[Peetwo]

GlenB embuggerance update: 29/09/21

Via the UP: 

Received from Ombudsman 23/09
Our ref: 2019-713834

Dear Mr Buckley

I refer to your emails below.

In our email to you on 23 December 2020 I noted that

• “one of the only outcomes we could potentially obtain for you would be an apology from CASA and advice that it did not direct APTA to end your employment. I believe this remains true. Please let me know if you are still interested in obtaining a written apology and formal advice from CASA that it did not give a direction to your employer in relation to your continuing employment. I can contact CASA to arrange for this to be done for you if you would like.”

My understanding from our subsequent contact was that you were not interested in receiving an apology if the substance was simply that CASA did not direct APTA to end your employment and if this apology was not published. My understanding is that the intention was to offer you an apology directly. Please let me know if you have changed your mind or we have misunderstood you on this point.

In terms of reports, our Office has not issued any formal reports about this matter. I note that a report would be issued under the Ombudsman’s name. That said, I acknowledge that earlier correspondence we issued to you was referred to as a “phase 1 report”. This was not a formal report, but was rather Mr Buss’ summary of our investigation at that point. The correspondence sought to confirm the matters we had finished examining, noted the matters on which there was broad agreement between our Office and CASA, and indicated the further aspects of the complaint we intended to examine. I apologise if we were not sufficiently clear about how the investigation proceeded from that point.

I am not aware of any specific comments you made that may have compelled CASA’s contact with APTA on 27 August 2019. However, as we have discussed, it does not seem to me that anyone is of the view that this contact was reasonable and appropriate. I note in this regard the outcome of your complaint to the Industry Complaints Commissioner, and the fact that on 29 August 2019 CASA clarified with APTA that it had no issue with your remaining an employee. Additionally, while I acknowledge your long standing view is that CASA’s actions in this case had an improper basis, I did not see a reasonable basis for this view on examining the internal documents we obtained from CASA during the investigation.

I acknowledge you remain dissatisfied by this whole situation. However, I remain of the view that our Office cannot obtain a better outcome for you by further investigating the complaint.

Yours faithfully

Mark

Complaint Resolution Officer

COMMONWEALTH OMBUDSMAN

Lead Balloon's summary...

What's happened is this in summary:

1. CASA has distanced itself from the dude who got you sacked and CASA is willing to apologise to you (Glen) that loose cannon dude shouldn't have done what he did.

2. On the regulatory issues, CASA has said to the Ombudsman's office that we, CASA, are the authority and we say the rules allow us to require APTA to provide a bunch of information in order to be satisfied the rules as we interpret them are being complied with by APTA, and APTA did not provide that information. The Ombudsman's office has accepted that.

Unfortunately, I've seen this outcome across a number of areas where the Ombudsman's office is asked to investigate in the last half a dozen or so years. The Ombudsman's office just accepts what 'the authority' or 'the Department' says about some legal issue without actually reading the legislation or forming its own view about what it's been told about the effect of the legislation.

About the only shining light of a Commonwealth organisation that conducts fearless, competent and in-depth investigations and produces corresponding reports at the moment is the Auditor-General and the Australian National Audit Office. Unfortunately, it doesn't 'audit' the kinds of circumstances that crushed APTA into the ground. Its audits focus on the spending of Commonwealth money through e.g. grants (think sports grants rorts and car park grants rorts) or procurements (think $30million for a $3million block of land). Further, the government is of course trying to starve the Auditor-General and the ANAO of resources in order to reduce its capacity to highlight the many unlawful and incompetent actions of government agencies.

And GlenB's response to Mark from the Ombudsman's office and a thank you to Sandy...

Response to Ombudsman letter 23/09 Refer post #1729
Dear Mark of the Commonwealth Ombudsman’s Office,

I apologise if my correspondence of 19/01/21 was not clear on this matter.

In your correspondence you noted; “one of the only outcomes we could potentially obtain for you would be an apology from CASA, and advice that it did not direct the Employer to end your employment. Please let me know if you are still interested in obtaining a written apology and formal advice from CASA that it did not give a direction to your Employer in relation to your continuing employment. I can contact CASA to arrange for this if you would like.”

