Albanese and his Labor minions to contend with. There won’t be any changes in CASA though, the same unpolishable turd will remain.
Look around the world, in western nations. The people are restless, the troops are starting to revolt, society has had it up to their eyeballs with incompetent governments that seem to just keep on digging bigger holes to bury their citizens in. In future years there will continue to be a rise of independent politicians, of non-mainstream political parties, of smaller political groups with ideologies that match the current world scene.
Glen, keep up the fight and never waiver in quest to seek justice. If at the end of the day you expend every dollar you have and every drop of blood in your body, you will be able to sleep comfortably knowing that you did your very best. Only a few more months to go and you will have the creator of the aviation white paper, lickspittle Albanese and his Labor minions to contend with. There won’t be any changes in CASA though, the same unpolishable turd will remain.
Thread Starter
Postponed again
Sorry folks, contacted by Ben again and unfortunately he is having difficulties connecting to Streamyard via the internet. Postponed again.
On the bright side, its our 25th wedding anniversary today. Had planned on redoing our vows and having a holiday for our 25th. Due to our current financial situation and health we will try again next year for our 26th anniversary hopefully.
This year, treating ourselves to takeaway. Looking forward to a good souvlaki. Not quite what i had planned years ago, but they do make a dam good souvlaki. I know it doesnt sound very romantic, but we do have a candle somewhere to add to the romantic night, and the lower light levels will cover up the sauces dribbling down my unshaven face, which would only have degraded the whole experience for my wife who is a staunch vegetarian. She will probably have a mung bean burger which may actually be even more disgusting.
Thanks all, and Im so sorry to have to postpone again. It will happen.
On the bright side, its our 25th wedding anniversary today. Had planned on redoing our vows and having a holiday for our 25th. Due to our current financial situation and health we will try again next year for our 26th anniversary hopefully.
This year, treating ourselves to takeaway. Looking forward to a good souvlaki. Not quite what i had planned years ago, but they do make a dam good souvlaki. I know it doesnt sound very romantic, but we do have a candle somewhere to add to the romantic night, and the lower light levels will cover up the sauces dribbling down my unshaven face, which would only have degraded the whole experience for my wife who is a staunch vegetarian. She will probably have a mung bean burger which may actually be even more disgusting.
Thanks all, and Im so sorry to have to postpone again. It will happen.
Thread Starter
Correspondence to CASA Board-
19/01/22
Attachments
· Two articles from Australian Flying “APTA before CASA action” and “APTA after CASA action”, provide a plain English overview.
· Emails clearly indicating CASA involvement 2 ½ years before CASA Executive Manager, Mr Jonathan Aleck has led the Ombudsman to believe that CASA first became aware of CASA.
· Copies of proposal and contract provided to CASA more than two years before they claim that they first became aware of CASA titled “ APTA agreement.”
· The CASA Worksheet obtained under FOI where CASA assessed all procedures, signed off on them, sent them for a peer review, approved them, 18 months before CASA claim that they first became aware.
· CASA initial Notification
Dear Air Chief Marshall (Retd) Mark Binskin AC, Chair of the Board of CASA, and Members of the CASA Board.
My name is Glen Buckley. You will be aware of my matter, as it has been the subject of an ongoing investigation by the Ombudsman’s Office, and I have written to the CASA Board on multiple occasions.
Background Information
CASAs basis for shutting down my business with no warning, was not based on any identified safety concerns, nor concerns about operational control, or in fact, any identified quality outcomes at all. CASA has never made any assertions against any of those criteria.
CASAs basis for closing my businesses was simply an allegation that my business was operating unlawfully against CAA 27(8), this was even though I had been operating for over a decade, and the last six years in the same “structure” that you claim was unlawful. Importantly, this structure was designed and revalidated over a two-year period with 10 CASA personnel involved and was fully revalidated 18 months prior to CASA suddenly determining that it was now “unlawful”.
CAA 27(8) was the only single piece of legislation that CASA ever made an allegation against and was the basis for declaring my business “not permitted”, giving it only 7 days surety of operations, placing restrictions on its ability to trade, enforcing an administrative freeze on all pending CASA regulatory tasks, and then contacting and requiring all customers to leave my business. This allegation made by CASAs Legal, International and Regulatory Affairs Department, can be found, on the upper half of page 2 of the attached initial CASA notification (Appendix- Initial Notification).
