I thank Paul Hyett for his invitation to become a more active member of the profession and I hope to do exactly that within the next few months. However, I think he has missed the point of my previous letter (AJ 23.5.02).
I have no issue with grass roots members who are involved in the promotion of the profession; indeed, Mr Hyett is right to celebrate their tireless efforts.
The problem as I see it is more fundamental.As a body its role has been eroded, especially since the passing of the Architects Act 1997 and the establishment of the ARB. The manner in which the administration of the profession is crudely divided up between two organisations does not make sense, and as a result compromises the role of the RIBA.What I am suggesting is a redefinition of its remit, whereby the RIBA's administrative and political roles are more clearly defined.
Theoretically, the fact the RIBA is not a government body, unlike the ARB, means it could potentially become more politically assertive. So, what is the RIBA's position regarding the new building regulations, the use of brownfield sites, recycling within the building industry, etc? Has the RIBA lobbied the government on these and other issues concerning the profession? If not, why not?
Greg Lomas, London