GlenB embuggerance update: 16/03/21
Via the UP and AP email chains:
11th March 2021.
To the Chair of the Senate RRAT Committee, Senator Susan McDonald, and Members of the RRAT Committee.
My name is Glen Buckley, the past owner of a business that was shut down by CASA. I had the opportunity to present before Senate Estimates on 20//11/20.
This is an allegation that the CEO of CASA at the time, Mr. Carmody substantially mislead the Senate Estimates Committee, and specifically in his additional submission to the inquiry. I will provide supporting evidence.
You are aware that I have raised allegations of misfeasance in public office against CASA employees, Mr. Carmody, Mr. Aleck, and Mr. Crawford in Senate Estimates on 20/11/20 and followed that up with a written submission.
In my follow up written allegations submitted to the Senate Estimates I had withdrawn allegations of misfeasance against Mr. Carmody. My rationale in that decision making was that he had retired from CASA, and I was of the opinion that any associated safety risk was therefore reduced. Whilst I have withdrawn the formal allegation of misfeasance against Mr. Carmody, I am compelled to bring this matter to your attention.
Please note that I have included the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, the Honourable Mr Michael McCormack, as the Minister responsible for CASA on this correspondence for his information only. I do not require a formal response from his Office, at this stage. I anticipate submitting substantial separate correspondence to him on this matter shortly.
I have also included the Commonwealth Ombudsman as that office is currently investigating this matter. I have included the Ombudsman as it is reasonable for me to assume that if Mr. Carmody in his role as the CEO of CASA has misled the Senate Estimates Committee, it is feasible that he or one of his employees may also have provided that same misleading information to the Ombudsman's Office.
I have also included Mr. Anthony Mathews as the Chair of the Board of CASA, and the person responsible for the governance of CASA.
In the supplementary submission to the Committee dated 29/12/20, Mr. Shane Carmody made the following statement to the Committee, note my bolding.
“During that time, CASA provided Mr. Buckley with substantial guidance, advice, and individual support to assist him to satisfy CASA that organizational arrangements of the kind required were, as he claimed, effectively in place. This, as said, was something he was persistently unable or unwilling to do”
Mr. Carmody’s comments may lead the Committee to believe that I was “persistently unable or unwilling” to produce contracts that satisfied CASA, when that is most definitely not the truth, and is in fact very far from the truth. Evidence to support my contention will follow later in this correspondence, and by way of the attachments.
Mr. Carmody would have been fully aware that he was misleading the Committee when making that statement and I am fully satisfied that he mislead the Committee with the intention of deflecting the Committee from obtaining the truth. The Chair of the Senates Committee has already admonished Mr. Carmody for “less than fulsome answers” and I have made several subsequent submissions drawing your attention to those matters.
The clarification of this matter is in fact integral to my entire matter, and perhaps the single most important issue.
Several businesses have been forced into closure, many employees have lost their job, and many millions of dollars have been lost. If I am alleging misfeasance in public office, then the question of “intent” is fundamental.
At all times I needed the CASA required contracts issuer fully resolved by CASA in as short a timeline as practical. It was in fact the CASA employees that I have raised allegations against, who were frustrating the entire matter. Mr. Carmody's inaccurate statement creates the impression that the resistance was coming from my end when that is clearly not the case. It was in fact a small group of CASA personnel who were frustrating and unnecessarily delaying matters.
To the purpose of this correspondence:
Regarding Mr. Carmody’s untruthful submission to Senate Estimates, and for complete clarity.
Mr. Carmody in his role as the CASA CEO stated that my approach to the resolution of the contracts “was something he was persistently unable or unwilling to do”
The truth is that at ALL times I and my management team was ready to immediately implement any changes that CASA required from the date of 23rd October 2018 when CASA placed initially placed restrictions on the business's ability to trade. I was persistently willing to comply with any CASA requirements in the contracts. That was APTA's position from October 2018 until it could no longer continue operating with the trading restrictions in place, in June 2019.
For CASA to suggest that I was “persistently unable or unwilling” is a gross misrepresentation of the facts.
You will recall that other operators doing the same thing as I, were not required to have contracts. It was a new and unique requirement placed on my business only, that I was fully prepared to comply with, despite the fact that I thought it grossly unfair that CASA placed restrictions on the business's ability to trade at the same time they made the request. on my business only.
It was essential for the business that the matter was resolved expeditiously. Consider that CASA had placed restrictions on the business's ability to trade that cost me in excess of $10,000 per week. I fully understood my responsibilities, as they were the same responsibilities, I had been exercising for over a decade as the Authorisation Holder over multiple entities.
