30 10 310 https://nam.maydayrooms.org/files/original/226c18ddc7cc2f630c160d42251c5aff.pdf 9af6d883022e3051a4f60602b0837eea 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 Time for ARCUK to put its house in Order' Subject The topic of the resource Article by M McCarthy (RIBA stooge) Description An account of the resource Opinion WITHIN the past few weeks stipulated by Parliament in the all architects will have registration Acts. received at their places of Readers may recall the series work the Arcuk Annual of "Luder/Parris Files" in Report for 1986-87. The BD. Those authors commented "The unwarranted and un• normally turgid little blue lawful interference of Arcuk book this year is enlivened by with the way members con- innuendoes, incongruities, duct themselves makes it and inaccuracies. Some plain that members of council passages seem to have been have no conception of the limits designed to deceive. The of their statutory powers and are thread linkingall these things gathering to themselves authority is architectural education. they do not in law possess." (BD January I l. 1980). only the The statement that "Arcuk is reasons for the gathering of not limited in its activities solely to those mentioned in the Acts authority and interference seem and may legitimately engage in to have changed! courses of action which it Board of architectural education considers relevant and/or focus for education matters necessary .. appears on page in Arcuk is obviously the board 19 of the report. Whether or not of architectural education. The this is true a questionofdegree constitution of the BAE is set and reasonableness in the cir- out in the second schedule to the cumstanccs. but it will most Architects (Registration) Act often be untrue. A more accurate 1931. It is this very constitution maxim would be • 'Arcuk is which Arcuk has now attempted limited in its activities solely to to subvert. those mentioned in the Acts". Former chairman Bob Adams Where does this contradiction states in the foreword to the lead? Let us consider. for annual report: "The board of example. the subjects of research architectural education has and continuing professional been expanded to include almost development. The report on all of thc recogniscd schools of page 20 proclaims: "Research is architecture in the UK. This not a luxury but an essential long overdue reform will enable component of a department in the board to reflect more any university or polytechnic." accurately opinions on archi- As a statement that is irrefutable. tectural education." The expan- but whether or not research for sion is ultra viro and the reason the benefit of schools of archi- given does not bear examination. tecture should be financed from The truth is partially revealed Atcuk retention fees is debat- on page 16 of the report. which able. Section I(4Hb) of the states: "The limited representa- Architects Registration (Amend- tion ofthc schools of architecture ment) Act 1969 authorizes on the BAE has becn the subject Arcuk to apply its education Of criticism for some time." fund in support and furtherance What the report does not say is of research providedit is designed that criticism has come since to improve the general practice 1983 exclusively from the un• ofarchitecture. Why is it that the represented schools. Less parti- research projects funded by san commentators have made a Arcuk are not listed in the wide range of criticisms about report. so that those paying for the deficiencies of the Act. them can see both the relevance including the gross under- of the work and that the Act is representation of practitioners being complicd with? and over-representation of The same page of the report academics on the over-large tells us: "The provision of committee of 64-plus members. •research awards has been ex- Limited additional places on tended to cover continuing BAE are possible. Paragraph 2 professional development. of the second schedule essentially Arcuk has made a major invest- authorizes a powerofco-option. The question is whether architects will put up "ith funding adventures in the name of education policy. ment in this area and must The paragraph creates five continue to influence further procedural hurdles to be over- developments". Contrast that come before an additional with Arcuk chairman John appointment to BAE can be Tarn's statement earlier this made. They are: month that Arcuk had chosento in respect of schools unre- promote CPD through its con- presented on BA E; stituent bodies (BD July 10). the governing body of the What right has Arcuk to do any school recommends a repre- of this? There is no provision in sentative to BAE; any of the Acts specifically the BAE considers the rec- enabling such investment. the ommendation (including whe- exerting of influence. or pro- ther or not the school is in fact moting through constituent unrepresented); bodies. The "dissemination of the BAE nominates to COUn- teaching or the results of cil in the prescrtbcd manner; and research concerning archi- council appoints to the tecture" is as close as the Acts board. come to the point. The "prescribed manner" At the same time as Professor means in the manner set out in Tarn was making his comments, regulations approved by the Paul Johnson was telling Daily Privy Council. Mail readers "The British For 55 years there was no Disease is not so much laziness regulation prescribing how and lack of enterprise. It is . . . a nominations were to be made to low-spirited willingness to put council. However, Arcuk made up with abuses because to an appropriate addition to reform them would involve too regulation 1986. and much risk and trouble. It is a it was approved by the Privy paralysing caution which at Council the following Nov- times amounts to sheer ember. Arcuk supposedly used cowardice." Architects are the new procedure for the first probably no more cautious than time at an annual meeting in other sections of society. but for March this year when it pur- years they put up with a code of portedly appointed additional conduct which Arcuk had no persons to BAE. Eighteen power to promulgate. and a ban names are listed on pages 26 and on practice as a limited liability 27 of the annual report under the company which Arcuk had no misleading heading of "Nom- power to impose. inations under regulation I The question now is whether Passing over the anomaly that architects will put up with this year's committees arc listed having to fund adventures in the in the 1986-87 annual report, it is name of education policy which noteworthy that not all persons stray well beyond the bounds listed claim to be a member of Time for Arcuk to put its house in order the BAE! We will return to this "governing body of a university point later, For the moment it is or polytechnic". The first phrase sufficient to note that Professor is ambiguous. but if the Act had Denys Hinton. purportedly meant a head ofschool acting on elected chairman of BAE at its his own volition then it would first meeting, is listed as a have said so. The term "govern- representative of Portsmouth ing body" must mean two or Polytechnic. more persons having a responsibility for the management of Breaches of the Act? the school. Some schools have It must here be said that the 1931 adopted this interpretation but Act is such a muddle that it others have not. It appears that makes the legal draftsmanship some representatives have been of an incompetent drunk on an recommended otherwise than in off-day positively shine. Some accordance with the require- sections offend against the ments of the Act. A few of the principles of natural justice, and representatives stumble at this the European Courts could hurdle. probably require them to be However. we discover at least amended. Taken as a whole it one non-runner. Arcuk claims creates an unnecessary and that the school ofarchitecture at unwieldy bureaucracy and irn• Brighton Polytechnic nomin- poses hopelessly inefficient pro- ated Robert MacLeod as its cedures. The following argu- representative. It is the East ments put forward for consid- Sussex County Council edu- eration now directly from the cation authority which is ul• provisions of the Act regardless timately responsible for the of logic or merit of circum- running of the polytechnic. The stance. county education officer states One perversity of the Act is categorically that neither the that Arcuk Council is given no county council nor the council discretion at the fifth hurdle in of the Brighton Polytechnic making additional appoint- have been involved in MacLeod's ments to the BAE. It must act as nomination. and that he under- a mere rubber-stamp and ap- stands that MacLeod is no point any person who has longer a member of the BAE. cleared the first four hurdles of It isa third and fourth hurdle the procedure. Let us con- argument that is the substantive sider the recent events against point of contention. At its the test of those four hurdles. meeting on Wednesday the A first hurdle argument is a RIBA Council was informed subsidiary one. but if accepted that its legal adviser considers means that Professor's Hinton's this argument to be correct. The nomination falls at the outset. BAE neither considered the The head of Portsmouth School recommendations from the is Professor Geoffrey Broad. schools normade thenominations bent, who sits on the BAE tocouncil. It could not. Section S of the Act requires the BAE tobe representing the faculty of architecture, British School at appointed annually. The BAE R ome (a statutory nomination). itself was to bc appointed at the Clearly it would be unreason- very annual meeting which pur- able to suppose that Broadbent portedly appointed the "co. could hold one opinion in one opted" persons. All those capacity and another opinion in properly recommended fall and his other capacity. Thus Ports. drop out of the racc at these mouth is effectively represented hurdles. There is a further. subsidiary on the BAE and is not entitled to fourth hurdle argument. The further co-opted representation. purported nominations were A second hurdle argument is not placed before Arcuk Council in the prescribed manner, in also a subsidiary one. Recom- that members were provided mendations to the BAE must with neither particulars of the come from "governing bodies of schools of architecture". It is persons nominated nor pare clear that there is a distinction ticulars (apart from names) of the schools they were to repre- between the " governing body of sent. In other words, the addi- a school ofarchitecture•• and the tion to regulation 1(1) so recently approved by the Privy whether it has taken into Council was ignored in every account matters which it ought particular. not to take into account, or It should be emphasised that conversely, has refused or challengtng Arcuk's conduct in omitted to take into account purportedly appointing addi- matters which it ought to take tional persons to the BAE in no into account, and also whether way reflects upon the integrity of having passed the first part of those persons. Doubtless they the test it has nevertheless come arc innocently trapped in a to a conclusion so unreason- procedural blunder. able that no reasonable person could ever have come to it. The What are the consequences? court will interfere if the test is If the substantive argument is failed. The main ground for correct then the appointment of review of decisions by Arcuk the BAE by Arcuk Council was and its BAE will be abuse of ultra vires and invalid. all subsequent decisions of the jurisdiction or illegality, BAE are invalid, and Professor Architectural education Hinton is ineligible to be The losers in this affair are our chairman of BAE. The invalid- architectural students upon ity of BAE decisions has far- whom the future of the profes- reaching consequences. It sion depends. would mean. for example, that The construction industry's five schools of architecture major clients are not satisfied would be derecognised, as with its traditional level of would