13th April 2007, 11:40 AM
The White Paper is a bit of a red herring in this thread really as any benefits it brings will have little effect on field archaeology and field archaeologists. A beefed up PPG16 may, if indeed that is what we get - rather than a watered down - streamlined PPS that serves a developers agenda. It is true that curators police standards on the ground and also true that our powers are limited in this respect - that said enforcement action is not a complete rarity in the region in which I work. Developers and consultants also seem to be realising that cheap ain't necessarily always that cheerful when planners are unwilling to discharge conditions due to shoddy or incomplete work. However Hurting Back your comments that curators hold the key to costing is only a half truth - in so far as there is a link between the price of something and its quality. However, it is not our role to comment on cost, only content and compliance. As such we cannot and should not be seen to 'regulate the market'.
Not really a 'pot person'.
Not really a 'pot person'.