There is absolutely no reason either commercially or for safety and compliance reasons that I would demonstrate any reluctance at all to fully comply with CASA requirements of anything at all in the contracts that they required. ALL current legislative requirements were already met. On this matter, both CASA and I had exactly the same interest. There was absolutely no reason for me not to comply. Any suggested CASA changes would have been embedded into the contract and returned within 24 hours. i.e. at any time this matter could have been resolved within 24 hours.
If Mr. Carmody the recently retired CASA CEO, or Mr. Crawford the current CASA CEO, as someone heavily involved in this matter from the onset seriously contends that I was persistently unable or unwilling to comply then I call on the Committee to ask for one single piece of evidence in support of that contention. Can CASA produce an email, a phone conversation, a handwritten note, or anything at all to support their statement? They will not be able to do it. I can do nothing else than call it out for what it is. A blatant lie and a blatant lie made directly to the Senators and most likely to the Commonwealth Ombudsman’s office. It also clearly demonstrates the complete lack of integrity that the CASA Senior Executive are prepared to demonstrate in pursuit of their objectives.
Evidence that at all times I was in fact, eager to comply can be found in the following emails that are attached. Please note that I have numerous other emails that can be provided that express the same willingness and ability to comply with whatever CASA wanted in the contracts. For Mr Carmody or CASA to assert anything else, is not truthful.
It is critical that this misleading information is clarified. For complete clarity. Mr. Carmody the CASA CEO stated that the finalization of the contracts was something that I was "persistently unable or unwilling" to comply with. That is so far from a truthful representation of the facts that it must be challenged. CASA has continually and substantially
Below are excerpts from the full body of the emails which are attached for your reference. If you require further emails supporting my contention, please advise.
Email from Glen Buckley to CASA Executive Manager Legal, International, and Regulatory Affairs dated 4th March 2019
“Thank you for the opportunity to meet last Friday, As you will appreciate I was extremely disappointed as I had hoped the suggested changes would suffice. My hope is that by CASAs lawyers meeting with my Barrister that we can arrive at a solution that fully satisfies CASA and that will be my intention. As this matter has now continued on for well over four months, it is now time to bring this matter to a close”.
“APTA wants to ensure that CASA is fully satisfied”
Email from Glen Buckley to CASA Executive Manager Legal, International, and Regulatory Affairs dated 15th March 2019
“I am and have been from the onset of the process prepared to write absolutely anything into the contract that CASA requires. As the Authorisation Holder, I accept full responsibility for all operations under my Part 141 and 142 Approval. I am fully aware of that responsibility, and welcome anything that clarifies my responsibilities.”
“I assure you, that if CASA have a clear idea of what they require, they will meet no resistance from me.
Email from Glen Buckley to CASA Executive Manager Legal, International, and Regulatory Affairs dated 26th March 2019
…………..“For clarity, I remain committed to a resolution, CASA has advised dissatisfaction with the current APTA contract. I am willing to place any CASA-required text into the contracts that will fully satisfy CASA.. If CASA is of the opinion that the contracts are deficient, it is incumbent upon CASA to advise what they require. A fundamental principle of determining that something is wrong, is that must know what is in fact “right”………… “simply tell me what you want, and it will happen”
Email from my father to CASA Executive Manager Legal, International, and Regulatory Affairs 28th March 2019
“Glen has made it abundantly clear that he will include anything you require in his contracts. CASA wrote the regulations, is it really impossible for you to write a suitable proforma contract…?
Email from Glen Buckley CASA Executive Manager Legal, International and Regulatory Affairs dated 28th March
“I remain open to any additional text that CASA prefer or require”
Email from myself to Peter White 9th April 2019
“no need to respond, but my frustration is not all about CASA wanting to satisfy themselves with contracts, my frustration comes from the severity of the action taken by CASA to resolve this matter, the many and still unsubstantiated allegations that CASA threw at APTA, the freeze on processing regulatory tasks, the wasted weeks arguing about the aviation ruling, and the disregard for the Regulatory Philosophy”
Additional information
CASA initiated the restrictions on the APTA's ability to trade in October 2018. With those restrictions costing me in excess of $10,000 per week. That fact was highlighted to CASA in writing repeatedly. i.e. CASA personnel were acutely aware of the commercial impact of their actions and decisions. The CASA action was also significantly damaging the business's reputation in the wider aviation community and with any potential students.
