Following a series of information forums and specific stakeholder engagements the Draft 1 NSW AAS documents have been received by the Outdoor Recreation Community and other key stakeholders.
- The NSW AAS Steering Committee and Technical Working Groups (TWG) were established, with over 65 individuals making themselves available and volunteering their time and expertise to the NSW AAS project.
- Between April and November 2009, over 65 individuals have volunteered 306 hours (38 days) of time and expertise to one or more of the NSW AAS committees, working through the documents and feedback received from organisations and individuals. A further 107 hours of ORIC Board Member time has also been volunteered to the review and development of the NSW AAS project, outside of the formal committee process.
- The Steering Committee is comprised of an appropriate diversity of key stakeholders. Activity specific Technical Working Groups (TWG) represent relevant industry expertise.
-
The Steering Committee and six Technical Working Groups (TWG) have contributed significantly to the development of the NSW AAS. Attendance at the meetings was strong, and was achieved either by face-to-face attendance, or by teleconference. As the working groups moved through the documents and issues, they were progressively consolidated into combined Committees and eventually into a Technical Advisory Committee.
- Individuals representing major sectors in the Outdoor Recreation Community are represented on the Committees; this includes commercial operators, schools, not-for-profit organisations, training providers, land managers, government departments, clubs and community based groups.
- Many committee members are located in Sydney. Approximately 20 members are based outside Sydney in the following areas;
- Eildon, Coffs Harbour, Colo,
- Bundanoon, Tharwa, Bega, Barrington Tops,
- Khancoban, Kangaroo Valley, Berry
- Katoomba, Kapooka and Stanwell Tops
- Six TWG were originally established, with the Abseiling TWG and Rock Climbing TWG later combining to form the Rock & Rope
TWG.
- All committee members received copies of the feedback received; two summary documents have been shared with Committees. The feedback received ranges from simple changes to complex issues. All Committees have been tasked to review and “boil down” the feedback to actionable statements or key recommendations. This process directed the subsequent focus for the groups.
- The TWGs analysed the feedback received and this analysis has directed the changes and discussions. The Bushwalking TWG also made excellent contributions in analysing the generic content, and has discussed refinements of the definitions for leaders, the rationale of group sizes, risk management content and made numerous edits and minor changes.
- Leadership qualifications, ratios and groups sizes are key issues throughout all feedback, these issues have also been raised at all Committees. Anticipating this the Committees were tasked to distribute a “Provider Survey” to assess the current practice in the field, once complied the actual field data will be used to inform the committee decisions regarding ratios, sizes and recognition of leaders.
- Australian Canoeing has proposed that the NSW AAS for Canoe & Kayak is replaced with the Australian Canoeing Safety Guidelines. The Steering Committee has discussed the proposal; no clear consensus has been reached at this stage. The Canoe & Kayak Technical Working group (TWG) are examining the proposal at the next Canoe & Kayak TWG meetings, and Steering Committee members have been tasked to review the proposal and discuss further. See attached update on AC proposal.
- The Generic content of the NSW AAS documents was divided and reviewed separately to the activity specific content. The Steering Committee were also tasked with reviewing and commenting on the generic content document.
- The overall size of the documents has been reduced and the text and tone of the document refined and simplied.
Development on the Draft 2 documents was completed and these were loaded onto the ORIC website for industry comment and feedback.
These and all captured feedback and comments was then again fed back through the Technical Working Groups, analysed and recommendations made to assist with the development of Version 1 NSW AAS Guidelines.
Version 1.0 documents have been prepared for 5 NSW AAS Activity areas (Abseiling, Rock Climbing, Bushwalking, Challenge Ropes Course and Mountain Biking). The Canoe and Kayak document remains under development at the draft 3 stage.
You are invited to Download Version 1 Documents
Provide your on-line Comments and Feedback
NSW AAS UPDATE : Australian Canoeing (AC) Proposal
|
Australian Canoeing believes the AAS document should be replaced with the Australian Canoeing National Safety Guidelines (as was performed in Tasmania) for the following reasons.
