1 10 110 https://nam.maydayrooms.org/files/original/22998c43220daecc16d2d0d5de76ab16.pdf 1be2aab6289d046f05ce2ee5a40b8871 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Professional Issues Description An account of the resource A cohort of NAM members became engaged with the professional registration body, standing as elected councillors on the Architects Registration Council and its various committees. Hitherto entirely dominated by the RIBA bloc, the Council began to yield to a new dynamic through NAM's involvement, enabling fresh perspectives on such issues as mandatory fee scales, greater lay representation on the body, ethically-based standards of professional conduct, etc. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource "Architects' Services", Monopolies Commission Report (see p.68 for ref. to NAM's Report Description An account of the resource Architects’ Services A Report on the Supply of Architects’ Services with Reference to Scale Fees ve LONDON THE MONOPOLIES AND MERGERS COMMISSION i Ordered by The House of Commons fo be printed 8th November 1977 | Presented to Parliament in pursuance of Section 83 of the Fair Trading Act 1973 HER MAJESTY’S STATIONERY OFFICE £2.85 net existing with mandatory scales which alreadytake account ofmany of the varied circumstances of individual jobs and where fees may be varied with the agree- ment of the professional body. But the pressure on architects to reduce fees is yery strong in view of the cyclical nature of the demand for their services. A switch from mandatory to recommended status for the RIBA scales would be interpreted as an invitation to negotiate by most large clients with their fiscal responsibility to ratepayers or shareholders, and architects under economic pressure would be unable to resist. In such circumstances it would be difficult to hold to recommended levels and the effects of a change to recommended scales would be likely to be little different from the effects of abolishing the scales altogether. We asked the RIBA about the possibility of a change being made after a period of notice. The RIBA considered that this would not help either the individual practice or the profession as a whole to resist the increased pressure from clients which would develop in the expectation of recommended scales. Evidence of the New Architecture Movement 213. The New Architecture Movement was founded in 1975 and states that it is working to alter radically the patronage base in architecture, so that ordinary working people may exercise effective control over their environment. Its programme covers action in the three spheres of practice, education and the professional constitution. Members of the Association are drawn from al areas of architectural activity in addition to the lay public. In the former category salaried architects in private practice form the majority, though local authority officers, teachers and students are also a significant element. The Movement’s ‘contact list’ in June 1976 numbered slightly over 200 and was claimed to be rising as the movement gathered momentum. We sent a copy of its 3% » 214. The New Architecture Movement does not support the RIBA’S case, and therefore submitted its own arguments independently. The substance of the Movement's case is that the current scale fee system is not an essential ingredient of the provision of architectural Services, but is a market device procuring uni- lateral benefits to architects. The Movement criticises arguments and statistics Supporting the RIBA’s case, and considers that the public interest is severely based on a ‘descending hierarchy of priorities’ as follows: (i) abandonment of the mandatory minimum fee scale entirely; (ii) retention of the fee scale on a recommended basis; prejudiced by the fee scale’s mandatory status. It proposes changes to the system (iii) retention of the mandatory fee scale, but with the establishment of @ permanent independent agency to review the levels of the scale: sucehe angency to include at least 50 perper cent non--professioinal repre fe 215.. With the New Architecture Moyement’s co:nsent, submission to the RIBA. The RIBA made it clear to us that it did not accept the New Architecture Movement’s arguments. The RIBA says that it is con- VLianceedtathrathitheecevieewsaexpressed in the Movement’si _—Isi are unrepresenta- ey \ » 3 Ye e ] és, Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource MMC Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived John Allan Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 8.11.77 https://nam.maydayrooms.org/files/original/5d5608350b085d890021ca24008fa0de.pdf c56ac8adbf43e83a25ba01cc2dbafb69 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Professional Issues Description An account of the resource A cohort of NAM members became engaged with the professional registration body, standing as elected councillors on the Architects Registration Council and its various committees. Hitherto entirely dominated by the RIBA bloc, the Council began to yield to a new dynamic through NAM's involvement, enabling fresh perspectives on such issues as mandatory fee scales, greater lay representation on the body, ethically-based standards of professional conduct, etc. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Architects' fee scale slammed in report Subject The topic of the resource Article in Daily Express Description An account of the resource By Jeremy Gates THERE was a slap in the face yesterday for Britain's 27.000 architects who are already facing one of the worst recessions in history. For a massive 200 - page report from the Government's Monopolies and Mergers Commission claimed that their scale fee system of charges was against the public interest. The report is publi.shed at a time when 1,000 architects are already on the dole—with forecasts that 7,000 more may join them in the next 12 months it the industry remains in the doldrums. The Commission found that charges on 99 per cent of the architect's workload were fixed by scale fee. The report called for the architects-to scrat) the scale tee system — and to quote competitive rates for every job. A spokesman for the Royal Institute of British Architects said last night : " 'l'be scale fee plays an important role in maintaining proper standards of service in both public and private practice." Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource J Gates Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived JA Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 10.11.77 https://nam.maydayrooms.org/files/original/d96e0bc0a898f0fc3d67b94f33e85d54.pdf e63bf3bb8257368160f2660a54603426 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Professional Issues Description An account of the resource A cohort of NAM members became engaged with the professional registration body, standing as elected councillors on the Architects Registration Council and its various committees. Hitherto entirely dominated by the RIBA bloc, the Council began to yield to a new dynamic through NAM's involvement, enabling fresh perspectives on such issues as mandatory fee scales, greater lay representation on the body, ethically-based standards of professional conduct, etc. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Architects' fixed fees attacked Subject The topic of the resource Cutting from The Guardian Description An account of the resource By Judy Hillman, The fixed fee system applied body. However, Mr Roy Hatters- ley, Secretary of State for | Prices and Consumer Protec- tion, has already asked the Dir- | ector General of Fair Trading by architects should be ended because it works against the public interest, the Monopolies Commission reported yesterday. to discuss the necessary action It also criticised architects for preventing competition for jobs. The report suggests that an independent committee should fix fee leyels which would not, |however, be binding and would leave architects free to fix their own price The Royal Institute of British with the professions—the sur- |; veyors have been covered in a second report—to change their present practice. The RIBA said the commmis- sion, by over-emphasising price competition, had made recom- mendations which could lead to a drastic reduction in quantity |4 Architects immediately de- and quality of xervices. unced the conclusions and it intended to fight the for an independent review The report does not agree. “We would expect the client always to be concerned with obtaining value for money in exi his choice of architect but not| tral | always to choose the cheapest, Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource J. Hillman Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived JA Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 10.11.77 https://nam.maydayrooms.org/files/original/741f72381abf86048b136e0918a06ea6.pdf c9ba4a9cf1e2b8670d2bb3fbfc2bb559 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Professional Issues Description An account of the resource A cohort of NAM members became engaged with the professional registration body, standing as elected councillors on the Architects Registration Council and its various committees. Hitherto entirely dominated by the RIBA bloc, the Council began to yield to a new dynamic through NAM's involvement, enabling fresh perspectives on such issues as mandatory fee scales, greater lay representation on the body, ethically-based standards of professional conduct, etc. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Architects' prices work against public interest Subject The topic of the resource Article in Daily Telegraph Description An account of the resource By JOHN PETTY, Commercial Correspondent A RCHITECTS and surveyors are working a price ring against the public interest, the Monopolies and Mergers Commission said yesterday after a four-year investigatio The Government immediately ordered Mr Gordon Borrie, Director General of Fair Trading, to take action. But the Royal Institute of rchitects said i not accept mgs and would instruct meÄbers to go on charging fixed minimum fees. "We will fight every 9tep of the way." said' Mr Gordon Graham, R I B A president. The Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors said it was surprised and disappointed by the findings. Abolition of a fixed scale of fees would work against the public intcrest. Free competition Commission produced separate reports on the two rofessions. Each ran to more t an 200 r free tion in pricing. But the Commission suggested- the Government should appoint a small independent committee to draw up a list of recommended prices as guidance to the public- Mr Hattersley, Prices an mer Protection Y, said he e findings of the Commission. His Minister of State, Mr Fraser, said Mr Borrie would meet leaders of the professions with a view to getting them to change their rules. n Mr Borrie will be given six Il months to report back to Mr r. Hattersley. 8' with regard to present circumstances in the construction industry." One of the main RIBA d objections is that the Commission stopped taking evidence nbout 18 months ago and there has been a marked collapse in the building business since then. It claims mandatory minimum fees are vital to carry the profession through slump periods. d Mr Graham said: Architects compete on quality and service, not on price. The report is pathetic." d Architects were depressed at the report's lack di clarity. reason and logic. It appeared to be further debasement of the quality of public debate in favour of dogmas. He said the Commission had Is failed td answer the main case d put forward by R I B A for maintaining the fee scale. R IBA had every confidence that it would be able to persuade Govt ernment that the Commission was wrong. Architects and surveyors both !d said that the bulk of evidence 10 presented to the Commission by v clients was in favour of retain• d ing a fixed-fee scale. On new works. architects It work on a sliding fee scale, with a minimum of 10 per cent. on contracts up to 22,500 in value and a minimum of 5 1 2 per cent. ts on contracts worth El ,750.000 or more. Minimum fees vary from 10 per cent. to 13 per cent. for work on existing buildings. th • • Survev•Or'•r,-ht• teo• Service'" each E2•85. BRIBERY 'VITAL IN EAST' 'LISSION to secure overseas sales were " absolutely necessary " in some Middle Eastern countries, the Old Bailey corruption trial was told yesterday. Sir LESTER SUFFIELD. former head of the Defence Ministry's defence sales organisation and at one time With British Leyland. said, however, that there would never be any question of a British firm paying commission to the British Government to further sales. Lt-C01 DAVID RANDEL, 40. of the Royal Signals, Aldershot, GEOFFREY WELLBURN. also 40, of Woodside Road, Beaconsfield Bucks. and FRANK NURDON. 60, of Barnet Road, Arkley, Herts, all ny corruption charges. ellburn was managin di ector of Racal B CC, o W mbley, which specialises in el onic and communication e ipment. Nurdon was the es director. The prosecution alleges that Randel took about 25,000 in bribes to ensure BCC radio equipment was bought and installed in Chieftain tanks sold to Persia. Secret contents Sir LESTER SUFFIELD said he was unaware of any payments made to officials of foreign countries by the Crown agents, lillbank T chn:cal Services. ogtent' o wh ged, he sa #reement on e to pay comrmssion so th was •not unknown in the M dle East for commission to be paid to officials of foreign co ntries, but the recipients re not necessarily in the in ustrial field. e believed agents were mmees paid their " commission " i cash in the United Kingdom. Ithough he had never been •rectly involved himself in oing it he knew the practice ent on. It was 'i more than likely " at a commission payment uld appear in company Ix)0ks, It not the name of the recipit because it was normal comercial practice to protect ents if thev requested it. In the Chieftain radio contract t e interests of his department d Racal were the. same and e also the country's interest. ndel had a duty as part of t team to further that object. ! would have been practically ssible for Randel while in P sia to have blocked the sale. e trial was adjourned until ersian knight Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource J Petty Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived JA Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 10.11.77 https://nam.maydayrooms.org/files/original/ffe692c179d6579865e52ba6dca638f0.pdf 9b72e15763391d181a59793fe9a48064 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Professional Issues Description An account of the resource A cohort of NAM members became engaged with the professional registration body, standing as elected councillors on the Architects Registration Council and its various committees. Hitherto entirely dominated by the RIBA bloc, the Council began to yield to a new dynamic through NAM's involvement, enabling fresh perspectives on such issues as mandatory fee scales, greater lay representation on the body, ethically-based standards of professional conduct, etc. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource ARCUK 'Unattached Architects Subject The topic of the resource "ARCUK 'Unattached Architects" Explanatory paper (6 pp total) Description An account of the resource ARCUK UNATTACHED ARCHI TECTS WHO ARE THEY? Shortl y there wi l l take pl ace the el ecti on of ' unattached ' Counci l l ors for next year ' s Counci l of the Archi tects ' Regi strati on Counci l of the United Kingdom (ARCIJK) . In these el cti ons a group of candi dates present themsel ves to represent those archi tects on the Regi ster who do not belong to any of the consti tuent bodies of ARCIJK which have the r i gh t , under the 1931 Act , to nominate members to Counci l on the basi s of one member f or every 500 (or porti on of 500) of thei r own membership . The most important of these, numeri cal l y , i s the RIBA with 42 members for next year , but al so l i sted are such bodi es as the Archi tectur al Assoc at i on (2 members) , the Facul ty of Archi tects and Surveyors ( 1 member ) the Incorporated Assoc at ion of Archi tects and Surveyors ( 1 member ) and S. . . 1 memebr ) . number of other organi sati ons nominate a member , but not on a numerical basi s . Archi tects not bel ongi ng to any of these organsi ati ons are the so-cal l ed ' unattached - for next year thei r number has grown to 6610 (the numbers grow ei ther through newl y-qual i f i ed archi tect E not joi ni ng any of the consti tuent bodi es , or through the resi gnat i on of ol der ones) wi th 14 representati ves on Counci l . Si nce they represent about one quarter of the professi on , it i s i mportant that there shoul d be , at l east i n thei r consti tuency ' of the 'unattached some understandi ng of what they stand for . It i s al so i mportant that these archi tects exerci se thei r r i ght to vote (often onl y about 20% do so) and , i f they f i nd no cand idates who represent thei r vi ews , that they nominate , i n future years , candi dates who do so. The Act al so set up a Board of Archi tectural Education on which , apart from representati ves of the Counci l , an even wider range of educati onal and other organsi ati ons are represented . These i nc l ude ( as now amended ) most of the School s of archi tecture. Those ' unattached Counc i l l ors and candi datess who have si gned th i s statement are i n no sense an organi sed group . But they do share some common ground which i s set out here for i n for nati on , wi der debate and to encourage greater parti c i pati on i n the el ect i on . ARCIJK IN AND OUT OF THE NEWS Most arch i t ects , beyond paying the necesary annual retenti on fee , have no contact wi th the organi sat i on , no i dea of what I t does , and l i tt l e i nterest i n i t s debates . I n recent months there was short l i ved medi a coverage of a rumpus between the RIBA and ARCUK on what appeared , to 1 most outsiders, to be tri vi al and l egal i sti c issues about the way people had been appointed onto ARCIJK Counci l and i ts Board of Archi tectural Education. Once there was news of an amicable rapprochenen t between the two bodi es , ARCUK once agai n sank i nto i ts customary obl i vi on ! But that rumpus was the t i p of an iceberg whose submerged porti on represents very real di fferences wi thi n ARCIJK on the way i ts rol e i s percei ved . The 'unattached have consi stentl y pressed that i nterpretati on of ARCUK ' s rol e which , as f ar as the Acts al l ow , broaden i ts representati veness , 1 ncrease i t s democratic processes and open to the publ ic i ts debates and i ts reports (e . g . an education ) . Above al l , they have recogni sed that the processes by which bui l di ngs come to be desi gned - whether forfthe s ate , l oca l authori t i es or pri vate devel opers as cl ients - exclude he 95% or so of the popul ati on whi ch (beyond perhaps wni or buying i ts own house) has no direct fi nanci al i nterest i n any bui lding project. These people are commonl y referred to as ' users which def i nes a role where f i nance , desi gn , producti on , ownershi p and management of the bui l di ng stock i . e . al l control of resources - i s excluded . Powerl ess , and di senfranchi sed , thei r i nterests are so i ndi rectl y represented , i f at a l l , that they may be better def i ned as ' sufferers ' of bui ldings rather than ' users . The Communi ty Archi tecture movement , wi th i ts strange al l i ance between Pri nce Charles, the RIBA and some devel opers, has come i nto bei ng as one response to the al i enati on whi ch ' users experience, especi al l y i n housi ng . Whi l st the movement has certai nl y had some l i mi ted successes , on the whol e i ts rhetori c now masks i ts unwi l l i ngness for any real transfer of resources to those who have none. So the tri vi al debates on form and styl e , the conti nui ng aesthet i c , soc i al and techni cal f ai l ures and the cl osed debate i n some School S , continue . Natural l y educati on i s seen by us as a central area of concern i nc l udi ng accepti ng the ful l responsi b i l i tes for recogni sing (through Vi s i t i ng Boards) and , i f necessary , hol di ng , exami nations as l ai d upon ARCIJK by the Act . The current negoti ati ons wi th the RIBA for joi nt Vi s i t i ng Boards are a step i n the di recti on of assuning thi s responsi bi l i ty i nstead of del egati ng i t , Hi th l i ttl e pol i cy control to others. As far as upholding and improving the standards of practice are concerned , we see i t as important that d i sc i pl i n ary powers wi th regard to disgraceful or unprofessi oal conduct should be used , where appropri ate , not onl y wi th regard to professi onal i ntegr i ty , but al so wi th regard to performance. So the ai m of produci ng bui ldi ngs wi th good , or at l east adequate , performance becomes the ul t i mate cr i ter i on . A VIEW OF ARCIJK ' S ROLE It i s cl ear that Par l i ament i ntended , i n 1 9 3 1 , to set up a mechani sm whereby the Statutory control of archi tectural practi ce and educati on shoul d be exerci sed by a group representat i ve of more than merel y the professi on i tsel f by bri ngi ng i n others who represented independent and pub l i c i nt erests . Al though the l i st of such bodies l ooks somewhat quai nt today , the Parl i ament of the day tr i ed , accordi ng to i ts l i ghts , to bring i n the infl uence of other educational bodi es , bui l di ng crafstmen and trade uni ons , the major Government commissioning Departments, and other professions i n the bui l ding i ndustry. In other words the i nf l uence of those who would work wi th arch i tects , comi ssi on them and produce the bui l di ngs they desi gned . I t i s reasonable to suppose that i t was al so intended that the users , at l east of the pub l oc bui l di ng stock , would be represened by the machinery set kip . these i nte f i ons have been l argel y frustrated. Some general objecti ves concerning ARCUK ' s and the professi on ' s i nternal structure fol l ow from Fi rst , that ARCIJK should work towards becomi ng a ful l y democratic body, i n which every archi tect has one vote , for a si ngl e national l i st of archi tect candi dates. Second , that wi thi n i ts own membership , ARCIJK promote such pol ic i es w i ll i nc ease communication between archi tects and the Counci l . And thi rd that ARCUK O use -every avai l abl e means to create equal opportuni ti es wi thi n the professi on , i rrespecti ve of race , gender or creed . There al so fal l ow more speci f i c obj ecti ves which rel ate to the posi t ion of archi tects i n the communi ty. The si gnatori es of th i s statement are ' unattacehd ' Counci l members , or candi dates. What fol l ows would probabl y be supported , i n general terms , by most members of Counci l and i ts Board. It i s the emphases and speci f i c detai l s , i f anything , which di sti ngui sh the pol i c i es of these ' unattached from the wider consensus. Speci f i c objecti ves 1 . Comprehensi ve The responsi bi l i t i es of ARCIJK are: . To mai ntai n a regi ster of archi tects . To both recogni se and , i f thought desi rabl e , hol d , exami nati ons i n archi tecture . To make awards to students i n nee d and for research d. To impl ement HM Government ' s obl i gati ons to the European Communi ty i n respect of EC archi tects e . To mai ntai n standards of conduct by d i sc i p l i nary proceedi ngs agai nst regi steredd archi tects whose conduct f al l s beneath an accepted standard set out i n The Standard of Conduct for örch i tects To prosecute those who use the ti t l e Archi tect i l l ega l l y . To carry out these objecti ves and to mai ntai n both prof essi onal and pub l i c cred i b i l i ty i n changing circumstances ARCUK must : . Mai ntain and enhance the standi ng of archi tects as evi denced by the �qual i ty and performance of the bui ldings they design , having due regard to the i nterest of cl i ents , producers and users and . Improve professi onal comwpetence of al l regi stered archi tects throughout thei r careers. 2 . Conduct . Promote the use of the Standard of Conduct and revi ew i t so as to make i t more preci se and more convi nc i ng wi th regard to hi gh standards set by the professi on i n i ts repsonsi b i l i ty to the pub 1 1 c Interpret the Standard of Condust so as to make the performance of bui l di ngs an i mportant cri ter i on c . Review the di sci p l i nary procedures so that , i n sp i te of ARCIJK bei ng judge, jury , prosecutor and court of appeal , they are more independent and seen to be so (un l i ke , for i nstance , the pol i ce compl aints procedures) . de Establ i sh a system , wi thi n the Acts , for carryi ng out the di sc i pl i nary functi ons i n a way more respnosi ve to publ ic assessment e . Make regul ar and publ i c reports i n detai l of those removed from the Regi ster , with both the processes and the reasoni ng behi nd the deci si on f ul l y set out (as , for i nstance , i n the Tines Lan Rep or ts ) . 3 . Education . Organi se and lobby for greater publ i c funds and resources for archi tectural educati on , and defend resources agai nst cuts (ARCIJK was, notabl y , the onl y professi onal body to defend vigorousl y the School s agai nst the cuts proposed by the E sher Report ) . Respond to al l government and other proposal s that would affect archi tectual educati on opposing those which woul d reduce standards , supporti ng tbose that would i ncrease i t . I n i t i ate proposal s of i ts own , part i cul ar l y having regard to the publ i c i nterest , which woul d i mprove educati onal standards . Create a centre of i nformati on and advi ce for a l l seeki ng to enter the school s as students or teachers and for the professi on . Wove towards an accred i tati on system that has the conf i dence of the publ i c , the professi on and the School s i ncl udi ng thei r students Reorgani se the vi si t i ng board system so that ARCUE , the prof ess 1 on , non-professi onal i nterests and students have adequate and agreed rol es g . Make al l vi si ti ng board reports pub l i c . 5 . Awards . Make awards to archi tectural students i n need , and ensure max 1 mum pub l i c i ty for the avai l ab i l i ty of thi s help . Provi de schol arhsi ps to enabl e excepti onal students to compl ete thei r courses wi th d i st i nct i on . Make awards for research to: . Undertake research projects Assi st the organi sation of research Publ i sh research resul ts having regard not onl y to the normal cr i ter i a of schol arshi p and rel evance , but al so to advancing professi onal and bui l di ng performance. A part of the funds must therefoe be devoted to advancing CPD. 6 . Conti nui g professi onal devel opmeht . Encourage and promote CPD for the whole professi on . Support the development of a regi onal CPD system . Appoi nt , or support the appoi ntment of , a nat i onal CPD co-ordi nator . Encourage and gupport the appointment of CPD c cordi nators i n the reg i ons and i n the School s , i n al l these acti vi t i es keepi ng , once agai n , the publ i c i nterest i n the forefront . 7 . European Community . Pub l i c i se the opportuni ti es i n the EC for both IJK and EC archi tects . Prepare the professi on f or the un i f i ed market proposed f or 1992 . Encourage the exchange of i nf ormati on between al l EC arh i tects on both practi ce and educati on . Create , or support the creati on of , a centre of i nformat i on on the EC for both UK archi tects wishi ng to work i n the EC and for those EC archi tects wishi ng to work i n the UK. 8 . Fi nance a . Col l ect and provi de adequate funds to achi eve these objecti ves , revi ew the retent i on fee annual l y and , i f necessary , i ncrease i t . b, Al l ocate adequate funds for education , awards and CPD. If necessary , move towards the ori gi nal 50% of the retenti on fee envisaged i n the 1931 Act . THIS ELECTION I f you agree wi th the tenor of th i s statement , and are an 'unattached archi tect , use your vote for the candi dates who commi t themsel ves to pol i c i es along these l i nes . It i s important for the total vote to i ncrease , and for those elected to f eel conf i dent that they real l y represent some si gn i f i cant proportion of opi ni on . If you can f i nd no candi dates who seem to represent your vi ews , organi se to have some nomi nated , at l east i n ti me for next year ' s el ecti on , and make sure that the i ssues you care about are debated both nati onal l y and l ocal l y . Si gnatures : Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource T Markus Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived JA Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource Undated https://nam.maydayrooms.org/files/original/fe3afcfe631438c77af18b3bda64f475.pdf a0ce95b3ab6a28369800f61467d6280a Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Professional Issues Description An account of the resource A cohort of NAM members became engaged with the professional registration body, standing as elected councillors on the Architects Registration Council and its various committees. Hitherto entirely dominated by the RIBA bloc, the Council began to yield to a new dynamic through NAM's involvement, enabling fresh perspectives on such issues as mandatory fee scales, greater lay representation on the body, ethically-based standards of professional conduct, etc. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource ARCUK scraps Code Subject The topic of the resource Article "ARCUK scraps Code" Description An account of the resource The weekly newspaper for the building team FRIDAY JANUARY 23 1981 No 529 Building Design's code campaign triumph ARCHITECTS were granted new freedoms this week when the Architects Registration Council voted to scrap its code of professional conduct. ARCUK Council agreed to abandon its existing principles and rules in favour ofa ARCUK new soft-line approach of discretionary guidelines out- lined at a special council meeting this week. The new principles leave architects free to choose their own standards of behaviour with no permanent form of guidance from ARCUK. A RCUK 's powers will be restricted to advice. S CChanges are particularly although there were some relevant to the 5000 reservations, particularly about simultaneous attached architects. They bility practice.and limited lianow have a set of far less But there a general restrictive ethics than RIBA acceptance of the new pnnciplcs members. for the maintenance of an The old code will be kept architect's integrity in the RAPS until June this year but ARCUKun-to following areas:was tntent to is suspending clauses relating of information on directorships and limited lia- availability The giving in a proper manner, bility companies and touting and without oust for work — falling in line With another architect from an recent RIBA code architect changes.will appointment A registcrcd not be struck off for carrying The definition of the terms out any of these prohibited of service, duties and responactivities between now and sibilities and their legal basis, June. scope and remuneration, and ARCUK's "new approach" the prior declaration of other means that no occupation or interests relevant to an engageaction is prohibited or is in ment. itself disgraceful. There will be The concientious perforno compulsory conditions or mance of duties undertaken, restrict ions On means with proper regard for the practice. such as limited o' an by or simultaneous practice. and the product, With fairness in the mation means or the of giv•ng amount out of fees.infor- adrmnisterin tract and witkout a buildvng inducementscon• On the whole the proposals to show favour. were welcomed by council, The architects are requested Inside aboard ! page 13 THAT MAN AGAIN pages 16-17 Index ROSTRUM 2, News 3-6 and 28, Infill 7, Comment 7, PersJ.ective 8. Scorpio 9, US cavity foam storm — 'Britain is quite safe' For Precincts, Pavements and Paths. ina wide rangeofcolours and textu 3 forcolcodata spec et to... Clive Green. Concrete Services Ltd. Ouse Acres, Boroughbridge Road.York Y02 5SR. Telephone 0904 794151 Concrete Services reader inquiry number 1 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Building Design Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived JA Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 23.1.81 https://nam.maydayrooms.org/files/original/46461c4f7d6695dec040a18fea4e0eba.pdf fe5f661ce46ed8dce53d69324d3d4a76 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Professional Issues Description An account of the resource A cohort of NAM members became engaged with the professional registration body, standing as elected councillors on the Architects Registration Council and its various committees. Hitherto entirely dominated by the RIBA bloc, the Council began to yield to a new dynamic through NAM's involvement, enabling fresh perspectives on such issues as mandatory fee scales, greater lay representation on the body, ethically-based standards of professional conduct, etc. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Article for Building Design on ARCUK issues, Dec 1979 Description An account of the resource a boards AkCUK kKetention Fees help subsidize, 4+(2)bemoreopentothepressWUCteoersiae,be/ 64 more accessible to the public, and abandon its 8 | oiticial-secrets-style paranoia (even the papers BUIDINGIDESIGN page issue datell jan writefialtz&murray Catch unattached 6 | | | 4+directorships of firms dealing in property, construction :| or building materials. This while the KIBA Council (sane 6 people switching hats for a mu.ent) was deciding that 8 lye a director of such a firm, tar Lrom Heing disgrace; 0 ene really was quite protessionally Ea ES OG arter all. 5 During the past year, the unattached Councillors | 4+ have also pressed AhCUK to | fay. assert its independence 3 MNERBXXKXresponsibilitiesforSUL educa— oF tion so long abdicated to the KibA, whose Visiting 304 inviting nominations sent out to 4500 architects 24 are boldly erblazoned "Confidential"), | 34(3)aiamoreneedystudentsinsteadofeearchitects' a khetention Fees to fund pet E York Centre, 04 (4) stop tolerating advertising KIBA Feeeeie like the | by i1BA frembers which it goes not tolerate among unattached | architects and cevelop an approach to the | question of gavertising and reassune ate statutory | speed up the nailing of ballots in AKCUK" s elections to minimise disenfranchisement At the same time, the elected Couned llors have of unattached voters. ' redcepaeiene which treats all architects equally, ait ——t-—bt ae nm also become concerned by what appears to peldbereeard 4 ooQ)ae) “~~ ul a <csbyAKCUKfortheproperapportioningWNotre onthe 44Council, as called for by Schedule Une ot the hegistratiagn || = 6tact. Although widely reported figures indicate that the | || B{kina's U.K. architect menbership, even including all | | 124year or at best remained stable, AKCUK has hevertheless | || }deciaed that it has risen by just enough tolgive kIBA | ® i6-jan extra seat on AKCUK at the expense of elécted repre- sentation. While the elected Councillors have PELOnE accustomed Sood : |i . Se Near | shown by their constituents in past quests ones res o1L | assistance 23 cousiderable xxnkxexkxk and Support and thus hope that fotjthese in long-term arrears, either declined! further this| ] } to obstruction, harassment and abuse iron most of the | I ee members on AkCUK, they have found the interest how : | mY. i.. .i SO XNUSXNERK NS tiany more of them will take aavantage of | ad : ye : ; peene reply-paia iacility proviued by Bu and answer the | 8 344iive questions they are asking this year. They would xx }| = 35-at the same time be happy to hear the views|ot those . i i| ae aercaderswhoarenot"unattachedarchitects!|"andhope aa,Re: .,: ‘O-they too will fill in and post the questionnaire, which such as | }2-considers issues X#NXXxxXxXxkxENM directorships; kIBA contol || 4-jof AKCUK, enployee and lay representation oy the kegistra caAbite : | 6>tion Council, and AKCUK's suppression of the electeu i,::| “8-Counciliors' report and questionnaire, | 0 The Councillors welcome also —4 2j0r suggestions concerning any adai{ibnal connents issues which ought to be raised be kept in contiuerce. ‘the } 4-on AKCUK. All names will | | Y LONG HSEN page issue date 11 jan writermaltz&murray catchunattached 7 | | | ———— issue date]] jan writer naitz&murrayCatChynattached & | | elected Councillors can be reached on any matter of | } | concern by writing to John Murray, c/o AKCUK, 73 Hallam Street, London Wl. BUD INGIDESIGH 3/3 élp end | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | ie ; | | Yes: No: Unaecided: 172 (650) 64 (2440) 29 I%»( 110) | f" | | | | option of not using | | | | | permit architects the Conditions ot Engagement?" the KIBA Yes: No: 170 (64%) 79 (30%) Undecided: 16 (6%) || Yes: 295 (96%) No: Undecided: 5 (2) 2 5 (2%) | | | |j | | | | | } | | | BUD INGIDESIGN ‘hesults of last questionvaire o “should AKCUK change its Code to permit architects to “Should AKCUK follow the recomuendations|oi the Monopélies Comiission by changing its Code to | “Should AKCUK take stronger measures to h discrimination in enploynent against arctriitects who page issue datell jan writer Maltz&murray catchunattached 9 practice as linited liability companies are not menbers of the kiBA?" mMoOQa=NM ‘r >?) N eeeones Sete eee tee Katee | | | 1j } ; © la. bo you think that control of ARCUK by wc RIBA Source is in the best interests of | 26 2 B. give employee architects representation on AKCUK in proportion to their present nuneri¢al streneth in the protession? Yes | 30-4 page issue date 11 jan writerMaltz&murray catchunattached 10 | | 24New questionnaire: QUESTIONS 4jn. bo you think AKCUK should continue to ice the 5 | 2 012. elected Councillors to insert a report ana question- naire in AkCUK's annual mailing to tnediiconertnentey Should AKCUK amend its Code to allow architects to be| 42 | owners or directors of firms dealing in property, 44- construction or building materials? | = 1645. Uo you think the Architects hegistration ict 1931 | —18- Should be retormed to 20-4 their A. allow all architects airectly to elect ,representa- 22 24 tives on AkCUK ? Yes | No | 24 No| || S| A. the public? Yes | io No| A Bb. the protession? Yes 4| No| 645. SNSNIMXAKEHRXARSNMALESANONEXLKD | Although the architects Kegistratiou Act 1901 allows 85 for anple lay representation on aAlCUX, those bodies 0 tree to appoint lay members invariably rétise to do So. bo you think that the act should be reformed to | UIUDINGIDESIGN require a lay presence on ARCUK? LiaVe SPACE ON FUKM FOR "COMMENTS & SUGGESTIONS"”........ ||| | 2 New_questionnaire: BACKGROUND INFO TO APPEAR ON FORM | ete Name 6/2. Address go. AKCUK status | | | 10+ a. "unattachea" architect | | | b. architect member ot 144 ¢. architect, not member a. under 5 b. 35-44 the KiBA | || of hIBA, but meiber of AA, | || |) (check one): | | 5 Cc. 45654 | } d. 55 or over ) sex (check one): | || a. tenale b. nale 38 a. employee, public | | sector | 04 b. employee, 421 c. employer private sector | ! | | | |: A | d. seli-enployed = e. unemployed 84 f. retired 94 g- other | 14 KIBA, does your with no employees enployer | | for == page issue date 11 jan writermaltz&murray catchunattached 11 g | FAS, LAAS or STAMP | |' 1 d. not on Kegister of Architects | 44. age group (check one): | ; roma GOT —— )6. employment status (check one): - It you are an employee architect and a metiber of the 2 A. require you to be a member Yes | | ot the KIBA? :| B. pay your RIBA suhscription? Yes | 12+ No| | 14-8. if you are an architect and do not consider yourself wn a 16 | a nenber in good standing of the hibaA, Ad, ITAAS, FAS or STAMP, Gid you recieve otiicial “nomination papers" 20+ fron AKCUK in November 1979? No | | SUD ESTER age issue date 1) jan writemaltz&murray CatChinnattacheda 12 Oo a eee ieeanpitanendornesiamsants Hugh Pearman Building vesign 5U Caluerwood Street London SE 18 6QH bear iiugh, 14 Holudale koad London Nw 6 19 december 1979 tHlere is the article (2000 words) on the elected Ai.CUK Councillors' report and questionnaire, tozether with the new questionuaire and initio. on the last one which your studio can vraw into bar graphs. Although the questiennaires aire a product o1 the repre- resentutives of the “unattached” architects acting as 2 sroup, the article itselt shoulu he creuited to John hurray and myself, who have written it on behalf ot the gnoup. He and I can be described in the byeline as "“nembers of ANCUK elected by unattached architects." Following our recent telephone conversations, I confirm our agreement as Ltollows, upon which terms the article and questionnaire is submitted: 1. BU to publish article with questionnaire in issue of 1] January ISt. 2. jWuestionnaire to be on reply-paid facility provided by GBD 3. Jobu Murray and myself, as authors, to be paid the standard Buy journelists rate for teatures plus £15 to help cover expenses incurred in article anda questionndire. 4. bv may open ana tally the auswers to the questionnaire but all questionnairs received by BLD will be turned over to john Murray and niyself (on behslt ot the elected Councillors) who will write any Lollow-up report in Bu on the results. Such a Lollow-up article @r articles) is to be cone on the sane terns as the present article. 5. All names anu addresses ol; guestionnairs to retain confidential to the elected Councillors. 6. ‘Ihe article and questionnaire are consioerea to be in the conmon interests of the elected Councillors, bu and the profession. 7. While aimed prinarily at “unattached" architects, all interested Hv readers wiil he invited to reply. A space will also be provided for conrents. &. As the article and questionnaire are on a “sensitive" subject and was written on behalf of and with the consent of the group of representatives, Bb wili clear with the authors any alterations or celetions tt night wish to make. (iif one of the Live questions needs to be aeletea, it should be no. 5.) AS I Shall be away trom 2U/12 to G/1, please contact John \.urray at O40-6651 (work) or 540-4055 (home) if such consultation is necessary. Yoursa2siHnpk‘ely cc;: John hiurray PA Y Hob Malt (4 BUIDINGIES|GN page issue date 11 jan writermaltz & murragatchunattached | | "Unattached" architects by now accustomed to recei :| the expense of their elected AkCUK Counciliors may have | been disappointed when they opened the envelope enclosing the official “nomination papers" sent to them by the : hegistration Council this past November. inia caretully— : i4- orchestrated nove ot unprecedented vindictiveness, and 1 in violation of even AKCUK's own Standing Orders, the | || kKiPA Council nominees who still control AkCUK pushed a 20-wotion through the kegistration Council's October meeting! >Jthanning further reports and questionnaires.| ;a3 | | vespite angspnxkxxuxxe unassailable majority on || e6441.CUK, the Portland Place delegation apparently seens : junable to cone to terms with the continuing |support which sO/the unattached electorate has shown tor those New archi- | 32-1ecture Movement members representing them and with | these Councillors forthright defenge both of the rights of unattached architects and of the public interest. .8ihe KlséA spokesmen said they believed the enone and o4questionnaixe drawn up by the elected Councillors were | 124no longer needed now that, in the event of ne election, _| ae ee Fecaeklae S-personai statenent with their election iniarmation. 84No rnatter that Councillors and candivgates might not be | ithe sume people, that such an electiog the folowing ‘year might not xxkexyinge be required, or tiat the t }“unattached representatives—--the only elected Councillors al s ; bail : 44candidates would have the opportunity oi iugluding a ! ee ores {-ing a brief report and questionnaire prepared by and at o page issue date 1) jan writemaltz & murrayatch unattached 2 | | on AKCUK---found such a report and questionnaire useful ‘ in carrying out their responsibilities on AKCUK. Iron- |}ically, it was a suggestion in response to jone of their :| previous questionnaires that Lea the unattached repre- | sentatives to press AhCUK to change its hegulatibns to aliow candidates to include such a personal statenent! | It was only at the recent December meeting of | the Council that the RIBA'S strategy of attlempting to silence the representatives of the unattached becane CU ceeast —S more obvious. ,ihey retused even to allow unattached Councillors to speak in opposition to majority policies, | to raise the question of the apportionment of seats on | ARCUK, to put relevant motions or to record! opposition ;| votes. | | The nine elected Councillors whohave| been repre- | ' senting unattached architects during the 1979-80 session |---John Allan, Freter Cutmore, sue Jackson, Marion koberts | || |}lan tod, Lddie walker, Tom woolley and the authors——-- i jare theretore gratetul tor the opportunity Building |Design is now ofiering to thank jreplied to last yeay’s questionnaire, to report back on | the results and on their activities } of the past year, ,.and their successors in the coning year. | | Last year, without the benefit of a r¢pily-paid -2.3|° 4-who 1eceived the questionnaire replied to three questions those architects who BUIDINGD ESIGN AS nN & TM ©© 5 and to present a new questionnaire to help buide them j{envelope, 265 ot the nearly 4500 unattached! architects ; age issue date 11 jan writemaltz & nurragatchinattached & |’ | concerning linited liability companies, AhCUK's support z| tor the kiBA fee scale and AkKCUK action (or lack thereof)) to aiscourage discrimination in enployment lagainst the || + growing number of architects---now acknowlédged by even| |i the kibA-controlled AKCUK to be over 22% of those on | the Kegister---who choose not to be members of the KkIBA. ! | The previous year's more open-ended survey had, as reported in BD (16 June 1978), concentrated on tinding 'i out who were the unattached (literally, those people on the Kkegister of Architects who are not members of one or more of the six organisations, including the RIBA, | ; 24- enshrinea in Schedule I of the Architects Hegistration 26-1 act 1951) 4nd -whoLare Mrs onlit Tea to pled represen | 284 xabix-ts Use » Why they were unattached, | >whether and how they would like AhCUK's Code of Protes- | San=~. ‘. e| sional Conduct retormed, and what further action they é 344 would like their representatives on AKCUK to take. It | 36+ also showea a six to one majority in Favout of amending | }' 35> the Kkgistration Acts to take account of the present | me composition of the protessionnx (by now 8% jemployees) i and an even split on the issue of increased lay repre- | 4 sentation on AnCUK. The RIBA Council, which is permitted | by the 1931 Act to appoint lay people to ARCUK neverthe- less appoints exclusively architect menbers o1 the hiBA. Last year, while the unattached electea Bury employees, the KitA Council was appointing management larchitects to fill 90% of its forty seats on ACUK. | HUROE OESIEL wal Nh ' ‘t rn rennarendriesennen cc c cw oO) hohm=k 4 is00oBbN Nm2 —D> c2@UO}aeN peereesmeaiearanaeanan jeleechaasmans o rece ed nce eOEEE OD | NM 2 BUIOINGIDESIGN page issue date 11 jan writemaltz & murrayatch unattached 4 | : This past year, unattached architects |responding 44 to the questionnaire came out solidly in favour, by 6 | a nearly three to one margin, of changing AKCUK'S Code g4 to permit architects to practice as limited| liability }| }°..=| 404 companies. As Johu Parris recently noteu 10 bv (7 vccenber (2-1 1979), Section 17 of the Kegistration Act would appear i} ne : : | 144 to allow linited companies and since AhCUKSs Code has no| 46-1 iorce in law architects are in tact alreauy free to ; |1 18+ practice as limited companies, though the presence ot | 29-4 the Code ban obviously serves to coiutuse and intimidate ’! | | 22 people. kven the Code, oi course, has never prohibited :| 244 architects irom practicing with linited lidbility in | 254 the form of a co-op under the Industrial and Provident .| Societies Act rather than the Companics Act. The elected Couucillors also took note ot the 30-4 324 364 ing to force architects to use the k1iBA Conditions ot | 384 ungagement, which incluaes the KiBbA Fee Scale. 64% were :;| 40-4 in iavour of changing the Code, SU were opposed and Aor 121 144 were undecided. | | | |' clear majority in iavour of AKCUK tollowing the reconmen-— dations ot the Nonopolies Comiission sressh no longer try—|} On the third guestion, whether AkCUK ,ought to take | 65 stronger measures to help end discrimination in employ—- j 8 rent against architects who choose not to be members of :C}. ! 04{ the KIBA, the elected Councillors received /a‘ near-unani- af nous response, with 96% in itavour ot stronger action, 44 2% opposed and 2) undecttiea. Although the Architects | :u} i) o Sieealateneresans UU Deol oage issue date 11 jan writermaltz&murray Catchunattached 5 | | registration ‘ses: ; lee the ofticially recognised quuliiication tor an archi- Sjtect, although KIbA membership represents nd bighber 8 /qualitication Gnkect, many corporate marvels of the RIBA i0Jare not even architects) and although Portland Place — 319 4 propaganda claims that the RIBA is a voluntary hody, 12 46 promotion to be menbers of the RIDA. kule 2's of the jAKCUK Code, enjoining each architect not to|"act in 20>disregard of the professional qualitications of those to <2\whon he gives authority, responsibility or employment" <47seems to be one of those parts of the Code Which the 26 7ik1BA-dominatea ALCUK preiters not to enLorce, ‘the unattached Councillors have becond increasingly concerned during the past year by AKCUK'S very selective 2 japproseh to enforcement of its Code and inté¢rpretation lot "Gissraceful conduct" for which it may strike an ji| sO4architect off the Kegister. The present rulérs of ARCUK || 384seen to concentrate on enforcing those manele ot the jwwode which establish a commercial cartel anOe private |khegistration Acts 19351 and 1958 established sone employers still require applicants tor!posts or 2architectural firms while ignoring those saydees nxwhich protect the public. For exaiiple, while AKcud has thus fe | i > | o>>Df ar taken no action against architects SO acd in joiticial enquiries into buiiuing disasters Led have j cee thelivesofwanypeople,ithasindiqatedits 2intention to strike off for "disgraceiul conauct" an sad : , | Syav ~ architect who intringed Rule 2.1 of the Code, forbidding Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Bob Maltz Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived John Murray Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource December 1979 Subject The topic of the resource Article for Building Design on ARCUK issues, Dec 1979 https://nam.maydayrooms.org/files/original/c72c1f2de394362452f511677ff5603a.pdf 70df5afd00e542a87919d44ae9f15dfa Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Professional Issues Description An account of the resource A cohort of NAM members became engaged with the professional registration body, standing as elected councillors on the Architects Registration Council and its various committees. Hitherto entirely dominated by the RIBA bloc, the Council began to yield to a new dynamic through NAM's involvement, enabling fresh perspectives on such issues as mandatory fee scales, greater lay representation on the body, ethically-based standards of professional conduct, etc. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Article for The Architects’ Journal re results of Elected Councillors Questionnaire, March 1980 Description An account of the resource Dan Cruikshank The architects' Journal 9 Queen Anne's Gate London SWIH SBY Dear Dan, 14 Holmdale Road London NW 6 31 march 1980 Yours sincerely, Yee rN Pm 72 1,N¢4 Vine C \ Bob Maltz Here is the 1000-word article on the etestem results of the elected AKCUK Councillors' questionnaire, together with the necessary information tor bar graphs which your studio can araw (see examples of Figures 1 and 2). Like the previous article, this one is written on behalf of the elected Councillors acting us a group, though the article should be credited to the authors, John Murray and myself. Following my letter of 16 January ana our telephone conversation of 18 Siarch, I coniirw our agreement as follows, upon wnich terms the article and intormation are submitted: 1. The AJ to publish article in issue of 9 April 1980. 2. John murray and tiyself, as authors, to be paid the fee of One Hundred Pounds. S. As the article is on a "sensitive" subject and has been written on hehalf of ane with the consent of the group oi elected representatives, the AJ will clear with the authors any alterations, aduitions or deletions it wight wish to make. (if such con- Sultation is neces~ary after 3 April, when i shall be away, please contact John Murray: work 34U-8U31, home 340-4559.) of the RIBA. 61 per cent of employee architects responding maltz & murray AJ 9 april results 1 End ARCUK's “ban” on directorships, end the RIBA Council's control of ARCUK and give all architects the right to elect their representatives on ARCUK, with employee architects given These are some of the conclusions to emerge from the over 500 responses to the recent questionnaire drawn up by the elected architect members of AhCUK and pub- lished in the AJ of January SO. Despite the seemingly controversiel seven tuents. Where marked differences of attitude did emerge, employee and self-employed these were more often between architects on the one hand other hand, rather than and architect members of the RIBA. Of the total of 524 cent came from people working, responses received, 94 per m@ or employers, in the protession. were employees, 18 per cent without employees. 70 per cent of these employers and 12 self-employed Among architects responding,y(again, the total), 32 per cent were 94 per cent of "unattached" and 67%,members their fair share of seats. nature of most of the, questions, the results on all but one were unequivocal. Only on the Architects Kegistration on ARCUK was the response other hand, a whopping 91% to allow the elected Councillors questionnaire in AKCUK's question of reforming the Acts to require a lay presence tairly evenly divided. On thought AKCUK should continue to insert a report and annual mailing to their consti- and employer architects between "unattached" architects the on the insert Fig. 1 insert Fig. 2 were RIBA members and 29 per cent of these said their employer required them (contrary to employment legisla- tion) to join the kKIBA. 99 per cent of employer architects responding were kIBA members. OL the self-employed, 70 per cent were RIBA members. Of all the respondents, 70% were under 45 years old. Only 5 per cent were women. These were the results, question by question: 1. "Do you think ARCUK should continue to allow the elected Councillors to insert a report and question- naire in ARCUK's annual mailing to their constituents?” (Last year, the RIBA Council's appointees who control ARCUK forced through a ban on further reports and ques— tionnaires.) Not only did $7 per cent ot "unattached" architects answer "yes," but even 87 per cent of KIBA members did. 2. "Should ARCUK amend its Code to allow architects to be owners or directors of firms dealing in property, construction or building materials?” 57 per cent answered "yes," with "unattached" archi- (65 per cent) tects more enthusiastically in favour of the change than RIBA members (53 per cent). On this issue there was little difference of opinion between employees, employers and self-employed. 3. "Do you think the Architects Kegistration Act 1931 should be reformed to: A: allow all architects directly to elect their represen- tfLAP PDOL2!OUPem maltz & murray AJ 9 april results 2 insert Fig. 3A tatives on ARCUK? B: give employee architects representation on AKCUK in proportion to their nunerical strength in the profession?" {At present, only those considered "unattached" may elect ARCUK Counciliors and “constituencies” are drawn on the basis of organisational membership rather than employment status.) 86 per cent favoured extending the franchise to all architects, with a strong vote of confidence in democracy coming from the "unattached": 99 per cent! 79% of all architect members of the RIBA who responded favoured elections. Among them, 85 per cent of employees, and even 64 per cent of employers, WEKEXxNX<HxXBUEX answered "yes." Likewise, 70 per cent said “yes" to giving employee architects their fair share of the profession's seats on ARCUK. Only the employers (36 per cent) opposed the idea. 80 per cent of employees were in tavour, as were 57 per cent of self-employed. 4. "Do you think that control of ARCUK by the PIBA Council is in the best interests of: A: the public? B. the profession?" (Ever since Parliament, refusing to give the RIBA a monopoly on the use of the term "architect" for its own members, set up ARCUK and kegistration, the RIBA Council has stopped at nothing to keep ARCUK a puppet of Portland Place. Through its control of ARCUK, the RIBA Council gave insert Fig. 3B maltz & murray AJ 9 april results 3 insert Fig. 4A itself nomination rights to 41 ot the 68 seats on ARCUK this year.) Not only did a massive 80 per cent reply that control of ARCUK by the RIBA Council was not in the public interest, but even 70 per cent of RIBA members agreed! Employees (87 per cent) and self-employed (84 per cent) were most strongly opposed to RIBA control of ARCUK; only the employers (49 per cent) had their doubts. Even more surprisingly, nearly as many respondents, 76 per cent, said that control of AkCUK by the R1BA Council was not even in the best interests of the profession, and this included 66 per cent ot responses from architect members oi the RIBA itself! Both employees (83 per cent) and selt-employed (78 per cent) favoured an independent AFKCUK. As many as 47 per cent of the employers responding thought control of ARCUK by "their" Council was not in the best interests of the profession. The views of “unattached” architects who responded were nearly unanimous on these issues. 9&8 per cent thought RIBA control of AkKCUK was not in the best interests of the public and 95 per cent, ot the profession. 5. "A?though the Architects Registration Act 1931 allows for ample lay representation on AKCUK, those bodies free to appoint lay members invariably refuse to do so. Do you think that the Act shoula be reformed to require a lay presence on AkCUK?" insert Fig. 4B maltz & murray AJ 9 april results 4 insert Fig. 4A itself nomination rights to 41 ot the 68 seats on ARCUK this year.) Not only did a massive 80 per cent reply that control of ARCUK by the RIBA Council was not in the public interest, but even 70 per cent of RIBA members agreed! Employees (87 per cent) and self-employed (84 per cent) were most strongly opposed to RIBA control of ARCUK; only the employers (49 per cent) had their doubts. Even more surprisingly, nearly as many respondents, 76 per cent, said that control of AkKCUK by the R1BA Council was not even in the best interests of the profession, and this included 66 per cent of responses from architect members oi the RIBA itself! Both employees (83 per cent) and selt-employed (78 per cent) favoured an independent AKCUK. As many as 47 per cent of the employers responding thought control of ARCUK by "their" Council was not in the best interests of the profession. The views of “unattached” architects who responded were nearly unanimous on these issues. 98 per cent thought RIBA control of AkCUK was not in the best interests of the public and 95 per cent, ot the profession. 5. "A?though the Architects Registration Act 1931 allows for ample lay representation on AKRCUK, those bodies free to appoint lay members invariably refuse to do so. Do you think that the Act should be reformed to require a lay presence on AkCUK?" insert Fig. 4B maltz & murray AJ 9 april results 4 insert Fig. 5 52 per cent of those responding said "yes," but there was a clear difierence of opinion between the "unattached," strongly in fuvour (64 per cent), and RIBA members (44 per cent), as well as between the employers who were opposed (43 per cent) and employees (v3 per cent) and self-employed (55 per cent) in favour. Ihe questionnaire also asked those architects who did not consider thenselves members in good standing ot the RIBA, AA, IAAS, FAS or STAMP whether they received official nomination papers trom ARCUK in November 1979, as all “unattached" architects, theoretically, should. Inexplicably, only 57 per cent replied that they had; 43 per cent said they had not. Many people who responded also took the trouble to include comments and suggestions. For example, although not a subject covered by the questionnaire, quite a few respondenots, many of whom were RIBA members, wished to see control of architectural education and entry into the protessioen taken out of the RIBA's hands. The following comments give some idea ot the very broad range of those received. maltz & murray AJ 9 april results 5 y maltz & murray AJ 9 april results 6 HOARE ---a non-architect, under S5 years old, public sector "The N.A.M. cannot be considered representative of the "unattached." ---an architect member of the RIBA, over 54 years old, private sector &-nIn theory AXCUK should have been the body which not only democratised British architecture, out also reformed professionalism in Britain across a bveaad front. In practice the RIBA"sS control and domination was an act of hypocritical compromise which denied both the publics’ interest in Scrutinising the affairs: of the profession, and the Deofession’s own interests in organising its own affairs representatively. Fifty years after the Rezistration Acts ve still have the same problems and the same legal structure. It works for no ones fre Registration Acts should be reformed to constitute ARCUK as it was originally intended. The problem is, thouzh, tecl(ororession is in too much. disarray to even consider that its public responsibilities are not being © Met, and the pudlic has no r2al notion of how its professions Should be brought to heel." Bal aes => ‘ tfa — Carnplouec! ~ a AY oO) —————/ ~——/ See ee malrz a Conga Sea Cs eCVenwy Mm eu) iw _ ri y| & wv Ue IeO 5 Jey oe gO 20 ec eciwe \|- eeeNe eres e SS FSeune & wa) (O) (a) ese i 1 eer = | mi) Lj it met ee - . ) \ D \ ' seSSSSa SAEEROPct “| al oa maltz - mn SAU AY SNao-l +P 49 COFiHOR Coal iSBAS :Or. ‘ue 9Voy We rrr | Seen Es |12 Pee)Oserieceeeegee \ to | in dQ EN) GAS CaylO ar HG)|eeLiG)e eae CON eS) a c ND ri ND tite) 2 so oe {lo pone nf Sa) eo ap Sa) OP CON cay aes Oe (Vy a Co) (ae ace Se)58) =sO RM SS ep 9 GS) @ Ue oa ——ee: |! |e aman VA \! bef eeeee- ha Fas If i) eal [Salen tees iat ae, } oh) Im iV) {a Li Yim Dey, Aaa > S&S Wee N of ra La Pee Sees ez Sw es SI <= Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Bob Maltz Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived John Murray Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource March 1980 Subject The topic of the resource Article for The Architects’ Journal re results of Elected Councillors Questionnaire, March 1980 https://nam.maydayrooms.org/files/original/09372d9fb49345d6cf734de0e718c3cd.pdf 734f564d34760eda7a27d85d3a00f6e5 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Professional Issues Description An account of the resource A cohort of NAM members became engaged with the professional registration body, standing as elected councillors on the Architects Registration Council and its various committees. Hitherto entirely dominated by the RIBA bloc, the Council began to yield to a new dynamic through NAM's involvement, enabling fresh perspectives on such issues as mandatory fee scales, greater lay representation on the body, ethically-based standards of professional conduct, etc. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Brief particulars about candidates for forthcoming election to ARCUK Council Subject The topic of the resource Brief particulars about candidates for forthcoming election to ARCUK Council (4pp Leaflet) Description An account of the resource Architects Registration Council of the United Kingdom Brief particulars about candidates Age Date of Admission to the Register of Architects. Name of Architectural Constituent Bodies of which candidate is a member (if any). Present professional post (including the name of the firm or employer) and previous professional experience. Committee experience (architectural and otherwise). (vi) Personal statement (if any). JOHN STEWART ALLAN 36 years 1976. Unattached. Project Architect employed at Shepheard Epstein & Hunter since 1973. Previously employed.at Department of Architecture and Civic Design, The Greater London Council (Housing Division) ARCUK: Member of Council Professional Purposes Committee 1979-80-81, Conduct Monitoring Group 1980-81-82, Admission Committee 1977-78-79. Design & Industries Association 1967-69. Junior Liaison Organisation 1975-78; Chairman, Highbury Plan Group 1975- Steering Committee, Blackstock Road Advice Centre 1978-79; TASS Building Design Staff National Advisory Committee 1977. Founder Member, The New Architecture Moyement. For too long unattached Architects have been regarded as an inconsequential minority whose interest could be ignored. But now numbering nearly a quarter of the entire profession — and growing fast— their significance can be discounted no longer. This years overdue abolition of ARCUKs surrogate RIBA code provides new freedoms to unattached Architects which institutions still encombered with unworkable codes are attempting to deny. The dropping of cartel arrangements should stimulate new endeavours to practise in the public interest— an initiative in which unattached Architects may now take the leading role. I will continue to counter the RIBA attacEn unattached Architects both within Council and in the wider professional arena. NORMAN FRANK ARNOLD 35 years. 1979. Unattached. Self employed, 8 years in private practice, 21/2 years in Local Authority planning and architecture. (V) ARCUK: Member of Council 1980-81-82; Finance & General Purposes Committee 1980•81 ; Professional Purposes Committee 1981•82. New Architecture Movement: Liaison Group and Alternative Practice Group 1978-79. Establishment of ARCAID Steering Committee 1979 (an aid agency for community groups). The past year has seen some fundamental changes of the criteria to be observed by architects in their conduct. Some of my colleagues representing the unattached have played a leading role in bringing these about. We should be wary however that one of the basic aims of the unattached Councillors, around which these changes were to have hinged, has of necessity been temporarily shelved by us for fear of the RIBA Councillors on ARCIJK voting it out of existence. This is the facility for the public recording of architects' business interests. Without this registration we must rely largely on the honesty and integrity of the vast majority on ARCIJK (i.e. architects belonging to the RIBA) for the thorough policing of "Conduct and Discipline". Is this democratic? I ask for re-election to promote "justice seen to be done" on ARCUK JAMES ROBERT ALISTAIR BLAMIRE 35 years. 1975. Unattached. �Partner housing. in Previous the firm professional of Arcade Community-Based experience as a Architects, salaried architect Edinburgh, in central working government mainly on inner and localcity authority and in private practice both in Britain and the US. Previous membership committee of for the the Graduate experience architects' Studies includes department Committee membership in at the the Livingston of University the ARCO branch of K Oregon, Admission of NALGO USA Committee 1978-79, 1976-78.for and 1981-82,as union representative As a member of the New Architecture Movement, my intention if elected is to promote the idea of architectural services becoming more widely available to the community as a whole, including lowincome owner-occupiers and tenants. I see this as a fundamental role for ARCUK as a public interest body. I am also concerned about the im provement of conditions for salaried architects, particulary those in the private sector. MICHAEL DAVID BROAD 31 years. 1978. Unattached. Senior Development Officer, Edinburgh City District Council working on inner city housing action areas. Previous employer Sir Basil Spence, Glover, Ferguson and Partners. ARCIJK: Association Member 1981-82; of Council New Architecture and Admission Movement Committee Liaison 1981-82. Group and Chairman Edinburgh Pathhead Group 1979-80-81;Community AUEW-TASS Edinburgh East; Secretary ADAS Dundee Architectural Students 1974-75. The future existence of ARCUK has been questioned by some members of the RIBA education is under attack and ARCUK must regain the control previously delegated to the RIBA ARCIJK is not the rubber stamp of any one constituent member. As one of the New Architecture Movement candidates I intend, if re-elected, to continue to seek a democratically elected Council that will carry out all of its duties under the Registration Acts, to promote the interests of salaried architects and other public sector employees and for as long as there are inner city areas where few people have ever met an architect I will resist the closure or limitation of numbers within the schools. DAVID JOHN BURNEY (i) 34 years. 1976. (iii) Unattached. Salaried architect, Shepheard, Epstein & Hunter since 1973. ARCUK• Member of Council and Board of Architectural Education 1980-82. New Architecture Movement. Past Chairman BDS-TASS London Branch. One of ARCUK's most important statutory duties is the recognition of examinations in architecture, the passing of which allows admission to the Register of Architects. The Board of Architectural Education is responsible for evaluating courses and making recommendations to Council. In recent years the BAE has sub-contracted this duty to RIBA Visiting Boards in defiance of the intentions of the Registration Acts. This practice has been encouraged by the pre-dominance of RIBA members on the Board, despite the majority lay membership provided for under the Act. If elected I intend to continue to press for the restoration of the statutory recognition procedure to the Board of Architectural Education and for the full involvement of the nominees of Educational Institutions and other lay bodies represented on the Board. PETER JOHN CUTMORE (i) 38 years. 1969. Unattached. Employed by Property Services Agency, Department of the Environment in their regiona I headquarters at Cambridge since 1968 as an architect designing and supervising various buildings of differing type and value. ARCUK: Member of Council 1979-80-81-82, Board of Architectural Education 1979-80, Admission Committee 1980-81. Member and sub-section secretary of the Institute of Professional Civil Servants. Member of Local District Council Architects Advisory Panel. My aim on Council has been to contribute to the task of maintaining ARCUK's independence as established by statute and representing the interests of the 'unattachecf by voting impartially on Council. I believe the Council and the BAE, and their Committees should be more open in their business and thus more acceptable not only to architects but to society in general. 49 years. 1961. (iii) RIAS. Chief Assistant, Department of Building Control City of Edinburgh District Council. Prior to this I was in artnership with R D Cameron for 5 years, following salaried posts in Local Authority, commercial 'in ouse', Contractor/Developer and private practice. ARCUK Council 1981-82, President of Student Architects Group Edinburgh (SAGE) 1959, Student representative on EAA Council 1959. Representing as I do many Architects, who, like myself, have left the mainstream of the profession, I am concerned by what I see from my resent vantage point. Too many Architects chasing too few projects, a never diminishing stream of brig teyed graduates destined for the dole, a general lack of excellence, competitiveness — or in some cases competence, I have to ask, how long can this go on? 100 year old housinq is currently being refurbished and should easily see the 21 st century, meanwhile, 20 year old housing much IS Deliggt, bein demolished, because it has neither the quality of Firmness nor Commodity — it never had and Architects were involved in most of it. Is Pompidou going to fall down before Eiffel? Are "slick shedS' Zeibarted? Why can't we compete with Tom Baron and Lawrie Barratt? If this sounds like the trailer for new week's 'Soap', I only wish it were!, because in a mere 7 days we would "know the answers to these and many other questions". ARCUK should be looking for answers, and concurrently encourage diversification into all related fields — not to escape, but to give strength to the Profession. ALAN LIPMAN 0) 56 years. 1963. Unattached. University Professor. The Welsh School of Architecture, University of Wales Institute of Science and Technology, practioner in Africa and in the UK; various practices, private and public. I have served extensively on academic, professional, public and political Board committees Panel Of the — RIBA including (ARCUKthe ARCUK, the Board of Architectural Education and the Visiting representative); until recently, I was National Co-ordinator of CND Wales. Architects, I contend, must seek and must help to establish ways of ensuring that they are responsive In furtheringto and are responsible to their social clients; to, that is, the users of the buildings they design. this notion of service to public interests — of public accountablility— with my fellow members of the New Architecture Movement, I am committed to action that will restore to the ARCUK and to the Board of Architectural Education the rights and obligations which were vested in the Council and in the Board by Parliament when approving the Architects (Registration) Acts. ROBERT MALTZ (i) 38 years. 1976. Unattached. Salaried employee with et the al), architectural London Borough education, of Haringey, community Previously action employed projects in and private architecturalpractice (Fielden & Mawson, Journalism. ARCIJK: Member of Council 1977-80. Professional Purposes Committee. 1977-78. Board of Architectural Education 1980. Educational Grants Panel 1980-81. New Architecture Movement. Member of NALGO (Departmental rep.). Since I last served on Council little progress has been made in the achievement of democratic reforms within ARCUK. However, the growing number of architects who choose to remain •unattached' provides a growing force within the profession which must be effectively represented on the Council. If elected I shall press committees for the full and representation panels from which of the they unattached have been on excluded the Board by the of Architecturalcurrent RIBA Education and In the on for longer the all architect term I shall representatives campaign for and the for replacement a majority of lay the representation present 'Banana on Council.Republic' by monopoly. direct elections GILES NICHOLAS PEBODY 31 years. 1977. Unattached. JOHN CHARLES PHILLIP GIBB �Senior project architect with the Society for C&operative Dwellings. Previously employed by Levitt Bernstein Associates. I have also worked in the public sector. Committee Founder member of 'Slate' of Magazine the New and Architecture the NAM Liaison Movement Group. (NAM) Erstwhile on which treasurer I served of London on the BDS EditorialBranch of AUEW/TASS. ARCUK Council and Finance and General Purposes Committee 1981. If elected I will continue to press, in the short term for open and democratic practices on the Council, for the reform of the Council to eventual direct election to all architects' seats and, in the future, for the control of ARCUK by lay interests. DAVID ROEBUCK 35 years. 1976. (iii) Unattached. Member of co-operative practice, private sector. Previously salaried employee in private and public sectors (v) ARCIJK: Council 1977-79, 1980-81, Professional Purposes Committee 1978-79, 1980-81, Conduct Monitoring Group. Formerly an executive committee member of the "Save Brighton Station Campaign" and served on the Council of Brighton and Hove Amenity Societies, and architectural adviser to various environmental/resident groups. Member of AST MS. Founder member of the New Architecture Movement. The past year has been a qualified success. ARCU KS new document "Conduct and Discipline" meets the criteria set out in my statement for last year's election. Now the capability of the Discipline Committee will have to be examined. The public recording of business interest remains on the agenda awaiting decision. In the coming year, if elected, I shall endeavour to introduce democratic reforms within ARCUK in order that the Council may effectively discharge its duties and free itself from RIBA abuse. In particular it is necessary, as a first step, that the unattached (who now comprise nearly a quarter of the profession) are fully represented on all ARCIJK committees, visiting boards, and panels instead of the token representation that the present RIBÄ monopoly dictates. EDWARD WALKER 31 years. 1976. Unattached. Currently self employed in Leeds engaged in work for community groups and organisations. Previously employed in company architects' office, PSA, Landscape Design office (Brian Clouston and Partners) and small private practices. Also supervisor on Community Centre Renovation Building Project. ARCUK: Member of Council 1979-80-81-82, Professional Purposes Committee 1981-82, Finance and General Purposes Committee 1980-81 , Admission Committee 1979-80-81. New Architecture Movement. Chairman AUEW•TASS Leeds West Branch 1979 Leeds Trades Council Delegate 1979, 1980, 1981, 1982. NAM members work on ARCUK last year included: Pressing unsuccessfully for more unattached representatives on the Board of Architectural Education. The new 'Standard of Conduct for Architects' is a first step on the road to eradicating the exclusive bosses club domination of Architecture. But have we been duped? Our fight continues to establish the principles of fair play with no petty rules and no unnecessary restraints on practice. Building Control (England and Wales): Opposing the use of membership of institutions as qualification for Self-certification which would restrain the unattacheds' right to practise. The unattached election is the only democratic voice affecting ARCIJK — let it challenge all others. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource ARCUK Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived JA Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource Undated https://nam.maydayrooms.org/files/original/71cad14334b998fecccd422fc44e99f6.pdf e5bc7f7486bbff0f9e2a97bd1942df81 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Professional Issues Description An account of the resource A cohort of NAM members became engaged with the professional registration body, standing as elected councillors on the Architects Registration Council and its various committees. Hitherto entirely dominated by the RIBA bloc, the Council began to yield to a new dynamic through NAM's involvement, enabling fresh perspectives on such issues as mandatory fee scales, greater lay representation on the body, ethically-based standards of professional conduct, etc. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Brief particulars about candidates for forthcoming election to ARCUK Council Subject The topic of the resource Brief particulars about candidates for forthcoming election to ARCUK Council (10pp Leaflet) Description An account of the resource Architects Registration Council of the United Kingdom Brief particulars about candidates (i) Age Date of Admission to the Registration Of Architects. Name of Architectural Constituent Bodies of which candidate is a member (if any). Present professional post (including the name of the firm or employer) and previous professional experience. Committee experience (architectural and otherwise) (vi) Personal statement (if any). The views expresed in the candidates' statements below are personal to the writers and do not represent the views of the Council of ARCUK. NORMAN FRANK ARNOLD ( i ) years 1979 Unattached Partner in a Leeds Practice; Lecturer at the Hull Schoool of Architecture; 17 years in public and private practice. (v) A Founder member of ARCAtD (Leeds); The New Architecture Movement; ARCIJK Council, Professional purposes Committee/Finance and General Purposes Committee- 1980-87. (vi) Over the past year I have represented the interests of Unattached Architects during sub-Committee preparation of draft documents concerning Disciplinary Procedures, hopefully enabling those of us who judge to be more enlightened, better informed and above all democratically fair. If reælected I will attempt to continue in this role. Together with Disciplinary Procedures and inter-European qualifications, Education continues to be a growing sphere of power for ARCIJK with regard to the European Community. I will endevour to represent the Unattached in these areas. Architects everywhere in Europe should be accountable to the public. 1 �JAMES ROBERT ALISTAIR BLAMIRE 41 years 1975 Unattached Self-employed inner city housing. architect Previously with Arcade a salaried Architects architect in in Edinburgh. central and working local governmentmainly on and in private practice both in Britain and the US. ARCUK Council 1982-88. Admissions Committee 1981-83. Finance and General (vi- Purposes Committee 1983-85. New Architecture Movement 1981-82. Previously involved in various student. union and education committees. (vi) The 'Unattached' numbers are substantially up again this year giving us a further seat on Council and a greater voice in the debates on education. conduct and discipline, tie EC Directive and finance. But although the electorate has been on the increase for many years now there is concern among the •Unattached' councillors about the consistently low poll at elections. In order to reverse this tend and to channel energy effectively moves are underway to create greater cohesiveness within and wider publicity for the group of which I am a represenätive on Council. The primary intention is to promote ARCUKs statutory duties in edJcanon and what I believe to be its proper role as a public interest body. Vote this year and support the moves towards a positive, democratic ARCUK. MICHAEL DAVID BROAD 37 years 1977 Unattached Partner of Mck Broad Terry Hughes Architects in Ednburgh. Previously with Edinburgh D.C. Housing Deparünent ARCUK: Counci Nkrnber 1981-1988, also served on the Admissions. Professional Purposes and Finance General Purposes Committee of ARCUK. Fourteen people Will be ELECTED onto the Council this year by the free vote of architects in ali types ot employment. This will be one more than last year and so the democratic representation continues to increase. The attempts by one Constituent Body to dominate the council by nominating their yes men onto council this past year backfired. ARCIJK has at last made some of its own decisions. Support he unattached representatives, on annuaJy elected Council. use your vote and write to those elected c/o The Registrar 73 Hallam Street London with your views. 2 ANDREW JAMES EARL 30 years 1984 Unattached Architect with COMTECHSA Ltd., Liverpool. Previous experience in local authorities and the Architects and Builders Co-opertive (Aull) Ltd. Branch committee-ACTSS (T & GWU). Company secretary-ABC, Committee -Hull Architecture Workshop. Build for people not profit. Work towards public accountability. Take back control from the grey men in suits. WILLIAM LESLIE FORSYTH 0) 38 1974 Unattached Lecturer, Department of Civic Design. University of Liverpool. 1979-86 COMTECHSA Ltd., Liverpool. 1973- 7B The Edinburgh Consortium. Various private and public practices. 1984-87 ARCUK Council, 1984 Professional Purposes Committee, 1979-86 Secretary. Comtechsa Ltd.. 1982-85 Secretary ACTAC, Numerous voluntary committees. The votes cast in last year's election for unattached councillors were less than 25% of the possible total. This represents a lack of interest second only to the turnout at some local authority elections during the World Cup. It hardly displays enthusiasm for ensuring that unattched councillors can act with confidence based on an active electorate. You may have noticed that the unattached have another seat on Council next year, a total of fourteen. In the next few years it is possible that the unattached will hold a substantial minority, if not a majority, of seats on Council. Make an effort, vote. ensure your colleagues vote, stand for election next year, contact your councillors and express your concerns over the future of your profession. 3 ALLEN BERNARD EDWARD GEAL 41 years 1973 Unattached Present professional post: Architect, Urban Design City of Bristol. Previous experience: Architect in pnvate pracbce. Student Representative, School Academic Committee, University of Bath. ARCUK Member of Council 1985 - ; Professional Purposes Committee 1985 - The statutory and indepen±nt role of ARCUK must be asserted against tie narrow •professional- interests of the RIBA This can be achieved hus: The assumption of full ARCUK control over architectural education and the encouragement and extension of relevant research. That is: the endng of RIBA involvement in the Visiting Boards and in the recognition ofSchools of Architecture. Increasing the professional and academic links with European Community professions whilst maintaining our traditional US and Commonwealth links. A vigorous and reasoned response to t•te National Council for Vocational Oaaflfications (a new quango!) in line with those of the Medical and Legal professionsand in distinction to the uncritical and shortsighted RIBA attitude. A reform of the principal Registration Act to bring it into line with the Medical Registration Act That is, to reduce the representation of professional bodies to a nominal (and appropriate!) level and form a Council largely from drecdy elected members of the profession. Now is the time. 4 28 years 1986 Unattached Salaried architect, Property Services Agency, Central Office for Wales. Previous professional experience in local government and private practice, and research into the subject of flexibility in office design, sponsored by the Science and Engineering Research Council. South Wales Women Architects Group. I believe that architectural practice should be foundedon technical competence, and I am therefore interested in approaches to education, information supply and professional organisation that would assist the achievement of a high standard of building performance. It is my conviction that research into the built enviorment is necessary to augment our understanding of how buildings work, and to provide design guidance for architects. I am concerned about public mistrust of the profession and welcome any initiative to set up a closer relationship between users and architects. I feel that sucessful design must acknowledge people's needs and preferences. MICHAEL JENKS 42 years 1975 Unattached Principal Lecturer in Architecture, and Head of Continuing Education, Oxford Polytechnic. ARCUK Council 1984-87. BAE 19857, GPC 1986-7, Awards Panel 1985-7, Advisory Panel 1985-7, Continuing Education Committee. Faculty and Departmental Boards, Oxford Polytechnic. The number of unattached architects is growing. and with it our voice in Council. We have been active in ARCUK's strengthened role in education and in moves to be more closely involved with the validating process through proposals for Joint Visiting Boards. The unattached have an important say in the architectural debate. and are part of the wide representation enabled by ARCUK's constitution. The attack on this constitution by factional interests in the RIBA is a malign attempt to undermine ARCUK's control. and with it the repsentation of unattached architects. Resisting this attempt has wasted valuable time when there are so many vital issues to debate that affect the profession both now and in the future. If elected I will , with other unattached representatives, continue to promote and support moves to strengthen ARCtJKs rightful role as a body that is democratic, representative, publicly accountable. and supportive of architectural education and practice. 5 MARY ELIZABETH KELLY 29 years 1985 Unattached Salaried architect with Bradford Communiry Technical Aid Service at present. Previous expenence; Architect with Free Form Arts Trust, Arch. assistant with Free Form Arts Trust. London; BBC architects Department. London; Forbes Bramble Ass. London; Topham Ravensdale Ass. Zambia; Blackmore Son and Co. Hull. Elected to/served on: ARCUK Council representing Unattached Architects 1986. F & GP Committee (ARCUK) 1986,87; staff Sub-committee (ARCIJK) 1986n; Management Committee Association ot Community Technincal Aid Centres (ACTAC) June 1986-87. It is essential that debate within the profession, and on ARCUK Council. is encouraged so that as many different voices are heard and can contribute. Such debate as there is on Council at the present is largely due to the efforts of the Unattached to bring into question certain majority assumptions and argue for change where and when it appears to be necessary. I feet that it is time for ARCUK to take up the mantle of duties allotted under the Act and be seen anci heard to be rue representative ot all members of the prolession and not simply promoting the views of any one constituent body. I would like to see evi&nce of greater encouragement being given to women to enter the profession by an increase in tie numbers of women on Council. ALAN ROBERT LIPMAN ( i) 62 (ii) 1963 Unattached Academic (Professor), The Welsh School of Architecture, UWIST. Cardiff; practitioner in southem Africa and in the UK - various practices. public and private. I have served on academic, professional. pubfic and political committees - including ARCUK. the Board of Architectural Educaton, the Admission Committee and the Visiting Board Panel of fre RIBA (ARCUK representative). Until recently I was ViceChairperson of CND Cymru (Wales) and a member of the New Architecture Movement The representatives whom you have sent to Council have consistently sruggled to reinsäte ARCIJK's statutory authority in architectural education. I have been part of that sÜuggte since fre mid-197ffs. In contrast to RIBA connivance in educational cuts (eg. via the Esher report). we have won support for ARCUK's rejection of efforts to slash Schools of Architecture and student opportunities. Regrettably more. much more. has yet to be done. We now face wider - and wilder - threats to student numbers, to Schools, to the length of courses. In addition,we must continue our long-standng struggles to make ARCUK a representative forum; one with extensive lay representation and one which reflects the composition of the profession. Vote unattached - help us to fight for a future for archtectural education, for architecture. 6 THOMAS ANDREW MARKUS 59 years 1950 Unattached Professor (Emeritus) of Building Science, University of Strathclvde, Glasgow. Professor 19661986. (v) Previously (1964-66) Reader in Architecture, Welsh School of Architecture; Manager of Products Applications Department, Pilkington Brothers. St Helens (1956-64); Architect. I.C.I. London (1954-56); Assistant Lecturer in Architecture, University of Manchester School of Architecture (1951-54); Assistant Architect, Manchester City Council (1950-51); Studio Assistant, University of Manchester School of Architecture (1949-50). Experience in practice, research, teaching and consultancy; chief involvement in architectural history and theory; buildings, climate and energy; fuel poverty and housing problems; cost benefit analysis and building resources. Involved in teaching and assessment at Schools in USA, Candia. Malaysia, Nigeria, Turkey, and a number of European countries. Committee Experience (Architecture and Otherwise): several three year spells as Strathclyde representative on ARCUK Board of Architectural Education; from 1956 onwards at various times members of RIBA Science Committee, Postgraduate Training and Research Committee, Documentation Panel, Board of Education (later Education and Practice Executive Committee) from 1970-1978 and Vice Chairman of Board, 1977-78. Chairman of Schools of Architecture Council 1977-79. Intermittently member of the RIBA Visiting Board 1969-77. Member of CAA Visiting Board. Member of ARCIJK Visting Board. Member of CNAA Architecture Board and Committee for the Built Environment 1979 — present. Member of CNAA Technology Research Sub Committee 1983. Member of a number of CIB Working Groups. (vi) I have worked in ARCUK and outside it for detachment of architectural products from the aims of elite power groups. This means the transfer of power in design, resource control and management to those with little power — i.e. the vast majority of building users — involving the defence, by ARCUK, of Parliament's clear intention to bring a measure of public control into architectural practice and education. 7 SHEELAGH MARIE THERESE McMANUS 0) 28 years 1985 Unattached Currently a member of Matrix Feminist Design Cooperative. London. Previously with Community Design Service. Cardiff; Community Technical Services Agency (COMTECHSA) Ltd.. Liverpool; Welsh Health Technical Services Organisation (WHTSO). Cardiff; Murray & Doran Archi!ects, Belfast. ARCUK Admissions Committee. 1986 & 1987; ARCIJK Advisory Panel on the Evaluation of Overseas Architectural Qualifications, 1987. South Wales Women Architects Group. 1985; Hull Architecture Workshops Management Committee, 198384; The Architects Qualifications (EEC Recognition) Order 1987 came into effect in the UK on Thursday 19 November 1987. This is the first stage of new legislation throughout the EEC which Will enable architects who have qualified and registered in one member state to have their status automatically recognised by any other member state. In naming ARCUK as the •Competent Authority' to administer and implement the EEC Directive in the UK. the British Government is quite rightly recogn•sing ARCUK as the Statutory Body responsible for the recognition of Architectural qualifications and the regulating of the Architectural Profession in this country. The Unattached play a vital role within ARCUK of reminding people of exactly what ARCUKs• statutory role is and working towards greater fulfillment of its (presently only partly assumed) role as defined in the 1931 Architects Registration Act. It is the only body which has the potentional to represent ALL architects' views in a democratic fashion. Please help to ensure in your choice of candidates that the Unattached view is a broadly based one. DAVID WILLIAM PETHERICK 40 years 979 Unattached Senior lecturer, Hull School of Architecture. Formerly partner in small private practice (1977-84) and research fellow at Institute of Advanced Architectural Studies, University of York (1984-86). Secretary to the Committee of Management, Saint Andrew Street Development CoOperative Ltd (1976-86). Member of the Housing Co-Operatives Working Group of the National Federation of Housing Associations (1979-86). Make sure the education of future generations of architectural students is determined by an organisation concerned with more than the economic interests of its existing members. Keep Arcuk democratic. Vote! 8 PETER GEORGE RANSON 30 years 1983 Unattached Salaried architect with the firm of CGHP Architects, London. working mainly on inner city housing. Previous professional experience with ASSIST Architects Ltd, Glasgow, and private practices in Northem England. Member of Visiting Board Panel (Student representative) 1980-1982. As another for alternative year rolls by funding and the for those retum working of those closely in govemment with local brings communities a continuedin search what struggles to remain public housing, I find myself out of touch with the changing attitudes of ARCUK and can only seek election under tie platform of man on the no. 9 omnibus (one man operation threatened) asleep on his way to a seat in the rear stalls. DUNCAN ROBERTS 28 years 1986 Unattached Salaried Architect with Community Architecture (Scotland) Ltd, Glasgow. Britain's first community-controlled commercial Architectural practice. Previous experience with the Technical Services Agency, Glasgow. a user-controlled CTAC: Architects and Builders Co-Operative Hull; Forbes Brambles Associates and R&M Finch F/ FRIBA London. Currently shop steward of CAS with the T&GWU, Branch committee. and Glasgow Trades Council. Given the present shambolic state of the their Architectural growing reputation Establishment in the educational I feel the timeand is ripe for the Unattached to build upon •community' orientated dicussion aspects of of design the Profession.and aesthetics and forces that mainipulate The increasing public them calls out for the informed opinions of practicing professionals outside of the Establishment to be heard. There is no reason why the Unattached cannot deveop into a forum for the discussion and dissemination of these ideas offer.and in so doing allowing the public the benefit ot the broa±r vision that we can 9 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource ARCUK Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived JA Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource Undated