26th January 2012, 08:32 PM
BAJR Wrote:FAir enough... and should this however contain elements where the people coming up with the standards happen to slip in the message that of course you not only have to adhere to this standard, (one that is happening already) but yu have to become an RO to actually be able to adhere to these standards, as if you are not, then we will exclude you from working in the first place...
This is hardly a document for the purpose of informing the local authority compliance officer about what a statutory HER is. ? IF that is the purpose... then should it not stick to that. rather than say, we will create the standard, and the standard involves using only us . hmmmmmmmm
I am fine... I would be ok, but I don't like being forced - I prefer to be convinced. Chicken Licken or the Big Bad Wolf?
A masterly summary of what I think is wrong with this consultation. I am well aware that the IFA is campaigning against LA cuts but feel that an organisation that is supposed to recognise the interests of field archaeologist should be well to the front and leading (manning the barricades and handing out the Molatove cocktails) the fight on an issue that could lead to the dimise of developer funded and LA archaeology as we know it.