In that correspondence you refer to the legislation and state, “Section 27(8) of the Civil Aviation Act states an AOC is not transferable. “
The interpretation and application of that legislation as a basis for closing my business down, with no prior warning, is the first time in my 25 years in the industry that I have seen it applied by you in that manner and has absolutely no industry precedent. For complete clarity, I do not feel it had any lawful basis, and I do not believe it was well intentioned. It was yet another case of Mr Jonathan Aleck decimating somebodys life and their livelihood.
CASAs previous and consistent interpretation of CAA 27(8) “an AOC is not transferable”, has been that the CASA issued AOC, cannot be sold or transferred on its own. i.e.
From my perspective, that allegation of a regulatory breach is ludicrous, and a complete change by CASA in the way that they had applied that legislation and has no precedent at all.
I completely refute that I ever transferred my AOC or considered transferring my AOC. I believe that your opinion has no valid basis in law or precedent
My allegation against CASA Executive Manager Jonathan Aleck of deliberately providing misleading information to the Ombudsman’s Office
To the purpose of this correspondence. I am fully satisfied that substantive and misleading information has been provided to the Ombudsman’s Office with the intention to pervert the findings of the Ombudsman’s Office.
That information was most likely provided by CASA Executive Manager of Legal, International and Regulatory Affairs, Mr Jonathan Aleck. You will be aware that I have made an allegation of misfeasance in public office against him in Parliament before the Senate inquiry and followed up with correspondence to the Board and the office of the Deputy PM at the time, Mr McCormack, as the Minister responsible for CASA.
You will also be aware that many other individuals and Organisations have made similar allegations against Mr Aleck of misconduct, none of which have been addressed by CASA. The continued coverup of Mr Alecks conduct through to the very highest levels of CASA is despicable and continues. As recently as yesterday, I have been contacted by people who have similarly had their entire lives decimated by this man.
The purpose of this correspondence is to bring to your attention that clearly misleading information provided to the Ombudsman’s Office by Mr Aleck, and for the Board to take appropriate action to ensure that the information provided to the Ombudsman’s Office is corrected, and that truthful information be provided.
You will be aware that I have written to Ms. Pip Spence, the CASA CEO, and she has chosen not to correct this situation. I understand that as an appointed public servant she may have other considerations that prevent her from acting in the manner that I would expect. It then becomes a matter of ethics, integrity, and truthfulness, it is a matter of Governance, and I feel it appropriate that I write to the Board.
Ms. Spences response was that she did not want to correct the clearly false information provided by Mr Aleck because she did not want to “interfere” with the investigation. I am fully satisfied that if CASA chooses not to correct that situation, then CASA is in fact becoming complicit in facilitating that situation, and therefore actually “interfering” in that investigation by choosing to endorse Mr Alecks blatant misrepresentation of the truth.
For complete clarity, I allege that CASAs Legal, International and Regulatory Affairs Branch under Mr Aleck has clearly misled the Ombudsman’s Office to be of the view that CASA was not aware of APTAs structure until just prior to the notification in October 2018 that led to the closure of the business.
This substantially misrepresents the truthfulness of the situation. There has been substantially misleading information on several topics provided to the Ombudsman’s Office although in this correspondence I am addressing only this one topic. That being the prior knowledge that CASA had of my business model.
In support of my allegations, and calling on you to rectify the situation, I am providing you with the following information, all of which you have the capability to satisfy yourselves as to the accuracy of, and then to act as the Board of most organisations would be compelled to act on.
Evidence that CASA was fully aware of the exact structure of my business model well before CASA assertion that they first became aware, “just prior to October 2018” when they acted and closed my business down.
In considering whether to correct this misinformation, I ask you to consider the following obligations placed on CASA which include, but are not limited to the following:
Purpose of the Board of CASA
“….to ensure CASA performs its functions properly, efficiently and effectively.
Obligations under the Public Governance, Performance and accountability Act 2013 (PGPA)
26. Duty to act honestly, in good faith and for a proper purpose
An official of a Commonwealth entity must exercise his or her powers, perform his or her functions and discharge his or her duties honestly, in good faith and for a proper purpose.
