The aim of this recommendation is to allow celebrant associations to establish a planning team of local marriage celebrants to host information sessions with representatives of Relationship Education Services, Legal Services and marriage celebrant groups.

It is recommended that funding for marriage information sessions for the general public be provided to CoCA associations.

These sessions would focus on information about the different styles of marriage ceremonies, the importance of marriage and the support services available to support marriage. It would:

• Encourage prospective marrying couples to use the services of a marriage celebrant who is a member of a celebrant association, recognised religion, or registry office.
• Maximise the services of celebrant associations in hosting information sessions on marriage to the community.

Cost Recovery

Some of various stakeholders in this exercise already receive state or federal funding for these roles. Part of the fee proposed via all marriages or all marriage celebrants as outlined in Recommendation 13 would assist increasing community information about marriage and both civil and religious marriage celebrants.

Read more … see TABLE OF CONTENTS

4.1 Fit and Proper Persons

The aim of this recommendation is to determine the suitability of the applicant for the profession PRIOR to commencing any course of celebrant training.

It is recommended that some parts of the current Fit and Proper Person criteria be applied to those wishing to become civil celebrants.

This would involve gaining information on:

• The reasons the applicant wants to be a marriage celebrant,
• What knowledge, skills and personal strengths the applicant would bring to the role,
• Their understanding of the need for a professional attitude to the work, and;
• Their levels of literacy and numeracy.

This process would ensure;

• Applicants can make an informed decision about this career choice. (Not all Registered Training Organisations (RTO)’s highlight the disadvantages of being a marriage celebrant).
• Applicants are clear about the importance of the role, including ‘Conflict of Interest’ provisions.
• There would be a reduction of the time and money used by MLCS in approving appointees that are likely to be unsuitable, and
• There would be a reduction of the time and money wasted by applicants being trained for a role for which they are unsuitable.

This is an important government role, the process of supervision should ensure the applicant is the one who applies and does the training, not some other person assisting them.

Cost Recovery

It is envisaged that full cost recovery would be obtained from the pre-training and appointment process. The person seeking the training and subsequent appointment would pay a fee for this determination.

4.2 Implement a Suitability Course.

It is recommended that consideration be given to develop and implement a suitability course.

CoCA has commenced discussion with Australian Skills Quality Authority (ASQA) on this concept. It may be smilar to the suitability course provided to other professions such as the police. According to ASQA, some regulated industries, such as Security, require an applicant to pay a fee at application for a criminal check (along with other requirements.)

Given that the Certificate IV qualification when taught properly is a big investment in time and money, an applicant who was not suitable would be saved the expense and time of the training. It would also increase the chances that a successfully trained celebrant would then offer a range of ceremonies to support their civil marriage celebrant role.

Cost Recovery

It is envisaged that full cost recovery would be obtained from the applicant at various stages of the pre-training and appointment process. The person seeking the training and subsequent appointment would pay a fee to complete the suitability course.

Read more … see TABLE OF CONTENTS

It is recommended that the Attorney General, in aiming to increase professionalism of marriage celebrants and ensure the ongoing viability of the Commonwealth Marriage Celebrant Program be guided by the following principles:

1. A professional model of celebrancy as “professional ceremonialists” is the most appropriate model upon which to base the future development of celebrancy.
   
   The definition of a professional ceremonialist is a person who adheres to high ethical standards.
   
   They uphold themselves to, and are accepted by the public as possessing special knowledge and skills in creating appropriate dignified and meaningful ceremonies to meet the needs of individuals, couples, families and communities and use key elements of ritual and ceremony.
   