the RIRA's examination. performance, and are rightly In order to regulanse the demanding that it responds to position. Arcuk must quash the their needs. New approaches are BAE and its decisions. and required if the clients' objec- appoint a properly constituted tivc of defect-free, value-for. board which must then re- money building is to be achi• conduct its business. Arcuk has eved. The architectural profes- shown a marked reluctance even sion is a very small sector of the to acknowledge the existence of industry and must appreciate a doubt about the propriety of both how it is changing and how its actions. so what legal reme- it needs to change. If the dies are available? In theory architectural profession is to there are five and they are all retain any credibility then available through the process of architectural education must judicial review, equip students to meet this Judicial review challenge. There needs to be a The legal system controls the strong partnership between actions of bodies that derive leading practitioners and the their authority from Act of heads of schools, Together they Parliament by way of judicial could formulate new policies to review. This specialised remedy seize the opportunities available in public law is the means by since the shedding of the old which the High Court exercises a restrictive code. supervisory jurisdiction over Those who perceive the R IBA inferior courts, tribunals or as a stultifying influence which other public bodies. can be circumvented by poli- The High Court cannot de- ticising Arcuk are wrong. Not terminc whether decisions are only because the leading prot- right or wrong on their merits. agonists will always move with However, the court can de• the balance of power, but termine whether or not admini- because Arcuk is an inefficient, strattve decisions are unlawful outmoded straight-jacket tot- and invalid. it can quash de- ally unable to respond to cisions. and it can ensure that change. The prevalence of the new decisions are taken prop- meaningless title Reg Arch erly. demonstrates the serious limi- There is no doubt that de- tat ions of Arcuk which is power- The losers in this affair are our architectural students, upon whom the future of the profession depends. cisions of Arcuk are subject to less to prevent its use by the the remedy of judicial review. unqualified. It would be as easy Grounds for review to abolish Arcuk as to update the Acts. Judicial review may be exercised In contrast it is a simple on the general grounds of: matter to amend the RIBA by- abuse ofjurisdiction; Iaivs. They could formally abuse of descretion; and recognise the Heads of Schools violation of the rules of Standing Conference and be the natural justice. basis of a permanent and satis- Lord Diplock has referred to factory relationship. these categories as "illegality", Had such a relationship "irrationality", and "impro- existed over the last five years. priety•• (I). there would not have been an In the widest sense, all the Esher Report. architectural grounds justifying the use of education would have been judicial review constitute an better attuned to the require. abuse of jurisdiction. How- ments of the nation. and the ever. abuse of Jurisdiction in the heads of schools could have normal. narrower sense is concentrated on the needs of encapsulated in the concept of their students. ultra vines. The question for I Council of Civil Service Un- determination is normally whe- ions v Minister for the Civil ther the public body has done something that the statute did 2 Associated Provincial Picture not permit. Houses Ltd v Wednesbury Cor- The test for abuse of dis• poration(1948) KB 223. cretion is made under the Maurice McCarthy has been an headings of irrelevancy and assistant director of the depart- unreasonableness. Irrelevancy men,' of building design and is a misuse of power to exercise construction at the London discretion in a manner which Borough of Hillingdon since was not intended by Parliament. 1974. He specialises tn 'heproject Unreasonableness includes rea- management of large and Ching a decision that is in- complex projects. He has four hercntly unreasonable. or with- times been elected to the council out any evidence to support it. oftheRIBA. nasa Vice-President This test of irrelevancy and in 1972 and honorary secretary unreasonableness is known as from 1981 to 1984. From 1982 to the Wednesbury principle after a 1985 he nas chairman of the judgment by Lord Greene MR institute's Arcuk liaison com- (2). In practice it means that the mittee and served on Arcuk High Court is entitled to in- Council throughout that time. He vestigate the action of a public has also served on the Arcuk body with a view to seeing discipline committee. News Helmut Jahn faces malpractice action over Chicago centre HELMUT Jahn has found the centre of the legal action. state of Illinois is seeking himself on the receiving end of The system uses giant re- SIS million repair costs from all a S20 million lawsuit over his frigeration units to churn out defendants. and SS ice million machines.from controversial State of Illinois 360.000kg of ice every night. the The makers suit of alleges the faulty in- During the day the ice is uscd to Center in Chicago. stallation of the ice-making state is suing Murphy/ By equipment and fraud on the part Jahn Inc. their partners I-ester B John Morrish of the equipment manufacturer. Knight & Associates. and sar- The Murphy/Jahnjoint venture ious other firms. alleging mal- cool water and keep the building with Knight is accused of practice and negligence in the at a maximum 26 deg C • •negliently and carelessly" planning and construction of Many of the 30.000 staff have failing to supervise the instalthe building. complatncd that temperatures lation contractor. Murphy/Jahn counter• have risen as high as 43 deg Cin In the meantime. the state has sued. blaming Knight for the summer and as low as 16dcg Cin called in a firm of consulting design of the heating and winter. when they were forced to engineers to repair the airventilation svstem "hich is at uear gloves in the office. conditioning svstem. Come and join... • Ahrends P,unon & Koralek • Andrews Kent & Stone • • Austin irueman Associates • Computing 9mccs • • PA)Vis • Steel Cocporation • • Building [k»s n Partnership • Butterbey Brxk • • Gambridge [ksign • Cliiton Nurseries • • Oepanment of Enuronmcnt • Don Rewolds • • Eurotunnel • Fitzroy Robinson Pannctship• Jahn (tight) Bith Messe Frankfurt chaitmmq Stauher. • Foakrete • George • Gunmnt • Europe's tallest • Hutchison luke & Monk • lbstock Building Products • • Institution of (ÄII • tower for Frankfurt • James Cunning. Young & Parners • • James Parr Partners • John Assael Panners • This sumttser secs the start of building n ork which will leadtothe construction of • Johnsons WelltieldQuarrrs • LG. Mouclwi & Panners • EuroÉs tallest building — an office skyscraper "hich is to be part of the Frankfurt Fair Grounds designed by Chicago-based Helmut Jahn. • Landscape Institute • IT.'lngston Mclmosh • 'Ibe 254m high tower is part of a rebuilding and rnodcrnisation B hic*' bas put Frankfurt on tbc map in terms of innovative architecture. Jahn • London [hcklands Devel%jrnent Corporation • has been cbosen to design the S4-storey tomr and a hall to complete the redevelopment of tbe east section of the fair ground. Toenable tbe company to • Melvin lansley & Mark • mount up to five oents pct month. a substantial doeloptnent prograrnrne been underway since 1980. calling for an investment or more than DM 700 • Micluel Brown landscape Ardlitc«s • million. lhe (air ground been divided into three autonomous section — • Development • Milrwt [klvaux • considered essential ror small rain often require integrated facilities such as conference rooms. • National Association of Alntshouscs • The Hall I allony ror of exhibition space on tuo as "ell as underground parking for 900 ears. The toner e ill provide a symbolic • (Xcidental Petroleum • Perdnch Steeplejacks • gate-nay at its base topped by apyratnidofsteel and glass. There "ill be m of tsable Funding for (be office tom•t is being provided by a group of • Powel Moya & Panncrs • Rendel Palmer Trilton • investors "ho are leasing the site from Messe Frankfurt for 75 yean. The new hall gill be primarily financed b' incornc from the Inn Parncrship • • Renton Wood Tea in the garden • Rock Townsend • Royal Institute of, BrilLSh Architects • • Sootüsh Development Agency • A GIANT teapot will dominate The display will cost almost • Sir Frederick Snow & Panners • Stoke-on-Trent's exhibit at the but councillors hope • 1988 Glasgow Garden Festival. they can attract sponsorship • Sates of Jersey Development Commitwe It will stand alongside a huge from pottery companies and • Thomas Macaulcy • Travers Morgan • cup. saucer and sugar bowl at a maJor tea companies which can key location within the River cash in on the • •cuppa" theme. • W J. Caims & Banners • Panruship • Clyde site. A sweetener for visitors to the All the exhibits will be con- garden will be seating disguised structed out of glass-fibre as sugar lumps, and the aim will because none of the city's be to scoop a gold medal for . and many other well-known pottery firms has an oven large Stoke-on-Trent and to promote enough to fire the outsize pots. the City as a tourist centre. names exhibiting at: CMC BUILDING A BETTER BRITAIN 30th ANNIVfRSA.RY O(HIBITION 1-3 OCT 1987 • BUSINESS DESIGN CENTRE ISLINGTON • LONDON Telephone 01-724 5012 for details of Design Centre remaining stands Enter 7 ON ENQUIRY EXPRESSCARO Enter 8 ON ENQUIRY EXPRESSCARO BUILDING DESIGN. July 31. 1987 7 Barclays Bank hase presented the City or Norwich with the Gurney 00<1. The 12 "oat glass panels were decorated With acid-etching b James Knight. featuring the Nor•ic coat of arms. the Barclays eagle and the and 197S. as the clock is to mad the bicentenary or the Gurney which became part or narc lays. Each crest is backed with blue acetate and side-lit, so that the panels clou at night. Knight said: • 'By øorking on both sides of the 'beet o' glass and allowing the acid to gay longer in certain areas. it is to achieve seu•ral different of cut, • 'With the Barclays eagle. I cut the three crossns "ithin the eagle deeper than the rest so that at night light floods out from them. gising real depth to the panel." Designs for the quay MARSHALL Haines & Barrow have des•gned a €25 million residential and commercial development for Skillion at Baltic Quay in Surrey Docks. project is scheduled for completion in 1989 and will provide 95 homes anda network of small offices. There will also be a pub, restaurants and shops. Have you noticed. . . that all patio doors look the same From Glostal you will of course get: High lever operated book 102k as standard. A choice o' silver, white or brown finjsh at nocxtra cost. A local dealer who will supply and install to your specification. A door that meets Building Regulations for vrntibtion. But you will also get: Three q•curity locking optionv National avadability through Glostal authoriscd installers. Plus this unique feature: A vented threshold which allows natural air circulation. with stale air escaping at the head and fresh air entenng at the cilJ. Contact Glostal, and patio doors will never lcx»k the same again. Ashchurch, Tewkesbury, glostal. Glostal Limited. Gloucestershire Gt.20 B. •rel: 06S4 297073. Fax: 0684 293904. Enter 9 ENQUIRY CARD Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Building Design 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 31 July 1987 https://nam.maydayrooms.org/files/original/61de4ddd3c2aad47571fc45b8ec9d544.pdf d9a6550c1d163e2794ef5606a4ae5943 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Introduction and Origins Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Tolmers Destroyed Subject The topic of the resource Report on the effect of property speculation on the Tolmers Square community. Not listed elsewhere. 16 printed A4 pages Description An account of the resource Contents Introduction This report shows what a large property developer has donetoasmallareainthecentreofLondon. Itspur- ose is: E 1. To stimulate immediate action in Tolmers Square. 2. To persuade Councils, Governments and ordinary people to take action to prevent anything similar happening again. The financial operations of property companies have been exposed in other publications. Here we concen- trate on the effect of one property company — Stock Conversion and Investment Trust on acommunity. _ What follows is not only a moral condemnation of those people who run Stock Conversion and their ass- ociated companies. It is also an incrimination of a sys- tem which allows these people to operate in the way they do. The Tolmers Square development area lies due west of Euston Station. It consists of decaying Georgian terraces, shops, workshops, warehouses, Indian rest- aurants, cafes and pubs. In this report we are primarily concerned with the property owned by Stock Conver- sion and Investment Trust, as shown on the next page. Buying Property Stock Conversion have been buying property in the Tolmers Square area since 1962, using several subsidi- ary companies as agents, to allay suspicion. They have now amassed approximately 5 acres. What follows are extracts from notes kept by one owner occupier at No. .Tolmers Square. “15 March 1968 Received first letter from an agent saying clients interested in acquiring No. .Tolmers Square.” “I made one phone call to Agent...to say that I cannot do anything until my husband returns from abroad.” “28 February 1969 1rang Agent who con- firmed that J. Levy is their client -they expect to start a development on the triangle of Euston Rd./ Hampstead Rd./North Gower St, which includes Tolmers Square, in 2 years time.” “12 March 1969 First offer received from Agent — £3,000. (Ignored)” “27 March 1969 Letter received from Agent asking for a reply to above offer — clients prepared to increase offer. (Ignored)” “15 May 1969 Further letter from Agent asking what are my terms?” 21 May 1969 Ifinally wrote to Agent saying not interested as offer does not represent market value of house and not sufficient to buy a comparable house. Told them to come back when plans accepted by competent Authority.” “20 June 1969 Agent replied to above saying clients prepared to allow me to remain in the house (at a rental) for a couple of years. What price would Iaccept? (Ignored) November 1970 Land costs now estim- ated at £375,000 per acre. At this figure /and on which my house stands isworth £10,000. “3 December 1970 Agent rang to say clients now prepared to offer more than previously (£3,000) — would pay in excess of £5,000 if vacant possession given. I told them my position is same as 2 years ago and am not interested.. This approach coincided with an article in local press that Housing Minister told Camden to look elsewhere for cheaper land.” “17 August 1973 Agent wrote to say clients now very interested to purchase my house and wish to discuss price. (Letter igndred).”” “30 January 1973 Draft CPO notice rec- eived...”” These extracts show the methods used by Stock Con- version to purchase the land. There is nothing illegal about it, but it depends for its success on the owners being unaware of the plans for the area, and thus the true value of the land. The above owners were not to be bullied. Not for financial reasons, but simply because they do not want to move- they like it in Tolmers Square. Other owners were not so smart and gave in after per- sistent approaches from agents. They invariably sold for sums far below the true market value. Five houses in Tolmers Square were sold for £3,500 each in 1969. Even then the land value alone of each house was £10,000. Now itisapproaching £30,000. 1965 1970 Increase in the market value of land. INTRODUCTION BUYING PROPERTY NEGLECT & DECAY Page 2 Page 3 Page 4 a) Removing the people b) Leaving Property Empty c) An Occupied House Page 5 Page 7 Page 11 e) Demoralisation CONCLUSION APPENDIX — ABrief History of Redevelopment Page 15 Negotiations. “2 April 1968 Agent asking ifI have made a decision.’ (letter ignored) “16 May 1968 Third letter from Agent asking if|am now ready to discuss sale.” (letter ignored) “25 February 1969 Agent phoned to ask if any decision forthcoming as clients were going to have a big meeting in the Haymarket office (obvi-- ous now that it is J. Levy)” Edited by Nick Wates -June 1974 Published by the Tolmers Village Association 102 Drummond Street London NW1 Tel: 01 — 387 4004 Further copies available (20p including postage). Layout: Barry Shaw, Suzi Nelson, Penny Reel. & others. Typesetting: Penny Reel Cover Photograph: Martin Slavin Map showing property owned by Stock Conversion & Investment Trust. (No responsibility is taken for errors). Page 12 Page 14 Second letter from Aerofilms 1969 £50,000 Zz 2 and we would First Remove the People CASE 1. Ms. E lives-on the top floor. For 3 years her roof leakedsobadlythatshehadtohave adustbininher room to collect the water. She constantly complained and every few months Levy’s builders came around and re-plastered the ceiling; a completely pointless ex ercise since itcame down again the next time itrained In fact, what was needed was a new gutter, and when the TVA complained about the situation, a new gutter was fitted within a few weeks. CASE 2 Mr and Ms. C have lived in North Gower Street for 35 years. They have two rooms on the first floor. They have no bath. They have cracks in the front wall thro- ugh which you can see daylight. There is damp on the kitchen ceiling. Ms. C used to keep flowers on the balcony but has given it up as she is frightened to walk on the balcony.in case it collapses. They have comp- lained to Levy’s but the builders say they cannot spend more than £5 or “the boss would kill me.” CASE 3 Ms. D one day found that her front door bell was no longer working, so she phoned Levy’s who sent a man with a van up from South London. The old bell was rusty and obsolete, yet the electrician twisted the wires together and got it to work. He said he was un- able to put in a new bell as it would cost more than £5 Needless to say, the bell broke down again a few days later. This £5 ceiling for repairs has been mentioned by several other people, and shows an extraordinary men- talityonthepartofapropertycompanywhosenet tangible assets in 1973 were over £62 million, and whose total profits for 1972/73 were over £5 million. Not a penny is spent on painting or maintaining the exteriors. The balconies inTolmers Square are a symbolic ex- ample These balconies are structurally very strong with steel bars protruding from the front wall of the house. But if they are not painted, the weather penetrates the plaster facing which then cracks and drops off, so giv- ing the balcony the appearance of imminent collapse. If left in this state for long, the weather erodes the brick pillars until they become unsafe. But at this point instead of replastering and painting, Levy’s builders merely knock down the balcony altogether, leaving an ugly scar. There is little objection from the residents, as by this time they are terrified that every time they walk in and out of their front door it is going to coll- apse, and are easily persuaded (wrongly) that the bal- conies are structurally unsound. The first balcony was taken down in 1969, and now only8 of the original 15 are left standing. TWO HOUSES IN TOLMERS SQUARE: Guess which house isowned by Stock Conversion? No obvious cases of winkling have come to light. Fortunately all the remaining tenants are oncontrolled and unfurnished tenancies. Stock Conversion’s methods are more subtle: they simply do the minimum of repairs, and do thosebadly, until the tenants are so fed up that they can’t wait to. get out. Martin Slavin Gower Street Houses taken from a Martin Slavin “The neighbours warm and friendly, The shops were bright and gaysnem Until plans were developed To change their lives one day.” (extract from apoem by Margarite Westo, akcal resident) As members will be aware, the area is run down and ripe for redevelopment.” (Camden Council Minutes 10 Jan 1973). That the area is now run down is evident toevery- one.W hether is is ripe for re-development is open to debate. W hat is seldom asked is why the area is run down. On closer i spection it appears that the area is run down mainly as a result of the activities of Stock Conversion who seem to have a deliberate policy of creating neglect and decay. “Our areawillneverbethesameaga not want it to be. What we would like is to bring back the varied life and bustling activity of the commur ity asitwasbeforepoliticalandfinancialspeculation ~ stepped in to lower the quality of life and cause the houses to fall to rack and ruin,” (Sheenagh Goodingham — Tolmers News No. 4) CASE 4 Mr. and Ms.A live in Hampstead Road with their two children and Ms. A’s mother. They are Greek and can- not speak English. They live on the first and second floors for which they pay £20 per month. The third floor has been empty since 1960 and ispresently occ- upied by an assortment of buckets and baths to collect the water which comes through the roof and subsequ- ently to their flat. The basement and ground floors have been empty since 1948 and are frequented only by rats. A musty smell emanates from these floors and pervades the whole house. Many of the walls are damp and peeling, and in the toilet it is only several thicknesses of lino which prevents one from falling through the rotten floor. There is no bath. “Someone came round from Stock Conversion three months ago, but they said they were not inter- ested in doing repairs because the buildings would be coming down. They didn’t say it like that, they used big posh words that we’re not used to.” explained Ms. A’s son-in-law, who was acting as interpreter. AccordingtoalocalnewspaperreportCae Journal 7/6/ 1974), a spokesman from’ I.E.& J. Levy said “Nobody from here has examined‘the house at all.”*He suggested that the men who called on the family were “probably bogus and from one of these local associations which set themselves up as do- gooders.” “If you are talking about the top floor, the family doesn’t have the top floor as part of their ten- ancy, so it is no concern to them.” he added.” As soon asany property isvacated, either because the occupants move away or die, it is boarded up and left empty. At present Stock Conyersion own 67 houses. Of these, 14 are completely empty, or occupied by squatters, 31 are partially empty. Altogether, 242 habitable rooms are empty, which represents 39% of their housing stock. They also own approximately 98,000 sq. ft. of commercial space, of which 28,000 sq. ft. is empty; comprising 8 shops, 1 bank, workshops, storage and offices. Over 2/3 of an acre of their land is vacant or being used for temporary car parking. Some houses in the area have been empty for over 8 years. This is totally absurd when in 1971 the number of ‘officially’ homeless in Greater London was more than 13,000. (Shelter Paper 4 1972) POPULATION DECLINE These figures taken from the electoral rol show the decline in population in properties now owned by Stock Conversion. The view from the kitchen window Georgian house empty in North Gower Street |b= Le s ey / _ t= ‘ she i Ci a* . te hie aT = =wi 3S a> 1953 1955 1960 1965 1968 1972 1974 342 312 269 249 243 189 173 + 39 squatters. i Leaving Property Empty (Editor's survey, May 1974) Camden Journal buckets and baths to prevent the rain water in the top room. Martin Slavin mpys Cung he ) ‘ ' CASE 5 As soon as a building is left empty it starts to decay; leaks in the roof go undetected, windows are smashed and left broken, pipes are ripped out for their metal content, and vermin breed. Several houses have had their roofs deliberately des- troyed, the tiles having been taken off and stacked up neatly; probably by lead thieves. With water running constantly through the house, ceilings collapse, rot sets in, and decay is guaranteed. This is the inevitable consequence of leaving houses empty and can only be construed as a deliberate policy to cause neglect and decay. CASE 6 In 1972, Ms. F, unable to find anywhere to live, was staying with a friend in North Gower Street. She not- iced that one of the flats in the house was empty, so she rang D. E. & J. Levy, the agents of the block, and asked if she could rent the flat. At first they fobbed her off by ‘denying the existence of the block.’ But after further phone calls and persistence, they did admit that one of the flats was vacant but “the block is coming down and it’s not worth re-letting.” However, they were kind enough to offer her an- other flat with a 3 year lease for £2,500 and £25 per week rent. Unfortunately, she had to decline the offer. Two years later, still being without a flat, she decided to occupy it without permission and squat. ENTER THE SQUATTERS With so many houses empty, it was inevitable that squatters would move in eventually, despite Stock Conversion’s efforts at making the houses totally un- inhabitable. The first Stock Conversion house was occupied in September 1973, when 8 people moved into No. 12 Tolmers Square. The House had been empty for 18 months. The ground floor and basement were bricked up, the roof was leaking, windows were smashed and the toilets dismantled. Water and gas had been dug up in the road, and al the water pipes in the house had been ripped out. Electrical wiring and fittings had also been taken. The house had been used by dossers and cats and was piled high with rubbish and cats’ shit. Two months later, at a cost of roughly £100, and a great deal of labour, this house was providing a home for eight people, each with a room of their own, plus a shared living room, kitchen/dining room, and toilet. All the services had been re-connected, windows un- bricked and repaired, and the roof repaired. Since September, 8 other houses haye been occup- ied and restored. They are now housing 39 people. No. 12 BEFORE No. 12 AFTER Tiles removed from the roof ofa house in Hampstead Road. Leaving houses empty and derelict does not merely affect those people who might otherwise have been living in them. It affects the whole community. Empty houses attract vanadalism, dossers, damp and rats. Shopkeepers suffer because trade windles. Residents suffer if shops have to close down. In once case, an inhabitated house in Hampstead Road suffers permanent damp because the house next door has had its roof removed. An empty shop in Drummond Street was nick- named “the pet shop’ because people could watch rats playing behind the glass. Eventually the Council came around and whitewashed the windows. A symbolic gesture. Martin Slavin The Eis an Indian restaurant in Hampstead Road run by Nepalese people. They obtained a lease from D.E. & J. Levy for the ground floor and basement. As the restof the house was vacant, the staff of the restaurant moved upstairs, and spent a considerable amount of money in doing it up. When Levy’s found out, they asked them to leave immediately. The manager tried to persuade Levy’s to rent the upper floors, but with- out success. He was told that because the roof was in bad condition (although it did not leak), and because the house did not have an inside toilet (like many of the houses in the area, the bathroom and toilet are in the back yard), it was not possible. The staff now have to commute to Finchley by taxi every night after they close the restaurant at 1 am to get a few hours sleep before being back at 9 am, to start work. The house upstairs remains empty. 213 North Gower Street is one of three adjacent houses owned and left empty by Stock Conversion. It may also provide clear evidence of deliberatevandal- ism by the owners. The rear dormer windows and framesofeach house have been pushed out and are still where they fell in the back yards. The rainwater gulleys have been removed and, in 213 at least, holes punched in the adjacent wall. Rainwater running off a rT’ An Occupied House Collapses ral! above: an empty house decays. On Saturday 13 October 1973, an occupied house owned by Stock Conversion collapsed with only a few minutes warning. Mr. Maria Castro and two friends who were living in the house managed to escape with- out serious injury, although they lost al their possess- ions. Mr. Castro suffered extreme shock. The cause of the collapse was never made public despite a call for a public inquiry made by the TVA. Camden’s District Surveyor felt that there was no need for an inquiry. He commented that “thebuilding just got tiredof standing.” According to the Hampstcad & Highgate Express (19 October 1973), a spokesman for D. E. & J. Levy said they would be holding a thorough investigation into what had happened. The results of this have not been released. Various theories were put forward as to why the building collapsed: It may have been affected by the heavy traffic in Hampstead Road; or by strong vibrat- ions which occured when piles were driven into the ground for the foundations ofthe Euston Centre across the road; or perhaps an ill-conceived conversion, which knocked holes in the party wall to make a large caravan showroom and thus weakened the struc- ture. Some people believe it was deliberate, as Builders hired by Stock Conversion were actually working in the building minutes before the collapse. While it would be unfair, perhaps, to accuse Stock Conversion of deliberately knocking the building down, collapsing houses is the logical conclusion of their pol- icy of neglect and decay. “Joe Levy was responsible for this” was an extremely apt, though short-lived, slogan painted across the hoardings. The unwillingness of the Council to hold an inquiry into the cause of the collapse shows the reluctance of the Council to take any action which might antagonise Stock Conversion. left: The potential of the house becomes apparent after squatters have begun work + OO yeneaee vbbbber the roof pours into the room below and holes, probab- ly deliberately made, in each of the floors, allows this water to run down the inner face of the wall. In time, the wall will, ifleft, bow and eventually collapse. This house has recently been moved into by squat- ters, who are attempting to renovate it and make it habitable. moys cung New Civil Engineer Ken Morgan i |iis (D.a ily Telegraph Magazine 30/10/1970) The Tolmer Ci a was another victim. It was bought by Stock Co 1and closed in March 1972. No- one asked the + rons if they would prefer an office block Mr. Andrew Keeshan, the manager, said; “It’s a terrible shame to see the place close. We haye more than 1,000 regular patrons and Idon’t know where they will go.” (St Pancras Chronicle 17/3/72, The cinema was pulled down in June 1973, despite a petition from local residents asking that it should be left standing until they had moved away. Stock Con- version just moved the bulldozers inone Saturday morning. For over a year, the site has remained empty, surroun- ded by abarbed wire fence. Stock Conversion wanted to use the site for a car park but this was quashed after a petition to the Council from the Tolmers Village Ass- ociation. The Association wanted to use it for a child- ren’s play area or recreation space but Stock Convers- ion was not amenable to the idea. There is no profit in playgrounds. Who Are The Real Vandals In Our Society? Ken Morgan Destruction of Tolmer Cinema ‘A mere two tube stops from the Cinicenta you'll find, if you look hard enough, “the cheapest cinema in the UK” -the Tolmer.....at 2s 6d. downstairs, and 3s 6d. up, it is probably the cheapest cinema around, and just to make sure that this fact doesn’t breed contempt, there’s a little notice pinned up above the ticket booth No sleeping in the s ...the university crowd are turning ~ ,“and we get a lot of young couples. The is a loyal matinee too: old age pensioners. Some of them come three times a week. We only charge them Od-” Slavin Mart Demoralisation All these tactics employed by Stock Conversion lead to demoralisation. In Tolmers Square no-one is surpri- sed to see things collapsing any more. Decay and neg- lect have become ‘the way things are’. They are part of life In practice, this means different things for differ- ent people. Some people (those that can) give up and move elsewhere. But the majority are not so lucky They cannot afford to move and the Council has been unwilling to rehouse people until the land comes into their ownership. (Why should they anyway? They didn’t cause the problem). These people just sit and wait and watch things falling apart around them. Some are angry, but most are merely disillusioned about everything and every- body and give up al hope of ever being able to do any- thing constructive. Sometimes there is talk about what a nice place it used to be, but even this is forgotten and gives way to the shame of living in such despicable surroundings. As Ms. H, a particularly resilient person, says; ‘I want to get out. It’s not for me, it’s for the kids. They’re ashamed to live in these houses.’ Her son, aged fifteen, won’t tel his friends where he lives, and will never let them come into the house. ‘He keeps saying, “when are we going to move?”’’ The whole of Tolmers Square now has such a neglect- ed, crumbling appearance that only those with tech- nical knowledge, or vision, can imagine that it is poss- ible or desirable to renovate and restore it. In fact, the houses are structurally sound and could still be renov- ated if action is taken soon. Martin Slavin “The buildings date back to the mid-nineteenth cen- tury, and although the original standard of construct- ion is not high, the houses have stood for over a hund- red years and are capable ofa useful future life.” ‘The case for retention should not be based on the extent of structural work required. Virtually al the buildings in the area will have a further 30 years life if certain localised repairs were carried out.” (Renton Howard Wood (Consultant Architects) Report No. 2, March 1974). The situation described is intolerable in a ‘civilised’ society, and exposes the inadequacy of our present system for managing city development. To summarise the situation in Tolmers Square: 1. Stock Conversion’s interests in the area are purely financial. They are only responsible to their shareholders, probably none of whom live in the area. No-one who lives or works in the area has any control over Stock Conversion, nor any way of influencing them, other than by direct action. Yet Stock Conversion have been able to disrupt the lives of many people, and virtually destroy a thri- ving part of a city. They have been able to exploit the rising land value and rising office rents to such an ex- tent that the Council has been unable to develop on their own, so forcing the Council to do a deal with them in order to obtain any re-development, a redev- elopment made increasingly necessary by Stock Con- version’s destructive behaviour. 2. Successive councils have been completely un- successful in carrying out any development or main- taining the area. Despite repeated declared intentions tore-develop ,they have been constantly thwarted by lack of planning legislation, lack of resources, and lack of government support. 3. Asa result, the area has suffered extreme plan- ning blight. 4. The vast mass of housing and public health leg- islation has proyen totally ineffective in preventing decay, bad housing conditions, and loss of amenities. 5. There must be an end to speculation in land and property. The government must either nationalise land, or tax al speculative profits at 100%. What has happen- ed in Tolmers Square is largely the result of rising land values. The land has risen from £50,000 per acre in 1965, to approximately £800,000 per acre in 1973; an inc- rease of 1,600%. Even if the land is compulsory pur- chased now, Stock Conversion would still make a profit because the Council (in other words, the ratepayers and taxpayers) would have to pay compensation at the pre- sent market value of the land; approximately £3 million. This profit would be obtained by doing absolutely no- thing except buying up land and running down a com- isrise in land value has nothing to do with the area itself, but merely the potential use of the land which is determined by planning permission given by local authorities. Inother words, itisa yaluecreated by the community at large. All profits created by the exploitation of this increasing value should therefore accrue to the community, and not to private individ- uals. As far as Tolmers Square is concerned, the whole area must be brought into public ownership immedi- ately, and legislation should be introduced so that the community does not haye to pay the inflated costs. 