It took a totally unacceptable timeframe of almost 6 months until 9th April 2019 for CASA in an email (attached) from the CASA Executive Manager of Regulatory Services and surveillance to write, ……… “I can confirm the content is acceptable to CASA. Finally, CASA had worked out what they wanted in the contracts, and I had fully embedded CASAs requirements that had only been provided days earlier. With the business now almost beyond repair I finally believed that this matter was over. CASA had finally resolved their confusion. I could now focus the business's attention on rebuilding and repairing.
Then approximately 5 hours later I get another email from the CASA Executive Manager of Regulatory Services and surveillance reversing his previous email only hours earlier and stating “Can I ask that you hold off.” That email is in the attachments. The entire matter then started up all over again.
Importantly at the time of CASA placing the restrictions on the businesses ability to trade, in October 2018 and CASA demanding contracts, CASA later realized that they already held the contracts that had been supplied to CASA on multiple occasions before they made their demand and placed trading restrictions on the business.
As a side note, could I respectfully request clarity as to whether CASAs additional submission to Senate Estimates, dated 29th December 2020, is signed by Mr. Carmody in his position as the CASA CEO at the time, or were those his personal views. Noting that Mr. Carmody advised Senator Susan McDonald that he was “retiring from CASA no later than the 24th December, Senator”.
Thank you for your consideration of the matter regarding clarification of my business and I, being “persistently unwilling or unable” to comply with CASA requirements. This matter clearly highlights that CASA has not been well-intentioned in their dealings with the Committee or I.
Respectfully Glen Buckley
Hmm...in relation to the part in BOLD (above) refer here: Footnote: Dots & Dashes in the DAS office? & Oz aviation, safety compromised by political and bureaucratic subterfuge ? & #SBG 14/03/21: Comedia? No, not divine; not even funny.
Via the UP and AP email chains:
11th March 2021.
To the Chair of the Senate RRAT Committee, Senator Susan McDonald, and Members of the RRAT Committee.
My name is Glen Buckley, the past owner of a business that was shut down by CASA. I had the opportunity to present before Senate Estimates on 20//11/20.
This is an allegation that the CEO of CASA at the time, Mr. Carmody substantially mislead the Senate Estimates Committee, and specifically in his additional submission to the inquiry. I will provide supporting evidence.
You are aware that I have raised allegations of misfeasance in public office against CASA employees, Mr. Carmody, Mr. Aleck, and Mr. Crawford in Senate Estimates on 20/11/20 and followed that up with a written submission.
In my follow up written allegations submitted to the Senate Estimates I had withdrawn allegations of misfeasance against Mr. Carmody. My rationale in that decision making was that he had retired from CASA, and I was of the opinion that any associated safety risk was therefore reduced. Whilst I have withdrawn the formal allegation of misfeasance against Mr. Carmody, I am compelled to bring this matter to your attention.
Please note that I have included the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, the Honourable Mr Michael McCormack, as the Minister responsible for CASA on this correspondence for his information only. I do not require a formal response from his Office, at this stage. I anticipate submitting substantial separate correspondence to him on this matter shortly.
I have also included the Commonwealth Ombudsman as that office is currently investigating this matter. I have included the Ombudsman as it is reasonable for me to assume that if Mr. Carmody in his role as the CEO of CASA has misled the Senate Estimates Committee, it is feasible that he or one of his employees may also have provided that same misleading information to the Ombudsman's Office.
I have also included Mr. Anthony Mathews as the Chair of the Board of CASA, and the person responsible for the governance of CASA.
In the supplementary submission to the Committee dated 29/12/20, Mr. Shane Carmody made the following statement to the Committee, note my bolding.
“During that time, CASA provided Mr. Buckley with substantial guidance, advice, and individual support to assist him to satisfy CASA that organizational arrangements of the kind required were, as he claimed, effectively in place. This, as said, was something he was persistently unable or unwilling to do”
Mr. Carmody’s comments may lead the Committee to believe that I was “persistently unable or unwilling” to produce contracts that satisfied CASA, when that is most definitely not the truth, and is in fact very far from the truth. Evidence to support my contention will follow later in this correspondence, and by way of the attachments.
Mr. Carmody would have been fully aware that he was misleading the Committee when making that statement and I am fully satisfied that he mislead the Committee with the intention of deflecting the Committee from obtaining the truth. The Chair of the Senates Committee has already admonished Mr. Carmody for “less than fulsome answers” and I have made several subsequent submissions drawing your attention to those matters.
