Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

ISAA Membership

2

Comments

  • #52
    Cookie_Monster
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24,522 ✭✭✭✭Cookie_Monster


    So much for my vague intentions to come back to this sport...

    Should be done the same as Scouting Ireland, centrally by the Head office / governing body removed from the individual in question, not by individual clubs. Makes it far to messy and open to abuse / legal challenge etc


  • #53
    Aryzel
    Closed Accounts Posts: 486 ✭✭Aryzel


    A lot of work was done to affiliated the colleges to the IAAA. It seems a bit extreme to drop everything before seeing
    what other solutions there are.
    - Granted, but having each club vet every individual that joins is the most extreme worst case solution. I don't think
    ye have a chance in hell of the colleges allowing ye to do it yourselves, ye have zero security for the data and records
    that ye will recieve, and it will be viewed as children vetting children and puts extremely private information in danger
    of becoming public knowledge. How and where is all this information going to be stored, who has access, what happens
    when people leave the club or just stop showing up, you have a very fast turn over of people running college clubs.
    What happens (in detail) to appeals and what happens if any piece of private data is made public (ie, the vetting officer
    ever tells ANYONE a single piece of information he has read). What happens if anyone fails the vetting, what do ye do,
    what do you tell people, who do you tell about why the person failed etc. What do ye need to tell people when they are
    signing up and are asking for their permission to vet them, i presume ye need to tell them what its for (checking for
    peadophiles), who will be doing the vetting (some random 3rd year student) and how/where the information will be kept.
    All these questions and more, need to be addressed in major detail before ye can even consider if ye should do this.
    You will need to permission of your colleges to do this also.


    You may not be able to use IAAA judges. The IV shoots will be removed from the calendar and there will be nothing
    to stop someone else running a shoot on the same day so there may not be any free judges. Also the judges could say
    no to doing your shoots. I'm not saying they will but IV shoots would be given the lowest priority.
    Well in the seven years I was involved, any many years before my time, we we never associated with the IAAA and
    there was never a single problem. Also ye can easily just use past university archers to judge the compeitions you know.

    You will loose the 10Eur shooting only fee.
    - Oh nooes!

    Clubs who run outdoor shoots not on their own campus wont be able to anymore such as DIT who use Dublin Archers field.
    - Fair point, though these are rare enough that you only need 1 college capable of holding them, GMIT can i imagine.

    The vetting process for archery was decided upon by the gardai not by the IAAA.
    - But it appears that the college clubs only need to do it because of your association with the IAAA, which is easy to drop.

    At the delegates meeting two answers were given in regards to the colleges being vetted.
    You could potentially knock it down to a handful of people.
    - This is where you might have a chance, if the way it worked was for the IAAA itself to vet the few main people
    in each club, then that would work fine. But there is just no way ye can have each individual college club vetting
    every member that joins, its not even remotely viable. Even if ye could come up with viable method of doing it and
    your colleges all allowed ye to do it, it would kill membership in your clubs. People would be going around to clubs at
    fairs day, arrive at the archery stand, looks cool, €5, sign me up, at which point you would have to explain, properly,
    that they would also need to sign their consent to allow that pimply 3rd year student behind the desk have access to
    their secure garda records so he could look it over and decide if they were a potential peadophile. Yip, that will be a
    big seller.


  • #54
    Sparks
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,038 ✭✭✭✭Sparks


    ruiner wrote: »
    The vetting process for archery was decided upon by the gardai not by the IAAA.
    Eh? The two choices as to who did the vetting were the IAAA and the Gardai. It seems a conflict of interest to let the Gardai make the choice, especially when they see it as them doing work versus someone else doing work (and the Gardai have zero concern for the liability issues that the IAAA inherit along with the work). How come the ISC wasn't the one making the decision?

    Also, the argument that juniors and seniors aren't segregated in clubs and so everyone must be vetted - the more I think about that, the more it falls by the wayside when you consider that spectators aren't vetted. What's to stop one of them grabbing a kid as they go onto/come off of the field?


