Glen Buckley and Australian small business -V- CASA
Thread Starter
4 of 6
Please find a document below those outlines the restrictions that CASA placed on the business, and their impact. I feel somewhat that the implications of the trading restrictions on the business are not being given the appropriate consideration in this matter. They were not proportionate, not necessary, and Mr Aleck was not compelled to make the decisions he made. These restrictions were unnecessary and had no basis in law or CASA procedures. A face to face well intentioned discussion of less that 3 hours duration could have had this entire fiasco avoided. It really could have been that simple, if all Parties were genuinely acting with good intent.
Consider that CASA provided short term “interim approvals to operate” in accordance with the timelines below. No education provider, or in fact any business could continue to operate in any industry with such limited surety of operations.
23/10/18 7 days surety of operations.
30/10/18 to 12/02/19 No surety of operations. Awaiting CASA determination.
12/02/19 to 13/05/19 Interim Approval expiring midnight 13/05/19.
03/05/19 to 01/07/19 Extension of Interim Approval to midnight 01/07/19.(Company transferred just prior to expiry of this final interim approval, the CASA CEO led me to believe that there would be no more extensions,
It is important to appreciate the impact of these interim approvals on the business. Had those restrictions In October 2018, after twelve years of operation, and 18 months after CASA had revalidated APTA to continue to provide multi base operations, CASA writes to me and advises that I have 7 days certainty of operations, that I am operating unlawfully, and subject to regulatory action.
CASA also placed an Administrative “freeze” on all pending regulatory tasks. I was unable to process applications. The impact of this was significant. I had a number of projects that were essential to operations and CASA would not process, these included freezes on CASA processing applications for Key Personnel that were essential to increasing oversight and control to prepare for anticipated growth of the Organisation.
Refusal to process additional courses to be added. These were courses that we were fully entitled to add on to our capability.
A new flight simulator laying idle for many months, as CASA would not process the application for its approval until the matter of contracts was resolved.
This was very clearly a variation of an AOC, and a very significant one i.e. short term interim approval to operate, and a freeze applied on all regulatory tasks. The CASA Enforcement Manual clearly outlines the procedures that should have been followed. by CASA. These procedures are outlined in CASA manuals to ensure compliance with administrative law, natural justice, and procedural fairness. These procedures were completely bypassed in CASAs’ dealing with me on these matters. CASA have a particular format for a Show Cause Notice (SCN). None was ever issued. This was one of the many breaches of procedures that should have been followed when varying my AOC. This document also outlines CASAs Regulatory Philosophy. In CASA dealings with me they demonstrated a flagrant disregard for the obligations placed on them to act professionally. Enforcement Manual (casa.gov.au)
For clarity, CASA initially advised me that they were going to close down the business and that what I was doing was unlawful.
The impact is immediate:
DOCUMENT IS STILL A WORK IN PROGRESS
Consider that CASA provided short term “interim approvals to operate” in accordance with the timelines below. No education provider, or in fact any business could continue to operate in any industry with such limited surety of operations.
23/10/18 7 days surety of operations.
30/10/18 to 12/02/19 No surety of operations. Awaiting CASA determination.
12/02/19 to 13/05/19 Interim Approval expiring midnight 13/05/19.
03/05/19 to 01/07/19 Extension of Interim Approval to midnight 01/07/19.(Company transferred just prior to expiry of this final interim approval, the CASA CEO led me to believe that there would be no more extensions,
It is important to appreciate the impact of these interim approvals on the business. Had those restrictions In October 2018, after twelve years of operation, and 18 months after CASA had revalidated APTA to continue to provide multi base operations, CASA writes to me and advises that I have 7 days certainty of operations, that I am operating unlawfully, and subject to regulatory action.
CASA also placed an Administrative “freeze” on all pending regulatory tasks. I was unable to process applications. The impact of this was significant. I had a number of projects that were essential to operations and CASA would not process, these included freezes on CASA processing applications for Key Personnel that were essential to increasing oversight and control to prepare for anticipated growth of the Organisation.
Refusal to process additional courses to be added. These were courses that we were fully entitled to add on to our capability.
A new flight simulator laying idle for many months, as CASA would not process the application for its approval until the matter of contracts was resolved.
This was very clearly a variation of an AOC, and a very significant one i.e. short term interim approval to operate, and a freeze applied on all regulatory tasks. The CASA Enforcement Manual clearly outlines the procedures that should have been followed. by CASA. These procedures are outlined in CASA manuals to ensure compliance with administrative law, natural justice, and procedural fairness. These procedures were completely bypassed in CASAs’ dealing with me on these matters. CASA have a particular format for a Show Cause Notice (SCN). None was ever issued. This was one of the many breaches of procedures that should have been followed when varying my AOC. This document also outlines CASAs Regulatory Philosophy. In CASA dealings with me they demonstrated a flagrant disregard for the obligations placed on them to act professionally. Enforcement Manual (casa.gov.au)
For clarity, CASA initially advised me that they were going to close down the business and that what I was doing was unlawful.
The impact is immediate:
- First and foremost, enormous reputational damage is done to me personally and immediately. Until this point in time, I have been of the view that CASA is supportive of APTA. They helped me design the systems, assessed the systems, approved the systems, audited the systems and in fact recommended APTA to flying schools. I have led customers to believe that APTA is fully CASA approved, as it is. The notice that APTA has as little as 7 days to continue operating brings enormous harm to the businesses, staff, customers, students and suppliers that are dependent on the APTA. Those people depending on me, understandably have concerns that I have involved them in something that is not CASA approved. The implications on those entities are significant.
