News Archive

Frequently Asked Questions

Do I need to be a member of the MAIA to become an accredited instructor?

No. Membership does, however, have significant benefits including substantial reductions in the cost of doing the accreditation course, access to and the support of the official representative body for Martial Arts in Australia and regular updates on legislation affecting martial arts.

How often are Accreditation courses run?

Accreditation courses are run according to demand. When a course date is set, information will appear on our “Latest News” page. To let us know that you would like to do an Accreditation course, please send an email to admin@maia.com.au and clearly advise:

  1. Your full name
  2. Your contact telephone number
  3. Name of the MAIA member in whose academy you provide instruction

When sufficient numbers are reached to conduct a course, you will be advised by email. Application forms can be downloaded from our ” Publications & Forms ” page.

What does the Accreditation course comprise?

Accreditation courses firstly require attendance at a lecture day covering the theoretical aspects of accreditation. There are a number of other requirements that can generally be completed where you live and teach. These must be completed within 6 months from the date of the lecture day. These additional requirements include completion of a written submission, completion of a video showing you instructing a class and completion of a Senior First Aid Certificate.

If I am qualified as a Cert 3 or 4 in Sports Coaching (Martial Arts) does that mean that I am accredited?

No. An ANTA based qualification does not, of itself, constitute accreditation but it can contribute towards gaining accreditation (see Australian Qualifications Framework Section of this site)

If I am not a signatory to the Code Of Practice for Martial Arts Instructors does it apply to me?

I would refer anyone who feels that the Code does not apply to them to read the comments of Barry Wollacott of the Slater and Gordon Legal Firm: ” Well if you say it doesn’t apply to you then you probably do so at your peril for the reason that once you have an industry Code of Practice set up, which is subscribed to by, you know, a reasonable significant number of organisations, then that starts to… if it’s a good code of practice and it’s clearly a code of practice which has the effect of reducing injuries, reducing claims and those sorts of things, then it’s only a short jump for plenty of lawyers for example to be holding that up as the… as the minimum standard that would be required, so if you’re not a signatory to the Code of Practice when you think that it doesn’t apply to you, then you’re probably going to be faced with the Code of Practice as a yardstick by which you’ll be measured and if you don’t at least have those minimum practices employed at your school/gym, then what you’re going to find is that you would be regarded as falling short of the relevant duty of care that would be applied to the reasonable operator of a martial arts school”.

What makes the MAIA the Peak Industry Body for example is there an Act of Parliament that does this and if not what?

No, there is no Act of Parliament that specifically makes the MAIA, or any other Industry Body, a Peak Industry Body but it is a fair question which in part in answered in the interview with representatives of the Slater And Gordon Legal Firm .

We sought an informed view from legal and insurance sources and then spoke with Warren Mitchell who was very helpful. Warren is Manager Industry Development for the Medical Industry Association Australia (another peak industry body) and a person with broad experience and knowledge in this area.

His view is that a Peak Industry Body should be able to say yes to all or most of these points.

  1. Is the organization referred to in any State or Federal Government legislation
  2. Does the organization have a history in the management, development and implementation of policies, procedures, programs and standards that have been applied within the industry
  3. Does the organization have significant industry representation
  4. Does the organization have in place mechanisms to receive input from industry participants and stakeholders
  5. Is the organization recognised by any State and/or Federal government agencies or Departments
  6. Has the organizations Code of Practice been referred to or applied as a standard in any local, district, high or supreme court action or decision
  7. Does the organization have, within its administrative structure, the capacity to source the appropriate specialist advise that it may need to formulate, revise and implement a standard, policy or code.
  8. Has the organization developed partnerships/working relationships with key industry stakeholders and/or organizations that can influence or dictate outcomes within the industry (eg insurance companies)

The MAIA can answer ‘yes’ to all of these points and there is simply no other organization that even comes close in its capacity to do the same.

Is accreditation compulsory or is it simply recommended? If it is compulsory, in what States and under what authority?

The need for accreditation varies from State to State and from purpose to purpose. For example you must be accredited in NSW to qualify for a Prohibited Weapons Permit from the NSW Police Service.

Many venue providers require accreditation before you can hire a venue eg PCYC’s in NSW and Qld, Many schools require accreditation before you can teach martial arts eg Dept Education NSW and Qld and the Catholic Education Commission and there are others eg Scouting Associations, YMCA’s etc. The thing is here that it is a list that will vary from month to month as more venues align themselves to this policy (and there will be a significant number of new venue hirers adhering to this policy in 2005-2006). One of the key driving factors here is the impact of proceedings within our courts.

There are two matters that I am aware of that are seeking to include venue hirers in lawsuits against instructors alleging negligence. The impact of this is that whether or not these actions are successful is not entirely relevant as the actions themselves strongly influence insurers and the venue owners to ensure that venue hirers have a minimum level of accreditation.

As the President of the MAIA I have acted as an expert witness in many court cases involving martial arts and so I am privy to what is happening in this area well before most others. It is this knowledge of these legal developments and their potential to adversely affect our industry that was the key driving forces behind the MAIA’s development of its ‘Accredited Instructors Only’ Policy – it is designed to keep you in business not out of business.

With regard to the ‘what authority’ part of the question – any venue hirer has the authority to set its own standards and that is what they have done.