Paul Gordons letter to farriers

this forum is mainly for farriers - all are welcome but don't enter if you are easily offended!

Moderator: admin

csc
Posts: 950
Joined: Fri May 20, 2005 5:40 am
Location: berks

Paul Gordons letter to farriers

Postby csc » Sat Nov 12, 2016 7:35 am

Hi Everyone

Thank you for inviting me last night to talk about the situation relating to the amendments to the farriers registration act, and how we are not proportionately represented with are own industry as farriers.

Many of you said you would go to your MP to canvas support and request your MP ask questions when the Bill is presented in the house on the 14th January 2017

Attached is relevant papers to help you, when you meet with your MP.
And ill give you some bullet points , as in facts you need to help you as requested.


1. It is stated there is a 50/50 split of farriers on the FRC council. This is not true, there are only 6 farriers on council. 4 elected, 2 appointed,
2. There needs to be 8 elected farriers members on council to create a democratic balance.
3. The chairman is appointed without consultation to the FRC , by a secret ballet by the worshipful company of farriers
4. All of the chairmanship positions on the FRC are appointed and held by worshipful company members
5. The worshipful company are only a London livery company with 375 members, and that 10% are farriers,
6. Since the registration act came onto force in 1975, 41 years ago there have been no appeals on disciplinary act, because you have to appeal to the high court, which can cost tens of thousands of pounds. Hence financially ruin, which intern intimidates them into not appealing, this is not just,
7. Also that the worshipful company make large amounts of money each year from the examinations, were do this go?
If you can and do go to your MP, please sooner rather than later, as time isn’t on our side, and let them know that that we have already contacted our relevant MPs and we have the kind support and help of Lord Addington who is a member of the house of Lords.

If you need anymore help please don’t hesitate to contact me Tel 07973752693


Sent from Mail for Windows 10

csc
Posts: 950
Joined: Fri May 20, 2005 5:40 am
Location: berks

Re: Paul Gordons letter to farriers

Postby csc » Sat Nov 12, 2016 12:49 pm

Worshipful company members who hold chairmanship positions on FRC council



Chairman of FRC Mr A B Charlwood
Chairman of Finance committee Mr J Chalmers
Chairman of Investigation Mr A B Charlwood
Chairman of Disciplinary Committee Mr C House
Chairman of Accreditation panel Lt Col Houghton

csc
Posts: 950
Joined: Fri May 20, 2005 5:40 am
Location: berks

Re: Paul Gordons letter to farriers

Postby csc » Sat Nov 12, 2016 12:50 pm

all the above are WCF

csc
Posts: 950
Joined: Fri May 20, 2005 5:40 am
Location: berks

Re: Paul Gordons letter to farriers

Postby csc » Sat Nov 12, 2016 12:51 pm

Farriers Registration act 1975 Amendments Bill

Farriers Registration act 1975 came into force 41 years ago, and in that time frame the farriery industry has changed immensely, but the infrastructure that was put in place in 1975 is now out of date and not fit for purpose,
In 1975 there was only the worshipful company, and the FRC,(Farriers Registration Council) to govern, Legislate, train, but now in 2016 the is a multi-faceted array or organisations and bodies within the farriery industry which all have an important role to play in the industry, but are not allowed to because of the outdated restrictions of the 1975 act.
The makeup of the FRC committee is greatly restricted by the historic requirements placed in it, it should now also contain representatives from:-
Colleges, (as they oversee the training requirement and welfare of the apprentices)
Apprentices (because they are now required to pay a retention fee, and subject to disciplinary act,)
ATF’S (as they, as an individual are the most legislative and financial requirements, to adder too,)
The appeals procedure under the 1975 act is out of date and unjust to any profession, let alone farriers. As the only right of appeal for a Farrier is to the High Court, which costs tens of thousands of pounds, which can stop an individual from appealing because of the financial risk that they are jeopardising their security and possibly there home, this is not justice, it is intimidation not to appeal. The evidence is how many people have appealed in the last 41 years,
The report placed before DEFRA stated that there is a 50/50 representation of Farriers on the FRC committee, the fact is, there are no more than 6 at any one time, 4 elected, 2 BFBA,
The worshipful company of farriers have a monopoly in the farriery industry which is unhealthy for the industry, to a point that if it was in any other industry there would be a review, especially when you look at the facts, that the worshipful

john ford
Posts: 1052
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2002 7:20 pm
Location: Pucklechurch, Bristol.

Re: Paul Gordons letter to farriers

Postby john ford » Sun Nov 13, 2016 4:19 pm

You have entitled this subject, Paul Gordons letter to Farriers. Can you now explain why no Farrier in this area of the South West hasn't received anything on this subject from any of you representatives on the FRC council?

PNB
Posts: 2239
Joined: Sun Jun 23, 2002 6:59 am
Location: Wilts, Berks, Ox, Hants, Avon.

Re: Paul Gordons letter to farriers

Postby PNB » Sun Nov 13, 2016 8:41 pm

John,

Try, farrierinformation ,on site title. All of the letters you question are posted there.

Hopes that helps!!

PNB.

PNB
Posts: 2239
Joined: Sun Jun 23, 2002 6:59 am
Location: Wilts, Berks, Ox, Hants, Avon.

Re: Paul Gordons letter to farriers

Postby PNB » Sun Nov 13, 2016 8:55 pm

John,

Tried it, you will have to google Site Title, To register provide user name, create password, click on farrierinformation, bingo.

PNB?

csc
Posts: 950
Joined: Fri May 20, 2005 5:40 am
Location: berks

Re: Paul Gordons letter to farriers

Postby csc » Mon Nov 14, 2016 7:00 am

john we have been posting on facebook and other sites and to individuals as the north seem more active it may look as though the south has been left out for more info contact me on stuart@equicentre.co.uk

john ford
Posts: 1052
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2002 7:20 pm
Location: Pucklechurch, Bristol.

Re: Paul Gordons letter to farriers

Postby john ford » Mon Nov 14, 2016 4:18 pm

Stuart, there are as you know 2800 plus registered farriers in the UK. Many do not use Facebook nor The Horses Mouth. Paul Gordon doesn't use The Horses Mouth and I'm not sure but he isn't active on Facebook. I can appreciate the cost of informing farriers by post, but by having some foresight in this matter, you could have used The Forge magazine to inform every farrier in the country for free. Also you should be aware that there is a minority of nosey farriers like myself, who make it their business to keep abreast with events within the farriery political world. To get a majority backing for your campaign, you need to make sure that EVERY Farrier gets the information, because that is the only way you will get the support you need to change anything.

PNB
Posts: 2239
Joined: Sun Jun 23, 2002 6:59 am
Location: Wilts, Berks, Ox, Hants, Avon.

Re: Paul Gordons letter to farriers

Postby PNB » Mon Nov 14, 2016 6:27 pm

John,

We can only do our best. Every thing arrives as a type. of document PDF, Paul seems to be able to copy then to text, to enable them to be forwarded. May be you could help here, we are working out the best we can!!

As a demonstration the actual registration BILL has only surfaced 4 days ago, we actually sent the BILL to the FRC registrar.

PNB.

john ford
Posts: 1052
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2002 7:20 pm
Location: Pucklechurch, Bristol.

Re: Paul Gordons letter to farriers

Postby john ford » Mon Nov 14, 2016 7:38 pm

Sorry Peter, I just don't have the time these days to tackle such subjects, and it's not going to effect me at my age in life. The only thing I can do is try to give you guys some advise from experiences I have learnt over many years. One of them being, three or four farrier representatives on the FRC Council aren't going to achieve very much if anything against the higher establishment, without at least 75% backing and support from the 2800 plus farriers on the register. Brexit wasn't achieved by Farage, Johnson and the rest. It was they that got the message out there, for the majority of the public to stand up and say they wanted out. If it had been left to those in Parliament to decide, we would still be in the EU.

PNB
Posts: 2239
Joined: Sun Jun 23, 2002 6:59 am
Location: Wilts, Berks, Ox, Hants, Avon.

Re: Paul Gordons letter to farriers

Postby PNB » Tue Nov 15, 2016 9:56 am

John,

You don't understand,,I am not saying dump farrier registration, it would frighten me if that happens just what the future would bring. It is simply we, our craft need to know what is beingORGANISED for it. Lord Bew's standards say we are entitled to that much.

I personally agree that openness and transparency has to be at the top of the agenda here and through Bew and his seven standards of PUBLIC LIFE it has seemingly now been encrypted it in LAW. The whole matter of third party bodies with vested interest in manipulation of public bodies has been thrown into the open, for FARRIERY today and in the future in fact it could be farriers will need to be fighting for REGISTRATION to be enabled to continue as J BAKER pointed out to all of us. We do need to be in the know a Bew version of openness and tansparency has to be at the top of the agenda.

FRC is a PUBLIC BODY whether every body likes it or not,we learnt that much at our meeting at PENNINGTONS. You will need to come to FRC on 30th Nov next to hear the debate and be informed at the same time as FRC members where it is hoped it is all going.

PNB.

john ford
Posts: 1052
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2002 7:20 pm
Location: Pucklechurch, Bristol.

Re: Paul Gordons letter to farriers

Postby john ford » Tue Nov 15, 2016 9:12 pm

So where the heck is this going Peter, the second reading of this bill is on the 13th January 2017, and I bet you haven't informed all 2800 plus registered farriers? The Forge magazine is out in December, have any of you written an article, or updated ALL farriers about this in it, as it is free to ALL farriers. It seems to me the four of you are all prattling amongst yourselves thinking you will change things? Without the vast majority of farriers in the UK, I'm afraid you haven't a hope in hell

csc
Posts: 950
Joined: Fri May 20, 2005 5:40 am
Location: berks

Re: Paul Gordons letter to farriers

Postby csc » Wed Nov 16, 2016 7:02 am

we are working on it John we have asked farriers to forward our e mails on and it would be great if we could get something printed in forge magazine

csc
Posts: 950
Joined: Fri May 20, 2005 5:40 am
Location: berks

Re: Paul Gordons letter to farriers

Postby csc » Wed Nov 16, 2016 7:45 am

We contacted you previously in June 2016 regarding the amendment of the farrier’s registration act 1975

Since then many more things have developed concerning the amendments to the 1975 act. Farriers nationally have now raised concern about Issue which they feel you should be aware of because of your support of the act.

On the 12th October 2016, I with two other members of the farriers registration council, (Peter Baker. Stuart Craig,) along with Lord Addington ( Member of the House of Lords). Had a meeting with Mr George Eustice MP minister of DEFRA in his offices at Noble House, to discuss issue which we, and many farriers around Britain felt that he was not aware of. Which relate to the amendments to the act, and the infrastructure that the farriers registration council, and the worshipful company of farriers (WCF) operate under to govern the industry.
The act as it stands is no longer fit for purpose, and is completely out of date for the industry of farriery which it legislates over, enforcing an historic stranglehold on democracy and far representation for farriers, implemented by the 1975 act and its amendments.

