Glen Buckley and Australian small business -V- CASA
Thread Starter
Follow up to Post #2932 to my Local MP-Carina Garland
18/03/24
To Dr Carina Garland MP for the Electorate of Chisholm.
On 28/02/24, I attended your Office and left a document for you. To ensure you received that correspondence I also emailed it through to your Office on the same day.
As you are aware, I have been a lifelong resident of the Electorate, and I sought your assistance on matters of misconduct within CASA. I understand that for reasons that I am waiting on an explanation for, you were directed, not to assist me with this matter, by Minister King.
Despite that direction from Minister King, I reached out to you because you are my Local MP, and that is your very purpose.
In this correspondence I am only asking that you advise me whether or not you are willing and able to attend to that relatively straightforward task regarding forwarding that correspondence to the following recipients.
If Minister King's position on this matter is unchanged, and you have been prevented from distributing it, could you please advise me. As almost three weeks have passed, I hope you can respond promptly.
Respectfully
Glen Buckley
To Dr Carina Garland MP for the Electorate of Chisholm.
On 28/02/24, I attended your Office and left a document for you. To ensure you received that correspondence I also emailed it through to your Office on the same day.
As you are aware, I have been a lifelong resident of the Electorate, and I sought your assistance on matters of misconduct within CASA. I understand that for reasons that I am waiting on an explanation for, you were directed, not to assist me with this matter, by Minister King.
Despite that direction from Minister King, I reached out to you because you are my Local MP, and that is your very purpose.
In this correspondence I am only asking that you advise me whether or not you are willing and able to attend to that relatively straightforward task regarding forwarding that correspondence to the following recipients.
- To forward the correspondence on to the relevant person within the Office of the Attorney General.
- to forward the correspondence for the direct attention of Minister King
- To forward the correspondence to the Office of the PM for assessment as to the requirement for him to have some knowledge and awareness of this matter.
If Minister King's position on this matter is unchanged, and you have been prevented from distributing it, could you please advise me. As almost three weeks have passed, I hope you can respond promptly.
Respectfully
Glen Buckley
Thread Starter
Ombudsman Office- follow up to follow up (#2915 and
To the Commonwealth Ombudsman's Office.
I am writing to you regarding Matter Reference 2019-713834.
On January 16th I wrote to the Commonwealth Ombudsman Office requesting that they correct a gross technical error that has developed during the 5 year investigation. ( My reference Pprune 2915).
That request remains totally unacknowledged despite over 2 months passing.
On February 26th, I sent follow up correspondence that also went unacknowledged. (my reference Pprune #2923). As over 3 weeks have passed, please accept this as a follow up to the follow up.
At this stage, I am only seeking a brief acknowledgement that my previous correspondence has been received by the Ombudsman Office.
I am wanting to progress my matter and I have asked the Ombudsman's Office to withdraw its Findings that were based on false and misleading information. If the Ombudsman Office refuses to withdraw the Findings as is my preference, it is essential that the Ombudsman address gross technical errors where they have developed. Without these matters clearly resolved it prevents me from seeking justice on these matters.
Respectfully, Glen Buckley
I am writing to you regarding Matter Reference 2019-713834.
On January 16th I wrote to the Commonwealth Ombudsman Office requesting that they correct a gross technical error that has developed during the 5 year investigation. ( My reference Pprune 2915).
That request remains totally unacknowledged despite over 2 months passing.
On February 26th, I sent follow up correspondence that also went unacknowledged. (my reference Pprune #2923). As over 3 weeks have passed, please accept this as a follow up to the follow up.
At this stage, I am only seeking a brief acknowledgement that my previous correspondence has been received by the Ombudsman Office.
I am wanting to progress my matter and I have asked the Ombudsman's Office to withdraw its Findings that were based on false and misleading information. If the Ombudsman Office refuses to withdraw the Findings as is my preference, it is essential that the Ombudsman address gross technical errors where they have developed. Without these matters clearly resolved it prevents me from seeking justice on these matters.
Respectfully, Glen Buckley
Thread Starter
The Gloves are off!
I have sent the following correspondence this morning. Please be assured that going forward the "gloves are fully off". 20/03/24
To the CASA Board
I am submitting a formal allegation against four CASA Employees. The Board has a detailed understanding of this matter, and my reasonable expectation is that they will respond, and take action.
The Board has remained silent for too long on these substantive matters.
I am fully satisfied that this matter has the potential to impact aviation safety.
I am fully satisfied that I have widespread industry support with regards to this matter.
I believe that this is a substantial matter and that there is a deliberate effort from within the Office of Minister King to suppress that matter. I make that statement on the basis that Minister King established contact with my Local MP for Chisholm, Dr Carina Garland and directed her that she was not to assist me in this matter. My Local MP has since refused to assist me on this matter, as directed by Minister King.
My specific allegation is that.
1. The CASA CEO, Ms Pip Spence has deliberately facilitated the provision of false and misleading information to a Commonwealth Ombudsman Office investigation for the purpose of affecting the findings of the Ombudsman investigation, and covering up potential misconduct of a CASA Employee. That Employee being Mr Jonathan Aleck.
2. The CASA Executive Manager of Legal, International and Regulatory Affairs, Mr Jonathan Aleck is the CASA Employee that provided false and misleading information to a Commonwealth Ombudsman Office investigation to cover up his misconduct. I also make an allegation of Misfeasance in Public Office against Mr Aleck, and have prepared substantial documentation in support of these allegations.
3. The CASA Industry Complaints Commissioner, Mr Jonathan Hanton was aware that false and misleading information was being provided, but chose not to act, and is therefore complicit in the provision of false and misleading information to a Commonwealth Ombudsman investigation with the knowledge that it would deny me justice.
4. CASA Flight operations Inspector David Edwards made a false statement to CASA that I shoved him in the foyer of the CASA Building.
I am seeking very clear direction from the Board on how to proceed with this matter. I am not satisfied that The Ombudsman’s Office can determine that it has been misled, so I am seeking an independent investigation. The Ombudsman Office has demonstrated an aversion to seeking evidence where substantive evidence is readily available, and most especially in situations where seeking that evidence could bring harm to the Agency, CASA
To ensure clarity on this matter. My very strong preference is that this matter be referred to the AFP or similar Body for investigation.
If the CASA Board and Minister King are unwilling or unable to initiate such action, I will very clearly be left with no option but to pursue litigation. As the CASA Board and Minister King are fully aware, I have gone to extraordinary lengths to avoid litigation, as it indicates that no “good intent “remains. From my perspective, it is my very last option, but one that I will vigorously pursue if necessitated by a failure of both the Board and Minister to act.
Please be assured that if I have not received a response over the next 14 days, I will go out to industry seeking their support, and initiate contact with the ACT Law Society seeking a meeting and guidance.
If I have not received a comprehensive response within 14 days, I will also write directly to the Office of the PM outlining the matter to ensure that he has both an awareness of the matter and an awareness of the involvement of Minister King in this matter. I will advise him that Dr, Carina Garland the Member for Chisholm has been fully briefed, and could be considered the Subject Matter Expert (SME) within his Government .
The allegations are substantive and considering the seniority of the personnel involved and the nature of the Government Department that employs them, these allegations cannot be swept under the carpet, they must be thoroughly investigated. Most especially considering the potential impact to the safety of aviation if these individuals were found to have provided false and misleading information to a Commonwealth Ombudsman investigation, as I know they have.
Whilst it shouldn’t be necessary, I feel it is. I draw your attention to
· CASAs Regulatory Philosophy https://www.casa.gov.au/about-us/who...ory-philosophy
· and to the Functions of the Board. https://www.casa.gov.au/about-us/who...RoleoftheBoard
· and the Ministers Statement of Expectations https://www.legislation.gov.au/F2023L00920/latest/text
in preparing the Boards considered response, and please ensure that Minister King is included in that response.
Please understand that I do not make these allegations lightly. I am fully satisfied that I now have enough evidence and witnesses that I can proceed promptly on this matter.
I have no doubt that the four CASA Employees that I make these allegations against should welcome a comprehensive examination of this matter, as it would provide them the opportunity to prove their innocence if that was the case.
I am also fully aware that by going public with such substantive allegations, I am subject to litigation if I were found to be making these allegations in a vindictive or vexatious manner. An AFP investigation would expose such matters and provide the CASA employees with recourse against me, assuming such an investigation found that it was I that was providing false and misleading information to a Commonwealth Ombudsman investigation.
Because I am satisfied that there is an attempt to suppress this matter, and because of the substantive role of CASA, and the Seniority of the CASA Employees involved, I have distributed this correspondence to other relevant persons and organisations.
I am hoping that this correspondence will finally force the Board to act and ensure good governance in accordance with the obligations placed on the Board, and to ensure the safety of aviation.
Finally, let me emphasise that this correspondence is me formally raising these allegations directly to the Board and for the attention of Minister King, who I expect will be involved in the CASA response or have awareness of it before it is sent to me.
For clarity, my very strong preference is that this matter have the involvement of a substantiver body such as the AFP.
With the access i have to witnesses and documents, I am confident that the AFP will be able to make a rapid assessment of this matter, and I suggest the easiest initial matter to address would be the allegation by CASA Flight Operations Inspector in the foyer of the CASA Lobby, that I shoved him with some force, and that I assaulted him which is a blatant lie.
An assessment of that matter would be quick and efficient and begin to unravel this matter in its entirety. If I am found to be not acting in the public interest, and being untruthful, then I too should be held fully accountable, and that is why I believe this is a matter for the AFP, and not a contracted investigation such as CPM Reviews who CASA have utilised previously to "engineer" desired results.
Respectfully Glen Buckley
To the CASA Board
I am submitting a formal allegation against four CASA Employees. The Board has a detailed understanding of this matter, and my reasonable expectation is that they will respond, and take action.
The Board has remained silent for too long on these substantive matters.
I am fully satisfied that this matter has the potential to impact aviation safety.
I am fully satisfied that I have widespread industry support with regards to this matter.
I believe that this is a substantial matter and that there is a deliberate effort from within the Office of Minister King to suppress that matter. I make that statement on the basis that Minister King established contact with my Local MP for Chisholm, Dr Carina Garland and directed her that she was not to assist me in this matter. My Local MP has since refused to assist me on this matter, as directed by Minister King.
My specific allegation is that.
1. The CASA CEO, Ms Pip Spence has deliberately facilitated the provision of false and misleading information to a Commonwealth Ombudsman Office investigation for the purpose of affecting the findings of the Ombudsman investigation, and covering up potential misconduct of a CASA Employee. That Employee being Mr Jonathan Aleck.
