[Peetwo]

On common themes, the Village Idiot and the embuggerance of an industry (cont/-) -



Simple answer - NO! 

Well not in this lifetime and here's proof, reference:

Barmen, Barristers, Barbers and even the humble 'Plod' on the beat can tell a fiction from a fact: eventually. The tell tale signs are obvious to those who deal with 'stories' told. Then, there are the 'versions' of tale. An old and valued friend of mine has 'a system'. It was explained to me more decades ago than I care to remember; and, with use, has been proven to be reliable 95% of the time –and a useful guide for the remainder. It is a simple enough construct; listen once and pay attention; then after the 'story' has been told five times; an inkling of the 'truth' may be gleaned – then ask the questions – the shift in and variations of the tale become clearly apparent.

I refer now to the 'Buckley' saga. There has never been a 'shift' in the GB narrative; well, not a discernible one at least. The CASA version is a moving feast of variation, spin, obfuscation, legal niceties and horse manure. This is backed up by careful research of data provided – not by Buckley, but from the very bowels of a very slippery, carefully modulated 'legal' wriggle room response.

The legal tentacles serve but one purpose – to bind and bleed. Buckley simply cannot match the fire power and wriggle room CASA will throw up in defence of their own. A decade and ten million may just put a dent in the CASA defence – maybe.

So, an alternative solution to taking on a bunch of professional twisters of the law (remember who penned that law) must be found; or, perhaps someone, with a grain of integrity could quietly sort the mess out and square the books.

I say a directive from the PM &C to 'sort it out' will save a whole world of ministerial embarrassment. Buckley may fade away; rubbed out by this and that – but his story and that of the many others which have parallels will not. Not while I can hold a glass they won't.

Far too many have been consigned to the CASA scrapheap – on their say-so alone, unchallenged, through lazy, minister supported, politically motivated face saving positioning.

CASA can sit back under the ministers umbrella; once they have stumped up to Com Care the measly 'premium' of $100, 000 then they have automatic access to as much money as it takes to 'win' a legal opinion in their favour. One goes to court for 'the law' not justice (boy). Buckley writes letters in his tea breaks – CASA just tip it all onto some of the finest, government employed legal minds and the tax payer picks up that tab....Strewth, talk about knives to gunfights.

Time someone with clout stepped in – it would be less expensive to 'square' Buckley. Cleaner and more sensible – just from a tax payer perspective; before we mention stuff like injustice or a fair go. CASA for some strange, esoteric reason shut him down and broke the heart of a honest man. The 'facts' are self evident – everything else cover up.

Shame, shame, shame on you Minister. I've scraped better of my boot heel.

Yes please Miss – keep 'em coming – I've something stuck in my craw – best flush it out.

A thing of wonder.

It was a bleak, dark and stormy night when some intrepid members of the IOS penetrated the swamps of Sleepy Hollow. Despite being at great personal risk and with some difficulty, they managed to liberate a master copy of the forecast CASA 'safety' lecture tours. But I must warn you, before you watch the CASA method of 'safety' vision, to beware of being outspoken.

You see, the minister must be appeased; there is great concern within his office that the fluffy, manipulated- 'Tell-us-U-Luv-us' questionnaire will not be able to convince anyone that CASA is a model, much respected, internationally admired organisation. The 'safe compliance' training lectures are designed to add credibility to the claim that all is well and CASA is keeping all 'safe'. So, here is the CASA vision splendid of 'safety training'.

Via the UP, a GlenB embuggerance update:

glenb

CASA deliberately misleading the Commonwealth Ombudsman's Office

---

I am currently very limited in what i can post. I woke up early this morning and was working through my correspondence.

I will write to the Ombudsman today challenging some information that the CASA Legal Department headed up by Mr Jonathan Aleck has provided to the Ombudsman. In my opinion that CASA Department has been responsible for providing significantly misleading information to the Commonwealth Ombudsman, presumably for the purposes of engineering CASAs preferred outcome.

CASA claims that they were not aware that APTA provided multi base coverage for different entities at the time they revalidated APTA as a Part 141 and 142 Organization in April of 2017.

Unfortunately, for Mr. Aleck, i have the email that i sent to CASA on 23rd June 2016, almost one year before CASA revalidated APTA. That email contained an overview of the concept and how i intended to present it to industry.

So for Mr Alecks department to claim that they were not aware is quite simply not the truth. I will write extensively on this matter later today, an overwhelming and interesting body of evidence is developing.

