Glen Buckley and Australian small business -V- CASA
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: South or 0°
Age: 38
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CASA seems to be going after the Crocodile Hunter, accused of tampering with evidence at a crash site. Could your's and previous CASA defendants' experiences of CASA interference be pooled to assist Mr Wright in his defence?
Thread Starter
Ping Pong- My letter to Ms Spence
In Posts # 2459 to #2461 I posted my letter to my local MP and Ms. Spence CASA CEO.
In Post #2471 was the correspondence from my Local MP.
In Post #2480 was the response from Ms. Spence,
My correspondence to Ms. Spence 02/12/22
Dear Ms.Spence,
I have contacted the Commonwealth Ombudsman's Office and fully withdrawn my Complaint to that Office.
I am fully satisfied that Mr Jonathan Aleck the CASA Executive Manager of Legal International and Regulatory Services has provided clearly false and misleading information to the Commonwealth Ombudsman's investigation.
There is a substantial body of evidence already presented to you that would indicate that my allegation may have some merit. You are readily able to avail yourself of the truth.You choose not to.
Over the last four years CASA has used the ongoing Ombudsman's investigation as a reason not to respond to my questions.
There is now no Ombudsman's investigation, so that cannot be used as an excuse, as it should not have been anyway.
I am calling on you in your role as the CEO of CASA to act in accordance with obligations placed on you by both CASAs Regulatory Philosophy and the obligations placed on CASA when they choose to close down a business as they did with mine, and as outlined in CASA s own Enforcement Manual.
As you are aware, I walked into my business of a decade at 8am on 23rd October 2018, having no idea that by the end of the day I would receive notification from CASA that the structure I had adopted for the last decade was now declared unlawful, and my business had only 7 days to continue operating. CASA placed a restriction on the business that prevented it taking on customers. This continued for 8 months until CASA stood by its original decision and forced all remaining customers to leave the business.
CASA did this entire process from that initial notification in October 2018 when the trading restrictions were put in place, through to closing my business in mid 2019, with me having no appeal process being provided to me at all.
How can that possibly be that the owner of a business in Australia has his business closed down, his life decimated, and no reason is provided in writing, there is no appeal process open to him, CASA does this without making a "decision" that can be appealed. Its not reasonable.
The truth is that CASA erred, and despite your best efforts, that cannot be covered up. CASA bypassed its own procedures.
I have never been provided with any correspondence that advises me what I did wrong.
In October 2018, I should have been provided a Show Cause Notice (SCN) that clearly outlined what the allegations were. That was never provided.
In mid 2019, CASA stood by its original determination, and forced all remaining customers to leave. I should have been provided with a copy of a "Decision" in writing rather than the process being verbal and unwritten.
As the family who have had their lives decimated by the sudden closure of their business, my request for a very clear written "decision" outlining very clearly what I did wrong, and why you closed my business down.
I will be frank. I believe you will continue to deflect, and not provide a response to my very fair and reasonable request, and that is why I have sought the assistance of my Local MP, Ms.Carina Garland. I need this not only for my own mental health, but I have taxation office issues that are related to the closure of my businesses, and I am required to provide an explanation. Because of this matter, I also have an upcoming case in the Supreme Court and I need to know why my business closed down, in order to defend myself.
It's also important reputationally for me. I want to know what I did wrong, so I can explain it to people.
Seriously Ms. Spence there is no reason that you would not provide me that document, I am fully entitled to it under procedural fairness. I find your deflection to the Ombudsman concerning. I am not interested in what the Ombudsman thinks at this stage. It was not the Ombudsman that closed my business, It was CASA. CASA must have had a reason. CASA should be able to explain that on its own, and is totally independent of the now terminated investigation.
.
Respectfully, Glen Buckley
In Post #2471 was the correspondence from my Local MP.
In Post #2480 was the response from Ms. Spence,
My correspondence to Ms. Spence 02/12/22
Dear Ms.Spence,
I have contacted the Commonwealth Ombudsman's Office and fully withdrawn my Complaint to that Office.
I am fully satisfied that Mr Jonathan Aleck the CASA Executive Manager of Legal International and Regulatory Services has provided clearly false and misleading information to the Commonwealth Ombudsman's investigation.
