3 10 310 https://nam.maydayrooms.org/files/original/683c67bc6c53834966dde4ea4a5bf8cf.pdf 5dea6107f1cc72b55178aec8b7ac521e 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 Education Description An account of the resource Many NAM members were engaged in the field of architectural education, either as staff or students, and pursued new ideas for course content and pedagogy, reassessing existing course structures and priorities in conventional architectural training. The concern to focus on socially necessary buildings and to find new and meaningful ways of engaging with building users and the wider community- both central NAM themes - illuminated much of the discussion. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource ARCUK Council papers Subject The topic of the resource Note Several items on Architectural Education Description An account of the resource 73 Hallam Street London WI N 6EE Tel: 01-580 5861 Registrar: Kenneth J. Forder M.A. 184/86 PRIVATE AND CONFIDENTIAL TWO HUNDRED AND NINETEEN ORDINARY MEETING 17 DECEMBER 1986 AT 2 PH AT 66 PORTLAND PLACE LONDON WI A G E N D A 1 . Apologies for Absence 2. Minutes of 218 Ordinary Meeting (Attached as Document 160/86) 3. Constitution of Council To accept the resignation of I G Urquhart and to nominate in his place Mrs Jenny Williams. 4. Constitution of Discipline Committee To accept the resignation of I G Urquhart and to nominate in his place Mrs Jenny Williams 5. Constitution of the Board of Architectural Education (a) The Privy Council formally gave its approval to the amendment to ARCtJK"s Regulations (text given in Minute 23 of document 160/86) on November 7th 1986. (b) To accept the nominat ion of Alan Chapman nominated by Brighton Polytechnic; 184/86/2 (c) To accept the nomination of Dr A Forvard nominated by Huddergfield Polytechnic. 6 . Section 7 of the Principal Act Conduct Cages attached ag ANNEX A 7. Reports (i) Admi68ion Committee to be tabled ANNEX Board of Architectural Education ANNEX C Board of Architectural Education Awards Panel ANNEX D Finance and General Purposes Committee ANNEX (v) Professional Purposeg Committee ANNEX (vi) Registrar's Report to be tabled ANNEX G Affidavit of complaint againgt Steven Lawrence Hole 8. Direct i ve of the Council of the European Community Chairman to 8peak to report attached. 9. Other Business 10. Date of Next Meeting 18 March 1987 Registrar. Kenneth J. Forder M.A. 181/86 BOARD OF ARCHITECTURAL EDUCATION REPORT TO COUNCIL - DECEMBER 1986 1. Education Policy Policy paper "Architectural Education: Statement of Principles" ig attached to Report. ARCUK has increasingly been placed in a position of making reactive reponses to various educational issues. The volume of material now being handled by ARCUK, augmented by its responsibilities to the Department of the Environment in termg of the E.C. Directive, is such that the GPC had concluded it vas necessary for ARCUK to formulate its own policy on education. The paper "Architectural Education: Statement of Principles" drawn up by the Chairman and agreed by the GPC vag welcomed by members of the Board ag providing a framework for ARCUK policy. Architects Registration Council of the United Kingdom ESTABLISHED UNDER THE ARCHITECTS (REGISTRATION) ACTS 1931 TO 1938 The regolution that the BAE adopt the paper and that it be put before — Council for endorsement vag pagged vith 42 voteg in favour and 5 against and the Board agkg the Council to ratify this document as a statement of policy. 2. ARCUK/RIBA Visiting Boards (a) ARCUK Participation in the Visiting Board Programme Because of responsibilities placed on it under the terms of the E.C. Directive ARCUK is nov obligated to be more directly involved in the recognition of qualifications. As a means of attaining this the GPC had recoamended to the Board that a partnership be established with the RIBA to operate joint Visiting Boards on which at least two representatives would be nominated directly on to each visit by ARCUK, the costs and administration to be Shared with the RIBA, the whole coming into effect for the autumn programme 1987. A paper (copy attached) vas endorsed in principle by the BAE and vas passed by 35 votes in favour to 2 against and vith 8 abstentions. Discussions vill begin with the RIBA vith this object in view. (b) Visiting Board Reports ( i) Mackintosh School The Board recotnmend8 continued recognition in the following formal terms ; that — (i) the three years full time course and four years part—time course leading to the University of Glasgov"• ordinary degree of Bachelor of Architecture, and the first three yeare of the four years full time course leading to the University' g degree of Bachelor of Architecture with Honourg, and their related examinations; and ( i i) the course leading to the University of Glasgov'g Diploma in Architecture (comprising either the tvo years full time or three years part time course or the fourth year of the Honourg degree courge followed by the second Diploma year full time), and its related examinations; or the course leading to the University of Glasgow's degree of Magter of Architecture (comprising the fourth year of the Honourg degree courge followed by the taught MArch course in Architectural Studies taken in one calendar year full time, one academic year full time and one academic year part time, or tvo calendar yeare part time), and its related examinations; and (iii) the School '8 lecture course and examination taken in the last year of the Degree course (RIBA Gl), the course and examinations taken in Diploma years one and tvo (RIBA G2), and the Professional Practice Examination (RIBA G3) taken on completion of a minimum of tvo years practical training undertaken in accordance with the RIBA Practical Training Scheme, continue to be recogniged by ARCUK as Parts I, Il and Ill respectively for the purpose of admission to the Register of Architects. ( i i) Dublin University College (visit on 6/7 February 1986) The Board recommends continued recognition in the following formal terms ; that ( i) the five years full—time course and related examinations leading to the National University of Ireland Bachelor of Architecture Degree; and ( i i) the Fifth Year course and examination in Professional Practice and Management (RIBA Gl and G2), and the postgraduate block course and the examination leading to the National University of Ireland Certificate in Professional Practice and Practical Experience (RIBA G3), taken on completion of a minimum of tvo years' practical training undertaken in accordance vith the Rules of the RIBA Practical Training Scheme, continue to be recognised by ARCUK as Parts I, Il and Ill for the purpose of admission to the Register of Architects. ( i i i) Humberside College of Higher Education (visit on 20/21 February 1986) The Board recommends continued recognition in the following formal terms ; that — (i) the three years full—tine courge and related examinationg leading to the CNAA Degree of BA in Architecture; and (i i) the tvo years full—time course and related examinations leading to the Humberside College of Higher Education Diploma in Architecture; and (iii) the Technical courge lectures and related aggeggmentg in the Degree course on contract Lav, the architect' g role, relationship to the building process and current legislation (RIBA Gl), the Lav and Construction lectures and related assessments in the Diploma course (RIBA G2), and the lecture course, seminars and related examinationg leading to the School' 8 Post Qualification Certificate in Architectural Practice (RIBA G3), taken on the completion of two years' practical training undertaken in accordance vith the Rules of the RIBA Practical Training Scheme , continue to be recogniged by ARCUK as Parts I, Il and Ill respectively for the purpose of admission to the Register of Architects. (iv) Polytechnic of the South Bank (revi8it, 6/7 March 1986) The Board reconnnend8 continued recognition in the following formal terms ; that — (i) the 4—year day—release course and related examinations leading to South Bank Polytechnic Graduate Diploma in Architecture; and (ii) the 3—year day—release courge and related examinations leading to South Bank Polytechnic Postgraduate Diploma in Architecture; continue to be recogniged by ARCUK as Parts I and Il respectively for the purpose of admission to the Register of Architects. 3. "The Content and Context of Architectural Education" ARCUK has been invited to respond to the RIBA discussion paper on architectural education. In view of the importance of the document it vas agreed to hold a special meeting of the BAE on January 13th 1987 to discuss and consider a response for report to the March meeting of Council. 4. Cont inuing Professional Development The Chairman and Registrar vill put forward a discussion paper to the May meeting of BAE containing proposal 8 for ARCUK'8 C. P. D. policy. 5. Appointment of Secretary to the BAE The increaging volume of educational material nov being handled by ARCUK hag been referred to in paras I and 2 (a) above. Since the Board met, the Finance and General Purposes Committee (report attached) hag endorsed the reconendation that a permanent Secretary nov be appointed to the Board of Architectural Education in terms of ARCUK Regulation 23. At the time the Board net a Job Specif ication for the nev post vas not available and it hag reserved to itself the request to examine this at its Special Meeting in January. 6. RIBA Examinat ion in Architecture The RIBA hag formally applied for ARCUK recognition of its revised Examination in Architecture. The examination vill be aggegged by an independent ARCUK Visiting Board. Profeggor D Hinton Chairman 125/86 ARCHITECTURAL EDUCATION: STATEMENT OF PRINCIPLES 1 . Introduct ion ARCUK's responsibilities in the field of Education derive directly from the 1931 Act and the 1969 amendments. The terms of these are statutory and prescriptive but ARCUK is not limited in its activities solely to those mentioned in the Acts and may legitimately engage in courses of action which it considers relevant and/or necessary to achieve the objectives which the Acts embody. The objeCt of this paper is to provide a framework of principles within which these objectives can be realised, based on (a) Decisions taken and statements already made by ARCUK. (b) Examination of issues confronting ARCUK in both the short and long term future. 2. Representat ion ARCUK"s own constitution and that of the Board of Architectural Education provide a broad basis for discussion not limited to members of the architectural profession. By this means it is possible to receive a vide range of opinions representing public and consumer interests, other professions, Universities, Polytechnics and Government Departments as vell as those of architects whether they belong to professional institutions or not. While taking full advantage of the breadth of its representation, ARCUK should try to ensure, on educational issues as on others, that the architectural profession speaks with one voice. It should therefore (a) give high priority to consultation with all its constituent bodies and with representatives of the unattached. (b) use the unique constitution of the Board to ensure a balanced presentation of opinions on educational issues. (c) establish a continuing dialogue with Government Departments and other agencies concerned with the formulation of education policies. 3. Powers under the Registration Acts A. The 1931 Registration Act the BAE to recommend to Council (a) the recognition of any examinations in architecture the passing of which ought, in the opinion of the Board, to qualify persons for registration under this Act; and (b) the holding of any examinations in architecture which ought, i n the opinion of the Board, to be passed by appl icants for registration under the Act; It follows that Board and Council must be concerned with and responsible for the setting and standards. 125/86/3 The wording places stress on improvement. ARCUK awards are by themselves insufficient to support major research programmeg but are intended to give encouragement to the expansion of research activities. The provision for research awards has been extended to cover Cont inuing Professional Development. ARCUK has made a major investment in this area and must continue to influence further developments preferably through collaboration with recognised Schools of Architecture and the profession. 5. Admission from Overseas 0 The existing regulations make provision for registration b possessing equivalent qualif icat ions to those recognised at art I level. This process will continue except for applications b the EC who will be admitted under the terms of the Directive. The Act vill be amended in 1987 by a Statutory Instrument to accommodate these prov is ions . Recent changes in procedure whereby all non E. C. applicants from overseas will be processed via Regulation 27 and the continuance of the JCAR Agreement vill provide a uniform body of information and further experience in the field of international recognition. A major task and an unprecedented opportunity confront ARCUK and its resent-ae-i-v-e.s—ia the Advisory Conunittee set up to advise the Commissron in BrusseTG--the implementation of the Directive throughout the EEC. Even at a minimum level of activity in this Committee, the task of coordination and verif icat ion vill be cons iderable. The opportunity — to create an agency active in the promotion of high standards and the exchange of ideas — is one which ARCUK must pursue energetically. It must be one of ARCUK's major priorities to 9-nsure unity of purpose i-A---e-he pursug 04 these aims and to put its experience in overseas relations at the disposal of the European Community. Prof D Hinton Chairman BAE 161/86 YISITING BOARDS Recent events, particularly the advent of the European Directive, have prompted a review of the present Visiting Board arrangements and the degree of responsibility exercised by ARCUK in the validation of examinations and courses. AS the competent authority responsible to the Department of the Environment for implementing the terms of the Directive, ARCUK has to supply information concerning standards and confirm that these have been met by the Schools nominated under Article 7. It ig cons idered that the present arrangements in which one member of the Visiting Board represents but is not directly nominated by ARCUK do not meet these requirements and that a system should be devised which gives ARCUK more direct responsibility for validation and enables it to vithstand possible challenges to its authority and methodology. One possible alternative would be for ARCUK to mount a wholly independent Visiting Board system — a proposal which has been considered in the past and rejected for the following reasons. 1 . The duplication of RIBA and ARCUK visits (together, in some cases, with those of CNAA) would place an unacceptable burden on the Schools. 2. The heavy additional cost in terms of ARCUK resources would not be justified. 3. The impression which vould be created of a divided profession v ith disparate aims and standards in Architectural Education should be avoided. These objections still apply and, as a vay of avoiding them but still retaining direct responsibility for val idation, it i s proposed that a partnership be established vith RIBA to operate jornt Visiting Boards on which at least vo representatives VI I l be nominated directly on to each so O 161/86/2 Visit by ARCUK and both the cogt6 and administrative work shared with the RIBA. It vill be necesgary for a scheme to be worked out in detail in collaboration with the RIBA with the aim of coming into effect for the autumn of 1987. The GPC recommends that the Board endorse this proposal in principle 60 that discussions vith this object in viev can be commenced . Prof D Hinton Architects Registration Council of the United Kingdom ESTABLISHED UNDER THE ARCHITECTS (REGISTRATION) ACTS 1931 TO 1938 73 Hallam Street London WI N åEE Tel: 01-580 5861 182/86 BOARD OF ARCHITECTURAL EDUCATION AWARDS PANEL REPORT TO COUNCIL - DECEMBER 1986 1. There hag been one meeting of the Panel since the October meeting of the Council. 2. Student Grants The following applications vere received: Renewals Other applications 9 Total 9 The applicat ions vere dealt vith as follows: Under review 2 Refused 5 Withdrawn 1 Avards approved 1 Total 9 3. The following grant is recommended: EGP 580 S T S Bates Poly of the South Bank E1582 Also one award recommended by the Chairman subsequent to the Panel meet ing. EGP 600 S Nadarajah Poly of North London E 846 4. At the meeting of the BAE the Vice Chairman of the Panel acknowledged the assistance given by the Heads of School in responding to the Panel's reports on individual cases. 5. 1986 Research Awards An increased number of applications vas received and the following tvo awards vere made: Dr. T Woolley — "User Participation in Design — Exploratory Project" E2500 Mr. P J Robinson — "Aspects of a Scottish Flat Tradition". E1600 6. The evaluation reports of the completed research projects of Malcolm Reading and Amy Sargeant are attached for information. David Gregory Chairman A HISTORY 0K} THE MARS GROUP 1933-44: A THEMATIC ANALYSIS: MALCOLM READING Historical writing should communicate; have selected evidence and have three central elements - narrative, analysis and description - and have a bibliography and footnotes. It should also be set in historical context and use both primary and secondary sources. This work reads well and therefore communicates. It makes extremely good use of primary sources. It strikes a good balance between narrative and analysis although it peters out somewhat at the end and really needs a good 'rounding up' conclusion. It could have set the historical context more fully. If the •work is aimed exclusively at architects, it probably serves in this respect but the general reader would not understand the background. More could have been made of the very strong anti-modern movement in Britain. There is no bibliography - a serious omission in such a work, particularly with such obvious books and publications which are directly relevant. It would have been greatly improved by some illustrations - eg, on page 79 there is reference to a six-page special, well illustrated feature by Fry in the AJ - it would have been nice to have seen it incorporated. It would have been useful too if more had been made of the architecture actually produced by members of the MARS Group which is so well documented elsewhere. As a piece of work simply indicating the history of the actual setting up of the Group it serves well. I enjoyed reading it; he is obviously extremely knowledgeable about the subject, has had the privilege of direct interviews with MARS Group members and his record of those meetings alone Will make this study interesting to other scholars. "Jacques Gondoin and the Ecole de Chirurqie" have read Amy Sargeant•s research report on "Gondoin & and the Ecole de Chirurgie". It is a brief, but well researched and well written piece of work. The illustrations in the larce folder, however, are far from well presented; poor quality photostats, haphazard sizes and even haphazardly rounted, scruffily titled (or, in some cases, untitled), no list of sources for the illustrations (although by inference and a lot of digging one can work this out for most, but not all of them) etc. Surnrisingly, apart fron the 50—year old paper bv Jean Adhemar, there i.s no recent work on this well—knol..rn building. Her reading, visits to Paris and Nice (where e remote descendant with material about Gondoin lives) have been fruitful. However, there is, T sunpose because of the Can.bridge "architectural— history—as—art—history" approach, en undue enphasis nn for-ral and metaphoric issues, with a consequent loss of discussion of the plan and section of the anatomy theatre, the roots for this kind of share, the way it relates to new scientific, medical end teaching attitudes in Prance in the last guarter of 18th Century, its relationship to earlier, circular, anatomy theatres such as Bologna, (is this the first semi—circular one? '"hat shape was its nredecessor in Paris? etc. Considering the huge delays on this award, it is surprisina that the proaress has not been more. Her (excellent) application made in 1982 already covered much of the material in the renort. Her interim report in 1 9 83 developed it a lot further — and the additional material in the past 3 years has been quite small. I feel she lost interest about 1983/ pa. a:evertheless, n. considerinc it only cost us El 000 (althouah at 1982 nrices) it was a worthwhile investment. '.5 th some tidvina up of a few confurions about references and a bit Af annlification of t:he issues mentioned above, it could (and Ghould) mako F. Architects Registration Council of the United Kingdom ESTABLISHED UNDER THE ARCHITECTS (REGISTRATION) ACTS 1931 TO 1938 73 Hallam Street London WI N 6€E Tel: 01-580 5861 Registrar: Kenneth J. Forder M.A. 185/86 FINANCE AND GENERAL PURPOSES cmNITTEE REPORT TO COUNCIL - DECEMBER 1986 Retention Fees (a) It vag reported that 419 architects had not paid any part of their fees by November 1986 compared with 426 at the game time the previous year. There vere however 643 who had only part paid (this is characteristic of any year following any increase in retention fee). (b) The Committee had reingtated to the Regi8ter the names of 5 architects. (c) The Coumittee hag approved the vaiver of 3 retention fees by persons retiring. (d) The Council is agked to author ise the removal from the Register on the 318t December 1986 the names of all those who still ove retention fees, wholly or in part, on that date. A list vill be tabled. 2. Admi88 ion Fees The recommends the Council approve the folloving changes in Admi88ion Fees in Regulation 37 — to come into effect on January 1 1987 185/86/3 3. Representation of the Constituent Bodies (a) On the 31st October 1986 the total number of architects on the Register vag 30,029 (29,593). The number of architect memberg of the constituent bodies vhoge addreggeg are normally in the United Kingdom and the number of repreeentativeg they are appoint to Council for the year 1987/88 are 8hovn belov. The figures in bracket8 indicate the position in 1986/87. Const ituent Home Number of Council Members To Body Member 8 h ip Nominate for 1987 (88 Session 800 (811) 2 (2) FAS 317 (319) (1) IAAS 98 (106) 1 (1) PROV 260 (290) 1 (1) RIBA 20788 (20462) 42 STMP 143 (149) 1 (1) 4. Election of Representatives of Unattached Architects AB at 318t October 1986 the total number of architects recorded as unattached vas 6390 compared with 6197 in 1985. The number of unattached representatives on the Council for 1987/88 vill be 13, as in the previous year. 5. Composition of Board and Committees Under the Gentlemen' 8 Agreement The Committee that the Gentlemen-g Agreement providing for the representation of the constituent bodies on the Board of Architectural Education and Committees of the Council as accepted by the Council at its meeting on the Il December 1985 be adopted and unaltered for the year 1987/88. 6. Admission Certif icates The Coumittee has considered a suggestion that persons newly admitted to the Register should receive Certificates of Registration but has rejected the idea. 7. Appointment of Secretary to the Board of Architectural Education (Ref. Report of the BAE above). The Committee hag carried out its annual reviev of staff conditions of service. The Committee unanimously recommends to Council the appointment of a Secretary to the BAE in terms of the attached Job Specification. 185/86/4 8. First Schedule to Che 1931 Act — Survey The Electoral Reform Society hag conducted a 15Z stratefied random sample of congtituent bodies by means of a questionnaire. The replies are nov being checked and evaluated by the Society and a report vill be submitted to the Comittee as goon a8 possible. F Goodall Chairman Atchitoct6 Rooibtration Council ot the United Kinodogn GENTLEMEN'S AGREEHENT 1 . at present constituted. the Gent Ignen' s Agreemcat provideg ao fol lovs : Board of Architectural Education 2. Of the 24 regiocered pergons co be appointed by the Council:— 2 shall be nominated by the Royal Ing tituce of Briti8h Acchicect6 2 Incorporated Aggociacion of Architects and Surveyorg 2 . Faculty of Architect6 aed Surveyors 2 Representatives on the Cotmcit of the 'Unattached' Architeccg Leaving 16 co be freely chosen by the Council. Admission 3. 8 registered persons shall be appointed by the Council of vhoa.•— 2 shall be nominated by che Acchiceccucal Association 1 STAMP section o? UCATT 2 Repregentaciveg on che Council of Che 'Unattached' Archiceccg leaving 3 co be freely chosen by che Council. Finance and General Purposes Coazniccee Profesgtonal Purpoges Cantntctee 4 . Each of che above Coamiccces shall cons isc of 13 raemberg . exclugive of che ex officio member 8, appointed ag follovs : — I by che Royal Ing t i tute of Brit i Ah Archi ceccs 1 ' e n v t ns• Incorporated Assoc i ac ron of Archi ceccg and Surveyor e Faculty of Arch 1 C CCC s and Surveyor 8 Archi t ectura l STAN!' MCA', r Repr e sent t o be t re e Candida c es foc t rec e lec t ion 5. Thac vich regard co che candidates for free election by che Counci l . che following infomacion shal l be provided, by chose nominating, in not more than, say, 25 vords: age, name of archi— cectutal constituenc bodies of vhich candidate is a member (i f any) . presenc post and cype of practice , and reason for nomination; and chac che nanes shall bc submit ced to the Council in alphabetical order. Dates for nominations 6 . That nominations for vacancies to be filled by free election together with the required information about the candidates, must be sent to the • Registrar, 21 days before the Annual Meeting of the Council, in order that the lists may be circulated to Council members prior to the meeting. 178/86 JOB SPECIFICATION TITLE Secretary ARCUK Board of Architectural Education (ARCUK Regulation 23) DUTIES Service Board of Architectural Education Avardg Panel Visiting Boards Administration Advice on formation of Boards Advice on timetables Attend gome visit8 EEC Service ARCUK'g Advisory Monitor EEC Schoolg CPD Develop policy Advise constituent bodies Monitor developments and procegg official reports Constituent Liaison on educational matters and Bodies otherwise administer implementation of Statement of Principles — ARCUK document 125/86 REQUIREMENTS Graduate or other suitable qualif ication. Age over 30 High Level Experrence Educat ion and/or Adtnrni8tration and/or Architecture Languages. French or German desirable Grade 11 SALARY 12-15000 Condit ions Standard ARCUK Staff Pengion Scheme 6 months probation DATE Start March/April 1987 SUPPORT STAFF Por the moment the lines of the duties of existing 8taff can be rescheduled to cope vith the secretarial load involved. Architects Registration Council of the United Kingdom ESTABLISHED UNDER THE ARCHITECTS (REGISTRATION) Acts '931 TO '938 73 Hallam Street London WI N 6EE Tel: 01-580 5861 Registrar. Kenneth J. Forder M.A. 183/86 PROFESSIONAL PURPOSES cmff1TTEE REPORT TO COUNCIL - DECEMBER 1986 ARCUK Disciplinary Proceedings Following the joint meeting with the Discipline Committee in September, the Committee is examining the implications of the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1975 and its effect on criminal cases appearing before ARCUK Council. The Home Office hag been asked for guidance. When confirmation is to hand, the Professional Purposes Committee vill continue its review of disciplinary proceedings. 2. Standard of Conduct The Committee has examined a suggestion that professional indemnity insurance should be made a condition of registration and concluded that no ruling would be feasible. 3. Criminal Cases (a) The Committee has asked for research to be carried out among ARCUK's past legal opinions on how a situation is to be handled where a person no longer on the Register has been convicted of a criminal offence. (b) ARCUK v. Bishop On October 23rd 1986 Malcolm Bishop was convicted in Cambridge Magistrates Court of an offence under Section I of the Architects Registration Act of 1938 as read with Section 17 of the Architects Registration Act of 1931 . A brief summary is attached. 183/86/2 (c) Warnings Letterg of warning have been gent to:— P R G Wean Chelmsford J A Smith Barking C W Lang Ed inburgh M C Nickolls Cha irman 188/86 REPORT OF MEETING op CLAEU 20/21 NOVEMBER 1986 FOR COUNCIL 17 DECEMBER 1986 The meeting vas held in Brussels on 20th and 218t November 1986 vith David Waterhouse (leader) and Alan Groves representing RIBA and Bob Adamg and Professor Denyg Hinton representing ARCUK. 2. The main item vas a prolonged discussion on alternative policies for CLAEU A wider role, increased expenditure, legal gtatus within the EEC and right to speak for all architects in the EEC, prepared by the French President of CLAEU and the French delegation. A modest role ag a forum for discussion and exchange of information, vith revised regulations prepared by David Waterhouse (UK). The UK view vas eventually agreed by 7 votes to 4. 3. It vas learnt that no EEC funds are available in 1986 or 1987 to get up the advisory committee under the directive and a motion deploring this situation and urging that this committee meet vag passed. 4. It became clear that not all countries had taken the necessary steps required by the EC Architects directive due to come into operation in August 1987. Further detailed information is being sought from all countries. 5. The budget for 1987 vas agreed at 1,506,700 BF (E25,500) compared vith a 1986 budget of 998,045 BP (E16916). The 1987 budget allowed Covering a deficit in 1985/86. ( i i) The entry of Greece, Spain and Portugal. ( i i i) Contingency for additional published information. 6. The UK share of the budget, equally shared with the R IBA. 1986 1987 Share 19.32% 16.4% Value 0268 ARCUK E1634 E2091 David Waterhouse vill become delegate general on 1st January 1987 having led the UK delegation for many years. 8. The next meeting vill be held in Spain on 30 April and I May 1987. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource ARCUK Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived John Allan Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 17 December 1986 https://nam.maydayrooms.org/files/original/36b02cec53c6b1373b59d1cd4b69d8bc.pdf b75322e7d0116d0dfaeee98be5faad91 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 Education Description An account of the resource Many NAM members were engaged in the field of architectural education, either as staff or students, and pursued new ideas for course content and pedagogy, reassessing existing course structures and priorities in conventional architectural training. The concern to focus on socially necessary buildings and to find new and meaningful ways of engaging with building users and the wider community- both central NAM themes - illuminated much of the discussion. 