[Peetwo]

Addendum to last - 

Via the AP email chain:

Dear Colin, could you please ensure this correspondence is distributed to each member of the CASA Board, hope you are traveling well, cheers. Glen

29/07/20

Dear CASA Board Members.

My name is Glen Buckley, you will be aware of who I am, and the nature of my concerns regarding the conduct of several employees of the Civil Aviation Safety Authority and specifically

•     Mr. Jonathan Aleck in his role as CASA Executive Manager, Legal, International, and Regulatory Affairs,
  
•     Mr. Graeme Crawford in his role as CASA Executive Manager, Aviation Group,
  
•     Mr. Craig Martin in his role as CASA Executive Manager, Regulatory Service, and Surveillance, and
  
•     Jason McHeyzer in his role as CASA  Region Manager of the Southern Region.
  

You will also be aware that the Commonwealth Ombudsman Office has now completed Stage One of the investigation, and that the findings of Stage One of the investigation have clearly supported my case and indicated that CASA has acted unlawfully, unfairly and unjustly.

The impact of those actions by those CASA personnel has resulted in significant financial damage to me and significant emotional distress.

I am now in a situation where I intend to work towards a fair and reasonable resolution of this matter.

I have made repeated attempts to resolve this matter in the most cost-effective manner for CASA, but previously those personnel named above, have elected a more combative approach, that can only result in a degraded outcome

I am now writing to the CASA Board and have included the Deputy Prime Minister, Mr. Michael McCormack in on this correspondence, as the CASA Board is accountable to him as the Minister responsible for the Civil Aviation Safety Authority.

The purpose of this correspondence is to seek a clear and concise determination from the CASA Board, their insurer, and the Deputy Prime Minister as to the direction that this matter will take from here on.

For clarity. Please advise if CASA is prepared to meet with me, without the need for me to engage a law firm to fairly resolve this matter.

If the CASA Board in conjunction with the Deputy Prime Ministers Department and CASAs insurer determines that they are not prepared to meet with me, then I will have no option but to engage a law firm to represent me going forward. A law firm has been briefed and is ready to take over this matter.

My hope is that CASA will act with good intent to seek the most effective resolution practical and avoid a far more costly and combative approach.

I have attached Stage One of the Commonwealth Ombudsman's findings to assist you to arrive at your determination and I look forward to a formal response representing the views of the CASA Board, the insurer, and the Deputy Prime Minister's office.

Thank you for your consideration of my request.

Respectfully, Glen Buckley

---

2020-713834
25 June 2020
Mr Glen Buckley
6 Susan Court
MOUNT WAVERLEY VIC 3149
(By email only to: defendapta@gmail.com)

Dear Mr Buckley

I am writing to provide you with an update on my investigation into the matters you raised about the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA).

As previously advised, I have broken the investigation into manageable elements. The first of these was to assess the regulatory setting in which you made your Air Operator’s Certificate (AOC) application, the arrangements under which you developed the exposition, and how CASA supported and responded during that process.

Conclusion of phase 1 of my investigation

On 23 June 2020 this Office sent a concluded view to CASA as follows:

The entry into force of the 1 September 2014 compilation of the Civil Aviation Regulations 1988 (CAR) removed the former CAR 206(1)(a)(vi) related to flying training organisations (FTO) from CAR 206.

CASA’s ruling Franchise AOC Arrangements (the Ruling) issued on 21 February 2006 refers explicitly to its application to commercial operations conducted for CAR 206 purposes. CAR 206(1)(a)(vi) referred to flying training, other than conversion training or training carried out under an experimental certificate.

With CAR 206(1)(a)(vi) removed from the CAR, I note CASA’s view that the policy objectives reflected in the Ruling have remained applicable to the conduct of FTO activities under the post August 2014 regulatory regime, irrespective of the explicit reference to CAR 206.

The Ruling was not amended to reflect that legislative change from 1 September 2014 meaning that the CAR and the Ruling were no longer aligned in material ways.

Conceptually, I accept CASA's view that the Ruling may reflect broader policy considerations.
Nevertheless in my concluded view there was an administrative deficiency due to an absence of a direct relationship between the activity being regulated and the policy said to regulate it. This gave rise to ambiguity and uncertainty with the potential to cause detriment to those relying on the accuracy of the regime or, conversely, prevent detriment from occurring.

In the circumstances, it is my concluded view that CASA should have made a concurrent amendment to its Ruling at the entry into force of the 1 September 2014 compilation of the CAR because of the practical effect of the change to those relying on the regulatory regime.

Thank you for your advice that CASA will amend the Ruling to confirm the intent of the breadth its application.

Please note that this is the Ombudsman’s opinion and CASA may disagree with it, or parts of it.
CASA’s other points of agreement

CASA agreed with the following propositions put to it by this Office:

 As of October 2016, no Australian legislation prohibited 'franchising' of an AOC, subject only to the exclusivity of the AOC holder’s operational control, and that remained the case as of 25 March 2020.
 There would be no legal or regulatory impediment to Mr Buckley or APTA selling or licencing intellectual property in the form of its AOC exposition to other FTO. And there would be no legal or regulatory impediment to CASA issuing part 142 Permissions on submission of those expositions by other FTO.

Commencement of phase 2 of my investigation

I am proposing to continue this investigation in order to consider issues giving rise, and
Subsequent, to CASA’s notice of 23 October 2018 to you (APTA) to cease all operations within
7 days and matters leading up to 27 August 2019 intervention by Mr Jason McHeyzer in your
Work-place.

Consultation

If you wish to discuss this investigation, please contact me.

Yours sincerely

Michael Buss

Assistant Director of Investigations
Office of the Commonwealth Ombudsman
Influencing systemic improvement in public administration

Hmm...me thinks it time Dr A collected what's left of his marbles and along with St Commode quietly left the building...

MTF...P2

References:

https://auntypru.com/wp-content/uploads/...port-1.pdf

https://auntypru.com/wp-content/uploads/...Amends.pdf