There is a substantial body of evidence already presented to you that would indicate that my allegation may have some merit. You are readily able to avail yourself of the truth.You choose not to.
Over the last four years CASA has used the ongoing Ombudsman's investigation as a reason not to respond to my questions.
There is now no Ombudsman's investigation, so that cannot be used as an excuse, as it should not have been anyway.
I am calling on you in your role as the CEO of CASA to act in accordance with obligations placed on you by both CASAs Regulatory Philosophy and the obligations placed on CASA when they choose to close down a business as they did with mine, and as outlined in CASA s own Enforcement Manual.
As you are aware, I walked into my business of a decade at 8am on 23rd October 2018, having no idea that by the end of the day I would receive notification from CASA that the structure I had adopted for the last decade was now declared unlawful, and my business had only 7 days to continue operating. CASA placed a restriction on the business that prevented it taking on customers. This continued for 8 months until CASA stood by its original decision and forced all remaining customers to leave the business.
CASA did this entire process from that initial notification in October 2018 when the trading restrictions were put in place, through to closing my business in mid 2019, with me having no appeal process being provided to me at all.
How can that possibly be that the owner of a business in Australia has his business closed down, his life decimated, and no reason is provided in writing, there is no appeal process open to him, CASA does this without making a "decision" that can be appealed. Its not reasonable.
The truth is that CASA erred, and despite your best efforts, that cannot be covered up. CASA bypassed its own procedures.
I have never been provided with any correspondence that advises me what I did wrong.
In October 2018, I should have been provided a Show Cause Notice (SCN) that clearly outlined what the allegations were. That was never provided.
In mid 2019, CASA stood by its original determination, and forced all remaining customers to leave. I should have been provided with a copy of a "Decision" in writing rather than the process being verbal and unwritten.
As the family who have had their lives decimated by the sudden closure of their business, my request for a very clear written "decision" outlining very clearly what I did wrong, and why you closed my business down.
I will be frank. I believe you will continue to deflect, and not provide a response to my very fair and reasonable request, and that is why I have sought the assistance of my Local MP, Ms.Carina Garland. I need this not only for my own mental health, but I have taxation office issues that are related to the closure of my businesses, and I am required to provide an explanation. Because of this matter, I also have an upcoming case in the Supreme Court and I need to know why my business closed down, in order to defend myself.
It's also important reputationally for me. I want to know what I did wrong, so I can explain it to people.
Seriously Ms. Spence there is no reason that you would not provide me that document, I am fully entitled to it under procedural fairness. I find your deflection to the Ombudsman concerning. I am not interested in what the Ombudsman thinks at this stage. It was not the Ombudsman that closed my business, It was CASA. CASA must have had a reason. CASA should be able to explain that on its own, and is totally independent of the now terminated investigation.
.
Respectfully, Glen Buckley
IANAL but it seems to me that having exhausted the available arbitration processes, you are now ready to go to Court. No one can say you haven't tried.
I'm not sure that a new Court action might stay the ATO in the Supreme Court.
I'm not sure that a new Court action might stay the ATO in the Supreme Court.
By coincidence, it appears that the Ombudsman’s Office is being questioned at the Robodebt Royal Commission. The line of questioning apparently implying that their opinion might have been skewed.
‘I have no idea what the current reputation of the OO may be.
https://www.theage.com.au/politics/f...05-p5c3sd.html
‘I have no idea what the current reputation of the OO may be.
spokesperson for the Ombudsman said the body regularly sent drafts to agencies for them to make comments on, however, the “form of a published report is a matter for the Ombudsman to decide.”
Appearing before former Queensland Supreme Court justice Catherine Holmes in Brisbane, McNamara was shown correspondence that included DHS proposing rewrites of findings and recommendations in Ombudsman draft reports, including a proposal the watchdog strike out wording that “inaccurate debts” were raised.
“Our legal division didn’t like that at all,” McNamara said. “They didn’t agree with it as a matter of law that it was an inaccurate debt, so they didn’t want that in the report.”
The suggested amendments also removed findings that debt notices didn’t provide a clear “warning that using averaged data may result in an incorrect debt”, and inserted language that cast the department in a better light.