6. Planning and management must be decentralised so as to give people more control over the places they live and work in. Whether the controlling agency is a Council or property company, it is becoming increas- ingly clear that they are unable to plan or manage their property effectively. Resources and power should be channeled to as lowalevel as possible; i.e. to com- munity associations, tenants’ groups, self help projects etc. Only in this way will the barbarity presented in this report be avoided. & = = If these houses were renovated, they would almost certainly provide a higher standard of housing accom- odation than can be provided by new Council constr- uction at the present time. CONCLUSIONS a APPENDIX Brief History Of Redevelopment Negotiations commercial profits. However, the end result was that Stock Conversion stood to make £20 million profit, whereas Camden’s subsidy was £3'% million. Camden’s officers were asked to commence nego- tiations with Stock Conversion. 1959 1960 1961 1962 1963 1968 1970 _ Planning application submitted by private developers to build a 24 storey block on the site between Tolmers Square and Euston Rd. * (eventually shelved) Another planning application submitted for asimilar scheme. (also shelved) LCC start considering including the area in a comprehensive development area. Stock Conversion and Investment Trust star- ted buying up property in the Tolmers Sq. area. At this time land was worth only £50, 000 per acre. _ Planning blight sets in: An owner occupier is advised by the Council’s (St. Pancras) archi- tects department ‘not to make any expensive decorating or repairs — just normal upkeep’ as demolition is imminent. (Owner occupier’s diary} ; Camden Council issued a compulsory purch- ase order on some of the property in the area. Owing to ‘financial aspects’ none of this pro- perty belonged to Stock Conversion. The Minister of Housing and Local govern- ment turned down the compulsory purchase order principally because of the excessive cost of the land, at that time considered to be in the region of £300,000 per acre. The minister was not prepared to pay more than £200,000 per acre. The increase in land val- ues was of,course largely the result of Stock Conversion’s activities. Smaller speculators and landowners, realising what was happen- _ing, revalued their property upwards, so con- tfibuting t6 the general inflationary situation in land prices. Stock Conversion proposed a deal to the Council for ajoint redevelopment scheme. 1973 Jan. July. Aug. Sept. The Council considered that the Levy deal was ‘the only way in which the Council will obtain the planning objective of comprehen- sive development providing asatisfactory housing content.....and at the same time, ensure that the land can be acquired at a cost acceptable to the Department of the Environ- ment’ (Council Minutes 10 January 1973). The Council therefore approved the heads of agreement, and started issuing compulsory” purchase orders. Claudius Properties proposed a deal to Cam- den Council. They offered to do exactly the same as Levy except that being a non-profit making company, al the profits from the scheme would be ploughed back into the community. —(The Tolmers Cinema was demolished) The Tolmers Village Association was formed by local people to represent their interests. The Council’s Committe Planning and Res- ources Committee (now in charge of Tolmers Square development) recommended that the Council should go ahead with the Levy Deal. They rejected the Claudius proposal on the grounds that the ‘Secretary of State would be most unlikely to confirm a compulsory purchase order to enable the Council to carry out the proposals.’ Stock Conversion were by this time the major landowners with a total of 4.96 acres, and the Claudius proposal was dependent on the compulsory purchase of their property. Land was now costing between £600,000 and £1,000,000 per acre. The “Stop The Levy Deal Campaign’ was launched by several Camden tenants’ groups to persuade the Council to change its mind on the grounds that: “CAMDEN willsacrificethechanceofhou- sing twice as many people with the money from Tolmers Square. CAMDEN will sacrifice the chance of proving that the profits of commercial dev- elopment can be kept for the community. CAMDEN willsacrificethechanceof proving that the power of the big developers can be challenged. (Stop The Levy Deal Leaf- let). 8,000 signatures were obtained. The full council turned down both deals pending investigation of other alternatives. 1971 THE LEVY DEAL “The company was to retain one acre of the site on which it was to build 250,000 square feet gross of officespaceand120,000squarefeetofindustrial space; the remainder of the site was to be turned over to the Council to build housing. As part of the bargain the Council would support an application for an office development permit — despite a plot ratio of 8: 1 — and obtain compulsory purchase orders on any part of thesitenotownedeitherbyStockConversionorthe Council.’ (CIS Report). In addition to subsidised hou- sing land, the Council was to be given a share in the | TOLMERS SQUARE Oct. Nov. _ Occupied house in Hampstead Road collapses. 1974 April | Compulsory purchase orders are issued but again not on any of the property owned by Stock Conversion. Instead, the Council asks their officers to prepare a report on the ‘imp- lications of acquisition by compulsory pow- ers of further housing and other properties in the area.’ (Council Minutes — 24 April 1974). Martin Slavin Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Tolmers Village Association, Edited by Nick Wates Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Andrew Brown Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource June 1974 https://nam.maydayrooms.org/files/original/93d41bd15f750908561e618903735d57.pdf 55b07b994ad225f0ea9322c8abed0401 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Liaison Group Including London Group Subject The topic of the resource Liaison Groups: NAM was initially structured as local groups. There was also a Liaison Group whose role was to coordinate the different groups, deal with correspondence and arrange the next annual conference. NAM campaign groups, which were largely autonomous, worked across local groups to develop their ideas. They arranged their own conferences and reported through SLATE and annually to the NAM Congress. The seven different campaign groups listed had members from a variety of local groups. Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Various Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1976-1979 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Tower Mill Subject The topic of the resource Programme for Weekend meeting in Norfolk 2 pp Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Ian Tod 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 5 Feb 1980 https://nam.maydayrooms.org/files/original/b167ee38f31043274e69d97401a476e7.pdf 827e455fba66bd8cb7c62f006d8c04bc Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Professional Issues Description An account of the resource A cohort of NAM members became engaged with the professional registration body, standing as elected councillors on the Architects Registration Council and its various committees. Hitherto entirely dominated by the RIBA bloc, the Council began to yield to a new dynamic through NAM's involvement, enabling fresh perspectives on such issues as mandatory fee scales, greater lay representation on the body, ethically-based standards of professional conduct, etc. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Unattached architects ask DOE for fair treatment Subject The topic of the resource Unattached architects ask DOE for fair treatment (3 pp) Description An account of the resource . 1 "Equal Opportunities for all the building industry professionals to be Approved (Building Control) Inspectors is crucial for the success of the Governments proposed new system of Building Control" . Elected Representatives of Unattached- Architects met with DOE Officials dealing with Building Control on Id April 1984 to discuss the Housing and Building Control Bill now going through the last stages in Parliament. The main features of the Unattached Architects case put to the DOE are: The new system of Designated Bodies Approving Inspectors must operate on the principle of free access by applicants to a range of Designated Bodies rather than one professional institute being the Designated Body for each profession. This principle is a natural extension of the Governments policies of market competition, eliminating monopolies and limiting ' 'closed-shops U rlhus in the general field of Building Control all Designated Bodies approved by the Secretary of State for the Environment from the disciplines of architecture, building, surveying, existing building control, should accept bona fide applications from people in all these other general disciplines. For example under the Unattached Architects proposals members of the Architectural Association will be able to apily to one of the following bodies (if they become Designated) to be considered for Approval as an Inspector: IBCO FAS CIOB RICS Therefore applicants will have a choice between Designated Bodies reputation, speed of processing, fees for applications and insurance costs. The Unattached Architects Elected Representative says 't such diversity of Designated Bodies could help the new system operate fairly for all suitably qualified people - there should be no closed shops with single institutes dominating their own discipline. Even members of institutes should have the choice between their own institute and other Designated bodies". .1 END�ADDITIONAL INFORI.IÄTION The Unattached Architects Representatives also pointed out to the DOE Officials the exact nature of Unattached Architects: rlhey are not "non—joiners" of professional bodies. It just so happens that they are not members of the 7 bodies listed in the Architects Registration Act 1931, First Schedule eg AA, FAS, II\ÅS, HIBÅ, STAIIP section of IJC%TT. Only this out—dated schedule determines uhe ther architects are Unattached or not (5,582 of them, nearly of UK Architects). So called Unattached Architects are often members of other important bodies within the building industry such as: IBCO CIOB AUEW-TI\SS RICS Contacts John Allan David Roebuck Work 01 607 0896 Eddy Walker ) Work 0532 445795 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Eddy Walker 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 Apr-84 https://nam.maydayrooms.org/files/original/f8a629a956cb8330fd4068debf64f03c.pdf 3781cff1fb9f7ec8b8b2ee0dd2d3b8c4 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Professional Issues Description An account of the resource A cohort of NAM members became engaged with the professional registration body, standing as elected councillors on the Architects Registration Council and its various committees. Hitherto entirely dominated by the RIBA bloc, the Council began to yield to a new dynamic through NAM's involvement, enabling fresh perspectives on such issues as mandatory fee scales, greater lay representation on the body, ethically-based standards of professional conduct, etc. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Unattached Arguments Subject The topic of the resource Article in Building Design Description An account of the resource before one was oneself in the position being a boss.” When Gradidge decidedtoset list. The RIBA spends its entire uponhisown,RIBArulesfortimesuggeit’satmiononpogly, welcoming recalcitrinatnottshe and that every architect is a fold were stricter than they are member. It does its best to today. ‘“‘They said, ‘Oh yes, we’d be delighted to have you, as long as you pay half of your entire back subscription,’ which would have added up to thous- ands of pounds! I don’t know whether or not they still have that requirement. But anyhow, that totally put meoff them for calls the Rotary Club factor: good.” Belief Many principals join because they believe that the Clients’ Advisory Service will get them work. Allan, a director in the I've been asked to give a talk firm Avanti Architects, isunim- about ‘‘Unattached”’ issues, pressed. ‘Having been part ofa where if you were unattached practice that was part of the you almost couldn’t drink in the CAS, I’m not aware of its ever same bar as people who were in having procured any work, or the RIBA.” that it was particularly active on Allan said that one of those the practice’s behalf. As far as things he has tried particularly we are concerned, the only to tackle has been the assump- reliable way of getting work is tion that non-members of the through the conscientiousness RIBA are somehow less quali- of your service and the quality of fied. ‘‘Quite a number of dis- your proposals. We are in the criminatory job advertisements RIBA directory, and I don’t have appeared for years in the think we’ve ever had any jobs architectural press, often put through that.’”? After a mom- out by public sector offices, ent’s thought, he qualified his stateme“Inthi:nk we were once of clean enor well as cut saves INFERIOR WOOD PRESERVATIVES CAN LET YOU DOWN BADLY.. The X Factor range will significantly outlast conven- Accidental chipping wil never expose 4 different asked to fix up a gay bar on the Ball’s Pond Road.” Gradidge seemed similarly suggest this on every occasion. And of course it’s not true. The general public is deeply misled over this matter.” Perhaps of more practical effect for many than either the List of Members or the Clients’ Advisory Service is what Allan ned todecorat Institutions vene the Standard of Conduct.’ But now that the unattached were not required to observe the sceptical. ‘‘Well I suppose it’s RIBA code, didn’t that mean jobs for the boys. If the RIBA that a member was now obliged under the Arcuk code, iti conceivable that you co penalised for incompeten tice, whereas that is not c by the RIBA Code. Fi latter, you’re only oblis carry out your duties fait In the case of Arcuk, obliged to carry ther faithfully and conscientio. The way Arcuk statistics are held make it difficult to make accurate observations about the employment status of the una- ttached. But it’s probably true that most of them are salaried. Despite —or perhaps because of — the efforts of the salaried Architects Group, the idea that the RIBA isstillaclubfor *‘boss architects” seems hard to shift. Even so, many hold off from coming out too strongly against the institute because they look forward to being bosses them- selves one day. To do otherwise would be about as logical as a group of militant grubs pro- testingagainstbeetles.becauseoneisn’tonthatbloody|Asaaeeeea —| t:arender you represented 100 per cent of to offer a higher standard of architects then it would be service? Not in Allan’s view. perfectly proper, because they could hand out the jobs to the right person. But in many cases the right architect isjust the sort of person who wouldn’t be a done so, decide for yourself member of the RIBA.” whether the Arcuk Standard of In his view, the institute Conduct is or is not more already enjoys an unfair ad- demanding than the RIBA vantage, thanks to a long- Code.” According to Allan, a standing misunderstanding am- “performance specification” ongst the public: “It’s always narked me that people still think that I’m not really an architect, approach is likely to be more effective than the RIBA’s com- plex set of rules. ‘‘For example “These institutions /‘at where the marketplace is a needing only th water, “Out in the real backwoodlands perhapsa little bit more crude than it is in London and the South-east, it does seem to bea lot more significant than it does here. Ihave been to places where incidentally. Nowsuch practices may be considered to contra- white finish is re ‘< one-coat technique Demanding “Read the code and having Perhaps surprisingly, A philosophical about the ence ofthe institute: “Alls vocational market secto have professional associ: That’s more or less inev and I don’t see much px simply mouthing off agai RIBA for the sakeof it. guesswork that c variations Incol consistency. time-saving co ate to decora te - late rd n an immaculate even when 4 quired. his ® here 1snO . arating. risk of layers SERS" ARGUMENTS arend isacoloured|render, texxture,, aand eatherprotection alinon p inonesingleswiftoperation,Iti" DYnt compatiblewithalnormalreners vat ‘cht ingre- | colour, either, e aeonSee oe Cullarend|isasi Ted in the same bag, | colour nig through. Neola e addition 3 appili Specification is sir fied, too, because 4 S| product specificatior now sufficient to COV! rendering needs — int as well as external. Blue Circle’s cor research and develor and itsunrivalled e ence of thebuilding try are enabling t plasterers to creat better finishes In ab« the normal tme eliminating the tra: 1-2 weeks’ delay fo! and the need for d ing. The key: ‘0! mously on time .aS ting out the an cause our and Further mes from not needing to return at a also means that t | |Name |address | eR Rae [- Categories Our High Performance _ weather sinpping on designed for the alesman. IF you’re an architect, the chances are that you’re a member of the RIBA. But have you ever thought seriously about why you joined? Did you do it as a gesture of solidarity with the profession? Did you join as soon as you could after you qualified, in celebration of your newly- attained status? Did you join it for the library, for the bar, or perhaps for the half-price lec- ture tickets? Or were you terror- ised into believing, as some still do, that if you wanted to join later, you'd be forced to pay half of all your back subscriptions since you qualified? Whatever the reasons, the vast majority of architects do join. In 1985, RIBA_ member- ship numbered 20,462, out of a total of 28,044 UK-registered architects — that’s 73 per cent. Most of the remainder, whe- ther they like it or not, are represented in Arcuk by the Unattached group. Compared with the fully-funded opera- tions of the institute, elected councillor John Allan and his colleagues have an uphill strug- gle. Nobody paysasubscription to the Unattached — a case of representation without taxa- tion. _ SpecifyAstolat High performance windows designed for Britain’s climate {BEaerT 5-9 OCTOBER 1986 EARLS COURT, LONDON Make space inyour diary for Building 86—it could be the most important day's work you do this year. Return the coupon for your advance registration details. Please send me advance registration cards and exhibition details 1\ } ae u The Exhibition for these changing times. Return to Building 86, Advance Registration, 11 Manchester Square London W1M SAB ance and inertia that suits the institute fine.” Allan has been an elected Arcuk Councillor for 10 years. “Until we became involved Arcuk had become more or less taken over as a sort of RIBA subcontractor. For example, until four years ago Arcuk gave statutory status to the RIBA Code. There’s no earthly reason why it should. And there’s no reason why people who are not members of the RIBA should be obliged because they're regist- ered under Arcuk to observe the rules of an institute to which they don’t belong. “More recently, under un- typically non-partisan chair- manship, Arcuk has correctly distinguished its role from that of the RIBA in the matter of education and, in so doing, made a valuable contribution towards the maintenance of standards. This independent stance would have been incon- ceivable 10 years ago; and I should like to think that the activity of the Unattached in recent years has been a con- tributory factor in this process of emancipation. What hasto be appreciated isthat becauseofits statutory responsibilities, Ar- cuk has a higher role than to serve any constituent profes- sional interest.” Roderick Gradidge, by con- trast, is the most isolated of conscientious objectors: in his own words “totally disenfran- chised ...not even attached to the Unattached”. The serious- ness with which he views the matter is markedly less than Allan’s; and his response to my question why he wasn’t a member was hearty laughter. “When I left the AA it didn’t strike me that it was going to serve a very useful purpose for me, and ‘having qualified, I didn’t bother to join. I don’t particularly like the RIBA, and as you know Ithinkit wasatthat time very mucha bosses’ union. That was in those happy days Allan cites three categories of Unattached — the conscient- ious objectors, those who don’t need to join a professional association because their boss, partner or spouse is a member, and the apathetic. Can one articulate apathy? Are there in any case really all those seasoned professionals out there who, though assiduous in pursuit of their clients’ interest, just couldn’t care less when it comes to professional matters? Italked separately to Allan, principal in an architec- tural co-operative and, by contrast, Roderick Gradidge, noted eccentric and one-man band. “T do believe that many newly qualified students simply join the RIBA out of a conditioned reflex,” says Allan, ‘assuming that in some way or other you have to, to practise as an architect. The last moment to deal with this misinformation Is of course Part I] — but then most of those running the professional practice courses are themselves RIBA members who may not really understand the position anyway, and are therefore almost bound to present the professional con- stitution from an RIBA view- point. It’s a mixture of ignor- e@motives of those who don't? ferent examples. Gradidge’s essential objec- tion was more personal. ‘The trouble with the RIBA isthatit’s impossible to move them by resoirdgoinnganiythninggelse, They’re such a solid lump of professional nonentities. ronthe vene the Standard of Conduct.’ But now that the unattached were not required to observe the RIBA code, didn’t that mean that a member was now obliged to offer a higher standard of service? Not in Allan’s view. Demanding “Read the code and having done so, decide for yourself whether the Arcuk Standard of Conduct is or is not more demanding than the RIBA Code.” According to Allan, a “performance specification”’ approach is likely to be more effective than the RIBA’s com- plex set of rules. “‘For example 7 under the Arcuk code, itisquite conceivable that you could be penalised for incompetent prac- Roderick Gradidge Architect. tice, whereas that is not covered Everyone from Christopher by the RIBA Code. For the Wren to Edwin Lutyens has latter, you’re only obliged to tried to call themselves Archi- carry Out your duties faithfully. tect. Nobody I know who’s of In the case of Arcuk, you're any quality really is tryingtocall obliged to carry them out himself ARIBA” — or chart- faithfully and conscientiously.” ered architect?, I ventured — Independent minds: Roderick Grad idge and Edwin Lutyens. ‘Ait in one single swift Decorative Projection Render togE A t: arender need ion aal weather protectionop k ea Perhaps surprisingly, Allan is “or chartered architect, a re- philosophical about the exist- volting expression! enceof theinsti‘tAlultsoerts:of “T work as an architect, and vocational market sectors will I’m much more interested in have professional associations. being an architect than all this That’s more or less inevitable, damn nonsense about profes- and I don’t see much point in sionalism . . . anyhow, I’m simply mouthing off against the Master Elect of the Art Work- RIBA for the sakeof it. ers’ Guild. That’s much more ‘“These institutions exist. important!” you decorate. STORE | uy ‘er aeprpre to creale ever because the same way ternal - —) BUILDING DESIGN, September 12, 1986 25 They’re probably 19th century cultural products, but there they are. And people who want to join themcan join them. What I think is not acceptable is if statutory bodies such as Arcuk, which were set up with a fairly clear brief from Parliament to achieve certain public interest objectives are, if you like, hijacked by the RIBA —either benignly or otherwise — to promote RIBA policy.” “As you know, I call myself NEW RENDER TECHNOLOGY Blue Circle : Le PRECISION PRE-MIXED RENDER, COLOUR, TEXTURE, WEATHER PROTECTION w Thevery finest traditional ingredients, CULLASENID | } render, texture, and — Opel colour one.Projection-applied compatible with alnorma colour, either, Cullarend 1s colour right the h... Specification issimp fied, too, because a single product specification now sufficient to cover a rendering needs ~ 1n as well as external. research and development and itsunrivalled experi: ence of the building indus- are enabling today S$ eration, it1sfully |render substrates. Blue Circle's constant To have al the right ingre- dients accurately Pre- mixed in the same bag. needing only the adaition of clean water. saves enormously on wume as well as cutting out the guesswork that can apn variations in colour an consistency. Further time-saving comes from not needing to return at a later date to decorate even when an immaculate WA white fimish is required. 7 precision-mixed in a 40kg bag. m No more guesswork. @ No risk of colour variation. w The plasterer simply adds clean water, mixes, and applies by Projection in one continuous operation from stad to finish, texturing as required. = Completion time: less than 48 hours (not 1-2 weeks, as with ordinary render and decoration). m No further decoration required — even to obtain an immaculate white finish! w No risk of layer separation or of surface Gamage revealing 4 different Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource T Ostler 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 12.9.86 https://nam.maydayrooms.org/files/original/ffe44e4d6e36781804a5ebb3b3850389.pdf 15ad4fd37c65317019740dda43699a52 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 Trade Unions and Architecture Description An account of the resource Themes included action on asbestos and Health &amp; Safety, and involvement with Direct Labour Organisations and Building Unions. Following comparative research of possible options, NAM encouraged unionisation of building design staffs within the private sector, negotiating the establishment of a dedicated section within TASS. Though recruitment was modest the campaign identified many of the issues around terms of employment and industrial relations that underpin the processes of architectural production. 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 Unionisation Conference 14.5.77 Subject The topic of the resource Open letter & report re results of unionisation conference (4 sides) Description An account of the resource Dear UNIONISATION CONFERENCE MAY 14 1977 Gomt/ierer May 14 Unionisation Committee 26 May 1977 4Highshore Road London SE15 SAA As required by the "Special One-day Conference on Trade Union Organisation in Architecture and the Allied Building Professions", we enclose a short report on the conference proceedings, together with news of the Unionisation Committee's progress to date in working with TASS, in fulfilment of its obligations under the Second Conference resolution. As you may have read in the Press, the 1st London Branch of the 'Building Design Staff' section of TASS has been set up. The Committee visited TASS HQ in Richmond on Thursday 19 May when the AUEW-TASS Executive enthusiastically endorsed the formation of the new Building Design Staff Branch. The formal process will be completed at an inaugural meeting to be held in the New Ambassadors Hotel, Upper Woburn Place London WCl, on Tuesday 31 May at 6.30 p.m. Please try to attend. New members will be able to 'sign-up' on the spot and will be immediately eligible to participate in Branch affairs. Members outside London should join their local TASS branches and separate BDS branches will be formed when the numbers have grown. Ther will be, in due course, in addition to the London Branch, a National Advisory Committee to oversee the org- anising drive at national level and to provide a focus for regional Building Design Staff members who, as yet, have insufficient numbers to justify their own local branches. We have styled the conference-born committee "May 14 Unionisation Committee" as a means of distinguishing it from the old pre-conference committee and also from the London Branch Committee and the NAC. Clearly the member- ship and recruitment functions will be taken over by these latter bodies as soon as practicable but, in the meantime, we suggest you return the enclosed membership application form to the May 14 Committee at the above address (rather than direct to TASS) Conityirer Yours fraternally The conference was a success and we have been impressed by the efficiency and enthusiasm shown by all the TASS officials we have dealt with so far. The Committee is now working with TASS on the production of new recruiting literature and the TASS research dept. will soon be taking up some of the topics raised by the conference. It is important that we keep up this momentum and hope that you will join TASS as quickly as possible and begin the work of organising union recognition where you work. Join Tass now! where no other union is recognised. Keep the Committee informed of your workplace situation. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Unionisation Committee 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 26.5.77 https://nam.maydayrooms.org/files/original/cc8b1ab9d50d3db5e0c6bb9aa1c7231e.pdf 9825b4c750514a575affe22a6991784b Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Brian Anson/ARC pre and post Harrogate Subject The topic of the resource Various documents describing ARC ideas and activities See below Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource ARC Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1975-1976 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Untitled Subject The topic of the resource 8 page paper including analysis of profession and 'Rules for Radicals' Description An account of the resource This is a rough draft of a peper which I'd like to have circulated generally. INTRODUCTION My whole approach, both analysis of problems and outline of tactics, is based upon the following: The profession of architecture is an integral part of our social and political system and thus any real change to the profession must make some alteration in the social and political system. There are two basic ways to look at the problem; either we can wait for the political Changes to occur that will have the desired effect on the profession, in which case we can'do our best' within the existing profession and put most of our energy into conventional politics, playing our part in speeding up the change. Or we can, as it were, look at the problem "the other way round': by seeing that the profession, like other group- ings, influence the society. In a strict philosophical sense you cannot have one without the other, its a type of ‘chicken and egg’ situation. I rejcct the first approach because taken to its logical conclusion, it’ says that no group, no individual can ever redg¢grect society and that instead we must all wait until the political system (whatever that mysterious force is) directs us. This is absurd, and history is our evidence. I came to the decision some time ago, that I would take the second approach, and the ramifications to me as an architect, were momentous; at once the problem was clarified and the solution, though difficult, at least presented itself, and I could build a reasonably solid foundation for my beliefs. My struggle as an erchitect was thereby much simplified. First of all I was able to be quite precise about my aim. I could consider a segment in society (my own profession) through the eyes of an expert; thus, to repeat, I could be more precise: did I want bits ef reform in this seqment? Did I want very radical change? or did I consider more was necessary? One of the natural aims in life is to get closer and closer to the truth of things. As regards society, unless you are a mature political theoretician, this can be very confusing especially in a society as comolex and subtle as ours. This has always been the dilemma of the citizen (and possibly explains why democraciys more often a word than a reality: "Suffrage gives you the right to vote but not the power". Lenin). But the citizen has another personality he is an ‘expert in his work. He spends most of his life at doing his work, and as he gets more and more experience he can become quite precise about what should, or should not, be done to improve the situation. And, taking this position, another opportunity presents itself: he can view his work role as being part of a society within a society. His profession, his trade, his job is like a miniature society reflecting in many ways the larger socicty of which he is a citizen. This is exactly the way I have come to view the profession of architect~- ure, while at all times realising that it is an analogy. Having done that, the similarities are striking: we have a government (RIBA). We have a community (20.000 registered architects and 8000 students) We have an educational system (38 schools of architecture) we have a system of laws and codes (registration and the code of conduct) we have a tradition and a history. So we have the striking similarities with our larger society, with one major difference which I shall come to shortly. But the analogy is with the worst aspects of our larger system: the ultra capitalism of the Tories and the extreme bureaucracy of Labour. Our educational system (with a single exception is state (RIBA) controlled. Our laws are | b ~Vfoinee topasi wae aziw Bors its‘Limde @MrEALIZ2 ai vp: ad2 tof .yisrode o3 figics: somoys a = % Signo SYgig <oCs me: a 49FO at0ace6 Madeye GefILoubS 2G. .iHOdst 3 ne ME ERA MSHS KS 995 ewei two .bslic wo £ ATS ai soiESsOcSqesxc hetsinorio evant of eAlll 6°T dotde zeegr se Yo 32: MpuCT & £L eBiat »vilatansp yoTRoudOR THI .82ig083 20 enilave Bor amaidotq Io cisvisns djod ,dosoteds efonw yi saqiwollot ort aoa boead et bas feiooe 1y0o to 31ag latpssai «cs zi stapsostiricous Io avieastorg odT else Jaum molsasiota oft o3 epasdo {sox vas enmid bas moteya [entsilog a2a ows SYS SieiT ,metey fax¢ Ome istooe e's ai noitstotis amos iszisziiog efit xot tisv aso ow wmoidozg efit ts dool oF aeyew olesd ,fOLeectiorg od¢ moO inotto Serteeh oft oved Lliw tad’ auoo0 oF espasio has aoiecsieiq patielxe ofd atrdiw ‘teed syo ob'as. ow saso dotdy at ni o2aqg ivo eniveta ,enisifod faaoitmevane osnit ypreite m0O to seom Jug maidoyd ofa jn doo] ,exsw Jf 6 .n69 ow 1D «+opmerin ofa gu epniboode “GROED 3— ouil .moksestorea off tedt oniseae yi :'bapoxr yaw tedto ofz’ tonuso yoy samoe isoldqoeolidg tolage s aI .ydslooe sda oomoullai ,apnat 2 "pepo 5n& qedoirio’ jo sqysy # esi ,terito ont suonsiw seao oved aoe? tsotpol a3i oF Gadtsd ocysood dosotags serit ais sootex Tt Jo2908 tpetebest x6 > f60 Leunbivibat on ,.cuorp of 2502 eyse =4 +SORSGRAVS Snosee ody ot63 Sirow I tadd ,ors omit amore solietosh of3 of oma 1 ,ayosmomom Stow ,Footinetws an eA om ot eaottroitiapy saz Bras ,fosorqgs s2iUoIIITIG deuods ,moitpioe aft Sas Bettiusio eaw aaideae aft some 36 oLssbawol Sifoe yidsnoes 2 2 bliscd Sivoo I bra ,}isett besnescuq tesef 35 »ootitiqnie foun ydotcHt? eew Jootl.o1s ap ee olppuqte ys .etctiad ya 12 Hbivoo I. .wis ym dyods eticste situn od of sids eaw I fis to Janda 20 @eyo od dpboudds (moisestor: mo ym) vtciovoe ai aAaompoe 5 sobienco esid gace I &r5 soaisure ose od Bios I yIsoqs4 ot ,aurs :;s3eguS as % bib xo fopasdo isoihss view tage I SiG ‘tanompoe cof st wr0etsy Io top oF ai otif ak amis isavgen ait te on $yxseeagosn os stom sasbicenos sesing yvtotooe a2buape1 24 ~sepatds to dturt eft of tozofs bas tosols onieuyInod yrov ad meso side ,asioidezosls Isoltifed oxetsa 6 ste vor avewic esd eid? .