- The flying schools are no longer able to enrol students. Courses for the Commercial Pilot Licence which comprise 95% of the business’s revenue, typically take 18 months. This CASA action occurred at the very time the business attracts new students considering their options after finishing High School. No person will enrol in a school with CASA action pending and only 7 days surety of operations.
- My own flying school Melbourne Flight Training that I have been operating for 12 years has suddenly been declared an unauthorised operation by CASA, and I have been advised that I will most likely be subject to regulatory action. This is simply ridiculous. My school operates in exactly the same awy it has for more than a decade. This action is inexplicable. Multiple requests to CASA to have this explained have not been answered. This cannot possibly be justified.
- The parent Company APTA is unable to attract new flying schools to join. CASA has determined that the model is now unlawful. The structure costs approximately $1,000,000 per annum to run, and is dependent on ten contributing members. I have members wanting to join, but CASA refuses to process new applications. Customers waiting to join have their confidence in APTA impacted as they are placed on hold. Bases that CASA has previously approved will have their approvals reversed.
- The entire reputation and credibility of APTA and me, are immediately called into question. I have a number of Entities that are wholly dependent on APTA for their continued operation. The initial correspondence from CASA leads me to believe that CASA is not only refusing previous approvals but reversing existing approvals i.e. my own flying school of more than a decade has suddenly been declared an “unauthorised operation” and CASA advises “if APTA has facilitated these Companies operating in contravention of the above provisions, it would be a party to such contraventions.” It was simply ludicrous that my own school could be deemed an unauthorised operation. My initial written response is attached as Appendix A
- Existing APTA members who have previously been approved by CASA have now had their approvals reversed. By joining APTA, they now have a situation that their continuing operations are wholly dependent on APTAs approval that has now been cut back to 7 days I the future. The CASA correspondence leaves little doubt that it is more likely than not, that APTA will be closed down, with that, their own businesses will be forced into closure. The
- Existing students in the flying schools become concerned. They have commenced their training, and now their education provider has only 7 days certainty of operations. Understandably they consider options at other Registered Training Organisations (RTO) for the balance of their training. APTA/MFT had been a Registered Training Organisation RTO 22508 with an impeccable audit history, and the highest levels of compliance. An obligation on me as the owner of that RTO and the responsible person, is that I do not enrol students into a course that I may not be able to deliver.
- The business is seeking to add new talent to the Organisation in preparation for projected growth. I am unable to enter into employment contracts with new staff. A recent course of graduates with an expectation of employment on graduation have now lost that opportunity.
- CASA has placed an administrative freeze on all regulatory tasks. I have applications with CASA for the addition of new Key personnel, addition of new flight simulators, and new courses needing to be added to cater for business demands. All of these projects grind to a halt. The impact on the business is substantial. CASA should not have placed these tasks on hold, as they were essential for the business, essential to increase oversight, and essential to increase quality outcomes.
- Existing staff become concerned about the security of their respective livelihoods. Their employer has been given only 7 days’ notice of continuity of operations. Many of these employees have been with me since I opened the business more than a decade ago. Whilst CASA did issue several short-term approvals, the staff become increasingly concerned. They know that cashflow has been impacted, and that new students are not signing up. Obviously, they become concerned for their future.
- As a Registered Training Organisation, I have legal obligations on me, not to enrol students if I cannot deliver a course of training.
- International Students planning to move to Australia to train with the Organisation, have to be contacted and told to put their plans on hold. This alone creates an enormous amount of instability.
- Suppliers that I have long established relationships with are impacted. Without any notification at all, and no time to plan, CASA has provided me only 7 days surety of operations. Throughout the process, I believed at all times that this matter could have been promptly resolved, as it could have been. The Suppliers gave me short term support, but like me, they did not expect this matter to drag on for a staggering 8 months.
DOCUMENT IS STILL A WORK IN PROGRESS
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: New Zealand
Age: 71
Posts: 1,475
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Baloney
Let’s be serious; a career bureaucrat does not know the working parts of this industry. She has no idea. She does not understand the negative impact that ‘her’ agency has had on Australian aviation. She does not understand the impact an outdated civil aviation Act and pisspoor regulations have had on the aviation industry. She does not understand how badly her agency has mistreated parts of the aviation industry and engaged in malfeasance and misfeasance.
Message to Pip - you aren’t in charge and neither is your Board. You are a toothless tiger. You are there to ensure that your beloved Minister isn’t embarrassed by any of your agency’s shenanigans. You are there to act as a bullet proof vest to ensure your Minister is never held to account for the shortcomings of your agency. You are a shield of Teflon for your Minister.
Tootlepip
What a stupid article. Full of fluff and hollow statements. I mean, wow, Pip has a long history of ‘observing’ aviation. Woohoo! How encouraging. Has she spent time at the aircraft viewing area at Brisbane airport? Does ‘viewing’ mean watching the cabin crew from Seat 1A? And she has an ‘interest’ in aviation. Again, what does that mean? Does she own Qantas shares or have a niece or nephew that works in aviation?