It was put to McNamara that extensive negotiation with the Ombudsman’s office took place over the report, to which he replied, “yeah, they were open to change.”
Appearing before former Queensland Supreme Court justice Catherine Holmes in Brisbane, McNamara was shown correspondence that included DHS proposing rewrites of findings and recommendations in Ombudsman draft reports, including a proposal the watchdog strike out wording that “inaccurate debts” were raised.
“Our legal division didn’t like that at all,” McNamara said. “They didn’t agree with it as a matter of law that it was an inaccurate debt, so they didn’t want that in the report.”
The suggested amendments also removed findings that debt notices didn’t provide a clear “warning that using averaged data may result in an incorrect debt”, and inserted language that cast the department in a better light.
It was put to McNamara that extensive negotiation with the Ombudsman’s office took place over the report, to which he replied, “yeah, they were open to change.”
https://www.theage.com.au/politics/f...05-p5c3sd.html
I have no idea what the current reputation of the OO may be.
In the case of ‘Robodebt’, the hearings of the Royal Commission so far reveal some things that disturb me about the way in which the Ombudsman’s office went about its ‘own motion’ inquiry into the scheme and resultant report in 2017. So far we have learnt that the Ombudsman simply accepted, at face value, assertions that the way in which debts were ‘raised’ against Robodebt’s victims – given the Orwellian label “customers” - was lawful, and that the Ombudsman’s report was ‘co-written’ with personnel from the Department whose administration was the subject of the inquiry.
As to the substance of the report, it said, among other things:
We asked DHS whether it had done modelling on how many debts were likely to be over-calculated as opposed to under-calculated. DHS advised no such modelling was done. In our view the risk of over-recovering debts from social security recipients should be the subject of more thorough research and analysis.
And when I contemplate the concept of “over-recovering debts”, I immediately think to myself: How could that possibly be lawful? An average second year law student could work out that the Commonwealth engaging in the practise of “over-recovering debts” from a person would either constitute an acquisition of their property on other than just terms, be a tax requiring separate taxation legislation or otherwise be the subject of specific legislation in the unlikely event the compulsory exaction was not a tax. Remember: The ‘robot’ sent debt letters to people who did not, in fact, have the income on the basis of which the ‘debt’ was calculated.
As it turns out, a qualified lawyer in DSS (in 2014), qualified lawyers in Clayton Utz (whose advice DSS requested be left in draft so that DSS could pretend the advice had not been given) and the Commonwealth Solicitor-General all came to the view that the basis on which debts were “raised” against Robodebt’s victims was unlawful. Cue the taxpayer to fork out around $1.8billion in compensation.
If only the Ombudsman had been a little more sceptical and had dug a little deeper in 2017, guided by a moral compass and aided by an average second year law student. Perhaps some of the damage done by the Robodebt juggernaut, including the suicides, would have been avoided.
This is all the product of what I call the weakening of the fabric of government institutions. The Commonwealth Ombudsman used to do a pretty good job as moral compass and fiercely independent investigator of government administration. It helped me a couple of times a few decades ago to take on and win against a mega-department. It’s now a shadow of what it used to be. On what planet would a supposedly independent investigator think it appropriate to invite the agency administering the circumstances under investigation to ‘co-write’ the investigation report? (It seems to me that CASA, Airservices and ATSB have become a mutual protection racket, particularly on airspace matters). Fortunately the current Commonwealth Auditor-General and ANAO continue to defend and maintain true independence, but unfortunately the nature of their audits does not go to these kinds of matters. It’s part of the reason for the collapse of Australians’ trust in democracy and governments. It’s why the calls for a Commonwealth corruption commission could no longer be ignored by the major political parties.
Last edited by Lead Balloon; 5th Dec 2022 at 21:12.
Thread Starter
Allegation to Minister.
09/12/22
To the Minister responsible for CASA, the Honourable Ms. Catherine King MP;
Please accept my formal allegation against two CASA employees. The allegation is that:
Mr Jonathan Aleck, CASA Executive Manager of Legal, International and Regulatory Affairs has provided false and misleading information to a Commonwealth Ombudsman’s Office investigation on five occasions.
Ms Pip Spence CEO of CASA has facilitated the provision of false and misleading information to a Commonwealth Office investigation on each of those five occasions.
The false and misleading information has been provided on five different matters, and each is substantive in nature.
In this correspondence I will attend to the first of the five pieces of disinformation only.
Over coming months, I will send you the additional allegations, of which there are four more to follow.
I apologize that there will be five pieces of correspondence, each raising a separate allegation. I have adopted this approach for two reasons.
The first being that the impact of this matter has had a substantial impact on my health. A lengthier single piece of correspondence covering all five allegations is not something that I am able to attend to at the moment.
Secondly, it should not be necessary. If you are able to promptly clarify this single occasion alone, I feel you will be compelled to act, and most especially because of the seniority of their respective positions, and the responsibility of the Department that they lead, i.e. the Nations aviation safety regulator, CASA.
In order to promptly attend to this matter, I understand that the first stage will require you to establish contact with the Commonwealth Ombudsman’s office and clarify the “understanding” of the Ombudsman’s Office.
In order to maximize the effectiveness of your approach to that Office, can I propose that the following question be put to that office?
Question to Ombudsman’s Office,
Has either Ms. Pip Spence as the CEO of CASA with expert knowledge on this matter, or Mr. Jonathan Aleck, CASA Executive Manager of Legal, International and Regulatory Affairs, acting as the sole representative of CASA in communications with the Ombudsman as part of that investigation led the Ombudsman’s investigation to be of the view that the structure Glen Buckley had adopted in his business was not permitted and had never been permitted by previously by CASA. It was something unique and something that he was doing for the first time. He was doing something that was not standard industry practice.
Glen Buckley asserts that CASA had always and on every occasion throughout his 25 years in the industry approved the identical structure that he adopted, and I emphasize identical. If there are any differences CASA should be promptly able to advise those differences. Glen Buckley asserts that CASA consistently throughout the last 25 years approved multiple operators to do exactly what he was doing. It was completely standard industry practice throughout the industry with full and formal CASA approval on every occasion. In fact, over recent weeks CASA has just approved two operators at Moorabbin airport to adopt the identical structure that they closed my business for.
I am confident that the Ombudsman’s office will advise you that they have formed the opinion that the structure I had adopted was never permitted by CASA, previously.
The truth is that it was always permitted by CASA. Mr Aleck has led the Ombudsman to be of the view that what I was doing was not standard industry practice, when in fact it very clearly was and he is fully aware of that.
I have 25 years’ experience in the flight training industry as Grade One Multi engine IFR instructor (the most senior), I have ten years’ experience as a CASA approved Chief Flying Instructor (CFI), and three years’ experience as a CASA approved Head of Operations (HOO), and CASA approved CEO. I am a Subject Matter Expert on the flight training industry, and what I am telling you is the truth.
I am fully satisfied that both Mr Aleck and Ms Spence are providing false and misleading information to the Commonwealth Ombudsman’s investigation for the purposes of perverting the findings of that investigation.
I have previously provided the CASA Board with the details of two individuals who will promptly be able to advise you of the truth. One being a current serving CASA employee who has offered simply to “tell the truth”. The second being an ex CASA employee with impeccable credentials as a pilot in the RAAF, Airlines and CASA, who would appreciate the opportunity to tell the truth. In fact, I suggest that any serving CASA employee in the position of Flight Operations Inspector (FOI) of which there are dozens within CASA will quickly be able to advise you of the truth provided appropriate protections are in place for those individuals.
My considerations are to approach the Federal Police or the Attorney General's Office, although I am seeking specific guidance from your Office before proceeding.
The Ombudsman’s Office is not the appropriate forum in my opinion, I feel that these substantive allegations need to be assessed at the highest level, and I request consideration that this matter be addressed to the new anti-corruption body.
Thank you for your consideration of my matter, and whilst I don’t require a lengthy response at this stage could I request an acknowledgement from both the Ministers Office, and the Board Secretariat for CASA that this correspondence has reached the intended recipients.
I have included other recipients in this correspondence including the Honorable Ms. Carina Garland as my local MP, and who is assisting me with this matter.
I fully understand that I could be subject to prosecution if I was found to be raising these claims in a vindictive or vexatious manner.