  • #55
    Cookie_Monster
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24,522 ✭✭✭✭Cookie_Monster


    Sparks wrote: »
    when you consider that spectators aren't vetted

    I'd like to see them vet all 85,00 spectators in croker every weekend:)


  • #56
    tenacious-me
    Registered Users Posts: 152 ✭✭tenacious-me


    If you really think about it, leaving the IAAA is not a viable solution to the problem, the work involved is too much for any given club and besdies being an IAAA affiliated club has its advantages.
    All that really is been suggested right now is the how-to in evading vetting for paedophiles, we need to work on a system of implicating the vetting not avoid it.
    For the ISAA in particular, i believe the meeting of certain requirements should determine vetting such as completing a 6-week training course or attending an IV or even showing up to trainig more than twice as on average about 80% of new sign ups dont keep up the sport.
    Anyway, the vetting training day is 5th of october whereas the AGM is the 25th, so like it or not every club is going to have to have a vetting officer, its just a matter of deciding the system of vetting......
    phew icon11.gif


  • #57
    Panserborn
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 807 ✭✭✭Panserborn


    Aryzel wrote: »
    that just means you prefer NUIG to be part of the IAAA

    Not quite. NUIG as a university and financial sponsor would prefer us to be part of the IAAA. Every penny that comes into our club is given by the sports authority of NUIG - and to be fair to them they are generous as they also pay a nice percentage of our expenses when shooting internationally. In return, They want us wearing NUIG colours and giving then official recognition for the support they give us. Totally understandable. They wouldn't be too happy for us to take their money and compete under the flag of another club, which is what we would have to do at any IAAA, GNAS, EMAU or FITA event.

    People would be going around to clubs at fairs day, arrive at the archery stand, looks cool, €5, sign me up, at which point you would have to explain, properly, that they would also need to sign their consent to allow that pimply 3rd year student behind the desk have access to their secure garda records so he could look it over and decide if they were a potential peadophile
    Addressing this issue was the reason I started the thread.


  • #58
    Cosine
    Closed Accounts Posts: 344 ✭✭Cosine


    Sparks wrote:
    See, you'd think - but if Tom, Dick and Harry all do the beginners course and Tom, Dick and Harry all sign the vetting form, and Tom and Dick are vetted and cleared and invited to join but Harry "fails" vetting and isn't, then if you think Tom and Dick won't talk about what happened, you don't know Irish people very well.

    I can honestly say I don't know, but since I'm planning on going to the vetting training on in a few weeks I'll find out and put it up here. I imagine/assume that there is some legal protection for a vetting officer.
    Sparks wrote: »
    But if everyone who ever wants to shoot an arrow is required to give a random stranger access to their Garda files and the only security is the lock on the filing cabinet and the good nature of the random stranger, I think there's going to be a recruitment problem sooner rather than later.

    Eh the Club vetting officers are expected to destroy their copies of the files after a decision has been made. The National Vetting officer will keep a copy of all files if copies need to be gotten later for whatever reason.
    Sparks wrote: »
    Thing is - if Swim Ireland, the crowd that brought all this down on us, aren't vetting all their members, only the people who're in charge of things (coaches, team managers, "designated persons" ie, coach helpers, committee members, and so on)

    Why not mention that at the IAAA AGM so? The IAAA is prob over reacting but its still going to be a requirement for every member of the IAAA unless something is said.
    Aryzel wrote:
    Hmm, something just occured to me, is the IAAA execting all normal clubs to vet themselves, or is the IAAA itself vetting everyone (which is what it should be and what you should demand of the IAAA).

    Ya, clubs are to vet themselves. The clubs Vetting officer sends the paperwork through to the National Vetting officer.
    Aryzel wrote:
    Granted, but having each club vet every individual that joins is the most extreme worst case solution.

    They won't do everyone, just the core who stay with the club. For example we (UL) get in maybe 150 - 200 members of which 50 might stay for the year. Those 50 are the ones who are supposed to be vetted.
    Sparks wrote:
    the more I think about that, the more it falls by the wayside when you consider that spectators aren't vetted. What's to stop one of them grabbing a kid as they go onto/come off of the field?

    Strangely this came up in the delegate meeting and the answer was something along the lines of "We're not responsible for the spectators but we are for the archers".
    tenacious-me wrote:
    For the ISAA in particular, i believe the meeting of certain requirements should determine vetting such as completing a 6-week training course or attending an IV or even showing up to trainig more than twice as on average about 80% of new sign ups dont keep up the sport

    I was thinking the same, it makes more sense to have a universal time that vetting would start at rather then every club deciding willy nilly. 6 weeks seems, to me, to make the most sense as after that no one who isn't serious would still be hanging around.