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 News Release Subject The topic of the resource Statement by IAAS supporting ARCUK, plus other papers Description An account of the resource 2. There have been eeverai. Not the leaec ig tha fact that ARCUK policy over the last tvo years has guyed strongly in the direction OE UK School recognition, notice OE ending of direct recognitiou baving been Bivan to 7 overgeao Schools; in contrast to the the poo it ion of the RIBA which, vith different a ins and objects hag a vorld vide recognition netvork. The JCAR neetings of recent yeare Mith our colleagues in the USA have tended to query why ARCUK does not do its ovu independent recognition. The EEC geetng to be foiloving a general pattern of EEC Visiting Boards and in tha case of at least tvo other profeoøiono ouch Visiting Boards run by competent authorities are already operating or planned; there is little doubt that vhen the position of architecto is examined ARCUK vili have to operate ac an independent inspecting authority. Word bas reached us that ARCUK'o present position ac a coapetent authority is likely to be questioned if it does oot control its ova accreditation and that the inpreseion should be avoided that architectural policy is being determined by a separate organioation to vhich ARCUK is danger of appear ing to pay lipoervice. There vere tvo revievo. The first by Honorary Off icerg foiloved by a full discussion in the GPC. In considering vuat action should foilov, cha issues described in che second and third paragraphs of paper 161/86 emerged ao those calling for priority action. You raised the question of representation on the BAE and the recent changes, made vith RIBA support, to increase the number of representatives fron Schools of Architecture. The gap has not been completely closed but ve vouid like to see 100% representation and have suggested vayg in vhich, vith the collaboration of the RIBA tbi8 can be done. As Bob Adams pointed out these changeo have oot throvn the composition of the Board out of balance. If you had been at the last neet ing you would have seen (and heard) evidence that the voices of those representing practice are loud and clear. Their votes also contributed to the large oajority by vhich the Visiting Board proposals vere carr ied at the previous meeting. Paog ing to the category 2 questions, va have already given a good deal of thought to the vay the proposals would be inplenented. We acknovledge of course that there auxst be a pro rata ghar ing of coste (detailed ageeoonent later). But ve also see that the office administration cannot for practical reasons be split up and must be situated in one camp or the other. From the point of viev of expertise the RIBA oft ice •eens the obvious choice. But the steering body vould be a Joint Board vhich vould be mandated to approve appointnent8 dravn up by the reøpective Sacretarxats. I would see in practice a procedure evolving vhereby at one of the 4 (ve anticipate) BAE neetiuge a year the list of Schools for the cotaing 12 moths vouid be considered and nanes of Visiting Board toemberø for each li8ted having regard for particular fields of expertige. The ARCUK Secretar iat would have the task of approaching those on the list and vould in due tine present the final i ist to the Joint Board for endorgenent. It vould be the object, ou each occas ion Co achieve a vell balanced 3. ARCUK vould take responsibility for enouring that necessary iatere•ts. including coaotitueat body interest', are catered for. wuid bope that a of alternating Chairøea could be arrived at both in the Joint Board and in each Vioiting Board; vo vouid also bope to •ee a joint report energing — a very oborC after each vigit. I hope the coatentg of thio letter vill be helpful in your consultations and look forvard to bearing fron you vhen you are ready for auochør discussion. Yours sincerely Professor D Hinton Department of the Environment Room Al 16 Romney House 43 Marsham Street London SWIP 3PY Telex 22221 Direct line 01-212 8 4 4 Switchboard 01-212 3434 GTN 212 10 February 1987 Kenneth J Forder Esq Registrar Architects Registration Council of the United Kingdom 73 Hall am Street London WIN 6EE RECEIVEü When we met on Friday we spoke about the government's view of the way in which ARCUK should set about recognising courses as complying with Articles 3 and 4 of the Architects' Directive. 1 promised to write confirming the line we discussed. Once the order in council has been made ARCUK will be the statutory "competent authority" for satisfying HMG that architectural courses satisfy Article 3 and 4 of the Architects ' Directive. This is therefore a statutory function that cannot be de legated . How ARCUK sets about deciding whether to recognise courses is, in the first instance, up to ARCUK. It would be quite possible to appoint non ARCUK assessors to visit educational institutions and make recommendations to ARCUK. What those assessors cannot do though is to take the decision. The decision on whether to recognise courses has to be taken by ARCUK. I hope that is helpful. Please let me know if you would like to take this issue further. Jenny Williams Copy to Peter Gibbs—Kennett •JEWS RELEASE ARCHITECTS EDUCATION BACKGROUND I r. the current confrontation between the RIBA and ARCUK over the education of archi tects, the inter-disciplinary Incorporated Associ ation of Architects and Surveyors (IAAS) has cone down firmly oa the side cf ARCUK. It was recently reported i G the press that ARCUK now plans to exerci se its statutory responsibil ity for architect 's education by appointing an education officer and seeking equal representation cn school visiting boards — whereas at present it supplies only one representative to RI EA visiting boards. This development has not found favour With the RIBA, which announced recently that it sees ARCUK primarily as a registration body and bel ieves that any expansion into other roles Wi l l cause confusion and diffusion of effort. The IAAS, founded years ago by the celebrated architect Sir Edwin Lctyens and committed to an inter-discipl inary principl e, has released the fol lov;ing statement cn the educaticr. issue: The IAAS welcomes the recent publ ic announcement by ARCUK that it intends to exercise its statutory responsi bil i ty f cr the educatica Archi tects. ARCO}' by statute, was from the outset never intended to act solely as a regi stratica body. Otherwise the Archi tects Reqi straücn Act would have been drafted di f ferent I v. The Incorporated Association of Architects and Surveyors Jubilee House Billing Brook Road Weston Favell Northampton NN3 4NW No (0604) 404121 As a constituent member of ARCUK, the IAAS has a I ways voiced its regret that ARCUK over the years failed to resist the b I cc l: partisaa lobby which resulted in the true role of ARCUI( being almost stymied f r cm As an inter-disciplinary body, the IAAS is uniquely placed to appreciate the value of the composition of the ARCUK Counci l and Boards in that their membership, like the IAAS, is drawn from a wide breadth of representation. The IAAS believes that this was a del iberate measure with a view to the self interests of single-ainded professional bodies being put aside and thus the needs of architecture being considered independently and as a whole. This is surely recognised by the fact that i G order to practice as an architect in the UK a person needs only to be registered by ARCUK to which requirement membership of a professional body, whi lst to be encouraged, is secondary. The IAAS applauds ARCUK for its self assertion and i r, full support the IAAS has changed its nominees and seeks to increase its representation cn the ARCUK Council and Boards. The IAAS hopes that ARCUK will receive universal encouragement aad support i this fresh and independent approach which the IAAS believes can only be for the good of students, educaticaal establishments, architects, industry and the public at large and act least the professional bodies themselves.' ENDS PR No. eus Embargo: Iamediate release Date: 13 February, 1987 Contact: Jack Scott, PRC prian Hughes, Administrator Telephone: Northampton (0604) 40412 i RIBA News Royal Institute of British Architects. 66 Portland Place. London WI N 4AD Press Officer: Acting Press Officer: David Atwell, Director, Public Affairs Date: 9 February 1987 Subject RIBA Nomination for ARCUK The RIBA wishes to strengthen its negotiating hand with Government and to this end has thoroughly reviewed its representation on ARCUK in the light of Council 's recent decision to resist any further closures of Schools of Archi tecture . The President, Larry Rolland, and the Senior Vice President. Rod Hackney, have been concerned during the past 12 months that the policies being pursued by ARCUK, in particular the increasing involvement in educational matters, are not in the best interests of architecture, the public or future student intake. They agree that in general RIBA representatives on ARCUK should be younger and in active practice . They believe that the team put forward on beha--.of RIBi. Council which includes Gordon Graham, the RIBA PasPresident serving on Council next session, will provide profession with a much more effective i nfluence in the difficult times ahead. The RIBA has been discharging its responsibilities for archi tectural education since long before the formation cf ARCUK and continues to fulfil its obligations •4 n this fie. - • It makes an annual investment in education of over million and has a committee structure of respected practitioners and academics supported by an experienced staff. The Institute sees ARCUK as primarily a registration body and believes that any expansion into other roles can only cause confusion and diffusion of effort. The full list of nominations submitted to the Registrar, ARCUK on 6 February is attached. The Senior Vice President added that the position of the Huddersfield School and the North East London Polytechnic School should be reviewed to see if, with the demands for architects in the inner cities being on the increase, the•.• can orient themselves to an enabling course in line with government policy to upgrade the inner city environment. Larry Rolland has suggested that Peter Melvin, Vice President Education, should meet with the Director of inner City Aid to see if some joint working relationsh:g could be established along these lines. RIBA NOMINATIONS FOR ARCUK COUNCIL 1987/88 1. P Beckett 22. M S McNidder 2. K S Bingham 23. M Me tcalfe 3. N M Brill 214 . M C Nickolls R S Critchlow 25. R - A Parnaby 5 . A Cunningham 26. D A Penning 6. J Curry (Mrs ) 27. Q Pickard 7. c W Daly 28. P W G Powell 8. R K Eastham 29. C W Quick 9. R Forsyth 30. T H Sherlock 10. G Graham 31. R C Shriaplin 11. R M Greenwood 32. T D scow 12. J Gregory 33. Prof J N Tarn 13. J Groves 34. A M Taylor 14 . P Hall 35. K H Taylor 15 • A M Horsley 36. J C Viner 16. J M Hutchinson 37. D B Waterhouse 17. M W Jeffels 38. J C Williams 18. P E Jones 39. A Worsley 19 J A Lane A F S Wright 20. Dr J Low:nan 41. R J Wyatt 21. J S Mackie 42. D M Yorke DH/CR/23/87 29 January 1987 Peter A P Kelvin Esq Vice President Education and Profess ional Development Royal Institute of British Architects 66 Portland Place London Dear Peter B0ßrdg We were grateful for the opportunity to neat on 28 January and begin our diocuooions. The neat ing nada sone progress if only because ve reached agree.ent on bov ve vouid proceed and the nain purpose of thic letter is to provide anovero to che questions vhich you raised. la fact ve nada progress in tvo other vayo — first by your that ARCUK proposals are not prina facie unacceptable and that the infornation you are seeking is to enable vider consultation to take place in the R IBA: and second, by accepting that ve should aim at a conclusion to our discussions by the late •uner vith an inter in report to the ARCUK BAE in Hay. To make this possible ve envisage a further zeetiag ia March and, to aid progrego, vould be willing to call a special •eating of the BAE in July or Septeuber. The questions vhich you put to ug fell into teo categories. Interpretation of the text of paper 161/86. 2. An extens ion of the proposals set out in the paper to illustrate hov ve think a partnership would vork. In attempting to provide this iufornation I vant to repeat that the paper 161/86 is the only one vhich the BAE and ARCUK Council have discussed and, ag in your ovn cage. they vould have to endorse any detailed proposals. Hovever. I an reasonably conf ident that vhat ve are putting forvard under category 2 vould obtain the assent of the Board. Under category i there are no sinister undertonea and I an sorry if the gave some people that impression. Our proposals are unconnected vith any criticisnø of the existing Visiting Board nacblnery and indeed our proposals do oot suggest any change in procedure in the field. We are avare that ouch criticisn• have beeu made and accept as you do, that any system can be improved. we night find that a partner•bxp vould provide the of bringing about improvenent — but that is oot the reason for euggesting it. You asked vhat vere the n recent events" referred to in the far st paragraph vhich prompted a reviev of the present arrangenaat•. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource IAAS Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived John Allan Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 13 February 1987 https://nam.maydayrooms.org/files/original/93cfb0665988a5b2ca3917bc49a25124.pdf 08c7b12ca7e23c051181541d40b53e9b 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 Education Description An account of the resource Many NAM members were engaged in the field of architectural education, either as staff or students, and pursued new ideas for course content and pedagogy, reassessing existing course structures and priorities in conventional architectural training. The concern to focus on socially necessary buildings and to find new and meaningful ways of engaging with building users and the wider community- both central NAM themes - illuminated much of the discussion. 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 Letter Subject The topic of the resource Letter to presidents of constituent bodies & Registrar cover letter Description An account of the resource Architects Registration Council of the United Kingdom ESTABLISHED UNDER THE ARCHITECTS (REGISTRATION) ACTS 1931 TO 1938 73 Hallam Street London WI N 6EE Tel: 01-580 5861 Registrar. Kenneth J. Forder M.A. WF/CK 4 September 1985 J S Allan Esq Avanti Architects 39-41 North Road London N7 9DP Dear Allan I have been asked by the Chairman of Council to send you a copy of the letter that has recently been sent to the Presidents of the Constituent bodies of ARCUK. A copy Is enclosed for information which is self explanatory. Yours sincerely il agreed to set advise Council up has begun a cil on October Registrar n established h Central ctive. Its 1 be binding as ce on constituent brmed about ns to be made nts you would ative on ARCUK Fer for the directly to the Registrar. Yours sincerely Professor D Hinton Chainnan Architects Registration Council of the United Kingdom ESTABLISHED UNDER THE ARCHITECTS (REGISTRATION) ACTS 193' TO 1030 73 Hallam Street London WI N 6EE Tel: 01-580 5861 Registrar: Kenneth J. Forder M.A. DH/CK/101/85 Dear E.c. DIRECTIVE You will know that, at its meeting on June 19th Council agreed to set up a Steering Group to analyse the Directive docment and advise Council on its implications and implementation. The Steering Group has begun a series of meetings and will make its first report to Council on October 16th. In the meantime, it has become clear that ARCUK, as an established statutory body, will be the principal agency through which Central Goverment will operate in the implementation of the Directive. Its terms, when we have sorted out exactly what they are, will be binding as far as ARCUK is concerned, but will have no statutory force on professional institutions or societies whether these are constituent bodies of ARCUK or not. Nevertheless, I am sure you will want to be kept informed about developments and these may well have a bearing on decisions to be made within your organisation. If you have any particular points you would like to raise may I suggest you do so through a representative on ARCUK who can speak at the October meeting — or if it is a matter for the Steering Group to consider before that date, by writing directly to the Registrar. Yours sincerely Professor D Hinton Chairman Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource ARCUK Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived John Allan Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 4 September 1985 https://nam.maydayrooms.org/files/original/32be27cbeefac3170e8236557890b9ec.pdf 747ff52bd736aee4527f19a51b03b852 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 Education Description An account of the resource Many NAM members were engaged in the field of architectural education, either as staff or students, and pursued new ideas for course content and pedagogy, reassessing existing course structures and priorities in conventional architectural training. The concern to focus on socially necessary buildings and to find new and meaningful ways of engaging with building users and the wider community- both central NAM themes - illuminated much of the discussion. 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 Month Subject The topic of the resource Comments on NAB/UGC Report (1 page) Description An account of the resource Professor Andy Macmillan, Home students could suffer as a Vice-President of the RIBA's Education and Professional Development Committee and result of NAB/UGC report Head of the Mackintosh School in Glasgow, told the Journal that many schools are IMPLEMENTATION of the tempted to accept large numTransbinary Architecture bers of overseas students who Group report could lead to a pay much higher tuition than situation where all overseas home students. students are allowed access to Part Il courses while only a Teachers lobby fraction of home students are allowed to continue towards a Macmillan continued: "My professional qualification. department can earn {100,000 That is the warning of Cho per annum by bringing in Padamsee, formerly head of Nigerian students on urban the Hull School and now design courses, and the univerdirector of an MSc course at sity pressures me to take them. the Bartlett School. If there's a quota to be placed on home students, there ARCUK letter should be one placed on over- seas students." In a letter to ARCUK Macmillan: overseas quota. "Teachers," says Macmil- Padamsee: real danger. Board of Architectural EducaIan, "are a lobby to protect tion Chairman Professor John Tarn, Padamsee results explains from thatthe present• done abroad a portfolio to the ARCUKof work and made will aware separately of the anomaly,consider their is a lobby jobs, just to protect like the qualityRIBA the anomaly the implications prior to a and numbers." The view of Admissions Committee for TAG report having confined or to the fuller discussion and decisions many teachers, he claims, is: itself to home students. The Part Il exemption RIBA Special Entry Commit- on implementation later in the "We don't care whether they total intake of home students to Part Il courses should be exemption tee for partial from Parts or completeI or Il or spring. only (students) want to get fill jobs our or places not, andwe reduced to a maximum of 700 Overseas quota get as much money as possiper annum by 1989, it says. In both. "It is a privilege not It is possible that some form ble." 1982-83, overseas students afforded hitherto considered to British students,unneces- of quota on overseas students Macmillan suggested: comprised 19.4 per cent of all sary, since they were free to will be enforced. At present, "Perhaps there should be a students passing Part I and institutions set their new category of membership, therefore eligible for entry to enter Part Il courses". individual in relation to the RIBAO, for overseas memPart Il. Padamsee argues that Professor John Tarn told the own policies do Part if the TAG recommendation Journal: "It is a loophole numbers of places offered to 2 bers, here where and Part they 3 might in their home were carried out, and the same which could be used. We could overseas students. But if im- and would not be number of overseas students be taking on a lot of overseas plementation of the TAG re- country, were eligible to enter Part Il, students on a purely commer- port is to achieve its twin of aimsthe allowed Alternatively,to practise Macmillanhere." they would then comprise 25 cial basis. The RIBA's view of increasing the quality its argues, "there might be an Act re tstration to home per cent of all students on would be that if this was a backit profession numbers, the while RIBA reducing itself may of Parliament to diploma courses. Padamsee door to qualification, then says: "Schools of architecture, must be stopped." be drawn into recommendihg Stu ents." in order to protect their re- NAB and the UGC will be a quota on overseas •students. source bases (in particular specialist and studio staff), and at the same time achieve a 10:1 staff-student ratio, would be tempted to make up student numbers by recruiting more overseas students. In some cases this could reach as high as 50 per cent of the diploma course." Overseas students The result would be that only some British students would proceed to Part Il and obtain a British qualification, while all overseas students would. In addition, an over- Rank Hovis McDougall HQ at Windsor by Edgington, Spink & Hyne, who recently celebrated their seas candidate is eligible to 129th anniversary. The development includes 60,000 sq ft of oflices and parking for 250 cars. RIBAJ March 1985 7 NORTH EAST LONDON POLYTECHNIC Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences Holbrook Centre School of Architecture Holbrook Road Head of School London El 5 3EA Nathan Silver MA(Cantab) BArch(Columbia) RIBA 01-590 7722 4 October 1985 Dear Councillor of ARCUK, In one respect it is hardly necessary for me to lobby you about architectural education, because of all the formally concerned professional bodies, ARCUK has already taken the most unequivocal and admirable stand. To paraphrase, this was that the Council, according to its enabling Act of Parliament, was concerned only with the standards that were met by registered architects, not with the numbers of registered architects. Splendid . I think ARCUK's progressive view will be remembered and respected a generation from now when far more architects are engaged in community architecture, building rehabilitation, interior design and (even) new buildings, than the Esher report had the perception to foresee. What ARCUK now needs to do is to make sure that all the new roles emerging for architects can be filled by architects, not by those who are unqualified, or who are half—trained, or who in desperation have been hired in from abroad. That was the mess the doctors of medicine got our nation into when their misguided attempt at manpower planning a generation ago finally bore fruit. As for my School 's own fate, I confidently expect that NELP 's effort to get off the current NAB/UGC Working Party's hit list will be short and sweet. We can amply prove our excellence, efficiency and worthiness, and comments are going forward through official channels in this respect. The one point I wish to make that is of direct concern to ARCUK is that the closing of ANY good school of architecture doesn't improve the balance, it worsens it. I hope you will see that further time spent by the Council leading to comment along these lines is very much part . of ARCUK's central concern about standards. My great compliments, and best wishes. Yours sincerely, Nathan Silver Head of School Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource RIBA Journal Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived John Allan Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource March 1985 https://nam.maydayrooms.org/files/original/7ab2f4be23c09d92b66782ede8174e32.pdf 2a30fe88696f42df0e342b1944bd83c6 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 Education Description An account of the resource Many NAM members were engaged in the field of architectural education, either as staff or students, and pursued new ideas for course content and pedagogy, reassessing existing course structures and priorities in conventional architectural training. The concern to focus on socially necessary buildings and to find new and meaningful ways of engaging with building users and the wider community- both central NAM themes - illuminated much of the discussion. 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 Appendix to Chairman's Report Subject The topic of the resource Benefits to UK Architects (2 sides) Description An account of the resource 4 . Constitution of the Council The CHAIRMAN: I wish to make a statement which is likely to be quite long on this item. I feel it is my duty to keep you fully informed of the events which have happened in the last few weeks . In June 1985 the Archi tects Directive was issued. HM Government decided to implement that Directive through the DOE and ARCUK. This has to be done by an Order in Council, to come into operation in August 1987 . The DoE expressed reservations on the present system of recognition and that it would be difficult to defend if challenged by the Commission in Brussels or by other member states. A change was suggested in paper 161/86: (a) there should be a joint RIBA/ARCUK board and (b) ARCUK should nominate two members . In 1986, throughout 1986, RIBA was kept fully informed of all these proposals during that time, either by RIBA members on ARCUK Council or through letters and meetings which I conducted with the President and others, or Mr Peter Gibbs— Kennett who was the educational adviser throughout that time. There was nothing which was hidden or concealed from the RIBA on any of these matters . Paper 161/86 received approval at the Board of Architectural Education on 13 November by 35 votes to 2, with 8 abstentions. A similar motion and paper were approved by a large majority at the ARCUK Council on 17 December 1986. No one spoke against those proposals . Included in that large majority were RIBA members, some of whom said they welcomed this proposal . At the RIBA Council meeting on 21 January 1987 1 understand that the list of nominations by the RIBA to ARCUK Council was not ready, that the position of the Chairman of Council and Chairman of the BAE required careful consideration and that the preparation of lists was delegated, at the President's request, to himself and two vice presidents . Mr BRILL: On a point of information, Chairman also the Senior Vice President. The CHAIRMAN: I will correct that and I will repeat, the preparation of the list was delegated to the President himself, the Senior Vice President and two vice presidents . Thank you, Mr Brill. On 28 January 1987 myself and Deny s Hinton and the Registrar were empowered to open discussions with the RIBA on paper 161/86 . A meeting was held at 5 pm on that date and we were told we had forty—five minutes. Mr Melvin, Mr Gosling, Mr Harrison and Peter Gibbs—Kennet were present, myself, Denys Hinton and the Registrar. Mr Melvin, on behalf of the RIBA, asked for further information on two matters : (a) why was change necessary and (b) how were the proposals to work? He also agreed that there should be a further meeting in March. On 29 January 1987 Denys Hinton wrote to Mr Peter Melvin, giving him the information on the two points which he had raised, all of which had been discussed at the BAE or at ARCUK Council and were already known to the RIBA . On 3 February 1987 1 was asked to see the President of the R IBA, Larry Rolland, and Mr Melvin was present. They expressed concern at educational developments at ARCUK. I said that, as Chairman of ARCUK, I must represent all the opinions in ARCUK and not the RIBA only, and that the proposals had received widespread support from RIBA nominees on ARCUK Council. Larry Rolland asked me if I was willin to try to overturn these policies and I said "no" that I was acting for ARCUK and thought that the present proposals for co—operation between the RIBA, ARCUK and the schools were in the best interests of the whole profession and ARCUK 's EEC responsibilities . I thought that there were several RIBA nominees who would not be willing to reverse their opinions within weeks because they had been ordered to do so the RIBA. On 6 February I received a phone call from Mr Rolland, and I will read out the note: "Notes of telephone conversation, 2.30 Friday 6 February from Larry Rolland, President, R IBA, to Bob Adams, Chairman, ARCUK : 5 . " Larr Rolland said that, arising from our meeting on Fe ruary 1987 with Peter Melvin, their concern was not allayed on the developments of architectural education in ARCUK. Having consulted other vice— p resi dents Melvin Jeffels and Hackney they had ecided to reverse all the educa tional deci e ast year, so that the RIBA retained full responsx y or archi tectural education. They wished to have a change at the top of ARCUK and to this end they would not be nominating Denys Hinton or Bob Adams to ARCUK for the next session. This would mean they would not be Chairman of the BAE and of ARCUK Council respectively. They would also be removing others who they felt would not support the RIBA line. "GRA asked about the vice—chairman. Larry Rolland said they would be nominating John Tarn but not Ben Farmer———— c Mr JEFFELS: Mr Chairman, could I get this straight? The CHAIRMAN: Would you like to keep your comments to the end, Mr Jeffels? Mr JEFFELS : You are quoting from a third party . does not seem to me right, whether the substance is right or not, for you to be quoting what someone else has said over the telephone . The CHAIRMAN : This is an extremely important matter, Mr Jeffels, and I have the right, as Chairman, to say what I wish. " Larry Rolland said he thought he should phone me about this before GRA and DH received letters confirming this action. Denys Hinton was on holiday and could not be contacted. He regretted this action but felt that GRA and Denys Hinton would understand." I did not make any reply or comment. The conversation lasted about five minutes . These made immediately after that phone conversation. I signed those notes and sent a copy to the Registrar. On 7 February I received this letter from Larry Rolland: "I am writing to confirm my telephone call today about RIBA nominations for ARCUK Council. You will C, have realised from the meeting which you and Deny s Hinton held here on 28 January with Peter Melvin and David Gosling that the RIBA has serious misgivings about the direction in policy is tending, particularly in the field of a-ucatx-on. "I saw a copy of Denys t letter to Peter Melvin about the meeting and Peter and I had further discussions with you on 3 February. I have since discussed the matter with the Senior Vice President and again with Peter Melvin and Mike Jeffels, the vice president for ARCUK affairs . Our concern does not diminish and this, together with the Senior Vice President's strong view that we have to make a new approach to ARCUK affairs, had led us reluctantly to the conclusion that there should be a change in the chairmanship of both the BAE and ARCUK Council . Your name and that of Denys Hinton is therefore omitted from the list of nominations that has today been sent to ARCUK . "I appreciate that you will be disappointed. At the same time I am sure you and Denys Hinton will have realised the depth of our concern. I tried to telephone Denys to tell him of this decision but heard from his home that he is in Sicily and out of contact. I am sending him a copy of this letter . " A similar letter was sent to Denys Hinton . I phoned all the honorary officers of ARCUK and the BAE and informed them of these deve lopments . I asked the honorary officers, the Registrar and all his staff to make no comment to the press in order not to exacerbate the situation. On 9 February the RIBA issued a news release, which I æwishes to strengthen its negotiating hand with Government and to this end has thoroughly reviewed its representation on ARCUK in the light of Council 's recent decision to resist any further closures of schools of architecture . "The President, Larry Rolland, and the Senior Vice President, Rod Hackney, have been concerned during the past twelve months that the policies being pursued by ARCUK, in particular the increasing involvement in educational matters, are not in the best interests of architecture, the pub lic or future student intake . They agree that in general RIBA representatives on ARCUK should be younqer and in active practice. They believe that the team put forward on behalf of RIBA Council, which includes Gordon Graham, the RIBA Past President serving on Council next session, will provide the profession with a much more effective influence in the difficult times ahead. "The RIBA has been discharging its responsibilities for architectural education since long before the formation of ARCUK and continues to fulfil its obligations in this field. It makes an annual investment in education of over E % million and has a committee structure of respected practitioners and academics supported by an experienced staff. sees A CUK as rimaril a registration bodv and believes that any can only cause confusion and diffusion of effort. "The full list of nominations submitted to the Registrar, ARCUK, on 6 February is attached. "The Senior Vice President added that the position of the Huddersfield School and the North East London Polytechnic School should be reviewed to see if, with the demands for archi tects in the inner cities being on the increase, they can orient themselves to an enabling course in line with Government policy to upgrade the inner city envi ronment. Larry Rolland has suggested that Peter Melvin, Vice President, Education, should meet with the Director of Inner City Aid to see if some joint working relationship could be established along these lines . " On 13 February the IAAS issued a news release, which I will read . "In the current confrontation between the RIBA and ARCUK over the education of architects, the inter— c disciplinary Incorporated Association of Architects and Surveyors (IAAS) has come down firmly on the side of ARCUK. "It was recently reported in the press that ARCUK now plans to exercise its statutory responsibility for archi tects education by appointing an education officer and seeking equal representation on school visiting boards, whereas at present it supplies only one representative to RIBA visiting boards . "This development has not found favour with the R IBA, which announced recently that it sees ARCUK primarily as a registration body and believes that any expansion into other roles will cause confusion and diffusion of effort. "The IAAS, founded sixty—one years ago by the celebrated archi tect, Sir Edwin Lutyens, and commi teed to an inter— disciplinary principle has released the following statement on the education issue: 'The IAAS welcomes the recent public announcement by ARCUK that it intends to exercise its statutory responsibility for the education of architects . 