20th February 2008, 10:56 AM
Cannot comment on welsh trusts as I have not worked there, and I agree that their needs to be good monitoring and action taken when lines are crossed(this is true right across the board and not when just concerning 'favored' units).
However, although I don't nessesarilly think that everything in the garden is rosy I do think that this discussion is in danger of becoming to pessimistic and assuming that alot of projects are awarded through the old trowel network. I have already outlined my opinions on 'favored' status between developers/ consultants and Units (council/ trust or private)but I think that their is a misconception of how councils award contracts - a curator has no power to award a contract to any unit - they are their to monitor standards and to look after the archaeology - by rights they should have no involvement in the actual contract side (I know this is idealised and fully expect a barage of yeh..buts). In fact from experience even 'in-house' council projects use external consultants to award the contracts (and boy was our tender scrutinised to the nth degree - probably as it should be). Most councils are audited regularly and have to be seen to be aiming to provide best value (a term to strike terror into any council employies heart) to the taxpayer. Basically this means having to justify every thing and being seen to be upholding the standards. Although, in know way do I think that this is always how it works, I do think that things do work like this most of the time. It was mentioned earlier that Councils monitoring their own units used to be regarded as lax but I don't think that this is predominantly the case anymore - generally the powers that be are a little more savy to this now and dont want to be open to accusations of nepitisim (sp?) etc and possible lawsuits.
However, although I don't nessesarilly think that everything in the garden is rosy I do think that this discussion is in danger of becoming to pessimistic and assuming that alot of projects are awarded through the old trowel network. I have already outlined my opinions on 'favored' status between developers/ consultants and Units (council/ trust or private)but I think that their is a misconception of how councils award contracts - a curator has no power to award a contract to any unit - they are their to monitor standards and to look after the archaeology - by rights they should have no involvement in the actual contract side (I know this is idealised and fully expect a barage of yeh..buts). In fact from experience even 'in-house' council projects use external consultants to award the contracts (and boy was our tender scrutinised to the nth degree - probably as it should be). Most councils are audited regularly and have to be seen to be aiming to provide best value (a term to strike terror into any council employies heart) to the taxpayer. Basically this means having to justify every thing and being seen to be upholding the standards. Although, in know way do I think that this is always how it works, I do think that things do work like this most of the time. It was mentioned earlier that Councils monitoring their own units used to be regarded as lax but I don't think that this is predominantly the case anymore - generally the powers that be are a little more savy to this now and dont want to be open to accusations of nepitisim (sp?) etc and possible lawsuits.