By that logic, it shouldnât be banned then! 
By that logic the replacement AOC 22 could reinstate it if it remained in the MoD list (is it still three year tours)
Possibly also an argument for greater supervision from the DG of Cadet forces rather than solely AOC 22 group.
3 Likes
come of it, when its gone, its gone. Far too much trouble to reinstate.
1 Like
Love your optimism:), got same book.
Well then.
No accidents relating to car parking in the last 2 years. None. And confirmation that the ACF are still allowed. Donât really know what to sayâŚ
@Cab Iâd honestly love to know what triggered the ban on this activity specifically above all else?
4 Likes
Well, since this a topic of peak cynicism, this feels relevantâŚ
So knowing that rafac are short on staff, lets put in FOI request to use more resources only to get an answer which alot knew already. 
1 Like
Itâs not my FOI, but I donât really disagree with it. They seem to be the only way we actually find our whatâs going onâŚ
Itâs been said many times before, people are putting in FOIs as their questions are not being answered any other way. More transparency will equate to less FOIs.
9 Likes
Didnt think it was you foi, sorry if it came across that way. Probably geographical, i simply ask WExO and got that answer, guess so e wings ate so easy. Its a vicious circle, which could be broken with expedient initial comms
2 Likes
So your WExO told what isnât a reason for the ban? That still doesnât tell anyone what actually IS the reason and ignores that it shouldnât be necessary to request additional information on a matter such as this.
Correct, and thatâs the point being made here and on the SWR thread. When announcing something, offer your justification and consider what questions might be asked so you can head them off by including those details.
To flip your own comment to an HQAC perspective:
3 Likes
You have missed it, reason was not as a result of any incidents (hence waste of time asking for evidence of any incidents), itâs purely that those at the top dont want any risk no matter how trivial so they said stop it. We may not like it but going around the same perverbial circle wont change it, just makes people look like spoilt 5 year olds who have had their toys taken away. So unless anyone can actually come up with another exopaination which originated from CAB or his direct chain of command, and not via any SM sites ( although Peps entry was rather good) then i have no reason to doubt WExO explaination.
I disagree, having that evidence makes requesting the justification a stronger position to hold.
If the argument is safety, we now have an amount of evidence that suggests to us that the activity isnât as unsafe as we would consider warranting a ban. Also that we are potentially an outlier by banning this activity.
Therefore, what is the actual reasoning and evidence used during the decision making process?
2 Likes
Canât afford any toys, our largest source of non-public funds has been cancelled.
9 Likes
We will have to agree to disagree as FOIs just take up scarce resources, the simple fix would be for his original email to be sent to all OCs then no need for lots of other bitty comms.Whilst people keep putting reasonable arguememts to prove the activity LOW risk, if they bother to listen to the actualy requirement the CAB wants NO risk and the only way of doing that is stopping the activity.
My gibe is aboutvthe timing as this should have been thought about before xmas. There we could plan ahead. No doubt there is going to be a further lists of stopped activities so hopefully we will get told well in advance (I am expected to be proved wrong). Any all the griping, producing evidence etc in the world isnt going to change thingâs so will have to try and find what we can do when oir blessed region let usboutcto play again.
You are Tony Keeling and I claim my ÂŁ5
7 Likes
So youâre saying that if decision and policy making was more transparent then there would be fewer FOI requests which would save resources.
And we know that CFAV have been asked not to put in FOI requests because it takes up HQAC resources.
Yet we continue to receive information and policies in forms that do not provide the detail that would prevent FOI requests.
Weâre not actually on different sides here. We both want fewer FOI requests and recognise that more transparency could provide this.
Thereâs no such thing as no risk and the guiding principle of risk assessing is ALARP.
⌠Shutting down the organisation.
An individualâs gut feeling or not liking something is not a risk assessment. Thatâs pure bias. Shutting something down without reasonable and tangible evidence (or rather: not presenting it if you have it) is bound to generate questions and challenges.
6 Likes
We may find MH370 before we get that answer 
There is no evidence AVM simply doesnt want ALARP (thanks for reminding me of that option), then there is stop.
One reason the RAF wanted to get rid of VR(T) was to get rid of the admin burden and dealing with the Civis in Uniform (Volunteers) who did things their way not military and what suited them when and when they choose. All these FOI is surely highlighting to MOD and Air Command that the Civis of the RAFAC are causing a huge admin burden, with cuts across CS, MOD and RAF, whats a good way to reduce that admin burdenâŚwhat happend to VR(T)!? Just a hypothesis but I would be thinking get rid of that so there is no need to ask a FOI as it donât exist.
Interesting language. I would argue that the FOI requests are a symptom of appalling communication. So actually it just proves the volunteers in this organisation wonât just be fobbed off, but will use whatever tools are available to it to try and get answers on what is going on.
If that means an admin burden, for this type of complaint, is simply diverted from military complaints to FOI requests then the organisation made an error of judgement.
4 Likes