Since the Health & Safety Executive’s initial
consultation and series of meetings with the sector regard
Licensing in 2016 and 2017, the Institute has been working
to support the sector to ensure an open and informed debate.
The Institute has played an active role in the establishment
and operating of UK Adventure Industry Group (UKAIG)
specifically established to provide support for the
HSE’s review.
In the past 6 months the UKAIG has worked closely with the
HSE to develop 3 options for the outdoor sector to consider,
regarding the future of adventure activity licensing across
the UK. The largest element of this work has been to outline
a sector led and managed scheme for inspection and
accreditation consistent with the HSE criteria for such
schemes. This has enabled the HSE to offer 3 options for the
future of licensing to the sector in its latest consultation
which closes on 9th March 2018. Those options are:
-
Option 1 Retain the AALA regulations and current
licensing scheme underpinned by the Health and Safety at
Work etc. Act 1974, and increase fees
-
Option 2 Retain the AALA regulations and current
licensing scheme underpinned by the Health and Safety at
Work etc Act 1974, and increase fees and extend the
activities in-scope
-
Option 3 Removal of the AALA regulations and move to an
industry-led; not-for-profit accreditation scheme
underpinned by the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act
1974, to provide assurance to users of outdoor
activities
It is clear that the sector has benefited hugely from the
introduction of Licensing. The current inspections and the
inspectorate are highly valued across the sector. A survey
of the sector by The Institute in 2010 resulted in two very
clear messages; that there was very little appetite for the
removal of Licensing without any replacement and secondly
that any changes to Licensing should result in a UK wide
scheme, reflecting the reality of how young people are
accessing adventurous activities across the UK.
It is also clear that the current Licensing regime is not
financially sustainable and has very little governance input
from the sector it is designed for. In addition, the very
limited scope of the inspection scheme as defined in the
1995 Act and restrictions on its development as a result of
it being embedded in legislation, has led to the emergence
of a number of non-statutory schemes. A direct consequence
of this is that many providers have multiple inspections for
different schemes and both the sector and its users have a
complex and confusing array of badges to contend with.
The Institute is seeking to increase the value placed on
outdoor learning across the UK. In considering the role of
inspections in outdoor learning service provision it is
appropriate that the inspections and the standards that
drive them be developed and managed by the sector. Shaping
and governing an sector led inspection regime should be the
responsibility of a professionally led and managed sector
and can play an important role in raising the sector’s
value proposition.
Whilst the Institute for Outdoor Learning’s board
recognises that not all Institute members will take the
same view, the Institute is recommending that outdoor
learning professionals across the UK respond to the
HSE’s consultation by selecting Option 3.