What's not good is the suggestion that the BMFA insurance scheme will probably not cover unregistered people who are attempting to make an insurance claim - the insurers will refuse the claim because, 'the flyer was unlicensed and therefore operating illegally.'
This takes away one of the major incentives for joining or remaining in the BMFA: many lone flyers only pay their BMFA subs in order to be insured; the only other tangible benefit to most of them is the BMFA magazine - and that's not good value for money.
Members of BMFA affiliated clubs will most likely continue to pay their BMFA subs so they can remain in their clubs - but they will be paying for insurance that's now worthless to them. There's a chance that their clubs will force them to register or leave the club because, "the club can't tolerate uninsured flyers."
So it's yet more counter-productive outcomes from introducing this mad scheme:
- There will be more uninsured flyers than there were before.
- Some people will drop out of clubs and the BMFA, because their club forces out any members who refuse to register.
- Some of those drop-outs will give up the hobby: others will continue to fly, but uninsured and away from affiliated clubs.
- BMFA membership will decline.
- Club membership will decline.