Press Release

STA TAKES ACTION TO PROTECT ITS MEMBERS

1st October 2006

By Roger Millward, Chief Executive of STA

In the February 2006 issue of STA’s member magazine Swim & Save, I first raised the issues surrounding the new licensing proposals from the ASA, and in the April edition I sought opinion from the membership, and other interested parties. The response has been tremendous, and to date we have received 292 written responses, 291 of which support the position of STA; there was just one anonymous response that did not support the STA position. I feel it is now time to report more fully to the membership on the developments that have taken place over the last few months.

Whilst the immediate cause for concern is the question of licensing there are three separate, but interconnected, issues that have led STA to take some very serious decisions. They are:

1.  The new Sports Coach UK coaching certificates currently being developed
2. Licensing for swimming teachers
3. The whole question of STA and ASA working together for the good of swimming and water safety.

Sports Coach UK Coaching Certificates (UKCC)
When this was first mooted it was thought that this related to coaching, i.e. sports coaching, rather than teaching. STA then discovered that the ASA was proposing to include teaching within the scope of UKCC and, furthermore, were doing this without consultation with STA.

We protested to the ASA and were subsequently admitted into some meetings; our contribution was stated to be valuable and many ideas from STA were agreed to be incorporated into the UKCC teaching certificate requirements.

At these meetings we were led to believe that both STA and the ASA would deliver Level 2 certificates that would be endorsed as meeting the criteria required for UKCC. Then it was unilaterally announced by the ASA that they would be the sole awarding body.

Following this I met firstly with the Education Director and the UKCC co-ordinator at the ASA, and secondly with the Chief Executive of the ASA on 23rd June 2005. My message was simple; if a sole awarding body were to result, then STA would withdraw and regard it as trade competition. We could not support a situation whereby the result would be that STA was supporting an award from another organisation rather than its own - this would not be in the interest of maintaining teaching standards, or offer choice to the public. On the other hand, endorsement of existing certificates, as originally envisaged, would provide an excellent base for closer co-operation over teaching and assessment methods and standards.

The response of the Chief Executive of the ASA was to reject the proposal out of hand; I was asked to put my thoughts into writing for the NSG (National Source Group for the sport), which I did. A meeting of the NSG was duly held, at which no STA representatives were invited, and my proposal was rejected.

In my view, the actions of the ASA are clearly contrary to the requirements as set out by the Minister of Sport in a letter to me dated 9th August 2006 when he said “Sports Coach UK guidance is that the NSG should be representative of sport across the UK and that the membership of the NSG should include UK and Home Country National Governing Bodies.” STA has not been involved with the NSG at any stage of the development of the UKCC, despite the fact that as representatives, we should have been.

I have recently met with the Chief Executive of Sports Coach UK who advises me that the UKCC is currently undergoing a “root and branch” review; this will include the question of whether it is right that the UKCC should extend to teaching. STA has responded to the Consultation Draft UK Action Plan for Coaching.

Whilst the UKCC on it’s own is a serious issue for STA, the way it is being used by the ASA gives even greater cause for concern as I will set out below.

ASA Licensing
I have already set out in the February and April editions of Swim & Save the background to licensing. In brief, STA requested to be involved in the proposals to launch a licensing scheme; the ASA refused to involve us in these discussions.

For the record, I repeat the position of STA. STA supports the principal of licensing for swimming teachers; however, we do not believe that the ASA criteria for obtaining a license is reasonable, or indeed practical.
Furthermore, because the ASA licensing records are held by a third-party who is one of our trade competitors, rather than an independent organisation such as SkillsActive, we are rightly concerned about data confidentiality issues, and therefore cannot support it.

What is interesting is that the Consultation Draft “UK Action Plan for Coaching”, referred to above, sets out proposals for Licensing and Registration with the suggested timetable of implementation in 2008. The document reports that SkillsActive will work with Sports Coach UK on licensing.

Two aspects have raised particular concerns about the ASA licensing:

1. A letter from the advisor to the Minister of Sport dated 18th August 2006 states “We have discussed the ASA’s guidance on its licensing scheme. I agreed that the first paragraph of their guidance could be interpreted as implying that the scheme has been formally approved by Government.” and “The ASA have made it clear to Sport England that they view their licensing scheme as an independent scheme.”

2. The ASA has indicated that in due course it is possible that only UKCC certificates will be accepted as fulfilling the licensing criteria. This would mean that no STA qualified swimming teacher would be able to be licensed under the ASA scheme.

This sums up the nub of the issue; the ASA scheme is implying that it is Government policy. Certainly current magazine articles contain comments attributable to ASA personnel that are still implying that it is Government policy, and therefore it achieves a level of acceptance; who is going to challenge the position when it is “Government Policy”!

If ASA in the future only accept UKCC certificates then the effect will be that my STA qualified members, who cannot get their certificates endorsed by STA as meeting the UKCC criteria, will be excluded from becoming licensed.

Working Together
It is no secret that despite our best efforts, on many occasions, to involve the ASA with STA initiatives, the relationship is still difficult.

