2nd July 2008, 10:11 AM
Quote:quote:Originally posted by Sparky
Oldgirl,
The discussion moved had already moved on. How is a supposed ?Offarch? meant to regulate everybody if not everyone is in the IFA? Sounds to me like a broad church.
S
Precisely my point! My issue with the original proposal was that it was a proposal to have a regulatory body for the IFA and ONLY for the IFA, ignoring completely those who were not members.
To others - thanks for the clarification on the membership of ALGAO. So the archaeological representative is nominated by the local authority.... who presumably are not archaeologists?
So, that would meet the impartiality criteria suggested. However, it doesn't answer the point about what happens if the complaint is about an ALGAO member, how do you ensure impartiality then? Plus, the powers that 'curatorial archaeologists' have are related to the planning system, and they are only advisory. And the planning system is changing anyway. And I'm not sure the members of ALGAO or their employers would feel that they have the time/money to police the archaeological profession.....
:face-thinks: I think my brain hurts. [xx(]