  • #59
    Sparks
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,038 ✭✭✭✭Sparks


    Cosine wrote: »
    I imagine/assume that there is some legal protection for a vetting officer.
    Still not optimal, even if you're correct in that assumption - legal protection just means insurance that covers barrister's fees, it doesn't mean legal indemnity...
    Eh the Club vetting officers are expected to destroy their copies of the files after a decision has been made.
    Who verifies the destruction is completed correctly? And that no other copies were made? And that noone got to see them in the meantime? In short, quis custodiet ipsos custodes? (And assurances as to the vetting officer's good nature are unacceptable - if they were, I could give you my assurances that I'm suitable and don't need to be vetted, after all).
    The National Vetting officer will keep a copy of all files if copies need to be gotten later for whatever reason.
    He will what?!?!?! Not my bloody file he won't! My garda file, complete with address, firearms stored there, make&model&physical location of the safe, CPO report on my house's security, all resting in someone's filing cabinet with a €2 lock between it and a burglar? Feck that for a yarn. Hell, we can't even keep a B sample secure in the HQ of Equestrian Ireland.
    Why not mention that at the IAAA AGM so?
    Because first WTSC would have to complete signing up to the IAAA and that would require that we all get vetted first, no?
    Ya, clubs are to vet themselves. The clubs Vetting officer sends the paperwork through to the National Vetting officer.
    So that's two people that have to see confidential Garda files. Why the hell can't this be done the way GNAS do it? They don't get the Police file, they get a report from the Police vetting crowd saying that someone's record is clean or that there's a concern. If there's a concern, then they can get into more detail.
    Strangely this came up in the delegate meeting and the answer was something along the lines of "We're not responsible for the spectators but we are for the archers".
    If that's the tone, I'll shoot arrows in my back yard and WTSC will forget about joining the IAAA. Either this vetting is done to protect kids or it's done because someone in the IAAA thinks their archers aren't trustworthy at the moment. If the latter's the case, WTSC has to protect its juniors by keeping away from a suspect body like that, and frankly, if that's how the IAAA feel, they should be calling the Gardai.


  • #60
    Sparks
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,038 ✭✭✭✭Sparks


    tenacious-me wrote: »
    All that really is been suggested right now is the how-to in evading vetting for paedophiles, we need to work on a system of implicating the vetting not avoid it.
    Frankly, if the design is as has been discussed here, with everyone being vetted and the vetting being done by the clubs and NGB, then the implementation of the vetting should not be taken on because the design is fundamentally broken.
    Anyway, the vetting training day is 5th of october whereas the AGM is the 25th, so like it or not every club is going to have to have a vetting officer, its just a matter of deciding the system of vetting.
    See, I could agree with vetting as done in the UK - where coaches, team managers, people who are in charge of u-18s are vetted, and where the police give a report on suitability instead of handing over confidential files. But this proposed system of vetting, this isn't acceptable. WTSC just won't complete joining up if this is a requirement. We have a 160m field, there's no law against buying archery equipment, and insurance can be gotten outside the IAAA, and we can run a match to FITA rules easily enough for our own members. So we'll just stay outside if the alternative is handing over garda files on all our members (which would contain all their firearms details, thus compromising their personal security).


  • Advertisement
  • #61
    Aryzel
    Closed Accounts Posts: 486 ✭✭Aryzel


    Has ANYONE actually talked to their colleges about this vetting process? Got their colleges permission to
    consider having a vetting officer, and how it would be done. It seriously looks like everyone is just talking
    in circles and noone has actually begun the process of seeing what can and what needs to be done.

    Stop talking and get the job done.


  • #62
    Cosine
    Closed Accounts Posts: 344 ✭✭Cosine


    I don't see why we would have to ask the college's permission. Maybe its different in other colleges but we're left run ourselves and are not really tied to our sports dept.

    @Sparks: Would it not make sense to email the president of the IAAA with your grievances so that something might be changed rather then arguing the same points over and over here?


  • #63
    Sparks
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,038 ✭✭✭✭Sparks


    @Cosine: No, it'd make more sense to mention this to their vetting officer to confirm that the things we're worried about over here are in fact correct; which is what I did yesterday.
    As to why we're talking about it here, it's because here is where it was first mentioned...


