10th February 2009, 07:11 PM
Quote:quote:Have the County Archaeologists been pushed out of the decision making phase, on who does the work, to the pure and simple standard phase, relating to what work will be sufficient and that works' satisfactory completion.That has been the case since the introduction of PPG16 and competitive tendering in 1990 - the principle being, if you ask the developer to pay for the archaeological work, then it is reasonable to allow them to choose the archaeological contractor.
Curators can't decide what contractors should be invited to tender, or who should be appointed. However, they can challenge the inclusion of a particular firm on a tender list, or the appointment of that firm, if they can demonstrate that the firm in question has failed to do work to the standard specified in the past, within that curator's area.
Curators can also require proof that individuals who would perform specific roles within the contractor's team have appropriate experience, skills and knowledge, and can object to the use of those individuals if they can't provide that evidence.
What curators shouldn't do, but often try to do, is specify that their own pet specialist should be used, without addressing the question of whether the person put forward by the unit is adequately qualified for the job.
1man1desk
to let, fully furnished