UK Scout Association "Sexual orientation should not be a bar to membership"

[Pint 23]

There is no local option, well to all intents and purposes.

If the Group Scout leader approves of that person, and in some cases the Group Exec comittee usualy made up of a mixture of parents/ex parents old scouters/ and any one from a sponsoring body ( in the rare case its a sponsored group) the new volunteer frst has to fill out an Adult aplication form which includes a full and comprehensive background check ( this includes something called and Enhanced CRB ) once cleared ( or sometimes before - but not without unsupervised access) He/She usaly starts on a provisional appointment this is then followed up by a meeting with the district apointments comittee.

 

Regardless of whos who, and whats what such as sponsored or non sponsored group - sponsoring bodys policy/Group scout leaders own opinions and so on they can not go against national policy on equal opportunites.

 

Although each Scout Group is an autonomous entity, if it folds ( ie ceases to exist) or choses to leave the Scout association and move to another scouting organisation all of its assets then belong to district, and in turn Regional, and from there national.

 

If a Scout Group decides to go against national policy those responsable for that decision adn enforcing it are removed/suspended from Scouting. the most recent case of this was a group who had some of their leaders removed ( ie mebership was revoked) when the refused to alow girls to join as this was against national policy.

 

The Natinal UK Scout Association policy as outlined in POR is above all else.

 

so in short in the UK District/regional/National would support a leader who was removed in contravention of natinal policy to the extent of removing those who went against this policy regardless of who they were/are(This message has been edited by pint)

[moosetracker 132]

Hey Cambridgeskip, How's those Olympics going for you now that "Party Pooper Romney" has left? I would imagine you are having a more "jolly ole time of it" now..

 

Hopefully Cambridgeskip will come back to discuss it, but I know it was discussed before.. I know they do not have Charter Orgs like ours.. From what I remember, that meant a full sweeping change, don't quite remember though..

 

So maybe we need the story retold.. Cambridgeskip, we are setting up the campfire, and rolling over some logs to sit on.. We are already for story time..

 

 

[Cambridgeskip 658]

Morning Moosetracker, and indeed everyone else.

 

Ah yes. Dear old Mitt. Didn't go down too well over here did he? Thankfully, for him at least, the country was so preoccupied with the Olympics for most people to notice him. Managing to upset the Conservative Prime Minister and Mayor of London who would normally be the Republican's biggest ally this side of the pond probably wasn't a bright idea but then I doubt it will cost him many votes on your side of the pond, if any at all. The Olympics are proving great fun. I've personally been to Badminton, Archery and this afternoon (or morning in your end of the world!) I'm seeing the 10m women's synchronised diving. And one of the football (soccer, nothing with pads and downs and such like) semi finals next week. Slumming it in the cheap seats mind, there's been a problem with corporate sponsors snapping up all the good seats and then not bothering to turn up. Sigh.

 

In terms of how our groups are structured there are essentially 3 sorts, closed, open and sponsored.

 

Closed groups are a tiny minority and are the closest we have to a chartering system. They are attached to and are run by some other body, typically a boarding school, with leaders coming from their staff and are open only to young people from that organisation. There used to be one in Cambridge attached to a private school until they seeded from the TSA and you could only join if you went to that school. Even then though the ONLY restriction that group could put on its membership above and beyond the policy of TSA was that members had to be part of that organisation.

 

The overwhelming majority are either open or sponsored. Mine is open (although historically we were sponsored by a local primary school but haven't been for many decades now) which means it is an independent charity affiliated only to TSA. We have our HQ which we own (although it needs knocking down and rebuilding) and recruit our own leaders and young people with no one other than TSA at district having a say over our leaders.

 

Sponsored groups are normally attached to another body, the vast majority being churches although some are also attached to Mosques, Synagogues and other places of worships and a handful are attached to schools. There is no requirement for any young person or leader to be a member of that organisation, indeed groups are not allowed to discriminate on religion however as Pint described the sponsoring organisation will typically have a seat on the exec committee so will theoretically have a say over who we recruit as leaders. In reality the exec is a rubber stamping body with the Group Scout Leader doing the active recruiting and district doing the interviewing and vetting (that applies to open groups as well). Typically the group meet at the church hall, pay a nominal amount of rent to the church but and have the church name as part of the group name (eg 14th Cambridge (St Lukes) Scout Group)

 

Does that cover everything?

[moosetracker 132]

Glad you are enjoying some of the events, and got seating, I know some watching on big TV's the events outside are really ticked off with the empty seats.. Sounded like they were going to let some of them in to fill those empty seats if no one shows up.. Are they starting to do that?

 

A few more Questions.. Did TSA just ride through the homosexual thing by never stating your position one way or the other and always being open? If it was a change in policy, did whole groups (like church groups), did sponsered groups loose their sponsors?.. Or was it individuals individually choosing to leave.. I know you stated the membership increase is due to many things, but wondering what happen during the fallout of the policy change.(This message has been edited by moosetracker)

[Cambridgeskip 658]

Moosetracker - It was basically a case of there never having been a publically stated policy until quite recently.

 

I don't recall when it was but I think in the late 90s there was a first stated policy that sexuality was no bar to being a leader and that was the first ever mention of the subject. I was a Venture Scout at the time and I remember it being a generational thing. My parents and those of my friends were all a bit shocked but to the scouts themselves most of us had just assumed it was the case anyway.

 

I have never met anyone that quit scouting because of gay leaders and I don't know of anyone that withdrew their child but equally I am sure it must have happened somewhere. Neither am I aware of any sponsoring groups withdrawing although there may be examples somewhere. Of course that may be because the largest number of sponsoring groups have been Anglican churches and they have traditionally been far more liberal that Catholic, Baptist or Methodist churches and also that sponsors generally don't get very involved in running groups.

 

But it may also simply reflect the more liberal circles I move in so don't take my experiences as necessarily representative of everyone!

[moosetracker 132]

Nice.. So in the 90s we got lost and took the wrong road, and you guys just defined the road you had always been on.

 

I am sure you do have some who choose to avoid a unit if they dislike a unit leader who is homosexual, but then that is not any different then avoiding one with a control freak, or braggart as a leader..

[acco40 95]

Just as long as they don't allow the Dutch, I'm fine with it. Say hello to queen Liz for me!