Let’s be serious; a career bureaucrat does not know the working parts of this industry. She has no idea. She does not understand the negative impact that ‘her’ agency has had on Australian aviation. She does not understand the impact an outdated civil aviation Act and pisspoor regulations have had on the aviation industry. She does not understand how badly her agency has mistreated parts of the aviation industry and engaged in malfeasance and misfeasance.
Message to Pip - you aren’t in charge and neither is your Board. You are a toothless tiger. You are there to ensure that your beloved Minister isn’t embarrassed by any of your agency’s shenanigans. You are there to act as a bullet proof vest to ensure your Minister is never held to account for the shortcomings of your agency. You are a shield of Teflon for your Minister.
Tootlepip
Let’s be serious; a career bureaucrat does not know the working parts of this industry. She has no idea. She does not understand the negative impact that ‘her’ agency has had on Australian aviation. She does not understand the impact an outdated civil aviation Act and pisspoor regulations have had on the aviation industry. She does not understand how badly her agency has mistreated parts of the aviation industry and engaged in malfeasance and misfeasance.
Message to Pip - you aren’t in charge and neither is your Board. You are a toothless tiger. You are there to ensure that your beloved Minister isn’t embarrassed by any of your agency’s shenanigans. You are there to act as a bullet proof vest to ensure your Minister is never held to account for the shortcomings of your agency. You are a shield of Teflon for your Minister.
Tootlepip
Thread Starter
Nice to see the new Organizational, Chart up
Our organisational chart | Civil Aviation Safety Authority (casa.gov.au)
Posting a letter to Ms Pip Spence later today. Will be sure to get it up here at 5PM.
Posting a letter to Ms Pip Spence later today. Will be sure to get it up here at 5PM.
Thread Starter
Letter to Pip Spence
TO:
Mr. Mark Binskin AC- Chair of the CASA Board
Ms. Pip spence PSM- CASA CEO
CC:
The Office of the Deputy PM.
Dear Ms Spence, and Mr Binskin,
Congratulations on your respective appointments. The General Aviation (GA) is highly dependent on you, in your respective roles, as am I.
I would like to qualify the following correspondence by acknowledging that you are both relatively new to the positions and have had absolutely no involvement in this matter to date, and therefore not responsible for it.
Similarly, the Honourable Mr Barnaby Joyce has only recently taken over from Mr Michael McCormack, as the Minister responsible for CASA.
Mr McCormack has been fully briefed on this matter by the previous CASA Chair of the Board, Mr Anthony Matthews, in accordance with the obligations placed on him by the Ministers Statement of Expectations of the Board of CASA.
Although Mr McCormack never responded to my correspondence his Office has recently acknowledged receipt, of extensive correspondence from me, including allegations of misfeasance against one of the CASA Executive Managers, and therefore would be considered the Subject Matter Expert (SME) within the National Party.
You will be aware of my matter; my name is Glen Buckley the previous owner of Melbourne Flight Training (MFT) and the Australian Pilot Training Alliance (APTA). Two flight training businesses shut down by CASA in October 2018. This was done with absolutely no supporting Safety Case despite my repeated requests for one.
I am fully satisfied that a CASA employees’ misconduct is the reason for the loss of my businesses, and others, and I have previously made allegations of misfeasance in Public Office against him before Parliament.
Other people have contacted me and offered to come forward and present their evidence, including CASA employees, against that same individual.
The impacts have been significant. Several businesses were closed, people lost their jobs, suppliers were left unpaid, customers impacted, and domestic and international students were impacted.
That is the reason that I am pushing to have my matter fully investigated in a well-intentioned manner. Far too many people have been impacted by this, and that causes an enormous burden on me.
The purpose of this correspondence.
I wish to provide you with a copy of a recording that I have not previously published.
If you listen to that recording of a CASA employee, it will bring this entire matter to a prompt resolution.
It will clearly demonstrate that CASA has mislead the Commonwealth Ombudsman in his investigation of this matter. Please be assured that there will be absolutely no doubt once you have listened to it.
(Some content of personal impact on my family removed for this postXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
I am currently off work for 6 weeks after being released from hospital with a heart condition that I attribute to the conduct of this employee. XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXI have come home decided to publish the recording.
Because of this individual misconduct I do not have the funds to obtain legal advice on this matter, so will default to your guidance.
Can each of you please advise the method that I can provide you with a copy of that recording in a confidential and appropriate manner.
Thank you for your consideration, and I hope you choose to take advantage of the opportunity presented.
Glen Buckley
Mr. Mark Binskin AC- Chair of the CASA Board
Ms. Pip spence PSM- CASA CEO
CC:
The Office of the Deputy PM.
Dear Ms Spence, and Mr Binskin,
Congratulations on your respective appointments. The General Aviation (GA) is highly dependent on you, in your respective roles, as am I.
I would like to qualify the following correspondence by acknowledging that you are both relatively new to the positions and have had absolutely no involvement in this matter to date, and therefore not responsible for it.
Similarly, the Honourable Mr Barnaby Joyce has only recently taken over from Mr Michael McCormack, as the Minister responsible for CASA.
Mr McCormack has been fully briefed on this matter by the previous CASA Chair of the Board, Mr Anthony Matthews, in accordance with the obligations placed on him by the Ministers Statement of Expectations of the Board of CASA.
