constitute an archaeological police force

[dmama]

yep i think i hit it on the head with offwaff.yet again we're going round and round. why are we so reticent to have an independent body made up of experienced and qualified members of our profession. not purely consultants, developers, units etc but a body made up of the lot where anyone can have a say. perhaps like a guild as architects or designers or lawyers etc...? forget the ifa or their ilk. we need something with teeth that can ultimately be respected and have authority. a body that even the lowly can have a voice not just the developers poodles.

[Marcus Brody]

The obvious reason why this type of thread descends into waffle and circular arguments is that unless people are willing to act as the 'Archaeological Sweeney' for free and in their own time, someone has to organize it and someone has to pay for it, and then everyone else has to accept its bona fides and agree to abide by its findings. Without a clear route by which these things can be achieved, even the best idea is just so much hypothetical chatter.

[dmama]

The obvious reason why this type of thread descends into waffle and circular arguments is that unless people are willing to act as the 'Archaeological Sweeney' for free and in their own time, someone has to organize it and someone has to pay for it, and then everyone else has to accept its bona fides and agree to abide by its findings. Without a clear route by which these things can be achieved, even the best idea is just so much hypothetical chatter.

bingo!!! so where do we go from here???

[Wax]

One thing we all could be doing is speaking out against the undermining of the local government curatorial services that is currently gaining momentum around the country. Make no mistake without the curators setting the archaeological conditions as part of the planning process there will be no archaeology apart from the occasional university or local community group dig. We are rapidly heading back to a planning free for all with no curatorial overview. Does anybody know what the state is across the country, how many curators have we lost how many H.E.Rs are under threat?

Before we look to a new archaeological police force lets look after the one we have got.

[kevin wooldridge]

Wax is right...we should be looking after our curators. letting our elected representatives know we care!!

I have recently been presented the opportunity by my local county council to comment on their plans to amalgamate (and to my mind emasculate) the archaeology service, the county records offices and the county 'folk' museum into a staff-lite heritage 'hub' as they describe it. My response was to tell them to preserve the best (the archaeology service and the records offices) and to cut the rest (the 'folk' museum). It kind of felt a little like that movie 'Sophies Choice'. I don't hate the 'folk museum' but from a pragmatic point of view if one of three had to go, I know I'd prefer to see an active curatorial service preserved in its entirety even if it's at the expense of some very nicely reconstructed IA round houses. I await the outcome of the consultation....

[Wax]

Does anyone, the IFA, ALGAO, etc have the figures on the job cuts for heritage in local government? I would include conservation officers in this as many of them have been working well with curatorial archaeologists and once they have gone the two way working relationship goes, with archaeological conditions on modifications and demolition to standing buildings disappearing from the system.

[kevin wooldridge]

Rescue have been monitoring the job losses across all sectors for the past 18 months. Check their website....

[Wax]

Thanks Kevin, it makes depressing viewing and is probably just the tip of the iceberg

[Jack]

And yet, in a parallel universe, architects perform the 'equivalent' role to the consultant: even though paid by the Employer (i.e. client/developer) they are independent and administer the contract in a fair and impartial manner, and yes sometimes the employer does try to stitch up the contractor, as well as t'other way round. As I droned on about before, cover a lot more than the Building Control (or Planning) officers. In principle there is no reason why the archaeological consultant cannot act in a similar manner. However, the big difference is that the Employer/client actually wants a building built, often (but not always) to the best possible quality (but usually for the lowest possibe price). Generally the employer does not particularly want any archaeolgical work done.

In building control its the insurance companies that enforce standards by proxy, because of the potential lawsuits if the building falls down.

No one but the curators enforces archaeology.

[the invisible man]

Not quite. Building Control is the department in a local authority that administers and enforces the Building Regulations which (unlike archaeology) are statutory. (yes, there are independent BC persons and it is possible to self-certify but there's no need to complicate the issue here). Building Control officers visit sites and inspect work at the appropriate stages. They inspect 'plans' submitted before work ever starts on site. They do not however have anything to do with 'quality' - if it complies with the regs then that is the end of their remit. Compliiance withe the contract is for someone else - typically the architect, and hence the ananolgy that I draw.

I have never seen an insurance person on a building site, and never had to submit drawings or specifications to an insurance company, although it is quite likely that a building built without the appropriate consent wouild not be deemed to be insured, in the same way as your life or your car is not insured if you fail to declare something that you should. Of course buidling professionals will carry PI and PL insurance which is not quite the same thing.