FRC meeting 16 Dec 2015.

[PNB]

All,

Sorry, I am a bit short of time and energy to post the meeting report in agenda format, but here is something to get started.

The registrar suggested we should again read the Ofstead report on The NFTA 2013. I never saw a copy, so requested SEFTON HOUSE sent me the below copy of the Ofstead report.

I ask you, (the subscribers to the Horses Mouth). In real time as it effects working CRAFTSMEN, "WHAT HAS CHANGED? ?", that is since the below report was published,

Your comments if any, unless you don't want this to happen will be down loaded and sent to DEFRA, for their future references.

PNB.

To follow !!

[PNB]

Yon can Google:- " Ofsted "report NFTA", in order to see the full Ofsted report.

I will try to down load the Internet link when I find out how to do.

PNB.

[PNB]

Click this link to view (download). PNB.

http://reports.ofsted.gov.uk/index.php? ... =1&refer=0

[ferrador]

my conclusion is that the modern youth needs to grow a pair and learn what discipline is , bullying , harrassment , etc , etc , in 99% of cases it is just down to being a spoilt little brat who has always had there own way and has never been told off by parents or at any time during education , bring back the cane I say

[PNB]

All,

Now the New Year is over and the end of year Tax returns are with the accountant I will try and work through the last meeting of FRC, the meeting was unusually late however 16th December .Firstly I question why the FRC meeting was called so close to Christmas? Any ideas??

Counciior Baker asked and observed that one appointee member was again absent and asked in view of the circulated letter, was the specific appointing body going to be invited to appoint an alternative member, when at least 3 continious absences from meetings of FRC by this appointee had been observed??

A request was made to an elected member on FRC by Councilor S Craig [absent] that in items withim several parts of the minutes and agenda which refered to him that his name was not included, he requested that his name should be attributed to items specifically directed at him. The Chairman and Registrar acknowleded Councilor Craig's observations and concern

Bare Foot Trimming Regulation,there seemed to be no progress in this.

The Registrar stated he had meetings with DEFRA in thie above regard, as well as Mandatory CPD. Mandatory CPD would not be progressed without a supporting evidence base to "make the case'.

The minuted flag up, The Chairman again asked Councilor Craig [16th June 2015] to ithdraw his comment on the competence of FRC, Coucilor Craig declined but stated his comments had not related to specific individuals.

That from my recallection deals with the minutes of the iast meeting of FRC, [16 June 2015.]

Counciior Baker asked and observed that one appointee member was again absent and asked in view of the circulated letter, was the specific appointing body going to be invited to appoint an alternative member, when at least 3 continious absences from meetings of FRC by this appointee had been observed??

More will follow.

PNB.

[Italian stallion]

My understanding is that if you have been absent for three meetings in a row then you would automatically be removed from council (FRC rule I believe) let's see if they stick to there on rules.

Regards,
E.W.

[ferrador]

do i understand correctly , the chair asked if comments made at a previous meeting could be withdrawn ? how often does this happen ? more disturbingly how often are they manipulating minutes behind closed doors without others knowledge , the whole frc thing is a joke

[PNB]

Ferredor,

That's not quite what happened, the comment made in the my report referenced to a minute of the previous meeting and was part of the written report on FRC 16th June 15. I am sorry if efforts the report confused.

PNB.

[csc]

I am afraid that they can do what they like they can manipulate whatever they like and use the 1975 act as there mandate so you see Peter when I say I feel the whole thing is corrupt you can ask why
THEY ARE NOT A PUBLIC BODY therefore they have no one to answer to on anther other hand they have no right other than what is in the black and white areas of the said act

[PNB]

Stuart,

So what are you saying?? Is it provided we consent to it being done to us we have no redress at LAW, well IF THAT IS THE CASE, as Feredor says it about time our fellow WORKING CRAFTSMEN globally grew a pair and as CHARLIE CHAPLIN said in 1940 STAND TOGERTHER to fend off THE OPPRESSION (importantly dispense with the uniform and the funny salutes however) as we don't need to hide behind anything !!