Although Mr McCormack never responded to my correspondence his Office has recently acknowledged receipt, of extensive correspondence from me, including allegations of misfeasance against one of the CASA Executive Managers, and therefore would be considered the Subject Matter Expert (SME) within the National Party.
You will be aware of my matter; my name is Glen Buckley the previous owner of Melbourne Flight Training (MFT) and the Australian Pilot Training Alliance (APTA). Two flight training businesses shut down by CASA in October 2018. This was done with absolutely no supporting Safety Case despite my repeated requests for one.
I am fully satisfied that a CASA employees’ misconduct is the reason for the loss of my businesses, and others, and I have previously made allegations of misfeasance in Public Office against him before Parliament.
Other people have contacted me and offered to come forward and present their evidence, including CASA employees, against that same individual.
The impacts have been significant. Several businesses were closed, people lost their jobs, suppliers were left unpaid, customers impacted, and domestic and international students were impacted.
That is the reason that I am pushing to have my matter fully investigated in a well-intentioned manner. Far too many people have been impacted by this, and that causes an enormous burden on me.
The purpose of this correspondence.
I wish to provide you with a copy of a recording that I have not previously published.
If you listen to that recording of a CASA employee, it will bring this entire matter to a prompt resolution.
It will clearly demonstrate that CASA has mislead the Commonwealth Ombudsman in his investigation of this matter. Please be assured that there will be absolutely no doubt once you have listened to it.
(Some content of personal impact on my family removed for this postXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
I am currently off work for 6 weeks after being released from hospital with a heart condition that I attribute to the conduct of this employee. XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXI have come home decided to publish the recording.
Because of this individual misconduct I do not have the funds to obtain legal advice on this matter, so will default to your guidance.
Can each of you please advise the method that I can provide you with a copy of that recording in a confidential and appropriate manner.
Thank you for your consideration, and I hope you choose to take advantage of the opportunity presented.
Glen Buckley
Thread Starter
Misleading the Ombudsman
The CASA Legal Department advises the Commonwealth Ombudsmans Office that "they only first became aware of APTAs structure just prior to October 2018. Note that October 2018.
My email to three CASA personnel that i was required to correspond within CASA. This email is two years and a half prior. June 20th 2016.. The one of only dozens of emails. Its obscene really.
"Dear XXXXXX (three senior CASA employees)
As you are aware i am in the process of putting together an alliance of flight organizations., under an Industry Leading Group of Professionals. My intention is to build a team that can communicate with CASA in an effective, professional and constructive manner
I have now invested significantly in this proposal. If practical i would like the opportunity to meet with you in the CASA Office to outline my proposed course of action. I will be seeking significant guidance from CASA during the process. My intention is to get it right first time. I want to genuinely want to work with CASA as closely as your resources permit................"
I really cannot believe that CASA would seriously put that proposition to the Ombudsman, and that apparently it has been accepted. Its trully staggering.
My email to three CASA personnel that i was required to correspond within CASA. This email is two years and a half prior. June 20th 2016.. The one of only dozens of emails. Its obscene really.
"Dear XXXXXX (three senior CASA employees)
As you are aware i am in the process of putting together an alliance of flight organizations., under an Industry Leading Group of Professionals. My intention is to build a team that can communicate with CASA in an effective, professional and constructive manner
I have now invested significantly in this proposal. If practical i would like the opportunity to meet with you in the CASA Office to outline my proposed course of action. I will be seeking significant guidance from CASA during the process. My intention is to get it right first time. I want to genuinely want to work with CASA as closely as your resources permit................"
I really cannot believe that CASA would seriously put that proposition to the Ombudsman, and that apparently it has been accepted. Its trully staggering.
Thread Starter
Response to Post 1809 from CASA
Dear Mr Buckley
I refer to your email of 3 November 2021 addressed to the Chair of the CASA Board, Mark Binskin AC and CASA’s Chief Executive Officer and Director of Aviation Safety (CEO/DAS), Pip Spence PSM. I have been asked to respond on their behalf.
At the outset, Mr Binskin and Ms Spence thank you for your congratulatory wishes, and both confirm their commitment to ensuring CASA performs its important regulatory and safety-related functions in a way that is supportive of the general aviation community.
The particular point of your email concerns a recording you say demonstrates that CASA has misled the Commonwealth Ombudsman in his investigation of your complaints about CASA. The Chair and the CEO/DAS consider it more appropriate that you provide that recording directly to the Ombudsman, on the basis that it is the Ombudsman who will be in the best position to consider its bearing on his office’s investigation of your complaints.
Should you also wish to share the recording or a summary of its content with the Chair and the CEO/DAS that would be a matter for you.
Yours sincerely
Colin McLachlan
Colin McLachlan| Board Secretary
I refer to your email of 3 November 2021 addressed to the Chair of the CASA Board, Mark Binskin AC and CASA’s Chief Executive Officer and Director of Aviation Safety (CEO/DAS), Pip Spence PSM. I have been asked to respond on their behalf.
At the outset, Mr Binskin and Ms Spence thank you for your congratulatory wishes, and both confirm their commitment to ensuring CASA performs its important regulatory and safety-related functions in a way that is supportive of the general aviation community.
