Anyone who has ever blogged will understand the joy of receiving comments and emails based on your latest post. I have about 50 subscribers but I do know that every now and then my posts get circulated - especially when I talk about my soon to be new friend jungle jim (who seems to be active again, I've
missed him).
I got an email from someone (I'm going to call him Albert) who has an incredible insight into the ABVA/SANAS relationship. I didn't get Kevin's last response, to me the behaviour of ABVA was its own issue and problem. However it seems as though SANAS has made certain demands on ABVA that might impact on the behaviour of ABVA's various members. You decide:
"There is no doubt that SANAS is involved somewhere. They are on a power trip second to none. As I hear from the people who applied for accreditation, and some of them have had as many as four inspections to date and some have spent in excess of R100 000 on the process (this does not include development costs for systems, only fees paid to date!), SANAS nitpicks and require a system which has a higher standard than that required of Chartered Accountants.
There is no doubt in my mind that the so called 'Guides' owe their existence to the over zealous and hidebound slavery to rules and ISO systems according to which SANAS want to bind everyone ( Remember their only experience to date has been the accreditation of Laboratories where ISO works well). Some of their requirements for the Verification industry are simply ludicrous and will not withstand examination. It seems that they dream up new rules and committees every night. I think it is a case of -'I like blue and therefor everyone should wear blue and be damned with the rest, I say do it!' The gods have spoken. They are clearly operating to a set of rules which they really do not have the authority to set. ABVA and its members either no not have the guts or will to stand up to them because they are afraid of not gaining Accreditation or the do not have the ability or authority as an association to say -'Enough is enough"- and take on SANAS with reasonable arguments.
I agree that going for Bernard will serve no one. He was clearly sacrificed by his friends. If he is guilty, and I don't think that he is, it is probably because he may have disseminated the 'guides', and thereby done all of us a favor.
A little bird tells me that quite a substantial number of the so called 'Full Members' of ABVA may not in fact have paid there dues for the current year. One wonders if they are then still in fact members or if their membership on record is kept in place simply to allow ABVA to claim a representative role. Is it not time for a new Broad Based Association to come into existence and really represent the industry in its widest sense? They can then speak for the Verification Agencies /and/ the Consultants (perhaps with one Board and two chambers to ensure that everyone works towards the same ideals and some synergy will be seen. This will certainly serve all."
Albert also sent me this document - which is a later version of the October document I posted last time. It still has cwu as the author. Albert writes
For your information I attach a copy of another version of the fateful 'Guide for Verification Agencies' which no-one wants to own up to.This one is dated 30 November 2007. It is also circulating in the Verification industry and at one time seems to have been accepted as the latest 'Word From Above' by some. It is clearly a later version of the 'October Guide' and may even have the same author. According to the 'Copyright Policy' on page 2 it clearly purports to belong to the dti who have now disavowed it.
Thanks Albert - I know that Kevin was very keen to read your comments.
Comments