1 10 61 https://nam.maydayrooms.org/files/original/aac82d5f8ce62e5e4ddb537dd07068c3.pdf 6bc8206b78090255d2a1706f8048de61 https://nam.maydayrooms.org/files/original/975acf336f42d49fb9bb87b9adc4b845.pdf bdb9116c66e73f262684d81211b1b87a 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 Brian Anson/ARC pre and post Harrogate Subject The topic of the resource Various documents describing ARC ideas and activities See below Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource ARC Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1975-1976 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 Brian Anson Letters and Documents 1974-1978 Subject The topic of the resource Brian Anson Letters and documents 1974-78 and AA Lecture 1974 from Albane Duvillier 4th Year AA Essay submissision 18.02.2008. Pia Arias Covent Garden Report about Brian Anson Description An account of the resource COVENT GARDEN Anglo Saxon and Early Medieval Westminster Excavations have confirmed that in the area of Covent Garden and Aldwych, there was the ex- tensive Saxon Settlement of Lundenwic: over 150 acres, with roads, lanes, houses and industrial buildings. It stretched from the contemporary wa- terfront inland of the Embankment probably to the old Roman road beneath Holborn and Oxford Street on the north, and from Aldwych in the east to Trafalgar Square. A wide range of Continental trading contacts, from Norway to France, is indica- ted by imported objects found in the site. Two ce- meteries have been found, one under what is now St. Martin-in-the-Fields, and another to the north in Covent Garden; the latter may have been included burial mounds. The Saxon town, which have gone through several phases of development, seems to have been occupied from shortly after 600 to so- metime after 850. The main excavation, at the Ro- yal Opera House, found traces of timber buildings nearly 40ft long, with lanes, industrial workshops and many signs of a thriving, congested urban spa- ce1. The Later Middle Ages Covent Garden was the name given, during the reign of King John (1199 - 1256), to a 40-acre patch in the county of Middlesex, bordered west and east by which is now St. Martin’s Lane and Drury Lane, and nor- th and south by Floral Street and a line drawn from Chandos Place, along Maiden Lane and Exeter Street to the Aldwych. An ancient footpath called Aldewichstrate (‘Old Farmstead’s Way’) issued from the west gate of the City of London at Fleet Street and Drewerie Lane branched off here to the north. In this quadrangle bordered by wall, the Abbey or Convent of St Peter, Westminster, maintained a large kitchen garden throughout the Middle Ages to provide its daily food. Directly to the north the monks also owned seven acres known as Long Acre, and to the south, roughly where the Strand Palace Hotel now stands, two smaller pieces of land known as Friars Pyes. The monks of St Peter’s Abbey cultivated orchards here, grew grain, and pastured livestock, selling the surplus to the citizens of London. These type of leases did eventually lead to property disputes throughout the kingdom, which the monarch King Henry VIII solved in 1540 when he dissolved the monasteries and appropriated their land. The next year, in exchange for some land in Devon, King Henry VIII granted both Friars Pyes to John Baron Russell, Great Admiral of England, and later the first Earl of Bedford. In fulfilment of his father’s dying wish, King Edward VI, bestowed the remainder of the convent garden in 1547 to his maternal uncle, Edward Seymour, the Duke of Somerset who began building Somerset House on the South side of the Strand the next year. By 1600 rapid growth here and outwards from the city alarmed the authorities, who made several Area Plan from the 1968 Draft Plan. (1) [1] The information about the Anglo Saxon excavation was decribed by Pevsner in his book London 6, Westminster. Pevsner Architectural Guides. attempts to halt, restrict or at least control the builders. None was properly enforced, especially when the Crown realized that fines for non-com- pliance amounted to a useful new tax. The plan- ned private developments of the C17 were able to evade these prohibitions by creating select, we- ll-built new districts that would not fill up with the disorderly and dangerous poor. In 1605, timber was prohibited for house fronts, and had to be replaced with bricks, though it was not given up for decades afterwards. Further Pro- clamations from 1615 tried to regulate floor hei- ghts and to enforce the use of vertical rather than horizontal windows.2 Planning Development The 4th Earl of Bedford decides to plan his esta- te with "buildings that would serve to ornament the town" and commissioned the Surveyor of the King's works to draw up a plan for an elegant square or piazza. During the years between 1615 and 1640, Inigo Jones (1573-1652) was the central figure in English architecture. Born in Smithfield - London, he became the Surveyor to the Kings' Works in 1614. Travelled to Italy and came back greatly influenced by Palladio, Bramante, Serlio, Scamozzi and Vitruvius. He established Palladianism as the Royal Style by dis- playing the Italian influence in the Queen's House at Greenwich, the alterations to St. Paul's Cathedral, the Banqueting House in Whitehall, the Queen's Chapel at St. James's Palace and the Piazza at Covent Garden.3 The Piazza counts as the earliest of the squares of London, laid out on the example of the Piazza at Livorno, the design made one composition with the existing mansion, Bedford house; taking charge of the side, and with streets entering at the middles of the north and east sides, and to the west side, where the center was taken by St. Paul's church. The houses had uniform façades, to make them individually inconspicuous and give them all together a palace air, a uniformity not achieved again in London housing until the C18. The owner cleared the land and laid out streets, but the houses were put up by agreements with speculating builders, who were then permitted to sell them on long fixed-terms leases. The landlord thus acquired the reversion of the properties and kept control of over the quality and design, without the cost of building them himself. Jones's plan also included London's first meows, that is streets meant for stabling and services (Maiden Lane, Floral Street): a device which encouraged the fronts of even very large houses to face directly on the street. And so, for all its quirks, Covent Garden begins the story of what we now think of as Georgian London.4 [2] LionelEsher,onhisbook“AbrokenWave:TherebuildingofEngland”,explainsthisperiodaswellasPevsneronhisseriesofArchitecturalGuides. [3] For more details on Palladianism and its references in English architecture, visit The National Trust website www.nationaltrust.org.uk [4] Inthearticle‘LondontheRing,CoventGardentheJewellofThatRing’:NewLightonCoventGarden,DianneDugganexplorestheEarl’sarchives and his intentions for the development of Covent Garden. Inigo Jones 1577 - 1652 (2) The Market The Piazza is half-filled by Charles Fowler’s Market House, built in 1828-30. Roofed over in the C19, and restored and converted into shops and restaurants by the GLC Historic Buildings Division in 1977-80. The- re were no British precedents for such an ambitious conversion and its immediate success inspired a host of imitations. Twenty years on, the market remains immensely popular, though the small independent shops of early years are less in evidence. Fowler’s structure remains almost intact, the best-preserved Late Georgian market house in England. It has three parallel east-west ranges, with external Tuscan colonnades of Aberdeen granite. The outer ranges are two-storeyed, and have at the outer angles low pyramid-roofed lodges. In the centre of each long side is a tall pedimented pavilion, curiously placed just east of the entrance passage. At the west end the central range stands free, a little set back. Above its columns a balustrade terrace and then the upper storey, pilastrered and with a big central pediment broken by a lunette. Through the middle of this range runs a glass and timber-roofed passage, with shops where herbs and flowers were sold. 5 The Piazza looking North, circa 1717-1728. (3) Their shopfronts were modified with plate glass in 1871-2. Segmental relieving arches above them, then a clerestory of rectangular openings with colonettes. Delicate produce was traded at the E end, which is different again: columns stand four deep across the whole width, making a continuous upper terrace. On the central pediment allegorical figures by R.W Sievier, of Coade Stone. The upper terrace has a glazed restaurant shelter added c.1985. Its wings evoke Fowler’s twin hothouses for the sale of potted plants, but with an obtrusive round-topped link between. The shelter first provided was modest, limited to a small area in the north court, to make it more spa- cious, twin roofs were raised over the outer courts, giving the markets its bulky external presence. In [5] “Covent Garden Market”, in Survey of London - Vol 36 The market building in the 19th century (4) 1874, W. Cubbit & Co added the iron columns and arches, and a glazed roof with an open clerestory. The offices were removed to the south court. Two oblong areas were sunk into the floor, to allow public access to the vaults running beneath. Fifty shops were created in all, some restored or replicated to Fowler’s design. Axonometric section of the Market (5) GLC Covent GArden Action Area Plan, 1978 - Covent Garden Committee St. Paul’s Church St. Paul’s Church by Thomas Homers Shepherd , 1828-31 (6) Built in 1631-5 by Inigo Jones in connection with the 4th Earl of Bedford. The first new parish church in London since before Elizabeth's time, it broke com- pletely with native architectural traditions: a new way of building, intended to suit the Protestant Church of England. The church is a perfectly plain oblong with no subdivision inside. Widely overhan- ging eaves, deep portico with two squares angle piers and two sturdy Tuscan columns between. The conceit of square piers derives from the Etrus- can temple as illustrated by Scamozzi, the rest from Palladio's Tuscan order, though with rather diffe- rent proportions. Originally there were six or seven steps up from the Piazza, so that the temple origin was more explicit. The church also points forward, to the simplicities of late C18 Neoclassicism. The Piazza lies at the east end. Contemporary evi- dence shows however that the altar was originally meant for the west end, with the entrance under the portico. The plan changed during construction, probably due to Bishop Laud's intervention.6 St. Paul’s Floor plan (7) [6] Pevsner, London 6 “Westminster” - Architectral Guide Series Though Jones’s conception can be savou- red undiluted, the church has had an unluc- ky history, and the visible fabric is mostly c18 or later c19. The red brick facing is as late as 1887-8 by A.J. Pilkington. Jones's walls, of rendered brick, were stone-faced in 1788-9 by Thomas Hardwick, but badly damaged by fire in 1795. Hardwick restored the shell up to 1798, renewing the portico. The west front has two more round-arched windows and a central doorcase with oculus over, i.e. the same arrangement as within the portico (if only because Butterfield's restoration erased lesser doorways benea- th the windows there, 1871-2). Low wings to each side: an original feature, made lower by Clutton. St. Paul’s burns on the 17th of September 1795 (8) Westminster City Council Archives Also by him, the semicircular steps and the holes cut to house the bells. The interior has a spare qua- lity that may not be far from what Jones intended, though nothing remains from his time. His ceiling is known to have been painted in false perspective. The present ceiling is compartmented plaster of 1887-8 to a more Jonesian design than Hardwick’s; it may well be Clutton’s brainchild, carried out by Pilkington. St. Paul’s Church Interior, 2007 (9) ©Steve Cadma, steve@stevecadman.me.uk The Royal Opera House Stands upon the site of the thea- tre erected by John Rich in 1731–2. It is the third theatre to occupy this site, both its predecessors were destroyed by fire. The first, designed by Edward Shepherd, was burnt in 1808, and the second, designed by Sir Robert Smirke, was destroyed in 1856. After this second fire, the present building was built in 1857–8 by E. M. Barry. After nearly two and a half cen- turies of theatrical usage 'Covent Garden' has earned many claims to fame—as a theatre still acting under the authority of letters patent granted by Charles II, as the scene of the triumphs of many great actors and musicians, and in recent years as the home of both the Royal Opera and the Royal Ballet.7 In 1983 there was an open competition to refurbish the existing auditorium and foyers, accommodation for the Royal Opera and Royal Ballet along with the rehearsal facilities and a second auditorium. Reconstruction of part of the Floral Hall and a ribbon of shops around the piazza. It was won by the architect Jeremy Dixon. The objectives of the project were: -To modernise the stage and scenery-handling facilities -To move the Royal Ballet to a permanent home at Covent Garden -To improve amenities for the public and make the theatre more accessible -To provide a decent canteen for the staff and performers -To improve rehearsal facilities -To bring the production workshops on site8 Axonometric view of the changes made by the Architect’s proposal (11) [7] Detailed information can be found in the Survey of London Vol 35 - www.british-history.gov.uk [8] The above is extracted from the Archtect’s website, www.dixonjones.co.uk/projects/royal-opera-house-covent-garden/ The Opera house and the Floral Market in 1892 (10) In the reconstructed Floral Hall, a grand pair of escalators (visible through the glass wall) to the Am- phitheatre Bar moves you to above level. Here they either remain in the upper foyer or proceed further directly onto the open loggia overlooking Covent Garden piazza. In place of the hierarchical public access of the old house – whereby the upper (i.e. cheaper) seats were reached from a separate side entrance –now this will cater to the audience from main Bow Street portico. A new public entrance from the northeast corner of the arcade that complete Inigo Jones’s square. The challenge was to meet all requirements of the Royal Opera House and at the same time to find an architectural approach that could respond to the diversity of the site context, bounded on the one hand by the implied formality of the market square and on the other by a series of typical Covent Garden streets with their ad hoc accumulation of uses and architectural styles. SOCIAL HISTORY As the eighteen century approached, the wealthy residents began moving westwards towards the newer squares of Mayfair and St. James. This produced a dramatic change in the social character of Co- vent Garden. Elegance was replaced by bohemianism as not only the poorer classes encroached on the area but also the writers and the theatre people. The theatres were re-opened and many new ones built. The Old Cockpit in Drury Lane was where the ordinary people of London flocked to see the plays of Will Shakespeare, Christopher Marlowe and Ben Jonson. Running parallel to theatrical Covent Garden in the 18th and 19th century was the literary world, centred on the coffee-houses and taverns, which became fashionable overnight. By the late 18th century it was the lower class of citizens who were rapidly taking over the spacious, decaying mansions of the gentry. The mansions of the nobility were gradually converted into tenements9. In 1836, in Sketches by Boz, Dic- kens10 exposed the poverty of much of Covent Garden, of Drury Lane he wrote: Drury Lane, Seven Dials - Illustration by Gustave Doré(12) [9] Lionel Esher, “A broken Wave” [10] CharlesDickens,alongwiththeartists’movementofthattime,livedandgatheredinCoventGarden.Sohewaswellawareoftheconditionsand spirit of the place. ..."The filth and miserable appearance of this part of London can hardly be imagined...Wretched houses with broken windows patched with rags and paper; every room let out to a different family, and in many instances to two or even three - fruit and sweetstuff manufacturers in the cellars, barbers and red-herring vendors in the front parlours, cobblers in the back; a bird fancier in the first floor, three families on the second, starvation in the attics"... Conditions grew so bad that, early in the 19th century, the Duke of Bedford's Estate began a determi- ned effort to change the area from the "lower-class residential quarter" it had become, to a profitable commercial centre. Every decayed house was pulled down without any attempt to make it habitable until major new building work could begin. In 1830 the 6th Duke of Bedford had begun the process of redeveloping and transforming the place, under a Private Act of Parliament, he cleared away the old market stalls and constructed the present central market building. In 1890 the Bedford Estate surveyor recommended that: "All the courts be pulled down as a commencement of the general clearance which it is desi- rable to carry out in this neighborhood..new houses will be constructed, which as soon as they are completed will be leased to very desirable tenants... and by prohibiting without consent the whole or any portion of the houses being underlet, the objectionable class of tenants who for- merly were inhabitants of these houses are excluded..." As the 20th century began, the London County Council took over the role of property landlords of the Bedford Estate. By 1905 the great thoroughfare Kingsway had been constructed, and many streets, alleyways and courts were gone, linking the Strand and Holborn, it was a desirable improvement because it cut through a large amount of slum property. By 1961 the population was down to 4.060 and the area was a commercial jumble composed of a multitude of crafts and trades. The major industry was the fruit and vegetable market, which now occupied an area of 15 acres and was the largest in Great Britain. By that time it was under the control of the Government, who appointed the Covent Garden Market Authority to run it. Since the 19th century, traffic congestion in the market had been a problem. By the 1960s, it had reached a breaking point. Naturally, the area had been designed in the 1600s for horse cart traffic – not for lorries. The existing roads and buildings couldn’t handle the huge volume of produce being brought in for sale, so business began to decline. Because there was no room to expand, the CGMA commissioned Fantus, a firm of ma- nagement consultants, to consider the relocation and to investigate 2 sites: Seven Dials and Nine Elms. In 1966 they gained Government’s approval to move the market to Battersea. The 12 acres empty spa- ce was seen as an opportunity to redevelop the 96-acre site, defined by the five principal roads of the Strand, Kingsway, High Holborn, Shaftesbury Avenue and Charing Cross Road. In October 1965 a con- sortium of the GLC, Westminster City Council and Camden was formed, they set up a Planning team and instructed it to work under the authority of a “Steering Group” composed of the chief planning officers of the three local authorities.11 [11] Lionel Esher, “A broken Wave” The Draft Plan Covent Garden Area Draft Plan, 1968 (13) The Steering Group was chaired by Ralph Rookwood, with Geoffrey Holland, Brian Nicholls and Brian Anson as deputies. There were three main objectives in the official mind. First was the need to clear out a small amount of actual slum and a much larger amount of depressing and redundant warehousing and office space and some archetypically gloomy Victorian tenements. The second was the opportunity, at a time when such objectives seemed within reach, to improve the heavily trafficked main streets surroun- ding the area, traffic was a major preoccupation in the 60s, so new roads had to be proposed. The third and most exciting were to wrap round the historic core of Covent Garden an architectural backcloth which would rehouse and augment the indigenous population, together with the theatres, arcades, ho- tels, boutiques, bars, restaurants.12 According to Anson, the major elements of the plan itself had nothing to do with the real history and character of Covent Garden. For instance, the brief stated that they had to design a plan segregating pedestrian and vehicles, and their intention was to make the centre of the area traffic-free, but to compensate more roads had to be included and it resulted in a drastic road plan that threatened to demolish over half the area. The Market Piazza would be redeveloped as a major shopping and entertainment route, the Piazza would be revived with a national conference centre and hotels. “Multiple uses” was the prevailing wat- chword and “partnership” between the public and private sectors the technique, whereby the profits of the latter would go some (though not all) of the way to carry the burden of the former. [12] Brian Anson, “I’ll fight you for it” Shallow surveys were set on foot to discover what sort of dwellings the locals wanted, and the results were inter- preted according to what the brief required. The ragbag of tiny industries –violin makers, coppersmiths, theatrical cos- tumiers – the 34 bookshops, 26 stamp dealers and 124 pu- blishers, printers and engra- vers, not to mention the Opera House and 17 other theatres, all were happily recorded by young clipboard callers. Urban structure and visual character were analyzed after the man- ner taught by Kevin Lynch and Gordon Cullen, and pedestrian routes and habits carefully plo- tted. Anson claimed that they must have been protected, not driven out: “The interdependence of existing activities must be recogni- zed and special care is taken to avoid their accidental loss”, even if they “may need special accommoda- tion in terms of design, location and rental levels”. 13 In 1968 the Plan was introduced in the most humane way possible: “One of the most exciting prospects is the opportunity offered by the removal of the market to cultivate experimental activities and new possibilities in urban living, small laboratory theaters, new combinations of indoor entertainment, small informal galleries combined with books and the modern equivalent of old coffee houses, linked with ar- tists’ studios, experimental film units... “the residential population would increase (from 2,347 to 7,000) as would space for hotels and entertainment, while office and warehousing space would be reduced. Ve- hicular traffic of all sorts would vanish underground, pedestrian radiating freely in all directions, often un- der cover, from a 3-acre garden that would replace the grim chasm of the ironically named Floral Street.14 Proposal for Road Network (14) Covent Garden Area Draft Plan, 1968 [13] Lionel Esher, “A broken wave” [14] Brian Anson, “I’ll fight you for it” Pedestrian Spaces (15) Covent Garden Area Draft Plan, 1968 The whole project, illustrated by expressionist drawings was uninhibitedly positivist: this would be the new heart of creative London. From Branson’s point of view, public participation was not as nearly as im- portant as economic viability; and with this being a £150 million project, with the private sector providing £110million, there was no question who it had to answer to. The struggle After the project was introduced to the public, major changes were made responding solely to the developers necessities. Little was left of the original plan and so the public, with the help of the press, became aware of the major faults, such as lack of housing and increasing traffic congestion due to the new commercial approach.15 By 1970, Anson was out of the team, and he made it his business to stir up the hitherto apathetic inhabi- tants against the intentions of his colleagues, with the premise that the working class had been left out of the plan by not considering enough accommodation for them, and the proposed ones would have higher rents that eventually would lead to their displacement. The artists joined the movement worried that their cheap accommodation would be eliminated too, and without it, their activity couldn’t flourish. In the Reverend Austen Williams, Vicar of St Paul’s Church, he found a sympathetic listener, and together they unfurled the banner of the defenceless poor and old. In 1971 the Covent Garden Community Association established itself with Anson and Jim Monahan orchestrating the first meeting. Monahan was an architecture student who rallied his classmates to hand out leaflets to every single building in Covent Garden for that first meeting. The demands were clear and a public statement was drafted: “This meeting calls on the GLC to publish in clear terms, what it intends to do in Covent Garden: to guarantee that the existing residents will be accommodated in the area at rents and rates comparable to those they now pay; to guarantee to people and organizations working here that they will not be bought or priced out by the GLC or private developers and to give a promise that the GLC will preserve the community.” Metting outside St. Paul’s Church (16) Coovent GardenCommunity Association The GLC/Camden/Westminster consortium split by political tensions and the GLC assumed the strategic responsibility which had been specifically reserved for it in the London Government Act. A Covent Gar- den Committee was set up, and it was chaired by Lady Dartmouth16. Born Raine McCorquodale, served in her local government for many years. As a member of the Conser- vative Party, she became the youngest member of the Westminster City Council at the age of 23. She ma- rried the Hon. Gerald Humphry Legge on 21 July 1948, and he became Earl of Dartmouth in 1962. They had [15] The above is part of Brian Anson’s statements, from his book “Abroken Wave” [16] More details on Lady Dartmouth’s life can be found on the local press’ obituaries, www.telegraph.co.uk/obituaries/2016/10/21/raine-countess-spencer--obituary/ four children together: William Legge, 10th Earl of Dartmouth, Hon. Rupert Legge, Lady Charlotte, and Hon. Henry Legge. They divorced in 1976, after which she married Earl Spencer, Lady Diana’s father. Soon she was at odds with the planners. Her resignation in a blaze of pu- blicity was a further blow to the beleaguered GLC team. It brought to the side of the left-wing CGCA the powerful support of right-wing aesthetes and liberal conservationists. Against such a background the result of the 1971 public inquiry was predic- table: the Secretary of State, Geoffrey Rippon, gave the GLC its compulsory powers over the area, but at the same time listed the majority of its buil- dings, a secretly prepared list of 245 buildings drafted by two architectu- ral journalists, Dan Cruickshank and Colin Amery, was approved17; and decreed that conservation was to be the central object of the operation and that “full public participation” was to be the technique18. We saw in Covent Garden the first thoroughgoing exercise in public participation and one of the most successful because of the high motivation of the participating parties. The mechanism for this was the Forum, deliberately not a GLC creation but constituted from below to represent by election all the inte- rests in the area, including the Community Association, whose chairman took charge. While the planners churned out discussion papers, slide shows and questionnaires, and organized even more meticulous house-to-house surveys, the new attitude to Covent Garden took shape. It amounted to a charge of cons- ciousness. The time-honoured notion that knocking down worn-out buildings and replacing them with something better was a useful and often a profitable occupation was ruled out. 19 Covent Garden Community Association (18) [17] Miles Glendinning in his book “The Conservation Movement: A history of Architectural Preservation” explains briefly how the struggle over Covent Garden became a trigger for the Conservationist movement in the UK. [18] Brian Anson “I’ll fight you for it” [19] www.covent-garden.co.uk/histories/histories2.html Lady Dartmouth in 1954 (17) GLC Covent Garden Action Area Plan, 1978(19) “Housing gain” had become an obsession on both sides, despite the incurable deficiencies of schooling and the almost total absence of green space in this congested area. The official target was now to raise the resident population from 2.417 to 5.274 (with 1000 children under 15)20. The inflexible CGCA position was the defence of the village against the cultural and tourist invasion. “we ask that there be no galleries or studios in the principal shopping streets...no more museums... no conference Center... no more ho- tels, with loud coachloads of singing Germans arriving at 6 am”. Covent Garden must simply “provide a living, shopping and leisure facilities for the people who work in the entertainment industry, rather than tourist attractions...Covent Garden is not part of the West End.”21 [20] Greater London Council, Covent Garden’s Moving, The Covent Garden Area Draft Plan, 1968 [21] Greater London Council. Covent Garden Action Area Plan. N.p.: Greater London Council, 1978. GLC Covent Garden Action Area Plan, 1978(20) The Plan was printed in 1978, it was affectionately received by all. Density: “Few residents express dissatisfaction with their present accommodation on grounds of lack of privacy, shortage of external space, or noise...Covent Garden residents, in common with those from other parts of the city centre, have a long tradition of urban living and the concept of density is not sig- nificant in their conception of a living environment; the value of plot ratios to control building bulk and employment density is limited”. Zoning: “The Council considers that a mixed-used approach to development control will provide the best possible way of achieving the Plan’s total aims...interpreted as flexibly as possible in order to res- pect the delicate relationships” Housing: “All residents displaced by public development will be rehoused in Covent Garden if they so wish. The GLDP states that planning permission will not normally be given for a change from residential use. The Council will encourage proposals for the rehabilitation by the private sector of existing housing, provided these are not to the disadvantage