The particular point of your email concerns a recording you say demonstrates that CASA has misled the Commonwealth Ombudsman in his investigation of your complaints about CASA. The Chair and the CEO/DAS consider it more appropriate that you provide that recording directly to the Ombudsman, on the basis that it is the Ombudsman who will be in the best position to consider its bearing on his office’s investigation of your complaints.
Should you also wish to share the recording or a summary of its content with the Chair and the CEO/DAS that would be a matter for you.
Yours sincerely
Colin McLachlan
Colin McLachlan| Board Secretary
Dear Mr Buckley
I refer to your email of 3 November 2021 addressed to the Chair of the CASA Board, Mark Binskin AC and CASA’s Chief Executive Officer and Director of Aviation Safety (CEO/DAS), Pip Spence PSM. I have been asked to respond on their behalf.
At the outset, Mr Binskin and Ms Spence thank you for your congratulatory wishes, and both confirm their commitment to ensuring CASA performs its important regulatory and safety-related functions in a way that is supportive of the general aviation community.
The particular point of your email concerns a recording you say demonstrates that CASA has misled the Commonwealth Ombudsman in his investigation of your complaints about CASA. The Chair and the CEO/DAS consider it more appropriate that you provide that recording directly to the Ombudsman, on the basis that it is the Ombudsman who will be in the best position to consider its bearing on his office’s investigation of your complaints.
Should you also wish to share the recording or a summary of its content with the Chair and the CEO/DAS that would be a matter for you.
Yours sincerely
Colin McLachlan
Colin McLachlan| Board Secretary
I refer to your email of 3 November 2021 addressed to the Chair of the CASA Board, Mark Binskin AC and CASA’s Chief Executive Officer and Director of Aviation Safety (CEO/DAS), Pip Spence PSM. I have been asked to respond on their behalf.
At the outset, Mr Binskin and Ms Spence thank you for your congratulatory wishes, and both confirm their commitment to ensuring CASA performs its important regulatory and safety-related functions in a way that is supportive of the general aviation community.
The particular point of your email concerns a recording you say demonstrates that CASA has misled the Commonwealth Ombudsman in his investigation of your complaints about CASA. The Chair and the CEO/DAS consider it more appropriate that you provide that recording directly to the Ombudsman, on the basis that it is the Ombudsman who will be in the best position to consider its bearing on his office’s investigation of your complaints.
Should you also wish to share the recording or a summary of its content with the Chair and the CEO/DAS that would be a matter for you.
Yours sincerely
Colin McLachlan
Colin McLachlan| Board Secretary
I would not waste my time or effort with the Ombudsman.
CAsA lawyers can request a copy from your lawyer.
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: New Zealand
Age: 71
Posts: 1,475
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
‘Tootle’ Pip Spence would have been very well aware of your ‘case’ when she commenced her tenure Glen, I can assure you of that. Her first command from the Ministers office will have been to deflect all of this negative publicity away from the Ministers office. That can be evidenced by the fact that the Acting DAS, the arrogant Scottish git, departed the organisation rather quietly recently, shortly followed by Mr Craig Martin. A gradual chipping away at the executive managers involved in the Glen Buckley fiasco has been taking place. That’s part of the game one plays when they float around at the top tier of an organisation - always be ready to be the scapegoat for someone more powerful. It is a scenario that has been played out at CASA on many occasions over the decades. It’s amazing how Jonathon ‘Teflon Jon’ Aleck is always well clear of the carnage after the dust settles. **** wouldn’t stick to that bloke even if super glue and dyna bolts were used.
Keep going Glen, you’ve come this far. With a Federal election probably taking place not long after May 2022, you might be able to get some support from some Independents who are willing to take a few pot shots at the current mob of LNP crooks and shonks in power.
Keep going Glen, you’ve come this far. With a Federal election probably taking place not long after May 2022, you might be able to get some support from some Independents who are willing to take a few pot shots at the current mob of LNP crooks and shonks in power.
Thread Starter
Response to Post 1811 from CASA Board and CEO
6th November 2021
cc: Ombudsman
Dear Colin, (CASA Board Secretariat),
Thank you for facilitating a prompt response to my correspondence dated November 3rd, 2021
I am formally requesting that CASA initiates contact with the Ombudsman’s Office forthwith.
It is my belief that CASA is duty bound, if not compelled, to contact the Ombudsman’s Office as soon as practical, after it became aware that it had potentially mislead the Ombudsman’s Office or provided information that is at its best inaccurate.
There can be no doubt that CASA has misled the Ombudsman’s Office to believe “CASA only became aware of APTAs structure just prior to October 2018; this is blatantly not the case.
In fact, that representation is very far from the truth of the situation as I am alleging that CASA has deliberately or otherwise mislead the Ombudsman’s Office and will provide evidence of that.
There are two fundamental points in asserting that CASA has mislead the Ombudsman’s Office, and. whilst not limited to only these two items, they are most significant.
Firstly, CASAs previously maintained CASA did not become aware of APTAs structure until, just prior to October 2018. From a legal perspective, I appreciate the significance of that statement. If it were the truth, it would work favourably for CASAs position in this matter. My assertion is that an employee / or employees of CASA were responsible for the provision of information to the Ombudsman that is clearly untruthful and was provided with the intention of misleading the Ombudsman on a number of issues. The purpose being to influence the outcome of the investigation.