The farriers are only asking for far and democratic equality in representation on the farrier’s registration council of a genuine 50/50 farrier ratio of 8 elected farriers that sit on the registration council, and the removal of the monopoly that the worshipful company of farriers hold over the industry, which results in that the worshipful company are the controlling influence in the industry,
Other bodies should also be considered to be eligible to sit on the FRC council, which are relevant to the modern day industry, such as members from the colleges, the colleges are the main welfare provider and of the job trainer of the apprentices for the industry, and have are real time input, to what’s happening in the industry, either from the apprentices, or the approved training farriers (ATF) they are in daily contact with,
Also the Apprentices should have a voice on council, because they are paying a retention fee, they deserve the right to be heard as their own body, plus the ATF, as the ATF puts In more time and finances personally proportionately than any other element to the industry, they feel they are subject to unfair rules, legislation, and are disregarded when show concern or objections.

The fact that the worshipful company are a London livery company which only have 375 members, and only 10% of who are farriers, having compulsory appointments to the most senior offices of the FRC gives the WCF a controlling role in the functioning of the FRC.
When the chairman of the FRC is appointed by the WFC it is done solely and exclusively behind closed doors, seemingly in a secret ballot by the WCF inner chamber, which is undertaken without consultation with the members of the FRC which seems to have created a monopoly, it is not democratically representational of the profession/craft they operate. When a more modern and impartial democratic process of appointment of chairman would be more in keeping with the modern farriery industry, (as it is on boards of other corporate bodies and within other industries )
Plus the facts that 5 of the chairman’s, out of 6 of the committees within the registration council are all worshipful company members.

Chairman of FRC Mr A B Charlwood
Chairman of Finance committee Mr J Chalmers
Chairman of Investigation Mr A B Charlwood
Chairman of Disciplinary Committee Mr C House
Chairman of Accreditation panel Lt Col Houghton

Also the WCF are the awarding body for the Diploma exam which is the main qualification required to be a registered farrier, at £800 for each exam on an estimation of 60 to 90 exams a year, not allowing for resits, a great deal of money is generated, the WCF are not compelled or obliged to show the accounts to the FRC,

It is also a fact that the WCF are soon to replace 1st4 Sport in being the agent for drawing down the funds from the government for the apprenticeship scheme. And that a meeting has taken place at the British Farriers & Blacksmiths Association (BFBA) in Stoneleigh Warwickshire proposing that the WCF become the standard setter in CPD for the industry. And you’ll only be eligible to acquire CPD points from courses run and managed by the WCF, for which they will charge.

It is also considered unjust and out of date that the only course of action for appeal against a disciplinary decision against a farrier is to the high court. This can cost an individual tens of tens of thousands of pounds,
Hence taking them into hardship and finical ruin, so therefore you need to be asking the question why there has never been any appeals since the act first came into force, in 1975, 41 years ago.
Is it because the FRC have always got it right? Or because farriers cannot afford it. I think you need to look at other industries and see how many appeals they have each year, because as it stands, farriers are not receiving justice, only bulling in the way if financial ruin if you object.


I would like to thank you for taking the time to read this letter, and hopefully take on-board the issues I’ve been asked to raise with you, I hope you consider these issue, and the farriers of Britain they attain to
Farriers are hard working men and women, who are only asking for two thing, democracy and justice, the two things which are clearly in short supply in the farriery industry as it stands today.

The one thing I do ask you to bare in mind most of all, is that the 1975 act, is an animal welfare act, and the welfare of the animal/equine is paramount, but if you stop caring for the welfare of the carer, were does that leave you?.

csc
Posts: 950
Joined: Fri May 20, 2005 5:40 am
Location: berks

Re: Paul Gordons letter to farriers

Postby csc » Wed Nov 16, 2016 7:47 am

just for you John this is plastered over facebook like the rest of the posts and on BFBA ITS HOW A LOT OF PEOPLE COMUNICATE NOW

john ford
Posts: 1052
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2002 7:20 pm
Location: Pucklechurch, Bristol.

Re: Paul Gordons letter to farriers

Postby john ford » Wed Nov 16, 2016 1:25 pm

So will you answer my very simple question Stuart. Is this formal letter going in to the next issue of The Forge magazine? YES OR NO

csc
Posts: 950
Joined: Fri May 20, 2005 5:40 am
Location: berks

Re: Paul Gordons letter to farriers

Postby csc » Thu Nov 17, 2016 6:59 am

depends on BFBA they might take the attitude and not publish anything for example the bill control of CPD to WCF etc etc in a mater of fact they have reported very little of what goes on at council. but I will keep you informed. apparently the last letter in forge magazine was rewarded with a complaint to the investigating committee.

john ford
Posts: 1052
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2002 7:20 pm
Location: Pucklechurch, Bristol.

Re: Paul Gordons letter to farriers

Postby john ford » Thu Nov 17, 2016 12:05 pm

That Stuart is a very evasive answer. Either you have submitted Paul Gordon's document to The Forge magazine for publication, or you haven't? If you have evidence that The Forge wont publish it, that is an entirely different matter.

csc
Posts: 950
Joined: Fri May 20, 2005 5:40 am
Location: berks

Re: Paul Gordons letter to farriers

Postby csc » Thu Nov 17, 2016 4:07 pm

I have sent you a e mail of the letter sent to the forge magazine spoke to Cliff also so lets see

csc
Posts: 950
Joined: Fri May 20, 2005 5:40 am
Location: berks

Re: Paul Gordons letter to farriers

Postby csc » Thu Nov 17, 2016 4:09 pm

We contacted you previously in June 2016 regarding the amendment of the farrier’s registration act 1975

Since then many more things have developed concerning the amendments to the 1975 act. Farriers nationally have now raised concern about Issue which they feel you should be aware of because of your support of the act.

