9th November 2012, 09:56 AM
(This post was last modified: 9th November 2012, 10:05 AM by trowelfodder.)
Our "product" is based on enough value being placed on archaeology and heritage to warrant statutory protection!
But do agree that we are heading down (and have been for a long time) a dangerous road! It is often very difficult to act in the best interests of both the client and the archaeology
On the topic of pay though do you think that 1.7 now and 5-8 later might be more palatable if there were smaller gaps. If 3 is not viable now then why will 8 be any more likely later? We have all seen this before - everything on the never never
But do agree that we are heading down (and have been for a long time) a dangerous road! It is often very difficult to act in the best interests of both the client and the archaeology
On the topic of pay though do you think that 1.7 now and 5-8 later might be more palatable if there were smaller gaps. If 3 is not viable now then why will 8 be any more likely later? We have all seen this before - everything on the never never