Secondly, CASA maintain that they made a number of well-intentioned attempts to resolve this matter in good faith and finalise the wording for the contracts. Whereas I would strongly assert that CASA did not act in good faith, deliberately frustrating the matter; what is more to the point never actually had any intention of resolving this matter. I will provide and release the recording of the CASA personnel that I have mentioned previously.
Dealing with the first point only in this correspondence at this time, I will address the second matter at a later date.
The impact of CASA’s misconduct and misinformation has been significant, and quite frankly after having spent every waking moment of the last three years dealing with this trauma, I am well and truly over it. Far too much time and stress has been directly related to me refuting clearly untruthful information by CASA to no avail.
It seems entirely appropriate that CASA reach out to the Ombudsman’s Office and advise that after the receipt of this correspondence, they request the Ombudsman’s Office to place the investigation on hold. Such action will enable CASA to reassess its position and provide both the Ombudsman’s office and myself with CASAs position, hopefully this time reflecting the truth. CASA may choose however to maintain its “position” in that they were not aware of the structure of APTA until just prior to October 2018.
Please find attached supported samples of emails to and from CASA dating back 2 ½ years before they claim that they first became aware.
Sampling of the emails and the timeline from mid-2016 are attached; that is, before CASA claim they first became aware of APTAs structure. I have also attached a copy of the proposed contract that was supplied to Mr Graeme Crawford the CASA 2IC on October 7th, 2017,being 6 months after APTA was fully approved by CASA; interestingly, one year before CASA claim they first became aware of my structure.
Exhibit A: 20 June 2016 => Email from Glen Buckley to the three CASA oversighting personnel. (2 ½ years before CASA claim that they became aware of APTA.
“Dear John,
As you are aware, I am in the process of putting together and alliance of flight training organisations, under an Industry leading group of professionals. My intention is to build a team that can communicate with CASA in an effective, professional and constructive manner.
I have now invested significantly in the proposal. If practical I would like the opportunity to meet with you in the CASA Office to outline my proposed course of action. I will be seeking significant guidance from CASA during this process. My intention is to “get it right”, the first time. I genuinely want to work as closely with CASA as your resources permit…………”
Exhibit B: 21 June 2016 => Response Email from CASA to Glen Buckley
This email is from CASA arranging the requested meeting
Exhibit C: 21 June 2016 => Email from Glen Buckley finalising meeting late June 2016,
(that is 2 ½ years before CASA claim they first became aware of my businesses structure).
Exhibit D: 23rd June 2016 => Email from Glen Buckley to CASA
This email has a 9-page document attached to it, that can leave absolutely no doubt in the readers mind as to the structure that is intended.
Exhibit E: 13th July 2016 => Email from Glen Buckley to three oversighting personnel within CASA.
This email advises CASA that I am obtaining some interest in this concept and requesting CASA time frames to add new Entities.
This attached the 2016 version of the proposed contract to Mr Crawford; it was provided as a courtesy in the interests of transparency. When CASA sent the initial notification years later in October 2018, they “overlooked” the fact that these contracts had been supplied on multiple occasions, and that can be clearly evidenced.
Exhibit F: 18th January 2017 => Meeting with Mr Graeme Crawford 2IC of CASA.
This is almost 1 ½ years before CASA claim they became aware of the structure.
The meeting occurred in Canberra on an unrelated matter. Interestingly, it was the CASA Executive, Mr Crawford who raised the subject of APTA; therefore, he was clearly aware of APTA existence at that time.
Conclusion
CASA has an obligation to act as a model litigant and whilst I certainly don’t intend to go through the charter here, I would like to highlight a sampling; however, Mr Jonathan Aleck will be fully aware of those obligations. The first of these being particularly salient in this matter.
Yours Faithfully,
Glen Buckley
cc: Ombudsman
Dear Colin, (CASA Board Secretariat),
Thank you for facilitating a prompt response to my correspondence dated November 3rd, 2021
I am formally requesting that CASA initiates contact with the Ombudsman’s Office forthwith.
It is my belief that CASA is duty bound, if not compelled, to contact the Ombudsman’s Office as soon as practical, after it became aware that it had potentially mislead the Ombudsman’s Office or provided information that is at its best inaccurate.
There can be no doubt that CASA has misled the Ombudsman’s Office to believe “CASA only became aware of APTAs structure just prior to October 2018; this is blatantly not the case.
In fact, that representation is very far from the truth of the situation as I am alleging that CASA has deliberately or otherwise mislead the Ombudsman’s Office and will provide evidence of that.
There are two fundamental points in asserting that CASA has mislead the Ombudsman’s Office, and. whilst not limited to only these two items, they are most significant.
Firstly, CASAs previously maintained CASA did not become aware of APTAs structure until, just prior to October 2018. From a legal perspective, I appreciate the significance of that statement. If it were the truth, it would work favourably for CASAs position in this matter. My assertion is that an employee / or employees of CASA were responsible for the provision of information to the Ombudsman that is clearly untruthful and was provided with the intention of misleading the Ombudsman on a number of issues. The purpose being to influence the outcome of the investigation.
Secondly, CASA maintain that they made a number of well-intentioned attempts to resolve this matter in good faith and finalise the wording for the contracts. Whereas I would strongly assert that CASA did not act in good faith, deliberately frustrating the matter; what is more to the point never actually had any intention of resolving this matter. I will provide and release the recording of the CASA personnel that I have mentioned previously.
