Guild of Battlefield Guides

[chrislock]

Thank you SG and coming from you I take that as a compliment but my problem remains. We have both discussed this at length in the past and it all ended for me when you explained that membership was by proposal only. This smacks of the old boy network and is partly why the GBG generates negativity in certain quarters. Why not open up to all from within and evaluate, encourage with full membership then being offered no less than many organisations do. It does feel like elitism! I also believe the Guild would do better if it would keep to it itself rather than often stating that only GBG badged guides are capable of creating and executing a battlefield tour and trust me, I have personally heard certain badged members state this on several occasions when advertising or offering their credentials. This is simply not true and is an insult to the many excellent un badged and independent guides operating around the battlefields today. We all guide as individuals but offer a common theme hopefully and I for one am happy with this. By the way I am meeting badge number 12 this evening for a beer or three and chat. I will pass on your salutations!

[Jack Sheldon]

Hi Chris. I should not get too wrapped around the axle on this business of 'proposal'. It seems clear to me that the Guild only wants experienced and practising guides to begin the validation process. In other words it is not intended as an association for those setting out on guiding. That said, it does not seem to me that it is intended to be exclusive; merely who better to comment on another's experience than a member and, should you wish to join, I am certain that the 'proposal;' business would be no more than a formality. Jack

[Tom Tulloch-Marshall]

Hi Chris. I should not get too wrapped around the axle on this business of 'proposal'. ... I am certain that the 'proposal;' business would be no more than a formality. Jack

Either the guild require a potential member to be proposed, or they don't. You can't have it both ways, and reference to "the 'proposal' business would be no more than a formality" is simply nonsense. What do you write on the application form under "proposed by" - "FORMALITY". The guild will just accept that will they ?

This proposal issue is one area where the guild is either making a rod for its own back, or it is purposely behaving like some sort of masonic brotherhood. If Joe or Jane Soap want to apply for membership then of what relevance is their being proposed by some already serving member ?

Do we have to be proposed to sit a driving test ? Do we have to be proposed to exercise our right to vote in local and national elections ? Do we have to be proposed to enrol in a course of further education ? (etc) - No. Do we have to be proposed to join the Freemasons - Yes.

The arguments for defined standards within the guiding fraternity are quite valid, but there is a right way of going about things, and there is a wrong way.

Tom

9-6-11.30.CEST

(Nb - if this post appears to be out of sync with any preceding posts, please be aware that it could have been delayed as I "... have been placed on moderator queue. This means that all content you submit will need to be approved by a moderator before it will be shown.")

[Guest exuser1]

On the way the Guild seems to be evolving ,I attended a meeting last year some where on the Western Front , the Guild attended in force to introduce itself to local B&B owners with a view to using them for future tours , the talk given was very interesting on a particular unit which served in the war , during the q&a questions were asked by the prospective Guild guides , after a few embarrassing questions the leader apologised and said "Sorry but for the for many of the prospective guides this was their first visit to the Somme " ! and they were mainly ex squaddies looking for a new career path .

[Tom Morgan]

On the way the Guild seems to be evolving ,I attended a meeting last year some where on the Western Front , the Guild attended in force to introduce itself to local B&B owners with a view to using them for future tours , the talk given was very interesting on a particular unit which served in the war , during the q&a questions were asked by the prospective Guild guides , after a few embarrassing questions the leader apologised and said "Sorry but for the for many of the prospective guides this was their first visit to the Somme " ! and they were mainly ex squaddies looking for a new career path .

Sounds like "military resettlement" training. I believe the GBG has links to a company providing such training.

Tom

[chrislock]

Hi Jack, thanks for that and I do understand where you are coming from however, I personally am still not comfortable with members having to be proposed firstly. To me that still feels as if this is the old boys network way of doing things rather than by simply on merit. Just my view but I do respect their internal rules and regulations providing their own agendas do not challenge the many excellent, professional and legal guides outside of their organisation who reside and work the battlefields. We are already governed by local and national legislation as legally operating businesses and we must comply with that legislation. Also if we cannot achieve the necessary level of competence without the need of a self valuating organisation proposing/discussing various UK or EU work remits on all of our behalves then surely we will fail anyway and our businesses will fold. The visiting public already has the ability to mark our sheet so to speak. If proof of this is required just simply look at our collective Trip Adviser and web site credits and that will surely confirm whether we all need to be managed, badged or un-badged. Just my views but I do wish the GBG much success from within no less than I wish those of us who choose to remain badge-less without interference from the Guild. Tom: good point I believe!!