27. Duty in relation to use of position
An official of a Commonwealth entity must not improperly use his or her position:
(b) to cause, or seek to cause, detriment to the entity, the Commonwealth, or any other person.
28. Duty in relation to use of information
A person who obtains information because they are an official of a Commonwealth entity must not improperly use the information:
(b) to cause, or seek to cause, detriment to the Commonwealth entity, the Commonwealth or any other person.
CASAs own Regulatory Philosophy
Our regulatory philosophy | Civil Aviation Safety Authority (casa.gov.au)
Aviation Safety consideration
The aviation safety consideration alone, should be enough to compel you to act. If my allegations are correct, and please be aware that there are many within industry would make the same allegations as mine, then you are compelled to act. Misconduct at the Executive Level of CASA cannot be facilitated by the CEO and Board.
Under the previous CASA CEO, Mr Shane Carmody there was a very vigorous campaign designed to crush me. Sadly, it has been successful. My mental and physical health is decimated. I have lost my home, and my two businesses, I have been left bankrupted and living week to week, terrified of how I will keep a roof over our head when inevitably My wife or I stop working, all without any safety case at all to support all the harm caused.
It is the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA), Australia’s National Aviation Safety Regulator operating under the Coat of Arms, the community is rightfully entitled to the very highest standards of ethics and integrity.
For complete clarity, Mr Jonathan Aleck has led the Ombudsman’s Office to be of the view that CASA was not fully involved in the design and approval of the business structure that I used.
I claim that CASA is deliberately and substantially misleading the Ombudsman’s Office in the investigation.
There is an overwhelming body of evidence to support my assertion that CASA had full knowledge of my structure, and to assert any other position is simply immoral, and most likely illegal.
I urge you to stand Mr Aleck aside on full pay until this matter can be fully investigated by CASA. By allowing the very person that substantive allegations have been made against to be the person responsible for providing information to the Ombudsman’s Office is not acceptable. I know of no organisation that would permit this to happen, and most certainly it should not be permitted within a Nations aviation safety regulator. The potential and ongoing risk to aviation safety of permitting a CASA Executive to remain in his position when such allegations have been made against him by so many affected individuals, cannot be justified on any level.
Should you choose not to stand him aside, I must insist that as a minimum he be immediately removed from any further involvement in this matter. An allegation of misfeasance in public office has been made against him, and he should not be the person nominated by CASA to be responsible for the provision of information to the Ombudsman’s Office. It makes no sense at all, on any level.
Without disclosing the current nature of my employment, I now work in a field in which many employees at any time are “under investigation”, some are permitted to remain operational during the investigation, whilst others are not. Most investigations find the employee has acted appropriately, and on occasions not.
Whilst I personally have not been under investigation, I will embrace the situation if it were to occur. It ensures a workplace with ethics and integrity. No doubt Mr Jonathan Aleck would welcome an investigation into his conduct, as I would in my own workplace. An innocent person has nothing to fear from a well-intentioned and well run investigation.
Surely the CASA Board must have a reasonable doubt as to the integrity of the information provided by Mr Aleck, and is compelled to act, and rectify the situation. Should the Board choose to facilitate this misinformation, my intention is to establish contact with Senator Susan McDonald and my local MP, Ms Gladys Liu requesting a two-hour meeting for me to fully brief them on the facts, and to bring this matter directly to the attention of Mr Barnaby Joyce, the Deputy PM, Leader of the Nationals and the Minister responsible for the conduct of CASA and its employees.
On February 11th, I will commence a group of sessions with a psychiatrist to attempt to repair the trauma caused by Mr Alecks conduct. I have finally accepted this option at the insistence of my GP and family. There is no doubt that Mr Aleck caused the financial harm, but CASAs continued coverup of this matter causes the psychological trauma. I am not the first to be impacted in this matter, but I must be the last.
I await a response from you, that you intend to clarify the truthfulness of CASA involvement and knowledge of the structure that I adopted with the Ombudsman’s Office.
Once again I extend my request to meet with any two Members of the CASA Board. The exact same request that I have made on multiple occasions over the last three years. That meeting should occur before the Ombudsman’s investigation is completed to ensure the accuracy of that investigation, and to ensure that the Ombudsman’s Office findings are based on facts and not blatant lies propagated by Mr Jonathan Aleck, to cover up his own misconduct.