   In the provision of their marriage services, they exercise their knowledge and skills to meet the requirements of the Commonwealth Marriage act 1961 and its Regulations.
   • a.    Increasing professionalism requires strengthening those characteristics associated with the traditional meaning of the word '‘profession”. (refer Appendix A)
   • b.    Business skills are required of all independent professionals, but that does not define them as only businesses. Considering celebrancy as a small business only, ‘unprotected’ by government and regulated by market forces for a once in a life- time event is not appropriate because that approach has not worked. Many celebrants do not consider themselves a small business and do not operate as such.
   • c.    It is not appropriate for a government program based upon government appointment
   • d.    The original program with a set fee model remains inappropriate as the role requires, under the Marriage Celebrant’s Regulation Code of Practice (37L), the delivery of personalised ceremonies. Thus remuneration needs to be tailored to the level of work done by the celebrant, the worth of the celebrant’s skills and resources, and their costs in providing their assets and services.
     
     
     
2. Acknowledging and respecting that marriage celebrancy services are part-time services for most marriage celebrants.
   • a.    Any fee needs to be based upon the capacity of marriage celebrants to make income from marriage work alone, not be subsidised by other means of income. The vast majority earn a part-time income at the most. Thus cost recovery needs to be set at a level commensurate with part-time work.
     
     
3. A limit to the number of celebrants on a regional basis.
   a.    to ensure the Marriage Celebrant Program serves the community in providing a stable system of competent independent marriage celebrant services in an equitable manner.
   b.    to ensure the sector continues to increase in professional development of services – rather than becoming a “revolving door” of brand new inexperienced celebrants replacing older still relatively inexperienced marriage celebrants, with an annual massive loss of people’s time, financial and other resources.
   
   
4. Utilising existing systems and services in training, education, administration, resource delivery.
   a.    to maximise the competence and professionalism of celebrants entering the Marriage Celebrancy Sector and to retain experienced competent celebrants.
   b.    to ensure that marriage services delivered by all marriage celebrants (Recognised religious, BDM staff and independent Marriage Celebrants) are of a high quality.
   
   
5. Ensuring that the majority of the work done by the MLCS is in line with its primary national role in making law and marriage law policy decisions.
   a.    To ensure that the implemented measures will increase the professionalism of all celebrants, without causing financial hardship to existing celebrants.
   b.    MLCS will continue to provide indirect, supportive services, not direct services.
   c.    to ensure the Marriage Act and Regulations are administered by the MLCS nationally in an equitable manner across all jurisdictions, and reviewed regularly.
   
   
6. Making the MLCS effective in quality and cost efficient in utilising state of the art computer and IT based systems.
   a. to minimise staffing and manual labour, and not duplicate knowledge and skills available in other sectors such as Registry Offices and Celebrant Associations
   b. to provide statistical information on a range of items.
   
   
7. Fees charged to Civil Celebrants must be directly related to work that is done for the MLCS’s compliance responsibilities
   a. cost recovery for appointments of new marriage celebrants needs to be obtained from those applying for authorisation
   b. costs for all other functions of the MLCS that can be related to all marriage celebrants need to be recovered from all celebrants, not just Commonwealth appointed marriage celebrants.

Cost Recovery:

Cost recovery needs to ensure the most effective and efficient use of the overall system of delivery of marriage services to the whole Australian community, by utilising the various stakeholders according to their primary role, their expertise and practical experience in delivering marriage services.

Read more … see TABLE OF CONTENTS

CoCA has previously approached the AGD/MLCS for funds to support the CoCA associations and their delegates.

This recommendation is to support that application with the following:

It is recommended that the AGD/MLCS provide funds to support CoCA for the following:

• With assistance to upgrade the CoCA website
• With travel equilisation
• With a salary for a part-time person to resource CoCA
• Recommendation 12

CoCA is committed to maximising the services of celebrant associations in providing advice and support to MLCS, BDM’s and the independent celebrant community and to promote maximum involvement of all celebrants. Financial and other support from AGD/MLCS would aid them in this vital role.

Cost Recovery

As per Recommendation 13

Read more … see TABLE OF CONTENTS

The purpose of these recommendations are to streamline the process of support for celebrants, especially as regards legal matters. It can be split into two levels.

It is recommended that in the event of a celebrant contact to any source, in the first instance:

• All celebrants to be asked whether they have made reference to the Explanatory Material, When Words are Not Enough, the Marriage Act and the Marriage Regulations, the Fact Sheets and other information available inside the Celebrants Only Section of the website.
• Then contact the BDM who will be registering the marriage for clarification.
• If the question asked is not covered by the Explanatory material and/or BDM advice appears contradictory, the celebrant raises the matter via their celebrant association or requests the BDM raise the matter with the “Expert Resource Team” on their behalf.
• If no answer is forthcoming within a reasonable period of time, then the celebrant may contact the MLCS.

This will enable the front-line services to refer the more difficult matters to the Expert Resource team for advice. It will also ensure:

• The most efficient and cost effective support service for celebrant support is available and to enable services such as the BDMs and Celebrant Associations who provide marriage services, to deal with the first level of celebrant enquiries.
• Promote the use of celebrant associations and thus to minimise the work load of the BDMs and MLCS.
• Less of a workload on part-time marriage celebrants and minimise distress and hardship on couples by having both standard and expert advice systems clearly identified.

Cost Recovery

As per Recommendation 9

Further Explanation:

• Note: Prior to 2003, it was rare for a celebrant to contact the Marriage Celebrant Section of the Attorney General’s Department. Celebrants contacted the appropriate BDM for advice or their celebrant association.
  
  Almost all problems were resolved this way. Occasionally the BDM or the celebrant or a celebrant association would contact the Department for advice.
  
  Also prior to 2003, celebrants paperwork was of a much higher standard than that of the Recognised Religious Celebrants.
  
  Thus the new system of low training standards from 2003, high celebrant numbers compounded greatly by the insistence of the MCS that all celebrants contact the Deparment, has created the current problems and work-load of the MLCS.
  
  It is unfair to expect celebrants to now pay for increased staffing to fix the problen of 18,000 enquiries pa.
  
  This CoCA submission proposes a systems approach to solve these problems by changing the recommended process, backing that up with an Expert Panel to deal with the more difficult problems, from which new resources can be developed, along with the other strategies proposed in this document.

Read more … see TABLE OF CONTENTS

The aim of this recommendation is to assist MLCS and other areas in minimizing the number of unnecessary contacts made to these areas.

It is recommended that:

• A resource team made up of MLCS legal staff, BDM representatives and celebrant association/CoCA representatives be appointed to handle difficult questions/situations.
• The role of this panel would be to:
• To examine the more tricky questions that come in via celebrant associations or BDM
• Provide a team approach to problem solving.
• To request the AGD to contact the relevant embassies etc as required
• To document the findings into Fact Sheets or Information Sheets as matters are resolved.
• Be a resource group for Prescribed Authorities
• It is envisaged that this panel would be a closed in-house web-based forum inside the upgraded MLCS website.

It is suggested also that a MLCS legal officer would be assigned to 2 or 3 associations as the contact for queries. This would ensure the most efficient and cost effective support service for celebrants is available to all. It would also promote the use of celebrant associations and thus minimise the workload of BDM and MLCS.

It is further anticipated that it would minimise the workload on part-time marriage celebrants and enable couples to have both standard and expert advice readily and clearly identified.

Cost Recovery

MLCS, BDMs and celebrant associations are already devoting time to address celebrants queries and needs for clearer information. No extra cost should be involved – rather less as these groups efforts would be coordinated and streamlined to improve efficiency an quality.

Read more … see TABLE OF CONTENTS

The aim of this group of recommendations is to ensure that the proposed upgrade to the MLCS IT infrastructure is cognizant of the requirements of the celebrant users of the system.

8.1 Requirements for Data analysis and planning.

The aim of this recommendation is to ensure that the new system can cater for the data requirements of celebrants and the need for access to statistical data for planning, record keeping and compliance purposes.

It is recommended that

• CoCA be consulted as regards what data MLCS is proposing to store for planning, program review and compliance needs.

CoCA has expressed to the MLCS, a need for statistics on marriage and marriage celebrants in the areas of compliance, national and regional statistics related to marriage and marriage celebrants and other relevant information. It is vitally important for CoCA to be included in the planning phase to ensure the statistical information required will be available.