Dealing with the first point only in this correspondence at this time, I will address the second matter at a later date.
The impact of CASA’s misconduct and misinformation has been significant, and quite frankly after having spent every waking moment of the last three years dealing with this trauma, I am well and truly over it. Far too much time and stress has been directly related to me refuting clearly untruthful information by CASA to no avail.
It seems entirely appropriate that CASA reach out to the Ombudsman’s Office and advise that after the receipt of this correspondence, they request the Ombudsman’s Office to place the investigation on hold. Such action will enable CASA to reassess its position and provide both the Ombudsman’s office and myself with CASAs position, hopefully this time reflecting the truth. CASA may choose however to maintain its “position” in that they were not aware of the structure of APTA until just prior to October 2018.
Please find attached supported samples of emails to and from CASA dating back 2 ½ years before they claim that they first became aware.
Sampling of the emails and the timeline from mid-2016 are attached; that is, before CASA claim they first became aware of APTAs structure. I have also attached a copy of the proposed contract that was supplied to Mr Graeme Crawford the CASA 2IC on October 7th, 2017,being 6 months after APTA was fully approved by CASA; interestingly, one year before CASA claim they first became aware of my structure.
Exhibit A: 20 June 2016 => Email from Glen Buckley to the three CASA oversighting personnel. (2 ½ years before CASA claim that they became aware of APTA.
“Dear John,
As you are aware, I am in the process of putting together and alliance of flight training organisations, under an Industry leading group of professionals. My intention is to build a team that can communicate with CASA in an effective, professional and constructive manner.
I have now invested significantly in the proposal. If practical I would like the opportunity to meet with you in the CASA Office to outline my proposed course of action. I will be seeking significant guidance from CASA during this process. My intention is to “get it right”, the first time. I genuinely want to work as closely with CASA as your resources permit…………”
Exhibit B: 21 June 2016 => Response Email from CASA to Glen Buckley
This email is from CASA arranging the requested meeting
Exhibit C: 21 June 2016 => Email from Glen Buckley finalising meeting late June 2016,
(that is 2 ½ years before CASA claim they first became aware of my businesses structure).
Exhibit D: 23rd June 2016 => Email from Glen Buckley to CASA
This email has a 9-page document attached to it, that can leave absolutely no doubt in the readers mind as to the structure that is intended.
Exhibit E: 13th July 2016 => Email from Glen Buckley to three oversighting personnel within CASA.
This email advises CASA that I am obtaining some interest in this concept and requesting CASA time frames to add new Entities.
This attached the 2016 version of the proposed contract to Mr Crawford; it was provided as a courtesy in the interests of transparency. When CASA sent the initial notification years later in October 2018, they “overlooked” the fact that these contracts had been supplied on multiple occasions, and that can be clearly evidenced.
Exhibit F: 18th January 2017 => Meeting with Mr Graeme Crawford 2IC of CASA.
This is almost 1 ½ years before CASA claim they became aware of the structure.
The meeting occurred in Canberra on an unrelated matter. Interestingly, it was the CASA Executive, Mr Crawford who raised the subject of APTA; therefore, he was clearly aware of APTA existence at that time.
Conclusion
CASA has an obligation to act as a model litigant and whilst I certainly don’t intend to go through the charter here, I would like to highlight a sampling; however, Mr Jonathan Aleck will be fully aware of those obligations. The first of these being particularly salient in this matter.
- Not requiring the other party to prove a matter which the Crown knows to be true.
- Act honestly and fairly
- Not causing unnecessary delay.
- Endeavouring to avoid litigation wherever possible.
- Not taking advantage of a claimant who lacks the resources to litigate a legitimate claim
- Apologising where the Crown is aware that it or its lawyers have acted wrongfully or improperly,
- The Court also traced the model litigant obligation back to the traditional relationship between the Crown and its subjects and noted that the Commonwealth and its agencies have no legitimate private interest in the performance of their functions and frequently also have greater access to resources than private litigants. For these reasons, the Court held that Australian Government Agencies and their legal representatives should act as moral exemplars when engaging with private litigants.
Yours Faithfully,
Glen Buckley
The model litigant obligation has nothing to do with CASA's interactions with the Ombudsman, Glen.
If you have some 'smoking gun' recording, just publish it.
They don't care, Glen. They just don't care. Your fundamental weakness is the belief that they do care and have any shame. They don't. This is 21st century Federal government.
If you have some 'smoking gun' recording, just publish it.
They don't care, Glen. They just don't care. Your fundamental weakness is the belief that they do care and have any shame. They don't. This is 21st century Federal government.
Thread Starter
Lead balloon
Cheers Lead Balloon appreciate the prompt input.
My understanding is that the model litigant obligations must be followed in the case of litigation, and as you pointed out, have nothing to do with the Ombudsman's Office. Whilst i appreciate its probably somewhat naïve, surely the principles and intent should apply, at least ethically. .
I also agree that it is highly unlikely that CASA will act with good intent. One way or another the response to that correspondence will leave me in no doubt.
Honestly Lead Balloon, i will at least know that i have exhausted absolutely every opportunity to encourage CASA to act in a decent manner.. It is unlikely, but the CASA response will clearly identify to me where i need to be directing my resources and energy.
