Every year graduates struggle to find Part1 placements. It will be interesting to see how any new proposals will accommodate work experience. I initially trained as a technician, and am now studying to become an Architect, andI think that it would be unwise to allow different specialisms to practice under the title of Architect. I agree with the above comment - the current 7 year process gives Architects an unrivalled broad knowledge of construction and design. The title 'Architect' is protected (in theory). If the RIBA/ARB promoted the profession (even at the smaller scale) then maybe there would be more opportunities for students to gain 'real world' experience. Personally I feel that abandoning the EU directive can only be a positive move. The current situation puts British students at a disadvantage to their continental counterparts both financially and in terms of time in education. While studying for 7 years is compulsory here, in the EU 5 years training is the norm. Yet the EU directive gives allows students from the EU to come to Britain and practice as an Architect. I would argue that the RIBA should be independent from EU laws - Surely they can have a great influence on education standards without EU directives etc.