Glen Buckley
Attachments
· Two articles from Australian Flying “APTA before CASA action” and “APTA after CASA action”, provide a plain English overview.
· Emails clearly indicating CASA involvement 2 ½ years before CASA Executive Manager, Mr Jonathan Aleck has led the Ombudsman to believe that CASA first became aware of CASA.
· Copies of proposal and contract provided to CASA more than two years before they claim that they first became aware of CASA titled “ APTA agreement.”
· The CASA Worksheet obtained under FOI where CASA assessed all procedures, signed off on them, sent them for a peer review, approved them, 18 months before CASA claim that they first became aware.
· CASA initial Notification
Dear Air Chief Marshall (Retd) Mark Binskin AC, Chair of the Board of CASA, and Members of the CASA Board.
My name is Glen Buckley. You will be aware of my matter, as it has been the subject of an ongoing investigation by the Ombudsman’s Office, and I have written to the CASA Board on multiple occasions.
Background Information
CASAs basis for shutting down my business with no warning, was not based on any identified safety concerns, nor concerns about operational control, or in fact, any identified quality outcomes at all. CASA has never made any assertions against any of those criteria.
CASAs basis for closing my businesses was simply an allegation that my business was operating unlawfully against CAA 27(8), this was even though I had been operating for over a decade, and the last six years in the same “structure” that you claim was unlawful. Importantly, this structure was designed and revalidated over a two-year period with 10 CASA personnel involved and was fully revalidated 18 months prior to CASA suddenly determining that it was now “unlawful”.
CAA 27(8) was the only single piece of legislation that CASA ever made an allegation against and was the basis for declaring my business “not permitted”, giving it only 7 days surety of operations, placing restrictions on its ability to trade, enforcing an administrative freeze on all pending CASA regulatory tasks, and then contacting and requiring all customers to leave my business. This allegation made by CASAs Legal, International and Regulatory Affairs Department, can be found, on the upper half of page 2 of the attached initial CASA notification (Appendix- Initial Notification).
In that correspondence you refer to the legislation and state, “Section 27(8) of the Civil Aviation Act states an AOC is not transferable. “
The interpretation and application of that legislation as a basis for closing my business down, with no prior warning, is the first time in my 25 years in the industry that I have seen it applied by you in that manner and has absolutely no industry precedent. For complete clarity, I do not feel it had any lawful basis, and I do not believe it was well intentioned. It was yet another case of Mr Jonathan Aleck decimating somebodys life and their livelihood.
CASAs previous and consistent interpretation of CAA 27(8) “an AOC is not transferable”, has been that the CASA issued AOC, cannot be sold or transferred on its own. i.e.
- CASA permits an Authorisation Holder to sell his Company and AOC together.
- CASA does not permit an Authorisation Holder to retain his Company and transfer the AOC only, to another Entity. The AOC cannot be sold as a “stand alone” item.
From my perspective, that allegation of a regulatory breach is ludicrous, and a complete change by CASA in the way that they had applied that legislation and has no precedent at all.
I completely refute that I ever transferred my AOC or considered transferring my AOC. I believe that your opinion has no valid basis in law or precedent
My allegation against CASA Executive Manager Jonathan Aleck of deliberately providing misleading information to the Ombudsman’s Office
To the purpose of this correspondence. I am fully satisfied that substantive and misleading information has been provided to the Ombudsman’s Office with the intention to pervert the findings of the Ombudsman’s Office.
That information was most likely provided by CASA Executive Manager of Legal, International and Regulatory Affairs, Mr Jonathan Aleck. You will be aware that I have made an allegation of misfeasance in public office against him in Parliament before the Senate inquiry and followed up with correspondence to the Board and the office of the Deputy PM at the time, Mr McCormack, as the Minister responsible for CASA.
You will also be aware that many other individuals and Organisations have made similar allegations against Mr Aleck of misconduct, none of which have been addressed by CASA. The continued coverup of Mr Alecks conduct through to the very highest levels of CASA is despicable and continues. As recently as yesterday, I have been contacted by people who have similarly had their entire lives decimated by this man.
The purpose of this correspondence is to bring to your attention that clearly misleading information provided to the Ombudsman’s Office by Mr Aleck, and for the Board to take appropriate action to ensure that the information provided to the Ombudsman’s Office is corrected, and that truthful information be provided.