'ARCUK, by statute, was from the outset never intended to act solely as a registration body . Otherwise the Architects Registration Act would have been drafted differently • C, 'As a constituent member of ARCUK, the IAAS has always voiced its regret that ARCUK over the years failed to resist the block partisan lobby which resulted in the true role of ARCUK being almost stymied from birth . 'As an inter—disciplinary body, the IAÄS is uniquely placed to appreciate the value of the composi tion of the ARCUK Council and Boards in that their membership like the IAAS is drawn from a wide breadth of representation. The IAAS believes that this was a deliberate measure with a view to the self interests of single—minded professional bodies being put aside and thus the needs of architecture being considered independently and as a whole . This is surely recognised by the fact that in order to practise as an architect in the UK a person needs only to be registered by ARCUK to which requirement member— ship of a professional body, whilst to be encouraged, is secondary . 'The IAAS applauds ARCUK for its self assertion and in full support the IAAS has changed its nominees and seeks to increase its representation on the ARCUK Council and Boards. 'The IAAS hopes that ARCUK will receive universal encouragement and support in this fresh and independent approach which the IAAS believes can only be for the good of students, educational establishments, archi tects, industry and the public at large and not least the pro fess ional bodies themselves. " Having seen that release, I again reaffirmed my instruction that we will make no comment whatever to the press . 1 informed the various committees of ÄRCUK that is, the Finance and General Purposes Commi ttee, the Board of Archi tectural Education, the Professional Purposes Committee, and all of the honorary officers. They discussed the situation and unanimously expressed their deep concern at the RIBA action and the damage to its reputation. On 18 February, because of constitutional matters raised, myself, Denys Hinton and Kenneth Forder explained to the Clerk to the Privy Council, who agreed with us to see us immediately and that day. The Privy Council is the body advising the Queen on all consti tutional matters and the powers of charter and statutory bodies . The Secretary made three points to us: (1) all members of a statutory body have a duty to implement functions of that body and this duty overrides the interests of their nominating bodies; (2) that a private body should interfere in the functions of a statutory body; (3) nominations made by RIBA were invalid if they had not been made by the RIBA Council. He offered to express these views to the DOE and the RIBA. We unders tand that was done and Patrick Harrison was informed on 24 February 1987 . We were so concerned about this development, that the matter of the nominations was not raised by us but raised by the Clerk to the Privy Council, we therefore decided to consult our solicitors, Ratcliffe's, who agreed that the Privy Council view was correct. I asked Ratcliffe's advice on (a) a draft note which I should send to the honorary officers and (b) future action. The soli— ci tors recommended us to consult counsel. On 2 March at 2.30 pm myself, Denys Hinton and Mr David Andrew of Ratcliffe 's, who is present today, saw Mr Stockdale of counsel, special ising in constitutional matters. Mr Stockdale said that the present RIBA nominations are invalid c and agreed with the Privy Council and our solicitors' view . He gave this advice on future action: (a) knowing that the RIBA nominations are invalid and that there was an intention by the RIBA to interfere in the statutory functions of a ARCUK had no option but to formally notify D the RIBA of ARCUK 's objection; (b) GRA and Denys Hinton cannot accept an invalid nomination from the R IBA, even if this were made; (c) ARCUK must ensure their Council is properly consti tuted, for two reasons: (1) ARCUK, as a statutory body, cannot act or be seen to act illegally; (2) if ARCUK Council is consti tutionally invalid all subsequent decisions of this Council are also invalid. On 9 March we received counsel 's opinion from Mr Stockdale, who agreed with everything which had been said. On 12 March 1987 at 10 .30 am the honorary officers had asked for a meeting with the President of the RIBA to express their view. At the meeting, of which we made a C, record, as far as the RIBA was concerned there was Larry Rolland, Mr Hackney, Alan Groves, Mr Melvin, Mr Jeffels, Mr Patrick Harrison, Chris Lakin and Peter Gibbs—Kennet. For ARCUK there was myself, Denys Hinton, Professor Tarn, Professor Farmer, Mr Nickolls, Mr Penning, Mr Taylor and Mr Gregory. The meeting s tated that it was the unanimous view of the honorary officers to urge that the RIBA should re—nominate GRA and Denys Hinton to ARCUK Council, to avoid further damage to the reputation of the RIBA and the profession. GRA explained the legal advice which he had received. Larry Rolland said the RIBA had received different legal advice. The honorary officers expressed their concern that the RIBA felt able to try to remove from ARCUK anyone who disagreed with RIBA policies. Larry Rolland said that he had agreed to the meeting to hear honorary officers' views but not to respond. Larry Rolland asked GRA to postpone the ARCUK AGM. After that meeting the honorary officers went back to ARCUK and discussed the situation, and they came to the conclusion, having received their solicitors' advice , that they had no option but to formally inform the RIBA c of the non—validity matters. We therefore wrote to the Secretary of the R IBA: "As you will know the RIBA representatives nominated to serve on the ARCUK Council for the year ending March 1988 were appointed not by the RIBA Council but by your President and two Vice Presidents to whom responsibility had been delegated. A formal objection has been loged with me and I am thereby put on notice . "I duly passed this matter to ARCUK solicitors who have said that I have no alternative but to say that my Council cannot accept the forty—two nominations which accompanied Mr Lakin's letter to me dated 6 February 1987 because they are not the nominations of the RIBA Council . "On behalf of ARCUK Council T ran, as Rea..i only accept these nominations when you can certify to me that they were appointed by the Council of the R IBA. It would be helpful if you would let me know, as a matter of urgency, what steps you suggest should be taken in relation to this matter. " On 13 March we received this reply from Patrick Harrison: "I acknow ledge receipt of your letter of 12 March 1987 in which you state that you can only accept the Royal C, Insti tute's nominations to ARCUK Council when I can certify that they were appointed by the Council of the RIBA. "The Royal Insti tute is advised that the exercise of RIBA Council's function to appoint representatives to ARCUK Council was properly carried out under the provisions of the Charter. If you contest this view I must ask for you to arrange for your advisers to meet ours today to satisfy us why the nominations are invalid. " I therefore gave instructions to our solicitors that they should meet the RIBA solicitors, which they did on that day . They met but did not reach any agreement. The solicitors therefore recommended that the two counsel concerned should meet, and those two counsel met yesterday. They again did not agree, but I have a note of their meeting. This is a note of the meeting between Mr B K Levy, counsel for the RIBA, and Mr T M Stockdale, counsel for ARCUK. It was noted " (a) that ARCUK had adj ourned the meeting of its Council until Monday 30 March and (b) that RIBA would be holding a meeting of its Council on Wednesday 25 March . "Mr Levy would recommend to RIBA that the appointment of members of the ARCUK Council under Schedule 1 to c the 1931 Act should be on the agenda and should be dealt with at the RIBA Council meeting . "Mr Stockdale would recommend to ARCUK that if the Council of RIBA made new appointments at its meeting those appointments should be accepted and there would be no question of ARCUK arguing that the appointments made in February were valid after all. "Subject to paragraph 5 below, new appointments made at the RIBA Council meeting would therefore resolve the immediate problem. t' Because of this I therefore wrote to the President of the R IBA: "The 220th Ordinary Meeting of ARCUK Council will be held at 2 pm, Wednesday 18 March 1987, at which I will give a full account of recent events to my Council . "At your request made at our meeting on 12 March 1987 I have postponed the AGM until 2 pm on Monday 30 March 1987, which is the latest day on which it can be held. "This is after the date of the next RIBA Council meeting on 25 March 1987, at which your Council may wish to review the present situation. " I also received a letter from Michael Darke to Larry Rolland, from the Heads of Schools of Architecture, and I will read it. "There was a SCHOSA meeting of Heads of Schools last Friday 6 March , when they discussed at length the recent C, RIBA press notice concerning nominations to the ARCUK Council. The letter which I wrote to you last week on behalf of our Steering Commi ttee was fully supported. Heads do not of course see ARCUK as primarily a registration body, and are well aware of its educational responsibilities under the Registration Acts as well as its statutory role under the EEC Architects Directive . "Heads of Schools are dismayed at your action in omi tting Bob Adams and Denys Hinton from the list of nominations to the ARCUK Council. The following resolution was passed: t SCHOSA urges the RIBA Council to review the list of nominations forwarded to ARCUK and requests that the current chairman of the ARCUK Council, Bob Adams , and the current chairman of the Board of Architectural Education, Denys Hinton, should both be reinstated as nominees of the RIBA on the ARCUK Council for 1987/88. ' " This resolution was agreed unanimously by the twenty— five Heads of Schools, plus three deputies, present, including Heads serving on the RIBA Council and EPDC . " As Chairman, I therefore had to decide what I should do on the matter of the AGM. I did not consider it appropriate that the AGM should be held with a background of legal di sagreement . I must, as Chairman, ensure that proper arrangements are made for the continuity of ARCUK and to protect the position of the Registrar. If the meeting was c held: (a) if forty—two RIBA members were declared invalid, the thirty—two could continue and would be quorate, but this would not be a fair reflection of the profession; (b) if the forty; two RIBA members were accepted, knowing them to be invalid on the advice of our solicitors, then all subsequent actions of ARCUK Council would be invalid. I therefore gave instructions that the AGM would be postponed and you all received a copy of my letter . As Chairman of ARCUK I must (a) act impartially for all interests; (b) carry out policies agreed by Council; (c) keep ARCUK fully informed of all developments . Until today, all honorary officers and all ARCUK staff and I have made no comments to the press in the interests of trying to reach a settlement. That is my statement, and the matter is now open for discussion. Mr JENKS: Chairman, in the light of that important statement, I wonder if the full transcript of that could be made available rather than the minutes? There are so many important events and the timing of those events is so important, I think minutes would not do justice to this . I think it is important to have the full record available to members . The REGISTRAR: The shorthandwriter tells me it will be ready by the end of the week or the beginning of next week . You want a copy put in the hands of all members? (Yes) Mr ALLAN : There is a vast amount of material there and I do not think anybody can be expected to digest all that, straight off the bat. It seems in all of this we have to distinguish between two aspects: conduct and consti tution. The conduct that has been described in the material you have read out to us, in particular of those representing the RIBA, would seem to me to be prima facie evidence of disgraceful conduct in accordance with the Standard of Conduct, and I would like to suggest that this matter is remi tted to the first meeting of the next Council 's PPC, to review whether there is a prima facie case of dis— graceful conduct to answer. Secondly, with regard to the constitution, I would be very grateful if we could spend some time considering these actions against the ARCUK regulations, because I fear that decisions that apparently have been made outside this Council may not be in accordance with the Council's own regulation . In particular I would refer to regulation 18, the relevant portions of which I shall read out. The regulation is titled "General" so I think we can deduce that it has application to all relevant parts of ARCUK business . It reads as follows : "The validity of the proceedings at any meeting of the Council" I will pause where I am omitting irrelevant portions of the regulation — "shall not be affected by.. . the fact (if existing) that by reason of any failure to elect or appoint the members thereof.. . the Council. . . may at the time at which the meeting is held be incomplete. t' I would be glad to have a legal interpretation of that. Mr ANDREWS: I do not think one can quarrel with that because the gentleman has been reading from the regulations . If the suggestion is that there should not have been a postponement of the Annual General Meeting, then I can certainly deal with that. Is that the gravamen of what you are saying? Mr ALLAN: We could start with that, yes . Mr ANDREWS : The starting point is regulation 2 on page 1, and I will read it: "The Annual Meeting of the Council shall be held in the month of March in every year and shall follow the Ordinary Meeting of the Council held in the same month • t' The present proposal is that it should be held on 30 March . c That will not be a breach of the regulations . I think that it is self—evident from what the Chairman has said in his statement that there was a possible constitutional crisis in the offing, and that it therefore made sense to avert that crisis to make a postponement of the Annual Meeting . There is nothing unusual or impractical about pos tponing a meeting, certainly against that sort of background. A valid notice of adjournment was given and the meeting is now due to take place, as you have heard, on 30 March . That, I would have thought, made very good sense for all conce rned . Mr ALLAN : I think I should preface anything that I and any of my colleagues on the unattached side might wish to say by saying that our contribution in this whole episode will be, and I hope continue to be, directed towards the best interests of ARCUK. I would like to stress that very strongly . It seems to me the best interests of ARCUK in this case are likely to be served by our being extremely careful if, at the request of one person who is not even a member of this Council, Council meetings are going to be pos tponed C, without prior consultation with the rest of the Council and in disregard of the regulation which I previously read out, which provides 8kact1y the circumstances which we now find ourselves in, which is that this Council can proceed and in fact the validity of the proceedings of the Council will not be affected if failure to elect or appoint members thereof is the case at the time the meeting is held. The Annual General Meeting is convened for this afternoon. I have not heard a reason why that regulation can be dispensed with. At the Annual General Meeting this Council has to achieve five things . Those things are specified in regulation 8 and they are as follows: (1) it shall elect a chairman; (2) it shall elect a vice—chairman; (3) it shall appoint the Board of Archi tectural Education; (4) it shall appoint the Admissions Commi ttee and (5) it shall appoint the Discipline Commi ttee . I would like to know why it is not possible for the Annual General Meeting convened for this afternoon to do those five things . c The CHAIRMAN: I have taken advice on this matter, but it is my decision alone. I have to protect the position of the Registrar and the honorary officers and it is my decision that it is prudent, and it would not be proper to proceed with the Annual General Meeting this afternoon when there is such an obvious imbalance in the representation of the profession. Mr GORDON : In that case, Chai rman, perhaps you could tell us on what you base your authority to make that decision? The CHAIRMAN: It says in the regulation: "The Chairman or the Vice—Chairman of the Council or not less than ten members of the Council jointly may by written request to the Clerk require him to convene a Special meeting.. . " I am also empowered to act on behalf of Council in between meetings of the Council and to act as I should think fit. Mr GORDON: And have you convened a special meeting? The CHAIRMAN: No. Mr GORDON: I am at a loss to know from where you derive the power to postpone a meeting which had already been properly arranged and intimated to members . The CHAIRMAN: I have consulted our solicitor on this point and I am told I am legally in order in so doing. That is a legal matter. Whether it is proper is a matter for my judgment. Mr GORDON: You have liberally given us the benefit of Council's advice earlier on this afternoon, which I think was a very proper thing for you to do. Perhaps you could quote to us the advice you received on this matter. Mr ANDREWS : I think it is a short point; it is not unusual for meetings to be adjourned and the Chairman has it in his right to adjourn this meeting, which is what he has done . Mr GORDON: I have never been to a meeting which was adjourned before it began. Mr ANDREWS: I do not think it has begun; it is on 30 March . The CHAIRMAN: I postponed the meeting; I did not adjourn it. Mr GORDON: In that case the solicitor is answering a different question. He answered that it was perfectly in order to adjourn the meeting . I am asking for the Council to be given the benefit of the legal advice which spells c out your authority, without consulting Council, to change the date of a meeting which you had already intimated to all the members . Mr ANDREWS: The Chairman is not duty—bound to consult the Council before he fixed the meeting in the first place . D Mr GORDON: That is not my point. Having fixed it, where is his authority for postponing it? Mr ANDREWS: Where is the authority that says he cannot postpone it? Mr GORDON: I am putting to you, that since there is no specific authority, to make a decision without that authority is ultra vires. Mr ANDREWS: The timing of the meeting in my view is within the Chairman's discretion and he has exercised that discretion. Mr GEAL: I think there are limits to that discretion. If I could quote the regulations, regulation 2, which has already been referred to: "The Annual Meeting of the Council shall be held in the month of March in every year and shall follow the Ordinary Meeting of the Council held in the same month . " I think special attention should be paid to the lack of punctuation in that, relating to the " shall follow" , wi th no reference to "shall follow within the month" but held in the same month . It is not a minor point when you refer to the Principal Act, Schedule 1, clause 6: " .. . every member of Council shall hold office until the expiration of one year from the date of his appointment or election. Shortly, at the end of today, I will have no office. 1 then see myself having an interregnum until the next Annual General Meeting, and everyone else having an interregnum until the convening of that meeting. The CHAIRMAN: I am advised that that is not a correct interpretation of the statute or the regulations . Mr ANDREWS: No, I think that the absence of punctuation is not peculiar to that particular regulation. If you look at the regulations as a whole punctuation is not found generally throughout them . It is again a matter of interpretation. I do not necessarily say my view is bound to be the correct one. It would have been a proper course had there been time for the Chairman to instruct me to make application to the c court for a declaration on guidance, but there simply was not time to do that. The Chairman does not have to consult on the timing of the meeting. Therefore it must follow that he can postpone it. "Shall follow. .. " , the words you are probably relying on, it does not say "shall immediately follow" and I would say " shall follow" means precisely what it says, ie, shall not precede . Mr GEAL: It would be a constitutional absurdity to proceed with members that were not constituted. My real point is on clause 6 . What is the Council and who are the members of Council as of today, before the next Annual General Meeting? There are none, because they all cease according to clause 6, until the expiration. The CHAIRBIAN: I have received advice on this and I am told that there is no difficulty whatever on this point. Mr BROAD: My point concerns the twelve months. It says "one year . " Had the original date for the AGM been two weeks ago and been cancelled, which was within two weeks of the twelve months from which we had all been appointed, then you might be able to postpone it for two weeks, but seeing that the year expires today — because it always follows straight afterwards and there has never been a problem —— from this afternoon onwards it is not twelve months and two weeks, it is twelve months . This is the saddest day for ARCUK that I have ever seen and for the continuation of ARCUK we must carry on and what concerns me is these two weeks. How does ARCUK survive over the next two weeks, if we all cease tonight? The REGISTRAR: This is not a terribly difficult point. We always choose a Wednesday in March. It is not always twelve months from the last Wednesday. On some notorious occasions we have taken deliberate steps to avoid a particular Wednesday, because something else was on. Normally it is accepted from a Wednesday in March to a Wednesday in March . Mr ANDREWS: There is a precedent for this. c Professor MARKUS: I would suggest a proposition which, at first sight, may seem somewhat ludicrous, but I think it will get us round a number of the problems we have been discussing. That is, that we should hold the meeting as arranged today, following this meeting. Those who are valid members of the Council should proceed to the five duties we have heard to be carried out, but all the people nominated under those five should resign immediately upon the calling of the first proper meeting of this Council, so that Council can take the matters into its own hands and appoint whoever it wishes, in the normal way. Whether that meeting is 30 March or any other date Council chooses to have does not matter. It means cons titutionally we have a properly surviving Council which has been properly constituted in the interim. The CHAIRMAN: 1 looked into this point. I have already given my reasons as to why I do not think it proper or seemly that that should happen. We would for that period have a grossly dis torted ARCUK Council. It says in the regulations that the election of Chairman C, and the other five members mentioned can only be elected at the Annual General Meeting, and it is therefore outside the powers of a subsequent meeting of ARCUK, the Ordinary Meeting, to re—elect those officers, except by a casual vacancy . There is no guarantee that those officers would resign . It would seem an unreasonable and unseemly procedure for me to get ARCUK into, if I agreed to this request. Dr WOOLLEY : I think that there are considerable diffi— culties if we t ry to interpret the regulations. I would like to speak directly to some of the points . I am really shocked at some of what you have just told us about. It is very important that the concern of people like myself, and possibly others in Council, is noted, because clearly a constituent body of ARCUK has acted in a way which is reprehensible, or has attempted to do so, and that really raises a number of very serious issues about ARCUK. I would like to congratulate you on the exemplary way in which you have responded to that threat and that crisis . (cries of "hear", "hear" ) I find myself in some difficulty, therefore, at having to c take issue on one question, which is whether it is proper for you to have pos tponed the meeting, because it seems to me that is what it comes down to. As you have said, it is a decision you have taken. There are a number of arguments which you have advanced for that to avoid a constitutional crisis, to ensure a proper balance of representation on the Council of the profession, to avoid it being grossly distorted. I can quite see those arguments, but it seems to me that there are other issues you perhaps ought to have taken into account. That is, that a particular constituent body has forced this crisis by its actions on ARCUK, and that you are to some extent, I would suggest, falling over backwards to accommodate those mistakes which that particular body seems to have made . I think you should also have considered the considerable inconvenience that this is putting other members of Council to. This is a gut feeling really — why should I be incon— venienced because of the misbehaviour of one of the constituent bodies? I feel very s trongly about that. I think it is quite improper. It seems to me that if it was necessary for that particular constituent body to have a meeting of its Council C, before putting forward the correct nominations then that body should have been inconvenienced to do that, not this Council. Why should I have to come back here in two weeks t time, on a day when I already have extremely important commitments that are extremely di fficult to change? Why should I do that to accommodate a particular constituent organisation, which has quite clearly abused its role? It seems to me on that basis there is a very strong argument for going ahead with the Annual General Meeting today because, under the terms of the regulations, such a meeting would be properly constituted and I do not give a hoot for whether or not it is fully representative of the profession. I believe that that consti tuent body has disqualified itself from representing this profession by the way in which it has behaved over this matter. I would have thought that you would feel just as strongly about it. I feel there is a very strong argument on moral grounds alone, never mind all the ins and outs of the regulations, that the Annual General Meeting should continue today and we should not be inconvenienced and put out to accommodate this c other body by holding the meeting on some future date, to suit its purposes . I appreciate the time scale was very tight, but I think there are very strong arguments to be said for that, and I think I and my unattached colleagues feel very strongly that the AGM should go ahead as planned today . The CHAIRMAN: You appreciate that I have not used any adjectives in my statement. Although you may use adjectives I should like to dissociate myself from those adjectives . Mr JEFFELS: That is a point I would like to make . The CHAIRBIAN: You appreciate that I have had a weekend of very considerable concern as to what to do . I had to take a number of considerations in, some of which certainly were YOurs . I appreciate that a number of people are being inconvenienced, but the most important thing is that ARCUK must continue and be seen to be properly constituted body which maintains the respect of all those who are concerned with it all the consti tuent bodies, Government and the public at large. I had a very difficult decision and I C, appreciate the comments which you have made, but I felt I had to weigh those comments against the other considerations which I have already made this afternoon . Mr EASTHAM: I have a lot of sympathy with what has been said, but I do not think we will benefit by repeating similar things. It is an unsatisfactory position and I am sure the RIBA will say maybe it is none of their making; others will say it is. But I would like to move on to other business . I have travel led a long way and it seems will have, like many, to travel a long way again. I would like to propose that we note your decision, with regret. Mr ASTINS: 1 second that. Mr GORDON: I feel that is adding insult to injury. This is an extraordinarily important matter, which it is proposed to brush under the carpet without adequate discussion. I hope there is support for continuing discussion until a conclusion has become clear . c Mr GEAL: Who will bear the cost of the additional Council meeting? The CHAIRMAN: ARCUK . Mr ALLAN: What is that cost? The CHAIRMAN: I do not know. Probably in the order of E2000 . Mr ALLAN: Is that more or less than the average amount given as a student grant by ARCUK? Mr JEFFELS: Chairman, on a point of order———— The CHAIRMAN: Can you answer that question, Mr Gregory? Mr GREGORY: That is about the maximum we would give. Mr ALLAN: About the maximum of a student grant? Mr GREGORY: For a typical provincial