UKPSF statement on Covid19 situation

[Tom]

The UKPSF have posted details regarding when sites would be able to reopen for business .... Unfortunately that’s not yet:


Hi Guys

let me open with an apology from the UKPSF for the radio silence when it comes to posts on here or in fact any other Facebook Page.

While we may not have been doing any posts we have been working hard in the background on a range of things.

Over the last few weeks we have produced 2 documents to help our site members get ready to open when government guidelines permit.

Therefore, we ask our site members to please check your inbox (the email will have gone to the inbox of the email you used when you signed up to the UKPSF) and you will find an email with 2 documents attached for the sole use of UKPSF site members.

The 1st is our UKPSF and Covid-19 document produced with help from members that kindly responded to our request for input.

The 2nd document is a Covid-19 Risk Assessment that has been produced by an external consultant in conjunction with the UKPSF.

In addition to the 2 documents the UKPSF has also been trying to get clear guidance on when our industry can reopen:

• We have contacted relevant authorities; this includes those tasked with enforcing lockdown measures such as Local authorities, environment health departments and the police
• We have contacted city and county councils.
• We have been in touch with our contacts in the insurance industry.

Getting a written response from any of the above has proved to be difficult but this afternoon we had a call back from a Senior Environmental Health Officer, they are one of the departments tasked with enforcing the current legislation.

We discussed at length our industry and the work the UKPSF had done to ensure our members were ready to reopen.

However, despite all of this work he informed me that based on current legislation, he firmly believed that our industry must remain closed.

The phone call was followed up with an email where he wrote:
“please refer to the latest amendment to the restrictions regulations at http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2020/558/contents/made which state that the activities described in Schedule 2 part 2 paragraph 19 need to remain closed. Funfairs (whether outdoors or indoors) [F2, theme parks and adventure parks and activities].”

The amendment he is referring to happened yesterday (1st June 2020) where the wording “theme parks and adventure parks and activities” was added to clause 19 on a document that lists businesses that must remain closed, previously clause 19 had only mentioned funfairs.

Obviously we needed to do our own research, please find below what we found.

Link 1: http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2020/350/note

This link will take you to the explanatory notes that support the key document where it says “These Regulations require the closure of businesses selling food or drink for consumption on the premises, and businesses listed in Part 2 of Schedule 2, to protect against the risks to public health arising from coronavirus, except for limited permitted uses.”

Link 2: http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2020/558/contents/made

This link will take you to the most recent amendment mentioned to us by the Environment Health Officer, the key bit being point (9) (a) (ii ) where is says (ii) in paragraph 19, at the end, insert “, theme parks and adventure parks and activities.”;

Link 3: http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2020/350/schedule/2

This link will take you to the main document where you will find schedule 2 mentioned in the email from the Environmental Health, Part 2 mentioned in our 1st link and paragraph 19 mentioned in link 2.

Finding this information was not straight forward and we can totally understand why some of our members have taken the most recent easing measures as the green light to consider opening there venues in the coming weeks.

Based on today’s conversation and subsequent legislation research the UKPSF believes that our members should keep their venues closed until the current legislation is amended to permit adventure parks and activities to open.

Rest assured this really was not what we wanted to find but please try and remember the UKPSF is merely the messenger.

Opening too soon and in breach of government guidelines and legislation could have a devastating and a long lasting negative impact on our industry and your business.

As is always the case if you can legitimately challenge what the UKPSF has found then please do but until then, Stay Closed, Stay Safe, be #paintballstrong.

Regards
Don Logan
Chairman of the UKPSF

https://www.facebook.com/289385814510830/posts/2990774814371903

 

[ant290]

This is exactly the kind of information we need to be coming from our governing body. One solid contact point which has the voice of the industry in the UK behind it.

Obviously not the message we want to have, but good to get clarification on it regardless.

 

[James ECI]

This is exactly the kind of information we need to be coming from our governing body. One solid contact point which has the voice of the industry in the UK behind it.

Obviously not the message we want to have, but good to get clarification on it regardless.

Its a reason enough that players should be members

Funny to see sites starting to release dates for walkons etc - least now we know they shouldnt be doing this.

 

[Tom]

Its a reason enough that players should be members

Funny to see sites starting to release dates for walkons etc - least now we know they shouldnt be doing this.

If dates were published up to yesterday then they were probably in line with advice, they had an update and change of guidance from government yesterday

 

[James ECI]

If dates were published up to yesterday then they were probably in line with advice, they had an update and change of guidance from government yesterday

I still think it jumped the gun - If i wanted to i could have said UKWM will be open for a July date but we wont.

 

[ant290]

Its a reason enough that players should be members

Although I wholeheartedly support the UKPSF, and certainly was a member when we used to play NSPL.... I think this is reason enough for SITES to be members, as this directly informs them as to what the situation is, removing the need for them to do the due diligence on that.

Having just looked and seen the membership fee is £5 a year that is a drop in the ocean that it costs to play paintball, however it needs to be pushed for when you go to play... it would be a small increase to the cost of your first walk on to then be able to book in with your UKPSF number. I appreciate that they are working for the whole of the industry and that includes players... but there needs to be a reason to get it... even if that reason is as simple as... you cant play a walk on without it, or you can't purchase a marker in the UK without it. I don't have the answer here, but it needs to be enforced somehow to make people bother to sign up.

 

[James ECI]

Although I wholeheartedly support the UKPSF, and certainly was a member when we used to play NSPL.... I think this is reason enough for SITES to be members, as this directly informs them as to what the situation is, removing the need for them to do the due diligence on that.

Having just looked and seen the membership fee is £5 a year that is a drop in the ocean that it costs to play paintball, however it needs to be pushed for when you go to play... it would be a small increase to the cost of your first walk on to then be able to book in with your UKPSF number. I appreciate that they are working for the whole of the industry and that includes players... but there needs to be a reason to get it... even if that reason is as simple as... you cant play a walk on without it, or you can't purchase a marker in the UK without it. I don't have the answer here, but it needs to be enforced somehow to make people bother to sign up.

We had the mandatory debate a couple years back on facebook. Never went anywhere

 

[ant290]

We had the mandatory debate a couple years back on facebook. Never went anywhere

Even though you are in such a prime position to help with it... would there really be that much backlash from players of the UKWM to have it?

 

[James ECI]

Even though you are in such a prime position to help with it... would there really be that much backlash from players of the UKWM to have it?

Theres no central system... how do you police it... how do you know who has what....

I've not got time to police and run a league seeing as I actually have a proper job which keeps me gainfully employed

 

[ant290]

Theres no central system... how do you police it... how do you know who has what....

I've not got time to police and run a league seeing as I actually have a proper job which keeps me gainfully employed

Perhaps the answer we need then is, for the UKPSF to have a system where players can be looked up ( by pre-validated sites who are also members ) which makes that process achievable during events sign up.

Perhaps even it costs £10 a year... and the UKPSF fund the member of staff on the day that goes round with their player list and checks them all in?... could be the same person who checks all the bottles are in date. wont need that level of commitment at smaller walk-ons as players can be checked on arrival.

I know i'm just a keyboard warrior here, but if you want sign ups, you need to be present... which they have openly admitted they have not been on Facebook (which is where all of the events get displayed, the vast majority of community content is produced, and a large part of sales get made)