[Peetwo]

GlenB embuggerance update: 28/12/22

Via the UP:

A draft letter to Minster. Sending 9AM 29/12/22

To the Minister responsible for the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA), the Honourable Ms. Catherine King MP,

My name is Glen Buckley, you will have some awareness of my matter.

On the 9th of December 2022, I sent you the first of a set of five, allegations of misconduct against two senior Executives of CASA.

· Ms. Pip Spence, CEO of CASA and,

· Mr. Jonathan Aleck, CASA Executive Manager of Legal, International and Regulatory Affairs.

Specifically, those allegations were related to the deliberate and considered provision of grossly false and misleading information to a Commonwealth Ombudsman’s investigation, with the intention to pervert the findings of that investigation.

Over coming days, I hope to complete and submit the second of those five allegations, and I will attend to the remainder as early as practical in the New Year.

Please note that this correspondence is not one of those five allegations, however it is highly relevant to the entire matter, and is one of the core matters.

I am fully satisfied that both Ms Spence and Mr Aleck are fully aware that CASA have acted unlawfully when CASA closed my business, and they have each been aware of that for a significant period of time.

I am fully satisfied that with that awareness Ms. Spence is attempting to “cover up” this matter by facilitating disinformation to that investigation, frustrating processes, choosing not to access the truth when it is readily available to her in her role, and in situations where she knows the truth, she chooses not to share that information when she should.

I believe this correspondence, the supporting evidence, the substantive nature of the allegations, and the ease with which truthfulness can be ascertained, must call into question the integrity of both Ms. Spence and Mr Aleck, and their suitability to continue in their respective roles, and most especially considering the seniority of their positions and the function of the Department that they lead.

Misconduct at such senior levels within CASA has the potential to impact on the safety of aviation, I feel you will be compelled to take action on this matter.

Before I get to the point of this correspondence, I will provide some required, underpinning knowledge.

On 23rd October 2018, and despite daily contact with my CASA team who had never raised any concerns, I received a written notification from CASA that I apparently been operating my business unlawfully for over 8 years, and that it was most likely that my business was to be shut down by CASA in as little as 7 days.

CASA immediately prevented me taking on any new customers, existing customers were advised that I was operating unlawfully, and what CASA termed an “administrative freeze,” was placed on all CASA regulatory tasks including the addition of Key Personnel, addition of courses, renewal of flight simulators etc.

Those crippling trading restrictions remained in place for 8 months, until Mr. Aleck stood by his initial determination of October 23rd, 2018, and forced all remaining customers to leave because the structure was unlawful.

Throughout that entire 8-month period as the business owner, CASA adopted a method that denied me any right of review or appeal. From having an established, safe and compliant business at 9AM on October 23rd, 2018, through to the closure of the business eight months later with the associated harm caused, at no stage did I have any right of review or appeal to that determination by CASA, and Mr Aleck specifically.

Mr Aleck made his determination that my business was operating unlawfully against two pieces of legislation and what is referred to as an “Aviation Ruling.” The Aviation Ruling was repealed by CASA shortly after they used it as the basis to close my business down. The allegations were that I had breached.

· Section 27a of the Civil Aviation Act

· CASR 141.050

· The Aviation Ruling (later repealed)

There were never any allegations against safety, no allegations that I did not have operational control, no allegations against any breaches of procedures in our CASA approved manuals, no requirements to alter any of our procedures in any way.

It was a change of opinion by CASA that because I utilised personnel that were not also my employees, I was in breach of those regulations according to CASA.

As the Owner of that business, there was never any doubt in my mind that the allegations of regulatory breaches were so absurd that I had concerns about “intent”.

I knew I was not operating unlawfully, and that Mr Aleck was manipulating legislation to achieve his desired outcome and bring harm to me. Most likely because I had taken an industry lead on raising concerns about the proposed new legislation not being “fit for purpose”, and the passage of time has clearly demonstrated that it is not. I had also raised concerns of the impact of the proposed legislation on Australian owned businesses and most particularly those in regional areas. Similarly, the passage of time has demonstrated that my concerns were valid.

