CRB Checks (was: Trade,Ratty is it worth it)

[pedr]

I'll say it again - I'm still not sure that anything that a games convention does with regard to open-age events is 'regulated activity'.

It has to fall within the terms "teaching, training or instruction" and/or "care for or supervision of" a child. And not be merely incidental to teaching, training, instruction, care for, or supervision of people who are not children.

The regulations which bring this law into effect (it is currently not in effect) may well clarify this. Some websites suggest that we should expect those regulations next month. Have a look at the consultation paper I linked upthread for some government thinking regarding 16 and 17 year olds attending open-age sessions of regulated activity, which to my mind makes it even less likely that games conventions will be seriously troubled - at least as regards the over-16s and events targeted at all ages.

[Morgoth]

This is true, but all it takes is for one numpty at a council to decide otherwise and boom, there goes the UK convention industry in one fell swoop...

[Phil Masters]

This is true, but all it takes is for one numpty at a council to decide otherwise and boom, there goes the UK convention industry in one fell swoop...

Not quite true. There goes a large chunk of it. The segment which already has an actual or informal over-18s-only rule ducks the bullet.

Assuming that there is a real problem here - and the new law just coming in may mean that there will be in future even if there isn't now - there are three general solutions available:

1. Work with the law. Get some people's records checked, make sure that convention rules make the legal situation clear and then enforce them - do whatever it takes. Some cons are apparently doing this, and reckon they can get it to work. Advantage: You're legally bulletproof, you maximise your membership, and you may even recruit new gamers for the future. Drawback: It takes at least some effort and expense, and may lead to a lot of hassle for at least some people who aren't even part of the convention organisation.

2. Slap on a flat Over 18s Only membership policy. Advantage: It's simple, it's cheap, and you don't have to worry about incidental stuff like access to the convention bar. Drawback: Some people won't like it, and it may arguably be bad for the future of the hobby, if you think that's your problem.

3. Ignore the problem. Really. Events like GenCon just gone let under-18s in, don't have any particularly strong rules on the subject, and haven't yet suffered any legal or PR disasters. You may even be legally quite safe really, and even if you're technically in breach of the rules, you can probably get along for years and years without any actual trouble. Drawback: If and when things go wrong, they may really go wrong.

Personally, I won't blame any con committee that opts for any of these. I'll just be interested to see which of them decide on what, and I hope that all of them are at least aware of the issue.

[pedr]

This is true, but all it takes is for one numpty at a council to decide otherwise and boom, there goes the UK convention industry in one fell swoop...

Perhaps. I'm not sure who is responsible for enforcement of the rules - almost certainly the police as the new scheme, when it comes into effect, will impose criminal penalties for failure to comply.

It may be that it will require some people in some border-line areas of activity (not necessarily the games convention industry) to be convicted of failing to ensure that everyone is registered, and appeal, so that the Court of Appeal can clarify what the law means. A better solution would be for the government to tighten the wording in the law so that it's clearer, of course! I imagine the advice they'll give will be that everyone has to be registered - but the government can't give authoritative interpretations of 'teaching, training, or instruction' - that's the judiciary's job.

One aspect we've not considered, though, is what stance public liability insurers will take. They might refuse to insure an organisation's activity unless the organisation undertakes to make sure that everyone involved is registered under the new scheme. They can't do that now, as the new scheme isn't in operation, and not everyone has access to CRB checks.

However, overall, this is probably not going to be a problem for 16-17 year old convention-goers; a 'no unaccompanied under-16 year olds under any circumstances' rule might well work, if the government follows-through on its stated policy regarding activity targeted to an open-age audience. Rather bigger problem for the CCG tournaments, than the RPG events, I'd have thought!

[Max Bantleman]

One aspect we've not considered, though, is what stance public liability insurers will take. They might refuse to insure an organisation's activity unless the organisation undertakes to make sure that everyone involved is registered under the new scheme. They can't do that now, as the new scheme isn't in operation, and not everyone has access to CRB checks.

Bleedin' good point!
I think it will unfortunately take a test case to set the rules (precedent) for what a games con is 'legally' obliged to do and what will be politely ignored or not enforced...

[queenortart]

I think it will unfortunately take a test case to set the rules (precedent) for what a games con is 'legally' obliged to do and what will be politely ignored or not enforced...

Oh please let that not be us. The insurance company I'm talking to hasn't mentioned it and I'm loathe to bring it up. I don't want to be a test case.

I think I need to make people put their year of birth in the database now.

[cade_tosscobble]

These are the sorts of questions clubs need to be worrying about now though (I know this thread is about conventions but it applies equally to clubs).

Our club is very aware of the way legislation is going.
At present we meet in a pub, so the age limit of drinking establishments affects our members anyway, but we haven't always met in a pub.

[Mick Red]

we meet in a pub also however the landlord is happy for kids to come and play, my son (13) is left by me at tables of GM's that i trust and are happy for him to play in the game, i go do my thing play my game go to the bog outside for a smoke whatever and leave him there, why? because i couldnt give a fish's tit about labours 'policy's' on this, whatever next the next door neighbours daughter has to be CRB checked to babysit while me and the wife go to the pub for a couple of hours. I work for HMCS (Her Majesty's Court Service) and indeed spoke to a District Judge about this very thing today, i was informed as long as i knew where he was and who he was with, regardless of what the council busybody said wile wielding the PC stick it would propably never go to court.

[pedr]

Mick's point's the important one. No-one observing what goes on at a club should reasonably think that anyone is providing care for children, or even supervision of them. They're either under the care or supervision of their parents, or are caring for and supervising themselves!

Perhaps where a lot of activities which are more in the news have problems is that they are explicitly providing 'training, teaching, or instruction' - here's how to do karate, here's how to build model aeroplanes and fly them, here's how to cook and make fires and sew, etc etc. Again, not really something that's going on at a club.

We'll see how it shakes out of course - though having said that, I doubt many district judges have read the Safeguarding Vulnerable Groups Act, as most of it isn't law yet.

[Mick Red]

I doubt many district judges have read the Safeguarding Vulnerable Groups Act

20% of current convention going adults are more vunerable that my 13yo son

[Kithran]

Well one worrying thing I saw on the news earlier today - a council had stopped someone dressed as a penguin handing out leaflets on climate change in a park that was also used by children, saying they needed to be CRB checked and risk-assessed because there were children in the park, even if the person wasn't handing out leaflets to the children. Having heard something as idiotic as that I wouldn't be surprised if some council busybody someday got his knickers in a twist about a gaming convention.

Kithran

[pedr]

People are rather idiotic in their reaction to these kinds of things.

I'm not entirely sure that this is a council issue, though, unless the event was taking place on council property - the council has some authority over what happens in a municipal park, in a way which they don't in, say, Reading University.

[Kithran]

People are rather idiotic in their reaction to these kinds of things.

I'm not entirely sure that this is a council issue, though, unless the event was taking place on council property - the council has some authority over what happens in a municipal park, in a way which they don't in, say, Reading University.

Where does Dragonmeet take place?

Kithran

[pedr]

Yes, that's possibly an issue. Let's hope that Kensington LBC are not idiots (of course the problem with unclear laws is that people can use them to make problems for those they dislike/disapprove of - if the council official you heard a report about didn't like what the penguin-suited-man was doing, he could have chosen this as a rather foolproof way of saying "oi, stop!" - regardless of whether the law really supported his position)

Of course, Dragonmeet is also after the potential implementation date for the new scheme (from bits of information I picked up from the net). You must all be tired of me saying that I don't think the scheme should, as written, affect RPG conventions, but whether or not it does - and whether or not venue owners and the police think it does - remains to be seen.

[Mick Red]

Well one worrying thing I saw on the news earlier today - a council had stopped someone dressed as a penguin handing out leaflets on climate change in a park that was also used by children, saying they needed to be CRB checked and risk-assessed because there were children in the park

And in response the Home Office warned the council they had overstepped the mark