student. Mr JEFFELS: On a point of order a motion has been put and seconded that we move on to the next business. Surely that should now be put to the Council. The CHAIRMAN: I appreciate that, Mr Jeffels . It is an important matter and I want everyone to have the opportunity of saying what they wish on the matter. Mr JENKS: I would like to reverse the thing in a way and seek an assurance from the Chair. If a precedent is being set to pos tpone meetings in this way, in accordance with the wishes of any constitutional body, I notice that there are four constitutional bodies that have not put forward recommendations to this Council could any of these, for instance the Secretary of State for Scotland, the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, the R ICS or the Society of Engineers, expect the same treatment, or the unattached, if we were irregular in our nominations to this Council? Could c we expect similar treatment to that being allowed to the R IBA? For example, if the Secretary of State for Scotland now comes alone and says "we are sorry about our nomination. We made a bit of a mistake. It was irregular, illegal. We would like to postpone this meeting for another time so that we can ensure that we are properly represented"? At the moment the Council will not be properly represented because there are four consti tutional bodies missing from that Council. Can we have that assurance? The CHAIRMAN: I do not think I can give you that assurance. This is a hypothetical question and it must be left to the judgment of whoever is there at the time as to c what he should do about that circumstances . I do not think I should say anything which could constitute a precedent in this matter . Professor Denys HINTON: The parallel which Dr Jenks D has raised is not a valid one. It is true that the RIBA made a request about this, but the real reason the Chairman has had to make this decision is that it would not have been possible to have cons tituted this Council at a General Meeting because it was not resolved what was the legality of the nominations . In that situation I would have to say to you, would you all have preferred to meet in this room and to have argued about the legality of whether the meeting could proceed? It would have had to have been closed if it had been called in the first place . Regulations, moral principles and other things apart, the practical aspect is that that meeting could never effectively have taken place . Mr ALLAN: We have been told by the legal adviser that those nominations were not legal . Does this Council take its own legal advice or the legal advice given to it second—hand by another body? Mr ANDREWS: The advice we gave, that was confirmed by the Registrar, the Privy Council and by the barrister that we instructed, was challenged by the R IBA. That being so, it was thought that a compromise was the best way forward and that is the compromise which has been spelled out in the note from which you quoted. The CHAIRMAN: Are there any other comments before I put the motion? Mr CRITCHLOW; I tend to sympathise with Dr Woolley in that it is regrettable that the meeting has had to be put off at great expense, but, likewise, a second notice has been send out so that anybody who wished to attend the AGM today might not have done so as a result of that second notice . So we have little alternative but to agree with the regrettable decision which has had to be made in postponing the Annual General Meeting. Mr BROAD: If this meeting does not go ahead today and we are relying on a postponed meeting in two weeks' time, c before which we are hoping that one of the constituent bodies of this Council will hold a proper meeting and re—consider their previous nominations and come forward to another meeting, we are therefore hoping to have the same open debates next year that we have had in the past. It has taken a long time, inch by inch, to have this forum in this chamber used for open debate, where points can be put forward and debated and people take votes at the end. Decisions taken last year were more or less unanimous . It is hard to see how we are going to have forty—two new nominees who are to come in here, according to the press statements that I have read, and carry out policy as told to them by somebody not in this Council Chamber. If the point of pos tponing is purely to enact this, it seems to me we are doing this body a disservice. Added to that, there are still technical, legal complications in doing so and I believe one of those is that this body has decided and it is in our minutes — that the nominations have to be in in advance of an Annual General Meeting by at least three weeks. We are hoping to change the nominations , we believe, and we are having a meeting in two weeks . C, The unattached have had it rammed down their throats that from the time they have their elections there is a very tight schedule to meet to come forward with nominations . If they ask for a day longer it is refused by this body . Are we sticking to three weeks for nominations? Is there a chance to change nominations or are we seeing forty—two people coming here in two weeks' time who will have this as a registration body . If that is what we are postponing it for, I think we do ourselves a great disservice . The CHAIRMAN: There are two kinds of nominations. One is any constituent body, and others nominated under the schedule of the Act, have a right to nominate; that is not subject to any time. They can nominate whom they wish, when they wish. The one you are talking about is nominations to boards and commi ttees . The REGISTRAR: For free election. It is only the free election which has a time limit. Mr BROAD: So those names will not change . The CHAIRMAN: we do not know. c The REGISTRAR: Mr Broad is quite right in saying that technically, I suppose, if the Council follows its previous rulings . The CHAIRMAN: I defer to your advice on this. Time is getting on. We have a motion before us. Mr GROVES: Chairman, you have had a motion some time. You have given people plenty of time. Would you please put the motion? Mr GORDON: On a point of order, Chairman the response which was just given was not clear to me and, I do not think, to a number of other people in the room. I am particularly aware in my own case, I am asked by my constituent body to confirm that I am prepared to act on ARCUK from early in January . I am slightly surprised, with over twenty—five———— Mr GROVES: Chairman, this is not a point of order . Mr GORDON: that another constituent body, presumably subject to the same law, is only able to give five days' notice. The CHAIRMAN: Your point is noted. Are there any more comments ? Mr ALLAN: I do not think we have had a satisfactory answer to Mr Broad's point and I would like to know from the Registrar what the period is laid down in ARCUK's procedures whereby nominations for free election have to be submitted to the Registrar, by whatever time before the meeting concerned, and whether those procedures can be upheld in terms of the timetable of this meeting which is being suggested for the 30th or not. The REGISTRAR: The answer is---- Mr BRILL: There is another comment———— Mr ALLAN: Could I have the answer to my question? Mr BRILL: It is an added one which may help clarify matters. We are talking about nominations for free elections . I have no information that those nominations by individuals and not by consti tuent bodies, are actually being challenged by the Chairman or any legal entity within this Council. The CHAIRMAN: I am sorry. This was considered but the nominations for the free elections can only be made by members of the Council. If those members of the Council are invalid then their nominations are invalid too. c The REGISTRAR: What we have normally stated is that we should have fourteen days notice of free election candidatures , solely in order that we can get out an aide memoire on each one. The simplest answer would be to suspend that require— ment for the Annual Meeting to be held on the 30th, so that people can nominate up to the moment of the meeting. Mr ALLAN: So that in addition to all the other incon— veniences we are being asked to tolerate we are also being asked to suspend a chapter of ARCUK 's normal procedures in order to accommodate this incredible faux pas — that is the most charitable description of it —- by the RIBA. 1 think it is absolutely astounding and utterly disgraceful. The CHAIRMAN: 1 now put the motion. Mr ALLAN: Could you repeat the wording please? The REGISTRAR: What I have is "note the decision with regret. Mr EASTHAM: "That we note the decision to postpone the Annual Meeting with regret . " Mr ALLAN: I would like to make an amendment to that, to substitute the word " accept" for the word "note . " It is whether we accept the decision. C, Mr EASTHAM: I accept that amendment. Mr ASTINS: Agreed. Mr CONNOLLY: I thought the motion was " to proceed to other business . " The CHAIRMAN: 1 thought 1 was right. I now have this motion by Mr Eastham "that we accept this decision with regret." Mr METCALFE: "And proceed to other business . " The CHAIRMAN: "We accept this decision with regret and proceed to other business" if you so wish. Is that all right, Mr Eastham? Mr EASTHAM: 1 agree. Mr ASTINS: 1 agree. Mr WATERHOUSE; May I move an amendment to delete the words "with regret"? Mr METCALFE: 1 second that. The CHAIRMAN: We now have an amendment to this motion, to delete "with regret" . The amendment was put and on a show of hands was carried with 28 voting for and 9 against. The motion as amended was put and on a show of hands was carried with 30 voting for and 13 against. 5 . Section 7 of the Principal Act (in the absence of the press) The CHAIRMAN: This is a discipline matter in respect of Steven Lawrence Hole . The REGISTRAR: Are there only members of the existing Council here? The CHAIRMAN: There are two who are new. Is there any objection to their remaining at this Council for this purpose, although they must not vote? (no objection was raised) Mr NICKOLLS: The report of the Discipline Commi ttee in the matter of Mr S L Hole is Annex A on the papers before you and you will note the recommendation of the Discipline Committee on page 4 of that annex. It is my proposal to move the re levant motion in respect of this, after which any matters can be raised from the floor if members of Council so desire. I shall therefore read the resolution as follows: "That the Discipline Committee having reported to the Council that Steven Lawrence Hole has been found guilty of conduct disgraceful to him in his capaci ty as an architect, this Council directs the Registrar (1) to send him a copy of the Discipline Committee report; (2) to inform him that after grave consideration the Council has decided not to remove his name from the Register but that nevertheless the Council considers that his conduct in the matter merits the severest censure and reproof; (3) to arrange for the publication of the Discipline Committee's findings and the Council 's decision in respect thereof in the architectural press 27 . I would hope, by virtue of the Annual General Meeting being postponed, that those in the Institute might take this opportunity of reconsidering their decision and of hope ful Iy nominating you again and Professor Hinton as their represent— atives,so that we can look forward to perhaps you, sir, carrying on for what is normally two years 1 do not think I can remember an occasion when a chairman has only served one . You, sir, have been in my view, and I am sure in the opinion of everyone who is here, a very able, faithful, competent chairman, and I am only sorry that this may be the last occasion you are sitting there . If it is, I would c like to thank you, and of course Professor Hinton, most deeply for all you have done for the Council and I hope others here will join me in making this "thank you" statement. The vote of thanks was carried with acclaim. The CHAIRMAN: Thank you everyone for that. This is somewhat ernbarrassing, as you will gather. Is there any other business? Mr ALLAN: I would also like to indulge the Council 's time with a brief, in my case, valedictory statement as this will be my last Council meeting for at least the foreseeable future to say I would like to add my endorsement to everything John Smith has said and that, in the ten years I have been an ARCUK councillor, it seems to me some extremely important and valuable progress has been made . I think it must be clear to a number of people that the more progress that is made in ARCUK in terms of its emancipation and reform the more it may be subject to the sort of, I would say, improper interference that may have happened in the recent weeks . I feel I can speak for all C, my colleagues on the unattached side in saying that in the last two chairmen we have found stout allies of the cause of fairness and impartiality in the chair; that is both yourself, Bob, and Denys Hinton. We would very much hope that that tradi tion even if not in the person of yourself but certainly that tradition would be consolidated and deve loped. In my own case it will take a little while to reflect on today's events . I do not think I can really 60 . come to and I daresay a number of other people will not be able to come to — proper conclusions until they have seen the verbatim report of your statement, which I think was a very brave one. In the meantime, however, I think people will inevitably draw conclus ions from what has happened and I would say it would be very sad indeed if anybody in certain quarters drew the conclusion from what has happened that, under pressure, ARCUK is capable of being intimidated, because I do not think it can and I do not think it should be. I can say that and I can leave after ten years of being on ARCUK, but it seems to me that that fact has to be demonstrated by the incoming Council next year and by all c subsequent Councils, that ARCUK is its own master and must act accordingly in accordance with its consti tution and its procedures . All I can say is I wish my successors well in that and if it appears to me that there may be any backsliding from that pattern of behaviour, I may be back ! (Applause) The CHAIRMAN: First of all I would very much like to thank ARCUK staff for all the work they have done this year . It has been a very heavy year indeed. It has imposed upon them the extra work of the Order in Council. I would thank the Registrar and his staff for all the work they have done . I would also like to thank the honorary officers, who again have had a difficult time this year. They have not only been extremely loyal and carried out the wishes of this Council but they have also been chairmen of their various committees and have done a great deal of work . I would also like to thank all the members of committees who have served both here, and those who are not here; I think they have added much to the quality of the work of this Council. I would thank all the existing Council members for what they C, have done and the manner in which they have conducted these debates some of which could have got a bit more heated than they have . I appreciate the discretion and moderation that has been used. I would finally thank the retiring members for all they have done . I would thank Mr Astins, Mr Barnes, Miss Bedington, who has been here since 1969, Professor Hinton, Mr Lewis, Professor Macleod, Mr Weardon, Mr Wilkinson and 61. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource ARCUK Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived John Allan Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource Undated https://nam.maydayrooms.org/files/original/4f44d6c8f639a5b5732aed0039f61420.pdf 2bd92f381891de8ed2e572aa5f30313f 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 Alternative Practice Description An account of the resource This investigated other forms of organisation of architects' offices based around the concept of cooperative working and shared equity. Several members went on to establish their own practices adopting such models. A pre-eminent example was Support Community Building Design, which emerged from a small group of graduates from the Architectural Association which went on to create a cooperative practice focused on potential client groups in society which traditionally were not the beneficiaries of the architectural profession which, we would have said, was essentially the handmaiden of capital. These groups eventually included local authority tenants, women's groups including refuges, ‘black’ i.e. racially self-defined groups. 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 Progress Report Subject The topic of the resource Report prepared for the 2nd NAM Congress, Blackpool 11pp Description An account of the resource NAM � PRrvnTC WORKING CROUP The Net,' Architecture movement, North London Group November 1076 PROGRESS REPORT Prepared for the New Architecture movement Conference, 81 ackpool , November 26-28, 1976. 9 ADDENOUtm: Draft Propo'el for a more Representative, Lay—Control I ed ARCUK 10 Part One OUR POINT Research, analY9i9, debate and nctfnn towards moro democratic, effective end prcountahle oractire of architpcturp hag hardly hpqun. It i q our feel inn it 'dill not occur outside the context of gneci f f c campafnnq that en he lat'nrhod hy in the very near future. Such cemneinng nenerAte nuhlfcity and create the atmosnhere of credibility and action that attract to us the hum*n and material resources needed to carry out the task and will remove it from tho realm of idle groculation. We in the "Private Practice working Croup" have begun to enpronch our subject from that stand— noint. The privpte sector account9 for over half of the rrof999ion, and uri9hino won't make it on moreover, itå influence ig even greater than f ts "numerical 'trenotht' miQht sugpegt. Private practice hrs, by and large, orovided the model -——excess hierarchy and bureaucracy, elitism, over—central— i sat ion, nrofit-oriented accountino, lack of accountability, etc. ———for nuh— lic nrortire. Its influence on the structure of the orofeggion---its ethos, code- 2nd regulation-, control of nrofesgional even more nrofound, 99 is its influence unon architectural education. We are hopeful, therefore, that our analysis and proposals may be, at least in broad outline, relevant as well to the public practice of architecture. 'L'e do not believe, then, that the solution to the problems of orivate prac— t ice, from the point of viet,f either of the frustrated, exoloited and alien— *ted workers Within it or of the communities that suffer from its products, i 9 ten! ace it nublic practice we now know it. Vhile progressive chenoe in nublic practice may he both necessary end nosgible, we don't gee why chanoeg in private practice cannot go on concurrently. we believe that the shortest and suregt route from private practice as it now ig to a oract ice of •rchitecture Which is democratically—structured and directly account— able to the communitv i 9 the direct one. t.'e ere by now all familiar with the "crisis in architecture" end how it effects both the ','orkere in the orofe99ion and the communities who must use its nroducts. Without ignoring the underlying nolitical and economic frame— work of Which architecture is merely a minor part, we believe that the ta'av -echitecttJte is not,' rrpctised is prime cause of the trouble. for the •rchitecturel worker, private practice today means: lack of joh 90curitv end declininq real income; soeed-un and cuttinn of cornerr; excesqive hierarchy end bureaucracv; arbitrary and excessive division of labour; aliena- t ion of the nrchitoct at the drawino board from t" client, the uner and the product; count-or-productive competition betw on workers nnd division into etatug groups; excessive pay differentiale; undemocretic dociefon-makino structures; manaoement secrecy; etc. From tho noint of view of the community, the lack of accountehility 19 the key problem. Thi' 19 not unrelated to the effect9 of the profit orientation of nrivate practice: a lack of concern for the community which heg reached ncnndaloug proportione in cages like Centropoint, Summerland, end Poulson: end the generally poor quality of work regultinq from an inability effectively to mobilige the abilitieg end committment of architectural workers, an ineffective structure of responsibility, and the alienation of tho architectural worker from the product end the ugor. Part Two or ARCHITECTURAL PRACTICE N.D. m. solution to the "cri9i9 in architecture" should be b*99d on the twin cornerstone's of workers' control (or "self-menanqment t') of architec tural practice end evqtem of direct eccountabflity to the local community which uses what i 9 produced. While we ought to make very clear our goals and criteria for developing a new model of architectural practice, thig model should not be too "utopian" or completely dooendent upon a prior totransformation of the political, economic and social structure of soci ety. We must, however, make clear What changes are needed in the existing context in Which architecture is practiced in order for any siqnificant prooress to be mede. We believe these changes include: 1. effective traHe union orqanigetion of architectural and allied workerq, 7. noeitive 9teoq towards restructurino of the entire industrv into 9 decentralisgH public degion (and eventually construction) service, and 3. orogresg towards fully-public control over the allocation of resources and investment. The criteria for develooino a new model of architectural practice follow from our analysis of the present problem. While these remain to he developed in detail, we can at least say that oractice ought to be democratic rather then puthoritaripn, itarian rather than elitist, decentrali99H rather than hier?rchicel , connerative rather comoefitive, efficient rather than I,tastpful, uqe-oriented rather than orofit-orientod, productive rather than bureucratic, sharino of various tasks reolacinp esceesively narrow d' vision lahour, etc. 'dork inc from such criteria, a credible model ran he develooed. '"e 999Ume it would call for basically small (but interdeoendent), locally—based gena non-profit basis. This need not rule or moro specialiged practiceq, perhapg non—imperialiqt export, Btr. '"e believe n model , the fol lowinn nreag urnent)y need 99,19tgm engurinn prcountahflftv to the user communftv, and method of oatronane (allocation of commissions) and definition of "congti tuency, size decision-makinq structure S. "manpower" allocation and enterinr end leavinp of staff, in relation both to functioninq of practice and individual career structure, 6. approach to the *i location of managerial, techriC91, clerical and menial tasks, 7 "scone" of the practice, includino it9 relation to related disciolines and to the construction 9ide of the industry, "inteqrity" of tho practice: its relation to other practices, degree and tyneg of specialisation. ond trance, relations nancing, legal structure, educational role, and IS. research role. "'e are convinced that a thorough study of the above-mentioned aspects, as well as a detailed evaluation of the isolated attempts Which have been made to set up "model" nractices, u'ill make very clear the need for general public design (and maybe construction) service as 9 context outside of which significant and extensive reform of orivate practice alono the 1 ineq we pro— oose be inconceivable. We are not yet in a position to oropoge What such a public design service (as a framework for small, locally-based col— lective rrpcticeg) WOU1d be. rts relation to (l)construction, planning end development control, (3) building control, (a) orofessional education, (S) research and development, (f) settino of "standards," (7) liability and insurance, (8) trade union organisation, and (9) nrofessional institutions •11 need to be carefully congidered. need to eddreqs as well thn cuegtionq of decent r?) i sat ion, control, r•eqources el location, h'ork location, end t s e relation in hoth the short and Iono term of guch a ouhlic ervice the orivate sector (i.e. , both nrivate oracticeq 2nd nrivate client'). thorouoh critical evaluation of National Health Service exrerience over the 1 Ast thirty years would be useful ouide In develooinq our nroposels. 0 Sit of research into the various architectural (and construction) sarvf cog are provided in some socialist countring %'0U1d orobably 9180 provtdo some "90fu1 19990n9. The next 9teo uyould be to outline 0099ib1e roads towards reali9inq tho new model .of architectural practice. We would obviously have to consider not only private practice 99 tho 9tartinq point but local authority and other oublic orectice 99 well. 'de should he oriented towardg both 9hort-term and lonq-term strateoieg. Any campeiong N. A.m. mipht launch or guooort renardfnn unioni92tion, the use of public patronage, ARCUK and then code of conduct" should take such 9trateqy into account. Some people in N. A.m. have urged that providing guidelines for architects wighino to convert a private practice into a gel f-managed "co-op" (or estab ligh a new practice along those lines) within the present totally capital int context should be orioritv of the "private practice workino oroup." While we don't u'Rnt to di9couraqe such pioneerinp efforts from beino made and ree thet there ig much to be gained by 9tudyino, evaluating and publici9ing their exoerience, we do feel that the main road to worker—controlled, account— able oracticeg lieg not through these "one-off" efforts but through the de velormpnt of ta'orkere' power (thus, unionisation), 9 public design service as a fr9mework, and far—reaching political changes. Dart Three ACTION camPAIGNS WHICH N.A.m. couto LAUNCH There ere three camnaions which we believe N. A.m. should launch as soon nossihle for concrete action in support of these proposals: trade union orqanisation of all architectural and allied workers, especi— 311 y in the almost totally unorqanised private sector, reform of the Architects Registration Acts (and ARCUK) in several key ways, end an attack uoon oublic patronaoe of practices which do not meet our critria. 0t the game time we should continue research, education end publ icity work on the subject of architectural oractice. As part of this, 99 well as in suoport of the three above-mentioned campaigns, we ask for your assistance in oromotino the "Interior Perspective" project Which is being launched at this conference. '-de believe also thet as part of its campaiqn for pccountabilitv, N. n. m. should try to develoo in collaboration with community action groups, tenants associations, trades councils, etc. joint campaion for tenant-control of housinm The housing aqsociation front may be particularly amenable to pro— �89 thi9 has been on area of frequent legislative concern and thn precpdent of tnnant-controllod housinq aggociationg already exists. 09 thig cnmpaiqn would depl nrimarily ta'ith the broader problem of accountability, the "private practice working group" hag not taken it on but hag concentrated its efforts on proposals for it9 three main campaigns. It should be noted, however, that housinq association, When doing its own architectural work "in house," provides an exist inq non-profit leoal form of orcani9ation which can be taken 99 en alternative to partngrships, companies, and local authorities. That scope for progrogs oxiot9 here hae been demonstrated by the Solon Housing Association, a comparatively democratic architectural or*ctice now being combined with tenant-controlled management. A campaign could at some point be launched to expand this little crack in the capitnl19t structure of the private sector, through publicity, lobbyinq for reform of housino association legislation and oregsure on thn government to channel it9 financial guroort, essential to housinp eggociations, into tenant-run hougino 9990ciation9 emnloyinq worker-controlled in-hougo or consultant architectural practices. In any event, ell democratically—organised, popularbased client qrouos are much more likely to patronise worker-run practices then ere authoritarian "establishment" clients and are, thug, deserving of our support and encouragement. 1. Ornanisation of Architectural and Allied Workers The "Private Prectire Workinrp Groun" is convinced that the democrati9Ation of prartice, as well thn development of accountability to users, can only occur through the act inns of architectural workers, who make uo nearly 904 of the "profession. Real control will never, to any significant extent, be handed over voluntarily by the hogseg. 'dorkerg' control requires workers' power, and Dower comes through solidaritv. Solidarity requires organigation. In our context, that can only mean trade unionism. Pt the oregent time, the 20,000 architectural workerq in the private sector ere almost comoletely unorganised. "Je get the highest priority, therefore, on the oreanisetion o' unorpanised architecture) ',torkers into qtrnnn, democr•tic 3nd hroed-mindod t rede union and the initiation thrownh that medium of milit9nt "shoo-floor" nnd "industry level" action for t,torkerg t control. This may nrovp to be a necessary orereouisite to effectively pur— suing the other two campeigns we ere oroposinr,. The subject of organisation has been dealt with in the Unionisation Working Croup's draft reoort orepared for this conference. 