Unsupported browser

For a better experience please update your browser to its latest version.

Your browser appears to have cookies disabled. For the best experience of this website, please enable cookies in your browser

We'll assume we have your consent to use cookies, for example so you won't need to log in each time you visit our site.
Learn more

ARB has been consistent in attitude to education

  • Comment

May I correct the inaccuracies in Leonie Milliner's letter (aj 16.12.99). These are the facts:

As early as September 1997 and on the advice of the then registrar, David Smart, the arb took legal opinion on the correctness of the joint working arrangements between arb and the riba for the validation of courses in our schools ofarchitecture, given our responsibilities under the 1997 Architects Act. That decision was taken by the board and in full consultation with the riba, represented at the meeting by the then riba director of education, Chris Colbourne.

qc's opinion in advising was clear and unambivalent: that arb must demonstrate that it alone should take the final, informed decision. The existing working arrangements needed to be adjusted to reflect that position.

arb has, throughout this exercise, consistently expressed on record its determination to work closely with the riba, recognising the Institute's expertise and commitment to the field of architectural education.

Throughout the protracted negotiations, we have always striven to ensure that any amendments necessary should not inhibit the continuing role of the riba.

Leonie Milliner's attempt to blame the arb for the delay in reaching agreement is unjustified. It is clearly important to both parties that what is no more than a technical and procedural matter be resolved as quickly as possible.

There is no ambiguity in arb's position, which was fully debated and supported by the board, including all the architect representatives. It has been the subject of numerous meetings between the riba and ourselves; and throughout this process, representatives of schosa have been consulted regularly.

In one respect, Milliner is absolutely correct when she claims that 'the new arrangements will not transfer authority for the validation of courses to the arb'. arb already has that responsibility, and has had it since the 1931 Architects Act. Our present negotiations seek to secure with greater transparency and clarity that authority as laid out and endorsed in the new 1997 Act.

It is our earnest wish to conclude this matter to allow all parties to get on with the real job of ensuring that the quality of architectural education in the uk continues to be world class.

Barbara Kelly, chairwoman, Architects Registration Board

  • Comment

Have your say

You must sign in to make a comment

Please remember that the submission of any material is governed by our Terms and Conditions and by submitting material you confirm your agreement to these Terms and Conditions.

Links may be included in your comments but HTML is not permitted.