David Train ban
 

'When a true genius appears in the world, you may know him by this sign, that
the dunces are all in confederacy against him.'

Jonathan Swift.


The latest news from the BCU bunker is that David Train's application for
BCU membership has been rejected - he is now barred for another 4 years.

? He has done nothing wrong.
? He has not been informed of any complaint against him.
? He has not been informed of any proceedings.
? He has not been permitted to attend any hearing.
? He has not been afforded the right to put his case or defend himself.
? There is no right of appeal.


Where have we heard all this before?

The BCU Board, clearly, have no sense of natural justice. They don't know
right from wrong.

Power has gone to their heads and they've all become corrupt.

First we had threats of Police action and lies and deceptions from the BCU
Chairman, then threats of sackings and now this!

Inherent in the ban are serious implications for the BCU, including:
? Restriction of trade.
? Restriction of employment.
? Contravention of human rights under Human Rights legislation.

Any right thinking person can see that this judgement is wrong and that the
BCU will have to make a grovelling climb-down - just as they have had to do
in the past.

Worst of all: the overwhelming moral imperative has been ignored. The issues
raised recently by David Train are of a Child Protection nature. The
attempts to silence those who stand up for the interests of the young people
in our sport look even more sinister.


Allan Bennett



--

"Allan Bennett" wrote in message
...


'When a true genius appears in the world, you may know him by this sign,
that
the dunces are all in confederacy against him.'

Jonathan Swift.


The latest news from the BCU bunker is that David Train's application for
BCU membership has been rejected - he is now barred for another 4 years.

? He has done nothing wrong.
? He has not been informed of any complaint against him.
? He has not been informed of any proceedings.
? He has not been permitted to attend any hearing.
? He has not been afforded the right to put his case or defend himself.
? There is no right of appeal.


Where have we heard all this before?

The BCU Board, clearly, have no sense of natural justice. They don't know
right from wrong.

Power has gone to their heads and they've all become corrupt.

First we had threats of Police action and lies and deceptions from the BCU
Chairman, then threats of sackings and now this!

Inherent in the ban are serious implications for the BCU, including:
? Restriction of trade.
? Restriction of employment.
? Contravention of human rights under Human Rights legislation.

Any right thinking person can see that this judgement is wrong and that
the
BCU will have to make a grovelling climb-down - just as they have had to
do
in the past.

Worst of all: the overwhelming moral imperative has been ignored. The
issues
raised recently by David Train are of a Child Protection nature. The
attempts to silence those who stand up for the interests of the young
people
in our sport look even more sinister.

Do tell us more.

I'm afraid that as a lowly L2 working with Scouts I don't quite follow what
the issue is?

Is it that we are looking at planning resources to train to win Gold at the
expense of all else and that David has questioned this and has been kicked
out? In which case I'm guessing that there should be a whole load more
people getting kicked out of the BCU too.

I can think of five without even going out of my own household!

Ewan Scott

Allan Bennett wrote:
Where have we heard all this before?

On this newsgroup,
every time you post it,
you tedious little troll.

Plus ca change!

urchaidh wrote:

you tedious little troll.

Point of order: trolls post deliberately inflammatory nonsense purely to
get a reaction. While I would agree that Allan's posts of nefarious
goings-on at BCU Central are indeed tedious, I think that's possibly[1]
more the BCU's fault than his. Messengers should only be blamed if you
can demonstrate they have an unsubstantiated grudge, and you need to
substantiate "unsubstantiated".

Pete.

[1] I don't know for sure. I'm not really in a position where the BCU
provide anything much I want or need, so I'm not a member. If I was,
especially ion a competitive discipline, I would at least take Allan's
posts as a reason to do a bit of investigation into exactly what they're
up to. Having recently clapped eyes on the LTDP at a pal's house I'm
not inspired as to how many Clues they have.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

In article .com, urchaidh
wrote:
Allan Bennett wrote:
Where have we heard all this before?

On this newsgroup,
every time you post it,
you tedious little troll.

Plus ca change!

Alter idem, semper idem.

If you haven't got anything sensible to contribute, please just go away.