2. The CASA Executive Manager of Legal, International and Regulatory Affairs, Mr Jonathan Aleck is the CASA Employee that provided false and misleading information to a Commonwealth Ombudsman Office investigation to cover up his misconduct. I also make an allegation of Misfeasance in Public Office against Mr Aleck, and have prepared substantial documentation in support of these allegations.
3. The CASA Industry Complaints Commissioner, Mr Jonathan Hanton was aware that false and misleading information was being provided, but chose not to act, and is therefore complicit in the provision of false and misleading information to a Commonwealth Ombudsman investigation with the knowledge that it would deny me justice.
4. CASA Flight operations Inspector David Edwards made a false statement to CASA that I shoved him in the foyer of the CASA Building.
I am seeking very clear direction from the Board on how to proceed with this matter. I am not satisfied that The Ombudsman’s Office can determine that it has been misled, so I am seeking an independent investigation. The Ombudsman Office has demonstrated an aversion to seeking evidence where substantive evidence is readily available, and most especially in situations where seeking that evidence could bring harm to the Agency, CASA
To ensure clarity on this matter. My very strong preference is that this matter be referred to the AFP or similar Body for investigation.
If the CASA Board and Minister King are unwilling or unable to initiate such action, I will very clearly be left with no option but to pursue litigation. As the CASA Board and Minister King are fully aware, I have gone to extraordinary lengths to avoid litigation, as it indicates that no “good intent “remains. From my perspective, it is my very last option, but one that I will vigorously pursue if necessitated by a failure of both the Board and Minister to act.
Please be assured that if I have not received a response over the next 14 days, I will go out to industry seeking their support, and initiate contact with the ACT Law Society seeking a meeting and guidance.
If I have not received a comprehensive response within 14 days, I will also write directly to the Office of the PM outlining the matter to ensure that he has both an awareness of the matter and an awareness of the involvement of Minister King in this matter. I will advise him that Dr, Carina Garland the Member for Chisholm has been fully briefed, and could be considered the Subject Matter Expert (SME) within his Government .
The allegations are substantive and considering the seniority of the personnel involved and the nature of the Government Department that employs them, these allegations cannot be swept under the carpet, they must be thoroughly investigated. Most especially considering the potential impact to the safety of aviation if these individuals were found to have provided false and misleading information to a Commonwealth Ombudsman investigation, as I know they have.
Whilst it shouldn’t be necessary, I feel it is. I draw your attention to
· CASAs Regulatory Philosophy https://www.casa.gov.au/about-us/who...ory-philosophy
· and to the Functions of the Board. https://www.casa.gov.au/about-us/who...RoleoftheBoard
· and the Ministers Statement of Expectations https://www.legislation.gov.au/F2023L00920/latest/text
in preparing the Boards considered response, and please ensure that Minister King is included in that response.
Please understand that I do not make these allegations lightly. I am fully satisfied that I now have enough evidence and witnesses that I can proceed promptly on this matter.
I have no doubt that the four CASA Employees that I make these allegations against should welcome a comprehensive examination of this matter, as it would provide them the opportunity to prove their innocence if that was the case.
I am also fully aware that by going public with such substantive allegations, I am subject to litigation if I were found to be making these allegations in a vindictive or vexatious manner. An AFP investigation would expose such matters and provide the CASA employees with recourse against me, assuming such an investigation found that it was I that was providing false and misleading information to a Commonwealth Ombudsman investigation.
Because I am satisfied that there is an attempt to suppress this matter, and because of the substantive role of CASA, and the Seniority of the CASA Employees involved, I have distributed this correspondence to other relevant persons and organisations.
I am hoping that this correspondence will finally force the Board to act and ensure good governance in accordance with the obligations placed on the Board, and to ensure the safety of aviation.
Finally, let me emphasise that this correspondence is me formally raising these allegations directly to the Board and for the attention of Minister King, who I expect will be involved in the CASA response or have awareness of it before it is sent to me.
For clarity, my very strong preference is that this matter have the involvement of a substantiver body such as the AFP.
With the access i have to witnesses and documents, I am confident that the AFP will be able to make a rapid assessment of this matter, and I suggest the easiest initial matter to address would be the allegation by CASA Flight Operations Inspector in the foyer of the CASA Lobby, that I shoved him with some force, and that I assaulted him which is a blatant lie.
An assessment of that matter would be quick and efficient and begin to unravel this matter in its entirety. If I am found to be not acting in the public interest, and being untruthful, then I too should be held fully accountable, and that is why I believe this is a matter for the AFP, and not a contracted investigation such as CPM Reviews who CASA have utilised previously to "engineer" desired results.
Respectfully Glen Buckley
The following 2 users liked this post by glenb:
They won't even blink on reading this letter. Not until the court date is set and they receive a summons. Best of luck Glen. Go hard!
The following users liked this post:
Thread Starter
They wont even blink!
Malcolm I completely agree. There is no doubt that litigation is CASAs preferred option, and I concur that they probably even have a bit of a snigger and an "inside joke" about me. Of that I have no doubt.
My hope is that it will at least force the Board to very formally clarify exactly where CASA stands, and its that response that will trigger my next step. Its important that i now ensure i have "CASAs" response. The Board has been stunningly silent on this matter, and it clearly demonstrates the impotence of the CASA Board.
