ITV News tonight 16th November

[graham]

Thank you. I would point out that this still brings a centre under the umbrella of the BCA as CIC is a BCA qualification.

Is there anything in the CIC literature that specifically mandates holders to issue such statements of competence?

Please note that I am not trying to stir the shit here, simply to elucidate some background information.

From the BCA perspective simply holding a CIC does not equate to the status of a trainer assessor. For the holder to become a trainer/assessor the BCA requires a strict program of apprenticeship. It is AALA who have taken the view that a CIC holder is automatically a suitable person to 'qualify' cave leaders. I think in these circumstances the centre cannot really be said to be under the 'BCA umbrella'. I'm not aware that NCA/BCA have ever communicated a view on this to CIC holders.

Thank you, again. It would seem that the AALA may be using the CIC for a purpose for which it has not been designed and may not be suitable. This may need addressing.

 

[Billy Butcombe]

Nice one Andy - thought it put our side over well. My thoughts are with the deceased and his relatives.

 

[Mr Fell]

Yep - Butcome is right for once -

 

[MSD]

for the Coroners Court to decide and not for the media to speculate on. Only then will similar tragedies be avoided in the future

"Only then will similar tragedies be avoided in the future...."

...Not so in my experience, having recently tried to find out background details of a caving incident (2001) from Coroners' Offices, writing to five different addresses - each passing me to the next - despite me providing the reference no., date and names of the deceased, only to be finally directed back to the first Coroner who wrote to say that the details of what went wrong, how, by whom, the experience of those concerned, any qualifications etc. etc. were confidential; the verdict is all we are able find out from these tragedies - the valuable background information from which other people can learn and thereby use to the advantage of others by avoiding similar mistakes is lost or unavailable. Knowing someone died from misadventure is insufficient to enable us to learn from the mistakes of others, thereby minimising the likelihood of such things occurring again in future.

From:

http://www.wakefield.gov.uk/CommunityAndLiving/Coroners/CoronersService+FAQs.htm#17

"Notes of Evidence at an inquest can be seen by properly interested persons, or copies may be obtained on payment of a fee."

"Medical records remain confidential after death. Coroners are entitled to request medical information that is relevant and necessary to their enquiries."

I'm not sure whether these policies are applied over the whole of the UK (the coronors courts seem fairly autonomous without a very strong national organisation). However, it suggests to me that you were fobbed off, because I suspect that policy is probably pretty uniform. I suppose they could argue that you were not "properly interested", but I would imagine that if you were (to take an example) secretary of the BCA, they could hardly claim that you had no ligitimate interest in the affair.

I therefore suggest that you ask the BCA or similar body to write and ask for the documentation, pointing out the above sentence in your letter.

Note that medical records remain confidential.

Mark

 

[nickwilliams]

<SNIP>

I'm not sure whether these policies are applied over the whole of the UK (the coronors courts seem fairly autonomous without a very strong national organisation). However, it suggests to me that you were fobbed off, because I suspect that policy is probably pretty uniform.

<SNIP>

Mark

I believe I am correct in saying that the whole arrangement for coroner's courts is being reviewed by the G'ment. Coroner's courts date from way back in the English legal system (middle ages, IIRC) and are very much a law unto themselves. Coroners have hitherto been through very little in the way of rational selection, and are very poorly trained. This has led to some very stupid decisions being taken, including some very insensitive treatment of the families of victims. Quite rightly, the g'ment has identified that this needs to change, and the wheels for this are in motion.

I hope that they do nothing which will prejudice a coroner's independence or allow the decision of a coronor's court to be lightly over-ridden.

It may be the changes have already happened, and that the situation which was cited by Cap'n Chris could not now occur.

Nick.

 

[cap n chris]

Sounds like a mixture of me being fobbed off and the system being under review so no-one wanted to do anything until the dust has settled. Perhaps I'll try again in a couple of years. There's no doubting that I was sent on a goose chase.

 

[Stu]

Thank you. I would point out that this still brings a centre under the umbrella of the BCA as CIC is a BCA qualification.

Is there anything in the CIC literature that specifically mandates holders to issue such statements of competence?

Please note that I am not trying to stir the shit here, simply to elucidate some background information.

From the BCA perspective simply holding a CIC does not equate to the status of a trainer assessor. For the holder to become a trainer/assessor the BCA requires a strict program of apprenticeship. It is AALA who have taken the view that a CIC holder is automatically a suitable person to 'qualify' cave leaders. I think in these circumstances the centre cannot really be said to be under the 'BCA umbrella'. I'm not aware that NCA/BCA have ever communicated a view on this to CIC holders.

Thank you, again. It would seem that the AALA may be using the CIC for a purpose for which it has not been designed and may not be suitable. This may need addressing.

Just leafing through the latest CIC handbook and there is a statement in which says that CIC is the relevant qualification for those wishing to technically advise centres and/or offer advise on caving matters. Technical advise couls one presumes lead to site specific "qualification" - not that I infer such in this tragic case.