The clarification of this matter is in fact integral to my entire matter, and perhaps the single most important issue.
Several businesses have been forced into closure, many employees have lost their job, and many millions of dollars have been lost. If I am alleging misfeasance in public office, then the question of “intent” is fundamental.
At all times I needed the CASA required contracts issuer fully resolved by CASA in as short a timeline as practical. It was in fact the CASA employees that I have raised allegations against, who were frustrating the entire matter. Mr. Carmody's inaccurate statement creates the impression that the resistance was coming from my end when that is clearly not the case. It was in fact a small group of CASA personnel who were frustrating and unnecessarily delaying matters.
To the purpose of this correspondence:
Regarding Mr. Carmody’s untruthful submission to Senate Estimates, and for complete clarity.
Mr. Carmody in his role as the CASA CEO stated that my approach to the resolution of the contracts “was something he was persistently unable or unwilling to do”
The truth is that at ALL times I and my management team was ready to immediately implement any changes that CASA required from the date of 23rd October 2018 when CASA placed initially placed restrictions on the business's ability to trade. I was persistently willing to comply with any CASA requirements in the contracts. That was APTA's position from October 2018 until it could no longer continue operating with the trading restrictions in place, in June 2019.
For CASA to suggest that I was “persistently unable or unwilling” is a gross misrepresentation of the facts.
You will recall that other operators doing the same thing as I, were not required to have contracts. It was a new and unique requirement placed on my business only, that I was fully prepared to comply with, despite the fact that I thought it grossly unfair that CASA placed restrictions on the business's ability to trade at the same time they made the request. on my business only.
It was essential for the business that the matter was resolved expeditiously. Consider that CASA had placed restrictions on the business's ability to trade that cost me in excess of $10,000 per week. I fully understood my responsibilities, as they were the same responsibilities, I had been exercising for over a decade as the Authorisation Holder over multiple entities.
There is absolutely no reason either commercially or for safety and compliance reasons that I would demonstrate any reluctance at all to fully comply with CASA requirements of anything at all in the contracts that they required. ALL current legislative requirements were already met. On this matter, both CASA and I had exactly the same interest. There was absolutely no reason for me not to comply. Any suggested CASA changes would have been embedded into the contract and returned within 24 hours. i.e. at any time this matter could have been resolved within 24 hours.
If Mr. Carmody the recently retired CASA CEO, or Mr. Crawford the current CASA CEO, as someone heavily involved in this matter from the onset seriously contends that I was persistently unable or unwilling to comply then I call on the Committee to ask for one single piece of evidence in support of that contention. Can CASA produce an email, a phone conversation, a handwritten note, or anything at all to support their statement? They will not be able to do it. I can do nothing else than call it out for what it is. A blatant lie and a blatant lie made directly to the Senators and most likely to the Commonwealth Ombudsman’s office. It also clearly demonstrates the complete lack of integrity that the CASA Senior Executive are prepared to demonstrate in pursuit of their objectives.
Evidence that at all times I was in fact, eager to comply can be found in the following emails that are attached. Please note that I have numerous other emails that can be provided that express the same willingness and ability to comply with whatever CASA wanted in the contracts. For Mr Carmody or CASA to assert anything else, is not truthful.
It is critical that this misleading information is clarified. For complete clarity. Mr. Carmody the CASA CEO stated that the finalization of the contracts was something that I was "persistently unable or unwilling" to comply with. That is so far from a truthful representation of the facts that it must be challenged. CASA has continually and substantially
Below are excerpts from the full body of the emails which are attached for your reference. If you require further emails supporting my contention, please advise.
Email from Glen Buckley to CASA Executive Manager Legal, International, and Regulatory Affairs dated 4th March 2019
“Thank you for the opportunity to meet last Friday, As you will appreciate I was extremely disappointed as I had hoped the suggested changes would suffice. My hope is that by CASAs lawyers meeting with my Barrister that we can arrive at a solution that fully satisfies CASA and that will be my intention. As this matter has now continued on for well over four months, it is now time to bring this matter to a close”.
“APTA wants to ensure that CASA is fully satisfied”
Email from Glen Buckley to CASA Executive Manager Legal, International, and Regulatory Affairs dated 15th March 2019
“I am and have been from the onset of the process prepared to write absolutely anything into the contract that CASA requires. As the Authorisation Holder, I accept full responsibility for all operations under my Part 141 and 142 Approval. I am fully aware of that responsibility, and welcome anything that clarifies my responsibilities.”