of existing residents”.22 [22] Greater London Council. Covent Garden Action Area Plan. N.p.: Greater London Council, 1978 GLC Covent Garden Action Area Plan, 1978(21) Traffic: “The most heavily trafficked of the through-routes is Monmouth Street/St. Martin’s Lane which carries 1.100 vehicles per hour through the working day”. Commercial: “It will be the normal policy to prevent a change of use from a retail shop and other uses to showroom use in shopping streets”. Offices: “Each case will be assessed considering the nature of the activity and the benefits to the com- munity such as provision of residential accommodation, provision of specific benefits in the form of buil- dings and other facilities for use of the public, conservation of historic buildings and architecture, provi- sion of small office suites”.23 The defeat of planning in Covent Garden was not primarily a conservationist victory, it was a political one, won by working people under skilled middle-class leadership. Its central theme was that people are more important than architecture.24 [23] Greater London Council. Covent Garden Action Area Plan. N.p.: Greater London Council, 1978. [24] Brian Anson’s thoughts displayed on his book “I’ll fight you for it” RECENT VIEWS By the end of the 90s, Covent Garden established itself as a The place to go for retailing high brands, the market for rental skyrocketed. This encouraged the Westminster City Council to lunch an action plan to secure and im- prove the local environment for residents, businesses and visitors. Resulting from the combination of successful approach in other parts of London, public participation and the Metropolitan Police; it addres- sed problems in traffic, transport, street environment, anti-social activity and street safety.25 The draft plan for Covent Garden includes the council working with landlords to enable shoppers to pick up large purchases by car and to encourage walking. The plans also aim to improve street lighting, reduce 'physical clutter' that detracts from the street and increase street enforcement to tac- kle busking. Council leader Simon Milton says: 'The draft action plan demonstrates our commitment but this must be seen in the light of the city council's very difficult funding situation. We do not have the resources alone to bring about the vision set out in this action plan. If we are to succeed, we are looking for a com- mitment of funding and to work with communities and busines- ses in Covent Garden.'26 Further analysis had taken place, in 2006 the City Council drafted a Planning Guidance for Entertainment uses; to determine the land uses, functions, scale and environmental quality of entertainment in Covent Garden. The purpose was to establish policies regarding existing and new entertainment use and accom- plish a balance between the mixed use character of the place. Land Uses Plan - Planning Guidance for Entertainment uses, 2006 (24) [25] www.westminster.gov.uk/archives [26] Interview for the article “Garden army.” Property Week, 5 Dec. 2003, p. 62. Business Collection, Covent Garden Action Plan,2004(22) Westminster City Council Logo for the Covent Garden Action Plan (23) The struggle in Covent Garden has definitely shaped the conser- vationist movement in London. Postmodernist interventions, such as the Comyn Ching Triangle, have a possibility to be listed be- cause of the precedents set in the 70s. According to Farrell, it stands as one of Covent Garden's land- mark restoration and new-build scheme. Best described his own words, "The Comyn Ching Trian- gle, with much of Covent Garden, was planned to be demolished in the 1970s. Then the Triangle became part of Covent Garden's wonderful regeneration story. My involvement as architect for this urban block lasted over ten years. The public space in the mi- ddle links together restoration and new buildings: shops, offices, interior and exterior details. It is still one of the best things I've been involved with”27. But the area has also grown to become an important part of London’s commercial core, and in this matter recent planning policy for the Central Activity Zone (CAZ) has established stra- tegies outlining hierarchy areas where local authorities will be expected to direct housing, so the office space in central London continues to be a key generator of economic prosperity. Journalist Colin Marrs quoted London’s major Boris Jhonson in his Architects’ Journal article to defend this premise: “The heart of the capital is the foundation of London’s reputation as best city in the world in which to do business”28 Axonometric drawing of the Comyn Ching Triangle by Terry Farrell (26) [27] Interview for the magazine Building Design [28] www.architectsjournal.co.uk/news/new-planning-rules-to-protect-city-from-residential-development/10004183.article Comyn Ching Triangle by Terry Farrell (25) List of Images and drawings No Title 1 Area Plan of Covent Garden 2 Inigo Jones 3 The Piazza looking North 4 The Market Building in the 19th century 5 Axonometric Section of the Market 6 St. Paul’s Church 7 St. Paul’s Church Floor Plan 8 St. Paul’s Church burns 9 St. Paul’s Church Interior 10 The Floral Market & the Opera house 11 Axonometric view 12 Drury Lane, Seven Dials 13 Covent Garden Area Draft Plan 14 Road Network 15 Pedestrian Spaces 16 Meeting outside St. Paul’s Church 17 Lady Dartmouth 18 Covent Garden Community Association 19 Conservation Area Boundaries 20 Proposals Map 21 Vehicle Network Proposal 22 Covent Garden Action Plan 23 Westminster City Council Logo 24 Land Uses Plan 25 Comyn Ching Triangle 26 Axonometric view of the Comyn Ching Triangle Author GLC Unknown Unknown Unknown GLC Thomas Homers Shepherd Unknown Unknown Steve Cadman Unknown Dixon Jones Architects Gustave Doré CGLC & W & LBC CGLC & W & LBC CGLC & W & LBC CGCA Unknown CGCA GLC GLC GLC Westminster City Council Westminster City Council Westminster City Council Terry Farell Architects Terry Farrell Architects Type Plan Painting Drawing Photograph Drawing Painting Plan Painting Photograph Photograph Drawing Illustration Drawing Plan Drawing Photograph Photograph Photograph Plan Plan Plan Logo Logo Plan Photograph Drawing Bibliography in alphabetical order 1. Anson, B. I'll Fight You for It: Behind the Struggle for Covent Garden. Cape, 1981. 2. Bradley, Simon, and Pevsner, Nikolaus. London. 6, Westminster. Pevsner Architectural Guides. New Haven, Conn. ; London: Yale University Press, 2005. 3. Cavanagh, Elaine. "Up for renewal." Estates Gazette, 19 Oct. 2002, p. 2. Business Collection, go.galegroup.com/ps/i.do?p=GPS&sw=w&u=uokent&v=2.1&id=GALE%7CA93116404&it=r&asid=- 17c76221e87cee84b155429f95d52535. Accessed 5 Dec. 2016. 4. Christie, Ian - Covent Garden: Approaches to Urban Renewal - The Town Planning Review; Jan 1, 1974; 45, 1; Periodicals Archive Online pg. 31 5. 'Covent Garden Market', in Survey of London: Volume 36, Covent Garden, ed. F H W Sheppard (Lon- don, 1970), pp. 129-150. British History Online http://www.british-history.ac.uk/survey-london/vol36/ pp129-150 [accessed 10 November 2016]. 6. 'Covent Garden Theatre and the Royal Opera House: Management', in Survey of London: Volume 35, the theatre Royal, Drury Lane, and the Royal Opera House, Covent Garden, ed. F H W Sheppard (Lon- don, 1970), pp. 71-85. British History Online http://www.british-history.ac.uk/survey-london/vol35/pp71- 85 [accessed 12 October 2016]. 7. Duggan, Diane - 'London the Ring, Covent Garden the Jewell of That Ring': New Light on Covent Gar- den. (Architectural History, Vol. 43, 2000), pp. 140-161 8. Esher, Lionel Gordon Balish Brett. A Broken Wave : The Rebuilding of England, 1940-1980. London: Allen Lane, 1981 9. Glendinning, Miles - "The Conservation Movement: A history of Architectural Preservation" - (New York: Routledge, 2013), 329 – 330 10."Garden army." Property Week, December 5, 2003, 62. Business Collection (accessed Decem- ber 5, 2016). http://go.galegroup.com/ps/i.do?p=GPS&sw=w&u=uokent&v=2.1&it=r&id=GALE%- 7CA111856021&asid=ccf23c7421f25d260c50d9c64c68293f. 11. Greater London Council, Covent Garden’s Moving, The Covent Garden Area Draft Plan, 1968 12. Greater London Council. Covent Garden Action Area Plan. N.p.: Greater London Council, 1978. 13. Hall, John - 'Covent Garden Newly Marketed', The London Journal, 1980 14.Matthew, H. C. G., Harrison, Brian Howard, and British Academy. Oxford Dictionary of National Bio- graphy from the Earliest times to the Year 2000. New ed. 2004. 15.O'Donovan Teige & Cooper - 'Covent Garden: a model for protection of special character?' - Journal of Planning & Environment Law, 1998 16.Richardson, J. Covent Garden. Historical Pubns, 1979. 17. 'The Bedford Estate: From 1627 to 1641', in Survey of London: Volume 36, Covent Garden, ed. F H W Sheppard (London, 1970), pp. 25-34. British History Online http://www.british-history.ac.uk/survey-lon- don/vol36/pp25-34 [accessed 4 December 2016]. 18.Westminster City Council - 'Draft Supplementary Planning Guidance for Entertainment Uses', July 2006. 19.http://www.british-history.ac.uk/survey-london/vol36/pp25-34 http://www.coventgardenmemories. org.uk/page_id__37.aspx 20. http://thespaces.com/2016/02/17/is-architect-terry-farrells-postmodern-comyn-ching-triangle-in- covent-garden-worth-listing/ 21.http://www.e-architect.co.uk/architects/terry-farrell 22.http://www.sevendials.com/about-us/patrons/item/14-sir-terry-farrell-cbe-riba-frsa-fcsd-mrtpi 23.https://www.architectsjournal.co.uk/news/new-planning-rules-to-protect-city-from-residential-deve- lopment/10004183.article 24.https://www.architectsjournal.co.uk/news/big-names-rally-to-save-farrells-comyn-ching-buil- ding/10005959.article 25.http://www.bdonline.co.uk/farrell-submits-comyn-ching-for-urgent-listing/5080195.article 26.https://www.westminster.gov.uk/archives 27.http://www.gustav-mahler.eu/index.php/plaatsen/228-great-britain/london-londen/1381-covent-gar- den-and-drury-theatre 28. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/obituaries/2016/10/21/raine-countess-spencer--obituary/ 29. https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/oct/21/raine-countess-spencer-obituary 30.http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3859566/Princess-Diana-s-stepmother-Raine-Spen- cer-dies-age-87.html 31. http://royalcentral.co.uk/other/private-funeral-for-princess-dianas-stepmother-raine-spencer-71011 32. https://www.nationaltrust.org.uk/features/what-is-palladianism Bibliography according to type of sources History 1. Anson, B. I’ll Fight You for It: Behind the Struggle for Covent Garden. Cape, 1981. 2. Bradley, Simon, and Pevsner, Nikolaus. London. 6, Westminster. Pevsner Architectural Guides. New Haven, Conn. ; London: Yale University Press, 2005. 3. ‘Covent Garden Market’, in Survey of London: Volume 36, Covent Garden, ed. F H W Sheppard (Lon- don, 1970), pp. 129-150. British History Online http://www.british-history.ac.uk/survey-london/vol36/ pp129-150 [accessed 10 November 2016]. 4. ‘Covent Garden Theatre and the Royal Opera House: Management’, in Survey of London: Volume 35, the theatre Royal, Drury Lane, and the Royal Opera House, Covent Garden, ed. F H W Sheppard (Lon- don, 1970), pp. 71-85. British History Online http://www.british-history.ac.uk/survey-london/vol35/pp71- 85 [accessed 12 October 2016]. 5. Esher, Lionel Gordon Balish Brett. A Broken Wave : The Rebuilding of England, 1940-1980. London: Allen Lane, 1981 6. Glendinning, Miles - “The Conservation Movement: A history of Architectural Preservation” - (New York: Routledge, 2013), 329 – 330 7. Richardson, J. Covent Garden. Historical Pubns, 1979. 8. ‘The Bedford Estate: From 1627 to 1641’, in Survey of London: Volume 36, Covent Garden, ed. F H W Sheppard (London, 1970), pp. 25-34. British History Online http://www.british-history.ac.uk/survey-lon- don/vol36/pp25-34 [accessed 4 December 2016]. 9. http://www.british-history.ac.uk/survey-london/vol36/pp25-34 http://www.coventgardenmemories. org.uk/page_id__37.aspx Institutional Information 1. Greater London Council, Covent Garden’s Moving, The Covent Garden Area Draft Plan, 1968 2. Greater London Council. Covent Garden Action Area Plan. N.p.: Greater London Council, 1978. 3. Westminster City Council - ‘Draft Supplementary Planning Guidance for Entertainment Uses’, July 2006. 4. http://royalcentral.co.uk/other/private-funeral-for-princess-dianas-stepmother-raine-spencer-71011 5. https://www.westminster.gov.uk/archives 6. http://www.sevendials.com/about-us/patrons/item/14-sir-terry-farrell-cbe-riba-frsa-fcsd-mrtpi 7.http://www.gustav-mahler.eu/index.php/plaatsen/228-great-britain/london-londen/1381-covent-gar- den-and-drury-theatre Academic Publicactions 1. Cavanagh, Elaine. “Up for renewal.” Estates Gazette, 19 Oct. 2002, p. 2. Business Collection, go.galegroup.com/ps/i.do?p=GPS&sw=w&u=uokent&v=2.1&id=GALE%7CA93116404&it=r&asid=- 17c76221e87cee84b155429f95d52535. Accessed 5 Dec. 2016. 2. Christie, Ian - Covent Garden: Approaches to Urban Renewal - The Town Planning Review; Jan 1, 1974; 45, 1; Periodicals Archive Online pg. 31 3. Duggan, Diane - ‘London the Ring, Covent Garden the Jewell of That Ring’: New Light on Covent Gar- den. (Architectural History, Vol. 43, 2000), pp. 140-161 4. Hall, John - ‘Covent Garden Newly Marketed’, The London Journal, 1980 5. O’Donovan Teige & Cooper - ‘Covent Garden: a model for protection of special character?’ - Journal of Planning & Environment Law, 1998 Specialist Press 1. “Garden army.” Property Week, December 5, 2003, 62. Business Collection (accessed December 5, 2016). http://go.galegroup.com/ps/i.do?p=GPS&sw=w&u=uokent&v=2.1&it=r&id=GALE%7CA111856021&asid=cc- f23c7421f25d260c50d9c64c68293f. 2. http://thespaces.com/2016/02/17/is-architect-terry-farrells-postmodern-comyn-ching-triangle-in-co- vent-garden-worth-listing/ 3. http://www.e-architect.co.uk/architects/terry-farrell 4.https://www.architectsjournal.co.uk/news/new-planning-rules-to-protect-city-from-residential-develo- pment/10004183.article 5.https://www.architectsjournal.co.uk/news/big-names-rally-to-save-farrells-comyn-ching-buil- ding/10005959.article 6.http://www.bdonline.co.uk/farrell-submits-comyn-ching-for-urgent-listing/5080195.article Local Press 1. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/obituaries/2016/10/21/raine-countess-spencer--obituary/ 2. https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/oct/21/raine-countess-spencer-obituary 3.http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3859566/Princess-Diana-s-stepmother-Raine-Spen- cer-dies-age-87.html Biography 1. Matthew, H. C. G., Harrison, Brian Howard, and British Academy. Oxford Dictionary of National Bio- graphy from the Earliest times to the Year 2000. New ed. 2004. Albane Duvillier, 4th Year, dip 7, essay submission for the Brave New World Revisited/Edward Bottoms appendix Brian Anson. Letter to Edward Bottoms, NOT FOR PUBLICATION. 18 February 2008 AA Project Review 1974-75 AA Project Review 1975-76 AA Project Review 1976-77 AA Project Review 1977-78 Brian Anson. “Let’s sing the Land Song”. Lecture, Architectural Association, London: 20 November 1974 AA Project Review 1974-75 AA Project Review 1974-75 AA Project Review 1974-75 AA Project Review 1974-75 AA Project Review 1974-75 AA Project Review 1974-75 AA Project Review 1974-75 Peter Cook’s unit AA Project Review 1974-75 AA Project Review 1975-76 AA Project Review 1975-76 AA Project Review 1975-76 AA Project Review 1975-76 AA Project Review 1975-76 AA Project Review 1975-76 AA Project Review 1975-76 AA Project Review 1975-76 AA Project Review 1976-77 AA Project Review 1976-77 AA Project Review 1976-77 AA Project Review 1976-77 AA Project Review 1976-77 AA Project Review 1976-77 AA Project Review 1976-77 Fred Scott & Bob Evans AA Project Review 1977-78 AA Project Review 1977-78 AA Project Review 1977-78 AA Project Review 1977-78 AA Project Review 1976-77 AA Project Review 1976-77 Brian Anson. “Let’s sing the Land Song”. Lecture at the Architectural Association London: 20 November 1974 Paul Bower : « The paper is over 8000 words long and includes no references as it was a typed manuscript. The paper comes courtesy of George Mills, one of Brian’s former AA students at the time and eventual col- league and friend » “We should sing the Land song again” This talk is about land. Who should own it, what is the power that it contains, what traps ownership of it may hold for common people – or for that matter rich people. It is not a definitive talk – that is it does not give a simple answer – yet it is topical in view of the Government White Paper. It is something in which I have always been interested and which I believe is, if not at the core of social prob- lems, pretty near the centre. It is such a vast subject that I am bound to miss much out, and likewise I am bound to annoy some in the audi- ence more learned than I on the matter, I don’t intend to and if I learn from them I shall be well pleased. I have some facts and some instincts. The facts are mainly in the paper that follows: my instincts are in a hum- ble way those of the great man whose picture appears on the poster; Padraig Pearce – they are with the landless man against the Lord of Lords and the breadless man against the master of millions. It is one of my basic beliefs that you cannot create a just situation from a basic injustice. It is clear to me that exploitation of land for private gain has been the second major course of injustice throughout the history of man, The first exploitation of man himself. Much of the misery, death and indignity that man has endured throughout history is in one way of another connected with avaricious schemes to deprive him of his land. I am aware that at certain times in history, and perhaps today is one of them, ownership of land has not been as helpful to the cause of a better society for common people – Engels, and to an extent Marx, were totally against returning the land to the people – at least whereby they became individual freeholders, Nonetheless I believe that the sacred connection between man and his land is still valid and I treat with suspicion any attempt to ignore it as something unimportant. The ancient traveller returning to his native soil knelt and pressed the earth to his lips manifesting his link to the elemental roots he must have if he is to remain sane. An aunt of mine died recently. Her body was taken by sea to Cork. Then by car to a little village outside Gal- way. They still have a simple tradition in the West of Ireland where the villagers come out 20 miles to escort the cortege into the village. She had been away for many years but her last wish was ‘take me home’. And that’s what the villagers were doing. The instinctive relationship to a sense of place that these two events illustrate are to me still very basic. I hope too many of you are not fidgeting and wondering the relevance of old ladies being taken back to villages or travellers weeping into the soil. I know you want facts, statistics and theories. There is no shortage of them, but the sacred relationship of people to land is possibly a greater truth for we are not in perpetual and rootless motion as the mid-cult trendies with their coffee table paperbacks or mobility theories would have us believe. So before I get down to some of the facts of history, I’d like to simply state where I believe the asnwer lies. Though I can’t as yet explain that it’s achievable. I believe that land must not be exploited for private gain in anyway whatsoever. In the contest of our mixed economy that means nothing less than taking ALL economic value out of land – in fact to make it VALUE- LESS. Paradoxically, in the context of our economically dominated society, to take a sacred element out of the system is to make it PRICELESS – which is what land is in reality. To my mind the common fact of history is the way that land has been exploited for monetary gain to the det- riment of civilised society. Why should we not put it in the same category as those other elements that we now consider priceless. Finite resources such as the air we breath are not yet part of the market mechanism – although in the centre of Tokyo one can ‘buy’ oxygen from a slot machine – and I take it no sane person here would advocate such a policy. The greatest, most priceless – although ironically not finite – resource of all, the human being, is not yet freed from the market system – but I take it no-one here would bring back slavery or the use of child-labour. We are capable now of considering the human resource as priceless – yet we had to struggle for the freedom – and the greatest opponents of the abolitionists were those who argued the collapse of our economic system should slav- ery go. Let us strive, therefore, to free land from the market. This is not day dreaming for at certain times in history, land has been viewed as a sacred and priceless element – and was arguably better cared for to the benefit of all. Sean O’Faolain has pointed out that the early Celts “...shared property in common and their hold on their land was absolute and incontestable. No Chief or King had any claim on the land and he could not legally dis- possess any family in his small kingdom...” The American Indians saw land as a gift from the great spirit and knew that they didn’t own it but held it in trust for future generations – and a whole ecological concept grew out of that belief. The downfall of that whole civilisation began with an attack on the land. “...the white man made us many promises” said Red Cloud of the Oglala Sioux “and he kept but one: he promised to take our land and he did”. I don’t know whether my concept can be made to work, anymore than the economic theories of Schumacher can be, but I think it’s in the right direction and I think it’s worth a try – in any case there’s been not other solution to the land problem in this country for the past six hundred years. I used to work for a stupid architect who, thinking he was a modernist, once said to me, that he was not inter- ested in anything written yesterday. I think the exact opposite and in order to learn what little I do know about the land problem I’ve had to go back a good many centuries. And so I begin in the past. But learning from the past is not the same as living in the past – so travelling through seven centuries as rapidly as possible I’ll end up with the current Government White Paper on Land Reform. And then if you’re still interested we can discuss it. We think we have a land hunger now and we think that the great inflation in land values of 1973 was an ex- traordinary event. The only extraordinary thing about it was that the Tory party at last publicly admitted the existence of what it euphemistically called “The unacceptable face of Capitalism”. According to Toynbee’s “English Social History” as long ago as the thirteenth century there was land hunger – too many people and not enough land in cultivation – greatly to the benefit of the landlords. Then the Black death wiped out half the population and the ensuing two centuries were to the benefit of the peasant – who struggled out of serfdom during this period. But by the sixteenth century land hunger was back fr the birth rate had wiped out the rav- ages of the plague and now there was a surplus of labour – the landlord was back in business. “Hence” as Toynbee states “The economic opportunity for the landlord to do what he liked with land so much in demand”. Worst of all the hated Enclosures Acts came into being at this time and ‘Economic neces- sity’ became the Tyrants’ pleas for much oppression when the common land was taken from the people. To be fair, I suppose, the landlord was under some financial pressure as inflation was running at a pretty high rate – between 1500-1560 food prices had trebled – but this plea of economic necessity went too far and became popular wisdom in later years when as Toynbee again says “ the dismal science of Political economy bore iron rule over the minds of men”. Tragically this dismal science has survived up to the present day and economic necessity is still an excuse for land crimes against the people. I am not an historian, but from what little I do know concerning the land question from the 12th century on and particularly with regard to the Acts of Enclosure, I acknowledge the tremendous complexity of the issue. What is not denied by any historian, however, is that the Common Law of England established under Henry II was an excellent foundation to work progressively towards a most just social system in society. Indeed much of that foundation has remained intact in such things as the jury system, and the birth of Parliamentary democra- cy. But not in the case of land, despite the fact that Trevelyan maintains that: “The starting point of our modern land law” began in 1275 under Edward I through his two statutes De Donis Conditionalibus and Quia Eviptores Laws which helped bring about the downfall of feudalism by vesting land rights largely in the King. I can’t see the reality of this, as in later centuries, particularly the 17th and 18th, the parliamentary democracy was largely controlled by politicians who themselves were large landowners. But to return briefly to the land system under the Common Law of the 12th to 15th centuries. It was John Stuart Mill who pointed out “it is custom, immemorial custom, which is the most powerful protector of the weak against the strong, their sole protector where there are n laws or government adequate to the purpose. That custom which even in the most oppressed condition of mankind, tyranny is forced in some degree to respect...” If there is any one major basis on which social life of England rested during the common law period it was this one of “immemorial custom” and particularly over land and tenant rights. The Durham Halmote Rolls pub- lished by the Surtess Society at the beginning of the 19th Century gives a vivid account of community life in Medieval Northumberland: “The dry record of tenures is peopled by men and women under the various phases of village life. We see them in their tofts surrounded by their crofts with their gardens of pot herbs. We see how they ordered the affairs of the village in matters concerning the common meal of the community. We hear of how they repressed their strifes and contentions, of their attempts, not always ineffective, to grasp the principle of co-operation. Local provisions for public health and general convenience are evidenced by the watchful vigilance of the village officials over the water supplies, the care taken to prevent the fouling of useful streams, and stringent by-laws as to the common place for clothes washing and the time for emptying and cleansing ponds and mill dams. labour was lightened and the burdens of life eased by co-operation on an extensive scale. A common mill ground the corn, and the flour was baked into bread at a common oven. A common smith worked at a common forge and common shepherds and herdsmen watched the sheep and cattle of various tenants when pastured on the fields common to the whole community.” According to Cardinal Gasquet writing in the early part of the 20th century – a review of the halmote rolls “leaves no doubt that the tenants, had a recognised right in their holdings, which was ripening into a custom- ary freehold estate.” Professor Thorold Rogers in his lectures on “the Economic Interpretation of History” given at Oxford in 1887, adds further evidence when he says that: “The peasant was rarely without his patch of land and beyond the plot which he held in severalty, the peasant had more or less extensive rights of common. The common, even if it did not afford herbage for his cow, was a run for his poultry, and assured him the occasional fowl in the pot.” The key phrase is “ripening into a freehold estate”. The immemorial custom backed up the obvious advantage of co-operative working may quite easily have developed over time into a well-nigh-unshakable social system based on co-operation and Communal ownership. That was well removed from despotic state control or bu- reaucratic Communism. Even Gordon-Rattray-Taylor in his recent and pessimistic book “Rethink” describes how one of the most com- mon topics of conversation during this time was the definition of a fair profit and he suggests that an individ- ual those aim was unlimited profit would have been forwned upon by society in general. Professor Rogers sums it up when he says: “...the rate of production was small, the conditions of health unsatisfactory and the duration of life short; but on the whole there were none of those extremes of poverty and wealth which have excited the astonishment of philanthropists and are now exciting the indignation of workmen. The age it is true had its discontents, and these were expressed in a startling manner. But of poverty which premises unheeded, of willingness to do hon- est work and a lack of opportunity, there was little or none. The essence of life during the Plantagenets and the Tudors was that everyone knew his neighbour, and that everyone was his brother’s keeper. My studies lead me to conclude that though there was a hardship in this life, the hardship was a common lot and that there was hope...” Three events changed all this, and in terms of the land problem changed the course of history: the Acts of En- closure, the dissolution of the Monasteries and the birth of the Industrial Revolution. The first two were to change drastically the ownership pattern of land; whether it be legal ownership or own- ership by ‘immemorial custom’. The industrial Revolution was eventually to create, amongst other things, the industrial city and the land problems that are with us still today. All three events together were to produce a new class of people which from now on was to lie at the very heart of the land problems: the “landless labourer”. In effect the industrial working class man was born, and his increasingly desperate plight was to complicate the land issue enormously right to to the present day. In future centuries some like Proudhon, the bourgeois Socialist and Parnell, the Irish Catholic leader would try to leas him back to that co-operative wonderland of individual ownership partly described above, while others like Marx and Engels would keep him away from such ownership and petit bourgeois traps in order that he might lead the socialist revolution. It is not the purpose of this paper to discuss the religious validity of the Reformation in England. As so often in the past, and still today, religious friction has been used by the ruling class as a cloak to hide or evade real social problems. But the social upheaval caused by this event was enormous in England. Again the issue is complex with one side, such as the partisan Catholics, arguing that the Abbots, Monks and Priors were re- sponsible and benevolent landlords to their tenants, and that the dissolution of the monasteries robbed the communities of a sound and reasonably happy base for living. The passages I’ve quoted above by such as Pro- fessor Thorold suggest there is some truth in this. Others, not impressed by ‘other-worldly’ attitudes towards community structure place greater emphasis on the undoubted misuse of responsibility shown by many monastic settlements and suggest that long before Refor- mation the monasteries were being run by secular middle-men with an eye to profit. It is for the individual to make up his own mind on whether the dissolution was socially retrograde step or not. Personally I tend to agree with the Protestant Radical William Cobbett, that the event was more a social disas- ter than civilised progress. But again there is complete agreement by most historians on one significant point. Dramatic events in history are neither entirely good nor entirely bad. Henry VIII and later Edward VI having confiscated the monastic lands had a wonderful opportunity to redistribute it justly amongst the people and in fact some historians suggest that in Henry’s case this was the first intention. But as Trevelyan says in his English Social History “...the Exchequer was empty and the courtiers were greedy and the hasty sale of the lands to private purchasers was the course adopted. The dissolution of the monasteries and the confiscation of the property of the chantries and guilds resulted in the transfer of well over 2,000,000 acres of land into the hands of new proprietors. The change of ownership was disastrous for the poorer tenants although many of the stronger yeomanry class did very well out of it and their first step to becoming property owning capitalists. The new brand of owners, who had in many cases paid large sums for their land, began immediately a system of rack renting and encroaching upon common land. As regards the early acts of enclosure there are again mixed views. There is clear agreement that the very poor suffered enormously as their common land was enclosed and they were deprived of its benefits, When the Parliament, as it then became, was closed by law to anyone not a considerable owner of land it is impossible to argue the right of ownership of land by ‘immemorial custom’. And that is the only right the peasant had. Prior to the dissolution of the monasteries and the Acts of Enclosure this right was largely adequate. The vast reduction of small holdings left the peasant farmer helpless and the worthless compensation that he did, on occasion, get merely led him to the alehouse. Suddenly great numbers of people were homeless, job- less, half-starving vagrants. In connection with this Elizabeth in 1495 brought her Statute of Labourers. According to Professor Thorold the object of this celebrated or infamous act was threefold. 