That CASA response will most likely be followed by correspondence that bypasses Minister King, as I feel that she has enough knowledge of this matter, and has chosen to "cover it up". I will write to the PM direct;y with a petition calling for an investigation into the conduct of the staff I have named.
I will go out to industry seeking signatures and I will be active in the Electorate of Chisholm. Realistically a relatively small number of signatures should do the job. I will submit that to Dr Carina Garland. If she refuses to accept it, I will approach all Independent Ministers and requesting that they accept it.
I may be on the wrong path but as stated it has little to do with CASA going forward although a number of FOI requests are coming, which will be very revealing, i believe.
CASA had demonstrated a propensity to be willing to provide false and misleading information, and recent FOI requests have left me in no doubt about that.
I may be naive, but if I write to the PM raising those allegations and copy in every Member of Parliament, I feel he will be compelled to act. Seriously how could the PM ignore such substantial allegations aginst the Senior executive of CASA, and most especially if he receives a petition calling for an investigation by the AFP into the conduct of those CASA personnel.
Surely they could not tremain in their respective roles, and they would have to removed from operational duty, remaining on full pay, pending the outcome of the investigation.
I believe that litigation will be forced within the next couple of weeks. Hoping for a hungry lawyer, and I just want to make sure I can feed him or her all the information that hungry lawyer needs.
My hope is that it will at least force the Board to very formally clarify exactly where CASA stands, and its that response that will trigger my next step. Its important that i now ensure i have "CASAs" response. The Board has been stunningly silent on this matter, and it clearly demonstrates the impotence of the CASA Board.
That CASA response will most likely be followed by correspondence that bypasses Minister King, as I feel that she has enough knowledge of this matter, and has chosen to "cover it up". I will write to the PM direct;y with a petition calling for an investigation into the conduct of the staff I have named.
I will go out to industry seeking signatures and I will be active in the Electorate of Chisholm. Realistically a relatively small number of signatures should do the job. I will submit that to Dr Carina Garland. If she refuses to accept it, I will approach all Independent Ministers and requesting that they accept it.
I may be on the wrong path but as stated it has little to do with CASA going forward although a number of FOI requests are coming, which will be very revealing, i believe.
CASA had demonstrated a propensity to be willing to provide false and misleading information, and recent FOI requests have left me in no doubt about that.
I may be naive, but if I write to the PM raising those allegations and copy in every Member of Parliament, I feel he will be compelled to act. Seriously how could the PM ignore such substantial allegations aginst the Senior executive of CASA, and most especially if he receives a petition calling for an investigation by the AFP into the conduct of those CASA personnel.
Surely they could not tremain in their respective roles, and they would have to removed from operational duty, remaining on full pay, pending the outcome of the investigation.
I believe that litigation will be forced within the next couple of weeks. Hoping for a hungry lawyer, and I just want to make sure I can feed him or her all the information that hungry lawyer needs.
Last edited by glenb; 21st Mar 2024 at 19:18.
Thread Starter
CASA Board re. Mr Aleck
Removal of Mr Aleck from Decision Making on my matter
22/03/24
To the CASA Board.
May I respectfully request a specific response to this correspondence only and no other issues, to maintain clarity on this matter.
Please note I have included Minister King and my Local Mp, Dr. Carina Garland in this correspondence, to ensure they remain fully aware of this topic.
I have raised allegations with the CASA Board that three CASA Employees have been responsible for providing and misleading information to a Commonwealth Ombudsman's investigation. The most substantive of allegations.
As the most serious of allegations are against Mr Jonathan Aleck, the CASA Executive Manager of Legal, International, and Regulatory Affairs, I feel this matter must be clearly addressed by the Board to ensure fair processes.
As you are aware, as a result of the way CASA handled this matter, I spent a period of time in hospital, and I had to hand over "authority" to my father who assisted me during that period, including some FOI requests.
Those documents that he received during my absence were highly redacted, although they left me in no doubt at all that CASA has provided false and misleading information to a Commonwealth Ombudsman investigation.
Shortly I intend to reapply to CASA to obtain a "less redacted" version of those documents, as I believe that will provide the final pieces of evidence I require to fully satisfy myself that CASA has provided false and misleading information to a Commonwealth Ombudsman investigation.
Should that application be rejected, I understand there is an appeals process.
The concern that I have is that the FOI Department is the Department of Mr Aleck, the very CASA Employee that I have raised allegations against. As he is the Executive Manager of that Department and the ultimate decision maker for that Department, it could be argued that he may use the power of his position to influence the level of redcation in order to cover up his misconduct, as I believe has happened to date.
That only makes my task more difficult, and denies me procedural fairness, as you will understand.
I have made this request of CASA before but it has been ignored, and I feel compelled to make it again.
Could you confirm for me that Mr Jonathan Aleck will not have any involvement in any FOI requests made by me to support my allegations against him of misconduct.
I specifically request again that Mr Aleck have no involvement in decision making on FOI requests that I make to substantiate my allegation of misconduct against him.
I would be satisfied if the Board were to accept responsibility for these responsibilities rather than Mr Aleck.
Alternatively, the Board has most likely identified this risk and the conflict of interest, and put in place suitable checks and balances. If so, could you advise me of those, so that I can satisfy myself that fair processes are in place.
