8th July 2008, 10:13 PM
If the alternative was the death of the unit in question, surely this is best outcome for all concerned?:face-approve: Secondly the 'regulator' in archaeology is surely the county/unitary curator in most cases. Thirdly research priorities are defined in the various national and regional research agenda, which are are put together by many archaeologists - curators, contractors, academics etc and are widely consulted upon. The large units do get a lot of the large projects but I see no drift to monopoly - Competition is alive and well in the area I work in. I can think of at least 8 different contractors and 5 consultants who have carried out work here in the last year, including the two concerned - Oxford and CamARC. Don't see any problem with naming them as this is not defamatory. Speaking to contacts at CamARC, none of them have expressed any concerns as to the future of their jobs and conditions, which should surely be our main worry. :face-approve: