16th April 2007, 12:38 AM
hmmmm....upon reading your response I can see that we do not actually disagree as I shall briefly discuss below (with parenthetical cross referencing!):
I agree that IF more enforcement powers where made available (see point 1. above) and were used in conjunction with the RAO scheme as you describe it would undoubtedly have the biggest and most beneficial effect on the market. The reason this would happen is because hardworking curators like your good self would be doing this across the country (see points 2. and 3.) and therefore acting as market regulators (see point 4. and my posting previous to that).
Therefore the impact you describe is one undertaken by curators within a framework of guidelines (IFA) and legislature (gov't...we hope), but as you have said it is the curator who is the active party, which is why I ascribe such importance to their actions and their effect on the market. As you yourself said, if you can pester units into better compliance now, which does affect costs (in my job I tender for work across the country and can often see the effects on the market price levels being correlated to the local curatorial attitude and their level of resourcing), then imagine the effect if all curators could regularly invoke the powers of enforcement in the way you described....which is precisely the point I was trying to make; thank you for putting it so well.
don't panic!
I agree that IF more enforcement powers where made available (see point 1. above) and were used in conjunction with the RAO scheme as you describe it would undoubtedly have the biggest and most beneficial effect on the market. The reason this would happen is because hardworking curators like your good self would be doing this across the country (see points 2. and 3.) and therefore acting as market regulators (see point 4. and my posting previous to that).
Therefore the impact you describe is one undertaken by curators within a framework of guidelines (IFA) and legislature (gov't...we hope), but as you have said it is the curator who is the active party, which is why I ascribe such importance to their actions and their effect on the market. As you yourself said, if you can pester units into better compliance now, which does affect costs (in my job I tender for work across the country and can often see the effects on the market price levels being correlated to the local curatorial attitude and their level of resourcing), then imagine the effect if all curators could regularly invoke the powers of enforcement in the way you described....which is precisely the point I was trying to make; thank you for putting it so well.
don't panic!