2. Reform of the Architects Reqi9tration Acts While there 19 a tendency to goe the Architects Reqi8tration Actg ag reac— tionary elitist and protectionist legislation, or at best meroly irrelevant, is our opinion that It 19 a fertile field for immediate N. A.m. action. The Architects Registration Acts established, however ineffectively, the principle of popular, lay control over the entire profession (even if it is by way of a pretty imperfect parliamentary system). Thi B principle could be exploited now in the context of great public disillusionment with the performance of the profession, following Centrepoint, Summerland, Poulgon and general dissatisfaction with the environment created (or destroyed) in the last 25 years. A campaign to reform the Architects Registration Acts, which form an interface between the public and the profession, will provide 09 99 well with an opportunity to spread our megsaoe and build solid base beyond the confines of the orofB9Bion itgelf and will coincide with effortq beinr; made for 1 ay control and accountability in other professions. The nrchitpctg Reti9tration Actg of 1931 and 193B restrict the use of the title, "architect," to those whose name rppears on the Register of Architerfs mefnfained hy the nrchitectg Reoiqtration Council of the United Kingdom (n o.C'-'V) %'hich established by the act. Entry to the Register ig now solely by academic exemination under the control of PRCUK'9 Education and Admissions committees. The Acts, unfortunately, rather than creatinn a "consumers' wetch— dog," put control of AECUK and of enforcement of tho Acts in the hands of erchitectural manaqemm t. Since its inceotion, ARCUK has by 2nd laroe deleoated ell its resnonsibilitåes for architectural education to the R IBP. The Architects Reoi9tration Acts thus established by statute a form of "man— power plannino" for the profession. In practice this has meant a loqally— sanctioned division of architectural workers into two classes, increasingly denyinn entry into the "orofesgion oroper" to peoole of workinn-clasg background or Who mipht otherwise tend to upset architectural management's neat little applecart. The increasing insistence on four or five yearg of full—time academic architectural education aims also to remove from the architectural employer his responsibility for on-the-job training and continuing education and to delay the architect's entry into the profession and into oroductive and remunerative work. Perhaos by that time the younn architect's awareness and expectations may be trimmed down to sixe and obl ined to take into account a family and a mortoape. The effects of this approach to the traininr of architects are, alas, for ell to see. ORCUK has also promulgated a Code of Conduct, which, in theory, must be fol- 1 owed by architects in order to remain on the Reoister. This code i 9 identical to thet of the employers' organigation and makes mandatory the use of the R IBP Conditionq of tnoeqement. The only parts of the Code, other AfiCUK regul t ions and provisions of the Architects Registration Acto which seem to be enforced urith any degree of seriousness at all are those Which aim to pro— tect the privileged position of architectural employers and keen competition among them operating in the interests of architectural employers ag a group. The Code does, however, clearly establish the principle of control "in the public interest" by ARCtJK over: I. what forms of practice are permitted among architects, 2. how architects may oet work, 3. hot.' erchitect9 may relate to one another and to their other employees, in business and orofeosional terms, and the architect' 9 resoons bility to "those Who may be expected to use or enjoy the product of his work" (which may be taken to mean both thoge who build buildinos and those who inhabit buildings). We believe that the main reason that ARCtJK has not exercised effective control over the profession in the nuhlic interest lieg in its control by ar— chitectural management. Of the 66 members of ARCUK, 56 (or 85<) are P. IBA members. There ere four non-RIBA architects and six "laymen" (04). Who are the six Four are nominees of the Councils of chartered institutions in related building orofessions and the remaining two represent employers in the building industry. Of the 60 architect members of ARCUK we have been able to identify the occunational status of 57 of them. (The other three ere, in any event, 911 R IBA members.) Of these 57, no less than 31 are partners in private oractice end two more are chief architecte in Biq Business. Thus, 58 4 ere 509999 in the private sector. Eight are chief architect9 or deputy chief architects in the public sector and three are professors or heads of schools of architecture. Thug, 44 of the 57 (or 77'.) are architectural menegement, ell RI BD.. Of the galaried architects, eight are in the public sector and only four in private practice. Some of those are presumably of "associate" status. So architectural workers, 'Jho make up at leagt of registered architects, have *round of the architects' representation on ARCUK. Yet oartners in nrivate nractice, who amount to about 15"' of registered archi— tects, have of the architectural representation on ARCL'K. We oropose that tho Prchitectural Reqistration Acts he amended to establish lay control over the profession, which will make a beoinninq towards account— ability. gy "lay control" we mean a lay majoritv on ARCUK, and a lay majority rerresentative of the general public es a whole, the real "consumers" of archi— tecture. The minority of architect members must also be more renresentative Of the nrofesqion. To encourqqe this, we nropose •n end to the nomination of architectural reoresentativeg hy the PI gn Council and similar bodi99, substituting direct elections within eech of the different interest orouD9 in the profeseion, with each group's representation baged on ite numerical 9trenoth In the profession. Pregumably, the orouoo would he, employers of, three or more peoole, other self-employed architecto, salaried architectural management, and all other 981aried or unemployed architectq: the architectural workers. We have already developed one 0099ih1e proposal for a more reoregentative and lay—controlled A9Ct!K. This nonearg in detail in the nppendix. In addition to rgform of PP.CIJK, we feel that N. n. m . should develop a reason*blv credible pronogal for chanqinn the restriction on the toge of the title, "erchitect," to rtJ1p out its use by architectural businessmen and bureau— crafs t,'ho have long 9ince ceased to desion buildinnq, prenare plans, and gunervi99 construction, as the word architect 19 commonly understood. They ghould oerhan9 be allowed to use titles like "ex-architect" or "erchitecturel executive." While such a proposal is unlikely to pet far enough to obl ine us to support the principle of protection of the title of architect, it might be useful for educational, organi9inp and oublicity ournogeq. r'Tther wo-k involvod Ir. d.n veloning a campafqn to reform the Architects Registration Acts would entail proposing a new, more explicit statement of purpose of the Acts and of ARCIJK'g brief, in line with N.A.". '9 goals of B democraticelly—organiged "profesgion, t' directly accountable to the community. We could outline a more epproprlete Code of Conduct or suggest a better way of ensuring accountability, democrecy, and competence. We would el so need to make proposals regarding ARCUK's control over architecturel education, ending its delegation to the RIBA and regarding entry into and removal from the Register. Ultimately, a realistic and equitable means of financing and structuring ARCUK as an effective working organisatlon In the public Interest would also need to be worked out. If N. A.m. Is to go further on the subject of the Architects Registration Acts, it Should be it can develop, mount end etJ9t9±n an effective campaion. If are not 9trong enough, the employers' oroanisetlone Will take the ornortunfty to ough throtJ0h harmless, phoney "reform." That, of course, may well haooen even tJIthotJt our Initiative. We are in a bit of a vicious circle, 29 well, since, we believe, only through such campaigns will N.A. m. be able to build up its strength. 3. Positive use of Public Patronaqe N. A.m. should immediately begin to develop criteria of industrial democracy, fair employment practices, and accountability, and system of applying these crftnrfn In the dl'penolnq of public patronage of architecture, as over of all architectural work 19, apparently, funded by the state. 'Je ought to research exactly where and to what extent the government ultimately pays the architect" foos and begin to demand that this money not bp used to support practices which do not meet these criteria. we might begin with a campaign to avoid supporting the most reactionary practices. In any case, a suitable strategy remaing to be developed. 'Je have as yet done little urork In th19 area but believe it could prove quite fruitful. It certainly COU1d begin to divert the "patronage debate" from the lese produc— tive arena of a simple conflict between the public and private sectors, where it ultimately workg mainly to the bosses' interests. 991 E r BIBL Ken Coates and Tony Tonham, The New Unioni'm: The Cage for Workers' Control, Penguin Books paperback, 1974. ESSENTIAL READING. Louis Hellman, "Democracy in Architecture," RIBA Journal, August 1973, PP 395-403. malcolm macEwen, ttWhat Can Be Done About The Architect Journal, 19 November 1975, op 1063-1084. Adam Purser, A Short History of the Architectural Profession, 1976. APPENDIX Draft Proposal for a more Representmtive. Lav-Controlled ARCUK Assuming 60 members of ARCUK, should ropregent the "profession" and the "lay" public. Of the 27 architectural representatives, 2 should be chosen by students of architecture and 3 elected by architectural technicians and assistants. The remaining 24 should be elected by registered architects. Each of the four groups of architects llsted below WOU1d be epportloned seats on ARCtJK in direct relation to its share of the total number of architects. Each group would then directly elect the required number of representatives from among its own number. The four groups are, architects who employ three or more people, other self-employed architects, salaried architectural management: chief architect9 and their deputies in public practice and private Industry and architects with positions of a comparable level in architectural research, education, etc., architectural workers: all other salaried or unemployed architoct9. The "lay" contingent would be open only to anyone not eligible to be elected to the "architectural" group. Of these 33, 14 9hOU1d be trade unionists nominated by the T.U.C. No more than half of the 14 should be union officials. At least of the 16, likewise split into officials end "lay" trade unionists, should be from the construction industry. The other 19 lay members, for 1 ack of a better system, could be nominated by the Secretary of State for the Environment, as follows: 1 . Five of these should be elected politicians, including two m.p.'g and three local councillors. Of the three locals, one should be from the GLC or a London borough, one from another urban county, end one from a rural county. Atleest one of these three should be from Scotland and another from Wales, unless ARCtJK to be devolved into ARCE, ARCS, and ARC'J. Two ghould be chosen from tenants' associations. Two should be chosen from gel f-managed houglng associations. Two should be chosen from voluntary associations. 5. Two Should be chosen from industrial and trade (employers) associatione. 5. Two Should be chosen from emong building control officers, district gur— veyors and public health officers. 7. Four should be chosen from other professions (e.g., engineering, law, medicine, planning and surveying), giving preference to those profession• not already represented. These 19 should be nominated after the other 41 have been selected end according to the f01) owino conditions. The 19 nominations must be used to redrege the balance in the total council of 60 to ensure, as as possible, that the followino groupg are not undor-ropreoonted on the Council In proportion to their percentage of the population of Britain: 1. womon, (non-management) employees, end people under the age of 45. Although all this may seem complicated, the principles are simple: lay control of the profession and e Council ag democratically-repregentative possible of the various interest groups within the profession end within society as a whole. ARCUK t 9 education and admissions committees ehould be constituted arrordfrq to agoug rr t,ncirlns. �4th N. A.M. Annual Congress 1978 Cheltenham 'Alternative Practice' Some Notes to Guide Discussion There has been no specific interest group in NAM concerned with alternative practice or 'community architecture' though there is a great deal of overlap vith the PDS group . ibvever there have been a number of developments which make it important for NAM members to clarify their position on these topics . These are The growth of groups such as Support , ARCAID , the Foinist Design and Build Group and so on . The attempts of the RIBA to get Government assistance and credibility for their ideas of 'coamunity architecture' The growing interest in co—operative models of employment in the private sector Firstly there seems little doubt that iB is feasible for a group like Support to be set up and find fee earning vork vith tenants , cotnunity; trade union and radical groups . The details of hov thig happens and the associated problems can be discussed . There are contradictions in vorking in the private sector and a debate vith the PDS group which may emerge at this congress but the demand for such a service from groups who vould shun conventional RIBA Architects must be acknowledged . By dealing with real and immediate problems it would be possible to carry out research and propoganda which vould aid the long term proposals of PDS . Meanwhile the working class and labour movement can be more effective if it has good buildings to live in and vork from Secondly there are some who advocate co—operation between NAM and the RIBA to support the Cotnunity Architecture Ibrking Group proposals for a Cocnunity Aid Fund . They are asking Reg Fresson for E 2 million . If we are -to critiscize the RIBA these critscisms should be more articulate and videiy understood . There are 'progressives' involved vith CAWG who would make overtures to NAM but independent approaches to FReeson are more likely to be in our interest . Thirdly there vas a very succesful seminar oa October 20 attended by about 30 architecst and others which discussed co—operative forms of organisimg practices . Mary Rogers vill be able co give a report on the results of this meeting It is suggested that in the morning vorkshop ve discuss general and political issues and the points of conflict and co—operation be discussed with the PDS group in the plenary . At 6p.m. in the evening ve hope that a nt.-caber of NAM members from different groups vill give short presentations vith slides about vork they have been doing Tom Woolley � Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Private Practice Working Group Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived JA/JM Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource Nov 1976 https://nam.maydayrooms.org/files/original/002230b0c0b8e3f24c7309c7bb425668.pdf cfa4fe2ef060f1ba71d99e99efdb4fe4 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 Alternative Practice Description An account of the resource This investigated other forms of organisation of architects' offices based around the concept of cooperative working and shared equity. Several members went on to establish their own practices adopting such models. A pre-eminent example was Support Community Building Design, which emerged from a small group of graduates from the Architectural Association which went on to create a cooperative practice focused on potential client groups in society which traditionally were not the beneficiaries of the architectural profession which, we would have said, was essentially the handmaiden of capital. These groups eventually included local authority tenants, women's groups including refuges, ‘black’ i.e. racially self-defined groups. 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 Notes Subject The topic of the resource Alternative Practice to Guide Discussion' (1 side) Description An account of the resource 4th N. A.M. Annual Con$ress 1978 Cheltenham 'Alternative Practice' Some Notes to Guide Discussion There has been no specific interest group in NAM concerned vich alternative practice or 'community architecture 'though there is a great deal of overlap vith the PDS group However there have been a number of developments which make it important for NAM members to clarify their psition on these topics These are The growth of groups such as Support , ARCAD , the Feminist Design and Build Group and so on . The attempts of the RIBA to get Government assistance and credibility for their ideas of 'community architecture' The growing interest in co—operative of employment in the private sector Firstly there seems little doubt that it is feasible for a group like Support to be set up and find fee earning vork with tenants cotmnunity; trade union and radical groups . The details of how this happens and the associated problems can be discussed . There are contradictions ia vorkiag in the private sector and a debate with the PDS group which may emerge at this congress but the demand for such a service from groups who vould shun conventional RIBA Architects must be acknowledged By dealing with real and immediate problems it would be possible to carry out research and propoganda which would aid the long term proposals of PDS . Meanwhile the vorking class and labour movement can be more effective if it has good buildings to live in and vork from Secondly there are some vho advocate co—operation between NAM and the RIBA to support the Co:mnunity Architecture Group proposals for a Community Aid Fund . They are asking Reg Fresson for E 2 million . If ve are . to critiscize the RIBA these critscisms should be more articulate and videly understood . There are 'progressives' involved with CALG vho would make overtures to NAM but independent approaches to FReeson are more likely to be in our interest Thirdly there vas a very succesful seminar on October 20 attended by about 30 architecst and others which discussed co—operative forms of organis ;mg practices . Mary Rogers vill be able to give a report on the results of this meeting It is suggested that in the morning vorkshop ve discuss more general and political issues and the points of conflict and co—operation be discussed with the PDS group in the plenary . At 6p.m. in the evening ve hope that a number of NAM members from different groups vill give short presentations with slides about vork they have been doing Tom Woolley Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Tom Woolley 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 1978 https://nam.maydayrooms.org/files/original/de47d02d3470650b4eccafa46490e3ff.pdf 06250635f1919ec1e222244d20669ce0 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 Alternative Practice Description An account of the resource This investigated other forms of organisation of architects' offices based around the concept of cooperative working and shared equity. Several members went on to establish their own practices adopting such models. A pre-eminent example was Support Community Building Design, which emerged from a small group of graduates from the Architectural Association which went on to create a cooperative practice focused on potential client groups in society which traditionally were not the beneficiaries of the architectural profession which, we would have said, was essentially the handmaiden of capital. These groups eventually included local authority tenants, women's groups including refuges, ‘black’ i.e. racially self-defined groups. 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 Occasional Paper Subject The topic of the resource Characteristics of Community Architecture 19pp Description An account of the resource �THE CHARACTERISTICS OF COMMUNITY ARCHITECTURE AND COMMUNITY TECHNICAL AID Edited by Tom Woolley WHO IS PARTICIPATING? Towards a new professional role. N. John Habraken TOWARD A THEORY Of PARTICIPATION IN ARCHITECTURE C. Richard Hatch WHAT IS COMMUNITY TECHNICAL AID? A talk to the Annual Conference of the Association of Community Technical Aid Centres — Liverpool, April 27, 1985. Tom Woolley May 1985 �Preface 'Community Architecture' has received a great deal of attention from architectural papers and a small amount from national newspapers. However, attempts to define the term or to explain its characteristics and reasons for its emergence have been done in only the most superficial and journalistic terms. The three papers included here give a general overview of the subject but locate discussion of the role of designers and architects in a broader analysis of politics, economics and concepts of participation and professionalism and try to go more deeply into the subject. There is a pressing need for more detailed and specific accounts of the way in which lay people, user groups and comunity action can involve professionals but it is also essential that this should be informed by a broader view. All three papers here attempt to provoke discussion and debate around these broader issues. The first, by John Habraken, was given at an International Conference on Design Participation in April 1985 in Eindhoven. Habraken, whose ideas of 'Supports' were highly influential in the 1960s as a critique of insensitve mass housing, set up the SAR, a research unit in Eindhoven. In 1975 he moved to MIT in the USA. Habraken neatly stands the normal discourse on participation on its head. Instead of allowing people to participate, he argues it is the professionals who should be asking if thu can participate and what they have to contribute. This is a refreshing perspective when most of the journalistic accounts of community architecture give all the credit to the architects and invariably present them as the initiators of participation. The second paper by Richard H?tch sets out the principal ideas in the book, which he edited, The Scope of Social Architecture, (published by Van Nostrand Reinhold, 1984). Hatch argues that the success of participation in architectural projects must be measured not so much through issues of design product and participation, but how such projects create opportunities for people to change their lives. While I reached similar conclusions in my PhD thesis (Community Architecture: An Evaluation of the Case for User Participation in Design, Oxford Polytechnic, 1985), I think there are dangers in the way Hatch presents his case. This is because he appears to be over-emphasising the idea that architects and professionals have a key role to play in changing peoples' lives and initiating projects. There are subtle differences here of emphasis and analysis but both papers should be a useful stimulus for discussion because of this. The third paper, not previously published, is the text of a talk given at the Conference of the Association of Community Technical Aid Centres in Liverpool in April 1985. In it I attempted to support •the case for Community Technical Aid as a model for how professional services for community groups and participation projects should be provided. There is likely to be a long and difficult debate about these issues as competition for Central Government funds increases. Hopefully, what unites all three papers is the idea that the yardstick for evaluating experimental professional servies, should be the way in which they benefit the users, the clients rather than the professionals themselves. Tom Woolley Glasgow, May 1985 2 WHO IS PARTICIPATING? Towards a new professional role N. John Habraken The idea of participation is a quarter century old, give or take a few years depending on how one interprets past events. It was in the early sixties that the role of the user began to be discussed in professional circles. I remember I found it encouraging that John Turner published a first article about his experiences in the barrios of Peru within a year from the publication of my own writing, based on observations in Holland. In those same years many began to speak and write about the concerns that bring us together today. But it was only in the second half of the sixties that the term "participation" came into use as a result of an intensified and increasingly politicised discussion. A review of the past must be left to the historian. I only recall the old days to suggest that the idea of participation has been around long enough for us to ask ourselves how useful it still is and to what extent the ideas can serve us in the future. This, of course, is very much a matter of conjecture and personal opinion, but it seems, nevertheless, a reasonable question to raise. I hope we wili formulate a new agenda for the future and do some projective thinking. Such thinking can not only be an extrapolation of the past but must also include a critical look at what happened so far. Perhaps the best contribution I can make as a "key-note" speaker is to give you some of my personal thinking on where we are, in the hope that it will stimulate others to the same. To begin with, I must confess that I have always been ill at ease with the term "participation" . try not to use it that frequently. It is easy to understand how the word indicates a certain position one can take relative to matters of habitation with which I sympathise. Used as a label for a common attitude I can, for instance, applaud the idea of a "participation conference" like the one we are engaged in now. The term, however, is used for two meanings that point in opposite directions. Some advocates of user participation mean user decision making power. They want to place under the responsibility of the user certain decisions that the professional is used to taking. In this case the word indicates a new balance that can only be achieved when some transfer of power takes place. It is a meaning that demands fundamental, structural change. The other meaning does not denote a transfer of responsibility; the professional domain remains the same. Here the term participation means that the layman is asked to voice his opinion. He is promised to be heard and to be taken seriously. This meaning indicates a change of procedure within an unchanged balance of power. The difference, obviously, is significant. The Dutch language has two different terms for it: "inspcaak" and "zeggenschap" . These can be translated to: "to have a voice" and "to have decision making power". Unfortunately, there are no exact equivalents in English. We all know the different positions one can adopt relative to these two meanings. I do not want to go into that now. There is another aspect to the term participation which is perhaps more pertinent to our meeting today. In the two distinct meanings we found so far the issue is the relation between the professional world and the world of the lay people; the users, as we call them. Those who advocated participation, in whatever meaning of the word, were always those who felt that we should reconsider 3 our professional the task.tacit belief The so called that professionals participation could movement do it was all. basicallyWe are a reaction to here because we know it takes both sides to have a healthy environment to Participation is advocated, in whatever and form, knowledge by those resides who refusewith the paternalistic model and know that experience lay people as much as with experts. But when we take a somewhat broader view, along a historic perspective, the term participation is peculiar. Because when we use it we mean that the user must participate in what we, the professionals, do. We want the people to participate in the emergence of their shelter. Yet, come at about the without same time thewe know that the majority of settlements still, today, direct intervention of any professional designer or, for that matter, any other professional except local craftsmen. We also know that, in history, most dwellings came about without the use of designers or engineers as we know them today. In the past the professionals we are thinking of when we argue participation, professionals like us were at best active in the design and construction of monumental buildings serving the temporal and spiritual powers of the day. We must also remind ourselves that we come from a more recent Western European tradition in a bourgeois society in which the architect was invited by the client to come and design his house. This relationship is still with us, in its pure form, when architects design villas for individuals who can afford their help. In other words, until a few generations ago, until the beginning of this century in fact, we were always to be invited by the user client to participate in the birth of a building. Earlier that same kind of building usually came about without a professional designer acting as the midwi fe. In this broader, historic perspective it is legitimate to ask who is participating in what? That architects at a certain point came to think that perhaps the user should participate, could only occur because in modern times something extraordinary happened. For a number of understandable and, I am sure, unavoidable reasons the responsibility for the shelter of a large part of the population in Europe came in the hands of a professional class: bureaucrats, lawyers, architects, engineers. This is the period of the mass housing projects. For several generations professionals could think that human settlement completely depended on them. Architects sincerely thought they carried the future of the built environment on their shoulders. (I remember a prominent colleague declare that, if we designed the right kind of cities, there would be no more war). To us, today, this notion sounds naive, indeed unbelievable. But that is the way it was and therefore, in the sixties, it had to be argued that this was impossible, if not plain wrong and it was proposed that the users be brought into play. Now, after all these years, we must again take a distance from what we are doing. What is happening in a broader historic perspective is, I believe, that a professional class is still trying to find the poorer way to participate in the age old process of human settlement. Indeed, it is us who must participate. Humanity has done without us for a long time, and would, we can be sure, survive and continue to build if we were to disappear overnight. Yet, we feel we have something important to contribute. What is it? This question is much less rhetorical than it sounds. I do not turn the participation issues upside down to make a witty remark, but because it illuminates the very quality of our task. By reversing the issue and asking ourselves how we can best participate, we ask, really, what it is we contribute to the process of settlement that no one else can. And this, • it seems to 4 me, is the question to be answered. We can not be responsible for everything, nor can we control everything. We participate in the drama of life and settlement, and the more precise we can formulate what exactly is our irreplacable contribution to it, the more effective we will be; the better we will be able to educate the next generation and the better we will project research and experimentation to improve our professional performance. The participation movement has questioned the professional's role. It was, inevitably in the beginning, a negative position. The advocates of participation knew something was wrong but could not know yet what the new professional model should be. This new model, I want to argue, is not that of the benevolent practitioner who lets people participate (in either of the two previously found meanings). It is the model that comes from the pserspective I propose here: that shelter is part of daily human life and will come about whereever and whenever people will share space. Today, in a new age where so much more is possible, the professional plays a crucial role in that process. Yes, our participation is important. That, I suggest, is the correct way to state our position. All this is to say we have passed the ideological stage. By now it ought to be possible to point out what are the makings of the new professional we represent. A professional is not known by what he does, but by the way he does it. Anything a professional does - building, designing, healing, writing contracts or teaching - laymen have done first and will continue to do. Professionalism lies in expertise and expertise rests on skill and method and knowledge. Much work has already been done on this score. Each of us, here today, has contributed by practical work, by experimentation, by thinking and writing and trial and error, to a new expertise. A new body of knowledge and professional know-how is emerging. Much of that experience has found its way to others by means of publications but even more circulates by word of mouth in seminars and meetings and through personal contacts and by papers and reports; world wide networks are working and overlapping with one another, all operating, in the true spirit of its participants, in an informal way. However, this implicit way of developing new expertise may soon no longer be sufficient. Today, we must become much more explicit about the skills, methods and knowledge we can bring to bear in the new role we have chosen. At a certain point more formal structures and more organised networks must be available to allow for further growth. This is particularly important in a field where the individuals who represent it are scattered over the world and still relatively small in number. There are very few institutions that actively seek to promote and support the development of the new knowledge we are talking about. National agencies, like those for aid to developing countries and, on an international scale, institutions like the World Bank may be providers of resources but do not play an active role in research for new methods and skills nor do they actively exchange information. Few architectural schools seek to educate the new professionals we have in mind here, and even fewer can find money for research or suffic— ient resources to build strong links with practice in the field. John Turner has been a tireless advocate for a better exchange of information among all concerned, but so far his valuable work remained largely exploratory. A magazine like Open House International clearly answers a need and can therefore survive on a minimum budget, . but could do much more if proper funding were available. SAR, here in Eindhoven, has begun to think about an international role but it is too soon to tell what the results may be. In short, we seem to be at the stage where stronger structures must surface that serve future growth of skills, methods and knowledge of the new practitioner who is already operating. 