  • #64
    Aryzel
    Closed Accounts Posts: 486 ✭✭Aryzel


    Cosine wrote: »
    I don't see why we would have to ask the college's permission. Maybe its different in other colleges but we're left run ourselves and are not really tied to our sports dept.

    Hmm, the colleges hold the ultimate responsibility for the clubs in them. If a college archery club is vetting people then the college must know. If anything goes wrong, of anyone has a compliant that ye are vetting them, or if ye find anyone that fails the vetting, the issue will go to the college. If the college doesn't know everything about your process there will be serious trouble. The college is also the ones that will embarrassed and condemed in the media for letting students have access to secure garda files on fellow students.

    This is a seriously major issue, if ye go the route of an individual in each college club vetting every (or even some) of the members in that club then you are asking for serious trouble, as in getting your club suspended, reviewed and shut down by the college.

    Either:
    Get the colleges to do the vetting
    Get the IAAA to do the vetting on the few top members of a club
    Tell the IAAA to get lost


  • #65
    Panserborn
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 807 ✭✭✭Panserborn


    Sparks wrote: »
    See, I could agree with vetting as done in the UK - where coaches, team managers, people who are in charge of u-18s are vetted, and where the police give a report on suitability instead of handing over confidential files.

    This would be a far better way of doing it, but (no disrespect to any members of the force) that sounds like something that I imagine the Irish garda would consider too much work and "not our problem". I could be mistaken and unfair, if anyone knows any different then correct me.


  • #66
    Sparks
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,038 ✭✭✭✭Sparks


    I wouldn't be surprised panser - I also wouldn't care. They get paid for doing the work, volunteers don't, and that's just for a start.


  • Advertisement
  • #67
    philmire
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 171 ✭✭philmire


    i have just red true this topic i am very intrested in this privercy lark sparks is talking about because from boards i have found out your name where you are from what club you shoot in and what your job is and what position you have in the club.
    from Wilkinstown Target Shooting Club i found your bebo account and what air gun you have

    from just that information i could do anything with that info. so if you have a clean garda file from this for me a complete stranger i have found out alot about you with out garda vetting in minits (by the way garda vetting is for protecting me i'm a jounier):D:D:D:D:D:D:D:eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek:



    i'll finish my rant now


  • #68
    Panserborn
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 807 ✭✭✭Panserborn


    The kind of info you (kind of intrusively) acquired on Sparks is info that he himself (or any of us) posted in one way or another on the internet. Garda vetting is different in that is provides info on records they have on a person. And, if the guards had records on a person you can be sure it is info more sensitive than anything you would find on a bebo page.


  • #69
    Sparks
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,038 ✭✭✭✭Sparks


    Thing is phil, when you look into what job I had, you'll find it was the PRO for the shooting governing body, the NTSA. My job required that I give up anonymity on boards. I would not be considered usual as a result of this - in fact, most shooters won't even let their neighbours know they shoot. If you try to find any of that data on any other shooter in here, it will usually (about nine times out of ten) be a different story.

    Also, despite my "outed" status, you didn't find out what house I live in, where in that house I store my firearms, what model and make of safe I use and where I have it located at the moment, or any of the other things that are in the Garda file on me - and remember I'm probably the most "outed" shooter on the boards.

    I can understand you not knowing, because you're not a shooter and don't know what my reputation in shooting, small as it is), but if I think that this vetting is putting too much information out there, well, that's sort of like getting your table manners criticised by Idi Amin.


  • #70
    philmire
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 171 ✭✭philmire


    my point is not that silly litle things of bits of information mean every thing but there are ways of fishing for information that could be used to get more information


  • #71
    Sparks
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,038 ✭✭✭✭Sparks


    And my point is that when I voluntarily agreed to become the PRO for the NTSA, I had the time and the ability to sit down and deliberate on what items of information on me I would make public (those are the bits you've found by the way) - but this vetting procedure not only takes away that voluntary aspect, but also the selection. Unless we've all read this wrong, it makes it mandatory to surrender all personal information held on you by the Gardai to two third parties with no real guarantee of confidentiality or security that I can see.


  • Advertisement
  • #72
    Panserborn
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 807 ✭✭✭Panserborn


    OK, got requests from various parties to close this thread.

    What I'll do is I'll close it temporarily until the facts of the vetting proceadure are known, then I'll open it again so it can be discussed without hear-say and rumour, but with facts and figures instead.

    Anyone has issues with this then PM me but please don't start a new thread whining about it.