On the 12th October 2016, I with two other members of the farriers registration council, (Peter Baker. Stuart Craig,) along with Lord Addington (Member of the House of Lords). Had a meeting with Mr George Eustice MP minister of DEFRA in his offices at Noble House, to discuss issue which we, and many farriers around Britain felt that the minister was not aware of. Which relate to the amendments to the act, and the infrastructure that the farriers registration council, (FRC) and the worshipful company of farriers (WCF) operate under to govern the industry.
The act as it stands enforcing an historic stranglehold on democracy and denies farriers of far representation by the continued implementation of the 1975 act and its amendments. It is no longer fit for purpose, and is completely out of step and date for the diverse and multi-faceted modern industry of farriery which it legislates over today.

The farriers are only asking for far and democratic equality in representation on the farrier’s registration council of a genuine 50/50 farrier ratio of 8 elected farriers members that sit on the registration council, and the removal of the monopoly that the worshipful company of farriers have developed over the industry, which has resulted in the worshipful company having a controlling influence in the farriery industry,

Other bodies/stakeholders should also be considered to be eligible to sit on the FRC council, which are relevant to the modern day industry, such as members from the colleges, Apprentices, Approved training farriers (ATF) Colleges are the main welfare provider and of the job trainer of the apprentices for the industry, and have are real time feedback to what’s happening in the industry, either from the apprentices, or the approved training farriers (ATF) of which they are in daily contact with,
Apprentices should have a voice on council, because they now pay a registration fee, they deserve, and should have the right to be heard as their own body and be represented, because they are the future caretakers of the industry.
ATFs, proportionately put In more time and finances personally than any other individual/stakeholder to the industry, they feel they are subject to rules/legislation that they are allowed no input on, and are disregarded when show concern or objections.

The fact that the worshipful company are a London livery company which only have 375 members, and only 10% of who are farriers, having compulsory appointments to the most senior offices of the FRC gives the WCF a controlling role in the functioning of the FRC.
When the chairman of the FRC is appointed by the WFC it is done solely and exclusively behind closed doors, seemingly in a secret ballot by the WCF inner chamber, which is undertaken without consultation with the members of the FRC which seems to have created a monopoly, it is not democratically representational of the profession/craft they operate. When a more modern and impartial democratic process of appointment of chairman would be more in keeping with the modern farriery industry, (as it is on boards of other corporate bodies and within other industries )
Plus the facts that 5 of the chairman’s, out of 6 of the committees within the registration council are all worshipful company members.

Chairman of FRC Mr A B Charlwood
Chairman of Finance committee Mr J Chalmers
Chairman of Investigation Mr A B Charlwood
Chairman of Disciplinary Committee Mr C House
Chairman of Accreditation panel Lt Col Houghton

Also the WCF are the awarding body for the Diploma exam which is the main qualification required to be a registered farrier, at £800 for each exam on an estimation of 60 to 90 exams a year, not allowing for resits, a great deal of money is generated, the WCF are not compelled or obliged to show the accounts to the FRC,

It is also a fact that the WCF are soon to replace 1st4 Sport in being the agent for drawing down the funds from the government for the apprenticeship scheme. Also a meeting has taken place at the British Farriers & Blacksmiths Association (BFBA) in Stoneleigh Warwickshire, proposing standards and compulsory functions for CPD for the industry, and apparently all the farriers and bodies tasked with developing and running the courses are WCF members, . And you will only be eligible to acquire CPD points from courses run and managed by the WCF farriers for which they will charge.


It is also considered unjust and out of date that the only course of action for appeal against a disciplinary decision against a farrier is to the high court. This can cost an individual farrier tens of tens of thousands of pounds,
Hence taking them into hardship and finical ruin, so therefore you need to be asking the question why there has never been any appeals since the act first came into force, in 1975, 41 years ago.
Is it because the FRC have always got it right? Or because farriers cannot afford to appeal
I think you need to look at other industries and see how many appeals they have each year, because as it stands, farriers are not receiving justice, only bulling in the way if financial ruin if you object.

I would like to thank you for taking the time to read this letter, and hopefully take on-board the issues I’ve been asked to raise with you, I hope you consider these issue, and the farriers of Britain they attain to
Farriers are hard working men and women, who are only asking for two thing, democracy and justice, the two things which are clearly in short supply in the farriery industry as it stands today under the present act.

The one thing I do ask you to bare in mind most of all, is that the 1975 act, is an animal welfare act, and the welfare of the animal/equine is paramount, but if you stop caring for the welfare of the carer, were does that leave you?.


AND HERE IS A COPY ALSO FOR YOU JOHN AND EVERYONE ELSE

john ford
Posts: 1052
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2002 7:20 pm
Location: Pucklechurch, Bristol.