For that and other reasons, I am fully satisfied that Mr Aleck targeted me, and most especially as I was the only operator that he shut down. CASA permitted the identical structure with other operators and continues to do so today. CASA led the Ombudsman to believe that I was doing something unique when the truth is that it was not unique, and CASA had always formally approved the identical structure, not only for me but for many operators.

To the point of this correspondence.

Ms Spence and Mr Aleck are both fully aware that CASA had no valid basis in law to close my business.

Since receipt of that notification of October 23rd, 2018, through until this day, I robustly maintain that there was no breach of those regulations, and I was not operating unlawfully. In fact, drawing on 25 years’ experience in the flight training industry it was ludicrous, and obviously not well intentioned that a CASA employee would use the legislation in this way.

There can be no doubt that both Ms. Spence and Mr Aleck are fully aware, and have been for some time, that the truth is that there were never any breaches of either of the two pieces of legislation or the Aviation Ruling, and CASA had no valid reason to close my business, and that CASA has acted unlawfully.

Mr Aleck was clearly abusing the significant power that he wields, including the power to close businesses based on his “opinion:”

To support my assertion that those two CASA Executives are fully aware, and have been for some time, that CASA acted unlawfully when it closed my business, consider the following timeline.

October 23rd, 2018, CASA advise me that I am supposedly operating unlawfully and have been for many years, CASA immediately placed crippling trading restrictions on the business. No legal advice has been sought by CASA at this stage. It is the “opinion” of Mr. Aleck only.

April 30th, 2019, CASA wrote to me advising that after 6 months with the trading restrictions in place, Mr Aleck has only now, finally received his first external and independent legal advice, when CASA wrote to me and stated.

“CASA has now received the external legal advice and that it has confirmed, inter alia, that Part 141 certificate holder is not precluded from entering into contractual arrangements with other parties to deliver flight training activities.”

There can be no doubt that by April 30th 2019 with the trading restrictions in place for 6 months, Mr Alecks application of opinion has been found to have no valid legal basis, and he is now fully aware of that, and the reasonable expectation is that with that knowledge he was again presented with the opportunity to act with good intent, and yet again he chose not to.

This is significant because by the end of April 2019, with the benefit of that legal advice Mr Aleck was presented with a further opportunity to either

· Admit error, and work collaboratively to avoid any further harm being caused, or

· Relentlessly continue to pursue his agenda to cause harm to me and my business.

Mr. Aleck chose the latter.

June 30th, 2019, Mr Aleck advises that he is standing by his initial determination, despite being in receipt of the independent legal advice he received two months earlier, the business is to be “dismantled”, and he deems the structure unlawful. CASA then contact the remaining customers and force them to find alternative arrangements for their own continued operations, including my own flying school of 12 years, Melbourne Flight Training (MFT).

The business structure adopted for the last 8 years was deemed unlawful because I utilised personnel that were not always my direct employees. i.e., they were employees of another entity.

Quite simply Mr Aleck was wrong, and he was fully aware of that before he continued with his decision to close my business. Mr Aleck closed my business two months after receipt of that independent and external legal advice. Understandably, CASA refuse to provide me a copy with that legal advice, however it would be a document that the Minister could access.

If there can be any doubt remaining that Mr Aleck was fully aware he was acting unlawfully before he made the decision to close my business in mid-2019, then there can be no doubt that he became aware he had acted unlawfully twelve months after he closed my business when Phase One of the Ombudsman’s report was released.

25th June 2020, Phase One of the Ombudsman investigation

Mr Aleck was fully aware that the decision to close my business in June 2019 was unlawful when were further validated on the 25th of June 2020, being twelve months after CASA closed my business, the Ombudsman wrote to me at the conclusion of Phase One of the investigation. In that correspondence he stated.

“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 another FTO.”

I am fully satisfied that by June 2020, Mr Aleck had access to was fully aware that he had acted unlawfully. He knew that before he closed my business based on CASAs own legal advice, and this was reinforced to him when the Ombudsman Report was released after he had closed my business.