I interpreted that as having two components;
one of the only outcomes we could potentially obtain from you would be an apology from CASA and
advice that it did not direct the Employer to end your employment
For clarity, I do expect an apology.

Regarding the first component, advice that “CASA did not direct my Employer to end my employment”., I felt that was of little value because CASA clearly did send an email directing my Employer to end my employment. I don’t believe that is in dispute by anyone, therefore, I could see little value in that component. It happened. It can’t “unhappen”

I do however very much expect an apology, and clarity around that direction.

I have had my two businesses shut down by CASA and. I was then forced out of the industry by that direction from the CASA Regional Manager. It was not practical that I could work in the industry again after that direction. It would and did become public knowledge very quickly.

Industry experience indicates that CASA usually restricted such directions to face to face verbal “suggestions”, rather than as written directives as in my case, for obvious reasons.

As you are aware several businesses were forced into closure by CASAs actions against me. Staff lost their jobs, careers were affected, staff lost entitlements. Suppliers were left unpaid, students training was impacted, and personally I was bankrupted. The moment that CASA put those restrictions on my business, it was doomed.

The personal cost to me runs into many millions of dollars, but there are also approximately one million of debts to parties that were completely innocent, and directly impacted by CASAs actions. They should not have been affected. It is reasonable that many of them would think poorly of me. If CASA shut me down, it would be logical that Glen Buckley had committed some very serious breaches of either a safety or regulatory manner.

Almost everyone in my life has been impacted, including three generations of my family. I have lived in this same area my entire 56 years, and everyone in my community knows that CASA shut me down and I was bankrupted. Its unbearably embarrassing and humiliating.

When I tried to find work and potential employers asked me what happened after 25 years in the aviation industry, I have to explain how CASA closed my business down and then sent an email to my Employer. In an interview that obviously raises concern. Its hard to sweep 25 years under the mat.

My families welfare has been absolutely decimated by the closure of the businesses. My mental health and physical health have been equally decimated. I carry an enormous burden every waking minute of the harm, that I have caused to so many.

My reputation has been absolutely trashed, and I am just too embarrassed to engage with anyone at all from the aviation industry. Many who have been significantly impacted.

None of this is based on safety, regulatory breaches, or quality outcomes. To anyone that doesn’t know the details behind this situation, it is likely that they will assume that Australia’s aviation safety regulator came down hard on me, and that I must have done something that was a grave and imminent risk to safety. When in fact, it clearly wasn’t.

I feel that an apology regarding that direction made public is a fair and reasonable request. It is essential that the apology identify that the direction was made on the basis of comments that I was making publicly, and not based on safety concerns or regulatory breaches.

I request that the apology be published nationally, and my preference would be that it is placed in Australian Flying or on the CASA website.

I am hopeful that you can assist me in obtaining an apology on this matter, and it seems a very fair and reasonable request, and it is very important to me.

Thanking you in anticipation of your consideration, respectfully, Glen Buckley.

---

Thankyou- Sandy - his letter to my MP.
I just wanted to express my thanks to a gentleman called Sandy Reith. For many from the Vic/Tas Region they will know Sandy as someone who owned and opertaed a local airfield. Despite departing the industry a number of yeras ago, he still remains active in protecting the interests of GA. I am very appreciative of the support that he has offered to me and the wider industry. Cheers Sandy. As with the efforts of you all, I am highly appreciative. Cheers. Glen.

Ms. Gladys Liu MP , Vic
Electorate Office, Burwood Vic.

15 Sept 21

Dear Ms. Liu,

I believe that Glen Buckley is appealing to you for assistance in relation to the conduct of CASA towards his aviation business.

I fully support his case and endorse his characterisation of the action against him by CASA as unconscionable, I would add disgraceful, and a blot on the Government of Australia.

I’ve been around politics for many years, my brother is Peter Reith, and I understand the difficulties that MPs have in determining the truth when assessing the many claims by their constituents. In this case a remedy for Glen Buckley would create a salutary example and potentially cause a great benefit to General Aviation (GA) and flow on throughout the Public Service. I’m sure that you will be aware that there’s a trend that Australians generally are tiring of bureaucratic over reach.

