uk.rec.scouting Google Group

Re: NEW vetting and barring scheme (as of Sunday morning)

2009-12-15T03:08:27Z

BTW, it's not just 16-18 year olds that get checked.
CRB figures reveal 1,922 14 year olds were checked last year and 336
children under 14.
Since 2002, 10,097 children aged 14 years old have been checked, 3,138
aged under 14 and 29,722 aged 15. They are among three quarters of a
million under 18s to have been checked since the disclosure service

Re: NEW vetting and barring scheme (as of Sunday morning)

2009-12-15T02:55:52Z

Or maybe people are just slow! :-)
What exemptions for 16-18 year olds?
No they haven't!
And what has that got to do with scouting?
If you read things carefully you will see it relates to those 16-18 in
continuing education who are doing things such as work experience or
volunteering as part of their continuing education.

Re: POR Update?

2009-12-15T00:35:43Z

In message <acKdnXcH2r2-IrvWnZ2dnUVZ7vGdn ...@pipex.net>, MatSav
<matthew@|.dot.invalid> writes
So when does it must apply from?
POR is the bible as far as rules are concerned so one MUST assume that
it is correct to follow POR in which case the rule applies from some
time in Jan. 2010 when POR is amended.

Re: Cycle Helmets (was Re: POR Update?)

2009-12-15T00:05:27Z

Possibly some kind of "fabric" patteren? I duno.

Re: Dogs of War

2009-12-14T23:26:13Z

[link]

Re: POR Update?

2009-12-14T23:09:46Z

It would avoid the problem of children wearing cycle helmets being
strangled when climbing.

Re: Dogs of War

2009-12-14T23:05:44Z

Who?

Re: POR Update?

2009-12-14T22:59:52Z

On Mon, 14 Dec 2009 22:48:45 +0000, Marc
Only if you read the rules to the letter. I suppose fixing a puncture
is a "cycling activity", though.
Perhaps it would have been better to write it as "Helmets must be worn
when riding cycles[1] on organised Scout activities". But I think we
all know what they meant, and it would be by no means the only bit of

Re: POR Update?

2009-12-14T22:58:44Z

I didn't ask about that. "Absurdio reductum", maybe? Or perhaps
you have a really valid question. If the Scouts bring their own
bikes, it's very likely that they've ridden them to the place
where the instruction is being given - so is it mandatory for
them to wear a helmet? I expect it is, if the Rule is interpreted

Re: Dogs of War

2009-12-14T22:52:24Z

News is a bit slow... a new AC has been appointed already to start in April.

Re: Dogs of War

2009-12-14T22:50:41Z

I think I've found a way to continue being a Scout, without a local
appointment, and will publicise something that's worth it and getting up
some people's noses locally. I might just join FLAG!

Re: POR Update?

2009-12-14T22:48:45Z

Even when teaching Scouts how to mend punctures?

Re: POR Update?

2009-12-14T22:42:00Z

I've had a response from the Info Centre. The rule has changed to
"must" from "should", and they have confirmed that the wearing of
cycle helmets is mandatory [But...] A new version of POR will not
be issued until January 2010.

Re: POR Update?

2009-12-14T22:30:08Z

There were several changes referred to in October Scouting that I haven't
yet noticed come through in the online version. But it seems we now have to
play a guessing game as to whether the version of POR on the website is
up-to-date or not. If the SA thinks it is important enough to change the
rules,

Re: Dogs of War

2009-12-14T22:23:57Z

Hmmm I wonder if the "new" DC had a new AA from completed?
Of course not, but then I never had any problem with a CRB clearance
that was needed, such as moving county/area, as opposed to " 5 Years has
gone by, we need to waste some more taxpayers money, on telling us what
we know"