PNB.

[csc]

check it out for yourself is FRC a registered public body or not

[PNB]

Stuart,

Seems FRC is described as a STATUTORY RY BODY.

Please will you explain the significance of FRC being a STATUTORY rather than a PUBLIC BODY.

PNB.

[ferrador]

nice to see the farcical council are up to date as usual , still no records of the minutes on their www site , bunch of incompetent muppets

[ferrador]

would I be correct in presuming the registrar is on a salary of over 60k a year ?

[PNB]

Feredor,

Serve a freedom of information request/notice (FOIN) upon FRC to ask that qestion!

Seems they will tell you they neve no obligation to respond to a FOIN as they are not a PUBLIC BODY. The latest info I have says responding to a FOIN is what a public body must do and a STATUTORY BODY does not have to do.

EW, maybe LIAM could advise?

PNB.

[Italian stallion]

Pnb,
I will gladly pose the question to him as he likes a Good laugh when it comes to FRC he calls them cowboy hill at Sefton house he can't believe they are still running.

Ferrador,
It's not just someone's salary that's the problem it's the fact that they can't do the job that they are paid for thats a worry.

What we need is FRC to step in to the real world and connect with farriery sooner rather than later, mind you I wouldn't hold your breath.

Regards,

E.W.

[ferrador]

the salary is a problem to me , i am paying towards it and i would like to know where exactly it is going ,in our local paper not long ago a position was advertised for a registrar with the local district council (population over 250 000 ) with a salary of 40k , it is a fulltime position , the frc registrar is never available , never in his office and IMO a complete waste of my registration money , the staff are inefficient at their job , lazy and all speak a though they are important and in charge , the whole operation is a disgrace from top to bottom and would not last 10 seconds operating a business in the real world , I object to an ex supermarket check out girl telling me that if i do not disclose my criminal records too them i will be dealt with and disciplined

[csc]

incompetent is what I said at the FRC meeting before last. my resignation was asked for. I refused to retract incompetent, its nice to know others feel the same

[csc]

how I see it basically as a statuary body the FRC is authorised by law to enact the legislation of the FRC act which means that the WCF are responsible for overseeing it with ANIMAL WELFARE and EXAMINATIONS they do not have a mandate for quasi rules and regulations. whereas a public body could make by law rules and regulations.
ANY VIEWS ON THIS!!!

[PNB]

ALL,

There is a huge issue here, after 46 years of the Registration Act there is still no mechanism in place to check the working farriers quality of work in the event of a complaint from a horse keeper about the standard of a working craftesman's labours. So how in heavens name is animal welfare being accomodated. ( No mechanism in place was confirmed with REGISTRAR and CHAIRMAN at recent committee meeting!).

I ask is this a satisfactory out come for either the horse or his farrier, complaints are not always fair or otherwise and currently the quality of workmanship cannot be checked as NOBODY/no mechanism is in place to undertake monitoring of work quality. I ask, so the investigating committee purely follows paper trails." Is this satisfactory to our other working craftesman ??

I have spoken with Councilor Craig and your responses will frame a question under Any Other Business to be proposed at next FRC? And be included when the commiunication with DEFRA is undertaken.

PNB.

[csc]

surely a welfare officer is of primary importance to look into animal welfare complaints ONLY as the of was the act intended .
most other equine institutions have them. I am totally against anyone checking individuals work as this could lead to victimisation and bios

[PNB]

Stuart,

I completely agree, monitoring a craftesman work should only come about following a specific complaint regarding a specific horse's welfare.

If for no other reason than to safeguard victimisation and bias as you highlight. Sorry if I confused!!

PjNB.

[csc]

it should be one of the must fundamental actions to instigate surely, I would also argue that all these quasi things set up within FRC are not enforceable because they are not a public body. likewise the chairmanships are not acceptable as council has not endorsed them or did you at the last meeting?