Cheers. Glen
My understanding is that the model litigant obligations must be followed in the case of litigation, and as you pointed out, have nothing to do with the Ombudsman's Office. Whilst i appreciate its probably somewhat naïve, surely the principles and intent should apply, at least ethically. .
I also agree that it is highly unlikely that CASA will act with good intent. One way or another the response to that correspondence will leave me in no doubt.
Honestly Lead Balloon, i will at least know that i have exhausted absolutely every opportunity to encourage CASA to act in a decent manner.. It is unlikely, but the CASA response will clearly identify to me where i need to be directing my resources and energy.
Cheers. Glen
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: New Zealand
Age: 71
Posts: 1,475
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Glen, if you haven’t already, get in touch with Nick Xenophon’s office. At the very least, he is amicable, smart and understands law. He also has political experience. Plus he understands how the Senate works and he has grilled CASA previously during estimates and inquiries. He knows the machinations of our esteemed aviation regulator. If he does make a return to politics, it will be as an Independent. The two of you might just have something in common that could be beneficial to both of you. Make the call…
Rex Patrick would probably be a potentially more sympathetic and effective person to talk to than Nick Xenophon. Rex Patrick is still in the Senate and is a pilot.
As a Victorian, Glen should be able to get the ear of Senator David Fawcett. He will understand what's happened but, unfortunately, he's a member of a major party and must therefore continue to pretend that CASA's doing a great job.
As a Victorian, Glen should be able to get the ear of Senator David Fawcett. He will understand what's happened but, unfortunately, he's a member of a major party and must therefore continue to pretend that CASA's doing a great job.
Glen, if you haven’t already, get in touch with Nick Xenophon’s office. At the very least, he is amicable, smart and understands law. He also has political experience. Plus he understands how the Senate works and he has grilled CASA previously during estimates and inquiries. He knows the machinations of our esteemed aviation regulator. If he does make a return to politics, it will be as an Independent. The two of you might just have something in common that could be beneficial to both of you. Make the call…
I agree with Lead Balloon though, this shower in Canberra think nothing of leaking private text messages from national leaders and heads of state in a pathetic attempt to get this excuse of a PM out of a 'loss of face' - I've never seen such a pathetic individual in the position of PM in my life, even Billy McMahon would be better.
In order to get traction in this, I feel you need to find a way of wedging these bastards - with an election coming up they need to be frightened sh-tless about bad publicity, but the timing has to be right, as if they react badly and lose the election, as is likely, the impetus may be lost except for perhaps a new government wanting to address outstanding matters while making it obvious under which administration it occurred and how that administration ignored the matter.......
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: New Zealand
Age: 71
Posts: 1,475
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Or Senator Rick Patrick. He seems to make a point of challenging the current government on every dodgy act they engage in.
I agree with Lead Balloon though, this shower in Canberra think nothing of leaking private text messages from national leaders and heads of state in a pathetic attempt to get this excuse of a PM out of a 'loss of face' - I've never seen such a pathetic individual in the position of PM in my life, even Billy McMahon would be better.
In order to get traction in this, I feel you need to find a way of wedging these bastards - with an election coming up they need to be frightened sh-tless about bad publicity, but the timing has to be right, as if they react badly and lose the election, as is likely, the impetus may be lost except for perhaps a new government wanting to address outstanding matters while making it obvious under which administration it occurred and how that administration ignored the matter.......
I agree with Lead Balloon though, this shower in Canberra think nothing of leaking private text messages from national leaders and heads of state in a pathetic attempt to get this excuse of a PM out of a 'loss of face' - I've never seen such a pathetic individual in the position of PM in my life, even Billy McMahon would be better.
In order to get traction in this, I feel you need to find a way of wedging these bastards - with an election coming up they need to be frightened sh-tless about bad publicity, but the timing has to be right, as if they react badly and lose the election, as is likely, the impetus may be lost except for perhaps a new government wanting to address outstanding matters while making it obvious under which administration it occurred and how that administration ignored the matter.......
I agree with both Leady and Aerial 100%. Fawcett is a very intelligent politician, and Patrick is no dunce. But because they’ve already got a lot of skin in the game I thought that a (possibly) returning Xenophon might be keen to grab a headline or two and use a case like Glens to stir up some action. Either way, it would be nice if some politician, any politician, could take the time to examine Glens case and become his champion for justice. It is palpable that anagency staffed by public servants, which ultimately is accountable to a government minister, could treat an Australian citizen so disgracefully. It’s something one would expect from a dictatorship. Oh, hang on a minute…..
Hopefully, the voters that will elect Xenophon all have photo ID otherwise they might be disenfranchised, yet another disgustingly low, cynical and disgracefully amoral little move by this shower, they know they're on the nose so out comes a 'Trumpian' BS move - a solution in search of a problem (as I explained elsewhere, it's a solution to a different problem, low socio-economic voters who may not have ID and who have been treated like garbage by Morrison). We mustn't have them voting, no.
Reminds me of that scene in Yes Prime Minister where Hacker insists that public opinion is important, isn't this supposed to be a democracy, doesn't the public deciding represent what that's all about - Humphrey responds "But Prime Minister, this is a BRITISH democracy". "You know what happens if the RIGHT people don't get power??" "No, what??" "The WRONG people get it."
I don't care about politics and the party sides, but JCA I hope the LNP get thrown out - and yes, Xenophon would be perfect, I was just offering another head kicker to the list LOL