+- BAJR Federation Archaeology (http://www.bajrfed.co.uk)
+-- Forum: BAJR Federation Forums (http://www.bajrfed.co.uk/forumdisplay.php?fid=3)
+--- Forum: The Site Hut (http://www.bajrfed.co.uk/forumdisplay.php?fid=7)
+--- Thread: CBA - Making Archaeology Matter and PPS5 (/showthread.php?tid=3586)
CBA - Making Archaeology Matter and PPS5 - BAJR - 15th November 2010
Recently, the CBA have launched the Making Archaeology Matter strategy document... to what extent does PPS5 require the Heritage Bill to ensure that adequate protection is in place, and indeed is it already there. There is also this statement:
Quote:As we all know, now is a time of economic upheaval:
Now more than ever the development of a strong, knowledgeable and skilled community of archaeological champions and enthusiasts is vital for the continued development and protection of archaeology. Without dedicated and passionate individuals, the recording and investigation of archaeology could become neglected with vital, irreplaceable, information being lost forever. We must also ensure that heritage does not slip from the public funding agenda in a tough economic climate.
- Developer-funded archaeology is under extreme pressure with thousands of archaeologists facing the prospect of losing their jobs and then leaving archaeology altogether.
- Heritage protection has been pushed down the list of priorities for national and local government as they struggle to slow the economic downturn with ever-dwindling budgets.
My bold - This is a quote from the CBA site. http://www.britarch.ac.uk/supportus/makeitmatter
The document can be downloaded from here:
http://www.britarch.ac.uk/news/101110-launch
The real question is to what extent this view of governmental cuts will affect the commercial sector.
With PPS5 there does seem to be already a protection to the system of development control archaeology, but is it strong enough, and to what extent does the cuts that will occur to groups like English Heritage, Local Councils and the Voluntary Sector (like the CBA) affect the commercial groups.
Do you think the statement that thousands of jobs are at stake is true?
Do we require a rethink of the curation and development control aspects of UK commercial archaeology?
There are currently many councils receiving advice from commercial companies... is this fair? Desirable? viable?
In terms of PPS5, the statement
Quote:73. Compliance with the PPS policies requires local planning authorities to use experthttp://www.english-heritage.org.uk/publications/pps-practice-guide/pps5practiceguide.pdf/
advice to inform their decision-making where the need to understand the particular
significance of a heritage asset and any proposed impact demands it. This may be from
in-house experts, experts available through agreement with other authorities, or
professional consultants. This advice may be complemented by advice from heritage
amenity societies, including the National Amenity Societies.
Expert advice: general points
74. Local planning authorities, developers and other stakeholders with an interest in the
historic environment will often find it useful and/or necessary to seek the advice of
appropriately qualified and experienced individuals or organisations. This may be, for
example: to inform the plan-making process, to provide advice on the significance of a
heritage asset, or to undertake an archaeological survey.
75. There are several established registers that can be used to identify appropriately
qualified individuals or organisations. Though not exhaustive, the list below may be
helpful:
This may be a good place to start from