[Tom Tulloch-Marshall]

Sounds like "military resettlement" training. I believe the GBG has links to a company providing such training.

Couple of interesting links of that type here and here.

As noted earlier, there are already some fairly hilarious stories in circulation about would-be guides visiting the Somme and having to ask how to get to the Thiepval Memorial (etc etc) - but of course many of these could well owe more to the anecdotal than they do to what might be factually correct.

I think that a big part of the problem here may be that this guild is an unofficial / private organisation and that the slightest (even) suspicion that "if your face fits" is the name of the game then it is going to be badly regarded by many in the guiding fraternity. The requirement to be proposed as a member rather points in that direction.

Tom

(Nb - if this post appears to be out of sync with any preceding posts, please be aware that it could have been delayed as I "... have been placed on moderator queue. This means that all content you submit will need to be approved by a moderator before it will be shown." )

[salientguide]

Couple of interesting links of that type here and here.

As noted earlier, there are already some fairly hilarious stories in circulation about would-be guides visiting the Somme and having to ask how to get to the Thiepval Memorial (etc etc) - but of course many of these could well owe more to the anecdotal than they do to what might be factually correct.

I think that a big part of the problem here may be that this guild is an unofficial / private organisation and that the slightest (even) suspicion that "if your face fits" is the name of the game then it is going to be badly regarded by many in the guiding fraternity. The requirement to be proposed as a member rather points in that direction.

Tom

(Nb - if this post appears to be out of sync with any preceding posts, please be aware that it could have been delayed as I "... have been placed on moderator queue. This means that all content you submit will need to be approved by a moderator before it will be shown." )

Well I must admit I for one failed utterly to understand or see the point of the anecdote. As far as I am aware and I think the links posted confirm it, the GBG provides no military resettlement training, that is provided by the company noted there. What point is being made about the GBG

And the "unofficial/private" organisation, what would that be then?

Possibly the organisation started by several senior and experienced members of the guiding industry, with the agreement and involvement of the most celebrated military historian of the time,a very active and involved patronProfessor Richard Holmes,

Whose president is now Professor Gary Sheffield, also a Western Front Association Vice president and eminent great war historian.

Now with 59 guides who have undertaken the accreditation process, passed nine assignments and acheived the status of badged Battlefield Guide , not just been "awarded" it.

Whose membership of those who wish to be associated with the Guild now exceeds 250.

Who have links with the All Party Parliamentery War Heritage groupand European travel associations.

Whose officers and executive committee,( yes self appointed at the beginning 10 years ago, come on catch up, because that is how every organisation starts,), are now elected by the membership at their very succsessful annual AGM weekend.

How "official" do you want to be and what woud that officialdom consist of then?

I much respect Chris Locks principled stand that he does not like the principle of being proposed. It is not rigidly enforced but I accept that. Otherwise most views seeking to belittle the work and achievements of the Guild are petty tosh mostly by those with an axe to grind for one reason or another.

The suggestion of EU regulation caused some incandesent rage here, with most immediately assuming the GBG was driving that, which it is not. If you dont like the message--

don,t shoot the messenger-- but be aware somewhere these ideas are churning around. And if they do surface how are you going to express your views against it? As part of a like minded professional movement which will have contacts and a voice in influential circles related to battlefield guiding.? Or do you think the EU is going to look on the GWF and pull out a few of your names at random as likely good chaps to seek your views on?

It is a shame that what shoud be a friendly association of like minded colleagues and professionals immediately prompts such irrational bilge from within?

Regards SG

[Tom Tulloch-Marshall]

Well I must admit I for one failed utterly to understand or see the point of the anecdote. As far as I am aware and I think the links posted confirm it, the GBG provides no military resettlement training, that is provided by the company noted there. What point is being made about the GBG ...

Taking your second point first. I don't think anybody is claiming that there is a direct commercial link between the G of BFGs and the training company TGT+V. The director of TGT&V is one of the earlier badged members of the G of BFGs but that, and other connections, is probably just coincidental.

The point which (I believe) he was making is that G of BFG members have reputedly been appearing on the battlefields on organised recces showing a level of knowledge about WW1 which has been ... not of a very advanced level (to put it very mildly). I was not at the meeting specifically referred to so I cannot report directly on what was said, but reports of these visits are legion. I repeat what I said in post # 32 - these could well owe more to the anecdotal than they do to what might be factually correct.

