7th February 2012, 12:28 PM
I'd have thought that it wasn't just a question of whether they can afford to run the service, but one of how they can fulfill their statutory obligations to take advice where planning might be affected by archaeological circumstance. I am sure that the IfA will be writing to AGMA (as they did in the Fenland case) to remind them that ditching a service does not necessarily discharge them from their responsibilities ....
With peace and consolation hath dismist, And calm of mind all passion spent...