Respectfully. Glen Buckley
22/03/24
To the CASA Board.
May I respectfully request a specific response to this correspondence only and no other issues, to maintain clarity on this matter.
Please note I have included Minister King and my Local Mp, Dr. Carina Garland in this correspondence, to ensure they remain fully aware of this topic.
I have raised allegations with the CASA Board that three CASA Employees have been responsible for providing and misleading information to a Commonwealth Ombudsman's investigation. The most substantive of allegations.
As the most serious of allegations are against Mr Jonathan Aleck, the CASA Executive Manager of Legal, International, and Regulatory Affairs, I feel this matter must be clearly addressed by the Board to ensure fair processes.
As you are aware, as a result of the way CASA handled this matter, I spent a period of time in hospital, and I had to hand over "authority" to my father who assisted me during that period, including some FOI requests.
Those documents that he received during my absence were highly redacted, although they left me in no doubt at all that CASA has provided false and misleading information to a Commonwealth Ombudsman investigation.
Shortly I intend to reapply to CASA to obtain a "less redacted" version of those documents, as I believe that will provide the final pieces of evidence I require to fully satisfy myself that CASA has provided false and misleading information to a Commonwealth Ombudsman investigation.
Should that application be rejected, I understand there is an appeals process.
The concern that I have is that the FOI Department is the Department of Mr Aleck, the very CASA Employee that I have raised allegations against. As he is the Executive Manager of that Department and the ultimate decision maker for that Department, it could be argued that he may use the power of his position to influence the level of redcation in order to cover up his misconduct, as I believe has happened to date.
That only makes my task more difficult, and denies me procedural fairness, as you will understand.
I have made this request of CASA before but it has been ignored, and I feel compelled to make it again.
Could you confirm for me that Mr Jonathan Aleck will not have any involvement in any FOI requests made by me to support my allegations against him of misconduct.
I specifically request again that Mr Aleck have no involvement in decision making on FOI requests that I make to substantiate my allegation of misconduct against him.
I would be satisfied if the Board were to accept responsibility for these responsibilities rather than Mr Aleck.
Alternatively, the Board has most likely identified this risk and the conflict of interest, and put in place suitable checks and balances. If so, could you advise me of those, so that I can satisfy myself that fair processes are in place.
Respectfully. Glen Buckley
I may be naive, but if I write to the PM raising those allegations and copy in every Member of Parliament, I feel he will be compelled to act. Seriously how could the PM ignore such substantial allegations aginst the Senior executive of CASA, and most especially if he receives a petition calling for an investigation by the AFP into the conduct of those CASA personnel.
MPs frequently get letters from members of the community alleging some sort of conspiracy. I'd expect the PM would receive even more.
Most of these claims are refuted outright or ignored after a simple enquiry to the Minister or Department concerned, if it even goes that far.
I said on this topic a long time ago that you've clearly been labelled by those you're writing to and those that you're alleging have wronged you as a nut, a sort of fixated person.
Whilst I (like many other of your supporters) can see the anguish of your plight, it is also so incredibly frustrating to see you persisting with writing these long and rambling letters.
They're not helping your case at all, if anything they're harming it. I'd expect that a solicitor would advise you to cease all direct communications - yet you keep going.
The GoFundMe raised a substantial amount of money that could and should have been used for proper legal advice and litigation. At least that's my view.
It's been over five years. Don't you want closure?
The following users liked this post:
Hello MagnumPI, you have said exactly what myself and I am guessing the majority of the readers on this site are actually thinking.
Every time there is a new letter it just prolongs the agony of a result and further cements the way that any Minister or Department would look at this matter.
It really has to stop and be handled by legal people, there is no way you can fight this fight yourself and win, at the moment there just waiting for you to commit suicide or give up and then the problem goes away. Use the money that has been pledged and allow the fight to be taken over for you by professionals who will just get the job done.
Sorry, rant over but it is just so frustrating to know that using the correct people this would have been over years ago
Every time there is a new letter it just prolongs the agony of a result and further cements the way that any Minister or Department would look at this matter.
It really has to stop and be handled by legal people, there is no way you can fight this fight yourself and win, at the moment there just waiting for you to commit suicide or give up and then the problem goes away. Use the money that has been pledged and allow the fight to be taken over for you by professionals who will just get the job done.
Sorry, rant over but it is just so frustrating to know that using the correct people this would have been over years ago
I agree with the two previous poster’s. Unfortunately, but with great respect, I have stopped reading your incredibly long pieces of text as my attention span is not that good on something I feel has been repeated on a number of occasions. For you however Glen, it may be cathartic to do that & if that is the case, then disregard what I said.
Just the same, it seems to me the longer this drags on, the less likely you will receive justice in the way you deem appropriate. The way things are going, Jonathon Aleck, the CEO & others will be long retired by the time this gets to crunch time & by then, your case will be somewhat of a distant memory to the CASA machine in the months/years ahead.
To you & your long suffering family, this matter is rightly of the utmost importance. To our Federal politicians however, I would regretfully say your matter is of little significance to them, largely because there’s no votes in it - & that applies to Labor & the LNP alike in my view.
Many posters here Glen have suggested that the time has come (& long gone) for you to commence taking a full on legal assault on CASA. You have a lot of supporters - but I’m sensing a degree of fatigue in that support due to the slow & seemingly counterproductive approach you are taking.