Respectfully,
Glen Buckley
To the Minister responsible for CASA, the Honourable Ms. Catherine King MP;
Please accept my formal allegation against two CASA employees. The allegation is that:
Mr Jonathan Aleck, CASA Executive Manager of Legal, International and Regulatory Affairs has provided false and misleading information to a Commonwealth Ombudsman’s Office investigation on five occasions.
Ms Pip Spence CEO of CASA has facilitated the provision of false and misleading information to a Commonwealth Office investigation on each of those five occasions.
The false and misleading information has been provided on five different matters, and each is substantive in nature.
In this correspondence I will attend to the first of the five pieces of disinformation only.
Over coming months, I will send you the additional allegations, of which there are four more to follow.
I apologize that there will be five pieces of correspondence, each raising a separate allegation. I have adopted this approach for two reasons.
The first being that the impact of this matter has had a substantial impact on my health. A lengthier single piece of correspondence covering all five allegations is not something that I am able to attend to at the moment.
Secondly, it should not be necessary. If you are able to promptly clarify this single occasion alone, I feel you will be compelled to act, and most especially because of the seniority of their respective positions, and the responsibility of the Department that they lead, i.e. the Nations aviation safety regulator, CASA.
In order to promptly attend to this matter, I understand that the first stage will require you to establish contact with the Commonwealth Ombudsman’s office and clarify the “understanding” of the Ombudsman’s Office.
In order to maximize the effectiveness of your approach to that Office, can I propose that the following question be put to that office?
Question to Ombudsman’s Office,
Has either Ms. Pip Spence as the CEO of CASA with expert knowledge on this matter, or Mr. Jonathan Aleck, CASA Executive Manager of Legal, International and Regulatory Affairs, acting as the sole representative of CASA in communications with the Ombudsman as part of that investigation led the Ombudsman’s investigation to be of the view that the structure Glen Buckley had adopted in his business was not permitted and had never been permitted by previously by CASA. It was something unique and something that he was doing for the first time. He was doing something that was not standard industry practice.
Glen Buckley asserts that CASA had always and on every occasion throughout his 25 years in the industry approved the identical structure that he adopted, and I emphasize identical. If there are any differences CASA should be promptly able to advise those differences. Glen Buckley asserts that CASA consistently throughout the last 25 years approved multiple operators to do exactly what he was doing. It was completely standard industry practice throughout the industry with full and formal CASA approval on every occasion. In fact, over recent weeks CASA has just approved two operators at Moorabbin airport to adopt the identical structure that they closed my business for.
I am confident that the Ombudsman’s office will advise you that they have formed the opinion that the structure I had adopted was never permitted by CASA, previously.
The truth is that it was always permitted by CASA. Mr Aleck has led the Ombudsman to be of the view that what I was doing was not standard industry practice, when in fact it very clearly was and he is fully aware of that.
I have 25 years’ experience in the flight training industry as Grade One Multi engine IFR instructor (the most senior), I have ten years’ experience as a CASA approved Chief Flying Instructor (CFI), and three years’ experience as a CASA approved Head of Operations (HOO), and CASA approved CEO. I am a Subject Matter Expert on the flight training industry, and what I am telling you is the truth.
I am fully satisfied that both Mr Aleck and Ms Spence are providing false and misleading information to the Commonwealth Ombudsman’s investigation for the purposes of perverting the findings of that investigation.
I have previously provided the CASA Board with the details of two individuals who will promptly be able to advise you of the truth. One being a current serving CASA employee who has offered simply to “tell the truth”. The second being an ex CASA employee with impeccable credentials as a pilot in the RAAF, Airlines and CASA, who would appreciate the opportunity to tell the truth. In fact, I suggest that any serving CASA employee in the position of Flight Operations Inspector (FOI) of which there are dozens within CASA will quickly be able to advise you of the truth provided appropriate protections are in place for those individuals.
My considerations are to approach the Federal Police or the Attorney General's Office, although I am seeking specific guidance from your Office before proceeding.
The Ombudsman’s Office is not the appropriate forum in my opinion, I feel that these substantive allegations need to be assessed at the highest level, and I request consideration that this matter be addressed to the new anti-corruption body.
Thank you for your consideration of my matter, and whilst I don’t require a lengthy response at this stage could I request an acknowledgement from both the Ministers Office, and the Board Secretariat for CASA that this correspondence has reached the intended recipients.
I have included other recipients in this correspondence including the Honorable Ms. Carina Garland as my local MP, and who is assisting me with this matter.
I fully understand that I could be subject to prosecution if I was found to be raising these claims in a vindictive or vexatious manner.
Respectfully,
Glen Buckley
FWIW, I doubt any current CASA employee would speak out on this due to the government whistleblower policies.
https://amp.theguardian.com/law/2022...ty-court-hears
https://amp.theguardian.com/law/2022...ty-court-hears
I can’t see how it would be whistleblowing if the Ministers office was to ask a current CASA employee a question regarding this matter.
Wether any current employee would be prepared to give an accurate and honest answer is another matter as Mr Aleck is obviously a very senior manager and a vindictive person.
It’s interesting to me that, with all of the very public allegations Glen is making, none of these employees have threatened, or taken, any legal action against Glen. I suspect that they do not want to be exposed to being dragged into the light of day in a courtroom, and are desperately hoping that Glen will continue to try to resolve this without court action and in a well intentioned manner as he has stated on many occasions.
Wether any current employee would be prepared to give an accurate and honest answer is another matter as Mr Aleck is obviously a very senior manager and a vindictive person.
It’s interesting to me that, with all of the very public allegations Glen is making, none of these employees have threatened, or taken, any legal action against Glen. I suspect that they do not want to be exposed to being dragged into the light of day in a courtroom, and are desperately hoping that Glen will continue to try to resolve this without court action and in a well intentioned manner as he has stated on many occasions.
"It’s interesting to me that, with all of the very public allegations Glen is making, none of these employees have threatened, or taken, any legal action against Glen. "
Exactly - in a witness box, on oath, with criminal sanctions for not telling the truth................ tells you all you need to know IMHO
Exactly - in a witness box, on oath, with criminal sanctions for not telling the truth................ tells you all you need to know IMHO
The letter writing has been going on for three and a half years now. Obviously it has had no effect.
Definition of insanity - doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result?
Is it not time change to change tack completely?
Definition of insanity - doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result?
Is it not time change to change tack completely?
I’ve chosen to not quote where you stated that a certain individual is vindictive. That’s bordering on defamation unless you have your own personal evidence.
As we have already seen from the Robodebt Royal Commission hearings so far, the only thing that eventually stopped the unlawful juggernaut was litigation commenced by victims. Up until that point, the bureaucracy actively avoided opportunities to bring on litigation to have the lawfulness of the scheme tested in court. That's because all of the bureaucracy's legal advice was to the effect that the methodology used for 'raising' the 'debts' was unlawful (other than an advice that was deliberately sought on the basis of a number of assumptions that were not valid, to get the answer they wanted).
That's how the bureaucracy works. CASA is part of the bureacracy.
Everyone knows that Glen was led up the garden path by CASA through its approval of variations of APTA's AOC to cover numerous 'bases'. CASA's claim that some fundamentally new information about the structure of which it was not aware came to CASA's attention in 2018 is a convenient invention to confuse folks like the Ombudsman and Ms Spence. If that information was actually relevant, CASA should have found out about it during the earlier variation assessment processes.
I suspect the claim is about the "complete control of your business" statement on APTA's website. However, if there were no financial viability issues and APTA had control over matters determining regulator regulatory compliance - both of which issues should have been assessed by CASA during each and every variation process - the way in which money moved around and business decisions within the structure are irrelevant to regulatory compliance. And CASA's statement about Parts 141 and 142 being drafted on the basis that all of an operator's personnel would be in all respects agents of the operator is wrong on the face of the legislation and in general agency law.
But CASA's not going to admit to any of that, unless dragged before a court. Glen would have to be the purest of purest optimists to believe that any bureaucracy is going to 'do the right thing' without being forced to do so. It's no longer in the bureaucracy's DNA.
Hmmmm, dunno about that. It took years to bring Robodebt down, despite lots of 'bad press'. Aussies are notoriously apathetic about things that don't affect them personally.
