8th July 2005, 10:48 AM
Quote:quote:Originally posted by achingknees
C Kid
Can understand the frustation of the above statutary pipeline excavations. Just a thought - perhaps you should be barking at the utility company and/or consultant? It's possible that the unit was in a difficult position re client confidentiality?
Consultant? I doubt there was one - the report says nothing. The utility companies should have voluntary agreements to consult, arranged through ALGAO. They sometimes do, sometimes don't - it's all very hit and miss, as voluntary agreements often are. I will be reminding them of this though. The unit on the other hand, is supposed to be governed by the IFA Code of Conduct regarding the archaeological work they undertake. I wouldn't expect the confidentiality concerns to apply, because as a statutory undertaking by a public body, there's no need for it. And why so cagey if the work's all being done properly? As I said - it's a courtesy to let us know, so we can try and apply the general good practice principles across the board. And that includes independent monitoring. The local society is happy to produce method statements for us to see and advise on before they do any work even though they don't have to - it's a pity that some of the professionals seem to think that they are above the goodwill practices needed to make the whole creaking system hang together.
The really amusing thing is that there wasn't anything there - something I knew already and could've told them before any watching brief took place - if they'd bothered to ask.