Re: Paul Gordons letter to farriers

Postby john ford » Fri Nov 18, 2016 4:24 pm

Well Stuart, if The Forge is reluctant to print Paul Gordon's letter, I'm afraid you have no other alternative to post mailshot it to every farrier in the country. All though this process will be expensive, I cant see how on earth you will get the majority of support you need to change or overturn these proposals by the FRC etc. One major error that Paul made in his letter was the assumption that all CPD points gained are only those organized or supported by the WCF. Make sure you do a complete research of TRUE facts before putting them in writing, because using false information to prove a point, will cause more damage to your case. You all should be aware that a vast majority of farriers in the UK, haven't had many major issues with the FRC or WCF, and many who have, have dealt with them personally, and carried on. I saw my proposal of having every farrier show that they had Public and injury to horses liability insurance for their years registration thrown out by the FRC. I could easily have made a big issue of this case by publishing this in the Horse & Hound to get all the horse owners onto the case, but in the end with some research, I found that the vast majority of good farriers had this in place, so why make an issue for the few prats out there?

PNB
Posts: 2239
Joined: Sun Jun 23, 2002 6:59 am
Location: Wilts, Berks, Ox, Hants, Avon.

Re: Paul Gordons letter to farriers

Postby PNB » Fri Nov 18, 2016 7:25 pm

John
" Your quotes".

"I found that the vast majority of good farriers had this in place, so why make an issue for the few prats out there? ". Yes, and please define , who is a "good: farrier".

John, How did you establish this, it will be very significant to see your paper trail and use it to offer guidance to those farriers who don't have, both legal cost/disciplinary and liability covers

PNB.

csc
Posts: 950
Joined: Fri May 20, 2005 5:40 am
Location: berks

Re: Paul Gordons letter to farriers

Postby csc » Sat Nov 19, 2016 7:11 am

John firstly I did not say the forge magazine would not publish the letter and sent you evidence that I had sent it to them, and published it on this website
thank you for your further advise

john ford
Posts: 1052
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2002 7:20 pm
Location: Pucklechurch, Bristol.

Re: Paul Gordons letter to farriers

Postby john ford » Sat Nov 19, 2016 9:13 pm

A statement by the Examinations Executive Group of the WCF regarding an email dated 12th Nov
2016 from Paul Gordon forwarded by Stuart Craig.
Dear Member of the Examinations Board,
The Executive Group was concerned and extremely disappointed to note the content of an email
circulated to registered farriers and others on the 12th Nov 2016 by Mr Stuart Craig, authored by Mr
Paul Gordon, containing the following:-
“Also that the worshipful company make large amounts of money each year from the
examinations, were do this go?”(sic)
We will refrain from commenting on the grammatical errors, but we believe this statement to be
dangerously misleading.
The Examinations Board of the WCF is an independent body entrusted by the Company with
maintaining the standards of the Company’s examinations. Two thirds of its members are farriers
with either FWCF or AWCF qualifications, the remaining are members of the Royal College of
Veterinary Surgeons with a particular interest in equine practice. It is solely devoted to delivering
and continuing to maintain the highest possible quality, service and standards in the Diploma and
other examinations offered by the WCF.
Whilst the Board has no interest in ‘FRC Politics’ and has no view on many of the issues raised by
Messrs Gordon and Craig, it believes that it has a duty to protect the status and probity of the
Diploma examination. The Executive Group would therefore wish that the following facts are made
widely available.
1. The DipWCF examination is run on a ‘not for profit’ basis. No money from the DipWCF (nor
any of the WCF examinations) is used by the Company for any other purpose than running
the examinations. All examination funds are held separately from general WCF funds.
2. The DipWCF examination (and all WCF exams) are carefully budgeted to reach a ‘break even’
point, on occasions a loss has been made and the Company’s Charitable Trust has
generously provided funding to make good the deficit. There is no question that the,
“worshipful company make large amounts of money each year from the examinations”(sic).
In fact this statement is diametrically opposite to the true position.
3. The Board enjoys the support of its enthusiastic team of examiners who devote much time
and effort to the work of the Board frequently on a voluntary basis. Without this support the
examination fees would have to be significantly increased.
4. There are relatively few candidates for the DipWCF every year (approx 120). Providing a high
quality examination for such small numbers at four different locations twice yearly naturally
has high per capita fixed overheads. Despite this we believe that the fee charged represents
extremely good value and compares favourably with other professional examination fees.
5. The Board operates with only one part time staff member (DipWCF) and one part time staff
member (Higher Exams). Despite this we offer an exam that has International recognition.
Such is the level of respect for our standards that Australian Farriers voluntarily sit the
DipWCF and pay for an examination team to travel to Australia.
6. The industry led working party on the new apprenticeship has determined that they wish
the DipWCF to be the end point assessment for apprentice farriers and the DipWCF is
recognised by the FRC as a registerable qualification under the terms of the Registration Act.
So in short the answer to the question, “were do this go?”(sic) - It goes towards providing the most
respected qualification in farriery in the World, delivered efficiently and fairly, whilst meeting all
governmental requirements. We firmly believe that the DipWCF is a qualification that all farriers are
rightly proud to achieve and something that should be celebrated as a great British success story.
The Executive Group understands that Mr Gordon’s email may have been widely circulated to
farriers, MPs and at least one member of the House of Lords and we hope that this correction will be
equally widely distributed. We have no wish to enter into the wider issues he raises, but are firmly
of the opinion that debate should be founded on fact not misguided conjecture.
Yours faithfully,
Dr Richard Stephenson BVMS, Cert EP, Cert VR, MRCVS.
Chairman of the WCF Examinations Board.

