30th June 2008, 02:36 PM
Quote:quote:As pointed out by Hosty, Curators apply the IFA's standards.Unlike EH/HS/Cadw, curators, SCAUM, ALGAO, CBA, BAJR or any other archaeological organisation that I can think of in the UK, the IFA is democratically accountable. Its Council is elected on a regular basis by the corporate members (i.e. all MIFAs, AIFAs and PIFAs), and key decisions are made at the AGM where all corporate members have a vote.
Who watches the IFA?
So, who watches the IFA? We do - thousands of ordinary archaeologists throughout the country. If you want a say, all you have to do is join.
As in most other forms of election in the UK, the IFA's elections are marred by voter apathy. But at least in the IFA, the rules are set by archaeologists for archaeologists and they are validated through the votes of the membership.
If you want some sort of 'Offarch', then please remember that such organisations are appointed by government and government sets the rules they operate, and can change them to suit itself. Is that really what you want?
On a separate but related point, any industry-wide overseeing body would not oversee the IFA, because it would replace it. If we put such an organisation in place, what would be the point of keeping the IFA as well?
1man1desk
to let, fully furnished