17th June 2008, 04:09 PM
It would be nice to think that half a dozen or so ex archaeologists, developers or experienced arbitrators would give their time either on a voluntary basis or for minimal fees. Where would the inevitable costs be raised from? Perhaps the board could be set up as a charity or gain funds from central government, i'm really not sure!
To put it simply I would just like to ensure fairness and transparency in contentious issues such as complaints and don't believe that there is any solid evidence to prove that organisations such as the IFA can supply this in fact there is a clear opinion that they can't and don't amongst a great many people.
What I am seeing in this thread is very much an obstructive approach from those who support the IFA, presumably financially as well as vocally, whereas amongst others there seems to be a general perception that a more independent regulatory body is desirable. What it needs is for a committed individual or individuals to investigate how to set up and fund such a body, I believe it would be possible to achieve such an end and cannot see how it could be anything other than welcomed by those archaeologists who genuinely want to see their profession be fair and respected.
By being the only apparent 'port of call' for non members wishing to complain about members and not being answerable to independent monitoring cannot fail but to make the IFA look 'unfair' whether or not it's judgements are so I think it is in their best interests too, to support any new body.
To put it simply I would just like to ensure fairness and transparency in contentious issues such as complaints and don't believe that there is any solid evidence to prove that organisations such as the IFA can supply this in fact there is a clear opinion that they can't and don't amongst a great many people.
What I am seeing in this thread is very much an obstructive approach from those who support the IFA, presumably financially as well as vocally, whereas amongst others there seems to be a general perception that a more independent regulatory body is desirable. What it needs is for a committed individual or individuals to investigate how to set up and fund such a body, I believe it would be possible to achieve such an end and cannot see how it could be anything other than welcomed by those archaeologists who genuinely want to see their profession be fair and respected.
By being the only apparent 'port of call' for non members wishing to complain about members and not being answerable to independent monitoring cannot fail but to make the IFA look 'unfair' whether or not it's judgements are so I think it is in their best interests too, to support any new body.