“I assure you, that if CASA have a clear idea of what they require, they will meet no resistance from me.
Email from Glen Buckley to CASA Executive Manager Legal, International, and Regulatory Affairs dated 26th March 2019
…………..“For clarity, I remain committed to a resolution, CASA has advised dissatisfaction with the current APTA contract. I am willing to place any CASA-required text into the contracts that will fully satisfy CASA.. If CASA is of the opinion that the contracts are deficient, it is incumbent upon CASA to advise what they require. A fundamental principle of determining that something is wrong, is that must know what is in fact “right”………… “simply tell me what you want, and it will happen”
Email from my father to CASA Executive Manager Legal, International, and Regulatory Affairs 28th March 2019
“Glen has made it abundantly clear that he will include anything you require in his contracts. CASA wrote the regulations, is it really impossible for you to write a suitable proforma contract…?
Email from Glen Buckley CASA Executive Manager Legal, International and Regulatory Affairs dated 28th March
“I remain open to any additional text that CASA prefer or require”
Email from myself to Peter White 9th April 2019
“no need to respond, but my frustration is not all about CASA wanting to satisfy themselves with contracts, my frustration comes from the severity of the action taken by CASA to resolve this matter, the many and still unsubstantiated allegations that CASA threw at APTA, the freeze on processing regulatory tasks, the wasted weeks arguing about the aviation ruling, and the disregard for the Regulatory Philosophy”
Additional information
CASA initiated the restrictions on the APTA's ability to trade in October 2018. With those restrictions costing me in excess of $10,000 per week. That fact was highlighted to CASA in writing repeatedly. i.e. CASA personnel were acutely aware of the commercial impact of their actions and decisions. The CASA action was also significantly damaging the business's reputation in the wider aviation community and with any potential students.
It took a totally unacceptable timeframe of almost 6 months until 9th April 2019 for CASA in an email (attached) from the CASA Executive Manager of Regulatory Services and surveillance to write, ……… “I can confirm the content is acceptable to CASA. Finally, CASA had worked out what they wanted in the contracts, and I had fully embedded CASAs requirements that had only been provided days earlier. With the business now almost beyond repair I finally believed that this matter was over. CASA had finally resolved their confusion. I could now focus the business's attention on rebuilding and repairing.
Then approximately 5 hours later I get another email from the CASA Executive Manager of Regulatory Services and surveillance reversing his previous email only hours earlier and stating “Can I ask that you hold off.” That email is in the attachments. The entire matter then started up all over again.
Importantly at the time of CASA placing the restrictions on the businesses ability to trade, in October 2018 and CASA demanding contracts, CASA later realized that they already held the contracts that had been supplied to CASA on multiple occasions before they made their demand and placed trading restrictions on the business.
As a side note, could I respectfully request clarity as to whether CASAs additional submission to Senate Estimates, dated 29th December 2020, is signed by Mr. Carmody in his position as the CASA CEO at the time, or were those his personal views. Noting that Mr. Carmody advised Senator Susan McDonald that he was “retiring from CASA no later than the 24th December, Senator”.
Thank you for your consideration of the matter regarding clarification of my business and I, being “persistently unwilling or unable” to comply with CASA requirements. This matter clearly highlights that CASA has not been well-intentioned in their dealings with the Committee or I.
Respectfully Glen Buckley
Hmm...in relation to the part in BOLD (above) refer here: Footnote: Dots & Dashes in the DAS office? & Oz aviation, safety compromised by political and bureaucratic subterfuge ? & #SBG 14/03/21: Comedia? No, not divine; not even funny.
Quote:Ps P2 coment - Besides the fact that this supp submission is a perfect follow up to the CM submission, as to how CASA do 'embuggerance' business (and that this is classic Dr Aleck legal gobbledy gook), I find it intriguing that everyone knows that the former DAS/CEO Shane Carmody's last day in the DAS office was the 24th December 2020 and yet here he is (apparently) on the 29th December 2020 trotting out a supp submission to the Senate RRAT Committee?? - Yeah right...![[Image: dodgy.gif]](https://auntypru.com/forum/images/smilies/dodgy.gif)
Quote: Wrote:Thank you, Chair and members. I'm very happy to take questions, and I have a copy of the statement to table if you wish.
CHAIR: Thank you very much, Mr Carmody. I understand that you have resigned from CASA. When do you finish up?
Mr Carmody : No later than 24 December.
MTF..P2 