The issues raised in my posting are of a very serious nature including Child
Protection and natural justice and we could do without your puerile and
pretentious, copy-cat feigned indignation.


Allan Bennett
Not a fan of the tedious


--

Allan Bennett wrote:
In article .com, urchaidh
wrote:
If you haven't got anything sensible to contribute, please just go away.

You hypocrite. You've said almost nothing that could be considered
sensible since the sad day you arrived here yet show no signs off
following your own advice and going away.

The issues raised in my posting are of a very serious nature including Child
Protection and natural justice

If that is the case, why is the only place we hear about these issues
in your repetitive posting to this newsgroup? It's been years since you
first started flooding this newsgroup with your nonsenses, if there
were any substance to your accusations would you not have made some
progress by now?

If there are serious child protection issues why are the authorities -
the police or social services - not investigating? Or does your
paranoia extend to thinking that the whole world is against David
Train? Maybe the police are in the pockets of the BCU driven new world
order. Or maybe you're talking rubbish.

Come to think of it, why do we never here from David Train, are you his
official mouthpiece as well as his self appointed arsehole?

What about the press? Surely some national or local rag would be
interested in this if the BCU, a publicly funded NGB, are as corrupt as
you suggest. Had any luck there?

I did read what you had to say when you first started posting. I even
went so far as to contact the BCU when you made your child abuse
allegations against a named individual in June 2002. I was satisfied
with the reply I received, but here we are *three years* on and you're
still talking the same pish.

Face it Allan, even if you had a point, preaching to a dozen
individuals in an obscure paddling newsgroup will achieve nothing. It
obviously hasn't worked in the three or four years you've been trying.

Why no police?
Why no social services?
Why no other investigations?

and we could do without your puerile and pretentious, copy-cat feigned
indignation.

Pretentious, moi? Puerile, certainly. But let me assure you that my
indignation is not feigned. You are a cancer on this newsgroup. You
attached yourself to it and killed it.

In article .com,
urchaidh
wrote:


Pretentious, moi? Puerile, certainly. But let me assure you that my
indignation is not feigned. You are a cancer on this newsgroup. You
attached yourself to it and killed it.



Steady on, no-one can kill a NG unless you let them!

Allan has given me some useful advice on this NG over recent years for which
I am grateful. I don't mind him airing his views, I may not always agree,
but I would defend his right to free speech.

And just think what the alternative would be to a Usenet NG: A moderated,
web based forum for right thinking canoeists, with adverts on the top of the
page and any real debate suppressed as it may hurt sales figures.

By accusing Allan of having 'killed' the NG you sound like a right drama
queen.

Kam

K Offit wrote:
In article .com,
urchaidh
wrote:
Pretentious, moi? Puerile, certainly. But let me assure you that my
indignation is not feigned. You are a cancer on this newsgroup. You
attached yourself to it and killed it.

Steady on, no-one can kill a NG unless you let them!

A lot of people pointed out that Allans repetive posting were annoying
and ask him, with varying degrees of politeness, to stop. He didn't,
they left.

Use google groups and go look for yourself. There was a thriving
paddling community on here before Allan started his incessant postings
on the subject of BCU corruption. Within a year 80-90% of the regular
posters had gone elsewhere, not because the didn't like what Alan had
to say, but because of how often he repeated it. He would pollute every
thread with his rantings. I guess if he stuck to a thread on BCU
corruption, few folk would read it.

Allan has given me some useful advice on this NG over recent years for which
I am grateful.

Indeed, sounds like he's quite a knowledgeable and experienced paddler.
This group used to be full of them.

I don't mind him airing his views, I may not always agree,
but I would defend his right to free speech.

No one ever objected to Allan airing his views. But he aired them
incessantly, in every thread, until it the signal to noise ratio fell
to almost nothing. There's a big difference between free speech and
SPAM.

It wasn't just few folks who left in the huff. It wasn't, as Allan
whould have you beleive, just a few folks with a personal grudge. It
was the majority of posters who left, most quoting Allan's nonsense as
the reason.

And just think what the alternative would be to a Usenet NG: A moderated,
web based forum for right thinking canoeists, with adverts on the top of the
page and any real debate suppressed as it may hurt sales figures.

I don't have to think, as what you describe is pretty much what
happened, though I don't think it's (ussuming you're referring to the
UKRGB) particularly moderated. This newsgroup became so unusable that
most everyone switched to the web forum. Why? Pretty much becasue of
Allan.

Even now, people asking questions in this NG will be directed
elsewhere.

By accusing Allan of having 'killed' the NG you sound like a right drama
queen.

Maybe, but I'm ****ed of. I have a nosey in here every now and again
and it's as dead as ever - it used to be so much fun. I believe Allan
(and his sidekick David Kemper :-)) killed it. The evidence is there
for all to see.

In article .com, urchaidh
wrote:

More of the same. I think, if you research the matter, you will find that
there were similar personal attacks to those just witnessed directed at David
Kemper and myself which helped caused the demise of this group.

Frankly, I think it is better without those that think they own it, but
nobody was compelled to leave.

You are not clever in being able to make abusive and personal remarks. It
does nothing to advance any argument you might have, and as anyone that knows
me will confirm, it will not cause me to deviate from the issues.

However, to answer some of the naive points raised in the typically
pejorative manner:

The BCU Child Protection Policy (and poster!) contain the following:

"If you have any concerns that a child may be experiencing any form of abuse,
it must be reported either to your appointed club officer or to the BCU Child
Protection and Harassment Officer. Alternatively, any concerns can be
reported to Social Services, the Police or NSPCC Childline on 0800 800 500."

The Police are only interested in matters of a criminal nature.

Most of the issues that have been reported to me are of a coaching matter and
should be addressed by the BCU. If they believe the matter to be of a
criminal nature, it is /their/ duty to pass it on to the Police.

Once reported to the BCU as the 'relevant authority', that should have been
the end of my involvement, but BCU claims that the allegations have been
'fully investigated' are quite wrong and the matters are therefore not
closed.

The fact that I was expelled for (allegedly) reporting a Child Abuse incident
is unforgivable.

As you claim you are satisfied with the BCU reply to your enquiry, how about
sharing it with us? In my experience, their answers do not stand up to
scrutiny.

I am currently involved with a number of issues with the NSPCC - in
particular how our so-called Child Protection Officer deals with reports of a
child protection nature.

Allan Bennett
Not a fan of the gullible

--

Allan Bennett wrote:
More of the same. I think, if you research the matter, you will find that
there were similar personal attacks to those just witnessed directed at David
Kemper and myself which helped caused the demise of this group.

'Personal attacks' didn't casue the demise of anything. They're
ten-a-penny on usenet when discussions get heated, as they did on
UKRBP. I'm not condoning this behaviour and am guilty of it myslef, but
I don't see how it's particularly relevant here.

The problem was you incessant posting of your views on the BCU et al.
Even that would have been fine if you'd stuck to relevent threads, but
you posted to and corrupted nearly every thread, you changed titles,
you repeatdly posted the same

Frankly, I think it is better without those that think they own it, but
nobody was compelled to leave.

In the first ten days of August there have been 10 posts:

- 3 on the problems with the BCU
- 6 on the problems with this group
- 3 from the SCA access officer
- 1 asking about campsites
- 1 sad little content free troll in repsonse to the campsite question.

Total number of posters, around seven. In what possible way is that
better than the vibrant community that existed here before you started
your spamming?

I also take this opportunity to repeat my earlier question that you
conveninetly ignored. If you issues with the BCU are so far reaching
and important, why is the only place I've ever heard about them on a
low traffic newsgroup like this?

Nobody thought they owned it. It was the vast majority of posters who
asked you (politley at first) to moderate (not stop!) your behaviour.
In a fit of pig headed arrogance you ignored the majority view and look
what happened.

You're right in that no one was compelled to leave but somewhat niave
in missing the fact that you made the group so intollerable and useless
that they decided to leave and go elsewhere. Again, remember, not just
a few folks but almost eveyone.

You are not clever in being able to make abusive and personal remarks.

I know that, I don't make abusive remarks in order to show that I'm
clever, I do it becase I'm ****ed off at the demise of this newsgroup
and blame you for it.

As for complaining about personal abuse, as someone who has openly
accused someone of child abuse on this group you have a bit of a cheek.
There are, as you well know, correct procedures for handling suspicions
or allegations of abuse. None of these suggests accusing someone by
name on usenet!

It
does nothing to advance any argument you might have, and as anyone that knows
me will confirm, it will not cause me to deviate from the issues.

Allan, given that you utterly ignored the pleas, arguements and
complaints of the vast majority of (now ex) contributers to this
newsgroups, I have no expectations that you'll pay any attention to me.

However, to answer some of the naive points raised in the typically
pejorative manner:

Hardly pejorative. I've been reading the same nonsense from you, on and
off, for years so I


The BCU Child Protection Policy (and poster!) contain the following:

"If you have any concerns that a child may be experiencing any form of abuse,
it must be reported either to your appointed club officer or to the BCU Child
Protection and Harassment Officer. Alternatively, any concerns can be
reported to Social Services, the Police or NSPCC Childline on 0800 800 500."

So where does it mention public accusations on usenet?

The Police are only interested in matters of a criminal nature.

And "sexual abuse" (your words) is not a criminal nature?

Most of the issues that have been reported to me are of a coaching matter and
should be addressed by the BCU. If they believe the matter to be of a
criminal nature, it is /their/ duty to pass it on to the Police.

Rubbish! Amongst other things your own quote from the BCU poster
contradicts this. You made allegations of sexual abuse and as a result
were accused of wasting police time. So you take to posting the deatils
to usenet.

The fact that I was expelled for (allegedly) reporting a Child Abuse incident
is unforgivable.

Allegedly - did you report the case or not, you should know.

As you claim you are satisfied with the BCU reply to your enquiry, how about
sharing it with us? In my experience, their answers do not stand up to
scrutiny.

It was three years ago Allan. I don't still have it. I was given
details of a case number a police officer to contact if I had further
questions. I left it at that.

I am currently involved with a number of issues with the NSPCC

Well I'd suggest that you put your efforts into that and leave usenet
in peace.

Think long term Allan - if you **** off and leave UKRBP in peace the
numbers will build up again. That way, when you return in, say, five
years time, they'll be lots of people to listen to your rantings rather
than the dozen or so that there are now.

Regards.

Why not just use the killfile? Block his posts from your newsreader and you
never have to read them again!

Charlie.

"urchaidh" wrote in message
oups.com...
K Offit wrote:
In article .com,
urchaidh
wrote:
Pretentious, moi? Puerile, certainly. But let me assure you that my
indignation is not feigned. You are a cancer on this newsgroup. You
attached yourself to it and killed it.

Steady on, no-one can kill a NG unless you let them!

A lot of people pointed out that Allans repetive posting were annoying
and ask him, with varying degrees of politeness, to stop. He didn't,
they left.

Use google groups and go look for yourself. There was a thriving
paddling community on here before Allan started his incessant postings
on the subject of BCU corruption. Within a year 80-90% of the regular
posters had gone elsewhere, not because the didn't like what Alan had
to say, but because of how often he repeated it. He would pollute every
thread with his rantings. I guess if he stuck to a thread on BCU
corruption, few folk would read it.

Allan has given me some useful advice on this NG over recent years for
which
I am grateful.

Indeed, sounds like he's quite a knowledgeable and experienced paddler.
This group used to be full of them.

I don't mind him airing his views, I may not always agree,
but I would defend his right to free speech.

No one ever objected to Allan airing his views. But he aired them
incessantly, in every thread, until it the signal to noise ratio fell
to almost nothing. There's a big difference between free speech and
SPAM.

It wasn't just few folks who left in the huff. It wasn't, as Allan
whould have you beleive, just a few folks with a personal grudge. It
was the majority of posters who left, most quoting Allan's nonsense as
the reason.

And just think what the alternative would be to a Usenet NG: A
moderated,
web based forum for right thinking canoeists, with adverts on the top of
the
page and any real debate suppressed as it may hurt sales figures.

I don't have to think, as what you describe is pretty much what
happened, though I don't think it's (ussuming you're referring to the
UKRGB) particularly moderated. This newsgroup became so unusable that
most everyone switched to the web forum. Why? Pretty much becasue of
Allan.

Even now, people asking questions in this NG will be directed
elsewhere.

By accusing Allan of having 'killed' the NG you sound like a right drama
queen.

Maybe, but I'm ****ed of. I have a nosey in here every now and again
and it's as dead as ever - it used to be so much fun. I believe Allan
(and his sidekick David Kemper :-)) killed it. The evidence is there
for all to see.

Charlie wrote:
Why not just use the killfile? Block his posts from your newsreader and you
never have to read them again!

I used to, but I'm reduced to google groups these days and I don't
think that's or option here.

I'm on a project with long builds at the moment so have odd times to
engage in a bit of trolling. Three of four years ago I would have
engaged in a bit of paddling chat, but there's not a lot of that going
on here.

I'll get bored again and go away soon.

In message .com,
urchaidh writes

Think long term Allan - if you **** off and leave UKRBP in peace the
numbers will build up again. That way, when you return in, say, five
years time, they'll be lots of people to listen to your rantings rather
than the dozen or so that there are now.


Whilst I agree with the arguments advanced here, I just wanted to log
the (sad) fact that few Internet users are frequenting newsgroups these
days - I know of other groups lamenting a steady decline in activity. So
frankly, I suspect that for many people, pukka websites are what they
expect to find or frequent (and Google's newsgroup access is no real
substitute). I rather suspect that, even without Messrs Bennett and
Kemper, this group would anyway now be a shadow of its original self.
--
David Pearson

David Pearson wrote:

Whilst I agree with the arguments advanced here, I just wanted to log
the (sad) fact that few Internet users are frequenting newsgroups these
days - I know of other groups lamenting a steady decline in activity. So
frankly, I suspect that for many people, pukka websites are what they
expect to find or frequent (and Google's newsgroup access is no real
substitute). I rather suspect that, even without Messrs Bennett and
Kemper, this group would anyway now be a shadow of its original self.

uk.rec.climbing is a shadow of its former self for (AFAICT) those
reasons. No particular cancer on the group, folk just drifted off to
web forums (with Work Of Stan user interfaces that aren't a shadow of a
good newsreader).

Others have fared better: uk.rec.cycling continues to thrive and grow,
uk.rec.walking seems to be sustaining very well too.

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

Whilst I agree with the arguments advanced here, I just wanted to log the
(sad) fact that few Internet users are frequenting newsgroups these days -
I know of other groups lamenting a steady decline in activity.

Interestingly, of the few other groups I have time to subscribe to, one
lists 79 unread posts and the others 100+ - I began to subscribe to all at
the same time - only UKRBP has died (effectively) - and Allan and David
don't post to the others...

Keith
(not a fan of obsessive compulsives) ;-)

"Keith Meredith" wrote in message
...


Whilst I agree with the arguments advanced here, I just wanted to log the
(sad) fact that few Internet users are frequenting newsgroups these
days - I know of other groups lamenting a steady decline in activity.

Interestingly, of the few other groups I have time to subscribe to, one
lists 79 unread posts and the others 100+ - I began to subscribe to all at
the same time - only UKRBP has died (effectively) - and Allan and David
don't post to the others...

Keith
(not a fan of obsessive compulsives) ;-)


It seems we still have a few lurkers reading even if they pretend to have
gone away.

Most other groups don't hold much interest for me, Keith.
Paddling does. My kids paddle. I paddle. I'm involved with flat water
competition paddling.
I know most of the people in charge of competition paddling in the UK. I see
what they get up to. I don't like what I see.
I don't like the way money from outside has corrupted our sport. The money
has become the focus rather than the participants.
I don't like child abuse, especially in sports my kids are involved with,
being covered up and effectively condoned.

I lurk at several other groups, mainly transport related, but rarely post
anything as I don't have the involvement or the inclination.

To address your actual complaint; I'm very busy with work ATM, but if you
let me know which groups you hang out at, I may see what I can do for you.
:~)

David,
Not a fan of slow readers.

It seems we still have a few lurkers reading even if they pretend to have
gone away.

Most other groups don't hold much interest for me, Keith.
Paddling does. My kids paddle. I paddle. I'm involved with flat water
competition paddling.
I know most of the people in charge of competition paddling in the UK. I
see
what they get up to. I don't like what I see.
I don't like the way money from outside has corrupted our sport. The money
has become the focus rather than the participants.
I don't like child abuse, especially in sports my kids are involved with,
being covered up and effectively condoned.

I lurk at several other groups, mainly transport related, but rarely post
anything as I don't have the involvement or the inclination.

To address your actual complaint; I'm very busy with work ATM, but if you
let me know which groups you hang out at, I may see what I can do for you.
:~)

I think that you would have to try very hard to exceed the vitriole that has
arisen from time to time on uk.rec.scouting, and it still thrives :-)

Ewan Scott

"Ewan Scott" wrote in message
...

I think that you would have to try very hard to exceed the vitriole that
has
arisen from time to time on uk.rec.scouting, and it still thrives :-)

Ewan Scott

Yeah, but you have to _be prepared_ for that sort of thing if you're a
Scout, don't you?

David
Not a fan of vitriol

"Charlie" wrote in message
...
Why not just use the killfile? Block his posts from your newsreader and
you
never have to read them again!

True, neither Allan or I morph our identities.

David
Not a fan of split personalities.

"urchaidh" wrote in message
oups.com...
Charlie wrote:
Why not just use the killfile? Block his posts from your newsreader and
you
never have to read them again!

I used to, but I'm reduced to google groups these days and I don't
think that's or option here.

I'm on a project with long builds at the moment so have odd times to
engage in a bit of trolling. Three of four years ago I would have
engaged in a bit of paddling chat, but there's not a lot of that going
on here.

Could that be because whenever some paddling chat starts, someone pops up to
suggest the poster moves (the conversation) to UKRGB?
On one hand people are encouraged not to post here, while on the other hand
people complain because the number of posts has declined.
If you want a vibrant group you need to make it so.


I'll get bored again and go away soon.

Bye then, don't slam the door on the way out.

David
Not a fan of google groups.

"urchaidh" wrote in message
oups.com...
The fact that I was expelled for (allegedly) reporting a Child Abuse
incident
is unforgivable.

Allegedly - did you report the case or not, you should know.

Allan did not report the incident to the police. I did. Police said to me
they felt there was grounds for concern but as the victim declined to make a
complaint and give a statement, they could not take action. They also stated
that they were sure further incidents would occur and they would hope to be
able to use the information I had given to them in a future prosecution. At
no point did the police say I had wasted their time or that the accused was
innocent. The BCU whitewashed the affair citing the lack of police action as
the reason for not taking action themselves. So young people continue to be
at risk because the BCU cover up for their employees..
Allan was falsely accused of "maliciously" reporting the matter to the
police by another BCU employee, one whose job should be to investigate child
abuse issues. That BCU employee knew it was I that reported the matter to
the police because I reported it to him first. He tried to cover up his
failure to take preventive action by saying Allan Bennett had reported the
matter, knowing that Allan was already in the BCU's bad books, and less
likely to be believed than myself. He also damaged the police investigation
by warning potential witnesses that the police would be asking questions.

David
Not a fan of cover ups

In article , David Kemper
wrote:


[snip]
He [MIKE DEVLIN] also damaged the police investigation by warning
potential witnesses that the police would be asking questions.


.... and did the police accuse /him/ of 'Wasting Police Time'? - the
accusation that was falsely laid against me by Alan Laws (erstwhile BCU
Chairman and proven liar) at a BCU AGM.



Allan Bennett
Not a fan of liars
--

An open letter to Brian Chapman (Chairman of the BCU) and Paul Owen (Chief
Executive of the BCU):

"The board's decision not to renew your membership was not taken in response
to the fact that you raised an issue of potential child abuse. It was taken
in response to the manner in which you chose to raise it, particularly in
relation to the wide circulation and frequent repetition of the accusations
which caused stress and concern amongst members of the BCU staff to whom the
BCU has an employer's duty to protect them from such actions."

(Letter from Chapman to David Train)

OK Mr Chapman - how should such an issue be raised, then?

? The BCU refused to communicate with David Train until he raised it with
other organisations and pressure was put upon the BCU to formulate a policy.

What you want (obviously!) is for everyone to keep quiet, isn't it?

? Regarding the 'wide circulation':

Please tell us to whom we are NOT allowed to write if we want to be BCU
members.

And to how many should we limit our circulation list?

? To what accusations are you referring which caused so much stress to your
weak and feeble staff?

Why is it that you are so concerned that your staff are reminded that they
aren't doing such a good job as they like us to believe and yet show such
scant regard for the welfare of our young paddlers or the membership as a
whole? Seems like someone has their priorities in a twist.

? You've tried the legal route and failed. There is nothing illegal in the
posts: no harassment; no libel; no defamation. There is nothing inaccurate in
his posts, nothing immoral, insulting or abusive. So, what has David Train
done that is /wrong/?

? Where is your evidence and where are the BCU rules that will curtail our
rights and liberties in this way?


** we now hear that it is the /tone/ of David Train's letters that has got
him banned! It gets even better!

Why is it that you can ban someone for expressing their views in the only way
they know how? Would you, in turn, ban someone who has a stutter and cannot
express themselves? Would you ban someone who is unintelligent and unable to
express themselves?

Or is it that you prefer to label David Train as 'mentally sick' (which you
have done and not repealed the statements publicly). Mentally sick people
are denied an opinion and freedom of expression within our sport, are they?



Following is a recent letter to the Princess Royal - going to ban her from
reading it, are you?

Capt Nick Wright, LVO, Royal Navy,
Private Secretary to HRH The Princess Royal,
Buckingham Palace,
London SW1A 1AA
7th August 2005
Dear Nick,

Institutionalised Emotional, Mental and Spiritual Abuse of Young People in
British Olympic Sport

"If you have any concerns that a child may be experiencing any form of abuse,
it must be reported either to your appointed club officer or to the BCU Child
Protection and Harassment Officer. Alternatively, any concerns can be
reported to Social Services, the Police or NSPCC Childline on 0800 800 500."

British Canoe Union Poster

In May this year I became aware of what I believed to be the abuse of young
people within the British Canoe Union, which I duly reported. Because I was
aware of the wider implications I wrote to a number of people, including you.
You rightly informed HRH the Princess Royal and said that you would speak to
Simon Clegg.

On 16th July I replied to your letter, saying that I believed that The
Princess would be astonished by the turn of events. Those events took an
even more astonishing turn last week when the Board of the British Canoe
Union, with Albert Woods -its President - taking part, banned me from
membership of the British Canoe Union, without any hearing, for four years,
for ‘daring’ to write to people to express my concerns, despite
admitting having no procedures in place to examine the issue.

Albert is also the Vice Chair of the British Olympic Association and, in my
opinion, he has brought both the name of the British Canoe Union and the
British Olympic Association into disrepute, and I wish to bring a case
against Albert Woods with the British Olympic Association, to bring some
sense into the situation. I cannot go to Craig Reedie or Simon Clegg
because, as you are aware, they are involved. I would therefore ask you to
take the matter, with some urgency, to The Princess.

There may be an easier way. The Princess is, like her father, well known for
not suffering fools gladly, and for being somewhat outspoken. At the time of
an earlier Olympic bid, often quoted by Alan Hubbard of the 'Independent on
Sunday', The Princess was heard to call Seb Coe a 'prattling'. Her
sharp 'coaching' words seems to have helped to change Seb and, today,
he is a hero, after winning for London. I am sure that The Princess will
see that for Albert Woods to be involved in banning anyone for reporting
what they believe to be a case of child abuse, whatever methods they use,
deserves the award of the 'prize prattling' of the Olympic movement.
Perhaps, to save wasting more time, you could inspire The Princess to fire a
shot across Albert's bow, to prevent him facing a broadside from a
disciplinary hearing of the British Olympic Association. Who knows, The
Princess's sharp 'coaching' words might yet transform Albert into a
hero!! We will all be winners.

Yours sincerely,


David W. Train.

cc. Peter Luff MP., Lord Coe, Albert Woods, Paul Owen. Alan Hubbard. Craig
Reedie, Simon Clegg. BCU Board.




--