20th October 2008, 12:25 PM
I also agree with your points Paul Belford. My problem is with the strapline and the overall lack of communication from the IFA. As you say "Why not have a professional institute that advocates on behalf of all of us at a much wider level?" Why not have a strapline that reflects this, rather than a slogan that could equally apply to a number of other bodies? If their main business is advocacy, training, building partnerships and promoting the profession, perhaps that should have been reflected in their strapline.
I don't see any reason for a seperate institute for field archaeologists only, surely fragmenting can only lead to weaker advocacy. Besides, lots of people do more then one thing. RICS does not have a seperate body for field surveyors.
I am glad to hear that there is a requirement for CPD. Was this decided at the recent AGM?
I don't see any reason for a seperate institute for field archaeologists only, surely fragmenting can only lead to weaker advocacy. Besides, lots of people do more then one thing. RICS does not have a seperate body for field surveyors.
I am glad to hear that there is a requirement for CPD. Was this decided at the recent AGM?