I would suggest that any reasonable person would not understand why the two organisations cannot work together to save lives in the aquatic environment and encourage more swimming, be it recreational or competition, with resulting higher standards of teaching and facilities.

It is perfectly reasonable to suggest that our two organisations work together to achieve this, and to support each other’s activities where they don’t compete and, where they do compete, to do so in a reasonable, civilised and fair manner.

According to a discussion I had with Sport England a few years ago, this is best achieved by a Memorandum of Understanding. When the Chief Executive of the ASA met with your Trustees on 6th June 2003 Hugh Hall, the then STA President, invited him to enter into discussions about this; he categorically refused then as he has done again by letter dated 31st July 2006.

We, at STA, have difficulty in understanding why the ASA refuse to discuss a proper framework and to work with us.

What has STA been doing!
For the reasons that I have set out above, the Trustees have become more and more concerned over the last few months about the effect of the UKCC decision and ASA licensing on what has been, for 75 years, the core business of STA. Below I have outlined STA’s actions on your behalf, and on behalf of the future of swimming teaching.

1. On 4th October 2005, having exhausted all avenues of communication with the ASA, and in light of the aforementioned exclusions, I wrote to the Minister of Sport about the effect of the UKCC accreditation.

The Minister of Sport is responsible for setting policy including the provision of funding to the ASA. In light of this, STA felt that he would be concerned about the effect of ASA licensing on the swimming teaching community, as well as the consequential effect on swimming and water safety including the sport, and its ability to achieve success at future Olympics and other competitions.

He replied on 30th November “.. this decision does not affect STA from awarding the existing STA teaching qualifications, nor does it preclude your organisation from becoming an approved centre for the delivery of the UKCC.”

I replied on 4th January 2006 and, as I explained: “The only way that STA could become involved with delivery of the UKCC would be for our members to train directly for the ASA. Our members would have to adopt the ASA methods and be moderated by them at extra cost; in effect you are suggesting that we give up our swimming teacher training and hand it to the ASA. This does not sit comfortably with your statements that we are “a respected teaching organisation in swimming” and “your experience is invaluable to the sport”.        

2. In response to this reply, and a further letter with regard to licensing, the Minister passed the matter to his advisors on 24th February 2006. I supplied full information about STA, and the effects of UKCC and Licensing on STA and on the provision of swimming teaching and water safety teaching in the UK.

3. During the following weeks, I had numerous phone conversations with the advisor. I made it quite clear that STA could not sit and do nothing; I outlined various options and set a deadline of mid-May to have a solution, failing which we would have no choice but to take alternative action. The position of the advisor was that the Minister wanted a solution to all of the issues to prevent repetition in the future; he said that there would be a meeting of ALL parties to resolve ALL issues.

4. By this time, the Trustees were becoming concerned that the mid-May deadline would not be met and a number of alternatives were considered. One of these was the legal position and subsequently a leading specialist competition barrister was briefed. The advice we received was that the actions of the ASA constituted an abuse of a dominant position contrary to s.18 Competition Act 1998.

5. This information was passed to the advisor who also expressed concern and said he was checking the legal position. I stressed that STA had absolutely no desire to follow a legal route and urged him to set up the agreed meeting to resolve all issues. I agreed to defer the mid-May deadline in the expectation of positive moves to resolve all outstanding issues.

6. By mid-June, with the parliamentary recess looming and no progress being made, the barrister was instructed to prepare the formal complaint to the Office of Fair Trading (OFT). This was finalised in early July.

7. On 17th July a copy of the formal complaint was sent to the Minister and to the ASA with a letter stating that in 28 days time (14th August) this would be filed unless there was positive actions to move on the issues as set out in the complaint.

8. On 9th August the Minister wrote to me and said, and I paraphrase:

a. Re: UKCC - become a centre for the ASA; this is precisely his advice of 4th October 2005 which I had explained fully was not viable for STA.
b. Re: Licensing - we should talk to the ASA. We have, we asked to be involved at the beginning but we were excluded.
c. Re: Working Together - we should talk to the ASA. We have, they have always refused to sit down (even as late as 31st July 2006) and create a framework.

9. As a result, the complaint was filed with the OFT on 14th August.

What can STA members do now?
There are three actions that you, as members, can take:

1. Make sure that everybody knows the truth about licensing. It is NOT mandatory, it is not the law, and it is not Government supported. It is a voluntary code of the ASA.

2. Write to me with full details on every occasion that you hear operators insisting on ASA licences or any other way in which STA is discriminated against.

3. Write to your MP and tell them how it personally affects you and water safety in your constituency

What happens next!
The complaint has been filed with the OFT, the processes will be carried out and in due course a decision will be announced.

The decision to file was not taken lightly but the Trustees felt they were left with no alternative. They have obligations to the members, and responsibilities to ensure that the charity continues to achieve it’s objective of 75 years - teaching swimming and saving lives.

This does not preclude discussions on a negotiated settlement, and I have again written to the Minister and asked him to meet with me to discuss how STA may fully contribute, and be involved, in delivering more and safer swimming. I hope that this assures you of my continued work on your behalf, and I will update you all further as more transpires.