1.To break up the combination of labourers To secure the adequate machinery of control To make the peasant labourer the residuum of all other labour – or, in other words, to forcibly increase the supply Not long after, in 1541, the first Poor Laws came into being. So one way to look at the results of the dissolu- tion of the monasteries and the Acts of Enclosure is to see them as robbing great numbers of poor people of their customary rights in land by confiscation; creating a new rich and powerful minority owning large estates; creating in the process a new class, that of the landless labourer; the creation of poor laws and destitution on a large scale – culminating in the terrible state of the working class in the 19th century in England – and finally as being the origin of the class scars that mark our society today. Others argue that while the early acts of enclosure created social damage, the final enclosure Acts of the 17th century and early 18th century were a national necessity. England, in those days, did not yet have access to the great granaries of the world – such as Russia, and with an exploding population and the rapid growth of the cities, the country must produce much more food or starve. As the traditional small farming methods were wasteful they must be replaced by a more streamlined arrangement of land use. Whatever the merits of the latter argument, the 17th century was also the pinnacle of the landowning gentry class – and poverty amidst affluence was commonplace. The Acts of Enclosure were beneficial to sections of the population even including the yeoman class and many of the craftsmen, but a whole section of the poor were totally excluded. In contrast Denmark which proceeded with enclosure at the same time took into account the interest of all classes, even the very poorest, with excel- lent consequences in the Danish society of today. By and large I agree with first Cobbett, and finally Toynbee, the modern historian who says: “Henry VIII had been driven by financial necessity to sell most of the confiscated lands privately. The potential value of the land was much higher than the lay purchasers had paid. The ultimate beneficiary of the dissolution was not religion, not education, not the poor, not even in the end the crown, but a class of fortunate gentry whose power replaced that of the great nobles and ecclesiastics of the feudal ages and whose word was to be law in England for centuries to come...” So land hunger and its consequent exploitation is nothing new. What about rocketing land values? Again it’s all happened before as 19th century Scotland shows, to give just one example. In these islands it is the Scottish people like the Irish who know deep in their bones what land means – they suffered one of the worst indigni- ties of any nation – they were driven from their land by sheep – the Cheviot. But as John Prebble says in ‘The Highland Clearances’: “...the land owners could see no reason for complaint. Wool was making them rich. Wool had forced up the value of land all over the highlands. In five years the sale price of the Castlehill Estate had risen from £8000 to £80,000. Redcastle, which had been sold for £25,000 in 1790 was shortly to be sold (in 1817) for £135,000 and the Fairburn estate, which had yielded a rental of £700 in 1800 was now in 1817 worth £80,000 rental a year.” They had a rather quaint legal system in those days for at the trial of Patrick Sellar, one of the villains of the time who spent his time evicting poor crofters in order that his masters could make the sort of profits I have described, it was stated: “that a bed-ridden woman of 90 had been evicted from her house and died five days later in an outhouse (the cottage was in fact set on fire by Sellar while the woman still lay in her sick bed). This was not contested in court and the judge and jurors agreed that Mr Sellar could not be held responsible for the ‘natural tendency of a person to die if rendered suddenly homeless’.” This is just one of millions of examples whereby horrific and tragic death springs directly from private ex- ploitation of land. Only two weeks ago I read of how fifty square miles of this same countryside that Patrick Sellar ravaged in the early 19th century is to be sold on the international market so that Lady Sutherland may rationalise the other 100,000 acres of her ancestral estate. To rationalise means to provide a lucrative grouse shooting, salmon fishing, golf course for the multi-national oil magnates no doubt. First it was the Chevi- ot, then it was mid-century Shell-Esso man – BUT WHAT THE HELL HAPPENED TO THE PEOPLE? Of course they never came into it. They never did in the past and if huge profits are to be made today from land they are likewise excluded. The Scots know that history will always attempt to repeat itself. In 1973 the last Tory government was deter- mined to bring its LAND DEVELOPMENT BILL in order to expedite the oil-rush. A spokesman stated publicly “We must have the platform building sites whether the people like it or not”. WE WILL BRING THE GREAT CHEVIOT IN WHETHER THE CROFTER LIKE IT OR NOT. But one last comment on Scotland. Even bureaucracies throughout history can occasionally make a statement that has the ring of pure simple truth about it. And the final statement of the Crofters Commission of 1892 said: “...the solution of the Highland Problem is not land purchase but the resumption of the Clansman’s right to occupy the Fatherland....” No mention of economic necessity or investment or a healthy economy – but a question of human RIGHT and a RESUMPTION of that right. Just think about it for a minute and ponder on modern interpretations: “The solution of London’s housing problem is a resumption of the old communities RIGHT to occupy the city....” “The solution to the Irish problem is a resumption of the Native Irish’s RIGHT to occupy the motherland.” And what is the land story in Ireland. I must confess that it was an interest in the history of that country that led to the beginning of my interest in the land problem. Land and the so-called Irish problem are synonymous and some of the greatest agitators for land reform in the 19th century came out of that country. I have already mentioned that the old Celtic order had a system of land ownership based entirely on the com- munity. A system of land control that was ta the base of social structure extraordinarily communistic in its character and in the truest sense of the term. Amongst the many dreadful deeds that England perpetrated against that nation, it’s attack on the land was par- amount in its destruction of a way of life. They first tried to conquer the land – and failed; they then tried to plant it with aliens and only partially succeeded, then they reinforced the little bit they could hold and invent- ed “The Pale” and finally in the great tradition of all imperial powers they partitioned it. In the early 1840’s two million people starved to death in Ireland and another two million emigrated with half of those dying in the coffin ships before reaching their destination – often because they were driven from the land. Never lecture an Irishman on Genocide. Nor indeed on the economic necessities that a poor landlord has to face. For it was as a direct result of land exploitation that Ireland changed overnight form being the fastest growing population outside China to the sparsely peopled land she is today. It was at the height of that famine that starving peasants were evicted from the land and when they built SCALPEENS to protect their shrivelled bodies from the weather. a scalpeen is a ditch with a bit of a roof over it – hence the Irish saying that you can never stumble into an Irish ditch without falling down a chimney - They were evicted from the Scalpeens. When this matter was raised in the House of Lords in 1846, Lord Brougham stated: “It is the landowners inalienable right to do exactly as he pleases to do with his land, If this were not so money would no longer be invested in land.” Fortunately history is not all gloom, for 1846 brought something good to the land question in Ireland. It brought the birth of Michael Davitt. A man of high courage, moral no less than physical, a passionate man totally intolerant of cruelty and injustice, and most important of all the man who was to become the father of the LAND LEAGUE. But before Davitt a few words on James Fintan Lalov who died three years after Davitt’s birth in 1846. Where the latter was the father of the land league, Lalov is popularly seen as the prophet of revolutionary Irish land reform. The social system of 19th century Ireland gave supreme power to the landlord and no security to the tenant. The growth of the landless labourer, referred to above, was very rapid in Ireland. Lalov assumed “...the gen- eral and common right of all the people as joint and co-equal proprietors of all the land ... and no man had a right to hold one foot of Irish soil otherwise than by grant of tenancy from the people in common...” Lalov was not interested in nationalisation – but rather in co-operative ownership. He considered the posi- tion of the landless labourer to be beyond repair, and his theories have little connection with the dense urban problems of our day. Davitt’s views are more pertinent and in the end he was as suspicious of individual peasant ownership as an answer to the land problem as Engels was. The son of an evicted Mayo peasant Davitt moved into Revolutionary politics through an early five year spell in the Irish Republican Brotherhood, the Fenian forerunner of the modern IRA. In addition his foundation with Parnell of the Land League in 1879 increased his radicalism for the organisation, through technically legal, was animated by the spirit of social revolution. The battle cry of the Land League was simply the land of Ireland for the people of Ireland and its initial aim was the overthrow of an oppressive landlord class.. Davitt was eager to emphasise its universal implications and declared that “...the principles on which the land movement rests are founded on natural justice ... the cause of Ireland is the cause of humanity and labour throughout the world...” The problem arose, and still today arises, when Davitt had to consider what system would replace the landlord. The tenant farmers led by Parnell (who incidentally would never tolerate Trade Unions) were clear on the aims – their own holdings would belong to them. Davitt thought otherwise – in line with Henry George, whose famous book ‘Progress and Poverty’ had appeared in 1879 – he saw nationalisation, or state ownership of all land – as the solution. According to Davitt, “Land was a unique commodity, it was no man’s creation, it was essential to all life and it was fixed in quantity. It ought therefore to be directly owned and administered by the state. Private monopoly in land meant that the landlord appropriated most of the wealth produced by labour returning only a bare liv- ing to the tenant. Under national ownership the tenant would enjoy the full product of his industry and would have a virtual freehold, paying a tax equal to the annual value of the bare land, and observing certain condi- tions. he holding must be cultivated: it should not be larger than the tenant could personally manage – and the State should have the right to authorise mines and minerals worked in it. In general terms the ultimate outcome in Ireland, peasant proprietorship, was not the solution of the land problem at which he aimed. His suspicion of this ‘solution’ was matched only by the contempt of such an aim by Engels who declared:- “...for our workers in the big cities, freedom of movement is the prime condition of existence, and land own- ership can only be a fetter to them, Give them their own houses, chain them once again tot the soil and you break their power of resistance to the wage cutting of the factory owners...” In England the land of nationalisation theories of Henry George, the American author of ‘Poverty and Prog- ress’ were advocated thirty years later by another George, Prime Minister, Lloyd George. In his budget – his Peoples’ Budget as he called it – of 1909, he introduced taxes on land values. Looking back on them they were not startling – eg. one 1/2 penny in the pound on the added value realised by the sale of land where the com- munity had made that value possible. But they caused a tremendous political storm and the House of Lords (which incidentally Davitt had referred to as that Den of Land Thieves) rejected the budget, and a constitu- tional crisis ensued. Lloyd George travelled the country presenting the land issue – and in his famous Limehouse speech he de- scribed the landowners living on unearned profits as parasites: “Who created these increments? Who made that golden swamp? Was it the Landlord? Was it his energy? His brains? It is rather hard that an old workman should have to find his way to the gates of the tomb bleeding and footsore, through the brambles and thorns of poverty. We cut a new path for him, an easier one, a pleasanter one, through fields of waving corn.” But the land taxes brought in little revenue and were abandoned n the days of the coalition. Lloyd George continued to proclaim his belief in public landownership and a total abolition of freehold. In the mid-twen- ties he was the main force behind the Green Book and Brown Book. The former called for public ownership of all agricultural land and the latter for total nationalisation of all urban land. Had these proposals been adopted our economic situation today might well be different. The Green Book proposed that the vast, and growing numbers of urban unemployed world return to a coun- tryside that belonged to them and not the large landowning farmers. Advocates of Lloyd George’s policy formed an organisation called the Land and the Nation League and toured Britain advocating land nationalisation. But the opponents of public land ownership were beginning to dig-on and eventually even the liberal party was divided. The early planning acts form 1909 through to 1932 had not proved a success – perhaps because they were too loosely drafted on such a vital issue. It proved too costly to pay compensation for development refusal, and the collection fo betterment levies provd well nigh impossible. Three major inquiries, the Barlow, Scott and Uthwatt, in the 30’s and early 40’s agreed on the need for a na- tional land system. Ultimately the 1947 Planning Act took up Ultwatt’s main idea: a transfer to the State of all development rights in land. The three major principals of the ’47 Act were: Planning Permission required for all development (this for the first time). No compensation paid for refusal Betterment would accrue to the State through Development charges paid to a CENTRAL LAND BOARD. In addition, and in retrospect fundamentally, all land was expected to change hands at existing use value. This in theory Local Authorities could buy land cheaply. Three things happened instead: Owners held land back (they hoarded it) Privately land changed hands at market value – this keeping up the price Landowners sat back expecting a future Tory Government to repeal the Act. Which is exactly what happened in 1951. The Tories kept development control and the no compensation clause – but abolished the Central Land Board. Now an absurd, but legal, two-pricing system existed. Local Authority could still buy land at a price exclusive of development value – if they could find it. But private sales took place at full market value. The Tories 1959 Planning Act reinstated the full market value for all land exchange – from now on no more cheap land for public services and amenities. The market mechanism was in top gear. From the early 60’s to the present day has been the boom period when land prices have soared and massive unearned fortunes have been made in property. Prior to this time land and property was not even quoted on the Stock Exchange; now it occupies the front page of all financial papers. One meek and mild attempt was made by the Labour administration to stop this criminal profiteering – when it set up the Land Commission in 1967. It called for a 40% flat rate tax on development gains – but noth- ing much else was done. Local authorities could still not buy land cheap enough to build desperately needed homes. In any case, the Tories abolished the Land Commission in 1970. It was during this time 1966-1972, that land values rose 228% house prices rose 113% manual earnings rose 52% During this time, according to Counter Information Services, 100 men between them shared £400 million from property and land deals. During this time – the profits of the big private architects rose 118% while the number of new commissions rose only 34%. During this time a senior official in Manchester Corporation Planning Department said – “Land means mon- ey – not just money – it’s a gold mine”. During this time I personally watched the first Chairman of the Covent Garden Development Committee dan- gle prizes of enormous profit from inflated land values before the slobbering faces of Britain’s top developers. During this time I got sick to death of the professions I was in because of the way land was handled as a mar- ketable commodity and the way the architectural and planning professions made no move to change the situa- tion. And now we are at the White Paper. I’m not going to go into great detail over the Land Nationalisation Bill – for one things it’s not a very detailed document anyway and had been criticised as such by none other than the Labour Party Home Affairs Commit- tee – but in any case I should be concluding soon. It’s important to see the Bill as just another stage in a centuries long effort to sort out the and problem in our society. This really has been the whole point of my talk. To understand the present we must understand the past – then we might have some hope of getting things right in the future. Of course it depends on your own viewpoint in the end – some would say we don’t even have a land problem, and many Marxists take this view, but when in 1974 we have 9 million families living in slums and well over a million totally homeless, yet in the last ten years 100 men have made £400 million pounds profit from land deals – I can’t see that we don’t have a land problem. The ultimate aim of the Land Bill is to take from private individuals into the community purse the wealth real- ised from values created by the community and to enable local authorities to have a more positive influence on development in accordance with public needs. This ill be done (it is said) by: Giving Local Authorities strong compulsory powers to purchase land at existing use value Charging a 100% Development Land Tax (DLT) on all developed land. This means that when land is devel- oped, the increased market value of the land springing from the development will go to the community. The argument for this is that the infrastructure which creates the increased value was provided not by the developer but by the public who thus should benefit The ultimate scheme (100% tax) will not come in for some time, say 5 years (by which time incidentally if his- tory repeats itself – and on land issues history does repeat itself, the entire Bill will be repealed by a future Tory Administration). An interim scheme will charge a flat rate of DLT of 80%. Ironically this is less than can be charged under De- velopment Gains Tax – where the maximum is 83%. I find Anthony Crossland’s (the main sponsor) reasons for delaying the ultimate scheme puzzling to say the least. He is quoted as saying the land values would drop too suddenly if the 100% tax was introduced immedi- ately. In the context of the phenomenal rise in land values during the last 5 years, I should have thought we wanted values to drop drastically. Certain land users are totally excluded from the payment of Development Tax: Owner occupiers Agricultural land Forestry land Statutory undertakers Builders and Owners with planning permission on White Paper Day (12 Aug). In basic theory the profits from the development of land will either accrue to the Local Authority or the Exchequer. The Local Authority have the option, instead of granting planning permission (whereupon the developer pays out his DLT to the Government) can acquire the land by Compulsory Purchase – net of DLT – then ease it back to the developer at the Developed Value. Crossland described this at his press conference as “money for Old Rope” and calculated that the public would profit by £750 million. Others think differently – and argue that the taxpayer will have to fork out £500 to £1000 million merely in order to fund the purchasing of the land even at existing use value. It’s a moot point – although Local Authori- ties have no money – and the Government is hardly rich. But it’s more complicated and worrying than that. Tony Crossland has in some quarters been called the Devel- opers’ Saviour because of the possible implications of the Bill. The argument goes like this:- Local Authority somehow finds the money to acquire the land by CP. Local Authority cannot afford to do much with it – and can’t allow it to remain idle – as some interest changes have to be paid. So Local Authority attempts to lease it to Developer – at increased Developed Value (remember Money for Old Rope). Developer won’t consider anything not profitable. (He’ll go into oil, or art or pornography or something in- stead) Suddenly Developer is in the driving seat again. As always he’s got the Local Authority by the curlies – and of course all his negotiating skills come to the fore. And bingo – we’re back where we started. An unwanted office block on that part of the site and a bit of expensive Local Authority Housing on the other. There are many other obvious criticisms of the Bill which unfortunately ring true. The market in development land will dry up because owners will not bring land forward unless profit is guar- anteed. They will simply hold tight hoarding the land until a future Tory administration repeals the Bill. All this has happened before. If Local Authorities have the purchase money and the expert staff (and this is a very big IF), to ‘hunt down’ the land hoarders, great social hatred will be engendered. It is argued, justifiably, that Local Authorities lack the expertise to handle such massive land-banks as would be required to solve our housing and other social problems. Furthermore Local Authorities do not have a very good reputation of looking after land. That they have acquired – a glance at any city centre will prove that. Finally the whole process can be bogged down in inter-area arguments over the definition of development land – and this is especially in the contest of the general public antagonism and mistrust felt towards Local Authority planning departments. On the bright side the Bill, as expected, really smashes the more blatant property speculators. For example if a building like Centre point is not occupied within two years after construction date – then the Local Authority can acquire it at construction date value. In the case of Harry Hyams Empire this can be the difference between £5.5 million and a market value of £42 million. But as I said this sort of Government action was expected and could well divert attention from the more complex land issue. Reactions to the White Paper are mixed. The RTPI is split – with half warning the Government to go slow on Land Nationalisation and the rest saying do it in a big way. The Association of Metropolitan Authorities are wildly enthusiastic – I presume because they will be given the power to buy land cheaply and sell it dearly. This is a very attractive idea to any group of human beings. I would call that an emotional response. On the other hand the Incorporated Society of Valuers and Auctioneers call it a blueprint for disaster – again I would think this is an emotional response – as the valuers commodity may well reduce in price – and no group of human beings like that idea. The Labour Party Home Affairs Committee chaired by Tony Beurn seems very disillusioned with the Bill – be- cause it is not strong enough or if you like not Socialist enough – you could call this an emotional response but at least it seems to pay some heed to historical truth. A final comment on the White Paper. Let me read you the paragraph on Land Disposal. ——– So what conclusions might I draw? I think the Bill will fail because it is not strong enough. I think most of the criticisms against it are valid, specifically I don’t understand why the 100% DLT could not be introduced immediately. I can’t understand some of the categories excluded from the force of the Bill – for example owners and builders already holding planning permission. I think the public’s disillusionment with the Local Authority power base (particularly in the light og recent corruption) is deeper than the Government thinks – and thus the increased powers of land purchase given to them is not so wondrous. But mainly I think the Bill will fail to solve the eternal land problem for two basic reasons: Nationalisation – or public land ownership is by itself neither here nor there – it is what one does the power of ownership that counts. And our representatives have not shown themselves responsible enough in recent years. Solving the land problem will not on its own solve the social problem – of production and power. My basic view at this stage is:- that first we must have total nationalisation of land immediately. Second: a new community-based power structure must be set up -possibly within the context of a Republic. Thirdly: public ownership of the means of production And fourthly, since none of the above have any meaning whatsoever without financial change, the Nationali- sation of the Banking System. Or if this seems too strong – the New Social Role of Money as James Robertson puts it. I have not stressed Nationalisation to such an extent because I believe in State Control – I do not – but rather because I believe more in balance as the real reality of social life – no-one can deny the existence of total im- balance on the issues I have mentioned. I am suspicious of the avalanche of books being written that pertain to be revolutionary but whose only message is: we will create a more just society if we only become good little people. Even dear old Schumacher’s book comes down to that. My view is get the balance back then we can make progress. To conclude: Land does belong to the the people – it belongs to you and to me – and thus to no-one in particular. This is not daydreaming, such a general attitude has been prevalent before in human history. That fact that our so- ciety, in terms of land-ownership, took a wrong turning somewhere in the past, and that our social system is based upon the consequences of that turning does not mean that we must forever live with it. For why should we accept that reality that has been forced upon us? The raped cities, the pollution or our environment, the millions of homeless, the hideous and unacceptable face of Capitalism, the death of Archi- tecture, the wars and the bombs and the bullets, the corruption of our representatives. We have the power to choose another reality. A reality based in co-operation, on the understanding that we can share things especially those common to all of us and vital to our existence. A reality based on past evidence – on a past when Arab and Jew did co-exist and not struggle over land – when Irish catholic and Irish Protestant did not kill each other over land. A past when the American Indian did offer to share his vast plains with the White Settlers and when the indigenous urban poor did share their land with those more well to do. I’m certainly not saying the answer is simple – I know that I personally must do much more studying of the issue. But if land does belong to the people, whether is it God-given or not, then at least I can begin from that basis and never flinch from that fundamental truth. If we wish to alienate people, make them sullen, make them desperate, and finally if we wish to experience more bombs, bloodshed and tragedy, then all history has shown the most effective way to accomplish this – cast them out, make them homeless – deprive them of their land. As I said I don’t know the full answer – I know it’s not simple – but I know that we are not going to reach it by picking ay a centuries’ old problem that came into being on the wave fo basic injustice. Out attitude must be more fundamental than that. 60% of the wealth of this country is owned by 3% of the population, and much of that wealth is in land. At the very least we must correct that situation. It may sound unhelpful but the best analysis of the situation I have come across is that which was printed in the events list. When Henry VIII dissolved the monasteries, which played some part in the Acts of Enclosure he did so by con- fiscation. Perhaps society will just have to confiscate the land back again – then we can begin solving the land problem. There are certain issues with which it is better to be angry rather than to have fashionable objectivity and kind- liness towards one’s adversaries. I think the existing power of the big land owners is such an issue. Bernadette Devlin ends her book “The Price of my Soul” in which she records her fight against the Unionist Party, with these words: “For half a century it has misgoverned us but is is on its way out. Now we are witnessing its dying convulsions. And with traditional, Irish mercy, when we’ve got it down we’ll kick it into the ground.” I have the same feeling over land ownership. I owe the title of this lecture to Dingle Foot who in a rather pessimistic article on the Land Problem as outlined in the White Paper, concluded: “We should sing the Land song again”. I agree and I’m going to. Of all people it was that old Tory Winston Churchill who led the singing of this song to vast open air meetings at the turn of the century. I’ll sing two original verses with the chorus plus three I’ve written to bring it up to date a bit. The tune is marching through Georgia. Sound a blast for freedom boys and send it far and wide March along to victory for God is on our side While the voice of nature Thunders o’er the rising tide God made the land for the people. CHORUS Hark the sound is swelling from The East and from the West Why should we beg work and let the landlord take the best Make them pay their taxes for The Land. We’ll risk the rest On the land that’s free for the people. CHORUS Why should Harry Hyams And the likes of Charlie Clore make their filthy fortunes from the homeless and the poor With their lousy architects Who are rotten to the core They all take the land from the people. CHORUS Why should Bonny Scotland Where the common folk are poor lose their homes and farmland to the oil rigs off the shore while the Multinationals just watch their profits soar from the land they took from the people. CHORUS But one day we’ll awaken with a passion that has grown to the sound of freedom boys. We’ll go and take our own And to Hell with Politicians and the lies that have sown We’ll take the land for the people. CHORUS The land, the land it’was God who made the land the ground on which we stand Why should we all be beggars boys With the ballot in our hand We’ll take the land For the people. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Albane Duvillier Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived JM Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 18 February 2008 https://nam.maydayrooms.org/files/original/1df71babf783c8ca5d146e280c33aa59.pdf b46d0f0773fe6e826f9f16ed174d6da0 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 Harrogate Founding Congress Subject The topic of the resource The Harrogate Congress was the founding of NAM. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Various Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 21-23 November 1975 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 People Attending Harrogate Congress Subject The topic of the resource List of people who attended first NAM Congress at Harrogate Description An account of the resource 49)6 -0cp4 Yir-3 2 /4 HARaOGATE CONGRESS, NOVEMBER 1975 ATTENDANCE LIST ALLLN John, 67 Rom- lly Road, London N 4 01 359 0491 ---GUS David, ArcTlitectural 1,scociation, Bedford Square, London W01 ANSON Brian, 16 Claremont Gardens, Su72biton, Surrey 01 636 0974 P J 18a Melbury RDad, London W 14 b-.21cG John, 36 Elm Gro,,c, Hor4Qy, London N 8 01 348 7669 eki L:1-,1-3.ELL Andy, Architectural Association, Bedford Square, London -,,IJANEY Anne, Geulan Feler!, Pentre Court, Llandysul, Dyfed. _Uandysul 3407 * ME 211RRY David, Beech Lodge, Beech Woodcote, Reading RG8 OPX Dr',.en, 34 Stainb=n Drive, LcQds 17 0532 687386 %.•±1-1;111=G Eariy. 82 Road, I-..ndon NW5 01 722 6048 1'31= 0ii7e, 73uildini; D2c4;n C.27.1')ON Hark, _L-2ctitectural AE:9celatJon, 71-eaford Square, London -1_1,,Jr3S holms v 9 Grilo 5 1.dARTVZI lc), John P 9 Fullerton C2escfJnt, Troon KAI() 6LL Ayrshire home OL92 313'236 office 041 424 3625 Jennift,r, Old Windy Mains, Huiloie, E. Lothian. _ Humbie 647 01 607 2536, Aar,:arut AT!ehitectural AsF;ocimtion, Bedford Square, London WC1 ,L7cLIWS0N Peter, 3 lio:51:e Street London SW3 01 584 1 398 Wilt 20 Stock-ton Road, Chorton Cum Hardy, Manchester M21 lED 061 28i 7859 L_;1.1JI :13n. 1.6 Yo:c],: '±cdding7..on, 01 997 9879 Peter, Tiedford Square London WC1 01 7 r7.r hJqJ UjIiis-ps;r 2';1560 :_Ducy). 56 1'l.litecl;a7,,1 Aia.7.=)Gr:v. Iiianchcster 061 434 4067 Canterb-Li2y oZ Ar, Canterbury. Bill :Irenitechc,r-1 :.-2ociation, Bedford Square, London Maga7;_ic lvhitley Bay, NE26 1DZ L- ohitecti, Iedford ST-are, London 01 63:-, 14 2u 60 71Deuoh Slree.t, :.Luddersfield. Huddersfield 36553 6C Paddock,Haf,dcrsfield. Huddersfield 36553 :ohn., 5 .London 6 01 348 8713 C Cl 548 8713 fyge,4141 17 Lolidon NV6 01 794 930 di 73 43a Tec/i'clouse J-Jf,n,= -Je-(11 2 t'L2-2 2L1a7_1, 50 -Lart-,at„; EA)a0_, Belper, Dellpyshire. 01 636 0974 ext. 14 n. Howard -2.-arc. 22 Tittle Portland Street, MT)c--1 52J.? rri_OP2;RIZS 37 qreenhara luad, TJo,ador I 10 Hore 883 9246 work 359 549 David, 0/0 Glyr Ha=rsix_iTh Road, London W 14 602 3462 Jon, YiamJ_ Exchange St1 dent, kfchitk2ctural Association. David Lept of Arch, Edinburgh College of Art, Edinburgh 711:_hlan) 031 229 9311 jt7iKS 11S CL:fol-d Gi 602 2270 0 , r 2 t1)7: Eisnophill, York W11,0? Lichttec'6u-al _ii3ociation, Bedford Square, London WC1 T.PT__T J, 27 CrusrIC,or Close, Whitwick, Leics. Coalville 37809 1=_7' ''E T, 1C9 Cado,zan Tei-race, London E 9 01 985 2676 to _1017) Roaa, :Feuds C 0532 785907 & Hull, 0482 25938 raul, 37 1:-J-7411c RJ.:±1. lorbituA, Kinuiton on T1-..2es 01 546 0614 ,;,ITERS Wayn, E;:changc Student, Architectural Association. WT3';-2 iTiek, 63 1;i72ohnlonc T.7._q3t, London WO1 WITON 12 -7=cli=re ?Thco, Edinburgh EH3 9JJ 03-: 226 6991 W 11 ftori W 5 1101T D E 166 Walton St2eet Oxford. Oxford 52876 _v NikJA:i, 23 Kin3scote Road, Ciliswick, London W 4 995 5504 Jonathan, :1.1-chitect=al Society, 35 ,Tarylebone Road, W 1 % ;..32RIN,1 Brian, 43,1, Wood:LDI„se acne, Leeds 2 ThYJLD Elaine, 35 Ea-,:yleto:n„; Roata, London W 1 997 4884 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource JA 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 21-23 November 1975 https://nam.maydayrooms.org/files/original/af2b7f11f553f4c7b021f367d9af6d24.pdf a47eba001da3f414a8bb9ef37cc54a5e 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 Harrogate Founding Congress Subject The topic of the resource The Harrogate Congress was the founding of NAM. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Various Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 21-23 November 1975 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 Attendance/ Contact List Subject The topic of the resource Attendance lists for Harrogate 2pp, and contact lists by area 12pp Description An account of the resource NEW ARCFTTECTURE MOVEMENT LOEDOLig I R ,SAY 22, 1976 ATTENDENCE LIST N s, -F1eM S tio tIftvliSSW) M1911\43, rkti/ 67 Rmilly Road, Lond6n, N4, 01-359-0491 —ANSON, Brian, 16, Claremont Gdns. Surbitbn Surreys 01-636-0974 ,444=1„....l.adamwb, 610 Finchley Rd. London Y.W.11 , CARTER'., Peter, Green Ban Action Committee, e Nurtha (>4 EDMONDS,S.P., 26, Runneymede 'FEMME 131 Brickfield Rd. oreshore Rd. London, S.E.8 en End, Kingsthorpe, 14a1941.&% N ek-eettitr, 68,Ranalagh Rd. London W.5 4 Birmingham, 021-773-7811,-------OZUga Rd., Whitton MiddlesexThornton Heath, Surrey. 5 -voir7 HOOPS, R. 226, North Mapte, Green Bay, Wisconsin U.S.A. C/./4""") 7 La T('URELLE, Dean, 5 Schoril of Environmental Studies, UniverSity Gower St, London, W.C.1 Architectural Society, P.C.L. 35, Marylebune London W.1 w /6, MARSH, J, School of Architecture, Scroope Terrace, Trumpington Cambridge Marjoram, Kevin, 444, Northampton Buildings, Rmsoman St, London, Maltz, R. 11, -iklmdale Rd. Lond©n N.W.6 -MalsAsy."--44A-r, Architectural Association, 01-636-0974 geTte117-N-e7ille, 610. Finchley 9 PLea4149-5,9-Alexander Road, Hedloway. London N 19. body, Giles,-76B Loveridge Road, London NW6 Rd, St, At 36 Bedford Sq. London, W.C.1 Rd., Londln N.W.11 -CEP. Acram7-50-Bargate Rcad, Belper • Derbyshire. 01-636-0974 14 CV giV VOA RA ONVSantt, 51 Landsduvme Road, Lon-dinn Wll o CBC Bank, 49 Berkely Street, Londo 11 hill SHORT D., 108 Lenten Boulevard, Nottingham. 61C ' TINKER Mark, School of Architecture, Scroope Terrace, Trumpington Street,' fraw c)-Livi 75 40. sawX✓ 41//k-470142t)-4 ,:2681.66N uitel-iiemirrtrlT97gzm 5 thAVIM Cambridge. 2,t ULLATHORNE P, 47 Claudia Place, London SW19 WREN Elaine, 26 Bourne Road, Bromley, Kent. 01-464-8666 --ffer,4 Irv/ 9 dua - Dot_upyl Ftrows. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource ARC 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 Nov-75 https://nam.maydayrooms.org/files/original/08a2b26de39f293c97bbeefabbf30da7.pdf da6af44da53bf9f5d1003534f83997cf 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 Harrogate Founding Congress Subject The topic of the resource The Harrogate Congress was the founding of NAM. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Various Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 21-23 November 1975 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 Ken Thorpe Presentation Subject The topic of the resource Ken Thorpe's presentation to the 1st NAM Congress at Harrogate Description An account of the resource HARROGATE CONGRESS, NOVEMBER 1975 ALLAN, John 67 Romilly Road, London N 4 ANGUS, David Architectural Association, Bedford Square, London ANSON, Brian 16 Claremont Gardens, Surbiton, Surrey BEAVAN, P J 18a Melbury Road, London.. W 14 BROWNING, John 36 Elm Grove, Hornsey, London N 8 BURRELL, Andy, Architectural Association, Bedford Square, London DELANEY, Anne Geulan Felen, Pentre Court, Llandysul, Dyfed FARMERY, David Beech Lodge, Beech Lane, Woodcote, Reading RG8 OPX FILEMAN, Brian Architectural Association, Bedford Square, London FINEBERG, Barry 82 Antrim Road, London NW3 FLEURY, Clive Building Design GIMSON, Mark Architectural AssOciation, Bedford Square, London HAGNESS, Einar Edinburgh College of Art, Edinburgh HARIVEL le, John P 9 Fullerton Crescent, Troon KA10 6LL Ayrshire HEDIN, Jennifer Edinburgh College of Art, Edinburgh JARRETT, Margaret Architectural association, Bedford Square London JOHNSON, Peter 3 Moore Street, London SW3 LEACH, Wilf 69 Davy Street Dean Bank, Ferry Hill, County Durham LERWILL Ken 49 York Road, Teddington, Middlesex LYNDON, Peter Architectural Association, Bedford Square, London LITTLE, Stephen 36 Whitechapel Street, Didsbury, Manchester LUCKING, Dick Canterbury College of Art, Canterbury McINTYRE, Bill Architectural Association Bedford Square, London MANN, E Building Magazine, 51 Beech Ave, Whitley Bay NE26 1DZ MOLONEY, Peter Architectural Association, Bedford Squgre, London MILLS, George 60 Beech Street, Paddock, Tuddersfield MILLS, Rosie 60 Beech Street, Paddock, Huddersfield MURRAY, John 5 Shilton Avenue, London N 6 MURRAY, Mrs J 5 Shilton Avenue, London N 6 PEBODY, Giles 17 The Mansions, 33 Mill Lane, London NW6 POWELL, Nigel 43a Woodhouse Lane, Leeds 2 PURSER, Adam 50 Bargate Road, Belper, Derbyshire DE5 1NF RIDDEL, T Renton Howard Wood Levin Ptnrs. 22 Little Portland St London W1N 5AP ROBERTS, Marian 37 Greenham Road, London N 10 ROEBUCK, David 0/0 9 Glyn Mansions, :7ammersuith Road, London W 14 SLOTE, Jon Miami Exchange Student, Architectural Association SOMERWELL, David Dept of Arch, Edinburgh College of Art, Edinburgh STEWART, Lachlan Dept of Arch, Edinburgh College of Art, Edinburgh TAYLOR, David Architectural Association, Bedford Square, London Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Ken Thorpe 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 22.11.75 https://nam.maydayrooms.org/files/original/e61d45ec6196158c51a4458ec08dbf16.pdf de66bc96d1d88057c31f371333b80261 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 Harrogate Founding Congress Subject The topic of the resource The Harrogate Congress was the founding of NAM. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Various Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 21-23 November 1975 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 Press Release Subject The topic of the resource Press Release for 1st NAM Congress with proposals for Profession, Practice and Education. (4 sides) Description An account of the resource hit>LEg,Meuse oT The N.A.M. Congress was heid at the Royal Baths Conference Centre, Harrogate, from 21st/23rd November, 1975. It was chaired by Mr, Peter Whelan and Miss Nikki Hay, both freelance writers and non-architects. The congress was initiated and organised by the Architects Revolutionary Council (1.R.C.) which handled all the advance publicityand accomrodatiion, but emphasised that their function was one of organisation only. The congress having begun, A.R.G. became fust one viewpoint anong many. The conference particiuants repre ed wide spectrum of the architectural profession,: incir ; laried architects, principals, technicians, students, teachers, es well as non architects. The coneress was based on the nremis that therc exists a rapidly growing dissatisfaction with the arc itectural profession. This premise was borne out by the congres 's misgivings about Min. ee si 2 - Alun ae aa 2 7 1 7 The many issues debated included What eifect Jo centralisa nh anu bureaucracy have on architects in Local government : 4 SelfManagenent What woud be the implications orofits were chared by principals private vee 5 Redundancie What will be tne effect of in architecture * Could if both responsibility and and assistants alike in ths growing aumber of redundancies alternative forms of practising & nionisation architecture ? this spur on ane movenent towards what shouic the cpproach of architects be to the Unions which already exist ? i Hducation Rees Keenst 2% suail sector of ? Should architect- jLic, and if so, how Do architects need their own union ? If so, in what way would the function of vnat union differ from the R.I.B.A.? If not, Who should control accessibility to and certification of architectural education ° What sort of education should that be °? @ "7TEMP« 25rd November, 1975 The conpress:. decided on. the following course of action for the immediate future: ‘ The members of the congress would begin setting up discussion groups in their own ereas to debate relevant issues. These groups would include all those involved in the built environment, designers and users. A second congress would be held in about three months' time. Volunteers from this congress have agreed to organise this and to act as liaison and contacts until the next congress only, after which a new liaison group would take over, thus hopefully avoiding the creation of a bureaucracy. The congress agreed to pool its experience of working for change, including failures as well as successes, and to build up a body of written work based on this experience, that could be circulated for disucssion before the second congress. Contact address: 10 Perey Sirest, Loudon W 4 PROPOSALS ON EDUCATION The 2 'A' level entry requirement to architecture schools is not a worthwhile criteria for selecting students, and that the special entry facility should be used more fully. School leavers should be encouraged to spend a year out between school and college, and that colleges should offer deferred places to allow this to happen. Greater opportunities should exist. for mature students and special courses established for mature technicians, That college prospectii should include a student written section. That all schools .of architecture should have student societies with funds and self-government. nes Encourage all schools to fully participate in the Schools of Architecture Council. Tx Ensure staff and student representation on college academic and governing bodies. 8. Encourage staff and student exchanges nationally and internationally. 9. Students transfering colleges should need only the consent of the new college. 10. Expendpart-timecoursesandensuretheiradequaterepresentationonallbodies affecting then. 11. Gain student representation on a reformed ARCUK Board of Education. 12. Establish responsibilities between local schools and practices. Establish links between schools and the community. 14. Allow teaching staff time and resources to develop their own courses, 1D Encourage employment of short term staff, and discontinue the practice of academic appointments for life. 46, Inadequate staff should be dismissable at the instigation of staff and students, serie Encourage the development of self motivated courses and projects as these give greater educational benefits. 18, Course structuring should not be so rigid as to forbid random/spontaneous activities on occasions. 19. Traditional exams are an inadequate guide to the educational development of students and should be replaced by sensible forms of continuous, assessment. 20. Part I should be regarded as notionally equal in all 38 schools, while main- taining individual characteristics; this would allow transfer between all colleges at this stage. 2A. Part II courses should include students from other courses though the final . qualifications would be different in name. 226 Part III, as in the EEC, should be taken while at college. 23. The RIBA "Visiting Board" system, to be replaced by an ARCUK body that has 13+ equal public, studént, staff and practitioners representation, 26 a 4. Ie Cn 3e PRACELCH /ROPOSALS PROPOSALS RELATING TO THE PROFESSION By adopting the following Principles environment." "For the benefit of the public, environmental practitioners, practices and education are to maximize their potential to create a socially responsible The new movement can truly claim that its interests lie not with the finanoial client but with the public. Instead of starting from a charter that beiins,| with "the advancement of architecture", we start from a social commitment to the public. While in the past a professional has been able to exist by being competent and honest, we place his usefulness to society Natuaally, his usefulness will also rely on him being competent and honest. That ARCUK be reformed by government so as to ensure an adequate accountability to the public. That architectural education is controlled by a reformed ARCUK Board of Education equally representative of the public, academics, That the Scale of Fees charged by architects be controlled by the government. as the future deciding factor. practitioners and students. To relate architects directly to clients and users. Draw up 2 list of professionals willing to do voluntary work. That all offices introduce worker participation in the management, to include all staff. To instigate situations where architects have responsibilities to specific communities, either through adopting local government offices or by setting up a new situation, Town Planning and Building Regulations be revised to wake them more applicable to the principles of serving the public without waste of resources etc. To speak out on all controls that deprive the environment of a humane and responsible development: i.e. cost yard-sticks, individual building programmes, large scale developments, property speculation. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Press Release 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 22.11.75 https://nam.maydayrooms.org/files/original/c8f85d8be9d3340b2fac07d85f298e4f.pdf 2fcee7fff2866ed4c724fd285177fecb 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 Miscellaneous Subject The topic of the resource Miscellaneous issues Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Various Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1976-1980 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 New Architecture Movement - How it all began Subject The topic of the resource A personal description by John Murray Description An account of the resource NEW ARCHITECTURE MOVEMENT HOW IT ALL BEGAN - A PERSONAL DESCRIPTION User involvement in Design As the project architect of the new Edgewick Primary School in Coventry, I was briefed by the City Education Client Officer, a helpful, experienced and committed client. But when I asked him how I should accommodate useful suggestions from the new Head Teacher about the design of her new school he said, “Just ignore her”. I decided instead to ignore him and went on to work closely with the Head teacher, staff and pupils in developing the design of a successful and well-regarded Primary School adjacent to the existing Victorian Primary School, situated near a large Courtaulds factory and not far from the centre of Coventry. For me this was proof that the users of a building must be fully involved if the design is to be successful. It was a very important lesson and my respect for the committed Head has stayed with me ever since. Now of course, consultation and participation are an integral part of the design process. But in 1968 they were not. (I discovered that in 2014 because of a shortfall in school places, Coventry City Council decided to double the number of pupils so both schools were demolished and replaced by a large PFI school) Working for Tenants and Residents In the early 1970s many architects while working in offices were also providing free design advice and alternative schemes to tenants and residents groups faced with unacceptable redevelopment proposals. This work was in stark contrast to how they were earning their living during the day, but it taught both sides the benefits of having a design service available to and accountable to the people who used buildings. I was working for tenants in Newham while during the day I worked for BDP. BDP incidentally was a very good firm whose idealistic founding partner Grenfell-Baines stated it should be multi- disciplinary and fully involve and reward its staff. (3Rs, Responsibility, Recognition and Reward) (These ideas subsequently influenced the NAM Public Design Group’s proposals). At that time, my wife Ursula was working in a Community Development Project in Canning Town. Through her I became involved with West Ham tenants. Most private firms were not so good as BDP for salaried staff, hence salaried architects desire for change. The RIBA was seen to be a mouthpiece for private Architectural Practice. These ideas became more widespread throughout the profession both amongst salaried architects and teachers in schools of architecture. At the same time, new young Labour councillors, who had emerged from tenants’ struggles, were beginning to be elected and this encouraged the development of NAM ideas in councils, for example Haringey. Architects Revolutionary Council (ARC) While working in BDP, we used to occasionally visit the AA in nearby Bedford Square at lunchtimes. There was also an AA Studio in Percy Street near the BDP office. There I met the tutor, Brian Anson and his students. Brian had established with his students the Architects Revolutionary Council (ARC). They talked to us about ARC’s proposal for a New Architecture Movement to develop ARC’s ideas and especially to take on the RIBA, ARC’s bête noir. They were trying to encourage sympathetic architects, teachers and students to attend an inaugural conference to establish the New Architecture Movement. After I talked to Brian about my interest in public design he asked me to make a presentation about a national design service at the proposed conference. In November 1975 an advert appeared in the architectural press inviting participants to attend the inaugural congress of a hitherto unheard of New Architecture Movement in the unlikely setting of Harrogate. The congress, organised by ARC after discussion with sympathetic architects, brought together a considerable number of like-minded salaried architects and students. NAM was born 1 The New Architecture Movement Harrogate is a very attractive and stylish former spa town in Yorkshire. No doubt ARC chose it for that reason. I presented a paper on a National Design Service to the Congress. Apart from meeting many like- minded architects, the main thing I remember about the congress is the debate about the proposed structure for the New Architecture Movement. NAM Structure ARC proposed that an elected Leader and committee should govern NAM. This resulted in an animated debate. The women at the meeting persuaded the men that the New Architecture Movement should be structured like the women’s movement; ie, groups of people interested in particular issues who would come together as necessary, not at the diktat of a higher body. In retrospect I think this was NAM’s great strength so we didn’t spend our time nit-picking as would inevitably have been the case if we had agreed to the centrally controlled body that ARC wanted. It was eventually agreed that NAM should be structured as local groups. There was also to be a liaison group, whose role was to coordinate the different campaign groups, deal with correspondence and arrange the next annual congress. Groups would report to each other through a magazine called SLATE. Liaison Group I was involved in the first London liaison group and in due course we got a grant from the Rowntree Foundation, which enabled us to set up an office in 9 Poland Street. During the first few months after Harrogate, we discussed how NAM should develop. We drafted NAM’s objectives (attached) and organised our first meeting in May 1977 in Covent Garden to encourage more salaried architects to join. Anne Karpf reported the event very favourably in Building Design. Groups The following campaign groups developed over time: • Alternative Practice • Education • Feminist Group • Professional Issues (A number of us were elected to ARCUK to represent ‘unattached’ architects) • Public Design Group • SLATE • Trade Unions and Architecture These groups, which were largely autonomous, worked across local groups to develop their ideas. They arranged their own conferences and reported through SLATE and annually to the NAM Congress. Although I was involved in the liaison group and other groups, my main interest was in developing the ideas for a National Design Service. This eventually became the Public Design Group. It included one of Brian Anson’s AA students and architects and students from Sheffield and Nottingham. So we did a lot of travelling, usually meeting in Sheffield. See separate report on how the Public Design Group evolved and how its ideas were eventually developed in Haringey. NAM’s ideas became more widespread throughout the profession both amongst salaried architects and teachers in schools of architecture. John Murray NAM Founder Member 31 August 2015 2 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource JM Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived JM Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2015 https://nam.maydayrooms.org/files/original/1bb0ac4c3c87e4b27578ac9428ea56d5.pdf cce682154f3cec1cce97a5fe48b0bbaa 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 Harrogate Founding Congress Subject The topic of the resource The Harrogate Congress was the founding of NAM. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Various Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 21-23 November 1975 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 NAM Handbook 1978/1979 Subject The topic of the resource Description of NAM's background, activities and campaigns with photographs and cartoons (40pp) Description An account of the resource NAM HANDBOOK 1978/1979 ARCUK CARDIFF EDUCATION FEMINISM GREEN BAN ACTION MONOPOLIES PROFESSIONALISM PUBLIC DESIGN SERVICE SLATE UNIONISATION CONTACTS LIST BIBLIOGRAPHY INTRODUCTION — The intention behind this hand- book is to draw together in one publication the various strands of activity undertaken by the New Architecture Movement (NAM). In so doing it is envisaged that a gap in NAM’s presentation of itself and its ideas to a wider public will have been filled. The handbook also sets out to explain the structure and workings of NAM, to counteract any assumptions that NAM is in any way a closed circle. It seeks to attract to the movement further people who ‘ agree broadly with its aims, and to give pointers to the areas of work still to be undertaken. It is hoped a useful tool will.thus have been created for the present and potential future membership. and structure of the movement, much of which still holds true today. Sev- eral local groups were established, and a Liason Group delegated to maintain and extend contacts , and to organise the annual Congress. In the three years since Harrogate NAM has continued to grow in strength and , with well over a hundred members and a growing list of significant campaigns in the previously complacent world of prof- essional politics, is now preparing itself for its fourth annual Congress. NAM’s strength undoubtably derives from. this success in campaigning against the anti-social and undemocratic aspects of current practice, in giving voice and form to the criticisms of those who, like the majority of architectural workers , are frustrated, isolated and exploited, alienated from the products of their labour and powerless in the face of architectural employers who have for so long jealously guarded The loose-leaf format was adopted to allow future addition and amend- ment , thus enabling the handbook to be kept up to date. The handbook is subdivided issue by issue in accord- ance with NAM’s working arrangements Additional material will be distributed in future issues of Slate, the NAM news- ural and allied workers in order to letter, whenever groups feel.the need to restate their position or bring the account of their activities up to date. ORIGINS OF NAM The New Architecture Movement was founded in November 1975 at the Harrogate National Congress. The significance of this event lay in the formalisation of a growing body of people with the shared belief in the need to reform architectural practice, The Congress achieved a consensus on the essential direction bring about radical changes in the practice of architecture . NAM seeks to restore control over their environ- ment to ordinary people , and social responsibility and accountability to the work of architects. In particular it seeks to fundamentally change the existing system of patronage , the power structure in architecture domin- ated by architects who are principles, both in private and public practice, and powerful corporate or bureau- cratic clients. NAM seeks notonly to challenge the existing relationship of architect to client and user, but also the status-quo. NAM was formed to channel effect- ively the collective action of architect- IN’ TRODUCTI ON the existing industrial relations between employer and worker,to restore avoice both to those who provide the labour for architecture and to those who use its products. STRUCTURE Despite the changeover to paid membership in 1976 NAM’s struct- ure remains very much as established Programmes for action are formulated at Harrogate ~ that of a network. from detailed critiques of the current situation and its background and to this end NAM exists as a network of groups which have over the past three years campaigned on specific issues in pursuit of these agreed aims. If the advance is to be maintained then NAM must continue to develop its critique across the spectrum of architectural practice and thus through regular discussion new areas of work: are determined and new issue or working groups are formed in response. MEMBERSHIP The majority of NAM members are salaried architects in either private or public practice, although students and teachers also provide a substantial Work is undertaken by locally based or issue based groups in furtherance of the overall aims of the movement Policy is ratified at Congress, an annual national event, by the membership as a whole and not by a central steering committee. Central functions are undertaken by the Liason Group and are largely administrative. It is hoped that NAM has thus avoided the pitfalls of bureaucracy and celebrities and also a two-tier organisation of the leadership and the led. Any group or individual is free to present work or propose changes in policy and thus take part in the refinement of NAM’s aims. Much of the work of NAM, the det- ailed development and presentation of policy on specific issues, is undertaken by issue groups which are self formed and self-directed in furtherance of over- all NAM policy. The continuing work element. Initially membership of NAM of such groups is communicated to the was based solely on a agreement with and involvement in pursuing the Move- ment’s aims. As the scope of activities increased an independent source of finance became necessary and member- Congress. Local groups, which hold ship fees were instituted at the Second regular meetings in a number of National Congress at Blackpool in 1976. major cities provice both a forum Whilst voting rights at Congress are retained by fully paid up members only, NAM is nevertheless keen to mainain contact with all interested parties and to this end all NAM events are open to and publications available to the public at large. It is intended to involve as many people as possible in the development of its ideas and activities by the full participation of its members and supporters in either issue groups or discussion meetings. for discussion of general issues and a potential for organisation around local issues. movement as a whole through the newsletter ‘Slate’, is presented for dis- cussion at local meetings and forums, and is endorsed as NAM policy by CAMPAIGNS In terms of democratic control over architectural practice NAM seeks a lay controlled governing body. ARCUK, though established as a ‘public interest’ body, has for its entire existence been controlled by the RIBA thus effectively regulating practice in favour of the architectural establishment. While NAM’s elected presence on ARCUK Council is growing at the same time so is disenchantment with the RIBA amongst architectural workers, NAM’s proposals for a reform of ARCUK are a component of its submission to a government sponsored Monopolies Commission report into architectural practice which concluded in favour of the NAM case that existing practice constitutes a monopoly oper- ating to the prejudice of the public interest. NAM continues to campaign for the abolition of the RIBA instituted mandatory minimum fee scale which restrict the availability of architectural services to the wealthy, corporate or bureaucratic. In the belief that the State represents for many the only means of access to resources NAM proposes a Public Design Service ,a reform of public sector practice, deriving froma critixjue of existing Local Authority departments. It seeks to establish locally based design and build teams directly accountable to tenants and usets — the abolition of existing hierarchical arrangements in favour of participatory democracy at a decentralised local level. In May 1977 NAM’s work on the unionisation of architectural workers , an essential component of the demo- * cratisation of architectural practice, culmin ited in the setting up of the Buildiiig Design Staff branch within AUEW-TASS specifically for architect- ural workers. The responsiblity and initiative fo rthis work has now passed to the Union. NAM has therefore, in the three years since its inception, sought out specific issues around which to campaign in furtherance of its aims . The recent successful formation of a NAM Feminist Group is an additonal example of NAM’s ability to seek out real issues as a centrepoint for concerted action. REPRESENTATION The New Architecture Movement was established as a decentralised democratic organisation rather than one with a dominant centralist org- anisation. To this end the annual INTRODUCTION Congress, held each year throughout a weekend in November, is the all- important democratic event at awhich the work of issue groups is endorsed and the tasks for the coming year determined. In addition the Liason, Group undertakes to organise a number whilst fulfilling that function, has of forums in different parts of the country throughout the year in order to bring together as many people as possible in the discussion of current work by issue groups who themselves give further account in Slate . Whilst the open democratic nature of NAM is undoubtably advantageous in enabling and encouraging the full participation of all members , the year to year dependence on Congress a s the banner, and also to attract a wider sole mandating event may as NAM continues to grow present drawbacks in terms of speed of response to events and accountability and the whole uced in London-by.an independent matter of constitution as at present under consideration by a working group. LIASON GROUP The Liason Group exists to provide essential services to NAM as a whole, a servant rather than an executive body. It currently has nine members drawn from various local and issue groups who meet regularly to under- take the coordination necessary to link together the dispirate elemenis that make up NAM. The Group answers or forwards all corresspond- ence and enquiries, administers fin- ance, handles publications and org- anises the annual congress and cer- tain other NAM events throughout the year. It is NAM’s practice to redelegate the entire group at each congress, thus ensuring a flow of members who have made themselves familiar with the workings of the movement. NAM group who are, like all NAM groups, accountable to Congress. It is published bi-monthly and sent free to all members but may also be bought by subscription or from many bookshops. SLATE A Publications Group was first established at Blackpool in 1976 with the aim of producing a NAM newsletter. Slate, as it soon became, outgrown its original brief, in terms of size, circulation and also ambition. Whilst still serving the needs of the membership in providing up to date reporting of NAM’s activities, the Slate Group has set out to give coyer- age and generate discussion on a wider range of architectural and environmental issues than necess- arily fall under the current NAM audience to NAM’s aims. Articles are commissioned both from with- in and outside NAM. Slate is prod- FURTHER DETAILS Further details about the New Architecture Movement, forthcoming meetings and any of the issues cont- ained in this handbook may be ob- tained by writing to NAM, 9 Poland Street, London W1. NAM is independent of all other bodies and relies solely on its mem- bers subscriptions to finance its activities. Twelve months member- ship, which includes a free subscrip- tion to Slate is £5.00 for employed people and £2.50 for unemployed people, students and pensioners. A membership form is included at the back of this handbook. July 1978 -e*—~all ARCUK a Nam ISSUE GROUP ARCUK GROUP Our interest in the Architects’ Registration Council UK (ARCUK) originated in the early discussions of the North London Group, which was established at the Ist NAM Congress, Harogate, November 1975. The North London Group was primarily concerned with the prob- lems of private practice; the relation- ship of architects to clients and users, and the industrial relationship bet- ween principals and salaried staff. The first of these issues - as applied to the public sector led to the setting up of the National Design Service Group (now the Public Design Service, or PDS Group q.v.). The second led naturally to consideration of trades unionism culminating in the major step of setting up the Building Design Staff section within the AUEW-TASS in May 1977. (An aspect of NAM’s work that is well documented else- where. However this still left the old North London Group- or Private Practice Group as became known when the issues had been thus refined - with the questions of accountability and control within the profession and the general problems associated with the concept of “professionalism”. It became clear that the system of self- government that is operated through ARCUK is central to the processes of architectural education, admission to the register and the regulation of practice by Codes of Conduct and Conditions of Engagement. Moreover, historical research into the origins of ARCUK and study of its constitution began to show that the unbroken tradition of RIBA domination severely limits ARCUK’s intended role as a “‘public interest” body. The initial conclusions of our study together with draft prop- osals for anew ARCUK Council were presented in the “Private Pract- ice Report”, to the 2nd NAM Cong- ress, Blackpool, November 1976. ARCUK Councillors represent- ing the professional associations are invariably appointed by the Councils of those Associations, but the Annual election of councillors to represent “Unattached Architects”- i.e. those simply registered with ARCUK who choose not to become members of any of the professional associations listed in Schedule I of the 1931 Architects Registration Act - offered an opportunity to gain access to the Council and raise some of the above questions directly in the context of ARCUK’s activities. The 1931 Act prescribes that the number of councillors representing the varipus “constituencies” shall be reckoned at one per 500 members or part thereof. Thus the “‘unattach- ed” elections of 1977 seven seats were available, six of which were sucessfully taken by NAM candidates. In 1978 owing to the increased number of unattached architects the number of possible seats rose to nine, and eight NAM candidates were returned. In addition, by virtue of a so-called. “gentleman’s agreement” councillors from each constituency are entitled to nominate further representatives to sit on certain ARCUK committees adding a turther two to the NAM contingent. The early work of the North London Group has thus produced a new NAM/ARCUK. issue group consisting of the elected councillors and any other interested in the field. tising - ensuring equal-rights for un- attached architects, South African investments - urging ARCUK to dis- pose of anti-social holdings and re- view its investment policy, ammend- ments to the Code of Conduct - esp- cially in relation to the monopolies issue (q.v. Monopolies Group), arch- itectural appointments - endevouring to prevent discrimination against the unattached in job advertisments, the question of limited liability and of course the monopolies issue itself. The NAM/ARCUK Group meets immediately before Council Meet- ings to allow discussion at greater length of the numerous and often complex issues. In addition, meeting are arranged whenever possible when non-London councillors are visiting to attend ARCUK comm~- ittee meetings. Some progress was made at the 3rd NAM Congress Hull, November 1977 in identy fing selcection criteria for NAM candidates in the unattached _ elections, and in establishingthe principle of councillors “stepping down” after an agreed term to allow otherstostandforelection. In such circumstances, to ensure the hard-won experience of outgoing councillors is not wasted, it is clearly desirable for prospective can- didates and any others interested to participate in group meetings and familiarise themselves with the pro- cedures of ARCUK in advance of the annual elections. In accordance with NAM const- itution, the Annual Congress and Group Forums allow an opportun- ity for the group to report back to the movement as a whole - and we have also endevoured to give regular accounts of our activities in SLATE Anyone interested in contributing to the group’s work is very welcome to contact in the first instance the NAM Liaison Group. July 1978 Although the unattached are the second largest constituency in ARCUK after the RIBA, the latters’ outright domination in Council, the Board of Architectural Education and all the committees has made it difficult for the NAM/ARCUK rep- resentatives to win motions in debate. Moreover the 40years undisturbed RIBA control has allowed us to be easily out manoeuvered while still “learning the ropes”. Nonetheless the very presence of a new and unfamiliar voice has had a certain dynamic effect which may be measured in at least one way by the extent that ARCUK affairs are now given considerably more press prom- inence. Issues with which we have been concemed include; corporate adver- CARDIFF A NAM LOCAL GROUP While the Cardiff NAM group was still in the throes of discovering just what is was supposed to ve about and where it was going, other things happ- ened which led to the idea ofa comm- unity design service. As the word spread that a group of radical archi- tectural workers had come together community groups were contacting us and it quickly became evident that they were primarily interested in us as a source of advice and ex~ pertise, interested in our professional capacity,that is. NAM nationally had already in- itiated discussions about what a National Design service might be, and it seemed that, at that time, we in Cardiff were in a position to initiate some such scheme. In view of the potential clientele there dev- eloped the idea that the project coul.] be run in an entirely different way to traditional practices. What we hoped to set up was a prototype community based design service which would begin to look at what terms like accountability’ and ‘a more democratic architecture *were really about - An apparantly ready source of finance at the time was the Manpower Services Commission (MSC) who were financing certain projects under their Job Creation Programme (JCP). In order to approach the MSC we needed to demonstrate that a poten- tial demand existed for the sort of design service we were proposing. We preparedaletter outlining the range and broad type of service we would be able to offer, and since we were hoping to use any responses we might get to back up our application, we asked respondents to say if they would use such a service if it existed and also HOW they would use it.The ' letter was circulated to residents associations ,community groups and voluntary organisationisn South East Wales. Response was extensive and positive from abstract encouragement to specific requests for help, some of them urgent. It came mainly from the run down older residential ateas of Cardiff, and from the mining valleys to the north and west. These responses raised questions about the catagories of work which should be undertaken by a design service such as the one we proposed . Should we be helping residents groups to provide voluntarily and out of their own pockets what government resources should be paying for, or designing kitchen/toilet facilities for the Church in Wales? These are questions that we had not even begun to discuss. Neither had we considered in any detail the ways in which the nature of the design service we would be offering would differ in essence from the sort of design service the RIBA might en- visage. The difficulties and short- comings of the sort of service we proposed would be enormous but I think it could be said that the demand for it had been firmly est- ablished. We agreed that in order to learn more about the mechanics of submitt- ing a JCP application we would need an early informal meeting with some one from MSC, Our first meeting was with the assistant to the MSC Cardiff CARDIFF GROUP area assessor. After outlining who we supposed lack of ability of the group were and who we represented we iden- to oversee the project, In order tq_ tified the need for a design input by have made the. application acceptable the community groups we had contact- to the MSC we would have had to ed and the linked need for employment have worked with local RIBA in South Wales for architectural workers groups and within the Local Author- To our surprise response was enthus- iastic. He thought the idea of a design service for community groups was very worthwhile attempting. He was full ofideas of how the project could be set up and along what lines it could progress. He even supplied us with the names and addresses of pecple and groups we should contact for letters of support. Towards the end of October 1976 we had a second meeting with the same assistant at the MSC, and this time the Cardiff area assessor was present for part of the discussion For this meeting the group had drafted out a JCP application. Once again the assistant was very enthus- iastic and helpful but the assessor was much more reserved about every aspect of the scheme, The wording and emphasis of the answers to some questions was altered to suit the assessor, Words such as credibility cropped up and he suggested that the workers employed under the JCP should be paid less than the negociated market rate for the job. However some kind of agreement was reached on the content of the form with particular attention to the comments of the assessor who it seemed would ‘judge’ the credibility of our apglication. A couple of weeks later after this final meeting the application, in its ammended form, went in with all the accompanying material. At the beginning of December we received a letter from the MSC inform- us that our applicatinn had been turned down with no reason for the refusal. We later heard mention of the lukewarm response of the local RIBA and the ity structure. The rejection of the JCP application made us realise that any work we did would have to fund itself. We are now doing improvement grant work to terraced houses in a previously blight- ed area of Cardiff for low income owner occupiers. This is being done through and with the encouragement of a local community and advice centre. The nature of these jobs and , more importantly, the financial’ status of our clients excludes a full percent- age fee service. Work is there fore being undertaken on a time charge basis. Extract from Slates 2 and 3 June 1977 Anyone wishing to contact this group should refer to the contacts list at the end of this handbook or write to the secretary of NAM. EDUCATION ANAM ISSUE GROUP Contary to statements made by NAM’s critics, only a small proport- ion of NAM membership is made up by students. Architectural students have always been reluctant to take action to alter the direction of architecture as a whole, or the direction of their education system. This apathy has contributed to NAM’s failure to arrive at a coher- ent educational policy, but it also demonstrates that a radical basis is required for students to identify and become involved with. Students have, however, consist- ently voiced legititmate complaints regarding the content and method- ology of architectural education. These include limited option opp- ortunities, lack of diversity both within and between schools, exces- sive emphasis on irrelevant academic and technological teaching, no com- EDUCATION GROUP munity involvement or accountab- ility, too many deadweight staff awaiting retirement, restrictive and elitist entry requirements, excessive power weilded by school heads, and soon. What is lacking is a crystal- lization of these grievances into an education policy, backed up by research and analysis. NAM'’s first education document, for the 1976 congress, was based on the need to “de-professionalize” the schools to create a radical acrhitect- ure, and encompassed student griev- ances in an analysis of education along Ivan Illich’s ‘de-schooling’ theories. It made proposals for action based around three aims: to enable a wider section of society to enter schools thus breaking down the middle class, elitist stature of = architecture; to ensure a more dyn- amic, adaptable and capable teach- ing staff; to dis-establish the schools make them democratic and account- able to the community and to real- ise the schools’ potential as a resource centre for use by all. This policy contained many excellent points and received support from students and staff in schools, but was not adequ- ately backed up by research and has never been developed. NAM’s recent activity in educa- tion has been confined to an analy- sis of the roles of the professional institutions and outlining the scope’ of an education policy. But the failure of full-time institutionalized architectural education to provide the ‘new architect’ to improve the image, relevance and ability of architects as a whole has promoted the establishment to call 1978 the year of the ‘great debate’ on arch- itectural education, the results of which will almost certainly be proposals for an even more rigid and irrelevant system. It is now of great importance that NAM can speak coherently on the issue and propose radical alternatives relevant to a more socially acceptable and democratic future role for architect- ural workers. It is necessary to formulate a pol- icy on three fronts: an analysis of the past and present education system, the pressures that created it and the results of it within a social, political and economic framework; the future direction for education to acheive a democratic, accountable architectural practice; and a programme for action within the system as existing to ach- ieve the needed. change. To be of any value and to have any effect, the formulation of this policy requires the participation and involvement of all NAM members, and the collective action of students and staff. July 1978 NAM Calendar 1977 FEMINISM & ARCHITECTURE A NAM ISSUE GROUP At the 1977 Congress in Hull NAM became tentatively aware of a gap in its radical approach to with and for women who are looking gq for an approach to design and build- & -ing which embodies these feminist wR ideals. We have been contacted by 8 several groups of women for help and & intend to set up a cooperative practice Fea} _in response to this demand. < architecture — that the ideas and experience of the Women’s Move -ment are as fundamental to the achieving of NAM’s aims as are those of the socialist movement and that they are intrinsically bound together. _ ised as follows: 8 Throughout their lives women live, work and study in an environment designed and built primarily by men and, more importantly, which reflects a male structured society. At present women who have beer successful in the architectural world have done so by taking up the values and modes of identification of that society and have therefore succeeded only in continuing men’s work, By working within the women’s movement and the labour movement as a whole we believe that a feminist architecture can exist. At the same time the circular nature of the relationship between buildings and society means that attempts to demonstrate the possibilities of an architecture where women are involved can be influential in the restructuring of that society. It is cherefore crucial that, as a group, we explore the alternatives both in theory and in practice, The theoretical discussion has developed along the lines described below and is outlined in SLATE 8 which is devoted to Feminism and Architecture and published an account of most of our work done up to that time. Qur action in practical terms is also summarised below but in partic- -ular it centres on the use of our skills Education — The conditioning of = girls away from technical subjects is a 4 Process which begins in early child < hood and is reinforced throughout = schooling. As few schools will a encourage girls to take up building Our current work may be summar- x telated subjects, we hope to organise a series of lectures for schools and colleges presenting architecture and building as a possible career for women. In order to facilitate this we are making a video film which will show women in this capacity. Women at Work — We have so far looked at the discrimination against women within our present economic system and the heirarchical organ- isations which exist in architectural practices. A Feminist Approach to Design — This centres around the relationship between the design of buildings and the role of ‘women in society todav and throughout history. We plan to show how design guides and hand- books tend to perpetuate the con- ventional role of women within the nuclear family and later kope to pro- duce a model design for a communal home. Women and the Press — We are investigating the ways in which architectural publications of all types promote the dominant role of men in the building industry and the conventional role of women in the home or as sexist aids to advertising. National Legislation — We have already made our reccommendations in the press that national legislation should require that a certain minimum percentage of women architectural workers be employed in all offices; that it should be mandatory for all larger offices to provide nursery Slate 4 and Slate 8 facilities and allow part time working and flexitime; that the goverment should actively encourage retraining schemes for women who have stopped work to bring up children; and that the government should support positive discrimination in schools in order to prevent conditioning of girls away from subjects requiring technical expertise. History of Women in the Construction Industry — The construction industry is supported indirectly by a number of manufact- -uring trades which employ mainly women. We are hoping to research more fully the facts regarding the employment of women in these trades and also to expose the part that women played during two world wars, and still do in many developing countries, in providing the main workforce for the industry. REALLY vo IiTTLE @RT) ‘SHOULD BE GiVEN | j Mowever, the treasury argues that specific rants tto sc 4 tresures must fe te Petition with otter public expenditure and therefore be under treasury control. ‘Ee sept rom he Eagenae Crmiie 19727 The Neti Lan Women architects demand a wore _ stag Sind plant in fespect cl better deal Troe | National tesislation should require that a certain p, Pang eovirnmen in Bish , ‘of women architectural workers be employed in | “2-7 The proportion ot womeg | abour 5 per cear. Thy paper prese: open eerie atten ow ABSURD To THiw ang Gin HAE BN ABILITY / Toiorie ToALLowwomen 76 STucy Fi ERIFiC HAVING WOMEN AS” is encee agrees mt he USN wont. omen Who must be eniplt whe meeung broadly fr ‘cs and ‘should also support positive di ‘er to preveat conditioning of girls “TBA survey ¢ The Feminist Group has been meeting regularly since it was formed in November 1977. Initially meetings. took.the form of informal discussions around our own experiences at work and as students. We then organised a few widely publicised open meetings with guest speakers on topics such as the communal role of women in early societies and women at work today. These meetings have been successful in many ways: as well as providing valuable material for research through the exchange of information and ideas, and a public platform for the views of the group and NAM asa whole, they have enabled us to practice skills in which many of us felt we lacked experience such as preparing, organ- ising, coordinating, chairing and speaking at largish public meetings. By November 1978, in time for the fourth NAM congress, we intend to have published a booklet chronic- 4s employing more than 20 people to prav’ sities and ta allow part time working o¢ flexiry “ovemment should actively encourage retra “en who have stopped work to bring up .> AncTheceTU?RE, THEYIRE OnLy Gea Lcom;NG FOR A HUSBAND ABOUT KiTCH! so he les generous iecatment of industrial bully ciation allowances for tax purposes may be at least cesposible for te lke nton devoued to produce x a Architecture Movement is planning to ra ce. The idea isto form a design andaild group whi sig. Already Oup’s activity gem part of the Group's contribution to the spa’ Women, Architects" exhibition being eNgbours in Pacis, starting on the 13 belandiatetitwudes: The tess 1») They feel chit women van ci. | technical devaiting, (b) They feel that women cannot expe st angressve cop.cactor on site, (c) They may have never employed 2 theredofnoavreventhink of thepossbilit (d) They feel rh: women are tnund children anyws fe) They may fet threatenedat eauld da the sume woe as theinselves may icel comtraimed by th the | axgainst werner. Several large a! swounen arch ehtch Pats get first job ron txsomewhat ma + carlyeighteenctehnt, ornerof thesite, Orenedfy Per (ales and cente, The evtof the workaround £40 00) 8 sgomber of the Federation sold icttheefhebling theAJthashewasvery soup, but thc the eorapertive ting dened oy a indemiey insurance quicly 35 they want the work © 88 Beomen areca valved |butts ilnoegalconatined, The scheme currently being put forward Borough Council forthe rejcena’ varket area AT 16.8.78 => “ehop thatthe m rea *i the foo woud have to be se 10 Fe FEMINISM & ARCHITECTURE fed work. design for a communal home for several families. This eclbped tbe propa ur ihe. pape, alo rewvmmended that it should be mandutney Je gt nytenesmeanfobicbeenepi e-apeatveprstcet up rece by NAS Peri -ling our research and findings on the above issues. We also have been represented at the Centre Beauborg in Paris this September at the exhib- -tion of the International Union of Women Architects. Contact with the group may be made through any of the members listed in the contacts list at the end of this handbook or through the secretary of the New Architecture Movement. July 1978 EEN A WOMIANON A FR COURSE SHE ONLY GOT 7 a” {CAL CLD HARRiDAN= FEMINIST 1 AN ASSCC TATE 6Y SCREWING Bae STAND THESE. AGSRESS ur GREEN BAN ACTION A NAM ISSUE GROUP A Green Ban is the action taken by groups of workers who refuse to work on socially and environment- ally harmful projets. The Green Ban Action Committee believes that only by creating a broad alliance involving ordinary working people as well as dedicated conservationists can effective action be taken to protect and improve our environ- ment. It is therefore composed of members of trade unions, commun- ity organisations and environmental groups, and seeks to involve a very wide range of people in its campaigns. The collaboration among those who live in the local environment includ- ing those who create it by their labour, results in a very powerful force. It raises the prospect of people working together to encour- age projects of a socially useful and environmentally desirable nature, rather than leaving profit to deter- mine the sort of environment in which we live. The Green Ban Action Committee was formed at a public meeting in Birmingham organised by people GREEN BAN ACTION COMMITTEE opposed to the destruction of the splendid Victorian Post Office in the city centre. The first actions of the comm- ittee were to start a petition (which collected 20,000 signatures ), hold a public rally, and to seek resolutions of support from trade unions such as EEPTU, AUEW-TASS, ASTMS* NUPE; NALGO, UCATT and TGWU. Support was aslo forthcoming from local MPs, and county and city councillors. Following the rally in March 1976, NAM was asked to prepare a planning report on the implications of the re- development with respect to the city and the financial return that was to be expected. Part of the report re- appeared in the first Green Ban Action Committee’s broad sheet which listed the arguments against the development, the support for the campaign and a brief explana- tion for the Green Ban idea. The broadsheet was distributed through all the local TV branches and schools as well as the people of the city, The campaign was featured in the local and national press, many magazines and journals and on Radio Birming- ham. The 24 hour occupation of a giant crane on an adjoining site in support of the campaign was feat- ured on television. During the summer of 1976 alternative proposals were formulated by the committee for the use of the building. NAM gained access to survey the building and prepare a feasability study on the reuse of conversion of the post office as a city recreation and leisure centre, In Novembera delagation rep- resenting the GBAC, the West Mid lands TUC and the Victorian Society met with the City Council and the Post Office Board - a meeting result- ing from pressure mounted by GBAC. The aim was to discuss objections of the proposed redevelopment of the GPO site. The leader of the City Council (now Tory) refused to consider revoting planning consent, and left it to the postal board to make. concessions. But in spite of detailed arguments about Birming- ham’s heritage, about planning for people instead of profits, and about the huge over provision of office space, the Postal Board remained totally fixed in its determination to demolish the Victorian Post Office and build offices. At the first AGM of the GBAC in March the following year, NAM pres- ented outline proposals for the use of the building as a leisure centre where they received unanimous approval. Following on from the meeting the alternative plan was brought before the UCATT regional committee and a resolution of support was passed. The proposals were brought up at the next Birmingham Trades Council meeting, received considerable support from the delagatesand a resolution of support. At the AGM of the West Midlands TUC the proposals received the unanimous approval from officals of just about all the unions of the West Midlands. Thus NAM has taken part in a revolutionary and historic depart- ture in the development of the British Trade Union movement and at the same time helped strengthen the support already given to the campaign. It may be too late to save the Vict- orian Post Office in Birmingham. That would be sad but it would not be end - rather the first step in a difficult and exciting process. The approach taken by the Green Ban Action Committee is a new one in Britain and it is hoped that it will be taken up in other cities and local- ities throughout the country. July 1978 landscapers, students and , of course, unemployment. The group meets regularly on the first Tuesday of each month holding extra meetings when necessary. In its activities to date it has not concentrated all its collective effort on its own specific issues but has tried to spread awareness of NAM’s existence and primary concerns. One example of the groups efforts on the part of the movement is its distribution system for Slate. Each member buys two copies of two successive issues and distributes them to lacal offices and the School of Architecture as well as attemipting to organise selling through bookshops. Another example was by visiting the majority of architectural offices in Leeds and Huddersfield to try to obtain signatures for the petition against ARCUK investment in South Africa. Also, contact has been made with the Wakefield and Barns.ey branch of the RIBA, the Huddersfield RIBA branch, Leeds City Architects Dept and people working in local practices, for the purpose of discussing the work and policies of NAM. * Anyone wishing to contact this group should refer to the contacts list at the end of this hand book or write to the secretary of NAM. July 1978 LEEDS A NAM LOCAL GROUP 2s The Leeds Group which consists of about eight members was formed a year ago. The occupations of the members are varied and include workers in private architectural practice, construction workers - including building cooperators, self employed builders, designers and builders working on theatres, comm- 8 Members of the group are very 8 unity centres and housing cooperat- The following list is of some of the organisations in which members are active as individuals: NAM liason group; ARCUK Council; local branch of AUEW ives, working with Women in Manual Trades (formerly Women in Construc- tion) , adventure playground workers, BDS-TASS; Women in Manual Trades; UCATT; ARCAID — this is a local org- conscious of the many possibilities for expanding the range of activities in terms of both local and national issues. Although in dividual members are separately engaged on most related issues, the group as a whole does not work on them as such. anisation which was started in response toa need for architectural and related services such as financial advice,-design, construction or refurbishing for local groups; tenants groups; community groups; groups concerned with local housing policy; building cooperatives and the Anti Nazi League. = LONDON Perhaps unayoidably, owing to the size of its constituency, the Lon- don group has proved the most signif- icant generator of NAM policy and action. Its form and role have chan- ged during its short history, according to the needs of its membeis, and the development of NAM as a whole. At present the London group provides a forum for NAM members to discuss a range of topical, theor- etical and practical questions which fall both within and outside the accepted body of NAM issues. Its meetings are held on amonthlybasis ate widely advertised and open to the public at large, so serving additionally as an introduction to the New Architectural Movement _ for those interested in a radical anal- ysis of architectural practice. This arrangement is , however, a relat~ ively recent innovation. At first, following the founding Congress in Harrogate in 1975, two separate working groups, the North and Central London groups, were est- ablished concentrating on distinct areas of interest and activity. In these the problems and contradict- ions of private practice and profess- ionalism were discussed, the case for union isation developed, the first National Design Service prop- osals formulated and the NAM sub- mission to the Monopolies Comm- ission undertaken. The first London seminar held in April 1976 in Covent Garden Community Centre, was well attended and provided the first pub- lic platform for much of this work. . Later, at the second Congress in Blackpool, the issue group structure LONDON GROUP. A NAM LOCAL GROUP Nick Wates co x» Ss An was formalised and distinct groups were formed to pursue the work on unionisation, the National Design Service, and the Monopolies issue, and to produce a newsletter for the movement which became Slate. A NAM characteristic had been estab- lished - that of the self-formation of a group of people through disc- ussion of an issue, resulting in a commitment to undertake the nec- essary work in terms of research of and formulation and presentation ofideas. Of necessity much of this work is undertaken in London and many London NAM members found themselves heavily committed to issue groups, or to the Slate or Liaison groups. In line with such developments it is hoped that the presently evolved format fulfils two functions. Through regular discussions it seeks not only to in- form and allow the membership a say in the work of issue groups, but to generate discussion and interest across a broader spectrunrof concern. Thus recent discussions have included presentations by NAM groups on the aftermath of the Monopolies Comm- ission and NAM’s proposals for the immediate future; Slate and Arch- itectural Journalism, centering on the problems of press accountability, and Women at Work, a discussion led by the recently formed Feminist Group on the current position of women in relation to architectural and building work and possible act- ion for future change. In addition meetings have been given over to discussion of the GLC Architect’s Department, the results and implic- ations of the drastic policy changes wrought by the Tories, and Altern- 3 ative Forms of Practice, a meeting at which representatives from co- operatives and other practices disc- ussed their experiences. The next meeting, planned for early September, will centre around Cynthia Cockburn’s book “The Local State’. London group meetings are usually reported in Slate and the weekly arch- itectural journals. They are adver- tised in these magazines and in “Time Out”, and anybody interested is wel- come to attend. Further informat- ion may also be obtained from, and suggested topics for the future prog- ramme send to the New Architecture Movement, 9 Poland Street, London, WIV 3DG: July 1978 MONOPOLIES A NAM ISSUE GROUP The ‘monopolies ’ issue - so called after the Monopolies Commission’s recent enquiry into architects’ fees has been a major element of NAM’s work since shortly after its form- ulation in November 1975. Dis- cussions originated in the old Central London Group and were continued in the North London Group early in 1975 until a specific Monopolies Issue Group was. needed to develop the work in detail. In September 1973 the Depert- ment of Trade and Industry asked the Monopolies Commission - a gov- ernment service department - to pursue the investigation of the arch- itects fee system which the National Prices and Incomes Board had begun. to reviewin 1968. The Commission set about gathering evidence from all parties considered to have an interest in the affair, ranging the RIBA (res- ponding as the monopolist) who through the statutoryAuthority of ARCUK make their fee scale and Conditions of Engagement binding on all architects; to many ‘consumer groups’ - including private organisation ations, public corporations and nation- alised industries. Towards the end of the evidence-gathering period NAM became interested in the issue and submitted its report “The Case Against Mandatory Fees”, in May 1976, The Commission was required to report on whether the fixed fee system used by architects was a that the way in which architects are paid led directly to the heart of the profession, how it is governed and the system of checks and balances that relates architects to each other and to those they claim to serve. Our report, which was closely cross-referenced to the RIBA sub- mission, was presented in three sec- tions. First we attempted to show the falsity of the Institutes’ central argument that the fixed fee scale is needed to sustain the architect’s “assurances” of integrity, unlimited liability, competence, accountability andaltruism. Next we juxtaposed some of the many incompatible statements within the RIBA docu- ment, and queried the inferences drawn from their statistics. Lastly we endeavoured to contsruct a definition of “the public interest” of broader application than the narrow formula adopted by the Commission. Asummary of the NAM position was featured prominently in the Commissions report, “Architects Services”, which was published in November 1977. The Commission concluded that the existing fee system was indeed a monopoly operating to the prejudice of the public interest and therefore recommended its abol- ition and the establishment of an independent government committee to determine new recommended fee scales. As the Minister accepted the report, monopoly(33% of the defined market) the Office of Fair Trading were asked and whether it operated to the prej- udice of the public interest. As our analysis developed it became clear to discuss with the profession how to ammend its rules to permit fee competition. At the same time, MONOPOLIES GROUP the basic NAM position having been vindicated, the Monopolies Group began to prepare proposals for anew fee system. These proposals, together with suggestions for Code of-Conduct ammendments and for the independ- ent Committee were published under the title “Way Ahead” and were pres- ented to the Office of Fair Trading by NAM representatives of Unattach- ed Architects in March 1978. : In May 1978 the OFT reported back to the Minister that no progress had been made with the RIBA or ARE€UK, leaving him to decide whether to use compulsory powers to enforce the Monopolies Commi ission recommendations. At the time of writing (July 1978) no further government action has been taken but the profession is active in lobbying both the Department of Trade and Industry and the DOE in an effort to persuade the Minister to set aside or modify the requirements. At the Third NAM Congress in Hull, November 1977, the Monop- olies Group’s interim report, “Do Not Pass Go - Do Not Collect 6%’. was presented and accepted, and the group was mandated to continue with the néce ssary follow-up action. A leaflet summarising the back- ground to the issue and the main proposlas of “WAY AHEAD” has therefore been prepared by NAM representatives of the Unattached Architects in order to bring our view point to the attention of the widest possible audience. There is much to be done, and with limited resources so that anyone wishing to contribute to the work of the Monopolies Group, which meets regularly in London, is very: welcome to contact NAM Liaison Group. Anyone wishing to contact this group should refer to the contacts list at the end of this handbook or write to the secretary of NAM. July 1978 PROFESSIONALISM A NAM ISSUE GROUP The current mode of professional organisation of architects in this country can only be understood in its historical context. In the early 19th century, new skills and areas of knowledge arose in response to the needs of rapidly expanding industry, and the traditional fields of expertise in the “professional” occupations were increasingly invaded by those possessing these new essential skills. Architects, seeing their territory being eroded by, for example, engineers and spec. builders, responded in a similar way to other threatened “professional” occupations. They defined the area which they considered to be their concern, and attempted to control the practice of skills which operated within that area. not gain entry to the profession. They could guarantee integrity, they claimed, by setting down a Code of Conduct, which those gaining entry to the profession must undertake to comply with. The profession sought to exclude the “unscrupulous and unfit” in order that the credibility of the profession should not be brought into disrepute. Well, you might say, what does it matter whether the motive for prof- essionalising was one of self interest, if the “guarantees” offered by the profession stem from what is, arguably, a need for ensuring compet- ence and integyity within the profes- sion. But this would depend not only on whether it is DESIRABLE to ensure competence and integrity, but also on whether it is POSSIBLE to“guarantee” these through a professional mode of organisation. Let us look at the “guarantee” off- ered by the architectural profession in terms of integrity - the Code of Conduct. (n an age where tree competition was “ deified”, how did professionals so successfully manage to organise to protect their own interest? Unlike similarly motivated attempts at organ- isation by industrial labourers of the period (which met with powerful and sustained opposition) “profess- ionals” did not identify themselves as a group whose interests were in opposition to those of their employers. action. In fact, the Code is prim- Rather, they identified their interests WITH those of their employers, and used this “common interest” as the basis for their organisation. They argued that, by organising, they would be albe to offer employers a “guarantee” of competence and integ- tity. They could guarantee compet- ence, they argued, by setting down certain minimum qualifications, without which practitioners would arily designed to cover relationships between principal architects and other principal architects, and bet- ween principal architects and clients. There is little applicability to salaried. The Code, in order to be compre- hensive, would need to cover the relationships between all the parties involved in an architectural trans- architects, and the users of buildings hardly get a look in (a mention has recently been made of them in Princ- iple 1 of the Code, but this is not supported by any of the Rules which follow from that Principle). PROFESSIONALISM GROUP In addition, the effectivity of any guarantee will partly depend on its enforceability. In practice, there is a reluctance to act on the Code until such time as guilt has been proved in acourt of law. The pot- ential effectivity of the Code asa “guarantee of integrity” can also be viewed in another way. It is said that the Code acts as a “moral oblig- ation”. Whilst not denying the pot- ential ofthis view, it can be argued that the weight of the Code as “moral obligation” can only be ass- essed when it is balanced against all the other pressures which operate on architects, such as the profit motive, the increasing bureaucratisation of the architects’s job, the contradictions of the salaried architects’ positions, an and the simple need to makealiving. The question that has to be asked here is, “what weight do moral obligations have against pressures such as these?” The major argument about “profess- ional guarantees’, however, is whether they are necessary at all. Society has moved on from the laissez faire atmosphere of the 19th Century when when professionalism was seen as the major counter to rampant indiv- idualism, Legislation, in the form of the Trades Description Act, Con- sumer Protection Act, etc., aim to offer the public protection, to per- form the very same function that the “professional guarantee” set out to perform.. So the Code of Conduct could be said to be incomplete and unenforc- eable, to carry little weight as “‘mor- al obligation”, and to offer the pub- lic little more than it is already offered offered in law. But it could be argued that it is nevertheless harmless enough for the profession to formally specify the way it would like its members to behave, even if this specification carried little weight. The trouble is that the profession is laying claim to a “social responsibility” it cannot ensure, and together with this, the profession lays claim also to the ad- vantages which accrue to “altruistic” professional groups in terms of status, self administration, etc. “Professional guarantees” are in- complete, ineffective, superfluous, and operate as figleaves, hiding from the public the way that the profession actually operates - in its own self interest. Currently, professional controls in architecture are undergoing change in response to pressure from within and from the Government. NAM seeks to add its voice to the debate and to contribute to future develop- ments through its representation of ‘unattached architects’ on ARCUK, its report to the Monopolies Comm- ision, and in its call for the reform of the Architects Registration Acts. (described elsewhere in this hand- book). For a fuller discussion of profess- ionalism and the Code of Conduct, see SLATE 3, and Way Ahead, the report submitted by representatives of “Unattached Architects” on ARCUK, to the Office of Fair Trading following the Monopolies Commission Report of Architects’ Services. Also ‘A Short History of the Arch- itectural Profession’: all available from NAM. A NAM ISSUE GROUP NAM’°s initial call for a radical change in the hegemony and patron- age in architecture led to two main points of action. Firstly the call for unionisation in private practice (explained elsewhere in this Hand- book), and secondly for a National Design Service which would meet the right of everyone to exercise control over the buildings which surround them and in which they live and work.’ This idea embodied the ‘commun- ity architecture’ approach, but also recognised that the existing system of public patronage would have to be challenged. Control over design could not be separated from control over resources. The NDS group developed their analysis in papers presented to NAM Congresses and in open meetings, culminating in a Conference in Birmingham in May 1978, which put forward several proposals for action. is that under the present economic system the majority of people gain their rightful access to environmental resources through the various layers of the State. The Public Design service is therefore visualised as a radically modified form of Local Authority (where most of the resources are in fact already distributed) rather than as a new parallel system which would have to wrest control from these pow- erful institutions. This approach led to careful assessment of Local Authority design departments and their potential for change. While the PDS group recognises that these are mostly bureaucratic instruments of social control necessary to support private capital, they also see them as susceptible to vigorous popular press- ure from below, being the lowest teir of government, The frustration engendered by local authorities could be directed into action for beneficial change rather than being spent in need- less and destructive criticism. PUBLIC DESIGN SERVICE GROUP LA Architect departments (and their logical partners, the direct labour organisations) are currently under attack from many quarters. The consequent weakening of these departments leads to the letting of design and building work to outside private architects and contractors, whose profit interest remove them further from accountability and control by the users. The PDS group is therefore in direct oppos- ition to any moves to dismantle these essential areas of public service. To help retain public control over resources, while trying to improve their distribution the PDS group are trying to develop the potential for joint action amongst Local Auth- ority Architects and workers, tenants federations, appropriate trade unions and direct labour organisations. The first point of NAM’s involvement will be to interest and organise LA arch- itects to defend their services, to promote their responsibility to the community, and to research and analyse the idea of a Public Design Service. There is much work to be done in trying to link the methods and exper- iences of the different local author- ities, to learn from the various uncon- ventional approaches already being tried, and in trying to take design and building to where it really counts counts - into the hands of Local Authority consumers. The PDS group has contacts through- throughout the country and anyone wishing to help or get further inform- ation should contact NAM, 9 Poland Street, London, W.1. July 1978 SLATE THE NAM NEWSLETTER Slate was first published in March 1977 asa resultof a resolution passed at the second NAM congress calling for anewsletter. Subsequently it has app- eared at two monthly intervals. The Slate Group sees the newsletter as having three main aspects: firstly as a message board for NAM’s dispersed membership by collecting and publish- ing information about NAM’s work in the various issue and local groups; secondly as an outlet for news coverage uncompromised by the need to pander to the whims of architects or to allow influence to be exerted over content by advertisers, as characterisesthe ‘straight’ architectural press; and thirdly as a way of building up a body of rad- ical theory with regular feature sections. Recent issues have included features on education, community architecture and Local Authorities. The latest issug is devoted to Feminism and Archi- J. tecture. The group sees the preoccupation \ * with form as displayed by most of the architectural ‘glossies’ as symptom\’, atic of the avoidance by the archit- ectural world of the crises faced by todays architects during a timeof. economic stress. In an attempt to compensate for this attitude,Slate has produced specific features on issues such as Government cuts in Local Authority architects depart- ments but, more importantly, given consistent coverage to currents of radical change within the profession and to the political background surr- ounding clients and their buildings which our profession so often chooses to ignore, SLATE GROUP” BUILDING A FUTURE FOR WOMEN. IN ARCHITECTURE | Aa The Slate Group, which is respon- sible for the production of the news- letter, is largely autonomous, It con- sists of approximately ten members who are elected each year at the i a= A IS <a has been established acting in offices and schools throughout the country. j Trade distribution is now handled by the Publications Distribution Cooper- ative with the result that circulation is steadily increasing. Currently the print run is 1000 copies. It is hoped that readership will ex- tend to include more building workers and community activists than at present, but the success of this dep- ends largely on contributions andin- volvement by people outside the group. 