8.2 Celebrant Only Section.

The aim of these recommendations is to ensure that the new system can cater for all classes of marriage celebrants to access easily and update details as required and assist with streamlining the work required to confirm celebrant compliance with their obligations and the Code of Practice.

It is recommended that:

• All marriage celebrants have the ability to login to a secure portion of the new system via an easily understood web portal environment.

This section will allow a celebrant access to their own personal information, as well as contain restricted information such as celebrant only Fact Sheets, Bulletins, OPD information and other information.

It will also allow celebrants to:

• Update their contact details
• Provide annual statistics on number of weddings performed and where
• Provide evidence of their professional attitude and duty of care and
• Confirm compliance with OPD and other matters related to the Code of Practice.

This should allow MLCS to track marriage celebrant progress through their 5 year compliance review. Thus it should allow for an administrative officer to take less time when addressing the compliance of a particular celebrant, and enable email confirmation of requirements to and from celebrants to MLCS.

This will encourage professional attitudes and behaviours as well as promote the learning of computer skills in the celebrant community, either with association memberships or through OPD training.

8.3 General Public Section.

The aim of this group of recommendations is to ensure that the national register of marriage celebrants contains information pertinent to all aspects of marriage celebrancy, from information about training to finding the right celebrant.

It is recommended that for celebrants:

• The national register contains celebrant details of suburb/region, phone and email contacts.
• It also contains language skills and association membership or religious organization affiliation where applicable.

It is considered that these measures will better assist couples to find the right celebrant for them, and will encourage association membership.

It is recommended for the marrying public that information is provided on:

• The different types of celebrants
• The different types of fee structures
• Information on how to choose a celebrant
• Relationship education
• Press releases

This information will:

• Inform and educate the marrying public and the media about a range of matters related to marriage.
• Encourage stable loving long-term marriages
• Focus on the importance of the Marriage Ceremony as the one essential and key element of a wedding day.

It is recommended for prospective celebrants that the site provides information about:

• The celebrants role, and especially the independent civil celebrant role.
• The characteristics, values, skills and resources one needs to be a competent celebrant
• The disadvantages as well as advantages of being a celebrant.
• Financial resources needed to set up a celebrancy practice
• Step by Step Process of how to apply
• A listing of CoCA and Celebrant Associations

This will assist prospective celebrants to assess their motivation, general knowledge, interests, health, resources (financial and otherwise) before commencing the pre-training suitability process.

Cost Recovery

See Table Recommendation 13

Read more … see TABLE OF CONTENTS

It is recommended that a self-funded uniform pre-appointment assessment process of knowledge and skills by interview be provided. This would ensure:

• a uniform high standard of entry for all independent marriage celebrants
• a qualitative baseline for trainers qualifications to provide training with the VET system, and
• a measure against which existing celebrants could be tested as part of their OPD in a 5 year review cycle.

CoCA recommended a Pre-Appointment Assessment Process be established and presented a model for such a process at the October 2010 AGD-CoCA meeting.

It is believed that some of the benefits of this process would be to:

• Address problems with the variable outcomes of the knowledge and skills of graduates of the VET system.
• Strengthen the perception that the Marriage Celebrants role is an important one requiring more than just passing a course.
• Provide an opportunity for a celebrant to become a CoCA accredited celebrant if the celebrant successfully passes this testing.

Please refer to Appendix 2 for the document presented in October 2010.

Cost Recovery

Cost recover for this recommendation would be recovered from the applicants for appointment.

Read more … see TABLE OF CONTENTS

The aim of this group of recommendations is to strengthen the training process at all stages, to improve the knowledge and skills of marriage celebrants, to increase professionalism, and to minimise MLCS staff time in addressing compliance.

5.1 Different approaches to training for different roles.

The aim of this recommendation is to improve the knowledge and skills of all classes of marriage celebrants (Commonwealth & state, religious and civil) who conduct marriage ceremonies.