PNB
Posts: 2239
Joined: Sun Jun 23, 2002 6:59 am
Location: Wilts, Berks, Ox, Hants, Avon.

Re: Paul Gordons letter to farriers

Postby PNB » Sun Nov 20, 2016 11:40 am

Dr R Stephenson,

Sir, we should all show our appreciation that finally the WCF (Examiniation Boarrd), is speaking to the men who shoe horses daily. I genuinely applaud this, without reservation.

The last time this happened it was a few years back, when your then Registrar made a comment each exam taken cost £500, for which a charge of £1k was levied. It seems from this communication that these two figures are now historical and out of date.

Sir, I thank you for this information and trust this line of interaction will remain available to all UK working farrier Craftesmen who should seek such interactions.

Best Regards,

P N Baker.

csc
Posts: 950
Joined: Fri May 20, 2005 5:40 am
Location: berks

Re: Paul Gordons letter to farriers

Postby csc » Mon Nov 21, 2016 3:50 pm

There are currently 42 members on RCVS Council: 24 elected members (all veterinary surgeons), two members appointed by each university with a veterinary school (Bristol, Cambridge, Edinburgh, Glasgow, Liverpool, London and Nottingham) only one of which must be an MRCVS (currently nine MsRCVS and five lay members) and ...



RCVS Council - RCVS



https://www.rcvs.org.uk/about-us/rcvs-council

john ford
Posts: 1052
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2002 7:20 pm
Location: Pucklechurch, Bristol.

Re: Paul Gordons letter to farriers

Postby john ford » Mon Nov 21, 2016 5:30 pm

And who are the overseers of Farriers ? VETS

Italian stallion
Posts: 380
Joined: Mon Nov 07, 2005 8:40 pm

Re: Paul Gordons letter to farriers

Postby Italian stallion » Mon Nov 21, 2016 5:50 pm

Well I'm flabbergasted, paragraph 2of that statement from WCF states that they have used the charitable trust money to bail out the DWCF exams if there was a short fall, that's paying themselves from the charitable trust, is this not a misappropriation of trust funds, considering some years ago a farrier from Leicester broke both his leg in a shoeing accident, and when he approached he WCF for help from the charitable trust he was told his injuries did not qualify him to make a claim, but paying themselves from the trust is, also the Farrier Fund has also approached WCF with no success with accessing these funds, (shocking) why on earth would anyone believe a word of what this lot put on paper.
It's time an outside education provider takes control of these exams, this would put these cowboys to bed.

csc
Posts: 950
Joined: Fri May 20, 2005 5:40 am
Location: berks

Re: Paul Gordons letter to farriers

Postby csc » Tue Nov 22, 2016 6:45 am

Mr Stallion you have to bear in mind that the vast majority of farriers like and want to keep the DIP and other exams. if a outside body took them over they would have a high fence to jump.
anyway our focus should be on achieving 50/50 representation on council as you can see the vets have more than 50% when that is done we can only blame ourselves for our actions in the future

Italian stallion
Posts: 380
Joined: Mon Nov 07, 2005 8:40 pm

Re: Paul Gordons letter to farriers

Postby Italian stallion » Tue Nov 22, 2016 11:17 am

csc, I take your point but that's not right, I will write to the charity's commission and inform then of such goings on, I will contact the farrier concerned as there's a case to answer here weather you or I like it not.

Regards.

john ford
Posts: 1052
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2002 7:20 pm
Location: Pucklechurch, Bristol.

Re: Paul Gordons letter to farriers

Postby john ford » Tue Nov 22, 2016 3:03 pm

Italian stallion, just leave it, as you are going into something well out of your depth, unless you want to spend many hours in doing fundamental homework in order to get your facts 100% correct to challenge this organisation?

Italian stallion
Posts: 380
Joined: Mon Nov 07, 2005 8:40 pm

Re: Paul Gordons letter to farriers

Postby Italian stallion » Tue Nov 22, 2016 4:44 pm

John I rather leave you trivial advice behind me and take the advice of my daughter that's head of finance for a large charity who has told me it relevant to inform the charities commission, I really do believe you are spending to much time sucking up to them stoneliegh boys.

john ford
Posts: 1052
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2002 7:20 pm
Location: Pucklechurch, Bristol.

Re: Paul Gordons letter to farriers

Postby john ford » Tue Nov 22, 2016 6:40 pm

Italian stallion, I have never, nor will I start to suck up to anyone, as I have been in a very fortunate position never having to use such tactics. I couldn't care a jot where or who your daughter works for, because even a top class lawyer will do their research thoroughly, so as not to make a complete ass of themselves.

john ford
Posts: 1052
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2002 7:20 pm
Location: Pucklechurch, Bristol.

Re: Paul Gordons letter to farriers

Postby john ford » Tue Nov 22, 2016 6:58 pm

Italian stallion, I have never sucked up to anyone, as I have been in that fortunate position never to have had to use such tactics. I couldn't care a jot where or for whom your daughter works for. Even a top lawyer will do a thorough research into a case, if only to cover himself from making a complete ass of himself. I suggest you follow Stuart Craig's advise and stick to his main agenda of getting a more balanced representation onto the FRC council.

csc
Posts: 950
Joined: Fri May 20, 2005 5:40 am
Location: berks

Re: Paul Gordons letter to farriers

Postby csc » Wed Nov 23, 2016 6:58 am

the Royal College OF veterinary nurses have 15 members 4x vets 8x nurses and 3x others

john ford
Posts: 1052
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2002 7:20 pm
Location: Pucklechurch, Bristol.