Bite the bullet Glen & get that legal action happening…
Just my 2 Lire’s worth…
Just the same, it seems to me the longer this drags on, the less likely you will receive justice in the way you deem appropriate. The way things are going, Jonathon Aleck, the CEO & others will be long retired by the time this gets to crunch time & by then, your case will be somewhat of a distant memory to the CASA machine in the months/years ahead.
To you & your long suffering family, this matter is rightly of the utmost importance. To our Federal politicians however, I would regretfully say your matter is of little significance to them, largely because there’s no votes in it - & that applies to Labor & the LNP alike in my view.
Many posters here Glen have suggested that the time has come (& long gone) for you to commence taking a full on legal assault on CASA. You have a lot of supporters - but I’m sensing a degree of fatigue in that support due to the slow & seemingly counterproductive approach you are taking.
Bite the bullet Glen & get that legal action happening…
Just my 2 Lire’s worth…
The following 8 users liked this post by VH-MLE:
"The Gloves are off!"
Glen, no they arent. You are persisting with an approach doomed to fail.
Everyone is yelling at you to take the legal approach using experts who can get a conclusion to this. That is your only option to a resolution. Get on with it.
Glen, no they arent. You are persisting with an approach doomed to fail.
Everyone is yelling at you to take the legal approach using experts who can get a conclusion to this. That is your only option to a resolution. Get on with it.
The following 5 users liked this post by MJA Chaser:
I agree with the two previous poster’s. Unfortunately, but with great respect, I have stopped reading your incredibly long pieces of text as my attention span is not that good on something I feel has been repeated on a number of occasions.
I’m sensing a degree of fatigue in that support due to the slow & seemingly counterproductive approach you are taking.
I’m sensing a degree of fatigue in that support due to the slow & seemingly counterproductive approach you are taking.
The following 2 users liked this post by Flaming galah:
April 2nd is not far away which is the date you said we would see the next step.
I’ve refrained from commenting until now however every poster is saying the same thing.
You have our support, use it.
I’ve refrained from commenting until now however every poster is saying the same thing.
You have our support, use it.
The following users liked this post:
long-term lurker here. I have signed up just now to metaphorically shake you into action, Glen. the time is nigh. you still have the room but there is reader fatigue. life is short
Thread Starter
Reply from Ombudsman to Post #2915
Post #2915 page 146 Request for clarification sent to Ombudsman requesting clarification of significant misunderstanding.
Post #2923 page 147 Follow up 5 weeks later requesting response.
Post 3 2962 page 149 Follow to the follow up after more than 2 months with no response.
The response from the Ombudsman received below. Dear Mr Buckley,
I am providing you an update of your complaint, reference number is 2024-102179.
Your complaint has been referred to Emma Cotterill, Senior Assistant Ombudsman – Investigations.
Emma will provide you a response by Monday, 25 March 2024.
We thank you for your patience.
Kind Regards,
Patrick
Post #2923 page 147 Follow up 5 weeks later requesting response.
Post 3 2962 page 149 Follow to the follow up after more than 2 months with no response.
The response from the Ombudsman received below. Dear Mr Buckley,
I am providing you an update of your complaint, reference number is 2024-102179.
Your complaint has been referred to Emma Cotterill, Senior Assistant Ombudsman – Investigations.
Emma will provide you a response by Monday, 25 March 2024.
We thank you for your patience.
Kind Regards,
Patrick
Thread Starter
Reply from Board to Post # 2963 and #2966
In Post #2963 i formally raised allegations of misconduct with the CASA Board.
In Post #2966 I made a request, as I have done repeatedly throughout this matter to have Mr aleck removed from involvement. FOI requests leave me in no doubt that there has been a very high level of involvement in this matter. Once again in an attempt to bring integrity to processes.
Below is confirmation that the correspondence has been forwarded to the Board.
to me, [email protected], [email protected]
Fri, 22 Mar, 14:26 (2 days ago)
OFFICIAL
Dear Mr Buckley
Thank you for your correspondence dated 20 March 2024, and the follow-up email received today dated 22 March 2024.
Both of your enquiries have progressed to the Chair of the Board and I hope to provide a response to you shortly.
Best regards
Colin
In Post #2966 I made a request, as I have done repeatedly throughout this matter to have Mr aleck removed from involvement. FOI requests leave me in no doubt that there has been a very high level of involvement in this matter. Once again in an attempt to bring integrity to processes.
Below is confirmation that the correspondence has been forwarded to the Board.
to me, [email protected], [email protected]
Fri, 22 Mar, 14:26 (2 days ago)OFFICIALDear Mr Buckley
Thank you for your correspondence dated 20 March 2024, and the follow-up email received today dated 22 March 2024.
Both of your enquiries have progressed to the Chair of the Board and I hope to provide a response to you shortly.
Best regards
Colin
Thread Starter
FOI requests Post #2943 Response from CASA
In Post #2943 I made an FOI request.
At my meeting with the CASA board Chair and CEO, it was revealed to me for the first time after 5 years that CASA action was in part, based on complaints that CASA had received from other Parties.
These allegations had NEVER been raised with me and I had no awareness at all until that time. My assumption is that CASA has most likely shared that information with the Ombudsman Office to lead the Ombudsman up a particular "path".