5 Our new professionalism — because and effective that is really organisational what we are steps talkingto about here - calls for practical secure its growth it and is necessary future development. to the vision But, that important must drive as us.this byExperiitself may be, ence must be gained, methods must be developed and tried, new knowledge must be codified and new teaching must be done. But all this will only happen if we know what we are about: if we of know the what new our kind participationgo about their really must accomplish. manner The practitioners and are not very interested in what the work in a self evident glossy magazines say. They do not measure their accomplishments against the teachings of professional and schools find of pride the and awards satisfaction of professional in the workorganisations. They go their way they do, keeping informed through those more informal, less pretentious channels. They may work for years to reorganise a squatter settlement, may be involved in upgrading an materials, old urban find quarter, a smart may little design program and developfor a simple components from local hand held calculator to be used in the field, or they may design an infrastructure for a new settlement, an expandable housetype, an adaptable building, and so on, and so on. We all know the variety of activities no one had heard of twenty years ago. How cen we describe this new role? Is there a model? It is, of course, difficult to characterise the common attitude of such a variety of individuals and activities. Perhaps it is even foolish to try. But I do believe I detect a common denominator in the sum of the incidental examples that come to mind. What brings us together here and what motivates so many others is what we discussed earlier: the knowledge that the environment is a phenomenon that will occur, spontaneously, wherever people live and share space ; the knowledge that we need not protect "Architecture" or determine "Its Direction". Our mission is to understand what is going on, how this natural phenomenon of settlement occurs, how it can stay healthy, how it gets sick, how it can recover. Most importantly, we see ourselves as those who not only study the health and well being of the built environment, but who know - a little bit - how to help it become better, how the single incidental act can contribute to the whole, how the whole can improve, can be nourished by our particular intervention. it is this knowing of our position towards the built environment that gives direction to all we do. Sometimes the well being of the environment requires physical design and the proposition of new forms, sometimes it requires the availability of certain resources, sometimes it means work with people and sometimes with materials. Sometimes it is geared to the specific conditions of a locality, and sometimes it has to do with general principles that are applicable under generally stated conditions. But in all cases we see ourselves, not exploiting a situation for the sake of an extraneous peer group standard, but nourishing something that is alive to make it better, stronger and beautiful. The attitude that I try to indicate here is the attitude - I have said it on other occasions as well - of the gardener who works to let plants grow, who knows what soil and light and rain they need and intervenes in a process to improve it. To have a good garden we sometimes must make an infrastructure: dig the soil, make paths and provide water. Sometimes we must reorganise the distribution of plants. Sometimes we must feed and stimulate. Sometimes we must weed and trim. At all times we must propose forms, suggests forms, help forms to come about. The gardener is in touch with physical things, working with his hands, but he also understands life and knows he can not make plants but can only help them grow and become healthy. 6 Our traditional role model is that of the carpenter. We are builders by inclination and know how to put materials together into a coherent whole. This is indeed the trade we come from, and the instinct for built form moves us. There is nothing wrong with that, but designing is not carpentry. be a carpenter one must work the wood. It is a trade to be exercised. The designer, on the other hand, puts down the piece of wood to think and propose to others how things might be put together. He stands between things and people. He cannot push aside people to impose his own form, nor can he just talk to people and be ignorant of buildings. I know metaphors have their limitations. However, what I like about the image of the gardener is that it. includes all the dimensions our profession aspires to: giving from, understanding a site, light, colour, texture, proportion, organic forms, nature and above all, environmental space. The gardener, like the architect, is conversant with all of this but something important is added: the dimension of change and growth. The gardener's subject has a life of its own. Trees will grow and make shadow. Shadow will make new species emerge, these will in turn stimulate changes elsewhere. What distinguishes the gardener from the carpenter is the dimension of time. The traditional architect was there to build the monument; his role was to defy time and place a stone in the river of life. This is a worthy role but a limited one, because it is only appropriate for the exceptional case, the new practitioner, I am sure, is the one who accepts the fluid movements of everyday environment and rejoices in them. He knows that life is rich, unpredictable and ever changing and that buildings and cities are part of life: are the product of life itself. Change is the key to our new professionalism. Not the technical change of flexibility - this technical term is inadequate here - but the change of everyday life. Not the disruptive change for the sake of "progress" either, but the change that comes from continuous adaptations and accommodations that are the heartbeat of the environment; the change that assures continuity. It is this kind of change that comes naturally like life itself and which is, indeed, hardly known when it is there. We only notice what goes too fast or too slow, not what goes right. It is remarkable that architecture, as distinct from engineering or the sciences, never acknowledged change as positive. Only when we study the transformations of things we will find what is constant. Therefore a body of knowledge, particular to architecture, will not come about unless we can identify the particular way in which architecture sees change in things as distinct from the ways engineers and physicists see it. I am convinced that the new professional attitude we are discussing here is the key to a new concept of architecture. Not, to be sure, a new style. Styles are results, not causes. dut a new discipline with its skills, methods and knowledge. Our newly gained interest in the dimension of time, and the uses we learn to make of it in our work, will render obsolete the skills of yesterday. By now I have moved far beyond the scope of participatory issues. This I did on purpose because I believe that there is a larger picture we should not ignore. The attitude of the gardener, the practitioner who, by intervention, seeks to participate in a live process is the model we have found to be effective. One can come to this attitude, it seems to me, by many routes, the route of participation is only; one. And if I am not mistaken, this is precisely what is beginning to happen. Let me try and explain the signs I see. 7 To begin with, there is architectural research. It is understandableof that much of what is called architectural research today is, in its way working, still close to engineering and the sciences. Environmental control, behavioural studies and building systems could already begin to develop without the new perspective we are exploring here. However, the new architectural understanding of the phenomenon of change is beginning to influence these very fields. In Holland at least, systems builders have begun to connect their products to specific levels of intervention. This link between the material system and the party who manipulates it over time was missing so far in the more general trend towards open systems. In Japan the nationwide investigation under the title "Century Housing System" is also interesting in this regard. Advocating open systems it likewise links use time to system's identification. In building economic* studies are conducted to introduce the concept of the building as composed of different systems with different lifetimes. An approach that emerged independently from the idea of user intervention, but is obviously compatible with it, bringing economists and architects together, comparing notes. Equally interesting from our point of view are the great many studies of particular environments that have been done in the last ten years. Observation is the foundation of all research. There is, among architectural students and researchers, a considerable interest in documenting everyday built environment; their forms, their transformations over time, their uses, their territorial interpretations and so on. It is almost as if we have begun to see, for the first time, the built world we live in. Some cf us, including colleagues here in Eindhoven, know, for instance, the work cf Fernando Domeyko who has spent many years documenting with the kind of relentless impartiality that can only come from great love, the ways and forms of everyday urban environments. He not only shows us the streets and the buildings but also the interiors and all the furniture and utensils that have their place in them. His work, never published so far, and ever growing, is unique in many respects. In a very different way, but with similar singleminded power, Christopher Alexander has brought to our attention the timeless patterns of the built environment. Patterns that come about, when people settle and are given a chance to cultivate their environments. There may be different opinions as to what they mean and to how we should use them, but Alexander brought them to our attention. People like Domeyko and Alexander make us see, and it is only when we accept the built environment as something that lives by its own energies, that we can begin to observe it in the ways they teach us. In that same attitude we find, in architectural schools, how each year students, when given the opportunity, begin to observe and document environments that they are familiar with, demonstrating a similar love and attent ion for details. They come with maps, photographs, written observations and it is astonishing how much knowledge comes to the surface once they discover that it is alright just to recognise an environment. There is no such thing as an uninteresting environment, there are only uninterested observers. We are beginning to discover the built world all over again, just at the time that we are in danger of losing it by the tragic ignorance induced by the "isms" of our ideological discussions. The experience we have through SAR is another indication that research begins to develop once one accepts the new attitude we are discussing here. The methods proposed by SAR could come about because the environment was seen as a complex form consisting of different levels of intervention with different actors on each level. We were not interested in the architect's ideas and personal values although these are obviously important, but in 8 the way the architect could contribute to the freedom and growth of forms under the responsibility of the users. We focussed on the interface between the professional and the living environment itself. This approach paid off when builders, manufacturers and managers began to see its potential. Here we have an example of architects' research feeding into technology and management. The irony is that it is therefore not recognised by some architects as relevant to architecture. It is precisely this broadening of the field, that is significant but it is understandable that it causes confusion in the beginning. With the introduction of the computer we find an increased interest among researchers to find out what designing is about. If we do not know what we are doing, how can we make a computer help us, or take over some of our tasks? Thus methodology becomes the key to the computer. Methodology, perhaps more than any other aspect of architecture, is based on the understanding of change in the built environment. It is the study of ways to interven% that is, to change. Change reveals the laws that are constant and it is on the constraints that methodology is founded. As a researcher I came to appreciate this connection and began to realise that my interest in participation was primarily because it makes the issue of change unavoidable. It was not, I must confess, the user's interests that drove me, but the broader interest of a healthy built environment which, without the users intervention is unattainable. If I have a message, therefore, it is that, today, we must begin to see participation as a component of a broader development. The ground is shifting in our profession making obsolete the labels of yesterday. It is the power of the new attitude we discuss here that it frees those who adopt it and makes them move into directions that are rejected by the traditional professional ideology as "not architecture" . It is again the younger generation that has the courage to trust its instincts. At MIT we find an increasing interest among architecture students to connect their design studies to other disciplines. Economy, management, technology, housing and so on. Of course, one can advance a practical explanation for this. Where jobs become hard to get, it may be prudent to have some additional expertise. But things ace never that one-dimensional. It also has to do with intellectual hunger and a feeling that we have drawn too tight a boundary around architecture. Where, on the one hand, the discussions about architecture become more and more esoteric there are, on the other hand, among the younger generations those who simply go into new directions venturing outside the ever higher fences around the increasingly barren fields of the post modern movements. Like those interested in the participation of users much earlier, they begin to explore new, uncharted territories. In a similar way, interests in participatory processes bring people from different disciplines together. The variety of disciplines on the roster of speakers in this conference is witness to this. Where I , in my old fashioned way, speak of architects and designing, Thys Bax and his group had the good sense to decide we should meet, not because we represent a discipline, but because we share an attitude. Ours are not the only professions that seek a new definition for their mission. Lawyers, and medical doctors are also discovering that life may go on and may find new ways, without them. At the time I was preparing for this address I saw an article in the New York Times by Henry G. Miller, a lawyer, titled "The lawyer is no. 2, not no. 1" and he states among other things: "There is no intrinsic necessity for a legal profession. They can do away with us. One may not easily conceive of a world without physicians or engineers, but the role of the lawyer could be supplanted by others". 1 would not be that at ease if I were a physician, but the fact that I found 9 this article in the paper right then was no coincidence. Signals like this have appeared for years to those who would listen. But while I am an architect and interested in the architect's new role,TOWARD A THEORY OF PARTICIPATION IN ARCHITECTURE you may permit me to return bias more to my than own anything field to else. conclude. My prupose All I who have was may to said,openRichard Hatch obviously, reveals my of beC. the debate. The question that is interest to the a new historian professionalismProfessor watching the addition current to scene the traditional is whether we architect's will see role the old? master There builder;maySchool of ArchitectureInstitute of Technology in replace as the Jersey emerge New or whether we will find the new professionalism more profound forceNewark, New Jersey 07102 USA only be a new kind of specialist. But I believe a attracts us and makes us seek a new role. Today the future of architecture will not announce itself by grand statements and manifesto's as used to be fashionable with the modernist generation. Nevertheless, there is a profoundINTRODUCTION shift taking place coming from a quiet of individuals but thoughtful who and do very matter-of-The widespread acceptance of the principle of user fact revaluation by a growing number into more interesting not shout andwhenparticipation is the major achievement of architecture in the they don't like what they see, but the just field. move This shift will change the veryrecent past. However, problems in participatory design theory promising directions, expanding all architecture. There always have limited the impact of this new direction in architecture. nature of our expertise and touch others who do not need will the beproposals for design participation, almost without exception, prima-donnas and there always will, of be the many profesion rests have looked to improvements in architecture user satisfaction as the measure haveof limelight to grow, but the future with those who seeksuccess. Adaptability, good fit, and to re-define its role.been set out as key criteria for evaluating participatory projects. It is important to note that these are all ways of describing buildings, or at best relationships between buildings and users. An alternative and potentially more effective approach would start with a theory regarding the effects of participation on the participants themselves——and then define architectural practice in terms of desirable individual and societal outcomes. PROBLEMS OF CONVENTIONAL PARTICIPATION THEORY The principal objections raised against conventional design participation——from both the right and the left——weakened the movement because they were fundamentally valid. First, participation rarely engages crucial guestions of social life and the city. The movement has had a strong tendency to focus on the individual and the nuclear family and view tends to minimize the importance of relationships at the workplace and in the community. This questionable emphasis on the private realm and the ideal of individual satisfaction has also limited the arena for participatory design. Housing is the program of choice, and even within this narrow scope the majority of schemes involve users only in the m configuration of personal space. The concept of architecture as collective as well as personal representations is lost. Second, the architects' traditional building orientation, found even in particpatory designers, reflects an impoverished view of human needs. The fascination with architecture as object continues to obscure a broader view of buildings as elements in a total environment meant to satisfy complex human drives . This is, perhaps, an inheritance from the Modern Architecture which stressed "the problem of dwelling" and posed the alternative: Architecture or Revolution. In its most simplistic formulations, human needs are reduced to so lei 1, espace, verdure, and that these should be 10 1 1 incorporated in correct dwellings (to be enjoyed, presumably, solipsistically) . Architects are still accustomed to thinking about needs only in terms that are tangible and quantifiable: numbers of families to be housed, acres of required parkland, work stations or hospital beds to be built.... The argument here is that there is a more fundamental level Of needs that has at its source drives to competence, to community, and to critical awareness, and that architecture——the process of making the capable of both creating and satisfying these fundämental needs. Third, the participation movement's preferred conception of the user as consumer exercising sovereignty over an expanding array of choices has its own difficulties. It is silent on guestions of energy and resource conservation. It appears indifferent to the socially-determined nature of consumer wants in a class society: wants that are exogenously induced and in constant change cannot be "satisfied" by participation. Sharing a contradiction with other proposals about consumer sovreignty, design participation is unable to explain how individuals might indicate a preference for collective goods, such as art, leisure, education, or equality. Lastly, it minimizes the importance of production: conceiving, making , exchanging. Proposals about the direction that participation ought to take, the issues to be stressed, the nature of the encounters between architect and user, and the distribution of authority over decisions reflect particular conceptions of human nature, history, and .the process of social change. An alternative theory of participation in architecture, then, begins with a proposition about architecture and human needs . ALIENATION AS PROBLEM FOR ARCHITECTURE The problems which participation in architecture must address——from the intractability of mass housing to the strong lack of affection most people feel for urban environments——are of relatively recent origin. It is my view that they result, not so much from the gap between client, user, and architect which followed the industrial revolution, but from the radical changes in the organization of life and work which accompanied it. The combination of urbanization and industrialization closed off many traditional avenues for the satisfaction of human needs without reducing the needs themselves. The history of Newark provides us with an example of the transformations that created new problems for society——and new tasks for architecture and for architects. In the 1830s, the Industrial Revolution loomed just over the horizon. But in Newark, craft production was still the rule. Shops were small, and following the familiar pattern, they were usually attached to the masters' houses. Women and children played important roles in the workshop as well as the home. The family was the basic unit of production as well as 1 2 consumption. Each worker owned his own tools; journeymen and apprentices reasonably expected to be self—employed one day. Small groups of workers made entire products in their independent shops. Products made in this traditional way were stamped with the personalities of their makers. As specialized workers, they were, of course, already tied into a market economy. In a market of these dimensions, economic interdependence was felt as personal interdependence. Exchange made these artisan households a community. By 1860, Newark's crafts had been industrialized or were well on their way to being so. Factory competition was intense: less than nine percent of male heads of households remained self—employed. The remaining workers, who possessed neither tools nor skills that were not generally available, were rapidly losing Control over the conditions of work. Hours were up; wages were down. The likelihood of rising to a position of ownership was becoming remote. Once forced to give up control over the arena of production, workers found that control of other crucial areas of life was also quickly stripped away. Workers no longer had discretion over the place of work, the pace of work, or the purpose of work. For most, employment came to be confined to a few simple and repeated operations. The ever—narrower division of labor, far from refining the skills of specialized workers, now ensured that each need know less and less about' the processes of production in which they are engaged. Adam Smith, whose very name is associated with the division of labor, correctly feared that the result would be "torpor of mind." The continuous process of deskil ling robbed work of meaning. Nothing has yet been found to restore it. The factory system finally broke the age—old nexus between life and work. The family lost its role in production and hence its independence. Dwel ling lost its sacred character and became another commodity in a world of commodities, allocated in accordance with the wage hierarchy of the workplace and organized into homogeneous communities based on class and race. Rather than the center of social existence, the family house became a place of escape, a haven in a heartless world. So long as home is consciously kept separate from the world of politics and power, participation in its design can be no more than an anodyne. In this sort of world, human capacities and desires tend to shrink to those that can be satisfied at a profit. Needs formerly considered among the most important——for creativity , for competence, for . It is my view that in this too brief historical analysis lies the agenda for participation in architecture: participation can be the means for overcoming alienation. Let me cite example from my own observation. 13 THE EXAMPLE OF CUBA In Cuba, with its heritage of this colonialism new role. and At exploitation,the victory of participation has in accepted 1959, the social situation there was an the Revolution exaggerated version sharp of spatial the general segregation history of of classes capitalistand development. A functions underscored the deep divisions within the cities—— and between the cities and the countryside. The separation of classes, and of manual and intellectual workers, was net. With little experience of self—government, no tradition of democracy or of self—government had developed. Almost from the start, the Revolution saw architecture as an instrument in the process of social transformation. At all scales, from the private to the national, architecture was called on to do more than make up the deficits common to underdevelopment. It was expected to change the relationships between men. architect Roberto Segre has written: The building oi socialism demands as a fundamental principle the creation OE an egalitarian society that permits to each member the maximum personal development and maximum choice between alternatives The designers of the physical environment have the reponsibility of interpreting these essential directives . In the early period, the need to build was overwhelming. housing, factories, schools, hospitals, roads.. . everything was needed. But raw construction was not enough. In 1963, Che Guevara wrote, "I am not interested in dry, economic socialism. We are fighting against poverrty, but we are also fighting against alienation." Grasping this truth, architects no longer focused entirely on guantitative results. The issues for Cuban architecture became eliminating segregation, challenging the narrow division of labor (and the low skill levels which it implies) , and creating active, engaged citizens . participation became the hallmark of the new era. Building programs were altered to maximize opportunities for popular involvement. Structural systems were invented which permitted intellectuals, farmers, and factory workers to contribute, along side experienced construction crews, to the making Of the new Cuba. New popular institutions were organized to channel the energies of citizens in campaigns for literacy, for improved public health, for cultural and educational opportunities, and for social construction. The microbrigade program is the outstanding example of participation in the -creation of the physical environment. Microbrigades are volunteer groups financed by their workplaces who come together to build new communities. On the large project site at Alamar in Havana, teams from the many of the city's varied industries and agencies are at work building badly needed homes, schools, factories, and shops. Professionals and mechanics, teachers and truck drivers work side by side. Because finished apartments are allocated through their different workplaces, this same rich social mix will end up as neighbors under the same roofs. Starting in their first year, student architects work on these construction sites, first as laborers, then as liaison between the designers and the future users, and finally as project directors——an exceptional professional preparation. At Al amar as on similar sites across Cuba, participation includes issues of personal satisfaction, but stresses more central issues of social life and work. And if the overarching goal is the creation of an egalitarian society, the objectives of participation are many: . Nation—building: participation in the creation of a modern Cuba is expected to build identification with the Revolution. . Growth of political culture: involvement in decision making and in negotiations between citizens and organs of the state is intended to lower the barriers between the governed and the government for the first time in Cuban history. . Women's liberation: significant participation opportunities for women have brought them out of the home and into the mainstream of national life. . Elimination of class divisions: carrying out common projects for the common good opens lines of commun— ication between groups and helps to overcome the traditional deprecation of manual labor. 5. Competence: an opportunity to shape the social environment generates creative energy, refines productive skills, and reinforces collective concerns. 6 . Transparency: direct involvement opens windows into the structure of society, its institutions, its values, and its technology. The formerly incomprehensible and alienating and managed for and by others ——is transformed into a place where people feel at home. NEW AGENDA FOR PARTICIPATION The central hypothesis of this paper is that the paramount purpose of participation is not good buildings, but good citizens in a good society. Participation is the means, and the richer the experience——the more aspects of the total architectural project opened to involvement, the higher the degree of participant control, and the more comprehensive the education that surrounds participation——the greater the impact on alienation will be, and the greater the recovery toward health. 