  • #73
    Panserborn
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 807 ✭✭✭Panserborn


    The meeting concerning the vetting issue took place at the weekend. Thread is re-opened so those present at the meeting can give the rest of us the facts around this matter.

    Feel free to discuss the issues but try and keep it to archery related vetting and how the clubs and colleges can deal with it. A sociological analysis of vetting is more suited to the soc boards.

    If anyone who was at the meeting is in attendence then you have the stand .............. do tell.


  • #74
    Sparks
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,038 ✭✭✭✭Sparks


    Please do!


  • #75
    Private Ryan
    Closed Accounts Posts: 76 ✭✭Private Ryan


    IAAA are to hold a meeting with the ISAA to discuss the implementation of vetting in our clubs.

    In non vetting matters but still ISAA related have recently contacted CUSAI (college univarsity sports association of Ireland). They are more than willing to help us and they can provide certain best practices policies inc years grace but they do recommend that college clubs are members of the national governing body.
    In case I start getting hounded for being proactive the reason I contacted them is that UCD have asked that I confirm the Intervarsity status of the competition I've booked in the hall. CUSAI are the body who confirm the Intervarsity status of cmpetitions.
    Any comments?

    MOD NOTE: I've copied this comment into a new thread all to itself, it deserves its own for what could be a big discussion. To comment on this please post here.


  • #76
    Panserborn
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 807 ✭✭✭Panserborn


    Private Ryan wrote: »
    In non vetting matters but still ISAA related have recently contacted CUSAI (college univarsity sports association of Ireland). They are more than willing to help us and they can provide certain best practices policies inc years grace but they do recommend that college clubs are members of the national governing body.
    In case I start getting hounded for being proactive the reason I contacted them is that UCD have asked that I confirm the Intervarsity status of the competition I've booked in the hall. CUSAI are the body who confirm the Intervarsity status of cmpetitions.
    Any comments?

    Hmm, thats a big one. I'm going to move that post of Private Ryans to a thread all to itself, so it can be given its own legs. Post here for comments on this issue.


  • #77
    Sparks
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,038 ✭✭✭✭Sparks


    Does this mean that the vetting discussed in this thread is to go ahead?


  • #78
    Panserborn
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 807 ✭✭✭Panserborn


    Sparks wrote: »
    Does this mean that the vetting discussed in this thread is to go ahead?

    Hopefully someone can clarify this. For the benefit the clubs who post here that are outside the IVs, if anyone has any info following the meeting in addition or clarification of the posts in this thread then post away.


  • #79
    Private Ryan
    Closed Accounts Posts: 76 ✭✭Private Ryan


    All the major issues regarding to vetting were discussed at the meeting. The session was an informal questions and answers session At the end, each line manager was sent back to their respective club with the task of discussing vetting with their members and if they have any further questions they can contact the national vetting officer. If enough questions remain unanswered another training day will take place.
    As for posting here the issues of the meeting there is not enough space, time and I feel it is not the correct forum. The IAAA is still finalising their rules in regard to vetting and publicly argueing the resulting teething problems with people who are not IAAA members could lead to even more problems.


  • #80
    Aryzel
    Closed Accounts Posts: 486 ✭✭Aryzel


    Private Ryan wrote: »
    As for posting here the issues of the meeting there is not enough space, time and I feel it is not the correct forum. The IAAA is still finalising their rules in regard to vetting and publicly argueing the resulting teething problems with people who are not IAAA members could lead to even more problems.

    Fair enough (ye are probably sick of me pointing out problems on issues lately), however ye should probably at least begin to mention it to some of your College Sports departments, as you don't want to get into the situation where ye have something worked out with the IAAA and then when ye get close to implementing it, some of the colleges refuse to allow it. Also any word on what other college sports clubs are doing?


  • #81
    Sparks
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,038 ✭✭✭✭Sparks


    Private Ryan wrote: »
    The IAAA is still finalising their rules in regard to vetting and publicly arguing the resulting teething problems with people who are not IAAA members could lead to even more problems.
    Or it might lead to people and clubs who are not currently IAAA members but who are considering it to decide either to go with the IAAA or to get insurance elsewhere and go their own way.

    Frankly, I've seen these "lets not talk about policy in public" decisions before. It always, every single time, without one single exception, means that something stinks and if you brought it out into public, people would be looking for heads to roll.