Below is part of the email sent to CASA on 23rd June 2016. Really Mr Aleck, are you still going to claim that CASA didnt know. I will also be drawing this information to the attention of the Deputy Prime Minister.

In the following posts, is the information i provided to CASA, two and a half years before they became aware of APTA and reversed its approval. Trust me folks, its very challenging trying to hold the Executive Management of CASA to account, when they are prepared to blatantly lie.

I claim that CASA is deliberately misleading the Ombudsman Office

  #1646 #1647  #1648

---

well, well, well

---

It seemed such a good concept. CASA knew about it. CASA worked with me to design it, CASA approved it, CASA audited it, CASA approved bases under the system, CASA recommended it.

CASA changed their mind overnight in October 2018. Not on a legal concern, not on a safety concern, quite simply a change of opinion by Mr Alecks Department.

Im not the first person to have their life destroyed by this man, but i will be the last!

Next from EWH with an Angel Flight embuggerance update: ref - http://www.australianflying.com.au/lates...gel-flight

"It was extremely disappointing that the court proceedings against CASA, based on there being no safety case nor any evidence to support the CSF regulations, failed essentially on the basis that CASA does not need to establish a safety case, nor does it require any empirical data or evidence upon which to base its regulations," Pagani told Australian Flying.


"None of my evidence was challenged at the hearing. On the contrary, the evidence of the CASA representative was telling in that, he admitted only after rigorous cross-examination that he had no such evidence, data, nor safety case, in respect of any of the regulations – not a single one."

CASA applied the restrictions based on data that it said showed CSFs were more likely to result in an incident or accident than a normal private flight, attributing that to added pressure to complete the mission. Angel Flight strongly contested both the data and the conclusions.

"The evidence was that, in coming to the view that pilots were under pressure when flying CSFs, CASA had not asked a single pilot; that no-one in CASA had any experience with CSFs; that in terms of his view that passengers were uninformed, they had not asked a single passenger and totally disregarded the documents, briefings and videos passengers must acknowledge before any flight.

"As the largest single supporter of private flight GA in Australia, we can only say that we did all that was possible to protect the rights of those pilots to fly, and the rights of disadvantaged rural and remote people to access much-needed non-emergency medical transport. 

"The support from our passengers and pilots was overwhelming, and we will continue to carry out this valuable work Australia-wide."

Plus off the LMH: http://www.australianflying.com.au/the-l...-june-2021

 ...Passing comment on the Federal Court ruling against Angel Flight is hampered significantly by the contempt of court laws, but the original regulations and the evidence presented by CASA are still fair game! With Angel Flight electing not to appeal, the resistance to CASA's community service flight restrictions has come to an end. This is by no means an admission that the regulator is right, but rather that the cost outlay of further action is too mind-blowing to be considered responsible. Most frustrating and galling of all is that even CASA has admitted that the restrictions will achieve nothing and the evidence presented to the court seems to support the theory that the underlying data fails to justify the action. However, the Federal Court ruled that CASA has no obligation to justify regulation based on data, which gives them a free hand with regulation. Armed with this precedent, will CASA use that free hand responsibly and fairly, or will they cloak it with a gauntlet and beat the aviation community further just because they can? The problem facing the aviation community is that–at the GA level at least–we have evidence that the operations side of CASA is better at beating than it is at being responsible and fair. Angel Flight gave it everything they had in a fight that had ramifications for the wider GA community and private pilots in particular...

  Finally, Sandy in reply to EWH...

 

..Regarding Angel Flight and it’s disappointing loss in court. I think it was Clark Butson of Polar Aviation, having gone to court with CASA, who said that he’d spent a million dollars in legal fees to learn that CASA has the power to do anything it likes. He had had a run in with CASA that started with what, from memory, began with a disagreement between Polar and a CASA officer about some operational procedure. Its also my view that Government Industries tend to stick together and that in our hierarchical system of government its all uphill to win against such a well entrenched and well funded Commonwealth corporate such as CASA. CASA’s writ of ‘safety’ can cover a multitude of sins against any unfortunate individuals that fall foul of the regulator or those that believe they have an indisputable case against CASA. 

We have a very long way to go before General Aviation is afforded a rational and respectful place in the normally accepted realm of free enterprise, as are most other pursuits. 

Nothing will change until there’s a change in the political sphere and this will require leadership of a high order, possibly spurred by a media campaign. The latter is probably our best hope.--

MTF...P2