For complete clarity regarding this correspondence.

I robustly maintained throughout this entire matter that there were very clearly no regulatory breaches, and that the legislation was being manipulated by Mr Aleck to achieve his desired outcome. His actions and decisions were not motivated by the safety of aviation but for other reasons, that were not well intentioned. It was personal, and I was targeted by him.

Mr Aleck, the CASA Executive Manager of Legal, International and Regulatory Affairs was aware in April of 2019 when CASA finally received external and independent legal advice. that he had no valid legal basis to declare my business unlawful, and place crippling trading restrictions on it, six months earlier in October of 2018.

With that legal advice received in April of 2019, Mr Aleck pursued his agenda regardless, and closed the business down two months later in June of 2019. He had no valid legal basis to do this.

Phase One of the Ombudsman Report received by CASA in June of 2020 would have again alerted CASA to the fact that Mr Aleck had no valid legal basis to close my business, although by now the business had been shut down for twelve months.

Ms Pip Spence commenced as the CEO of CASA in May of 2021. I acknowledge that Ms. Spence was not the CEO of CASA at the time that CASA unlawfully closed my business. Ms Spence however has been in the role for 18 months and is fully aware that CASA acted unlawfully. I have made her aware in writing throughout her tenure and she has access to those documents i.e. the Ombudsman Phase one report and CASAs own legal advice.

This correspondence is not intended as an allegation against Ms Spence or Mr Aleck, as I will attend to that in the subsequent correspondence.

The purpose of this correspondence is to ensure that there is an awareness within the office of the Minister that there is existing knowledge at the most senior levels within CASA that CASA have acted unlawfully, and that was known before the decision was made.

I have approached Ms Spence requesting a well-intentioned meeting, but she steadfastly refuses to meet with me.

I truly believe that this matter could be bought to a prompt resolution if Ms Spence was to clearly articulate to the Minister, and also to me, whether

CASA maintains the same position that it did in October of 2018, i.e. that I was operating in breach of

· Section 27a of the Civil Aviation Act

· CASR 141.050

· The Aviation Ruling (later repealed)

Although the response from Ms Spence may be lengthy, as I anticipate it will be, it needs only be one word, and that would be a yes or a no. In fact, if I may respectfully put forward a suggestion. The response could ideally commence with the “yes” or a “no”, and then perhaps be followed up with the supporting information.

I anticipate Ms Spence may be reluctant to respond prior to the release of the Ombudsman’s report, but this is an entirely separate matter and gets to the core matters of ethics and integrity. CASA must surely have its own position on this matter. Has its position changed substantially or does CASA stand by Mr Alecks decision making.

If as a I allege both Ms Spence and Ms Aleck have been responsible for providing false and misleading information to the Ombudsman’s inquiry then I can understand their preference to postpone responding until after reports release.

A reluctance for CASA to reiterate its stance on the regulatory breaches alleged of October 2018, must surely raise concerns regarding ethics and integrity.

Whilst it may not be an “offence” to be aware that you have acted unlawfully to close someone’s business and cause so much harm, it certainly speaks to ethics and integrity, something that has been eroded over the last decade.

Thank you for your time, may I respectfully request an acknowledgement of receipt of this correspondence, and I shall write to you over coming months with the further four of the five allegations against Ms Spence and Mr Aleck.

Glen Buckley

Comments in reply...

Sunfish

Furthermore, the CASA defence that Dr. Aleck or another member of staff made a "simple administrative error" in this matter is not available because it is untenable when one considers the drawn out nature of the proceedings and Dr. Alecks purported reputation and experience.

---

aroa

Sunny, the trouble with CAsA is they can cobble up any defence that suits at the time, and revise that later if needs be to keep their BS line up front and centre.
And who’s to question any of that, a Minister for the nod of disapproval? A politician ?
The Industry and the victim know it’s arrant tosh, but the problem remains the same. NO resolution.

MTF...P2