Re: Paul Gordons letter to farriers

Postby john ford » Wed Nov 23, 2016 11:16 am

I've now got you going on this one Stuart. With reference to other similar practices, you now have a far stronger case to argue, than you had before. I see the second reading of the FRC Bill has now been put back to the 27th January 2017.

Italian stallion
Posts: 380
Joined: Mon Nov 07, 2005 8:40 pm

Re: Paul Gordons letter to farriers

Postby Italian stallion » Wed Nov 30, 2016 3:14 pm

Well I've logged my concerns about the WCF charitable trust with the charities commission and what a very helpful sevice they provide, open and transparent as things should be.

PNB
Posts: 2239
Joined: Sun Jun 23, 2002 6:59 am
Location: Wilts, Berks, Ox, Hants, Avon.

Re: Paul Gordons letter to farriers

Postby PNB » Wed Nov 30, 2016 3:42 pm

EW!

Well done. Keep us in the loop.

Interesting FRC today. Speak on phone later.

PNB.

4 north wales and border farriers present who seamed very interested in the way FRC conducted itself!!

csc
Posts: 950
Joined: Fri May 20, 2005 5:40 am
Location: berks

Re: Paul Gordons letter to farriers

Postby csc » Wed Nov 30, 2016 4:36 pm

To all registered farriers in the Company: Please see the statement below from the Registrar
Dear Liveryman/Freeman
The purpose of this message is to alert farrier members of the Livery to an email circulated to registered farriers and others on the 12th November 2016 by Mr Stuart Craig AFCL, authored by Mr Paul Gordon DipWCF, which is being widely circulated via email and social media. The stated purpose of their email is to ask recipients to lobby their MPs to ask for an increased representation of farriers on the FRC Council, but the email contains several serious and untrue allegations about the WCF. These allegations are presented below, together with the Company’s response. Company members are asked to disseminate the correct facts as widely as possible.
Paul Gordon: “All of the chairmanship positions on the FRC are appointed and held by worshipful company members” (sic)
WCF: The only Council position that the WCF appoints is the Chairmanship. This is in accordance with the Farriers (Registration) Act 1975 which states that the 16 Council members include “three persons appointed from time to time by the Company, of whom one shall be Chairman of the Council”. All other appointments are made by the Council. Other bodies, such as the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons, are similarly obliged under the Act to appoint FRC Council members – one of which is currently Chairman of the FRC Disciplinary Committee.

Paul Gordon: “The chairman is appointed without consultation to the FRC, by a secret ballet by the worshipful company of farriers” (sic).
WCF: There is no truth whatsoever in the statement that the Chairman is appointed by a secret ballot. The Company undertakes to find an individual with the correct skill set to chair a public regulatory body.

Paul Gordon: “The worshipful company are only a London livery company with 375 members, and that 10% are farriers” (sic)
WCF: Livery members are highly capable people from all walks of life who care passionately about the welfare of the horse. The percentage of Livery members who are farriers has almost doubled in the last 10 years to just under 20%.

Paul Gordon: “Also that the worshipful company make large amounts of money each year from the examinations, were do this go?” (sic)
WCF: The examinations are run on an entirely not-for-profit basis. All exam revenue and expenses are paid via the Farriery Education and Training Ltd account, and the accounts are open to inspection at Companies House. The Chairman of the Examinations Executive Group has issued a comprehensive statement in response to this dangerously misleading statement.

There are two further misleading comments in documents attached to the email:
The Company is referred to as the “compulsory Awarding Body for examinations”. Under the Act the FRC approves any qualification “which, as the result of an examination taken in conjunction with a course of training approved by the Council under this section, is granted to candidates reaching a standard at the examination indicating, in the opinion of the Council, that they have sufficient knowledge and skill to carry out the shoeing of horses”. The fact that the approved qualification is the DipWCF is entirely determined by the FRC.
It is stated that “The worshipful company are placing themselves as the standard setter for CPD requirements in the industry” (sic). Under the Act the Company has “the general function of securing adequate standards of competence and conduct among persons engaged in the shoeing of horses”, but they are not the standard setter for CPD, and are not seeking to position themselves as such. The CPD system is administered by the FRC, and no other organisation has a specific role in the CPD system.
The WCF exists to support farriery and the welfare of the horse, and we do this by promoting the importance of good farriery in the equestrian world, and through our DipWCF, AWCF and FWCF examinations which are respected throughout the world as representing the highest standards in farriery. It is disappointing that Messrs Craig and Gordon have formulated such a negative view of the Company.

Mrs Charlotte Clifford
Clerk
Worshipful Company of Farriers
www.wcf.org.uk

To unsubscribe, please contact The Clerk to The Worshipful Company of Farriers, theclerk@wcf.org.uk

csc
Posts: 950
Joined: Fri May 20, 2005 5:40 am
Location: berks

Re: Paul Gordons letter to farriers

Postby csc » Wed Nov 30, 2016 4:41 pm

thanks for the spin Charlotte,
all our information and statistics are available and taken from the W.C.F R.C.V.N R.C.V.S websites so if they are inaccurate you should address the errors to your web people
as was demonstrated at the FRC meeting today in front of the chairman.

john ford
Posts: 1052
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2002 7:20 pm
Location: Pucklechurch, Bristol.