I am interested to see the nature of the complaints. It will be interesting to note if they are genuine concerns or perhaps something malicious. I very much embrace the process of confidential reporting, although CASA must have some filtration procedure. As an absolute minimum, if someone makes allegations to CASA, i should have the knowledge that they exist and the opportunity to address those concerns, prior to CASA making a decision. Anyway. they will arrive shortly as you can see from the correspondence below. My applications had not been acknowledged for two weeks, and I was concerned that it may be a delaying tactic on the 30 day counter. The correspondence assures me that those documents should arrive imminently."CASA Ref: F24/8101
Dear Mr Buckley,
Apologies for the delay in sending you an acknowledgement on your request(s) as I have been away being unwell. Please find below the acknowledgement for your request made on 3 March 2024. Your second request made on 4 March 2024, will be acknowledged in a separate email.
I refer to your email of 3 March 2024 whereby you requested access to the following information under the Freedom of Information Act 1982 (the FOI Act):
Can I request documents that CASA hold on to file for the period October 23rd 2013 to October 23rd 2018.
Those documents would be complaints or information made to CASA about my Organisation on any aspect of safety or compliance, or anything of any nature that would rightfully raise concerns within CASA.
Those complaints would have been submitted by a person or Entity external to CASA…
I acknowledge receipt of your request under the FOI Act. CASA received your request on 3 March 2024 and the 30-day statutory period for processing your request commenced from the day after that date. You should therefore expect a decision by COB Wednesday 3 April 2024. However, the period of 30 days may be extended if CASA needs to consult third parties or for other reasons. Should the timeframe be extended, you will be notified by CASA with the new due date. Your above request has been assigned the reference number F24/8101, please use this reference number in future correspondence relating to your above request.
You will be notified of any charges in relation to your request as soon as possible, before we process any requested documents or impose a final charge. CASA’s practice is to release documents in pdf format transmitted via email to your nominated email address. Please advise if you wish a different communication method – additional charges may apply.
When CASA has made a decision about your FOI request, we will send you a letter explaining our decision and your review and appeal rights.
Should you have any queries, please do not hesitate to contact me at: [email protected]
Once again, I apologise for the delay in acknowledging your request.
Kind regards,
XXX XXXX
Freedom of Information Officer
Legal Advisory and Drafting
Legal, International and Regulatory Affairs Division
At my meeting with the CASA board Chair and CEO, it was revealed to me for the first time after 5 years that CASA action was in part, based on complaints that CASA had received from other Parties.
These allegations had NEVER been raised with me and I had no awareness at all until that time. My assumption is that CASA has most likely shared that information with the Ombudsman Office to lead the Ombudsman up a particular "path".
I am interested to see the nature of the complaints. It will be interesting to note if they are genuine concerns or perhaps something malicious. I very much embrace the process of confidential reporting, although CASA must have some filtration procedure. As an absolute minimum, if someone makes allegations to CASA, i should have the knowledge that they exist and the opportunity to address those concerns, prior to CASA making a decision. Anyway. they will arrive shortly as you can see from the correspondence below. My applications had not been acknowledged for two weeks, and I was concerned that it may be a delaying tactic on the 30 day counter. The correspondence assures me that those documents should arrive imminently."CASA Ref: F24/8101
Dear Mr Buckley,
Apologies for the delay in sending you an acknowledgement on your request(s) as I have been away being unwell. Please find below the acknowledgement for your request made on 3 March 2024. Your second request made on 4 March 2024, will be acknowledged in a separate email.
I refer to your email of 3 March 2024 whereby you requested access to the following information under the Freedom of Information Act 1982 (the FOI Act):
Can I request documents that CASA hold on to file for the period October 23rd 2013 to October 23rd 2018.
Those documents would be complaints or information made to CASA about my Organisation on any aspect of safety or compliance, or anything of any nature that would rightfully raise concerns within CASA.
Those complaints would have been submitted by a person or Entity external to CASA…
I acknowledge receipt of your request under the FOI Act. CASA received your request on 3 March 2024 and the 30-day statutory period for processing your request commenced from the day after that date. You should therefore expect a decision by COB Wednesday 3 April 2024. However, the period of 30 days may be extended if CASA needs to consult third parties or for other reasons. Should the timeframe be extended, you will be notified by CASA with the new due date. Your above request has been assigned the reference number F24/8101, please use this reference number in future correspondence relating to your above request.
You will be notified of any charges in relation to your request as soon as possible, before we process any requested documents or impose a final charge. CASA’s practice is to release documents in pdf format transmitted via email to your nominated email address. Please advise if you wish a different communication method – additional charges may apply.
When CASA has made a decision about your FOI request, we will send you a letter explaining our decision and your review and appeal rights.
Should you have any queries, please do not hesitate to contact me at: [email protected]
Once again, I apologise for the delay in acknowledging your request.
Kind regards,
XXX XXXX
Freedom of Information Officer
Legal Advisory and Drafting
Legal, International and Regulatory Affairs Division
Thread Starter
FOI request applications
I realised that i had not posted this FOI request on here, or at least a quick scan did not reveal it.
Regarding the significance of this request. CASAs stance is that throughout the decade that I operated they were not awre that i was utilising employees that were employees of other Entities. CASA advised that if I transferred all employees of all Entities to become Employees of the same Entity that held the AOC the entire matter would immediately be fully resolved.
Very clearly this is not supported by any industry precedent or legislation.
I maintain that CASA was always truthfully awre throughout the decade. The significance of this request is that it will clearly confirm that CASA was fully aware of the relationship and the recollection of this documentation is that it clearly indicates such. to me, Freedom
Thu, 21 Mar, 11:09 (3 days ago)
OFFICIAL
CASA Ref: F24/8102
Dear Mr Buckley,
Apologies for the delay in sending you an acknowledgement on your request(s) as I have been away being unwell. Please find below the acknowledgement for your request made on 4 March 2024.
I refer to your email of 3 March 2024 whereby you requested access to the following information under the Freedom of Information Act 1982 (the FOI Act):
On approximately 27/07/17 an application was made for the addition of our APTA- AVIA base.
On approximately 05/10/17 an application was made for the addition of our APTA- LTF Base….
What I am seeking in this FOI request is the paperwork that would have been supplied to me once those bases were approved. That "certificate" or "approval: was created by CASA, and CASA provided us with those two documents, one for each APTA base.
I acknowledge receipt of your request under the FOI Act. CASA received your request on 3 March 2024 and the 30-day statutory period for processing your request commenced from the day after that date. You should therefore expect a decision by COB Thursday 4 April 2024. However, the period of 30 days may be extended if CASA needs to consult third parties or for other reasons. Should the timeframe be extended, you will be notified by CASA with the new due date. Your above request has been assigned the reference number F24/8102, please use this reference number in future correspondence relating to your above request.
You will be notified of any charges in relation to your request as soon as possible, before we process any requested documents or impose a final charge. CASA’s practice is to release documents in pdf format transmitted via email to your nominated email address. Please advise if you wish a different communication method – additional charges may apply.
When CASA has made a decision about your FOI request, we will send you a letter explaining our decision and your review and appeal rights.
Should you have any queries, please do not hesitate to contact me at: [email protected]
Once again, I apologise for the delay in acknowledging your request.
Kind regards,
XXX XXXX
Freedom of Information Officer
Legal Advisory and Drafting
Legal, International and Regulatory Affairs Division
Civil Aviation Safety Authority
Regarding the significance of this request. CASAs stance is that throughout the decade that I operated they were not awre that i was utilising employees that were employees of other Entities. CASA advised that if I transferred all employees of all Entities to become Employees of the same Entity that held the AOC the entire matter would immediately be fully resolved.
Very clearly this is not supported by any industry precedent or legislation.
I maintain that CASA was always truthfully awre throughout the decade. The significance of this request is that it will clearly confirm that CASA was fully aware of the relationship and the recollection of this documentation is that it clearly indicates such. to me, Freedom
Thu, 21 Mar, 11:09 (3 days ago)
OFFICIALCASA Ref: F24/8102
Dear Mr Buckley,
Apologies for the delay in sending you an acknowledgement on your request(s) as I have been away being unwell. Please find below the acknowledgement for your request made on 4 March 2024.
I refer to your email of 3 March 2024 whereby you requested access to the following information under the Freedom of Information Act 1982 (the FOI Act):
On approximately 27/07/17 an application was made for the addition of our APTA- AVIA base.
On approximately 05/10/17 an application was made for the addition of our APTA- LTF Base….
What I am seeking in this FOI request is the paperwork that would have been supplied to me once those bases were approved. That "certificate" or "approval: was created by CASA, and CASA provided us with those two documents, one for each APTA base.
I acknowledge receipt of your request under the FOI Act. CASA received your request on 3 March 2024 and the 30-day statutory period for processing your request commenced from the day after that date. You should therefore expect a decision by COB Thursday 4 April 2024. However, the period of 30 days may be extended if CASA needs to consult third parties or for other reasons. Should the timeframe be extended, you will be notified by CASA with the new due date. Your above request has been assigned the reference number F24/8102, please use this reference number in future correspondence relating to your above request.
You will be notified of any charges in relation to your request as soon as possible, before we process any requested documents or impose a final charge. CASA’s practice is to release documents in pdf format transmitted via email to your nominated email address. Please advise if you wish a different communication method – additional charges may apply.
When CASA has made a decision about your FOI request, we will send you a letter explaining our decision and your review and appeal rights.
Should you have any queries, please do not hesitate to contact me at: [email protected]
Once again, I apologise for the delay in acknowledging your request.
Kind regards,
XXX XXXX
Freedom of Information Officer
Legal Advisory and Drafting
Legal, International and Regulatory Affairs Division
Civil Aviation Safety Authority
So the standard CASA response to an FOI request is a delay of at least 30 days and likely longer for no particular reason other than to delay and frustrate you. This is a f#cking waste of time. Go to court Glen! Your legal team will squeeze out the truth from the bastards!
The following 3 users liked this post by MalcolmReynolds:
It's like posts 2967 through to 2973 do not exist!
Regretfully, I'm sorry to say I'm no longer going to actively follow this thread. Having said that, I hope you do eventually obtain the justice (& compensation) you need...
Regretfully, I'm sorry to say I'm no longer going to actively follow this thread. Having said that, I hope you do eventually obtain the justice (& compensation) you need...
He knows what he’s doing.
He’s just getting all his ducks in a row before the next step. We’re behind you GB!