The tone of the remainder of your mailing (#33) is rather strident, and I would suggest that whilst you have every right to be a member of this organisation of 59 "badged guides", you should - 1) respect other's rights not to associate themselves with it, - 2) stop trying to big-it-up into something it isn't.

Tom

(Nb - if this post appears to be out of sync with any preceding posts, please be aware that it could have been delayed as I "... have been placed on moderator queue. This means that all content you submit will need to be approved by a moderator before it will be shown." )

[Guest exuser1]

Out of the 59 guides who have taken the test how many are employed as full time guides ? as stated earlier the question I would ask is where on the list are the names I would expect to see who are the top in their fields , and as to the anecdote it was witnessed by me earlier this year .

And as to the Guild being some self appointed body to regulate the guiding to areas of conflict ,when I passed my exams in electrical engineering it was with a government appointed institution not a dining club .

[Tom Tulloch-Marshall]

... And as to the Guild being some self appointed body to regulate the guiding to areas of conflict ,when I passed my exams in electrical engineering it was with a government appointed institution not a dining club .

The "self appointed" element is maybe inevitable as it is unlikely that the government or some other "official" authority is likely to set up some similar accreditation system. Having said that the guild does rather fall into the same class as, say, a political party set up by some like-minded people who quite naturally believe that their own views are the only ones which are right and proper. History tells us that that is a far from reliable situation.

The "proposer" issue has to be a sticking point, and whilst recognising the dangers of anecdotal evidence being regarded as fact; if there is much truth to the reports being circulated about the knowledge levels of some guild members then universal respect is not gong to be the outcome.

Tom

(Nb - if this post appears to be out of sync with any preceding posts, please be aware that it could have been delayed as I "... have been placed on moderator queue. This means that all content you submit will need to be approved by a moderator before it will be shown.")

[Willywombat]

...It seems clear to me that the Guild only wants experienced and practising guides to begin the validation process. In other words it is not intended as an association for those setting out on guiding. That said, it does not seem to me that it is intended to be exclusive; merely who better to comment on another's experience than a member and, should you wish to join, I am certain that the 'proposal;' business would be no more than a formality. Jack

You are right that the "proposal" is little more than a formality. It's no more than many organisations have and is just there to ensure people have a genuine interest and not joining on a whim, only to leave shortly afterwards.

However, as to the Guild only wanting experienced and practicing guides to begin validation - not really so.

I joined after volunteering to organise trips for my local WFA branch (no-one else was daft enough). I had been a few times before, but only with friends, and the "guiding" aspect was little more than knowing where the B&B was! I then used the validation process as a means to learn how to research, organise and deliver a tour. I am now badged, but does that mean I'm the best guide out there? Far from it! In fact, I'll probably be the one asking where Tyne Cot is! . The proposal was no problem - I simply went along to a Guild weekend, met the then secretary to whom I had spoken on the phone, was introduced to a few people and very quickly found myself amongst friends.

More than anything, though, what the Guild does for me is provide the opportunity to meet, and learn from, far more accomplished guides than I will ever be. There are one or two retired Colonels for sure, but many, like Salientguide, have no military connections and everyone, without exception, has been friendly, welcoming, and fully supportive every time I have asked for advice and help. That may not be for everyone - some may feel they are admitting some sort of weakness by asking for help, (or, indeed, may not need it). For anyone with an open mind and a willingness to learn, though, the networking and fellowship provided can't be beaten. I'd be very nervous of ringing up a random guide out of the blue to ask his advice on touring a particular area - he might think I'm trying to poach his business. If they're a fellow member of the guild I don't have that worry and know I'll get a positive and welcoming response.

The Guild also organises educational weekends and recces, where an accomplished guide, knowledgeable about a particular subject, battle, campaign or area, will take other members along and share his knowledge. I attend every one I can and learn a huge amount.

All I would say is: take it for what it is. Don't expect individual badged guides to be experts in anything and everything - they're not and don't pretend to be. But whether you're just starting out in guiding, or an accomplished guide who doesn't mind sharing ideas and resources, it's a great organisation to belong to.

[Cormorant]

Having been pointed in the direction of this thread, I have just read through all the previous comments with some interest.

Firstly, thank you to Chris B and to Jack Sheldon for their measured comments. There are good guides and bad guides and the vision of those who founded the Guild was simply to try to raise standards of guiding. We have all overheard guides of the 'why spoil a good story with the facts' variety and if, by being a member of the Guild, guides are encouraged to think a bit more about their craft then that surely can be only a good thing.

As far as membership is concerned, it splits roughly 50-50 between civilian and military - and often one doesn't know which is which - so it certainly isn't solely an ex-military club. There are many ex-teachers so Alan you would not feel out-numbered and I would be happy to propose you (no doubt salientguide might second). Nor is the Guild simply an 'old-boys club' since at least 10% of the members are female. That may seem low but then there aren't that many female guides around.

The discussions salientguide mentioned as taking place are with the European Tour Operators Association. Whether we like it or not, that organisation is looking at some form of regulation for guiding in Europe.

Finally, someone mentioned that he knew 'plebs' who had been turned down for 'badging'. The only pre-requisite for entering the Guild Badge validation programme is previous guiding experience. I can only think that the so-called 'plebs' had no previous such experience.

A Badged Guide of the Guild of Battlefield Guides.

[chrislock]

The discussions salientguide mentioned as taking place are with the European Tour Operators Association. Whether we like it or not, that organisation is looking at some form of regulation for guiding in Europe.

You have missed it! We established European guide companies/guides are already operating as legal. We are registered as per the rules and legislation stipulated by the countries we reside and work in. We are also tax registered here and for some of us, we are also recognized and recommended by the local authorities applicable to us. Does this scenario not fall into your statement "some form of regulation for guiding in Europe"?

[Kate Wills]

Are guides appointed to cover one area of expertise?

[Cormorant]

I don't think we are at cross-purposes. I suggest you look at the European Tour Operators Association website to see what they are working on - for those of us who are guides from an EU country where tour guiding is not a regulated profession eg UK but who wish to work in countries where it is regulated.

As far as your earlier comments about proposal etc - as Willywombat says above it is really no great hurdle. Prospective members are invited to attend a Guild event before applying to join in order to see if they like what they see and wish to become part of it. If they do and want to join then any member may endorse their application form. Why don't you come to a Guild event?

[chrislock]

Excellent question Kate!

[Chris_Baker]

I happen to be Chartered Engineer by profession. Not that I have engineered anything for many years, but that is another story.

The various UK engineering institutions

- require a prospective member to be proposed by existing members;

- are self-regulating;

- set the standards for accreditation;

- grant that accreditation if a member reaches a certain set of standards.

They too have a dreadful tendency to blazers and ties, but that is another story too.

It just struck me that they are not so dissimilar to what is being discussed here. No one forces an engineer to become chartered. Many do not. But would you stand on a bridge designed by a mechanical engineer or built by a civil engineer that wasn't? Or operate machinery not designed by the best qualified engineers and whose operation was not planned by the best qualified production engineer?

You may well bump into an unqualified engineer who asks the equivalent of a "where is Thiepval", but that does not mean that the qualified engineer does not know.

What is the difference?

[Sly]

Hi,

We established European guide companies/guides are already operating as legal. We are registered as per the rules and legislation stipulated by the countries we reside and work in. We are also tax registered here and for some of us, we are also recognized and recommended by the local authorities applicable to us. Does this scenario not fall into your statement "some form of regulation for guiding in Europe"?

I totally agree with Chrislock, regulations already exist in each country and you are supposed to submit to them in the country where you live and work, aren't you ?

Sly

[inkerman]

The GBG is, whatever it's faults, a better network for guides than Linked in. It is an honest attempt to set a standard and to encourage professionalism amongst guides. I am one of the retired officers who seem to have been the target for criticism on this site, but I have never witnessed anyone deliberately snubbed or ignored, rather help and advice has been freely given.

You may feel that it is not for you, and that will not alter your guiding abilities one little bit, but I do suggest that you try it first - you might enjoy it when you get there!

Yes, I am a member of the GBG.

[Willywombat]

Are guides appointed to cover one area of expertise?

It depends what you mean by the question. Are you asking if the Guild badge is awarded for "expertise" in one field or many? (I've just not heard the word "appoint" used before in that context).

If so, then I can answer that some guides are specialists in one area and choose to complete the assignments for the badge in that area alone. No-one is expecting a guide to have a huge spread, from medieval, through Great War and up to and including Iraq and Afghanistan (although a few do!). A guide may choose what area he/she wishes to be assessed on and completes the assignments accordingly. Having said that, a badge would be hard to get if one was a "one-trick-pony" and a broad knowledge of the chosen area(s) would need to be demonstrated.

As an example, I did some assignments on various battles and actions of the Great War, others on the Anglo-Zulu war. I'm no expert in either, but worked hard and researched such that I satisfied the validators. I could have chosen one or the other and stuck with that, but I wanted some variety in different areas that interested me.

The process is no secret and set out on the website: http://www.gbg-inter.../path_badge.htm

[SWorrall]

Member of the Guild, see my signature block, but not a 'Badged' member.

SG is quite correct in recognising the vast quantity of uninformed opinion being passed off as fact against the Guild here. Dealing with some of the points in posting order:

the Guild makes no claims to be a regulatory body. What it offers is a mark of competence to those who wish to go down that route.

Mark H: contact me if you wish to join?

Tom T-M: No-one has been 'turned down for badging'. That's a fabrication. No-one has been refused entry or been made to feel 'in' or 'out' for any reason.

Sly: What gives the right to work in the EU? Residency in the EU does that. Not Guild membership. No-one is exempted from legislation by wearing a pin, but the Guild does offer guidance to members about certain aspects of the laws of other nations they may work in, which be very diffferent to what they are used to at home.

Chris L: ETOA is pushing an agenda that everyone working as a 'guide' (in any field of endeavour) within its competence (i.e. the EU) will have to undertake some form of assessment of their competence to be entitled to use that title. In certain EU countries the title of Guide is awarded by law as a mark of distinction after many months or years of formal training. The UK does not require that, at present. If ETOA has its way then there will be a standard set to attain if one wishes to work as a 'guide'. The ETOA is looking at the Guild Validation scheme as an exemplar of how such an assessment scheme will work. So the Guild is assisting ETOA as a business partner. It is not pushing the agenda, which has come from with ETOA itself. There is something to be said for the idea, by bringing citizens of countries having no requirement to assess up to a universal standard. When you hire an accredited Guide you will know that they meet a certain standard of competence.

Proposal is not subject to a vote / blackball / rejection along the lines of a Fraternal Society such as the Freemasons. It's more that someone can vouch for you being whom you say you are and that they have explained the benefits and costs of membership to you, so that you make an informed decision to join or not. It was explained to me that being a battlefield guide was not a quick path to instant riches, for example. My reason for becoming interested was seeing a number of unguided school parties touring the Somme being hustled from place to place at high speed and being told a complete load of tripe by the teachers in charge. I just thought 'there has to be a better way than this'.

Tom: It is a membership organisation and needs to keep records of its membership. It is not a masonic brotherhood, so there are no background checks, no CRB check, no vote on the person's application to join. I speak as a Freemason of nearly 9 years. So I know whereof I speak.

Chris L: TripAdvisor is unreliable as a source of information. It has been exposed recently that quite a number of entries have been gerrymandered by the outfit being commented upon doing a favourable job upon themselves or by their friends and relations. Conversely unwarranted bad comments from a rival, under a nom-de-plume, can damage a reputation.

where is the register of those at the 'top of the field'? Can I examine it? Certainly the Guild makes no claim to be the arbiter of that.

Tom: If the ETOA, as may happen, forces the creation of a pan-EU register of Guides who have earned the right to that title by formal assessment and periodic re-assessment, what will 'guides' from the UK do to express their opinion? Who will represent them? If they become unqualified as a result, by refusing assessment, what will become of them then?

Sadly, I do not expect that anyone will leave their entrenched and fortified position as a result of my explanations above. There are some who seem to regard themselves as so superior as to not need any independent assessmernt of their capabilities. They feel that they are so far advanced in the practise of their craft that they resent any idea that they might benefit from Validation of the superior quality of their work. These are not Guild members, but rather those who seek to denigrate an organisation which seeks to raise standards, by disseminating an unfavourable opinion of it.

Regards to all,

Simon.

[chrislock]

Positive and worthy points concerning GBG membership and rightly so but here is the rub. If the GBG have a policy of admission by proposal only then that is up to them but this is not for me. We professional un badged guides/companies established in Belgium France and elsewhere must and do operate already legally and by regulation. Surely GBG members on this site do not have a problem with that?