    It's a bit sad to find it in here as well, I was finding all this a refreshing break from finding it elsewhere :(


  • Advertisement
  • #82
    toxof
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 419 ✭✭toxof


    If people have nothing to hide then they should not be worried :)


  • #83
    Aryzel
    Closed Accounts Posts: 486 ✭✭Aryzel


    toxof wrote: »
    If people have nothing to hide then they should not be worried :)

    For 99% of people that is true, their police file will contain little more than their age and address. However the remaining 1% might have extremely sensitive information on their police file that has nothing to do with their safety around kids in archery but that information will be viewed by 19-20 year old college student. So it needs to be clear how that information will be stored, who will view it, and what legal rights does the individual have if the vetting officer so much as makes a hint about that personal information to anyone, ever.

    Example case, someones father is in jail, vetting officer sees that on the file. Months later some archery night out, drunk vetting officer whispers to the individual "I know about your dad!", can the individual concerned sue the ass off the vetting officer and the club itself, perhaps also the University and IAAA?


  • #84
    Sparks
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,038 ✭✭✭✭Sparks


    Or, as I pointed out above, my file would have my exact address, what firearms I have there, what the house security is like... if I get vetted and a month later I'm burgled and someone makes off with five grand's worth of firearms, do I sue the IAAA because they didn't keep my information secure? And how do the IAAA prove that their vetting officer didn't pass on the information? He or she might be completely honourable individuals - but proving that in court in those circumstances would not be something I'd want to have to do.


  • #85
    Sparks
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,038 ✭✭✭✭Sparks


    Besides, if toxof is right and those with nothing to hide have nothing to fear, why not discuss it here? What have the IAAA got to hide, after all?


  • #86
    toxof
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 419 ✭✭toxof


    If you need to discuss it with the IAAA talk to them in person!


  • #87
    Renegade_Archer
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 743 ✭✭✭Renegade_Archer


    So we're not allowed discuss it here as concerned archers?


    Perhaps we need a sticky, or a definitive post that gives the actual _facts_ about this vetting process?


  • #88
    Reku
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,766 ✭✭✭Reku


    If it goes through on clubs I'll probably quit the sport, if it goes through on IV's I'll let them vet me, nothing in my file anyway AFAIK, but I won't compete.
    It's a slippery slope, next we'll need to register our fingerprints and DNA to engage in the sport, then full medical assessment to keep anyone not in prestine health off the range in case they kick the bucket mid-draw. In fact should we not be worried about participating in a sport where injuries happen when for all we know other members have HIV?:rolleyes:
    Oooh, and think of all the dirty-dirty things folks may have done without washing their hands and are then touching the same targets as the rest of us...:rolleyes:

    Quite simply my issue is less with who knows what as opposed to the sheer idiocy of the entire matter, had they at least put it forth as us requiring firearms licences, and so being covertly vetted for this, I could have accepted the reasoning behind that, but that the fear is we can't be trusted around kids as opposed to we'll try kill someone with the bow, just sheer idiocy IMO. When you give into one idiotic idea why not the next one?

    Coaches of kids are the only ones who should be vetted, and even there I still think there's much better codes of practice that could be brought in instead so that the chance simply never presents itself rather than hoping that all the paedophiles have actually got prior convictions for such behaviour.


  • #89
    Panserborn
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 807 ✭✭✭Panserborn


    Renegade_Archer wrote: »
    So we're not allowed discuss it here as concerned archers?


    Perhaps we need a sticky, or a definitive post that gives the actual _facts_ about this vetting process?

    Discuss away, unless it gets silly I'm not locking the thread. (Public sport + public policy) = public discussion, as far as I'm concerned. But, keep it to archery rather than sociology please.


    When facts are available and written in stone I can sticky it, or add it as a post to one of the stickyed threads.


  • #90
    toxof
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 419 ✭✭toxof


    Renegade_Archer wrote: »
    So we're not allowed discuss it here as concerned archers?


    Perhaps we need a sticky, or a definitive post that gives the actual _facts_ about this vetting process?

    Yeah discuss away, but if there is something you need to know, why not give one of the IAAA exec a ring.

    As for quiting the sport! Thats idiotic!

    If all this vetting prevents one kid from being abused, then its worth it!