When the first Federal Court claim was brought by a victim, the alleged 'debt' was magicked away, rendering the proceedings to have no utility. Typical trick of the bureaucracy. But the second Federal Court claim finally brought things to a head. In the mean time, AAT decisions against the bureaucracy, on the basis that the averaging methodology was not a valid way on which to 'raise' a 'debt', were waved away by the bureaucracy on the basis that each AAT decision was applicable only to its specific facts.
A while ago I watched bureaucrats in front of a Senate Committee say, with a straight face, that an AAT decision in favour of Senator Rex Patrick, to the effect that the 'National Cabinet' is not a Cabinet of the Commonwealth executive and, therefore, its records are not exempt from FOI access on the ground of 'Cabinet in Confidence' claims, was a decision unique to the circumstances. The bureaucracy continued to claim 'Cabinet in Confidence' over the records of the 'National Cabinet'.
These people have no shame. Some headlines are like water off a duck's back.
When the first Federal Court claim was brought by a victim, the alleged 'debt' was magicked away, rendering the proceedings to have no utility. Typical trick of the bureaucracy. But the second Federal Court claim finally brought things to a head. In the mean time, AAT decisions against the bureaucracy, on the basis that the averaging methodology was not a valid way on which to 'raise' a 'debt', were waved away by the bureaucracy on the basis that each AAT decision was applicable only to its specific facts.
A while ago I watched bureaucrats in front of a Senate Committee say, with a straight face, that an AAT decision in favour of Senator Rex Patrick, to the effect that the 'National Cabinet' is not a Cabinet of the Commonwealth executive and, therefore, its records are not exempt from FOI access on the ground of 'Cabinet in Confidence' claims, was a decision unique to the circumstances. The bureaucracy continued to claim 'Cabinet in Confidence' over the records of the 'National Cabinet'.
These people have no shame. Some headlines are like water off a duck's back.
At this time of year Glen, I would like to wish you and your loving wife and family the best this festive season.
As you have worked out over these last years, we love and support you and have/are/will feel the pain "they can" inflict and often with glee.
Would love to sit with you one day and enjoy a beer and old days of what were fun years in the game - long since gone.
I will still support your fight if you step it up - many of us will.
Take good care my stranger, but eternal Mate - hope to meet up one day.
Regards Bendy.
As you have worked out over these last years, we love and support you and have/are/will feel the pain "they can" inflict and often with glee.
Would love to sit with you one day and enjoy a beer and old days of what were fun years in the game - long since gone.
I will still support your fight if you step it up - many of us will.
Take good care my stranger, but eternal Mate - hope to meet up one day.
Regards Bendy.
The following 2 users liked this post by Bend alot:
Thread Starter
Thunderbird Five
Im a one finger typer and each piece of correspondence takes me many weeks to send finalise, then it sits with the Ombudsman for many weeks, then CASA respond, the Ombudsman digests and responds to me. It has been a war of attrition, and extremely slow. In my well-intentioned feedback to the Ombudsman i will make mention that a three-way conference with the Ombudsman, a CASA representative, and myself would have had this entire matter resolved in weeks, not years.
Many months have been spent trying to demonstrate that Mr aleck is misleading the Inquiry.
And to be honest, my mental health has impacted. I generally rise at about 4.30am and spend the mornings working on this until the family wake up. There have been periods of many weeks when i have been unable to attend to it.
The delay is basically truthfulness and intent. If CASA were acting in a truthful and well-intentioned manner, this would have been resolved one way or the other many years ago.
Cheers. Glen (typing on the side of the road in sunlight on the way to work. Apologies for any poor editing)
and yes, I am about to change tact.
Thread Starter
Letter to my MP Ms. Garland
I wasnt going to publish this, as it is a bit embarrassing and back slapping, nevertheless here it is. I truly believe that CASA has portrayed me as a nutcase (which most certainly was not the case prior to October 2018, this was intended to counteract that. Sadly, i have little confidence in the Ombudsman investigation and intend to depend on my local MP for assistance going forward.
11/12/22
Dear Ms Garland,
I apologise that I am bombarding you with emails. Please note there are other recipients including the CASA Board.
As you are aware CASA closed my two businesses down, and I then obtained employment in the industry until CASA wrote to my Employer, and directed that my continuing employment was no longer tenable based on comments that I was making publicly. I was terminated and left the industry.
