Well said John Kellett. I would suspect that this measure will be self defeating given that it is still possible to carry out the role of an architect without actually calling yourself one. Presumably there would be mass resignations which would reduce the funding to police the scheme or a massive hike in fees which would lead to yet more resignations from the register. Unless the role is protected this will not work. If the role is protected it seems to be a sensible requirement.
I'm not a great lover of competitive tenders as I believe that they are one of the drivers of poor performance- they are certainly one of the reasons why architectural salaries are so low. Best value does not mean lowest price. A competitive tender is unlikely to be the best way to select an architect who is the most suitable for the project. However, given that it is likely that a significant number of practices will score 100% on quality irrespective of what percentage it is of the judging criteria, it will be the fee which will be the decider so does it matter that the split is 70/30 or 10/80? I'm not sure it does.
I'm intrigued by this decision - it appears to say that CIAT qualified technicians are not able to carry out site visits without reporting to an architect. Maybe its just the way it is written and my interpretation of it.
"The organisation was set up to explore the reasons why the region has 44 per cent fewer 16-34-year olds than the national average"
Well, I think they may have answered this by choosing a practice from London.......
Missed opportunity to 'put the show on the road' and move it around the country - lots of temporary seating to use and plenty of sheds to put them in