Aim and Scope
The Australian Canoeing National Safety Guidelines are a national document that covers the brief of the AAS and has stood up to scrutiny in its current form since 2002. We oppose duplication and the possible confusion caused by multiple standards.
Government direction
In 2006 at the meeting of the Standing Committee on Recreation and Sport of the Sport and Recreation Ministers Council, it was decided that there was to be consistency between the AAS of all states. Consistency in canoeing and kayaking is best achieved by adopting the existing national standards.
Federal government focus
Australian Canoeing is directed by the federal government to produce the benchmarks for the sport and recreation of canoeing in all its forms. It specifically provides funding for this requirement. If ORIC is concerned that the document is not representative then ORIC can both input to this process and nominate representatives to the AC Education and Safety Technical Committee. In fact we request that the role of the ORIC AAS Canoeing and kayaking committee be a NSW needs based review of the AC Safety Guidelines.
Test of process
The AAS existed in both Vic and SA at the time of incidents (Torquay and Victor Harbor). In both cases the actions of the leaders were tested against the AC National Safety Guidelines and not the AAS. It is critical to note that even though Marine Safety Vic endorse the Vic AAS, they ran the investigation using the AC Education and Safety Technical Committee as the panel of expertise and the AC Safety Guidelines as the benchmark document. SA have effectively dropped the AAS for canoeing and kayaking as a guideline and work from the AC Safety Guidelines. The Victorian AAS is the AC safety Guidelines in an AAS cover and with AAS formatting (but having said that, Torquay showed the redundancy in that process).
Access and equity
Any individual or group is free to input into the AC National Safety Guidelines. It cannot be argued that the AC National Safety Guidelines are biased or not representative of some parts of the industry.
AAS Process
If the NSW AAS group decide through its process that there are components or sections within the AC National Safety Guidelines that require further discussion in any way, there is an open discussion system for that process. |
PLEASE REVIEW THE AUSTRALIAN CANOE GUIDELINES AND THE PROPOSED
NSW AAS, AND PROVIDE YOUR COMMENTS ON THE AUSTRALIAN CANOE PROPOSAL
The majority of development was focussed on the generic content of the documents with significant progress made on a number of challenging issues. The activity specific aspects still require refinement; outstanding issues are currently being addressed with the focus shifting to the activity specific content.
Following the series of committee meetings the generic content has been finalised and is ready for legal review.
Significant issues raised during the meetings included;
- The issue of ratio’s and group sizes proved to be too challenging to define at a minimum standard level. A series of risk management considerations has been added to the generic text. Further consultation is required to define which specific activities require a ratios’ statement and which activities it is appropriate to remain with the risk management approach. This may be accomplished during the activity specific focus stage.
- The issue of recognition of leaders has been successfully addressed. There was lengthy discussion during many committee meetings on the topic. The results are a combination of many people’s ideas and expertise.
- The definition and requirements for first aid qualifications and the definitions of remote area and urban areas.
- The definition of Metropolitan and urban bushwalking help clarify the applicability of the NSW AAS in this context.
- Canoeing and Kayaking document is at draft 3 stage. The Australian Canoeing proposal was discussed at length at many meetings. Opinions were often divided with some robust discussions at the meetings and numerous email correspondences. The result of the debate has seen the tentative acceptance of the proposed draft 3 documents however a few key issues remain. These issues include the paddling on the dam with a 32:1or2 ratio, ambiguity around membership requirements and minor merging conflicts between AC text and AAS generic content.
Over the next 6 weeks, four key processes are to be addressed:
- A consultative process will seek a formal response from Steering Committee Members and other key stakeholders.
- Development of NSW AAS Canoe and Kayak draft 4 for specific stakeholder review and feedback, then to version 1 based on feedback on draft 4.
- Conduct targeted consultation with organisations to finalise outstanding issues in current version 1 documents.
- Legal analysis and formal advice sought for NSW AAS documents.
- Stage 2 Project Plan proposal developed for a second suite of NSW AAS activity areas.
|