You will be aware that I have written to Ms. Pip Spence, the CASA CEO, and she has chosen not to correct this situation. I understand that as an appointed public servant she may have other considerations that prevent her from acting in the manner that I would expect. It then becomes a matter of ethics, integrity, and truthfulness, it is a matter of Governance, and I feel it appropriate that I write to the Board.
Ms. Spences response was that she did not want to correct the clearly false information provided by Mr Aleck because she did not want to “interfere” with the investigation. I am fully satisfied that if CASA chooses not to correct that situation, then CASA is in fact becoming complicit in facilitating that situation, and therefore actually “interfering” in that investigation by choosing to endorse Mr Alecks blatant misrepresentation of the truth.
For complete clarity, I allege that CASAs Legal, International and Regulatory Affairs Branch under Mr Aleck has clearly misled the Ombudsman’s Office to be of the view that CASA was not aware of APTAs structure until just prior to the notification in October 2018 that led to the closure of the business.
This substantially misrepresents the truthfulness of the situation. There has been substantially misleading information on several topics provided to the Ombudsman’s Office although in this correspondence I am addressing only this one topic. That being the prior knowledge that CASA had of my business model.
In support of my allegations, and calling on you to rectify the situation, I am providing you with the following information, all of which you have the capability to satisfy yourselves as to the accuracy of, and then to act as the Board of most organisations would be compelled to act on.
Evidence that CASA was fully aware of the exact structure of my business model well before CASA assertion that they first became aware, “just prior to October 2018” when they acted and closed my business down.
- CASA own Industry Complaints Commissioner stated the following in his own investigation: “CASA had an awareness of the APTA business model for a significant period of time prior to its compliance with regulation being called into question. In changing its position so drastically, the circumstances were such that CASA’s actions weren’t fair, given APTA’s likely to have relied on CASA’s failure to highlight any concerns when conducting its operations and planning.”
- CASA had always permitted, and formally approved, more than one flying school entity to operate under a single AOC provided that the Authorisation Holder accepted full responsibility and accountability for all persons operating under the AOC irrespective of where they drew their salary. That was the case throughout my entire 25-year involvement in the industry, and in fact that was the case for decades prior. Any CASA Flight operations Inspector with experience prior to October 2018, will be able to verify the truthfulness of that situation to you. The CASA Board will be able to ascertain the truthfulness of that statement easily and promptly, and therefore becomes compelled to act.
- CASA was fully aware that I had been delivering a multi base, multi entity approach to flight training for at least 6 years before CASA claim that they first became aware of it. With full CASA approval, and by way of formal processes, I had taken over operational control of AV8 (a Darwin based flying school), 6 years earlier. It is simply ludicrous for CASA to suggest that they had no knowledge of this operation, as a formal and comprehensive CASA process was required. This clearly demonstrates the precedent that CASA permitted such activity and was fully aware of what I was doing for at least 6 years before Mr Aleck would have the Ombudsman’s office believe.
- CASA approved via formal processes referred to as a Significant Change, the addition of other bases including, Melbourne Flight Training (my own school), Learn to Fly and AVIA. The latter two schools being Moorabbin flying schools not owned by me. The addition of these two additional bases occurred approximately two years before Mr Aleck claims CASA first became aware of the structure. This involved my business submitting manuals and procedures that were fully approved by CASA. It involved CASA visiting the sites to assess their suitability, and me having to pay fees for those CASA tasks.
- CASA conducted the highest-level audit referred to as a Level One Audit. This occurred in November 2017, approximately 1 year before CASA claim that they first became aware of the structure. This involved visits to the CASA approved bases. It is not reasonable to claim that CASA auditors visited these bases and engaged with my Key personnel at those sites and addressed correspondence to my organisation about those audits at those sites. It would simply be ludicrous for CASA to maintain that they were not aware.
- Many CASA employees attended our weekly Group Meetings, and minutes of those meetings and attendees can be provided. Ten CASA personnel attended those meetings 18 months before Mr Aleck claims that CASA first became aware. During the CASA attendance at those group safety meetings it was very clearly apparent that we were operating a multi base, multi entity structure. Furthermore CASA personnel attended and delivered briefings to meetings with all bases in attendance.
- Mr Alecks false assertions also disregard the fact that APTA underwent a substantial process over a two year period as we attended to the revalidation of the structure as a Part 141/142 Organisation and was formally approved by CASA in April 2017, being 18 months before CASA claim that they first became aware. The design process with CASA was substantial and required an investment by me, of several hundred thousand dollars.
- Whilst I cannot expect you personally to be a Subject Matter Expert on the topic, you do have access to resources within CASA to determine the truthfulness of the situation. I would encourage you to verify this information directly with Flight operations Inspector Naomichi Nishizawa, as he was the CASA employee directly involved in the process, at the time. He can verify that apart from a name change only from Melbourne Flight Training to APTA, the identical structure had been adopted with formal CASA approval for at least 6 years.
- Similarly, Mr Nishizawa will also be able to confirm that the structure was fairly commonplace within the industry with many operators including Latrobe valley Aero Club which operated under the AOC of Bairnsdale Air Charter (BAC). When Latrobe Valley decided to change from operating under BAC to my business. It was my business that was declared unlawful and shut down with no prior warning.
- In June 2016 I wrote to CASA advising that I intended to significantly expand this structure, and I sought CASA involvement in completely overhauling my operation and investing significantly in designing a system that was engineered and designed from the ground up to improve on what we we already doing. At the time CASA was very supportive of the concept, and you will be able to verify that by contacting the CASA employees involved in that process, and specifically current employee, Mr Naomichi Nishizawa. A number of past CASA employees have also contacted me offering to come forward and tell the truth on this matter. I worked side by side with 10 CASA personnel over a two-year period to redesign the business for the exact purpose of delivering this multi base multi entity structure. This required an investment of many hundreds of thousands of dollars.and the revalidation as a Part 141/142 Organisation occurred in April 2017 (18 months before CASA claim that they first became aware of APTA. At the time of this revalidation, I was operating in the multi base, multi entity structure, and had been for many years.
- I invested many hundreds of thousands of dollars in a head office facility, personnel, manuals, and IT systems to continue delivering a far improved version of the multi base, multi entity structure that I like many other flying schools had been delivering throughout my 25-year involvement in the industry. This investment occurred many years before Mr Aleck asserts CASA first became aware.
In considering whether to correct this misinformation, I ask you to consider the following obligations placed on CASA which include, but are not limited to the following:
Purpose of the Board of CASA
“….to ensure CASA performs its functions properly, efficiently and effectively.
Obligations under the Public Governance, Performance and accountability Act 2013 (PGPA)
26. Duty to act honestly, in good faith and for a proper purpose
An official of a Commonwealth entity must exercise his or her powers, perform his or her functions and discharge his or her duties honestly, in good faith and for a proper purpose.
27. Duty in relation to use of position
An official of a Commonwealth entity must not improperly use his or her position:
(b) to cause, or seek to cause, detriment to the entity, the Commonwealth, or any other person.
28. Duty in relation to use of information
A person who obtains information because they are an official of a Commonwealth entity must not improperly use the information:
(b) to cause, or seek to cause, detriment to the Commonwealth entity, the Commonwealth or any other person.
CASAs own Regulatory Philosophy
Our regulatory philosophy | Civil Aviation Safety Authority (casa.gov.au)
Aviation Safety consideration
The aviation safety consideration alone, should be enough to compel you to act. If my allegations are correct, and please be aware that there are many within industry would make the same allegations as mine, then you are compelled to act. Misconduct at the Executive Level of CASA cannot be facilitated by the CEO and Board.
Under the previous CASA CEO, Mr Shane Carmody there was a very vigorous campaign designed to crush me. Sadly, it has been successful. My mental and physical health is decimated. I have lost my home, and my two businesses, I have been left bankrupted and living week to week, terrified of how I will keep a roof over our head when inevitably My wife or I stop working, all without any safety case at all to support all the harm caused.
It is the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA), Australia’s National Aviation Safety Regulator operating under the Coat of Arms, the community is rightfully entitled to the very highest standards of ethics and integrity.
For complete clarity, Mr Jonathan Aleck has led the Ombudsman’s Office to be of the view that CASA was not fully involved in the design and approval of the business structure that I used.
I claim that CASA is deliberately and substantially misleading the Ombudsman’s Office in the investigation.
There is an overwhelming body of evidence to support my assertion that CASA had full knowledge of my structure, and to assert any other position is simply immoral, and most likely illegal.
I urge you to stand Mr Aleck aside on full pay until this matter can be fully investigated by CASA. By allowing the very person that substantive allegations have been made against to be the person responsible for providing information to the Ombudsman’s Office is not acceptable. I know of no organisation that would permit this to happen, and most certainly it should not be permitted within a Nations aviation safety regulator. The potential and ongoing risk to aviation safety of permitting a CASA Executive to remain in his position when such allegations have been made against him by so many affected individuals, cannot be justified on any level.
Should you choose not to stand him aside, I must insist that as a minimum he be immediately removed from any further involvement in this matter. An allegation of misfeasance in public office has been made against him, and he should not be the person nominated by CASA to be responsible for the provision of information to the Ombudsman’s Office. It makes no sense at all, on any level.
Without disclosing the current nature of my employment, I now work in a field in which many employees at any time are “under investigation”, some are permitted to remain operational during the investigation, whilst others are not. Most investigations find the employee has acted appropriately, and on occasions not.
Whilst I personally have not been under investigation, I will embrace the situation if it were to occur. It ensures a workplace with ethics and integrity. No doubt Mr Jonathan Aleck would welcome an investigation into his conduct, as I would in my own workplace. An innocent person has nothing to fear from a well-intentioned and well run investigation.
Surely the CASA Board must have a reasonable doubt as to the integrity of the information provided by Mr Aleck, and is compelled to act, and rectify the situation. Should the Board choose to facilitate this misinformation, my intention is to establish contact with Senator Susan McDonald and my local MP, Ms Gladys Liu requesting a two-hour meeting for me to fully brief them on the facts, and to bring this matter directly to the attention of Mr Barnaby Joyce, the Deputy PM, Leader of the Nationals and the Minister responsible for the conduct of CASA and its employees.
On February 11th, I will commence a group of sessions with a psychiatrist to attempt to repair the trauma caused by Mr Alecks conduct. I have finally accepted this option at the insistence of my GP and family. There is no doubt that Mr Aleck caused the financial harm, but CASAs continued coverup of this matter causes the psychological trauma. I am not the first to be impacted in this matter, but I must be the last.
I await a response from you, that you intend to clarify the truthfulness of CASA involvement and knowledge of the structure that I adopted with the Ombudsman’s Office.
Once again I extend my request to meet with any two Members of the CASA Board. The exact same request that I have made on multiple occasions over the last three years. That meeting should occur before the Ombudsman’s investigation is completed to ensure the accuracy of that investigation, and to ensure that the Ombudsman’s Office findings are based on facts and not blatant lies propagated by Mr Jonathan Aleck, to cover up his own misconduct.
Glen Buckley
No worries mate. They will probably fish through what you said here and say because you reckoned the Independent Complaints Commissioner report is substandard and lacking honesty and integrity it must be wrong
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: New Zealand
Age: 71
Posts: 1,475
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No CASA Board members will meet with you Glen, as they are gutless turds. They are too afraid to crawl out from behind the protective government wall that shields them from ‘’outsiders’ such as yourself. You see, you are not of their concern. Their sole purpose is keeping the government and its ministers safe in their cosy jobs, that is what concerns them the most. The Board are part of a protective barrier that keeps society at an arms length from their beloved minister. If you were to meet with them they might stumble in their conversation. You see, they need to communicate with you in writing only, they need to present your requests/queries/questions to CASA legal for a scripted response, which they send back to you. To meet with you face to face would be a horrific and unsettling experience for these bottom dwellers to go through. In their world that would be risky, you might ‘trip them up’, or they might verbally say something that supports your case, and they can’t risk that. These fools need scripts in front of them.
I applaud your tenacity Glen. You are a true champion for justice. At the very least your correspondence with the Board will no doubt cause the Chair to take time out from his busy schedule of drinking kalelatte’s, eating keto salads and licking every particle of dust off the ministers shiny shoes.
I applaud your tenacity Glen. You are a true champion for justice. At the very least your correspondence with the Board will no doubt cause the Chair to take time out from his busy schedule of drinking kalelatte’s, eating keto salads and licking every particle of dust off the ministers shiny shoes.