GA has been suffering for many years since the administration of civil aviation was removed from direct Ministerial control. Over-regulation and the creation of new and unnecessary permissions for which swinging fees are extracted from the GA industry have resulted in the decline of this once growing Australian industry with the loss of thousands of jobs and businesses. The Bureau of Infrastructure, Transport and Regional Development statistics show this decline but not in the context of a nearly doubling of our population, thus the situation is much worse than Government agencies portray.

I’m a retired commercial pilot, previous owner operator of Phillip Island Airport where I was Chief Pilot and Chief Flying Instructor with various additional CASA approvals.

On the other side there is a great opportunity to create jobs and garner support from thousands of aviators, happy to discuss further.

Kind Regards,

Alexander C. Reith

sandy@reith.com.au

Next GlenB, on the way to work, emails the ANAO:

28/09/21 To the person responsible within the Australian National Audit Office.

I write to you in regard to the current audit into the Civil Aviation Safety authority (CASA) Planning and Conduct of Surveillance Activities.

I am writing to you as a person directly impacted by what I perceive as deficiencies in this area, and I feel that I could make a valuable contribution as part of a process of continuous improvement.

In short, I operated two businesses in the flight training industry, since 2005. That business underwent a complete revalidation by CASA in April 2017.

In November 2017, that entire business underwent a Level One Audit. This being the highest-level audit that CASA can conduct. It involved several CASA personnel over a period of one week. No concerns other than minor administrative matters were raised.

In October 2018, CASA determined that identical business was now declared unauthorised, and placed restrictions on the businesses ability to trade, leading ultimately to its demise which impacted on businesses, students, customers, suppliers etc.

Personally, this matter has cost me many millions of dollars and left me bankrupted.

I am concerned that the business could undergo a CASA revalidation in April 2017, followed up by a Level One audit six months later in November 2017, but be declared unlawful in October 2018. In a subsequent investigation, CASA had advised the Ombudsman’s Office that they were not aware of my business structure until just prior to October of 2018. The Ombudsman subsequently found that despite CASAs assertion, the business was in fact not unlawful. I find it concerning that CASA would not be aware of the organisation structure, despite conducting a level one audit.

Had CASA identified any concerns during the development stage prior to the April 2017, or during that audit, I may have had the opportunity to act in a more timely manner and avoid the associated closure of my own business, business dependent on me, and the impact onmany staff, students, and suppliers also impacted.

May I respectfully request that someone from your office contact me by phone on 0418772013 at a suitable opportunity. In order for me to discuss making a submission,

I would need to arrange a few days annual leave. If my matter is not pertinent to the current audit, then I obviously will not make a leave request to my current Employer.

Yours thankfully, Glen Buckley

What prompted this was the fact the ANAO notified an extension period for contribution to CASA audit:

The Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) Planning and Conduct of Surveillance Activities

  Contribution for this audit has been extended until 28 November 2021

Finally Para 377 (aka Gobbledock) response to that:

Lead Balloon is correct. The scope of the ANAO’s audit processes centres mainly on government departments, agencies and bureaucracies spending. They predominately audit what, where and how budgeted monies are spent. As we all know, government money is mostly taxpayer money and that means each department must adhere to governance and spending processes. Even then, there is little to nothing that the ANAO can do, other than issue a damning audit report. A proverbial slap with the wet lettuce leaf. Unfortunately the scope of their work does not include whether a member of the public/taxpayer has been personally screwed or shat on by a government agency.

This government is happy to waste many many billions on continuous bureaucratic f#ckups such as the Defence submarines and aircraft debacles, pork barrelling and rorts programs, snowy hydro mess and the Great Barrier Reef gift of half a billion dollars, yet it cuts budget spending for the ABC and the ANAO! I wonder why that is? This government and successive ones are absolute shysters, crooks and incompetent morons. They are bending over 99% of Australia’s residents while looking after the interests of the 1%. It is no wonder, in fact it is of very little surprise that poor Glen is being treated like a little worker bee amongst a large hive. He has little say and certainly little assistance from the drones and their Queen as they center themselves in the middle of the hive and don’t give two handfuls of shit about the others.

MTF...P2