24th March 2012, 10:44 PM
Hmm, possibly written in the light of a bad experience. Not sure about the financial check. But I don't think it's unreasonable for county to seek assurance that archaeology's not at risk from shoddy practice by confirming credentials. It doesn't help anybody if a particular contractor is proposed who clearly doesn't have the capacity/specialism/whatever and the curator says nothing, only to cause a stink later on.
As regards legality, I think because it's simply provision of information - 'this list exists that is compiled by the professional body' - rather than specific recommendation, it's in the clear. Of course, it depends how it's phrased when the advice is given...
As regards legality, I think because it's simply provision of information - 'this list exists that is compiled by the professional body' - rather than specific recommendation, it's in the clear. Of course, it depends how it's phrased when the advice is given...