But if the organisation refuses to cooperate with the BCA, then the result will be the same, whether the statement exists or not
It really doesn't matter what happens to 10.1, it will make no difference to the powers that the BCA actually have.
his is not aimed just at Charterhouse it could apply to certain Welsh issues which had significant effects on British caving.
I'm struggling to understand how a couple of entirely local issues affects British caving *as a whole*.
Quote from: Badlad on October 18, 2021, 03:10:42 pmhis is not aimed just at Charterhouse it could apply to certain Welsh issues which had significant effects on British caving. I'm struggling to understand how a couple of entirely local issues affects British caving *as a whole*.
If there was substance to the legal reasons which were claimed to be behind the banning of under 18 year olds at Charterhouse, then clearly this could become an issue for other access controlling bodies in other areas for other caves. If Charterhouse were banning under 18s on legal grounds then other landowners and their ACBs might well do the same. This could have caused serious problems for young cavers and those who take them underground. BCA's role would have been to investigate the facts and try to mitigate any consequences of the Charterhouse action or prove them to be unnecessary.
I'm not saying there's a right of access, I'm saying the BCA should work to improve/maintain access to caves for cavers big and small.
I'm not sure the point of changing 10.1 is being fully understood - and it was me who proposed that the wording be changed. A change may well not give the BCA anymore powers to force an independent body to do anything. The point was that they should be able to look into issues which might affect the wider membership. The Charterhouse issue demonstrates the problem nicely. Charterhose banned under 18 year olds and they did not make it clear as to why or engage in discussion on it. When BCA's Youth & Development received a complaint about it they looked into the matter themselves. Charterhouse then made a formal complaint to BCA about interference and this then rumbled on, costing BCA several thousand in legal advice, for several years and no one actually got to the bottom of it all. Potentially this could have affected youth caving in areas far distant from Charterhouse.So just allowing BCA to make their own enquiries on issues that might affect the wider caving world is what this is all about rather than section 10.1 of the constitution being used to prevent that.
Bad Behavior has blocked 1270 access attempts in the last 7 days.