15 WHAT IS COMMUNITY TECHNICAL AID? A talk to the Annual Conference of the Association of Community Technical Äid Centres - Liverpool: April 27, 1985 Tom Woolley Director, Housing & Rehabilitation Research Unit Strathclyde University, Glasgow As an architecture student, nearly twenty years ago, I once asked our Professor why our training did not include much about the people who would, after all, use the buildings we were going to design. ' If you are interested in people - you should become a sociologist' was his reply. Indeed, at that time many architects and planners believed that they could design environments that would ensure successful conditions whether it was through cities in the sky or streets in the air. Unfortunately, the sociologists did not tell the architects what people wanted, concentrating, quite rightly, instead on criticism of determinism: - the idea that physical environments could determine social behaviour. Unfortunately, few architects and planners paid heed to these criticisms and, to this day, many designers still believe that they as professionals hold the key to the solution of social problems. They see themselves as indispensible, an attitude which I want to call into question. But to come back to my personal story, I did not want to be a sociologist but I did want to learn about people, especially those who got the worst of our environment. Eventually I got involved in the Tenants' and Squatting Movement, but initially, my social conscience on my sleeve, I was sent by the University Settlement with a couple of others to decorate an old man's flat. The flat was damp and decaying and it was obvious the wallpaper would peel off after a few weeks. We had literally been sent to paper over the cracks. The old man, who was very poor, insisted on plying us with tea and chocolate biscuits and while we worked he criticised what we were doing. We should be in the Uniüersity, he said, learning how to be experts that would help people like him change society so that he could live in better conditions and relative comfort. I have never forgotten that simple political lesson and since then have searched for a way for professional expertise to be put to the service of radical political change. Such political change needs to be defined, not by the rigid programmes of political parties but the desire of everyone, if only they had the opportunity, to live richer and more creative lives. Lives enriched by the possibility, if they want it, to shape and manage the environment where they live, work and play. This morning, I want to emphasise the importance of a political perspective, something that is lacking in the development of technical aid, because we need to distinguish between those who pay lip service to such ideals and those who are genuinely willing to engage in the struggles that are needed to achieve them. To illustrate what happens when there is a lack of perspective, we need look no further than the current media interest in the development of socalled Community Architecture as typified by a recent article in The Times by Wates and Knevitt entitled 'Power to the People of the Twilight World. ' It is not clear who these twilight people are because we hear far more about the glowing achievements of the Government, the RIBA, the Prince of Wales and others. What is clear from this 'hype' , and that is what it is, is that someone thinks that professionals are indispensible, that it is they who hold the key to the problems of the inner-city. Articles like this largely create the impression that the credit for recent initiatives in the inner city goes to professionals, and not to the ordinary people who worked hard, often unpaid, to make them successful. 16 But what are these problems of the city, how are they caused and what contributions are professionals like architects and planners making to solve them? Inner cities and problems of environmental dereliction are only one symptom of a serious decline in social and economic conditions which are getting worse for most people, the poor, for women, ethnic groups, young people and the unemployed. Today 15 million people live below the official poverty line. The distributiom_of wealth. is also getting worse. In 1982 the wealthiest one per cent owned one fith of the total wealth, the richest ten per cent owned more than half. The poorest half of the population, which includes most of us, owned only four per cent of the wealth. In 1979 the twenty highest paid directors together received as much as 454 average male manual workers. By 1983 they were paid more than 722 such workers. The pay of managers has risen twice as fast as manual workers according to the National Managers Salary Survey. In Merseyside, with twenty per cent unemployed, we have one of the largest concentrations of low paid workers and yet the Government argues that it needs to scrap minimum pay legislation so that the people can 'price themselves into jobs. Despite increasiang poverty and bad conditions with 1.25 million dwellings unfit and 2.5 million affect by damp, the Government has made massive cuts in public spending on housing and social services. While many of these cuts have drastically curtailed unpopular and bureaucratic State services, they have still seriously undermined our quality of life. Furthermore, the cost of living has risen dramatically. For instance, rates have increased by 130 per cent since 1970 and this has largely been due to massive cuts in the rate support grant. Hackney has some of the most serious problems in the country and yet it has suffered heavily from cuts. Manchester has lost E73 million in real terms between 1981 and 1985. These are some of the statistics of the problems of urban reality is the withdrawal of State and industrial investment on a huge scale, with massive profits being made in speculation on the not re-invested in decaying areas. The outlook is bleak. Set context, the El million Special Grants Programme (which finances peanuts and only a few tiny crumbs of this go to groups inner city. The ,extent of activity which this small amount lates is surprising. Many of the projects with which Community Technical have been born out of a dissatisfaction with the paternalistic and ient public services the Tories are so keen to cut. So why are they taking to new initiatives?the money saved, . - the which local runs voluntary into Billions and self-help of Pounds, projects and giving that, Wates and Knevitt would have us believe, are pioneering solving the of the twilight world. Sadly, analysis of many initiatives will show that much of what money does come from the Government goes to professionals and contractors, even though some of their projects may be of people. A study for the London Voluntary Service Council showed help good was at fund a misnomer, raising, it with hardly the existed.right contacts It was and the knowledge professional system works who got access to resources in the inner city. This is why Community Technical Aid is important because Community I filter do not through think Technical which it is Aid resources ideal as a that model can it provides get should to be those a through source people of a who filter, information and advice.expert advice which is potentially accountable to people who need that 17 Of course, there are always some local voluntary groups that are so well organised that they know how to raise money, they know exactly what they want and they can hire and fire professionals, making sure they do what they want. But such qroups are rare indeed. My experience and research tells me that there is always a measure of dependence on the professionals. The professionals have expertise and information and they can use that power to reinforce dependence on, and the prestige of, professionals. This is why the model of the RIBA Community Aid Fund is fundamentally wrong. An elitist self interested, essentially Conservative body, receiving funds which it then disburses to deserving causes, usually architects, is no way to 'enable' (a favourite word of the RIBA). It is a recipe for ensuring that scarce resources are creamed off by professionals and that dependence on professional aid is maintained. Community Technical Aid, on the other hand, holds up the prospect of a vast network of locally based agencies providing all the skills and information required by local groups. Such agencies can be managed by those who use their services and can function in partnership with or even inside local authorities. Furthermore, they open up the possibilities of providing all the skills and information that user groups need. No private, commercial architect firms (even if they do call themselves Community Architects), can build up a pool of skills in architecture, surveying, planning, feasibility work, advice on grants, finance, accounting, legal knowledge and build up the necessary links with voluntary service councils, local authorities, builders and so on. Nor can they share expertise and experience in the same way. The architectural profession in particular is notoriously bad at this. One only needs to look at the almost complete absence of changes to architects' training to take account of these new areas of work. I believe that Community Technical Aid organisations have begun to provide a good service, especially in terms of process. Expertise in how to help get projects off the ground is well developed, though there is numerous scope for this experience to be better recorded and evaluated. I think we are less well advanced in terms of user participation in design and in the encouragement of lay people who can stand up at meetings and challenge the professionals who steal all the glory. The advantage of an organisation like ACTAC is that it can develop an agenda, a programme of changes which identify needs and take steps to tackle them, training, information, resources like a Participatory Design Laboratory, educational material, much needed publications. We have a great deal to do, we can pioneer the model of how expertise can be made available to lay people in a way that does not simply 'enable' This has become an over-used and out-worn slogan. We must empower people so that they are working, not only to mitigate immediate circumstances, but so they can change the whole way in which our environment is developed. Such a fundamental social change is needed whatever Government is in power. there is an upturn in public spending it must be under local control and not simply managed by professionals and bureaucrats as before, however sympathetic they may appear to be. Such empowerment can only come through working practices based on thorough political debate and shared understanding. Sadly there are opportunists among us who do not share a full commi tment to user accountability though I believe that such user accountability can be possible through both working methods and, or forms of, organisation. This means that in ACTAC we are not necessarily for one form of organisation only, model led on the Glasgow TSA or COMTECHSA and against private practice. 18 There are many members of ACTAC that are to all intent and purpose, private practices. However, they strive hard to ensure that, in their working practices, they are as accountable to their clients as possible. Furthermore, by joining ACTAC, we are all indicating a willingness to share our ideas, experience and knowledqe, rather than privatisinq it and using information to increase our power and profits. We are also working towards a situation in which Government finance to tackle social and environmental problems reaches those who really need it, channel led through organisations which can be accountable to local communities. This is why we need to join with the RIBA and others in establishing a working party to review present funding methods to ensure that Central Government understands the value of the CTAC model. We must be prepared to point out the disadvantages of channel ling finance to professional bodies which are not, in any way, accountable to ordinary people. What we must also do is to build greater support for what we are trying to do among ordinary people and among the organisations of the tenants' movement, housing co-operatives, trade unions and the voluntary sector. If we can do that, we need worry less about petty squabbles with the RIBA and others because there will be public demand for Technical Aid Services which the Government will ignore at its peril. For more information about Community Architecture and Community Technical Aid in the U.K. contact ACTAC Unit B688, New Enterprise Workshops South West Brunswick Dock LIVERPOOL L3 4AD Tel. No. 051 708 7607 ACTAC publishes a Directory of Technical Aid Centres: Price 5.00 plus post and package. This working paper is one of a series to be produced by the Housing and Rehabilitation Research Unit, Department of Architecture and Building Science, University of Strathclyde, 131 Rottenrow, GLASGOW GO ONG. Tel. No. 041 552 4400 ext. 3014. Many thanks to Dr R Beheshti Eindhoven University of Technology P.O. Box 513 5600 MB Eindhoven The Netherlands ings for permission of DPC Eindhoven to reprint 1985, the in Habraken three volumes, and Hatch can papers.be obtained The • full from proceed-the above address, price — 160 Dutch Guilders. 19 � Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Tom Woolley (ed.) 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 May 1985 https://nam.maydayrooms.org/files/original/5cd9edfe5d68d8c325d8388276e4dc53.pdf 794e5567f0480b49eebd3b04cccba6ca 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 Alternative Practice Description An account of the resource This investigated other forms of organisation of architects' offices based around the concept of cooperative working and shared equity. Several members went on to establish their own practices adopting such models. A pre-eminent example was Support Community Building Design, which emerged from a small group of graduates from the Architectural Association which went on to create a cooperative practice focused on potential client groups in society which traditionally were not the beneficiaries of the architectural profession which, we would have said, was essentially the handmaiden of capital. These groups eventually included local authority tenants, women's groups including refuges, ‘black’ i.e. racially self-defined groups. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Article Subject The topic of the resource Practice Management Incorporation 4pp. Description An account of the resource Al CVS'B PRACTICE MANAGEMENT INCORPORATION Since changes in the Arcuk code in 1981 permitted architects to practice as limited liability companies, many partnerships have opted for the change of status. But there has hardly been the queue of architects at Companies House that some predicted. Ruth Owens talked to Ray Moxley, who has been considering taking the plunge, and to Michael Manser and Andrew Derbyshire who gave him some advice on the basis of their practices' experience. Michael Manser heads a west London practice with 14 staff, which became a limited company within a year of the code changes. 'The only thing that held us up was tax complications. Our commercial clients approved of the change, although one did ask to see our insurance certificate. Some asked why on earth we had not done it before,' said Manser. 'The insurance company assumed responsibility for the historical risks of the partnership on behalf of the new limited company. So, provided the company continues to exist, directors who were partners can retire with an easy mind.' Manser's original reason for making the decision was indemnity, but he has gradually discovered that a limited company is also a good way of doing business. 'Directors can come and go without causing the company to wobble. They don't have to be shareholders.' Other advantages he cites are paying tax by PAYE, the opportunity to leave money in the company after retirement, and the ability to diversify by forming subcompanies and to set up or borrow from pension funds. He has no regrets over winding up the partnership. 'There used to be some cachet in being a partner in a professional firm but not any more. There is a general drift away from partnership. Uncertainty is the main problem. Your partner can quietly run into deep financial problems and the law makes you bale him out. Partnership is a bit like marriage—very demanding of personal relationships.' RMJM (London) Ltd Andrew Derbyshire is chairman of RMJM (London) Ltd, a practice at the opposite end of the scale to Manser's with more than 150 staff. The original partnership was formed in the late 1950s and set up two offices, in London and Edinburgh, with a high degree of autonomy. They were each run by local partners meetings, and their activities co-ordinated by a policy committee controlling borrowing and work search. But around 1980 this set-up began to be questioned. 'In London we became dissatisfied with the structure, which makes each partner jointly and severally responsible for what the others do. In effect it meant partners had a right and duty to be involved in every decision. This was becoming cumbersome,' says Derbyshire. 'We needed to be able to respond more quickly to the changing market conditions brought about by the recession, the abolition of mandatory fees, and the code changes.' Various alternatives, including a co-operative, were considered over a four-year period until February 1984, when the London office began trading as a private limited liability company. As well as the Edinburgh office, some jobs in London for clients of long.standing remain under the partnership. 'The big advantage is that company structure is clearly understood,' explains Derbyshire. 'Eventually, within about five years, we aim to become a common ownership company, with all our senior employees on a council which controls the shares through a trust.' The council, made up of the London partners, elects a board chairman for a three• year term. The chairman selects the chief executive, deputy chairman and board members, and reports back to the council quarterly. The board is not composed entirely of the partners, nor are all partners on the board—some have found niches elsewhere in the organisation. The practice's jobs are assigned to one of five project groups, which report to an 'operations board' on organisational matters and a 'design board' (chaired by Derbyshire) on matters of design and quality. There is, however, no attempt to enforce a house style. 'Our buildings are noted for their diversity,' says Derbyshire. 'But in some areas our procedure can become more autocratic now. I'd like to enforce use of the National Building Specification, for instance, and draw up lists of good and bad products on the basis of experience.' Derbyshire sees the company structure as being well suited to RMJM's traditional characteristics. 'Our aim has always been to provide continuity of employment for good designers. We are not like those firms based on one or two personalities, which tend to disappear when the "big AJ IS January 1986 6t name" retires or dies.' Derbyshire's personal enthusiasm for multidisciplinary practice also led him to support the idea of becoming a company. 'New skills can be brought onto the board much more easily than making new partners: it is not such an irrevocable decision. I was keen on getting young architects and engineers into the management of the business and the company structure made this possible.' Dynamic structure Having learnt from the experiences of Michael Manser and Andrew Derbyshire and spoken to its accountants, Morley, Jenner and Partners decided to become incorporated. 'It seemed the best thing for us to do. It is a much more dynamic structure than a partnership—and the London office needs it,' says Moxley. 'l suppose the main advantages are first that a limited company is a legal entity, which a partnership is not, and second the organisational advantages it gives.' Architects trading as limited liability companies are required by Arcuk to take out adequate professional indemnity insurance in order to protect their clients, so the change does not reduce insurance costs. But if the company is sued, individual employees do not risk losing their personal property. Likewise, retired directors— unlike retired partners—are safe from future claims. 'In partnership, if one of you goes, you all go down together.' The organisational advantage, Morley believes, will be to allow more local autonomy and responsibility. 'It is difficult for eight 64 A' IS January partners to control the efficiency, direction and marketing of a practice based in three separate offices, each with its own way of working. The set-up was too amorphous for there to be strong central policies. 'Instead, we hope eventually to form three separate companies, allied for marketing, career structure and information transfer, but each with its own chief executive and its own local directors. The Cardiff and Bristol offices are to remain as partnerships within the group for the time being.' Taking a share Morley regards a company structure as highly democratic. 'The directors are responsible to the shareholders and elected by them. The directors in turn elect a managing director or chief executive to oversee the direction of the firm. 'It's like a ship—you can't have three or four captains. But if a director becomes ineffective you're not stuck with him for life, as in a partnership. The shareholders will vote him out.' The initial shareholders will be the former partners, but the plan is to broaden the base of the organisation by allocating shares to new associates. 'We've got one starting next week. Once he's proved himself, we'll give him some shares and make him a director,' says Moxley. Besides these major advantages, Moxley reels off a list of minor ones. Directors can contribute more towards pensions than partners, and have a slight tax advantage as well; tax is paid as you go along rather than in arrears, which can be an advantage when profits are falling; outside capital can be brought in if required; shares can be bequeathed to members of the family; and the company can build up more capital than a partnership, since it can set aside income before tax, whereas partnership income is tax paid. Client reaction Before the change was finally decided upon, the practice also consulted its clients. 'Two-thirds of an architect's new work comes from previous clients, so it is very important that they should support the change,' says Moxley. 'Fortunately, none of ours responded negatively. If any current client had objected, we would have had to run the partnership down over a period and there would have been two lots of bookkeeping to do.' Having avoided this pitfall, the only disadvantages he foresees are the need to file annual returns (and the consequent accountancy bills) and the increased National Insurance contributions for directors compared to those paid by partners. In view of the enthusiasm of those who have tried it, and the trend towards companies in other professions, it is surprising to learn that a RIBA survey in January 1984 found only 102 out of 4709 RIBA member practices were limited companies. The RIBA has no more recent figures available. 'It is only in the past two or three years that the climate of opinion among clients has changed and limited companies have become acceptable,' says Ray Moxley. 'Lots of other practices of our size could benefit from it. It simplifies relationships with outsiders because they understand what they are dealing with.' He cites the example of the Surrey Docks competition. 'We entered as a design consortium together with Chamberlin, Powell and Bon. The developers did not know how to relate to us. Now we have just won a competition for Chelsea Basin. We have set up a company with the others involved in the design and everything is much simpler. Everyone knows where they stand.' The future Manser, too, sees companies as the thing of the future: 'It's the way the rest of the world trades. I'm much happier trading as a director than I was as a partner. Companies are more autocratic than partnerships—because the commitment is not so hair• raising you can reach decisions much more easily.' Derbyshire, meanwhile, sets the trend in a broader perspective. 'The strain on the profession due to the recession, code changes, the need for more marketing, and the collapse of the public sector will lead to many new forms of practice. As well as setting up limited companies for design, architects will become involved in more multidisciplinary firms, and design and construction companies.' With the leaders of the profession turning to limited companies so enthusiastically, it seems that the days of the old-style architectural partnership could be numbered. ACA Index November 1190 December 119$1 For application see AJ 26.1.83 pp27 and 53. PRACTICE MANAGEMENT COMPANY OR PARTNERSHIP In AJ 15.1.86 p61 Ruth Owen examined Ray Moxley's very positive decision to practise as a limited liability company, heeding advice from Michael Manser and Andrew Derbyshire. Following representations from several of his architect clients, solicitor Gordon Jones now presents what he feels is a more balanced view, particularly for small practices. What prompted me to proffer some contrary views to those in Ruth Owen's article was the clutch of letters from architect clients that dropped on my desk asking why my recent advice on incorporation was so much at odds with the views of Ray Morley, Michael Manser and Andrew Derbyshire. I do not seek to challenge the wisdom of their own decisions. Many of their reasons are valid as general principles. There are, however, assertions and opinions I would question. Before outlining the pros and cons of incorporation the nature of the architectural profession should be considered. The 1984 RIBA census reveals that in private practice (including sole principals) the average number of principals per firm was approximately two. If sole principals are excluded, the average rises only to three. One therefore has to consider the most convenient business framework for a profession of creative individualists. A number of factors come into play. Limited liability Limited liability is the most often quoted benefit. It is a snare and a delusion. Ignoring directors' guarantees—often required by banks, landlords and hire purchase companies—it is true that the directors and shareholders are not, in normal circumstances, liable for the company's contractual obligations. However, if one of the directors commits the tort of negligence while about the company's business, he will be personally liable. It may be argued that his failure will not ruin the other directors and shareholders, but the directors will have 7. z shared the profits. Should capital is a possibility though they not share the uninsured the 'partners' may prefer to losses? I would certainly raise long-term loan capital advise architects and thus retain the benefit of contemplating incorporation the growth in the firm's to enter into a shareholders' profits. In this case a large agreement providing, inter partnership could just as alia, for contribution towards easily borrow. such claims. Liability under Profit-sharing can be fixed such an agreement survives or flexible under either death or resignation, thus structure, though there are sleep may not necessarily tax efficient profit-sharing be easy. schemes for rewarding employees with shares or Capital, profits and tax options on shares which are available only to companies. Historically, the capital of a These advantages may well be partnership has generally critical factors in favour of been provided by the equity incorporation for large firms. partners and is limited by A traditional method of their resources. In theory a increasing the capital of a company has greater firm is by retention of profits. opportunities than a Here the company has a major partnership to raise capital advantage in that retained from outside sources, but for profits will suffer only the an architectural practice is small companies tax rate of there a real difference? Not 30 per cent, whereas the for small firms. An outside partnership will suffer the investor, professionally partners' highest marginal advised, would be unlikely to rates up to 60 per cent. invest as a minority This 30 per cent may be the shareholder in a private maximum exposure to tax for company dependent on the many years if low salaries and architectural talents of a dividends are paid by the small band of architects. company, though Capital If all the required capital is Gains Tax may be payable on not easily provided by the disposal of shares in the architects themselves, banks company. and insurance companies will There are many tax aspects be the sole source of outside to be considered, but if capital whether the small firm partnership profits bring the is corporate or not. marginal rate of a partner's As for large firms, the tax above 30 per cent acquisition of outside equity incorporation may be advantageous. Timing, however, will be critical. Pensions The maximum rate of contribution for self.employed persons and partners is 17 • 5 per cent of earnings (though higher for persons born in 1933 or earlier). For companies, the maximum employee contribution is 15 per cent of earnings, but there is no limit on the company's contribution provided the Inland Revenue maximum benefit limit for the employee is not exceeded. If partners start early enough and pay maximum permitted contributions they can acquire as high a pension as from a company pension scheme. However, unlike a company, partners cannot adequately compensate in later years for insufficient funding earlier. Funding partnership capital is possible in both methods. For a large firm a self-funded corporate pension scheme may be an attractive option that can also assist with funding capital assets. For partnerships of seven principals or more there is the option of forming a friendly society to provide a pension scheme. Management control A partnership is owned and managed by the partners. A company is owned by the shareholders but managed by the directors, who need not be the same. Traditionally a professional practice had to be owned and managed by members of the profession. However, since the 1931 Act architects have been permitted to practise in corporate form provided the business was controlled and managed by a registered AJ 9 April 19B", 67 person. It is therefore possible to have non• architects as partners, shareholders and directors provided they are not in control. If non-architects are required by a particular practice it may choose either partnership or company form. Similarly, the form of management and administration within both a partnership and a company may be tailored to suit the firm's requirements. By the use of special articles of association and shareholder agreements many of the structural advantages of a partnership can be incorporated into a limited company. It is also possible to write into a partnership agreement many of the advantages claimed for corporate bodies, such as tighter control, more effective decision-making and stricter reward for effort. For each firm there may be one dominant reason for choosing partnership or company; that does not mean that it cannot gather many of the presumed advantages of the other structure. Consider the following: • Job security. It is often alleged against the partnership that it is generally for life and breeds complacency. The answer is to specify a fixed term—say, five years e Career structure. A partnership can offer associateship, salaried partnership, junior equity partnership rising to senior partnership. Profit sharing can be on a 'points system', reflecting the various contributions of partners from time to time • Decision-making. Ray Morley regards companies as at once democratic and autocratic! Like partnerships, they cannot be both at the Al 9 1986 same time—and it depends on your definition of democracy. Conventionally, each partner has one vote on all fundamental matters, but the larger the partnership the more likely that majority voting will prevail on even fundamentals such as admission of new partners, architectural style and profit sharing • Industrial democracy. The corporate form probably has the edge because it is easier to give shares in a company to the employees than shares in a partnership. But participation can be provided in a partnership; the critical factor is the *ill of the parties—both employers and employees e Statutory regulation. It is often alleged that a company is simpler to understand than a partnership but this is another delusion. The Partnership Act 1890, comprising 50 sections and no schedules, is of common law origin and codifies laws governing a group practise. There is very little statutory regulation of partnership. A corporate body is a creature of statute, an 'artificial person'. The Companies Act 1985 comprises 747 sections and 25 schedules. A company must pay a tax of one per cent on all share capital issued. It must maintain registers of shareholders, directors and mortgages; hold shareholders and board meetings; file annual returns and have professionally audited accounts. For a large firm these administrative obligations will be no problem, but for a small firm it can be a tiresome burden. Departure Superficially, the death of a partner may appear to cause more of a problem than that of a director/shareholder. In the latter case the company, being a legal entity, continues under the control of the remaining directors with the deceased's shareholding vesting in his personal representatives. However, the well advised director will wish to ensure that his or her investment in the firm can be realised by the deceased's family, and this can be achieved only by a shareholders' agreement making provisions similar to those in a partnership agreement. While technically death terminates a partnership, most deeds provide for automatic continuation among the surviving partners with payment of the value of the deceased's share to the personal representatives. Much the same applies on resignation or retirement. Conclusions • Corporate and partnership forms are very flexible e Partnership for the professional is a good motivator and is relatively simple. It must be right for most small firms • Capital requirements and pension provision may dictate a corporate structure for a particular firm e Management philosophy may fit one form rather than another e Ownership can be spread more easily through shares in a company e Client and public relations must be considered and the costs of conversion weighed in the balance • Limiting liability should not be a factor. That problem with regard to professional negligence needs legislation. Cordon Jones is the senior partner •f Church, Adams, & Co. Right of reply The AJ contacted Moxley, Manser and Derbyshire for their reactions to Jones' article. Both Moxley and Manser were still satisfied with their decision. Derbyshire did not disagree with Jones but challenged his view of the profession: 'Gordon Jones claims that the advantages of a limited company can be built into a partnership if anybody wants to, and this is true. But the real point is that they don't have to be built into a company. They are there already. This encourages members of a company to take advantage of the flexibility of management structure that is available. 