RYA ? Uh? What is it good for?

[havener]

Apologies for the rather dodgy song title thread name!

Following on from the "Don't support the RNLI" thread which pointed out that independants can do as good a job as a major national institution, my thoughts turned to the RYA (also fed by a thread on the Commercial forum).

Now don't get me wrong, I applaud much of what the RYA does - youth sailing involvement, designing (some) course syllabuses, etc....but what really winds me up is their attitude that they are the sole guardian of all that is good in the boating world. They don't represent manufacturers (BMF), offshore sail racing (RORC), and to me their stance recently on licencing and drink-boating have marginalised themselves to that of a self-interest pressure group. Even their slogan, (Protecting and Promoting Boating) is self-serving suggesting that boating needs protecting from anyone! I support their campaign on red diesel, but then surely that should be part of a wider campaign to reduce over taxation on ALL fuels, rather than just a "let motorists pay but not us" type view.

So where's this all leading? Simple - I'd like some views back on a little idea I have - namely that the MCA should be responsible for the setting of, and awarding of, training standards (especially VHF, where the RYA have been awarded a legal monopoly unknown in any other area), and that ANY suitably qualified person could become an instructor teaching to a national, independantly examined, course.

In other words, exactly what exists in relation to driver licensing in the motoring world.

And the point of this change - to open up training to properly regulated competition, meaning that students and instructors can choose how to teach a course provided that the content required by the exam is tought, without instructor fees etc going to the RYA. Of course, if the RYA want to continue to develop new courses or course material, that's fine, and they're also welcome to charge anyone who wants to use such material.

So, any thoughts? (Grabs helmet and runs for cover.....)

[codprawn]

Put the Gestapo in charge? Have you gone mad???

[jwalker]

Originally Posted by codprawn

Put the Gestapo in charge? Have you gone mad???

[Doug Stormforce]

You present a very odd argument, you give examples of alchol and taxation policy and then propose reform in training.

What is wrong? have you recently failed and RYA exam or something?

[havener]

No, I've never had any problem passing RYA exams.

My problem is simply that on one hand they are acting as a pressure group - on the drinking / licencing / diesel issue, and that's fine if that's what they want to do, although as a member I have never been asked whether I agree with their stance, but on the other hand they act as a regulator - VHF licencing especially where if people want to abide by the law, they have no option but to go through the RYA.

And in my view you cannot be a pressure group and a regulator at the same time.

The MCA are the regulator - its what we pay them for via taxation, and therefore the buck stops with them. It's not a question of putting them in charge - they already are!

I'm simply arguing for a level playing field for instruction, whereby anyone can be validated to instruct via the regulator - that's what happens in the merchant marine to a large degree.

It's the difference between policy making and service delivery - no-one expects the RNLI to coordinate search and rescue, but likewise HMCG can't deliver the service of operating lifeboats. The two are seperate and it works brilliantly.

As I said, much of what the RYA does is good - even if on some issues I don't agree with them, I'll still pay my subs and respect their campaigning stance, and if by promoting their own training schemes one person comes home safely who might not have done, that's great. But there are others with views of equal weight and experience to the RYA - and they should not be marginalised by the regulator only listening to one voice.

After all, if the Fire services can recognise three water rescue / boat handling training providers with different certifications, then surely the same can apply to the rest of us?

I guess I just have a natural distrust of monopolies!

[Pete7]

Handing control to the MCA could be good for training schools, especially if they required re-testing say every five years Probably best to implement it though the back door by some suitable EEC regulation. They would also need an Army of civil servants to "police" the system. With some more thought I could probably write a suitable job description that would involve spending sunny days zooming around the Solent with blue lights flashing, overtime and a hardship allowance for working on an open rib, oh and of course a gold plated final salary pension scheme.

That should finish off codders nicely

Pete

[havener]

Originally Posted by Pete7

Handing control to the MCA could be good for training schools, especially if they required re-testing say every five years Probably best to implement it though the back door by some suitable EEC regulation. They would also need an Army of civil servants to "police" the system. With some more thought I could probably write a suitable job description that would involve spending sunny days zooming around the Solent with blue lights flashing, overtime and a hardship allowance for working on an open rib, oh and of course a gold plated final salary pension scheme.

That should finish off codders nicely

Pete

Funny, I've never noticed the RYA doing that to "police" training centres, and yet "rogue" centres are very few and far between....so why do you think the MCA would need to do it that way?

A regular visit from your local HMCG Sector Manager should surely suffice - and isn't 5 years considerably more than the RYA currently revalidate?

And the benefit would be that, if done properly, any surplus from validation fees would boost the SAR budget.

[Solent Ranger]

[QUOTE=havener;169289
namely that the MCA should be responsible for the setting of, and awarding of, training standards (especially VHF, where the RYA have been awarded a legal monopoly unknown in any other area), and that ANY suitably qualified person could become an instructor teaching to a national, independantly examined, course.

/QUOTE]

But the VHF course is! The RYA offers the VHF course under the auspice of the MCA. It is also the only RYA course where the assessor is subjected to an external quality control report. About twice a year an assessor gets a envelope through the door which is is an independent audit of their performance. That report also goes to the powers that be.

You seem to be wanting to shake a tree for no reason.

[Simon Hawkins]

If you look back you will see that the MCA did use to operate its own training schemes. The RYA was then formed and the MCA then gave alicence to them to prepare and run the courses, hence why commercial endorsements are given from the RYA.

Simon

[tim griffin]

Yachtmaster International an American Company are approved by the MCA
BSAC Diver Coxswain approved by the MCA
RLSS UK Rescue Helm training programme approved by MCA as club's can gain SAR recognition
Same goes for the SLS GB Rescue Helm

So it seems other organisations can gain MCA approval to run training