After a nervous breakdown and a period of unemployment, I obtained employment as a Youth Justice Worker in a custodial facility with Victoria's most challenged males in the 18 to 21 age group. It's a dangerous but challenging role. It involves many of the same skills I drew on in my aviation career. Sound decision making, good intent, standards, ethics, mentoring, dependability, risk assessments, etc.
The purpose of this correspondence is to inform you that each year a Directors Award is presented to the Youth Justice Worker of the Year. I am proud to be the recipient of this years award, and i quote.
The purpose of providing that information is as a character reference for myself.
As the person who had his well being decimated by Mr Jonathan Aleck, please be assured there is a very significant story to be told here. I am making a further appeal to you Ms Garland as my local MP. I am a 57 year resident of the electorate, my family desperately needs your assistance. I appreciate that you have limited resources and a high workload, but I thank you for your support to date, and thank you in anticipation of that continuing support.
Please be assured that there is a story to be told here, and if told it will demonstably improve aviation safety in this Country and the industry is watching closely.
Respectfully, Glen Buckley
11/12/22
Dear Ms Garland,
I apologise that I am bombarding you with emails. Please note there are other recipients including the CASA Board.
As you are aware CASA closed my two businesses down, and I then obtained employment in the industry until CASA wrote to my Employer, and directed that my continuing employment was no longer tenable based on comments that I was making publicly. I was terminated and left the industry.
After a nervous breakdown and a period of unemployment, I obtained employment as a Youth Justice Worker in a custodial facility with Victoria's most challenged males in the 18 to 21 age group. It's a dangerous but challenging role. It involves many of the same skills I drew on in my aviation career. Sound decision making, good intent, standards, ethics, mentoring, dependability, risk assessments, etc.
The purpose of this correspondence is to inform you that each year a Directors Award is presented to the Youth Justice Worker of the Year. I am proud to be the recipient of this years award, and i quote.
- Glen Buckley (YJW1)
The purpose of providing that information is as a character reference for myself.
As the person who had his well being decimated by Mr Jonathan Aleck, please be assured there is a very significant story to be told here. I am making a further appeal to you Ms Garland as my local MP. I am a 57 year resident of the electorate, my family desperately needs your assistance. I appreciate that you have limited resources and a high workload, but I thank you for your support to date, and thank you in anticipation of that continuing support.
Please be assured that there is a story to be told here, and if told it will demonstably improve aviation safety in this Country and the industry is watching closely.
Respectfully, Glen Buckley
The following users liked this post:
I wasnt going to publish this, as it is a bit embarrassing and back slapping, nevertheless here it is. I truly believe that CASA has portrayed me as a nutcase (which most certainly was not the case prior to October 2018, this was intended to counteract that. Sadly, i have little confidence in the Ombudsman investigation and intend to depend on my local MP for assistance going forward.
It sux to fall foul of the monster and I do hope your local member can both see that and help out in some way.
Thread Starter
Thanks Sandy
Sandy has been a staunch supporter and does a lot behind the scenes to push my matter. He copied me in on this correspondence to my local MP, Ms. Garland. I hope you dont mind me posting it Sandy,
“ Dear Ms. Garland,
I support Glen Buckley in his pursuit of justice. This case should have never developed and those of us that are familiar with the General Aviation (GA) industry believe that Government must make amends to Mr. Buckley and his family.
My career has been in GA and I’m not unfamiliar with political life being the brother of the late Peter Reith.
I’m sure you understand that being Glen’s representative it’s most important that you assess his case in detail. I, and many others, would be happy to answer any questions you may by way of information of how the system has been working.
Kind regards,
Sandy Reith “
“ Dear Ms. Garland,
I support Glen Buckley in his pursuit of justice. This case should have never developed and those of us that are familiar with the General Aviation (GA) industry believe that Government must make amends to Mr. Buckley and his family.
My career has been in GA and I’m not unfamiliar with political life being the brother of the late Peter Reith.
I’m sure you understand that being Glen’s representative it’s most important that you assess his case in detail. I, and many others, would be happy to answer any questions you may by way of information of how the system has been working.
Kind regards,
Sandy Reith “