It is recommended that:

• Civil marriage officers in Registry of Births Deaths and Marriages (BDM) and Court Houses – complete 2 of the compulsory legal units of the Certificate IV in Celebrancy.These would be: CHCCEL402 A Maintain knowledge of the legal responsibilities of a marriage celebrant, and
  CHCCEL404A Plan a marriage ceremony in line with legal requirements.
• Ministers of religion in recognized denominations – complete 2 of the mandatory legal units of the Certificate IV in Celebrancy. These would be: CHCCEL402A Maintain knowledge of the legal responsibilities of a marriage celebrant, and CHCCEL404A Plan a marriage ceremony in line with legal requirements
• Independent religious celebrants – complete the 4 mandatory legal units of the Certificate IV in Celebrancy and 1 of the compulsory core units which would be CHCCEL401A Work effectively in a celebrancy role.
• Independent Civil Celebrants – complete the Full Certificate IV in Celebrancy

All marriage celebrants are required to meet the same standards for legal registration of Marriage Notice, Verification of Identity etc.

It has been noted by state BDM’s that errors in legal paperwork are generated as much by Ministers of authorized religions as by other Coalition of Celebrant Associations groups. It would seem appropriate therefore that all celebrants complete some level of legal training.

Independent religious celebrants are more comparable with recognized Religious celebrants in that the Marriage Act grants the non-aligned religious marriage celebrant the right to conduct the form of the ceremony according to the precepts of their religious organization, thus they may not require as much training in ceremony.

Civil Marriage Officers in BDMs offer a limited range of ceremony options, thus do not need to tailor ceremonies to the specific needs of their couples. Their physical resources also limit what they are able to offer.

5.2 Upgrade training of Civil Marriage Celebrants.

It is recommended that two additional units of study be added to the core competency skills and recommend two particular electives if the trainee has no prior business experience.

The two units recommended to be added as Core Units are:

• CUSMPF303A – Prepare for Performance. (or a similar unit that relates to voice and delivery).
• CUFWRT301A – Write content for a range of media. The two recommended electives if the trainee has no prior business experience are:
• BSBSMB405A – Monitor and Manage small business operations.
• BSBSMB406A – Manage small business finances.

The Code of Conduct states that the ceremony must be heard, thus skills in vocal delivery are vital. Although this topic is touched on in the current core units, it is not considered strong enough to apply competency in ceremonial delivery. Similarly, if the celebrant is to develop a personalised ceremony for a couple, high levels of skill in writing prose and correct use of language are also paramount.

Approximately 70% of applicants do not have a business background. The celebrant needs to conduct some basic monetary exchanges for their work and to ensure this is accurate and appropriate. Course notes should recommend these two electives if the trainee has no prior business experience.

5.3 Use the services of ASQA to strengthen training in the VET system.

It is recommended that CoCA and the MLCS utilise the new national training authority, Australian Skills Quality Authority (ASQA) to strengthen the training of celebrants by the VET system. ASQA are responsible for mandating national Literacy and Numeracy (LLN) skills. MLCS and CoCA can work with ASQA to ensure:

• National Standards for Trainer Qualifications – Experience as a celebrant a must (varies each state)
• Time Frame – Set minimum time for the course eg VIC UNI = 800 hours
• Registered Training Organisations (RTO’s) – if not doing the course, to take it off their scope and/or check the currency
• Competence testing to be reviewed.

According to ASQA, and under standards for National Vet Regulation (NVR), RTO’s are required to have a process and mechanism for providing students with information about the training, assessment and support services available. Support services include LLN. RTOs have a responsibility to assess a student’s level of LLN for any program in which they enrol.

Whilst literacy and numeracy (LLN) is a complex area, as the Celebrancy qualifications is at Certificate IV level, it is assumed the student has a level of literacy and numeracy to complete – and the RTO needs to assess this accordingly. RTOs need processes in place to ensure LLN is appropriate to the level of study the student is undertaking. This is an area that ASQA audits under our Standards for RTOs. The obligation is on the RTO to comply.