  • Advertisement
  • #91
    Aryzel
    Closed Accounts Posts: 486 ✭✭Aryzel


    toxof wrote: »
    If all this vetting prevents one kid from being abused, then its worth it!
    Thats making it a bit too simplistic, what if the cost of saving that one kid, is ruining the lifes of 10 other people (as in causing a suicide etc) which is just as likely an outcome as saving the kid. But thats not really anything to do with the discussion, just being picky on that one, people should not assume the side effects are less than the good goal being aimed for. Some good goals do cost (I don't mean money) too much to be implemented.

    Anyways back to the discussion the question is:
    What are the full and exact details being proposed for the vetting in terms of College Archery Clubs. What are the opinions and options given by the IAAA and the Coleges to the clubs to meet each of the requirements. Without that information we can only go in circles, there isn't really anything else to say.

    @Sparks, if the IAAA, College and the ISAA are still unsure on the answers to those questions, if they are still doing alot of back on furth on what will happen, then there is nothing wrong with them holding back talking about it on the forum. There is a difference in not talking about it because it is not refined enough to take public, and hiding the information because they can't answer the questions that might be asked. I'm sure they will make it public once they start to know what might be implemented, and want people to ask questions they might not have thought off, so they can have the solutions before the policy goes live.


  • #92
    Sparks
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,038 ✭✭✭✭Sparks


    toxof wrote: »
    If all this vetting prevents one kid from being abused, then its worth it!
    If it saves one child from accidentally poking his eye out with a nock, shouldn't we just ban archery then?

    Aryzel, if we discuss the impact here, doesn't that give the IAAA a data point in their deliberations?


  • #93
    Panserborn
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 807 ✭✭✭Panserborn


    Aryzel wrote: »
    I'm sure they will make it public once they start to know what might be implemented, and want people to ask questions they might not have thought off, so they can have the solutions before the policy goes live.

    AFAIK (I have been known to be wrong in the past) I think it is live. I need to talk to our captain who was at the meeting. As Private Ryan said, they will be discussing things with the ISAA, but for non IV clubs it is live AFAIK.
    Sparks wrote:
    Or, as I pointed out above, my file would have my exact address, what firearms I have there, what the house security is like

    Now that I think of it, at the original delegate meeting where the vetting intentions were announced, it was said that previous vetting for other organisations don't count. Hopefully, this means that all info on your shooting specific vetting will not be available or made known to any party in the IAAA at all.


  • #94
    tenacious-me
    Registered Users Posts: 152 ✭✭tenacious-me


    Aryzel wrote: »
    For 99% of people that is true, their police file will contain little more than their age and address. However the remaining 1% might have extremely sensitive information on their police file that has nothing to do with their safety around kids in archery but that information will be viewed by 19-20 year old college student. So it needs to be clear how that information will be stored, who will view it, and what legal rights does the individual have if the vetting officer so much as makes a hint about that personal information to anyone, ever.

    The individual Line manager(Vetting Officer) from each club will never be shown or told any individuals details, the only person that will see anyones file is the IAAAs national Line Manager, who will, if there is a problem with someones record, simply inform the clubs' line manager with a yes or no.
    The individual will be informed of the Refusal by the National line manager and will be given the chance to reply, in writing, I hope that answers a few questions...


  • #95
    Sparks
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,038 ✭✭✭✭Sparks


    Thing is Panser, that the address, firearms, security stuff - that's not from the NTSA vetting, that's from the actual garda licencing process itself (they send a CPO round to your house to check its security as part of the process). So anyone getting a copy of my file would get that information.


  • #96
    Sparks
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,038 ✭✭✭✭Sparks


    tenacious-me wrote: »
    I hope that answers a few questions...
    It does, but there are a few more left to answer, if you'd be willing?


  • Advertisement
  • #97
    Aryzel
    Closed Accounts Posts: 486 ✭✭Aryzel


    tenacious-me wrote: »
    The individual Line manager(Vetting Officer) from each club will never be shown or told any individuals details, the only person that will see anyones file is the IAAAs national Line Manager, who will, if there is a problem with someones record, simply inform the clubs' line manager with a yes or no.
    The individual will be informed of the Refusal by the National line manager and will be given the chance to reply, in writing, I hope that answers a few questions...

    Thanks, some solid information at last, previous info indicated that each club vetting officer would have total and sole access to all the data for their club. What you indicate is a much clearer better system, that should be acceptable and workable.

