Why would an ADI association require Chatham House Rule at meetings? What is discussed is hardly of National Security.
We believed that when an individual puts themselves forward to be a delegate for one of the associations they have an obligation to report back on all matters.
Most of the delegates are elected and as such are paid expenses for attending meetings it is only right that members know what has been said and by whom.
The ADI associations represent a minority of the total number of instructors on the register. Whilst our foremost duty is to protect the interests of our members, we consider we also have a wider brief to encompass all ADI’s and the profession as a whole.
Discussions and decisions need to be transmitted back to ADI’s; this promotes further discussion and debate resulting in policy being decided. It also makes all instructors aware of what is being considered.
Chatham House Rule is in essence a gagging order allowing those who have been appointed or elected to make decisions on your future behind closed doors. This can’t be right or allowed to continue.
We understand that sometimes the DSA or to use their new name DVSA have in the past asked the national associations not to report on a subject until it’s been finalised, this we understand and have complied with.
The ADI National Associations represent you, whether or not you are a member; therefore you should be kept up to date on all discussions and decisions. Why should nameless individuals be allowed to carry on in this way?
In the article last month only one person was named as heading up a response to the ADI Registrar, at not time did the article mention anything that had been said from within the meeting.
It should be noted that we didn't consider the meeting was governed by CHR as it was discussed but never invoked.