The Fifth Estate: Upcoming Examination of Scouts

thats probably what it is, someone who was in scouts did something while they were not.... hope its nothing serious, and that we have a coordinated response to it everywhere

Working in an industry that has come under investigation by W5 I think it is best that we just let SC do their due diligence and get legal advice, etc. before we jump to conclusions and make a lot of comments. We can count on W5 doing a follow up and taking comments from here for their investigation (and likely out of context)

Everything will come to light eventually and likely will not cause a big stir outside of the scouting community

Southpaw,

I work in the media and have/still do public relations/media relations work. As I've watched Scouts Canada react to similar situations, they've failed to follow standard crisis communications practices. My hope is that they've learned from the past and make a concerted effort to get their message out as quickly and accurately as possible.

Apparently, they will be talking about incidents from the 70's and 80's. Things were handled differently back then. Why bring it up today?

Apparently, they will be talking about incidents from the 70's and 80's. Things were handled differently back then. Why bring it up today?

Good question. A basic tenet of journalism is "what's new?" The only thing I can see, from the promo, is that these "lists" of Leaders have now come to light. SC will be held to the same fire as the Roman Catholic Church and those involved with the residential school system: if you knew about this abuse, why didn't you do something about it?

My quibble is with people trying to rewrite history and apply today's standards to yesterday's actions and mores. While abuse at any time is wrong, criminal and a tragedy, we have, as a society, handled it differently in different eras - whether that way of handling things have been right or wrong. SC has to be bold in proclaiming regret for past actions, clearly explain what steps it took to change this situation and boldly promote what our current practices are to protect our youth.

Apparently, they will be talking about incidents from the 70's and 80's. Things were handled differently back then. Why bring it up today?

They spent 3 years witch hunting the Canadian military trying to prove them out to be war criminals guilty of torture. But the witch hunt failed when it was proven they were doing the complete opposite. So now they have to set their attack sights on something else with the word 'Canada' in it.

Apparently, they will be talking about incidents from the 70's and 80's. Things were handled differently back then. Why bring it up today?

Good question. A basic tenet of journalism is "what's new?" The only thing I can see, from the promo, is that these "lists" of Leaders have now come to light. SC will be held to the same fire as the Roman Catholic Church and those involved with the residential school system: if you knew about this abuse, why didn't you do something about it?

My quibble is with people trying to rewrite history and apply today's standards to yesterday's actions and mores. While abuse at any time is wrong, criminal and a tragedy, we have, as a society, handled it differently in different eras - whether that way of handling things have been right or wrong. SC has to be bold in proclaiming regret for past actions, clearly explain what steps it took to change this situation and boldly promote what our current practices are to protect our youth.

Robert, you said this very well. The BSAC of the 20th Century is not anything like the SC of today, and that is, of course, how national should handle this (as you have pointed out). BSAC made the same mistakes that the Catholic, Anglican and United churches made in the Residential School scandal. Let's face it, any organization that dealt with kids was utilized by predators. SC just has to be straight up about it, say that they dealt with the problem, and that we don't sweep the crap under the rug anymore, and haven't done so for a very long time. Actions speak louder than words.

we don't sweep the crap under the rug anymore

Not trying to insinuate or suggest anything, but we need to be careful between what we know and what we hope...

• We know the procedures national dictates for adult screening are much more comprehensive.
• We don't know that they are followed by all leaders. I know that nine years ago I was never properly interviewed, nor were my references checked. The same screening rules were in place as there are now.
• We don't know that national is not sweeping stuff under the rug.

We hope all the above is taking place correctly, but we do not know.


Allan.

Well, 5 years ago I was interviewed and all my references checked. I would hope all groups do this now.

we don't sweep the crap under the rug anymore

Not trying to insinuate or suggest anything, but we need to be careful between what we know and what we hope...

• We know the procedures national dictates for adult screening are much more comprehensive.
• We don't know that they are followed by all leaders. I know that nine years ago I was never properly interviewed, nor were my references checked. The same screening rules were in place as there are now.
• We don't know that national is not sweeping stuff under the rug.

We hope all the above is taking place correctly, but we do not know.
Allan.

Allan, let me remind you that anyone with a computer can read the messages on this Forum. The kind of statement that you made here is way out of line and a very serious accusation. I suggest that you remove it from the Forum yourself bu deleting the message...be careful in what you say; perhaps the fact that you were not properly interviewed and your references not checked could just be grounds for terminating your membership..."sleeping dogs..."

The kind of statement that you made here is way out of line and a very serious accusation.

I didn't make any accusation, I was just stating that we should differentiate between what we know and what we hope. Perhaps there should be additional checks and balances in the system. Lets take the very hypothetical case where a group chair wrote down that references were checked, but never actually did call the. How would that ever be caught in the current system?

perhaps the fact that you were not properly interviewed and your references not checked could just be grounds for terminating your membership

My current group chair is always welcome to interview me and check my references. In fact, anytime a new group chair takes over, I would think one thing they might want to do is interview each leader and check their references. They are putting themselves on the line, they might want to be sure they are comfortable with their leadership time. I didn't do that when I took on our group chair role, but looking back I probably should have given subsequant issues.

..."sleeping dogs..."

Wouldn't that be akin to "sweeping under the rug"? Not that I think you would ever do such a thing, especially where the safety of the kids might come into play.

It seems to me that we have nothing to fear but a slanted story. We all know that at the first whiff of anything improper we must report it, the individual/individuals are suspended and an investigation takes place. We also know that we have had mandatory Police Records Checks in place for many years, we interview and we do reference checks. Once someone is in, we have Duty of Care which is taught in our training and discussed in new leader orientation and if I am not mistaken referenced in our annual renewal verbiage. Two deep leadership, never alone with a child etc. etc. Not sure what other preventative measures could be taken.

As to secret files, we don't have any. We do have a file of people not allowed to join/rejoin Scouting as a result of a PRC hit or the result of an investigation. For obvious reasons, the names are maintained as appropriate from a prIvacy perspective. I have never heard of files kept of people because of rumours or innuendo and as a Council Commissioner I would know otherwise. I also know we do not just rely on a police investigation which may find someone not charged or found not guilty. A leader who puts youth at risk by not following our policies is dealt with and that alone can be grounds for dismissal and banned from rejoining.

It is sad that even with the above we have had very isolated instances where a bad apple got through and it is indeed tragic if that led to anything improper with our youth.

The 5th Estate will do what the 5th Estate does. Hopefully to credit us with our advanced policies but I am sure they would not be running the story if that were the focus. I think we need to see what the story is and then as an organization, decide how best to respond.

I THINK SOME OF YOU HAVE POSTED SOME GOOD ADVICE. ANYTHING WRITTEN HERE
CAN BE CUT AND PASTED AND USED OUT OF CONTEXT. NATIONAL IS AWARE OF THE
5TH ESTATE'S ACTIVITIES. WE HAVE BEEN FORTHCOMING WITH SHARING OUR
POLICIES AND PROCEDURES.

LET'S NOT GIVE THE 5th ESTATE WORDS THEY CAN DISTORT TO SUPPORT A BIASED
STORY BY ENDING THIS DISCUSSION UNTIL WE SEE THE SHOW AND NATIONAL'S
RESPONSE.

And on that note, can this thread be locked?