Apart from the above, any worthy company will offer the public tools such as Trip Adviser etc for our clients to post their thumbs up or thumbs down? Surely that is what you call regulation also!

I guess a lot of this negativity is possibly due to the fact that the guild seems at times to feel they are qualified to speak on behalf of all of us when in reality, we professional non GBG guides are already regulated and registered and fill a place in the guiding world and I for one, my boss and the other guides we employ from time to time recognise this.

One day if the GBG does open up it's membership by merit or review without proposal then I would consider applying however, I still feel strongly that at times the GBG seem do seem to feel they are able to or must speak on behalf of others who are not from within their fold. That is a shame as there are some truly superb, established un badged guides working the battlefields and long may they continue without badges if they so wish.

Fascinating thread this one.....

[Willywombat]

If the GBG have a policy of admission by proposal only then that is up to them but this is not for me....

....there are some truly superb, established un badged guides working the battlefields and long may they continue without badges if they so wish.

See my previous post about proposal - it's a formality. Anyone who turns up to a GBG event will very quickly find many people ready to propose/second them. It's simply not an issue. I didn't know anyone in the Guild before I joined, apart from one chap who had come to speak at our WFA branch.

As regards your last point - I wholeheartedly agree! They may, just may, be missing out on some fantastic learning and development opportunities, though!

[SWorrall]

Surely GBG members on this site do not have a problem with that?

Apart from the above, any worthy company will offer the public tools such as Trip Adviser etc for our clients to post their thumbs up or thumbs down? Surely that is what you call regulation also!

I guess a lot of this negativity is possibly due to the fact that the guild seems at times to feel they are qualified to speak on behalf of all of us when in reality, we professional non GBG guides are already regulated and registered and fill a place in the guiding world and I for one, my boss and the other guides we employ from time to time recognise this.

One day if the GBG does open up it's membership by merit or review without proposal then I would consider applying however, I still feel strongly that at times the GBG seem do seem to feel they are able to or must speak on behalf of others who are not from within their fold. That is a shame as there are some truly superb, established un badged guides working the battlefields and long may they continue without badges if they so wish.

Fascinating thread this one.....

The Guild has never claimed a monopoly on Guiding, or sought to assert control over the guiding community.

TripAdvisor does NOT constitute regulation in any way shape or form. Regulation means a professional body having authority to enforce rigorous standards and discipline, or even strike off a person from a profession.

Guides in the UK, and in many other contries, are not regulated at all, nor are they registered. It is this which creates tensions abroad when a body of Guides in a regulated and registered country see others not subject to the same controls on 'their' territory. The putative ETOA scheme will go quite some way to redressing that imbalance and is to be welcomed. The fact that someone seeking to set up a formal Validation and continual assessment scheme is looking at the Guild Validation as a model template ought to tell you something positive about the nature of Guild Validation.

If the Guild were to shift to a membership model by merit who will assess whether that merit reaches the required standard? Who sets that standard? Why not just adopt the Validation model as it already exists? If it is to be by review without proposal: Who will initiate the review process? How will membership be established? One would still have to initiate the process of joining by contacting them. All that you have done is take away the sole checkpoint about identifying the candidate and letting them make an informed decision about what the Guild stands for and the positives and negatives of joining.

The Guild does not seek to speak on behalf of non-members at all. It cannot do so. But as the sole body (at least in the UK, and having members in many countries) representing the interests of battlefield guides it is uniquely placed to get involved in matters of interest to the guiding fraternity as a whole, and to become involved in giving them a voice. The fact that the UK Commission planning the UK commemorations of the Great War has a Guild member at their meetings gives the Guild, and (only by implication) the entire guiding fraternity a say in influencing the outcome. Salientguide was correct to point out that bodies involved in planning and organising matters like these find it easier to involve a semi-representative body than to try and select at random from a place like the GWF.

As regards your last: "there are some truly superb, established un-badged guides working the battlefields and long may they continue without badges if they so wish", I agree with statement & the sentiment. But what if ETOA forces all into a Validated scheme by enacting EU law? And what about the many charlatans, who demean the reputation of the good ones by implication? How do you deal with them? In an un-regulated job-market they have as much right to call themselves 'Guides' as do the best in the job.

I welcome the friendly spirit in which we can debate this without rancour, please try to make sure that it continues and the earlier heated opinions can give way to an exploration of fact, not rhetoric.

Simon.