[john ford]

This is an issue that I have been concerned with for a very long period, I even bought it up with council in 1993. I disagree with any Farrier who challenges a competent person’s rights, to check his/her standard day-to-day work, in line with what the Farriers Registration Act 1975 was intended to do, that being: to protect horses from poor horseshoeing in the UK. My system would be very simple, and wouldn’t cause any farrier loss of trade or face within the industry. Also by having these checks, it would make every farrier aware that his work could be checked and, therefore take that little extra time and care. We are all human, and not one of you will deny spending a little more care and attention to that job when your client for example has sold/or loaned their horse to someone who uses a farrier who is recognised throughout the country as a top natural craftsman.
Finally, why is an apprentice and his/her work checked by a third party three to four times a year whilst having a licenced ATF training them every day? Yet when that apprentice qualifies and becomes self-employed, not one person checks their standard of work, till the day they retire or die?
I passed my driving test in 1962, but I have frequently come up against the police to get my ass kicked over the years.

[csc]

john you have excellent points , but to administer is a different issue regarding your view yes this could be implemented for farriers that buy into this and this could be implemented on a star basis like restaurants have for cleanliness
so how do we deal with those that don't want to get involved I would like to know how you propose to deal with this issue
regarding your last comment I didn't know you drove like a woman posting.php?mode=reply&f=2&t=968#

[john ford]

How would it work? I am absolutely certain that not one of you would agree to my proposal, because like me you are all self-employed, and therefore know better than anyone else how a particular horse should be shod, especially as to the work that it is doing on a day-to-day basis.
In no way am I referring to show shoeing horses here, just basic principles of everyday work.
First Step: Find two all-round practical people who are qualified enough to access basic principles of horseshoeing. Not competition judges or veterinary surgeons, maybe retired farriers who don’t have hidden agendas attached to their profile, as is the case with many farriers with-in our industry.
The assessor would have a selection of questions on his clip board to be answered by the horse owner, such as:
The date the horse was shod last?
Where was the horse shod? Field, Stable. Level well light covered area etc
Is the horse very good to shoe? Assessor goes around the horse with a hammer checking
Name of the Farrier
Naturally the horse owner will automatically be asking the assessor if the work is up to standard, and if the horse has a particular problem with his feet, be asking the assessor for advice.
This is where the FRC have it written in law that the assessor never condemns or comments on the work done by the farrier, or gives advice on how the horse should be shod.
Regardless of how poor the work is, the assessor must always leave the horse owner in the belief that a good standard of work has been carried out, and if there are concerns with the horse owner over issues of poor feet or lameness, then they should consult their farrier about it.
After some time in a particular area the assessor discovers a very poor standard of farriery carried out by the same farrier, that farrier gets a letter sent to him/her, requiring him/her to attend a School of Farriery for a couple of days or more for a refresher course in say six months’ time.
Doing it this way, protects the farriers business, protects the client and above all protects the horse.
Because the farrier can just say he is taking a holiday for a few days.
If something like this isn’t done, because we farriers don’t like interference from others and in particular from the FRC. Then what the hell is the 1975 Farriers Registration Act for?

[csc]

thanks John I am with you on this one I am surprised we don't have a welfare officer as most equine disciplines do but there again that's why FRC got such a roasting with OFSEAD but they like to keep that quiet

[john ford]

If you agree with it Craig, especially with the format that I have laid out in my post. Would it be possible to bring this up at the next council meeting. If so, I would be fascinated of their reply?

[csc]

I think your elected councillors already think this is a good idea in principle and yes I think this subject will be asked

[john ford]

I will put all my money on their answer being: It would be far too expensive. Money always wins over common sense.

[PNB]

John,

That's a kite left to fly after the meeting on the 16th Dec 15.

Let's go there when this thread has run it's course, I would like to hear the view of a few other farriers first.

PNB.