    A few questions on implementation details though:
    - What sort of information will be on the files that the National Officer receives? I've no idea what would be on the files the garda send.

    - How will the files/data be stored, or will it be destroyed after the Yes/No decision has being reached by the National Line Officer.

    - I presume the way it would work for ISAA, is that when people signup to the club (or a few weeks into the academic year) they fill in a form giving their name, address,...?, to vetting officer in the club, who sends the form to the National Line Officer, who then get that persons file from the Garda and reviews it, give the result to the club Vetting Officer. The club vetting officer then tells the person they have passed or failed the review. If they failed the review then the person is required to not attend the club anymore. Is this the procedure imagined? Oh and when the person is given the form to fill in, what exactly (word for word) will they be told, to explain what is being done and why it is required (it shouldn't be to hard to word this to be fairly clear without scaring people off :P)

    - If a person fails the vetting, does the club officer need to tell their college? As if anything did happen by the person in another club, and it was found out they had failed vetting by the archery club, but that nothing had being done to stop the person from attending other clubs, it could cause trouble. But it might not be legally allowed to inform the college, ye should ask the college about that when ye are getting their permissions to do this.

    - If a person fails the vetting, how does the appeal process work, in detail. The person has only got a Yes/No, so their first question will be 'Why?'. What info will they be sent, by whom, in what time frame limits, and what in detail is the full process for appeals from there onwards. Detailing at all stages, who is doing what, what information is being sent, what locations meetings will be held with individual (Appeals officer will travel to the individual or vise-versa), etc. You get the idea, a fully detailed process. Also there is no way the National Line Manager can make the decision and handle the appeals, has to have an independent oversight of some kind. What happens if they go to the college itself instead of the channels you imagine they should go to. Ye will need to get the college to agree that if someone complains to the college that the college then directs the person back onto the right appeals channel.

    - Has the procedures and questions(with solutions) being detailed and written out for each of the ISAA clubs, so when each individually goes to their Colleges, the clubs knows the situation well enough to be able to present and argue the case strongly enough to not get turned down by their colleges?

    - Has a standard information sheet detailing most of this info, in particular the detailed appeals process and contact numbers, being done up and ready to be given to people to take home when they fill in the initial form giving permission to be vetted. Hmm, would probably want to make a double copy of that permission form, so the individual takes one home, one goes to the National Line Manager.

    - Oh, and you will need to have a professional Lawyer (in whatever sub-spec this is, constituation law?), to given a written professional assessment of the procedures planned. Do they comply with the government laws about vetting and do they comply with government laws on individuals rights, privacy etc. Not sure if the lawyer can do this, but students in universities might also receive additional rights from the university that might need to be considered, ie, being college students they might have the right to not be vetting by college institutions (which a sports club might be considered to be)

    Dermot


  • #98
    Private Ryan
    Closed Accounts Posts: 76 ✭✭Private Ryan


    There is plenty of clarification can be provided but I'll repeat, the ins-and outs of the various issues should not be made available to the public at large in the same way that the IAAA are not going to release the exact process of admitance/refusal to the members.
    The policy is live but it is to be implemented incramentally. If you want exact timelines ask your club rep that was at the meeting or contact the national vetting officer. It is for everyones benifit that everything is not made available on the net as it lends itself to risk of people finding loop holes and exploiting them. At least if this process is conducted in private the issues can be resolved without embarrasment.
    I'm not saying don't post your quieries just don't expect answers.

    As for the colleges Dermot is correct make sure they are aware of what is going on. I've met with my college and it was very productive. If you have any college specific questions send me a message and I'll have them answered when we meet with the IAAA


  • #99
    Sparks
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,038 ✭✭✭✭Sparks


    Private Ryan wrote: »
    There is plenty of clarification can be provided but I'll repeat, the ins-and outs of the various issues should not be made available to the public at large
    That's rather smelly.
    If the process applies to the public at large, it should be detailed to the public at large.


  • #100
    Private Ryan
    Closed Accounts Posts: 76 ✭✭Private Ryan


    Sparks wrote: »
    That's rather smelly.
    If the process applies to the public at large, it should be detailed to the public at large.
    It doesn't apply to the public at large. It applies to IAAA members and volenteers in the IAAA clubs


  • #101
    Sparks
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,038 ✭✭✭✭Sparks


    If it applies to anyone who wants to try or take up archery, it does apply to the public at large.


  • Advertisement
Advertisement