14th February 2012, 10:43 AM
Marcus Brody Wrote:Here in Scotland, there are already Councils that employ consultants to provide their archaeological advice, and the extent to which this is successful is largely dependent on the details of the contract between the two parties setting out when the consultant will be asked for an opinion. I'd imagine that the distinction has been drawn in the current document because there are already standards and guidance documents in place for conservation officers and consultants, which they should be following anyway - you'd have to hope that the new document doesn't conflict with any standards set out in these existing documents, as this would put anyone performing a dual role in a difficult position!And consultants are often in a curatorial role as the client's agent's archaeologist on a road scheme or similar role on a rail scheme. Interesting to note that lots of the big engineering consultancies for whom those archaeologists (like me) work aren't RAOs - although their archaeologists will be IfA members. I've never been convinced that the RAO scheme added much for thsoe companies if every archaeologist in that organization was in the IfA anyway and its other procedures were being monitoried by BSI or similar.