'It is not easy to implant an executive management team into an existing partnership. A company provides freedom to select the appropriate leadership. 'All in all I need no persuasion that there are both advantages and disadvantages in changing to a limited company for the "average UK two.man practice". However, small practices that want to be ready for growth, able to respond quickly to changing needs and provide a better service to the building industry may decide that they will be better equipped for the future if they choose limited liability and multi.skilled diversification.' RIBA Services Ltd is holding a seminar on converting to a company on 8 May at the RIBA. Details on 01-637 8991. ACA Index February 120-39 March 12089 For application see AJ 26.1.83 pp27 and 53. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Architects Journal 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 15 January 1986 https://nam.maydayrooms.org/files/original/e9d8184aaaf53a2abdb044d1a9074d7b.pdf 7663b4a3788e9ef8ceb34fb6510298d7 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 Alternative Practice Description An account of the resource This investigated other forms of organisation of architects' offices based around the concept of cooperative working and shared equity. Several members went on to establish their own practices adopting such models. A pre-eminent example was Support Community Building Design, which emerged from a small group of graduates from the Architectural Association which went on to create a cooperative practice focused on potential client groups in society which traditionally were not the beneficiaries of the architectural profession which, we would have said, was essentially the handmaiden of capital. These groups eventually included local authority tenants, women's groups including refuges, ‘black’ i.e. racially self-defined groups. 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 Support Newsletter 1 Subject The topic of the resource Newsletter 13pp Description An account of the resource SIJI%DOAT newsletter 1977 Futlished and written by the Support Group nark Girason, „arrns, illnsle-• Colin T. a-erlor, "oolley ( teäporar" Q(idress) QC, Church noad, London 9P'Ä. Telephones: 01 965 10 or 27. iz Suoport? ?age 3Ilow Cupport Be e:an. 3. The Current Situ-ationo 5Support Projects. 50 ?.elationship ?areCoe,unity Architecture' 9 7. The -•uture 0-0 10 Alternatives in Gousir•• (.1 report on Self Juild in Dritain). The views expressed in this document do not necessarily reflect the collective viewpoint of all Support mernbers, but ideas under discussion e 13 SUPPORT? It is currently an inforrral organisation of like minded people with a background in architecture, building, housing and planning. We are concerned with: proraoting socially resporsible work in these fields. developing alternatives to current professional ways of working. developing social and political work that Will bring benificial chances for the majority of people who, at present, have no control over the resources that produce and shape the built environment. to discuss the theoretical and practical issues that these involve. Support is both simple and comple%. It has developed in response to a sireple need of many organisations to find sympathetic and responsible 'experts' to work with them on buildings housing ana planning problems. then such grours as tenants associations, voluntary, self help, under— " priveleged croups and connunity advice and action centres think they need architect'-xal, buildinc or similar advice, it is often hard for them to find experts they can trust and who share similar objectives. In addition there are many new grouy•s with access to resources, like tenant co-operatives who find conventional professional services unsatisfactory. There are a crowin'" nnmber of asenciec dispensing assistance on welfa•e rights, the law, sonle aspects of housin— often through radical departures from conventional practice, many with official financial support, but it is only through chance or personal contact that useful help from an architect (for instance) can be found. in additions such croups often have difficulty finding the money to employ their own professionals and as we describe belove' there are many dangers in relyin€ on voluntary help uithout a well organised structure. Support is concerned with getting to grips with these problems, finding sympathetic experts to help groups and finding ways in which such experts can earn a living doing socially useful and responsible work. The demand is there and there are a few, though not enough 'experts t with the experience and ability to :neet it, The more complex side to Support appears when one asks why should 9C,; of the population be in a situation where conventional professional practices are of Ij.ttle use to them? .1hy should a growing number of youns professionals reject the methods of working that they have been trained for? What new principles shoulel emerge to structure the way society organises and uses specialised services? Developing a critique of pro-e.?.aioaali-sra and tryins to work with I-ew principles is more difficul€.• It raises trany issues about ideoloe•or and social change. it involves a comr;ittment to challenge current assumptions about the way things are done, codec of conduct, the mystique o: professional expertise and the relationship we all have to our work. The idea we have is that Support will retuin a cæparitavely ,smll informal organisation not a prozeure group in the conventional sen.ze, with a large ruernbership, nor will it be a conventional commercial firm. An adequate pressure srovp in the form of the new architecture iovernent alreadj- exists. Instead Support members will be involved in carrying out work which will be monitored and carefully anal;sed with each 2. member rharinc experience:z and di.acagsinc broader problems and Ciihe ideas developed will be spread by example and through research and publicati.ons, based on the practical experience of a workable service to meet speci.ic neeus. As we become more fIvent at explaining ourselves, briefer statements setting out the principles v.'iII emerge, but for the time being occasional publications such as this will e:cpLain the work and ideas in course of development. This newsletter doesn't represent a complete statement of our position and important caps will be filled in future newsletters. 2. GUPPCRT Support bec2n with discussions between a small group of staff and students in the Architectural Associaticn O chool o: Architecture (10k) about alterrative ways we co'ald worki outside an educational institution. Cne of the naira features of the 'unit t we were part of in the A. A. vas that students work involved puttint sone of the Support, ideas into practice through t live projects'. A great deal '.:as learnt from the Glistakes and achi everaents of thece projects 'out we were always inahibited by the pressure to confor:a to more traditional requiremezts, assessrnent and a different view of architecture which prevailed in the college as a whole. Current thinl:inc in architecture and architectural education will be a further discussion in future newsletters as there ic an increasing polarisation between those Who talk of architecture' and those with more cli Sist approach. Li-:e pro*cct work by Etuder.tz in the A.A. included:— 1 ) work with residents in a ilarringay Il. A..l. 2) with a resi,tent a-soc in a Zambetli }I.Ä.Å, 3) a repo:t on squatting. research on co—ops. work on rehab with association in a Urent G.I.Å. Desi-3i and helping to erect temporary building• with a o•roup of volunteers in owindon. the completion of report on self build housing. other interests included rural development in cngland studies of and traditional materials, chort life hous.inc. beginnings of work, with a group converting w•xrehouse in P,o+.herhitlaeo Currently students in the A .A. Unit 2 are working on:— 1 ) dtudies of a housing action area in Brent 2) .!ork in an in L eumbeth. A study of low cost conversion of industrial property in &ast London with the Joint Docklands Group. Vlork with a tenants in Southwark. ..'ork with the Community groups in the Isle of Dogs. It is not unusual for such student projec%s to continue beyond the academic year but because cf the voluntary rature of the students contribution, all sorts of problems can arise, another issue to be diccussed in more detail below/later. The result of this work taught us thnt an icr,portant distinction had to be trnde between work student— could do and a large der:nnd for help that couldn f t be dealt with by therne In addition the ideals, principles and political objectives discussed in college become much harder to apply, when thrust into the 'real world . Support, therefore, would be a moans to link experts, often isolated around the country — supporting them through opportunities to meet and discuss comrno'-l The links with the Architectural Acaociation are however, on the one hand marro' croups approach the A.A. lookin o• for the sort of help Support members can give. In addition we are able to give students the opportunity to corne into contact with our ideas. On the other hand wc are not keen to be associated %ith other work going on at the A. A. gorae Support members will continue to teach at the but it is hoped that Support itself will have a sepamte base. 'u'ith the dispersal of members of Unit 11 in the sunracr and the uncertainty of mny peoples' immediate 5 of us felt the need to form a workirac party to try and develop the idea of Sun,ort. w e have found that small selfdi.fici.plined meetings where we stick (by and lance) to an ac,enda and keep minutes has a 1101%'ed us to make a lot of progress. %'here have been 7 meetings since veptember 1976 and they large-my consider the following: 1 . Requests and enquiries that come in through variety of channels — to the A. A. , contacts etc., usually people asking for information, advice or needing building or architectural work done. discuss •,lho could handle such requests. Often this means coir-g back for more information and explaining to people that where are no soup kitchens' with unlimited nuraher.3 of voluntary helpers to assist a group. i;'e also have to explain that the architect and other j professional t T,embers are bound by law to work to a minimum fee scale we Ina-or not agree with it but we are not yet confident enough to Vick fights with bodies like the 2.1.z.A. }iowever, there are ways to find help or funds Cor Groups with very little money. In addition, number of other architect3 have established the ri"ht to provide free or flexi 'oly priced services to low income people and it i 5 likely that these arrangements may receive more fcr:nql recognition 'oefore longs 2. Je discuss people who might be able So take on work who we trust and can recommead because their abilities nvatch the 'clients' needs. have been able to find help for people as far apart as South ,/ales and London so far. Ile discuss work in progress i.e. any projecte that have come about as a result of a ;3upport contact. ,lho isworking on it, what problems are there, uh-at should be donet Ile discuss general issues about working and professionalism. •J e swap information about meetings, publications etc. , of interest. 6. There is also a crowing load of administrative work, all of which is undertaken on a voluntary basis with minimal funds (such as the production of this newsletter) . To date wc have resisted suggec.tions about forming a co—op, a company or association etc. , because Support GO far relies on trust and communication. There is little point in hiding behind an institutional label when the aims of the organization arei-n conctant developrnent , however the need to e,3ta'oIish things on a slightly more business like level are discussed below tocether with c'ar ideas on how the or-anisation might function in the future. Any work taken on through Support is taken on by individual meznbers singly or in geoups, contracting directly with their client. Support does not enter into any business relationship i!ith people needing survi ces Its members therefore have their own business or architectural practice. It has not been feasible to l:eep everyone in touch with the way things Inve developed and we 'nave generally relied on people taking the initiative themse Ives to find out what is happening. we felt it necessary to arrange the raeeting on I'larch 5th to bring everyone together and discuss recent develorrnents. This is a list of work undertaken by Support members with very brief descriptions of what the work iavolves. ..'e hope to publish material from time to time in this newsletter or as special papers about work ctkrri.ed out. haven 't listed here the many requests and enquiries that have been discussed at, Support meeting,3, which haven't led to projects 30 Law Centre — survey work to aid tenant, funded by Green Scheme, in council ovmed damp house, taking council to court. South dales ?overty action Carapxiga — Job creation sch erae in ,löercarni.d, co—ordinator to work on rehab and conversion o? a connunity building funded •J.C.r. Full tirne employment. Dri.dse Road i ,odernisation, Drent — advice to tenants association on inadequately annaged scheme to rehabilitate 32 council flats, with I-Brent Cornrnunity Law Centre — no fundc av.aj.lab]e. Brent Active Pensioners aud Disabled leople Day Centreo Plans and advice on conversion of cid church hall — will lead to help with building work funded by urban aid. ct. "ignes Place, nbeth — rehabilitation feasibility study. Survey and production of report about 1+9 houses to be demolished for a park. Part of a study called • IGaining Ground" bein• carried out by Garth Resources Research Limited, funds from trusts to E. R.R. 5. Architects could be homes for thirty years st Agnes to husband housing from Buckingham 10i. ecratc shortage of accommoda. La mbe•thv co uncil•c has moving out tenants and leav. commended demolition of the ing the houses empty to st dwellings. parkland on the site of the submitted t•.ith houses and the min. is nearlyoruens]olra. to tained the houses. that the The residents council sulitaVb!el says for shlllthelm •are pr.omptcd by its desire deal The architects say the cost of rehabilitation has been Mr Tom on and Walls l report Colin Taylorthe instructions prepared the of houses, mainly St Agnes withthree-storey Place consists terrace of 49 haveb been weakened wrecking biofn• SqumEarth Resources Research Ltd, units. Built in the nineteenth da mageu h{aas edeen uctausbcYd •bthy SQUATTERS SCUFFLE with police a: they try to stop the demolition in st Agnes Place, Kennington, after New threat to St Agnes Place " half of Lambeth ratepayers. GLC, of there collusion.could be no ques- " DANGEROUS STRUCTURES notices were served on Lambeth Before starting work. the CounCouncil last Friday. in a new cil knew an injunction was development saga, in writes the St RosemaryAgnes beang in three sought. parts Cranes. of the breach workingstreet,of Place street of Victonan days earlier, housesthe used demolition methods codes.in the council Righter. Two 49 Wednesday, The notices, under served the by Lambeththe dis- Tuesday Lambethiniunetion against which extension them. agreed of in theona trjct surveyor London to the Building Acts, require tion notices give Lambeth the The of securing the damaged option houses letter but recommends the surveyor'sdemoliing to further first-floor demolition level of eight" of tion and with " roof damage. It has four of sanng two small little hope houses.Agnes Place has been at St the centre a borough of fierce With controversy.17.600 in . families because on the of council plans waitingto delist. molish the houses and grass to take down, repaut• or other- (h lemma.Lambeth is responsible Cor the over The the council Site. proposes e',entwise secure " 14 houses. Tlur• teen Lambeth three were hours. on severely January employing darnageql 17, a in underby houses' vote against safety. have demolition. and qith choice a it councilwouldbut ualiy either to link the the tvso penni+ion street: parks but ontoit side of detnoli- appear to little tion team behind a barrier of to shore up the unsafe houses. has close neither the road. nor funds a.%oca. more than 200 police. One house Larnbeth's leader, Alderman Its budget untll the 1980s. pressure had a month been earlier vandalu.ed to prevent by Lambethsquat- evening David be St:mpson. served claimed until who as notices the thus on Fr:daywould'sut ek. ted Local cillors in houses have could beengroups shener and ccun•Latr,• ters tnoving ln. not commented that district the beth's homeless. The destruction was halted by surveyor as employed by the a Court injunction on be- �Carret Lane Law Centre, Wandsworth — New Law eentre converting old building, advice on arguement with D.S. about t structural alterations • Church End Estate (Brent) hrnting study with Brent Inw Centre and liarlesden Advice Centre on heatinc problemc in new council estate with electric ceiling heating. A number of other potential projects are currently under discussion. The central group rnembers keep time sheets on the work they do on the above projects and keep notes on the problems they experience. succest to other people who are working on other projects that they do the In addition •or e keep an information sheet or, each project. One of the key factors in attempting to work outside the limitations of the traditional relationship between the 'expert' and the 'layman the professional and the client, is the need to establish another working relationship which makes completely clear the roles and responsibilities of all involved. Critical to this new definition is the distinction between working in a voluntary capacity, and working in a contractual relationship with others. Acceptance of the contractual principle implies the need for change in the systern to allow a reallocation of control and resources. It also implies a new role for the expert of an 'enabler' with a committment to chare skills and demystify his field of expertise. The model of 'voluntary work' by experts for others is frequently adopted as an alternative to the traditional relationship, and the voluntary approach is well established in British Society. Voluntary work sets up a complex though usually ill—defined relationship between the 'doer' and the 'done—by' At worst, the motives and objectives of the volunteer be fundamentally in contradiction to those he is working with, though this may take time to become evident and the results may be irreversible. It may also prove difficult to refuse further intervention from the volunteer when his true role his been recognised. At best, the relationship can be confusing and wasteful of effort, and even when volunteers attempt to rake themselves accountable to those they are working with it is difficult to avoid an eleraent of paternalism. In order to avoid the pitfalls of voluntary work there must be a 'contractual' relationship of some kind. The normal professional/client relationship is one particularly limit inc form of contractual agreement. It works to a certain degree when an affluent and well—informed client needs an expert to perform a clearly defined task, although the client r.ray well find that the export has not fully answered his needs but that the expert is well protected by his professional status. Establishing contractual relationship need not always require the exchange of noney. host important is a clear statement of what is to be done, and a firm agreement as to who is going to undertake different parts of the work and with what decree of co—ordination. Peayment might be in kind (by an exchange of services or skills), or 'oy access to eome useful resource (i.e. floorspace, use of workshop etc.). 'Jhat is eccential is that there should be a mutually agreed contrac between the expert and the client group (for want of better ternc), and that the client croup is thus able to control the expert or to dispense with his services. 2he lack of this power of hiring and firing is raajor weakness of the voluntnry relationship. The concept of a contract, of a two way exchmnge, is vital in defining a viable wom:ing• relationship. Fcr the client group it alto implies an important chance in its political and economic relationship with 'the system % for it requires El redistribution of control and resources for the client group to be able to employ its own experts. This new relationship will also enable people with skills and expertise to earn a living doing socially responsible and useful work without compromise. Equally important in the definition of a new working relationship is committment to deravstify the area of expertise and to work with rather than for people, so encouraging the redistribution of control. It is easy to slide into an 'advocacy' role with the expert pleading for or standing—in for the actual group. The tendency of the client group will be to accept and rely on expertise without question, while the expert ray be tempted to get on with the solution to a problem in his own terns without expYQining and discussing it. This merely reinforces the alienated status o: experts and increases the dependence of others upon them, rather than enabling all people to broaden their control over their lives by increasing their knowledge and self— confidence. In previouc Support discuscions the tema•, ' cunbler' has develooed ac a useful description of thic new role. a ne enabler is aiming for the very opposite of the profeseional role in opening—up the design and process (in support case / to all whom it effects, rather than privatising information and expertise. It be recognised that this new relationship reguirec considerable enerc-jr .and tirae input by the client croup, and this can be a barrier unless responsibilities and objectives have been erefully discussed at the outset, This relates to the need for a clear 'contract ana to the importance of the client croup establishing control over resources. These on defining a new working relationship have been stated in nn abstract way. Iany of the points will be clearer when discussed in relationship to actual situations in future newslett.e+s, Community architecture is rapi.dly becor:äns a fashionable expression. It is used groups as disparate as 0.2C (Architects Revolutionary Council) and the R.I.iJ.A. It is important that our w.•rk and ideas can be distinguised fron this bandwagon which is inevitably attracting many architects in search for work. Public hostility to r.i0dern architecture has grown in recent years and it is not surprising that the establishment should be looking to inl..rove its image as radical croups er,er€e withiz, the profession. Zhis article deccr.i-bcs briefly some of these developments and future newsletters will deal with ther,i in more detail •The R.I. B.A. has established a community architecture working croup in an attempt, according to 'Building Design', ato win grass roots sympnthyil. Its objective is to gather information on innovations such ac Support and report it back to the R. I. 2.1. Council in June 1977 60 watch out: To this end a meetinz held in 2irminghara recently, to discuss 'cont:.unity architecture It was chaired by Rod Hackney the i'iacclesfield based architect who has established a reputation of working with communities. There was some disatisfaction on how the meeting was organised. Lie cnn supply more details of who was there and what happened, to anyoneinterested. Another group to emerge, Jkillpool, is a referral service with a Lexrge number of women architects which claims to 'serve the community effectively as possible but is primarily concerned with 'putting members in touch with each other for the purposes of obtainins work' (3'.ti1dins Design) . 'Che architects Revolutionary Counéil has close links with the A.Å. but has different aims and :aethods to It organises a community architecture office in the Colne Valley in Yorkshire with the help of the Rowntree ?rust and is holding an :-kC Inter:ntional in July which will cost you .25 or a day to attend. It established the New Architecture *loveraent which has a larce and growing Z'.embership who have rapidly dissociated themselves from Lar:ely supported by young disaffected enplo•jee and unemployed architects, it has produced an impressive number of papers, help several conferences and begun canpaicns to refor.%i the Architects Registration Act (to raalce architecte publicly accountable) and to get employee architects, especially in private offices to join a trade union. Support raeabers ray find it worthwhile to becoroe involved with activities with its broader pressure group objectives. '21kiui plans to hold an open meeting in I,ondon (on Larch 26th probabl") and will shortly be publishing a newsletter. There arc r.ore restrained stirrings in the surveying profession: a nunber of surveyors operate a voluntary work cchæe through Citizens advice 13ureau. k'hile one night have criticism of how it operates it is certainly a need with lese pretentiousness than nany of the architectural groups. For more ir,forrxation about the Groups referred to above contact Communitö' Architecture v/orking Croup, Charles Incr.enn, Royal Institute of 2ritish Architects, 66, Fort land Place, London, Architects levolutionary voancil, 10, Percy Ctreet, London l! .10 new architecture Mcvenent, 143 Whitfield Street, London, • I e Voluntary Zurveyors scheae, (Building and ßstates Surveyors) Dudley Lei rh, 15, ia1f Koon é%reet, Lond0'.u 11.10 The ortyanieation is in -'1 tionrll stage in which we have beon pre—occupied with the content or net, i vit,ir•• than its Il-scioutiornl form. Oe have enthusiacra for its tremendous potential prepared to put a great deal of energy into its development. As several of us need place to work cand support needs base we are setting up an office in the Clerkenwell '!orkshops near the City of London. Clerkenwell workshops is an iuteresting experiment in the provision of low rent working space as of a plan to revitQ1ize decaying inner city area. One P2rt of the building is occupied by snall scale producers, and service industries. The other part is used by ;roups like the 7:Ül+ Theatre Group, Coryunity lction ingazine, the Ghelter C0ä1nunit'J 2ction Tea:n, t Spare Rib' the wonene' nar•-.zine and the Distribution Co—op which distributes publications to alternative bookshops. will send out our full addrecc o.nd telephone number at Clerkenwell shortly. yeoo.le azsociated '„'ith ' hpport t have v:urying desrees of interest and the organisation will need to be amole to opente on two levelc. .orae want to commit themselves to workinty tozether and making a livi1T P"2rt time or even full time fron socially respoasible worlc. 'o•ailt up sor.le experience of What this involves. Others have full titae or are geocraphictllly isolated want to work in their spare time, or be a?le to respond to an occasional request they feel they can turaage. •.1e don't •tnnt to an exclusive croup but the core group of oeople are prepared to ret the office together, participate in reculaa• and frequent raeetin c•s tuncl help to organise or take on work an principles. •This can only happen between people who can develop a good relationship o: trust. 'Zhe wider group of interested people are just as inportant to Support and we need advice on how best to involve ther. •2he onus is on people aore loosely associated to Izeep in touch with us. We can organise occnsional general meetings, send out newsletters, produce papers and publications for sale etc. , but this will need financial aelp. zosentially there are three functions for ?upport: 1 . Operating referral cyztem where enquiries that cone to ,jupyeort can be discussed und people fron the central or wider group with the right skills cr Ijeocr•aphical location are found to take on resulting work. Individuals having diffieulties or needing '.vice or stipport would also contact the centrnl group. 2. ..:e would publish Vipers which would help ilith discussion of ideas and issues. This you-I d inc.l.uae research on particular topicc and pro'D1er..•s "2he office at Cierkenwell would build up infornation bank open to people associated with Surport. 90 IN ?IOUSING: report on Build in The report ' alternativcø in 710usinc? t has gone into its third printing which means that about 800 entogether have been produced. Chey Inve becn distributed through the Zookshop and the rublicztions Distribution Co—op. Je anticipate (hope?) that no :nore will be printed as the dexnnd generated by the various reviews has almost dried up and we have about 300 left at the moment. Inevitably the work on the report has fallen on the shoulders of the Support working party. On several occassions onc or other of uc has been •oked to talk about self build, •so in this way we have been Äb1e to make use of the work done in the It is available for 75p including postage from Jupport.�• SUP}ORT' is shortly to open an office in the Clerkenwell Rorkshops shown in these photographs ( reproduced from Architectural Design ) ) Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Support Newsletter 1 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 March 1977