9 Slate welcomes any letters, articles or information suitable for publication and also offers of help in editing and production. Anyone wishing to contact the group should refer to the-contacts list at the end of the handbook or write to the secretary of NAM. ea annual congress. Most of the produc- tion tasks such as editing , graphics, typesetting, paste-up and some of the i printing , is carried out by the mem- mej bersofthegroupitself. A distribution network of agents sléte!, n,n. & vit, 1. Idinds of groy, green, oF bluish-purple rock easily split fato fat smooth plates; piece of euch e used as roofing-material; pieco of It ramed in wod used for’writing on UNIONISATION A NAM ISSUE GROUP Trade Union organisation is a major feature of modern profession- al, as well as industrial occupations and most architects in public employ- ment or in large Housing Associations have recognised Trade Unions at their place of work. Why then are only a tiny proportion of the 50,000 workers in the private sector of building design, Trade Union mem- bers? For architects the traditional ans- wer has always been that private arch- itectural practices are small liberal “families” of equal professionals sharing the same abilities, interests and goals. Within this “family” the hard- working architect of ability rises naturally to partnership, employs younger architects himself, thus pro- viding equal opportunities for the next generation. Trade Union org- anisation, it is argued, is thus of no long-term interest to the architect in private practice. Whether this image of architect- ural practice was ever more than myth in the past, it certainly bears no resemblance to today’s reality. Private architectural practices comprise some two-thirds of the pro- fession and are, by and large, business- es in which the 90% of salaried employ- ees have little hope of achieving any share in the control of the work they do, or ¢-£ their own salaries and cond- itions. In the pursuit of business ION’ —WHAT ON 1WEWANT NN A OMION FOR T!! \ PD <) UNIONISATION GROUP efficiency more practices are expand- ing, becoming heirarchicai and bureau- cratic. The smaller practice where it still exists uses the “family” metaphor to justify the low salaries paid to emp- loyees and to evade the obligation to provide good working conditions. They claim low profits - but invari- ably refuse to disclose figures to their salaried staff. Partnership law exempts practices from the inconvenient obl- igation to disclose trading figures but the declared earnings of principals in private practice recently* showed differentials of 50 fold between partners and salaried architects in some large practices - a far cry from ~ the equality preached by the profess- ional myth. The salaried architect is, typically, overworked, underpaid, and as much at the mercy of the market as any other worker. All architectural workers are now beginning to realise that better pay and conditions, job security, and control of the work they do can only be gained by acting together to bar- gain for these rights at their place of work. MANY UNIONS....7 At LUCAS AEROSPACE workers have refused to. accept that the manu facture of military hardware is the only expediency, architectural workers useful work available and through their remain unorganised and illequiped Trade Union organisation, are prom- to protest at the cancellationof oting an inventive new range of soc- ially useful products as an alternat- ive to redundancy. By contrast in 1977 at a well-known London arch- itectural practice salaried architects set to work on the design of gallows for a middle-eastern prison, were *.....iN no position to complain.” Architectural workers are the first to be affected by the use of the building industry as an “econom- ic regulator” in the pendulum of gov- ernment spending. Whilst hospital workers and teachers are actively fighting, through trade union organ- isation, for an end to socially destruc- tive cuts in social services made in the interest of short term economic Louis Hellman essential medical and educational buildings. = In any previously unorganised. occupation there is the danger that several rival unions, including “craft” or quasi-non TUC affiliated unions may emerge, encouraged by employ- ers, which divide workers and prevent effective united action. To avert this possibility and to encourage organis?- tion of ALL employees in private practice architectural workers in NAM set out to examine the options open and to launch a campaign to encour- age membership in strength of single TUC affiliated Union, by all workers in private sector building design. In 1976 the Unionisation Work- ing Group of NAM Central London Group submitted a draft report to the NAM Blackpool Congress prep- osing active Trade Union organisa-_ tion for architectural workers in the private sector. The Congress set up a national Unionisation Organising Committee to develop realistic prop- osals for organisation and to initiate an organising drive. The committee published the report - WORKING FOR WHAT?- setting out the case for trade union organisation in private sector building design and began detailed research into the options open. The committee exam- ined the possibility of forming a. wholly new union for building workers but this was considered im- practical without the financial and organisational back-up of an existing TUC affiliated Union. After detailed research the Organ- ising Committee held a building des- ign workers conference on May 14 1977 attended by over 70 delegates from throughout Britain. Briefed by a 10,000 word research report the delegates debated and chose TASS by a clear majority as the one Union within which building design workers should organise. TASS was chosen because of its record as an effective Union in enginéering design and for its high quality “back- up” of officials, publicity, legal and research facilities. TASS pioneer- ed equal rights for women (having If you refusetf iate withus. ther bor, tnion TASS will tate forus:.- a Angus Slate 3 UNIONISATION GROUP the first national Womens’ Organiser) and is linked with the powerful AEUW- - Britain’s second largest union. By 31 May 1977 a Building Design Staff section had been set up within TASS and the first Branch (BDS - London Branch) inaugurated. With the formation of BDS-TASS main responsibility for the organ- ising drive among architectural work- ers transferred from the NAM Org- anising Committee to the BDS- TASS membership though since many of these are also NAM memb- ers close links are maintained. A National Advisory Committee (NAC) of BDS members co-ordinates membership at national level, proy- iding a focus for BDS-TASS members in general TASS branches through- out Britain and dealing with general recruitment. The NAC publishes a BDS NEWS and recruiting literat- ure aimed specifically at building desi BDS- LONDON Branch meets monthly at Polytechnic of Central London, 104-108 Bolsover Street, London, W.1. Each meeting holds a general forum open to non-members and alternate meetings have an invited speaker. The branch has become perhaps the only place where many building design workers can discuss important issues outside the pressur- ised atmosphere of the office. The Branch research has produced a “model” contract of employment to assist members tied down to oner- ous (and sometimes illegal) condit- ions of employment, and joint con- sultations are in hand with public sector Trade Unions to form an “Architectural Workers Alliance” to represent the voice of all workers in both public and private sectors. A monthly Branch bulletin pub- lished by BDS London Branch giving full details of branch meetings can be obtained, free of charge, to- gether with further BDS—TASS lit- rature from: The Secretary, Building Design Staff National Advisory Committee, Onslow Hall, Little Green. Richmond. Surrey. TW9 1QN July 1978 CONTACT LIST ARCUK c/o NAM, 9 Poland Street, London W1. CARDIFF Sue Barlow 205 Arabella Street, Roath, Cardiff. EDUCATION Hugo Hinsley 449 Mile End Road, Bow, London E3. tel: 01-251 0274 FEMINISM Frances Bradshaw 14 Duncan Terrace, London N1. tel: 01-278 5215 GREEN BAN ACTION COMMITTEE David Roebuck 25 St Georges Avenue, London N7. tel: 01- LEEDS Norman Amold 9 Midland Road, Leeds 6, West Yorkshire. LONDON Ken Pearce 127 Fairbridge Road, London N19 MONOPOLIES c/o NAM, 9 Poland Street, London W1 PROFESSIONALISM Anne Delaney 28 Pane Place, Cathays, Cardiff. PUBLIC DESIGN SERVICE David Green Show House, Bardney Orton.Goldhay,Peterborough. SLATE c/o NAM, 9 Poland Street, London W1. UNIONISATION David Berney 23 Arthur Road, Kingston-upon-Thames, Surrey. BIBLIOGRAPHY . ARCUK Private Practice Report NAM November 1976 Professionalism Cardiff NAM Group, November 1976 Arcuk After 40 Years in the Wilderness Slate 1, March 1977 Professional Government 3 part feature in Slate 3 July/August 1977 EDUCATION FEMINISM Women Who Are Builders Building a Future for Women in Architecture GREEN BAN ACTION COMMITTEE NAM and the Green Ban GBAC sends PO plans to Council MONOPOLIES Slate, Issue 6 Slate, Issue 4 Slate, Issue 8 Slate Issue 4 Slate, Issue 7 NAM November 1977 Services — A Straightforward Guide Slate 5 Do Not Pass Go — Do Not Collect 6% Monopolies Commission Report on Architects Who Pays? — Who Gets It? Way Ahead End Architects Fixed Fees PROFESSIONALISM Professional Government Way Ahead A Short History of the Architectural Profession PUBLIC DESIGN SERVICE A National Design Service Building for Whom? Way Ahead UNIONISATION Working for What? BDS/TASS News, Issue 1May 1978 NAM July 1978 Slate, Issue 3 _ NAM July 1978 NAM 1975 NAM 1976 Slate, Issue 7 NAMJuly 1978 NAM 1977 NAM Calendar 1976 Soa. *! ge E==) Crxodus$0”Asthetica Andit was said “God is in the details’ the People trembled fore the might ofthe Word, they saw he light on ae They Sid without the Word nd their Selves Nant PUBLICATIONS AVAILABLE FROM NAM Way Ahead New report proposing new fee system, changes in Code of Conduct and making suggestions to forthcoming Government Committe in the light of the Monopolies Commission recomm- endations. £1.50 Do Not Pass Go .... Do Not Collect 5% The only independent evidence to the Monopolies Commission arguing the case against mandatory minimum fees, plus proposals for a more representative, lay controlled ARCUK. £1.00 Public Design Service Conference Papers Analysis of the origins and role of Local Authority departments of architecture, and interim proposals for a locally based design service directly accountable to tenants and users, £1.50 National Design Service Initial critique of Public Sector design , considering alternative structures to allow local control of design and resources. £0.75p Private Practice Progress Report @nference papers on a new model of architectural practice, the need to reform the Architects Registration Acts, and the case for trade unionisation organisation of architectural and allied workers. £0.35p Short History of the Architectural Profession From its first origins to the present day. £0.30p Prices include postage and packing. Back Issues of Slate — £0.35p each Slate 1 Slate 2 Slate 3 Slate 4 Slate 5 Slate 6 Slate 7 Slate 8 Community architecture Professionalism — the myth and the ideology. ARCUK -—insignificant or not? Women who are builders and feature on Construction in Crisis. Report on 1977 NAM Annual Congress. Guide to the Monopolies Commission Report. Education special. Building for whom? - Local Authority primer. Women in Architecture special. DIDUINY NYANMLY 88 MEMBERSHIP FORM Please use block letters Name Address Telephone ___________ home —_______. work enclose a cheque/PO payable to the New Architecture Movement for the sum of £ Membership fee for twelve months including subscription to Slate is £5 for employed people and £2.50 for students, OAPs and claimants, Please make all cheques and postal orders payable to the New Architecture Movement and send to NAM, 9 Poland Street, London WI. Are you an unattached architect? I would like to become a member of the New Architecture Movement, The following information will hetp the Liason Group serve better its membership and readership: If employed, nature of work If student, name of school Unemployed Name of Trade Union, if member Ofer aL LEAS NAM Handbook 1978/1979 Published by NAM Liason Group 1977/1978 Design and Artwork by NAM Liason Group Typeset by Maggie Stack and NAM Liason Group Printed by Islington Community Press Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Liaison Group 1977/78 Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived JM Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1978 https://nam.maydayrooms.org/files/original/8ee7418d360475df4c1352ff3d3d9b51.pdf 71737d6bd29a58464842d3bd4038bef3 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 Liaison Group Including London Group Subject The topic of the resource Liaison Groups: NAM was initially structured as local groups. There was also a Liaison Group whose role was to coordinate the different groups, deal with correspondence and arrange the next annual conference. NAM campaign groups, which were largely autonomous, worked across local groups to develop their ideas. They arranged their own conferences and reported through SLATE and annually to the NAM Congress. The seven different campaign groups listed had members from a variety of local groups. Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Various Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1976-1979 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 The Challenge to the Architectural Profession Subject The topic of the resource Article by Anne Karpf about NAM following the first NAM meeting in May 1976 in Covent Garden “Professional Revolutionaries: The Challenge to the Architectural Profession from TwoRadical Groups of Architects--the New Architecture Movement and the Architects' Revolutionary Council'” Description An account of the resource ANNE KARPF looks at the challenge to the architectural profession from two radical groups years were developers’ pimps, skilled in of architects the New Architecture Movement and the Architect's Revolutionary Council. Both argue that architects are more identified with property speculators than with the workers were economically impotent by- people they should serve and that a more accessible, more publicly accountable architecture is necessary to counter the mistakes of current practice. Cynics might say that the rotten reputation currently enjoyed by architects isafunction of a similar condition in their buildings. Certainly the architect no longer represents to the public that enviable synthesis of artist and scientist, the practical dreamer operating in the moral vacuum of art. Indeed, since the community action eruption of the late Sixties, they have been lambasted by tenants demanding satisfaction, and now a group of radical architects in London are demanding that they be allowed to give it. standers. And some of those self-same archi- tects are now trying to use tlhe present relative slumptojustify past profligacy. On the public side, ever since ‘partici- pation’ became the fashionable palliative, you frequently hear miserable tenants challenging architects to come out from their tarted-up Islington terraces and try living in one of their creations. And when architect Erno Goldfinger did, it proved a Jolly publicity stunt which only threw into relief the incompatibility between drawing- board inspiration and the realities of indigenous working-class culture. Why did architects allow themselves to be used in this way and continue to be identified with ‘them’ rather than ‘us’? The explanations of NAM and ARC are an The New Architecture Movement (NAM) is a broadly-based front of radical architects Press meeting at the A.A for A.R.C, and arose out of a conference at Harrogate last November called by the more tightly- knit Architects Revolutionary Council (ARC). Both groups are profoundly critical party. of the profession in its internal organisation and its relation to the rest of society and would appear to be voicing the daily archi- tectural Brievances of much of the popu- lation At its most basic, they argue that archi- tecture cannot be separated from its political implications and social obligations; that art for architects’ sake is not an acceptable dictum by which to build Our cities that architecture, particularly as promulgated by the Royal Institute of British Architects {RIBA), has become an apologia for archi- tects and is not accountable to the people who have to live in and with their work They maintain that this has come about because of the System of patronage, both public and private, which effectively dis eniranchises the vast majority of the popu lation wl h has no say in the design Or use of profession as a homogeneous whole, equally culpable or blameless of the misdeeds per- petrated in its name. There are over 20 000 registered architects in Britain, distributed fairly equally between private architectural practices and the public local authority sector. In the private sector, only about 20% and that the present professional relation- uncompromising indictment of the structure of the profession and its institute. Firstly, it is wrong to conceive of the Developers’ pimp: Penitent architects seeking to exonerate rest — all those in the public sector and 80% ship excludes perhaps the most important That this has been deleterious is plain for all to see, since the turn-of-decade property boom obligingly furnished us with some particularly graphic examples. Legendary and often empty office blocks are the particular product of private patronage, while comprehensive redevelopment and high-rise tower blocks were the contribution are principal partners in firms and they of public patronage. themselves claim that they were only the icing on the speculators’ cake and that the meal could have been made without them. They only tinkered with its appearance, but were innocent in dreaming up the recipe. in private practice —are salaried, paid by the state or their bosses, the private principals. In the boom, the earnings of private principals shot up with the increase in building prices. The RIBA deny that archi- tects made a bonanza in these years, claim- ing that the increased costs of Tunning an rhis is belied by reality: one architect said in 1971, ‘the most successful architects are those who understand property values and architectural practice simply kept pace with he mechanics of property development’, inflation. NAM and ARC disagree; they ind another gave his name colloquially to a show that the increased profits during these series of planning loopholes which en- years were not equitably distributed to gendered maximum floor space. At their salaried employees and, moreover, that the the building-user are rarely the same being worst, successful architects in the boom bulk of the really lucrative work could only live in buildings, but have never employed an architect, fall into that category, indicating quite clearly that the architect’s client and $56 AD/9/76 procuring planning permission; tenants and are paid according to a mandatory minimum fee scale as a percentage of the construction costs of the buildings they undertake. The Dennis Crompton its environment. Those of us who use or RIBA-baiting Both NAM and ARC are in a sense most comfortable when on RIBA-baiting terri- tory. That is not to say that they do not have proper ideologies of their own, but it is evidently easier to ram against a clearly- defined enemy rock than to flounder ina sea of abstract theory. Perhaps NAM’s most effective marriage of thought and action arose out of its oppo- sition to the RIBA’s recent submission to the Monopolies Commission on the case for minimum mandatory fees. They them- selves acknowledge that this stimulated them to focus their opinions. They submitted a carefully worked-out counter-report, which concluded that ‘the current fee system is not intrinsic in the system of architectural ser- vices (which the RIBA had maintained) but a gratuitous market device procuring uni- lateral benefits to architects’. Where the RIBA held that the minimum fee system gave the client a network of assurances which guaranteed high quality work, NAM showed that such assurances are part of the normal legal safeguards which operate quite apart from any RIBA quid pro quo. Where the RIBA claimed that the absence of a price floor would create under-cutting, which’in times of slump would put archi- tects out of business, NAM suggested that architects, because of their low level of capital investment, have the capacity to withstand such fluctuations. Likewise, there is an acute conflict between the wish to maintain a federalist, loosely-grouped, locally autonomous struc- ture and the need to present a concerted becoming bureaucratic? How to inculcate into alienated and passive tenants the con- fidence and ability to take decisions? Will they be of any value without corresponding changes in land tenure, for what use is power over building without control over land? And how to deal with the truly national decisions, some of which will always have to And where the RIBA was adamant that This multi-story car park is part of a proposal f the low elasticity of demand for architects means that a reduction of fees would hardly increase the volume of work — architectural sharply-defined plan of action, which has the costs being only a small percentage of total virtue of attracting support and might help costs, and architects, without rival substitutes, being unable to attract work from other sources NAM put it that lower charges would enable potential user-clients who can only afford small sums to initiate small-scale schemes and that was the whole point. All well and good. NAM argues its case with quite sharp legal logic, but disarmingly concedes that the whole subject is hardly quintessential, but simply a good one to get stuck into. to build a mass movement. To what extent is that possible? NAM sets itself an ambitious target: if it does not succeed in carrying with it 10-20% of the architectural electorate within 5 years, then it feels it may as well disband and join the tighter-knit caucus of ARC. National Design Service In the crude language of advertising, they need a selling pitch. Perhaps their notion of And this raises some quite fundamental a National Design Service (NDS) serves this conflicts endemic to any group lobbying for function but, though admirable as a pure change in capitalist society. One might concept, it is fraught with difficulties. protest that NAM’s Report to the Mon- The argument runs like this: You counter opolies Commission is hardly more than a the remote, unaccountable nature of archi- reasonably sophisticated, highly enjoyable tectural practice, both public and private, by exercise in pretend-litigation, a polemic, and that any serious move to radically alter the profession and its place in society must start by looking outwards at the rest of society, the financing of local building to feed this for change within the one is ineffectual without change in the other. And up pops that ‘Socialism in One Country versus World Revolution’ tussle, popularly transmogrified into a chicken-egg conundrum. NAM and ARC both concur on this one, and hold — if only to maintain their buoyant sense of optimism that ‘to change every- thing else involves a milennial struggle: in the nicaulime, what do architects do at their brought about? How to prevent it from drawing-boards? You operate from 9 to 5 as an architect, and that is your sphere of action; there is limited yalue in being an evening-class politician’ (NAM member). 5 Ny hal grafting on to local authorities a freely available National Design Service, decentra- lised and controlled by the people. You alter service. And thus you pervert the tendency of private practice to answer to owner rather than user and the inclination of the public sector to, at its best, put the national interest before the local. It is perhaps unfair to put NAM’s serious proposals into political baby language like this, since they are acutely aware of the questions therein begged. How can this be en See 557 _be handled by sizeable practices. Since only 1500 of the 4000 private firms in this _Country have more than 5 members and far s fewer are large enough to handle the really Major schemes, the substantial benefits a ‘accrued to a small but powerful minority. ip at makes this minority doubly PoWerful is its position in the RIBA. On the last RIBA Council, the largest single group _Were the principals in private practice, who Constituted 34 out of the Council’s 60 members. Of the replacements to the Council announced on June 3rd, 1976, once “#€ain_ the private principals dominate, exceeding the aggregate of all other groups (public sector, salaried private sector). How _can the RIBA speak for the vast majority of _architects who are salaried (80%), asked a Council member recently, when so few are = the Council, and when the voting system invariably favours the big names? The RIBA concedes that its head and lungs are domi- hated by the senior partners of established practices, but puts this down to the un- willingness of salaried architects to become involved and to the reluctance of employers to release their employees for RIBA duties. All this goes a long way to explain ARC’s angry criticism that the RIBA failed to come Out on the side of ‘the people’ in those demolishing years. Dog doesn’t eat patron. —arr Ree — tethroneet——ee or the comprehensive re-development of the central business area of the London suburb of Ealing. It has the full backing of the local council, but not the majority of residents. If it is built, it will mean the destruction of what little remains of Ealing's village character, the rehousing of local residents and the economic ruin of existing small businesses. be made, unless a magic wand waves in a pre-industrial mode of anarchism which renders al such considerations irrelevant? On this last, they suggest a parallel with the division of labour between general practitioner and hospital, mutually inter- dependent, but taking responsibility for dif- ferent kinds of decisions. Their extended analogy between their hoped-for NDS and the existing National Health Service might provoke wariness, if not cynicism, in patients who feel that the present health service expropriates their capacity for self- -determination quite as much as being an impotent tenant. Sensibly, NAM plans to work on more concrete and immediate themes for the time being. They aim to do a treatment of the RIBA code of conduct, on the lines of their Monopolies Commission Report. They intend working on the possibility of in- creased unionisation for architects, either to better their membership of and represen- CAPTIONS FOR PROFESSION REVIEW however piecemeal and undramatic, Students of Brian Anson, a teacher at the Architectural Association and founder of ARC, have been working for a year with tenants in Bootle, his home town, managing to reverse a local authority clearance order and now devising a rehabilitation scheme where tenants control the design, financing and rate of building. ARC have been work- ing for free with the Ealing Town Centre Action group, designing according to their behest and needs. The ASSIST group of Glasgow has been organising public- participation rehab in the Govan tenement area, responsible to the local community association. The Support group, now in embryonic stage, plans to engage in a similar kind of community architecture. And in private practice, Rod Hackney in Macclesfield helped the local action group create their own improvement proposals and implement them. Says Hackney, ‘people working for me have to live with the question is not ‘what forms?’ or ‘which ference in Hull. They claim that such shock described in the morally neutral currency of ‘aesthetics’, devoid of political content for the people affected, the more elitist and the more removed from the political review of ordinary people become the experts who use this currency’. Nevertheless, conclude NAM, “we've got to grasp that nettle at some stage or other’. in all this? In a sense, theirs is an easier situation. They see themselves as a small, tightly-knit module, the vanguard (and therefore able to exult in their romantic, architects do all the acting, can be just conspiratorial closeness). This relieves them another way of disenfranchising the power- of the need to attract wide support (and the less: as planner John Turner has said, ‘while conflicts which this entails). They created acting for the poor may be very rewarding NAM for that. They have also been lucky for the professional, it effectively minimizes and industrious in having practical the necessity for any of the Tules of the schemes to engage in local communities, to game to be changed so as to include the poor demonstrate the practicability of their themselves’. techniques?’, but ‘who are my patrons?’, for it is this which draws up the whole chain’. In this, they follow planner Robert Goodman, who is aware of how distancing art-talk can says NAM, ‘either more brave than us, or be and that ‘the more architecture can be theory and to show themselves as more than just the debating society which both groups dread becoming. absorbed into the political bloodstream and simply help it flow smoother. Similarly, he was. Now, will we listen? community action, where supposedly radical This is not what NAM and ARC want nor does it have to happen. Indeed, there are several small-scale, locally-based experiments going on at the moment which indicate how They have just produced their first broad- side, ‘Red House’, and, with enviable realistic architect accountability can be, $58 AD/9/76 tote re eercart LAL eee } Ealing residents have called in ARC to fight the communities. And if the residents don’t like tation within the existing unions — UCATT (construction workers), ASTMS (manage- ment) and NALGO (local government officers) or to create alternative struc- tures. (‘Architects are somewhere in the Stone Age as far as awareness of their real-life political predicament’, one of them International. They are working towards co-ownership working relationships within has said), Another group is looking at what they hope will eventually become a offices similar to Yugoslavia, where the law architectural education and eventually they new school of architecture and intend to limits practices to no larger than 5 and will take up with aesthetic matters. This latter is hard for them: since their inception, they have mustered much of their energy from debunking the supremacy of the ‘artiness’ of art. As they say, ‘the radical hold a dress rehearsal in the form of a decisions are shared. : council-backed redevelopment scheme (top). After public meetings and extensive surveys, ARC drew up an alternative (bottom) and are now preparing evidence for a government enquiry. our work, they ring our doorbell at midnight and tell us it’s a load of rubbish’. Concomitant with these external changes, optimism and the support of foreign NAM wants the profession to heal itself colleagues, they make plans for an ARC inside. This would include co-operative and summer school next year. Meanwhile, critics might unkindly allege, they can amuse themselves with radical foreplay, such as their disruption of the recent RIBA con- Behind al these changes is a fundamental change of attitude. Tom Woolley, teacher at the AA and part of the Support group, puts it like this: ‘Professionals, not just architects but doctors and others too, think they know what people need, and this becomes insti- tutionalised. People hand over responsibility to the professionals, and we want to get people to take it back into their own hands. We’re not saying there’s no expertise involved in building, but we see ourselves as ‘enablers’ to help people to think about their environment and make the decisions about it themselves’. : One hundred years ago, William Morris said, ‘the architect is carefully guarded from the common troubles of common man, building for ignorant, purse-proud digesting machines’. He thought architecture could tactics are a quite legitimate means to an end — to decrease the credibility of the RIBA and eventually to destroy them. They are, more naive, depending on your point of view. In any case, they have burned their professional boats, which we haven’t’. Nevertheless, both groups — whatever their self-confessed problems — do perform important functions and provide a critique of the inadequacies of the present system of value to more than just disaffected young architects. For instance, they are rightly scathing about current public relations exercises in nominal participation which only be reborn when it became part of the Vanguard And what of ARC: where do they stand harm than good: radical antibodies are are no more eccentric in their analysis than masquerade as the real thing and do more life of the people in general. NAM and ARC ANNE KARPF isafreelance investigative journalist working in London. She previously worked OD research for TV documentaries for the BBC: Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Anne Karpf Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived BD Article Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 19-Oct-77 https://nam.maydayrooms.org/files/original/26e891dd4d2cda4acb68050d1d7032ec.pdf 00ed69e399bea54ecdd64cd5067da6b6 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 Liaison Group Including London Group Subject The topic of the resource Liaison Groups: NAM was initially structured as local groups. There was also a Liaison Group whose role was to coordinate the different groups, deal with correspondence and arrange the next annual conference. NAM campaign groups, which were largely autonomous, worked across local groups to develop their ideas. They arranged their own conferences and reported through SLATE and annually to the NAM Congress. The seven different campaign groups listed had members from a variety of local groups. Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Various Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1976-1979 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 NAM Index From Harrogate to Blackpool Subject The topic of the resource An Index of all documents relating to the Movement from 11/75 to 9/76. (92 entries) Description An account of the resource JUSTIBAOP] 9.1N{D9IIWOIY MON J Index N.A.M. INDEX FROM HARROGATE ‘TO BLACKPOOL Copies of any of these papers are available from NAM Central London Group, 143, ‘whitfield St., London 71. They are free, unless otherwise stated, but please enclose 5.A.z. 1. 2. 3 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. ARC DE TRIOMPHE Announcing Harrogate Congress "Building Design' AKC Draft Manifesto ARC "Start the New Architecture Movement" N.A.M. Congress Program for Harrogate. N.A.M. "A New Architecture Movement” Paper delivered at Harrogate by John Murray. Paper delivered at Harrogate by Ken Thorpe. Summaries of Congress Vorking Parties: Proposals relating to the Profession. Practice Proposals Proposals on Education ist. Congress at Harrogate: Press Helease 14.11.75 Pre- Harrogate Congress 10. Harrogate Congress: Attendance Liat 11. Minutes of ist Liason Committee Meeting 12. "When the Talking had to stop" . Keview of Harrogate. ‘Building Design' qs "When the Contribution had to start" Liason Group reply. Building Design. 14. "Dissidents Architects' New Movement". Review of Harrogate "Building' 15. "New Movements in Architecture". Review of Harrogate A.A. Events List No. 10. 16, "Marching towards the new Architectural Dawn” Review of Harrogate in Architect's Journal 17. Liason Group letter to all members 18. N.A.M. Broadsheet One oe oe oe oe se ee es ee 50 21.11.75 22.11.75 23.11.75 23.11.75 23.11.75 26.11.75 28.11.75 04.12.75 27.11.75 8-12.12.75 03.12.75 11.12.75 11.12.75 19. Liason Group Minutes of 3rd. Meeting( Published as 2nd.+ ) 11.12.75 20, 21. 22. 08.01.76 01.76 18.01.76 22.01.76 02.76 "N.A.M. to fight R.I.B.A. all the way" Paul Gorka's letter in ‘Building Design' . 02.76 03.02.76 03.02.76 04.02.76 Letter from Rob Thompson refuting Edinburgh Group's letter. 05.02.76 Edinburgh Group reply to Brian Anson's Green Paper Notes by John Murray on CLG/Liason Group Minutes of C.L.G. meeting Minutes of N.L.G. meeting Minutes of C.L.G. meeting Minutes of N.L.G. meeting Minutes of C.L.G. meeting Minutes of N.L.G. meeting 11.02.76 23.02.76 25.02.76 01.03.76 09.03.76 12.03.76 16.03.76 17.03.76 26.03.76 March 76 31.03.76 31.03.76 April 76 35.6 N.A.M copy for Time Out Minutes of C.L.G. meeting Letter in the Architect's Journal from David Roebuck and John Murray. "NALGO Action: democracy not insults". Letter in "Building Design' from Adam Purser. 596 "Professional Representation" article by Louis Hellman with references to N.A.M. in Architectural Design. 40. Minutes of C.L.G. meeting 41. Letter in Architect's Journal from Marion Roberts and Giles Pebody. 42. Letter in Architectural Design from John Allan and Giles Pebody. Minutes of Central London Group (C.L.G.) meeting. Brian Anson's Green Paper Minutes of North London Group (N.L.G.) with John Allan's report of Highbury District group meetings concerning the Islington Plan. Minutes of C.L.G. meeting Letter from Paul Gorka to N.A.M. 43. Minutes of N.L.G. meeting 44. Minutes of C.L.G. meeting 45. Minutes of N.L.G. meeting 46. "A history of the Architectural Profession" by Adam Purser. (Price 10p.) 47. Minutes of C.L.G. meeting 48. Monopolies Commission Report (Price £1.00) 49. Reference in Architect's Journal to N.A.M. national design service in'Bring Architecture nearer to the people’. 50. C.L.G. report to Birmingham Green Ban Action Committee. St. "N.A.M. attacks H.I.B.A. on its fee scale" review of MCR in ‘Building Design’ p.28 52. to 56. incl. Papers given at the London Seminar, 52. An Historical Perspective, by John Allan. 53- Prom Radical to Revolutionary, by Brian Anson ARC 54. A National Design Service , by John Murray 556 The Relationship between ARC and NAM, by Rob Thompson 06.04.76 15.04.76 28.04.76 May 76 03.05.76 14.05.76 19.05.76 20.05.76 21.05.76 56. Group statements from the Cardiff Group and North London Group. 61. "N.A.M. working to re-distribute power in architecture”. review by Louis Hellman in ‘Architect's Journal’ of the London Seminar. 62. Minutes of C.L.G. meeting 63. Minutes of NAM/ABT meeting. 64. Paper on Trade Unions to C.L.G. by A. Fekete. 02.06.76 21.06.76 24.06.76 21.06.76 65. "N.A.M. reservations on Unions", letter in the Architects Journal from Andrew Fekete. 23.06.76 57. "Fixed fees deprive poor says New Architecture Movt." review of MCR in ‘Architects Journal’ p.1020 26.05.76 58. "N.A.M. wants new patrons for community design service", review of London Seminar in ‘Building Design' 28.05.76 23.05.76 25.05.76 59. London Seminar Attendance List. 60. Minutes of C.L.G. meeting 66. News item on London Seminar in 'Building Worker's Charter' Vol.3 no. 11 p.4 67. Paper to C.L.G. on ABT. by A.Fekete 68. Minutes of N.L.G. meeting 69. N.A.M. Leaflet. 10. Minutes of C.L.G. meeting 1. Minutes of N.L.G. meeting 72. Minutes of N.A.M./ARC meeting 73. Paper on Unions to C.L.G. by Giles Pebody 14. Minutes of C.L.G. meeting 15. Draft Program to 2nd. Congress 16. Minutes of Liason Group meeting 17. Minutes of 6.L.G. meeting 78. Draft document on Unionisation (C.L.G.) 19. Draft report on Unions (C.L.G.) 80. Why Join a Union? (C.L.G.) 81. Draft of campaign document no.2 (C.L.G.) 62. Minutes of N.L.G. meeting 83. Minutes of C.L.G. meeting 64. Minutes of C.L.G. meeting 85. Minutes of ABT/NAM meeting 86. Minutes of N.L.G. meeting 87. Agenda to Cardiff/C.L.G. meeting 88. ‘N.a.M. presentation at UWIST seminar 89. Reflections on Cardiff 90. Minutes of N.L.G. meeting 91. Minutes of Liason Group meeting on 2nd. Congress. 92. "Professional Revolutionaries", Article by Anne Karpf in ‘Architectural Design’. July 76 05.07.76 12.07.76 July 76 16.07.76 28.07.76 29.07.76 no date 02.08.76 09.08.76 06.08.76 16.08.76 16.08.76 16.08.76 16.08.76 16.08.76 09.08.76 31.08.76 13.09.76 14.09.76 20.09.76 27.09.76 01.10.76 04.10.76 04.10.76 30.10.76 Sept. 76 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource JA/ Central London Group 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 1976 https://nam.maydayrooms.org/files/original/750edb1b3a91da269678c1361865ad15.pdf 00047d8401c8df8b4c757d241dfb42b7 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 Introduction and Origins 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 What is the New Architecture Movement? Subject The topic of the resource Description of NAM's Aims, Origins, Activities, Structure, Participation and Support, Enquiries. (12 page copy) Description An account of the resource JUSMISAOPT 01N{D9IIYOIY MON NeAM is a movement Of architects and laymen committed to radical change in the relationship of the profession to the public, and within the profession itself. NeA.M, Believes that architecture is a public service which should be equally available to all sectours of society. Therefore we are working to redistribute power in architecture among the 80% of the population who at present have no say in the design or use. of their environment, The following pages give a synopsis of our background, aims and programme of action. If you wish to find out more, or join us please contact:— John Browning, 36 Elm Grove, London N8 014-348-7669 . .>: : noe ° Au? ARGHITacTUR ie at 1. BACKGROURD . @ It has taken almost exactly twenty-five years for the ; impetus behind the first .odern jovement inthis, country to:be 7a exhausted. The festival of Britain 1951 and. jAIT- taken as the official niles tones at the amumataen and closure ef the period respectively, ‘e seem to stand new at the beginning cf a new phase , in which the eriteeia of ‘relevant! action will be determined as much by the understanding of our legacy as our current political standpoint, | The effeots of the piacese at radicalization induced by war emuld be seen in the arrival of the first. modern Socialist Government ih its far-reaching s>cial referms on the damestic scale, and in eur modified nation status in | ‘ate and the realization that we were no longer an imperial power. | : os cfenvironmenttheNewTownsMovement, the Town & Country Play ine Act ey iat hone the first expression of a new vision and omfidence that had already permeated other Bpoven) af BeOL Sys including for example the health services. The South Bank Pxhibitien and ue Associated Housing schemes in Lansbury, ast London epitomised the mixture of exuberance and ‘committed concern' while sheving that modern architecture was not simply a flat roof or a corner window, but a cemprehensive urban language. The underlying ideas, had of course been werked out long befare : it was tcedified visually in the 1938 Exhibition that is at about the time when @nthe threefold premise of cheap ! energy, expansionist economics and enlightened paternalism, | "progressive"architects and planners (now comfortably established in government institutions and Wall connected practices) were ready for the big boom, The extent of development, publicly or privatelys sponsered during thel960's, is unlikely te be equalled during the lifetime of anyone reaching this - and the housing, new towns, universities, tansport infrastructure etc., of this period will somehow fone be do for the majcrity of us and our children till the latter are middle-aged. of the Mars Group, which itself derived its premises from the parent CIAM movement in Barope. But theclimate of 1945 wasdifferentbointdehgreeandinkina. Thepost-warar.:.°fortheft timesawtheallianceofthe "new wisdom', hithertu phevecupation ef dissatisfied intellectuals and enlightened bourgeois patrons, withall ins executive farce of government and the major institutions. At the very moment that the pioneer's thesis appeared ts be vindicated, so the process ef institutionalizing its assumptions ean in its adeptien by a new establishment due ta become infinttery more sophisticated ~ and bureaucratic than any hitherte. Naturally it was intelligent° enough to abserb . the prece ss and perssnalities that would otherwise haye beew dynamite, and throughout the 50's the ’professions ef architectuarned planning were happy to be included in the monolithic drivefor reconstruction. Me anti-thosis which tan Tea a ins in conflict with¢ this centralist orthodoxy Speed ants in the 1960's in phenomens, ranging from the satire novenent, to student protest, But abteriés were hardening . In 1970 the DOE - a concept that would have seemed revolutionary 25 years earlier - established itself in the now familiar faulty towers, sited carefully separate from Waitehall ; and expressing so precisely its blant combination of technogracyand officialdom, to provide over a process -that was already: in decline. What would happen now? Obvious with hindsight ;& simple coronary case with enmplications. We ran out of fuel — petro-: chemical, financial, and most important social. For by new the assumed popular consent on which all this development had been based was solidly organised into community groups, environmentalists, conservation lobbies, spaceship earth economists, tec of increasing expertise. It began to seem once more that the people with the power were less intelligent than the people without it. The -complications? Almost as fast as the develapment boom fever was dying in the establishment the antihodies were being absorbed, Particpation, piecemeal planning,rehab and recycling have been hastily substituted in the official policies of national and local authorities and the professional institutilns such that concepts of ‘community Architecture' and Neighbourhood Participation! are already bandied with bogus fone and trendy humbug, without much noticeabje advantagteo the intended beneficiaries. The cur rent climate is pluralistic and diverse to the extent that, given the rifgt form of words , everyone can apparently claim to be progressive - the rg5, RIBA, most L.A. 's, the RTPIetc, ete - concealing the fact that major idealogical change is eccurring with little or no.commensurate redistribtuiion of power. Fnvironmental matters ccntinue to be detemminedon the basis +f power, not of need, and the status quo is effectively maintained. It is this situation that NAM was formed to study and pehetrate. So much for what amounts te the context in ‘the sutside world. Meanwhile, what ofour context in the profession? In the same perind the profession has transformed iteself from a craft-orientated elite of aesthetic gastronomes supported by forelock tugging draughtsmen, into and army of professionals dpeendant on a very different calibre of re cruit, a university educated, mainly middle class mass of aspiring principals whose habit of identifying with employers has blurred their vision of the pelitical reality within their offices and throughout the RIBA. Contessccoes Salatied architects, more direct and satisfying the majority of the profession, who may relationships with the users of their products, have little to be optimistic about because of the economic crisis, The professions. governing body, RIBA, is dominated by the interests of private practice and salaried architects have to realise that the NAM is the only*effective voice challenging the Private Practice Principal's Party , 66 Portland. Plage... Such a.state. of. affairs,.when 80% of a ea ake profession is misrepresented by default (or not at all) would be absurd at the best of times, now ‘that the crisis bites home the contrdietions | between principals and assitants, established and still at college. grow daily more apparent. The Middle East Klondike can only briefly disguise the fact that wheras the publiss access to lawyers and doctours was relatively easy, until the goverment. use of architects beaurocratic offices. cuts reduce this. too,: the publics. only existed by surrogate clients and a remote . ceeTe Ae hope for It is out of this uneasy climate of reality and alussion, wisdom and displicity that N.A.M. developed. At the unlikely venue of Harrogate a gathering of under a hundred people meet for a weekendi:n November, 75,- at the invitation of a small group called ARC, ARC had been preoccupied with such questions for a couple of years,— The outcome was the nucleus of a New Architecture Movement which has since distinguisheidt’s om identity from that of ARC and-at the same time consolidated its aims and membership. More on aims later. The two essentail characteristics of the Movement that Harrogate established ares- ‘ a. It must have a constructive attitude: founded on strong annalysis. Yet another vocal articulation seemed unnecessary and. abortive. b. That its. structure should be both federal and national, allowing the individual personal involvement and avenues of action. Apart from a rudimentary liason process the character of the movement is its diversity and localised basis. A centralised power elite was seen as alien and. unconstructive, Individualansdlocalgroupsspreadthrougthheocountrymakeupthe movement, all are ofan equal status and are free to.develop their own programmes in support of the generally agreed aims. Any material produced is signed, Edinburgh NAM Group, or NAM Cardif Group. The~ purpose of the small, at present London based, .Liason Group is to maintain and develop contacts and to set up the next National Congress, If you are thinking of joining we hope that our contact list has:a member close by you, if not then we would be delighted if you initiated your own NAM Group. Speakers and information can be sent to yOUs In time a network of groups should develop to cover the country, each one working out its own ideas wether localised or more universal. The Congress will be one way of communicating between groups and for working out overall.aims and strategies, a The key to this decentralised structure is that of individual commitmant and local autonomy. We are not a movement with presidents or celebrities, its strength lies in the involvement of you, and the help we can all give each other. , For a Schubert or’“a.Cangin such constraints as “imposed ‘by patronage — were minimal for they were in effect their own patrons dirécting thei creative energies towards thair own needs and conditions. But in architecturheis is by no.means so easy, for it is a rare occurrence for the architect to.act as nis own patron, except say, when he builds his own house. Of all the’arts, “then, architecture is particularly dependent on patronage. , for without patronage there is no building and without building architecture.enters the realms of graphics and sculpture. For those whose art is less dependeont on external- patronage for their well being there has been the opportunity ‘to liberate themselves from stereo-typed convention, but in architecture we have- ‘been trapped. Tach move into a mew mode of work is frustrated. Those whohave attempted to escape by side stepping the issue altogether have: fled ‘to the world of ‘alternative technology! or to the world of the 'conceptualists!. For the alternstive technologists there is bub one fate, the eventual take over by the owners of production who will appropriate their creations to further their owna@ids. Those inventions that have a potential for generating profit and maintaining the status quo will be exploited: those that do not will be thrown avay. For the conceptualists there is only the world of fantasy and dreams. Like the 'trip' one too maay it will end in trauma and despair, their self inflated bubbie w2.1l burst,for it has little content and no Substance, The New Architecture Movement offers a third alternative to this impasse. It is devising a strategy that attacks the heart of the dilemna, the principles of patronage. The notion of patronage encompasses 1 variety of associations but their common reference point is to an unequal relationship between benefactor and benificery. The benkficery of course is the architect. Hoi do we define patron2ge in our context patronage is the means by which the building needs of individuals and their institutions are determindd. ‘le realise that under any social system there will alvays be more users than patrons but we do not see this process of assessing building needs as an independent variable to the design problem. It is intrinsic to the forms that we will create. This is a »rinciple of our movement. Ye cannot wait for the real patrons to stand up. “ve must go to then, but this will only be achieved by removing the obstales in our own instituticns. ‘aArchitecture', it is suggested is the social art. Certainly the crertion of architecture is a prerequisite for civilisation. Undeniably, it effects everyone's aspect of peoples lives. And yet we have situations where architecture, which is about living, is practised by a group of veople, architects, who have erected barricrs around themselves, Our conclusions can only be thatthe barriers have been erected because either the practitioners are incapableo’f practising architecture or unnecessary, or their masters, the patrons, misuse their practice. Thus it is our belief that the institutions of architecture operate not only to the detrinmt of the non patrons but to architects themselves. As a creative activity architecture, supposedly represents values that exist beyond mere building. All creative activities experience to some degree or another three converging imagination, the power of technics and the exercise of patronage. ALE three interact through design and their’ megolution is~ the creation of forms, In the “sence of. patronag technics’ aes imagination have no context and thus no substance or meaning. onde? the force of the —2 NAM identifies these institutionass the way architects are organised, their education and their methods of sractice. Sach in turn reinforce and sustain the present system of patronage and moreover because the architect is the beneficery in an unequal relationship, they were intended to do so, .If we accept that patronage is ultimately exercised for its. own benevolence whether for prestige, profit or pover andifitisthemeansofassesthseibuinldgingneedsofsocietythan there is a prima facie case of ‘aiding, and abetting’. NAM intends to exemine each institution in turn. NAM will demonstrate the vay in which these institutions.act for patronagbey isolatins the practice of architecture. from..its. context. The RIBA claims to speak for architects as if they were one voice, Assension.and arguement is confined to the closed doors of Portland Place. It thefefore snuffs out any attempt to undermine a system of patronage at which it is the beneficery. Through education it produces students who aquiesSce to the status quo because the nature of their training has concealed from them the true nature of their work, The organisation of practice is so structured that it is only able to function in the context of the | existing patronase. the setting up of small scale loc lly based projects should be seen in the context of a national oxperiment. pimilarly. Housing associations, Housing .ctbion Areas and (IAs are controlled by professionals at the expense of the residents whom they purport to serve, In the long term, this can only render the professional impotent, for it is through real participation where the bases for decisions are exposed to all. that the orofessional will foster iis own development. Private practice is accountable only to the ae who weild power i.e. that.,small.sroup ve have identified as patvons. ‘here is no effective means of control by those who are affected by the buildings thus produced and there is little public awareness of the profits yielded by the. fee scale, ithin offices, a minority of employer architects exercise hierar— chical control,:due as much to their orn inclination as to their respon- Sibilities.sided: Partnership La» heir employees, lured by the carrot of eventual advancement ~— if chery find favour - are suspicious competi-~ tive and divided. Such a system will, in the long term collapse for Lt is-not sufficiently flevible to respond.to the wanging pattern of patronage: the dominance of the public ‘client and the increasing social. economic and environmental avareness expressed by the public at large. whether in conservation issues ‘or.politicel stances, N.aA.ii. therefore proposes a whole range of reforms within practice, from ensuring that private offices are subject to a form of local accountability, to office structures. based on the principleosf co-ownership. Salaried architects should be givena real opportunity to organise and join unions for without such strength they are at the mercy of the market. Hor the public sector architect there looms a different series of frustrations, Local Authority architects work in large centralised rigid | organisations which, while.professing to serve he public, in reality serve md are ecountable only to co.mittee chairmen, Direct contact between users and architects is at least discouraged or forbidden. “he monolithic internal hicrachy fosters the promotion ethos. Success isto méve out of architecture into management. Rarely does:the Chief Architects? heavy responsibility for huge expenditure to one client create an office’ spirit any more inspired thea vell-organised defensiveness. “hy is this so? Host public architects have a firm belief in the. sist 4Oe" of their cause... liany’ have gone.to good vublic offices tO essoane the partner bréathing down their. neck. -.-Might it be that the, system. has been so devised to tolerate the mediocreo,r that it is so. fail-safe that no practitioner is that importent? It is clear that es bureaucracies. develop, the definition of roles becomes increasingly restrictive. ‘he public architect is. insulated from the very problems which @e the substance | of building néeds; and: the exercise of his imagination and skill becomes 7 irrelevant BS r . the Wew architecture liovement believes that she bide which is continually croding the basis of the architect's vork can only be turned by surplanting the local authority service by a National Design Service based on de~ centralised local authority design teams and offering a freely available service to groups and individuals in local -reas, ‘hese teams vould be organised in such a vay that not ohly would they to help articulate the needs of residents but also implement them, Such an intimate relationship vould automatically introduce a means of accountability. this is not a vague notion of control or criticism but a participatory process by which the skills of architects do not hide behind a bushel but are exposed to the commonsense of the laymen. Architectural education is dominated and controlled by the RIBA through the Board of Uducation, yet it is society which foots the bill without any means of control, or rather it has vested its control in the hands of architects. iwhis has encouraged an introverted montality, H.A.li. has been disappointed, but in rotrospect not surprised,a& the failure of achitec tural students to respond to the «uestions that NAH. ete have -posed. ~The fostering ‘of architectural studies in a world of unreality;whether.in.“theworstoxcessesofon aoe orteetinical.5 fetishes, ‘is producing. anew sowense ion of ¢lraving-board fodder or drop outs.oa ;ioe : : : te. NAN, dhidnde: to set up a’ sia aby group to examine the cuestion of.education but -it is clear that central to our attitude is to arrange a marriage between schools:and:. their communities. Schools of Architecture have considerable resources: which could be used for. the benefit of the community. /In:general, we should be’aimingf.or more autonomy in syllabus in order to enable’ cach school to respond to varying local con- dittons ond opportunitics. i : here can be few: doubts as to our attitude to the way the profession is. at present: organised and:controlled. ighty per cent of architects wrote off the BIBA years. ago. . Yet, though it no longer has any meaning for most architects, its power is immense and Council is controlled by the same faces year aftcr year. NAH. seeks 0 echoes ornor ples of practice outside the RIBA in such a way that’ are not cosettcd in their own front: room but are excposed, tothe street. ‘whese new principles of practice will range from a set of ethics, perhaps in the: form.of an oath; model rules on procedure,to the abolishing of mandatory feo scale, so that a range: of architectural ARCUK which is Bevory afront organisation of the RIDA. servismcoreeswid:elyavailabie Controloftheactiviticsofthe profession should be returned to where it was originally invested, namely par Laem the Asthey stand, the Registration Acts are’administored by:--: NA.'isnota igoly ‘Itspressontemphasisonele and theory is a-prelude to a programie of action.: Yhat action is aimed at breaking down the barriers bet:reen society and architects, Links will be forged with the local communities where we live through: trade unions, -. tenemts associations, local amenity groups and locel councillors. TC. hall. work to raise jhe expectations of the service provided by. practices sient offices,.Onabroader.scale,our.intentionistoco-operate with other progressive groups. By lobbying politicians we hope -to achieve changes in the Registration Acts. ‘Our prograime is not: reformist for all our actions are to! be judged.in. the light of our desire to seck fundamental changes in the exercise of patronage. In practising community architccture our philosophy.is not. to offer @ndy to innocent children but to demonsttrate the failure of established institutions to respond to the peoples needs. Sy this means people themselves will seek their own solutions; and for architects there is tho reward of their own fulfillment. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Liaison Group 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 February 1977