25th January 2012, 07:38 PM
(This post was last modified: 25th January 2012, 07:58 PM by Martin Locock.)
I'm confused, Unit: you think it's a good thing that you an ignore standards but a bad thing that there is an initiative to apply standards to address precisely the variability in practice you complain about.
But as to the deficeincy of the Standard in specfying how curatorial decisions should be taken, the Standard itself (not the Guidance) says:
" Archaeological advice on the investigation and stewardship of the historic environment
must aim to benefit the public both now and in the future, through the advancement of
understanding, sustainable management of the resource and the realisation of social,
environmental or economic benefits.
Advice must be clear, consistent, compliant, reasonable, timely, informed and impartial,
and proportionate to a reasoned and clearly-documented assessment of significance.
Advice must be provided by suitably qualified, skilled and competent practitioners and
based on an up-to-date and publicly-accessible information base maintained to nationallyagreed standard."
(Emphasis added)
In which case you should be responding to the consultation saying that this is an excellent development and it is a pity we have had to wait so long, rather than a waste of time and money.
But as to the deficeincy of the Standard in specfying how curatorial decisions should be taken, the Standard itself (not the Guidance) says:
" Archaeological advice on the investigation and stewardship of the historic environment
must aim to benefit the public both now and in the future, through the advancement of
understanding, sustainable management of the resource and the realisation of social,
environmental or economic benefits.
Advice must be clear, consistent, compliant, reasonable, timely, informed and impartial,
and proportionate to a reasoned and clearly-documented assessment of significance.
Advice must be provided by suitably qualified, skilled and competent practitioners and
based on an up-to-date and publicly-accessible information base maintained to nationallyagreed standard."
(Emphasis added)
In which case you should be responding to the consultation saying that this is an excellent development and it is a pity we have had to wait so long, rather than a waste of time and money.