are you answering the OP or my query??
He very rarely says anything that isnât having a pop at anyone who does not support his peculiar view of how we are governed & run. (Ie not by the Sqn Chair).
2 Likes
I am a bit like a politician - answer a question using with another question.
However do what you think is right is also not the answer. To be precise, there should be guidelines on what is or is not acceptable practice. The fact that you may have submitted paperwork is purely a mechanism to ensure Cadets are recovered by insurance - a formality not necessarily an endorsement.
Has anyone ever had a PIPE turned down I wonder?
As I see it, in line with a requirement to acknowledge fundraising guideline, surely the ACMB, which controls all the rules, should issue guidelines on what is or is not good practice rather than leave it to local discretion.
If things were clear there would be no need to ask on an open forum, but given that no-one has answered my own questions about the ACMB, it would appear that forum members clearly dont know all the answers.
Maybe you should ask your Civcom, but as ACP10/11 are not easy to interpret, I would feel without experience they are as much in the dark as you are.
My point is that you have sufficient reason to get official clarification which should then be made available to everyone.
But in many ways this is how squadrons get donations. Take car parking as a for instance. Iâm on a organising committee for village events and our annual fete relies heavily on the Scouts (I donât get the cadets involved as it would mean I wouldnât be able to enjoy the day) to do car parking and help out, for which they get a handsome donation. Without them it would be more difficult to run.
Then there are all the charity collections including Poppy and Wings, that cadets only seem to be involved in because they are in clothing linked to the military and the organisers either donât have their own people willing to get off their backsides or arenât set up that way, thinking here of HFH, who Iâve understood how or why they exist, except for the need of a certain headline grabbing PM in the early 00s. Cadets in these are cheap labour.
Whenever we do these things it comes under the "citizenshipâ heading, which I fully endorse as I think we have too many people willing to just sit around and do sod all in the community and moan when things stop, as there arenât enough people willing to give up some free time. So if a couple of cadets get involved in local groups a few years on and what weâve sort of instilled in them is why, so much the better.
I have had quite frank chats with my RAFA and RBL branch on the lack of members involved in collecting. I accept that many are getting older, but I know they never did it when they werenât so old and there are younger ones who donât do it.
So cadets cheap labour yes, just like so many youth groups who don common clothing.
Personally I donât see what this would have to do with the ACMB, given they are not civilians, but feel they experienced and knowledgeable enough about every facet of the Air Cadets and perfectly placed to dictate to all corners of the organisation how the organisation operates. Imagine the furore if a squadron commander was to set their own guidelines on fundraising.
But as we donât have an independent purely civilian element free from uniformed interference at the top levels we are stuck with them. The situation should be that the Air Cadet Council is a purely civilian affair with one ex-officio uniformed individual sitting in and this Air Cadet Council decided Civ Comm policy.
I do think that all levels of the civilian side above squadrons should be responsible for itâs own fund raising and not pilfering.
If you could all restrict your whining about the ACMB to the ACMB thread (started by Aries for that purpose) that would be very much appreciated.
As far as I can tell, the ACMB has nothing to do with RAFA donations, but I would be happy to argue the toss on the aforementioned thread.
2 Likes
Your query!
Like a politician, deflect the question as you canât answer it because you donât have a clue what your talking about but try and blame someone else ???
It would be good to get a concise answer and point rather than rants against the ACMB
2 Likes
The frustrating thing is that Aries probably has a valid point to a degree about the operation of civilian committees in accordance with relevant legislation but its lost in the pseudo-legal babble and tin foil hattery
6 Likes
in which case youâve not understood my query and oddly i agree with Aries it is not the answer
if there were truth, as suggested by @Aries, that the use of GPF funds for Cadet Insurance for an event which had no benefit to the organisation, indeed by its very nature was direct benefit for another charity then it should not occur - how then would it work for less obvious situations, as i offered, Marshalling at a local fun run, directing traffic for an airshow/other event??
the case of âdo what i think is rightâ would mean i would be directly going against policy each time i stepped out of the Squadron compound as funds and insurance would not be used as they should be.
in reality yes we do what we think is right, but if the suggest by Aries is true (insurance isnât valid) then we shouldnt even consider these events - which is twoddle as Units up and down the country do
although i cannot find the reference now (the closest I have is ACTO011 but it isnt the long list i was expecting8) there is a list in an ACP/ACTO/similiar of approved Cadet activities and events. that is the list that needs considering i see no benefit in having a second one.
although you acknowledge not answering the question, i am not sure what your follow up question is.
unless you consider âhas anyone ever had a PIPE turned downâ question - i have, but for holes in paperwork, which were perhaps updates or minor edits to RAs or admin orders.
do you mean to ask, has anyone been banned from attending an event by the CoC because of what the activity was or who it benefited?
i know of no examples of that, and i would expect the CoC to adopt the list as indicated previously.
if it is classed as an approved event and the paperwork is in place, crack on!
*ACTO011 does indicate what events GPF and insurance covers which answers @Aries original question
So for the events my unit takes part in, my HQ demands a copy of the other organisationâs insurance is submitted with the PIPE, so I presume that would be the first recourse for any claim, rather than Cadet Insurance.
I do agree that HQ needs to take a very hard look at everything Cadets do and ensure that there is cover, especially as ignorance is no excuse in eyes of the law. The list of activities is not exhaustive enough. But who should take on this task?
1 Like
From my involvement in things outside the ATC, no one today can run an event without insurance, unless they have extremely deep pockets want to run the risk. For one of the things Iâm involved in we have to supply an event management plan which has to include RAs and PLI and someone has to go to a meeting at the council.
In the ATC weâve had to get PLI from organisations for years. You are right in that this ensures any claims etc are through the organisers and not the ATC.
HQAC puts the onus on squadrons to get PLI from event organisers, which can a PITA.