If a student hasn’t got the level of LLN appropriate to the Certificate IV qualification, one has to question how they are able to complete the qualifiction.
ASQA has also advised CoCA that the Certificate IV in Celebrancy needs a lot more work on specific assessment requirements and critical aspects of evidence. CoCA will commence discussions with the specific Industry Skills Council to address this issue and be recommending that the MLCS work with CoCA on the appropriate legal and other units.

5.4 Upgrade skill levels for trainers of the Certificate IV Course

The aim of this recommendation is to ensure high standards for trainers of the Certificate IV in Celebrancy course.

It is recommended that current and future trainers will need to achieve the following:

Current Trainers:

• MLCS to conduct a knowledge and skills assessment of all current trainers to gain MLCS approval to teach the Certificate IV in Celebrancy core and mandatory units.
• The MLCS assessment would require; a current Curriculum Vitae, proof of their status as a marriage celebrant, proof of having conducted a minimum of 10 weddings in the previous three years and proof of their qualification in Workplace Training and Assessment and the Certificate IV in Celebrancy.
• MLCS approval to be re-assessed every five years. NB in the initial period the Pre-Appointment Assessment process could be used as part of the MLCS assessment procedures

Future Trainers:

• Mandatory requirements for trainers will be:
  • Certificate IV in Celebrancy (including funeral units)
  • Certificate IV in Workplace Training and Assessment
  • Experience in the elective units
  • Proof of status and experience as above.
  • Approval from MLCS as a trainer.

High trainer standards will ensure higher levels of training competency which should flow on to the quality of the training being delivered to aspiring celebrants. The current rate of three weddings in two years does not provide sufficient experience, practical knowledge and competency as a marriage celebrant, and consequently, as a celebrant trainer.

A professional ceremonialist, having a broad celebrancy skill set (as provided for in the compulsory marriage units training package material) will be able to offer a full range of ceremonies. This will also reinforce the knowledge and skills in ceremony design and delivery, working with couples and families and many other common aspects of delivering a marriage ceremony.

Cost Recovery

Applicants for approval by the MLCS to deliver the Marriage Celebrant electives of the Certificate IV in Celebrancy would be required to pay for the assessment of their skills.

5.5 Audit of Registered Training Organisations

It is recommended that Auditors of RTO’s be provided with the results of pre-appointment skills and knowledge assessments. This concept is being discussed with ASQA. General auditors do not have celebrancy knowledge.

Cost Recovery

Unless otherwise stated above, costs for this set of recommendations on Training would be recovered from the applicants and the various bodies in the state and federal system responsible for the planning, delivery and evaluation of the VET system.

Read more … see TABLE OF CONTENTS

CoCA recommends that the following 6 main principles be used by MLCS in the consideration of Conflict of Interest:

1. A professional is expected to be impartial in advice/ service giving. Thus a celebrant needs to be at arm’s length from any related activities.
2. The other activities of a professional can harm the public perception of the profession.
3. Free and informed consent to choose a celebrant must not be hampered by the actions of the celebrant’s other activities.
4. A celebrant’s other activities or roles must not impact on their ability to fully and competently prepare and deliver a marriage ceremony.
5. The benefit from another activity must never outweigh the benefit from the celebrant role (esp. financially), tempting the celebrant to take shortcuts or to act illegally.
6. A professional is expected to have some motive involved in their work, beyond their
   own personal needs celebrant.

CoCA considers that ensuring stricter Conflict of Interest Guidelines would increase professionalism and decrease the number of people entering celebrancy, who assume they can combine a function in an industry related to weddings with being a marriage. Please refer to Appendix 5  for further information.

Cost Recovery

If clearer and stricter guidelines were available and implemented, then the time spent by the MLCS in answering enquiries, appointing celebrants and monitoring their compliance and dealing with complaints would be minimized. Thus cost recovery expenses would impact less on celebrants and marrying couples.

Read more … see TABLE OF CONTENTS