Re: Paul Gordons letter to farriers

Postby john ford » Wed Nov 30, 2016 9:18 pm

As a completely independent observer, I wish to draw your attention to one major point that you may have overlooked.
In your time in the UK, have you heard about any other examination other than: Diploma of the Worshipful Company of Farriers? Associate of the Worshipful Company of Farriers? Fellow of the Worshipful Company of Farriers? All these exams have been drawn up by the Company long before the FRC Act 1975, and are set in stone as far as I know, as the only way on to the FRC Register. Therefore the way I look at things, if the Companies exams are accepted above any other, shouldn’t they be the ones to do the final examinations? Shouldn’t they be the ones who credit higher Continued Professional Development in the industry? Shouldn’t we Farriers be congratulating them for their efforts in promoting Farriery in the UK as top, and leaders of the World in Farriery?
Why don't you all just stick to your original task by seeking to get your 50/50 representation on the FRC, and stop having a go at those people who were set-up by Charles 1st to improve Farriery here in the UK, which was a bloody long time ago and long before the FRC came onto the scene?

csc
Posts: 950
Joined: Fri May 20, 2005 5:40 am
Location: berks

Re: Paul Gordons letter to farriers

Postby csc » Thu Dec 01, 2016 6:20 am

well JOHN IT SEEMS THAT THOSE EXAMS ARE UNDER THREAT FROM THE GOVENMENT. as we were informed at council yesterday but you may be surprised to hear that we all support them100%, maybe the Charles 1st Club should stick to its exams,

Italian stallion
Posts: 380
Joined: Mon Nov 07, 2005 8:40 pm

Re: Paul Gordons letter to farriers

Postby Italian stallion » Thu Dec 01, 2016 6:30 am

We live in a democratic country (supposedly) now just because something's are the norm, there's no reason why one shouldn't ask questions. We are correct in wishing to seek a fair balance on any committee as far as a 50/50 goes. The WCF has historically loaded these committees in there favour, so why not push and shove them a little it's only what they've done to us for years.

PNB
Posts: 2239
Joined: Sun Jun 23, 2002 6:59 am
Location: Wilts, Berks, Ox, Hants, Avon.

Re: Paul Gordons letter to farriers

Postby PNB » Thu Dec 01, 2016 7:11 am

Charlotte, et al.

Just a small comment on yesterday's meeting. A vast andunder explained agenda was obvious, (chairman in a hurry) My feelings the agenda demonstrated over regulation of our micro body/craft to the extreme.

I have often wondered why FARRIERY describes itself as a PROFESSION (WCF and FRC) when it it is seemingly a CRAFT of long standing, (Charles the first is stated above as being the time examinations were started).

I have read a chart within the -AGENDA (situation as at 27thSept 2016) headed FARRIERY-OPERATING MODEL:WEF 1 NOV 13. Headed:- WCF, Head of PROFESSION. Seems the description PROFESSION thing then is all to do with a perception of power or a need to control !! I dont honestly know however.

Any one else have an idea!!

PNB?

john ford
Posts: 1052
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2002 7:20 pm
Location: Pucklechurch, Bristol.

Re: Paul Gordons letter to farriers

Postby john ford » Thu Dec 01, 2016 7:45 pm

We became a profession so I believe after the FRC Act 1975. No person can practice farriery unless they are on the official FRC register. Let me explain. All crafts apart from Farriery can be carried out by anyone without having any qualifications, and are not controlled by a governing body. A engineer is not a professional, but a chartered engineer is. An accountant is not a professional, but a chartered accountant is. Also, did you know that now a Registered Farrier can witness a legal document.

PNB
Posts: 2239
Joined: Sun Jun 23, 2002 6:59 am
Location: Wilts, Berks, Ox, Hants, Avon.

Re: Paul Gordons letter to farriers

Postby PNB » Fri Dec 02, 2016 5:30 am

OK John,

You have not convinced me FARRIERY is a PROFESSION In the wider sense, as are solicitors, doctors, dentist, vets since 1949 and many others. I however have to go alone with the description. This really was not my point!!

The comment was a guote from the agenda,


"WCF

Head of profession."

Where didthat cone from?? A somewhat pretentious statement as I see it. Are we as mainly self employed men not in charge of our own destinies, with an unfettered freedom of speach both written and spoken words and an absolute entitlement to openness and transparency regarding things that are being arranged for us, (see Recent Report Lord Bew, September 2016).

PNB.

csc
Posts: 950
Joined: Fri May 20, 2005 5:40 am
Location: berks

Re: Paul Gordons letter to farriers

Postby csc » Fri Dec 02, 2016 6:48 am

and did you know John at the FRC meeting it was disclosed that there have been no prosecutions for illegal farriery over the last three years,
since Mrs Heather left .
and when questioned if a farrier did not register what would happen , the answer was well he would be prosecuted, but no one has and why? because of (Hemming's v Westminster council), a poor excuse would you not agree. so the registrar was asked why haven't you reported any cases to the police, the police are not interested came his reply,
my conclusion John is your Profession and act are not worth the paper it is written on just a paper tiger.

john ford
Posts: 1052
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2002 7:20 pm
Location: Pucklechurch, Bristol.

Re: Paul Gordons letter to farriers

Postby john ford » Fri Dec 02, 2016 4:22 pm

So on that basis Stuart, statements like that, especially from the Registrar should be made public. Even gaffs in the House of Commons are recorded by the press, so why can't you lot?

csc
Posts: 950
Joined: Fri May 20, 2005 5:40 am
Location: berks

Re: Paul Gordons letter to farriers

Postby csc » Sat Dec 03, 2016 7:37 am

just have


Return to “farriers discussion board”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests