Posting as John Cousins Our error for quoting £750 rather than £715 for an AALA license, which can for some be for two years. Very interesting to hear from ‘anonymous 5’ that ‘AALA have put forward a proposal for a new inspection regime which would meant that they could become entirely self funding - without increasing the licence fee’. This sounds very interesting. I was at a meeting on Monday of the ‘UK accreditation transition group’ who the HSE originally put together in the autumn. It includes reps from MLTUK, RYA, AHOEC, OEAP, SAPOE, BAPA, EOC, Skillsactive, NUT, SAAF and AAIAC and none of us knew about this proposal. This group is doing its best to make sense of the devolved decisions on behalf of the outdoors and while we’ve corresponded with HSE in the last few days we haven’t heard anything about this (in case anyone doesn't have their head round this HSE is AALA). It would be good to share any such information so I’d welcome details (john@mltuk.org). In the case of Adventuremark it is currently always issued for two years and LOtC is not an additional cost if they are applied for together. Added to this when the Adventure Activity Industry Advisory Committee set this up it was with scheme, rather than individual approval in mind. So most Adventuremark badges are currently being gained via organisations such as the BCU, BASI, MIAS, AHOEC, BAPA etc. The fees involved can therefore be managed by that body in as cost effective way as they can manage. With the likely demise of regulation, in England at least, MLTUK will now investigate how we might accredit our awar holders who are ‘single sport, sole trader’ under this system in as accessible manner as possible. An industry led system would also have the advantage that we could manage the parameters of such a scheme i.e. the sector (industry?) could decide on frequency of inspection, duration of licence or any other matter and therefore evolve the scheme over time. Finally it is worth noting this is a not for profit system that AAIAC have put in place.