@xyo es oltdye bas xelemeo es ytiotvee 6s ai yilinioegrs ef yoriupoce, ydw enicioxe vidierod Ons) assitio sdf Io smmielib afd asod . azov a3 gapia ofg woy eovip spsxtine siydiisou s asd? Brow5 saetio stom vitisaeeton iteddoun and nesttic oy spa viniaod .*xowoy sdt gon tod eid patobh $5 o%if eitl to teo7 evrecs of .atoW atin omopod nso of GOMOEE GRO o¥om GAA ox ea9 ovyotdwmi of ond6b ed ,jon biivoie IO iD 8DOf:tLonstSo Yosansteg7o “2H .wisitooe «4 — "a sF9D2 aitoosacy 3Jood thos to “HO paige pao Pe etet vraektio fm, et at yin £ sd sre $i 4 t +1 g0rK is ei on ep of eb bas ,#tow tedw gyoda selosoite sHOLSansfe leer 2 O85 sabe Pialdute iS fpoe 000.98) yiiowemoo ¢ “eteaye Innoljysoubo as 3 ag ftetsatesy) 2 mo Bas awet Fo yuoteid 5 Sas aelsissz2 as -,CASIS}) taompusavon s eved cw } (@¢nobete COCe har esgostinor toteyea BR svi. ow iors To a VE ow f > aboo off Ss atid th are MOG oo, Uh oe a 4 pe ter i € 3 aR < vs a Che th at feu tacSensemogevefeoltsiinoyongItanutiswlisJeuqowSessent mo el yiogelr bas .GSaveds af eiaT .sy afoestib (ef sp4pt evroltseseyn BRIAN ANSON ARC The political power structure with the silent support of his own profession, persecutes him and throws him out. The monopoly blacklists not based upon the right to work but devised to perpetuate the government (RIBA) The general principle of our government is excessive free enterprise. Our privilege. The one major difference in the analogy is that our larger society, with all its imperfections, at least has an organised OPPOSITION. In our architectural society we do not and that is why at Harrogate, I described our profession as a one-party, Migtalitarian” State. The description is not inaccurate. The RIBA Nas Virtually supreme power over British architecture and it controls the most history is based solely upon important element of all, the schools. If it did not many of the schools would question its moral right to assess them. As it is they meekly submit to its decisions. Having taken the analogy this far, I can now look at change in the same manner. What have people done throughout history when faced with totalitarian regimes? I begin to suggest answers to this question in the section on tactics, but brief- ly the historic answer has been to form a tight-knit guerrilla group Then eventually initiate a mass movement, then the revolution is begun. This is exactly what ARC has done so far. We have the situation where all the outward statements concerning intention and the general aims of education point to a ‘creative’ art - in fact to THE creative art, but where the reality is a jungle which is controlled by a monopoly. We, like the rest of society, are forced to live within the physical environment which (1) we often detest, (11) which we have been trained to look at differently, (111) but which we are powerless to alter, even though we are the holders of a ‘certificate’, given to us by the public, which proclaims us an expert in the matter. It is this'monopolistic' situation which is at the root of our dilemma, and to which we should give our attention. It is as if, being trained as doctors we are then let loose in society to be driven mad by the sight of people being neglected and left to die, or being butchered by our own professional colleagues (the few who gained the power to practice) who quite frequently perform such butchery for money alone. There we stand, with knowledge of the disease and sound idea of how to treat it but everything prevents us acting. Yet some of us can't stand idly by and though lacking equipment and money we try to act: out of our efforts come some new answers and again we are beaten as our privileged colleagues take the fruits of our labour and use them to further strengthen their monopolistic position. There are many examples ©f this situation in our field. An experienced architect planner helps to design a project which out- wardly is progressive and for the social exterior it is the usual butchery. good. Beneath its glamourous He revolts against his own work and using it as a reference point begins to build up a power base amongst the local community. HOW THE PRESENT SYSTEM IN THE ARCHITECTURAL PROFESSION IS ABSURD At very great expense the state (through public taxes) trains us to become architects, then throw us into the system lacking the power to practice. ae vee $89pt 54 oid” 2 “Be 5. £5; i i alo gnedroget -binow aLlooros ger dive yLuoom $.#00L woa aso d tueodpyordt fe:aieoe PRSoeeee ‘ ve OF aU anisits (eoxuns cee ee e es : = : ‘ | wit ans peecapeen os ‘ oaks ea! se |. | } 7 entoed Iniog somoteIsy s es $2 gaden bast dsow fie tek qi are oF * stEris: aIOD pa root ot ‘Stdnoc 8 a ton -{ASER) Fnomesovop Sons priaaco%: fT. -epeiier= oe futo5d frioan He r+ixa ue own amo rgue GNF Staute-: i Sut] coatJ3oTae | ie oe olidue .Apunt) ‘aside a4 ay t or Yiov 3A HO 2. Te gotaporaell 2 Words . aody (etoosinons SmQood : e (24 SoReosta oF ees ~*~ ei o2 So. . ‘od baer BEOFOOD = es iggtee-todote Loo. ‘Peacieseiare wo ain0 SiPTIEoe t stiup odw feoisoric siz Sypodt $k $8933 aaa Yibl 9tta20 to :hooncixsatsaA “"p0mGg al yibtaw + ek SL AOLTSIRS a isau3 $25 oad rit Roc: age | fe 2gritcovedOW 2. ae Baten bbegeases ‘silitzeuew sia . | | | pe ee ftotsudovexodd $3. Pe "‘'.083a8nob2”’: aswog oat ebtoed mosaye “2 (tt. Ggai ay’ ! si CaS ais Lo Jmougue jtelie edd Wie suutoutte solicits teiiyiiiiibamn ail ateiivtosid yloqonom er? .tyo mic evorts Sie mtA us¥uscemise VAOk: isotayigq«isatdtiwoviiofpeorob"ballvysotsos"to‘devs.oe‘eatloH bontsitt need. over sw airy (£0) 48328" 933 sow tt) aaidy avnsninoy ivas .. , ove ceed te. og adoitowed -or4 3¥ Asiae dud (LEU) -yyismous?ihb jie Acol of yi ae ; ont ye au ot tov bir .igtenitisras’ = to te“Bilord eae >is ow sport Se oe jdaaoffatdxoqgroaeanaminipepack)dokdy him and he is jobless. Things are worse,not better. will-thia bring into the organisation? Still he continues and a great people's movement emerges to struggle against the political and professional power base. This power base fights savagely for several years against the people's movement until it has to admit defeat. The power-base submits to this defeat and uses all it's iniative to find ways to still keep essential control. The architect is by now worn out with the struggle and forgotten. Both the political and professicnal power-base now useS, 45 a foundation for their respective philosophies, the very concepts for which the architect was pilloried in the first place. The end result is threefold: The people's movement has been given a ‘sedative’ a sleeping-pill to calm it down. The powerbase is still there, much strengthened and with it's individuals holding higher office. The avehitect is still blacklisted, THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN ARC AND NAM SHOULD BE BASICALLY IN NAME ONLY - AND IN CERTAIN MINOR VARIATIONS IN TERMINOLOGY. Bs The aim is to build a mass power base ~- to provide an alternative | to the status quo - at this stage there can be no other aim and everything must be subordinated to that end. Until we have developed that base we can confront no major issues in architecture we have nothing with which to confront anything. Until we have constructed that base our tactics will be quite different tc power 2 tactics . Thus every decision at this stage must be subcrdinated 3 to one point: how may recruits from the offices, the schools, etc., We are not spending our time here, in order to create an escteric ‘club' to discuss the malaise of architecture. We will not produce change in that manner: No, I repeat, we are here to build an ALTERNATIVE POWER BASE in architecture. Zs What prevents us having that base? Of course the RIBA - The only effective power base - (though we should pay attention to the fact that the ACA is moving up pretty fast - it was surely a master tactic on ACA's part to get one of it's past presidents elected "Chief-of-Staff" at Portland Place) We have a far greater need to 'capture’ the minds and hearts of the architectural body than have RIBA or ACA. Both these bodies have need of the mass support, but both also have tremendous (to us at this moment seemingly unshakeable) backing from the establish- ment, from historical precedent and from those who control the schools. SO WE ARE NOT HERE TO PLAY GAMES. The task is massive - but difficulty of task can, ironically, force us to think ef our strategy in the right manner. Remember that a handful cf people (ARC) faced this task - and the results are us here now. Tactics without 2 FPARGET are pointless - and a target which is mere idealism and scme woclly vision of the future - will not draw in the recruits necessary to form the POWER BASE. (opuyse eet ARES Lint OF ASttaGies ££ ee a262 2nwW agit oicoabsd“En i ae ae} %VROT SOU. i 2 ee ‘ehtmokad td astt tisiw tyo mtdw ~ ¥dHoO aM Au BHi YEIAOISAS SG escic -“YSOcOuIMISTureaeae“iM7 ASDWIaus Mise a t<atees er St: ioF @£ mis ed? ~ o8p eussde os oF over oy ifetre shivestq of 2. si JRBM- prt: aytave eonearaa.ontnox3aenar5D.owoeadtaedabeaolevss ti6 .enintyas tuoxines oF datdy Ags eatiup ed iLiw aottos ‘ge. rm oerte stat $= note toc 2a0l2to OCF Moai atic: Sao igreiaspzo: ereseb gw dake. White oven ow mtt33e5 iaof + fisy as 36 opision| ou Sone $543 me OBHEaD soubor ao ke i aIqHe 3 ain ‘Sag a ;' ithaacge: ton s1s..98 aonorie Sead ATI0F GVITAVAR dA fe g5woq sid? Psa thomevon bas tsstsh +LORSHOD coe vira HEAPS eg. ‘duis’ ‘+ab Wootsise eins ne eed (BSA) <298u won sesd-19 wor lshiabessto: a bas isot#ifoa ods soa 202 stqo> aon yitev. 6dt (soinggeen: aa avitosdest tisht 102 SAT 208% tetit oft at. itoliiea esw tSootidors ». 08 4£be~pe: geole f ‘ovisEioa' &foviy assd earl Ms : @'glqesgq sit es <iwobFialo eispbsarthrk ‘i ctiw bas bemordtonoiste. doum-.orscts [Lisa cs >f bt Bee a boseLL: J ei Amadtouog Sit isin’ onkblod jootidozs sit S Serpe i we. ig mM & re ie uw * ~se Action comes from REACTION and so the process starts until we have the existing powerbase (RIBA} actually working at PROVING to it's mass base, The Profession, that it is dedicated to the right things in architecture - As soon as this happens then we really are in business for creating an alternative ~ an opposition. The point is that the RIPA has never felt it NECESSARY to prove it4s existence - it has been so supreme it could literally take it for granted. To take the political analogy further: if the RIBA actually did represent the totalitarian government of a complete state (and in the narrow confines cf cur 'professional' society - that is exactly what it is). Then all ARC members would be arrested and incarcerated; some NAM members would be treated in a similar fashion and the rest would be watched. Both ARC and NAM would be proscribed organisations. The logic is that we have the freedom to create an architectural opposition - yet there has been no Overt reaction from the establishment (RIBA) because it realises that NAM has not yet devised the MEANS to elicit such a REACTION - In short we only TALK about our alternative =< «se do nothing. I have always accepted the fact, (though it worries me, as it implies a fear of our own language) That ARC's title and openly declared aims, might prove a stumbling block to the building cf a MASS movement. That is why ARC initiated NAM (which incidentally is not the same as controliing it or manipulating 1) but, to repeat, . ARC and NAM should be different in name only - the FUTURE VISION of the two movements may well be quite different, but their IMMEDIATE aims must be identical - otherwise why collaborate. It is my considered opinion that ARC has the right approach and further that the RIBA is more concerned about the Revolutionary Council than about The New Movement. This brings me to a final point before laying out some tactics for achieving AIMS: I would be frankly dead against our next Congress becoming a platform for discussing the actual work we do - What I mean by this is that I don't want to waste my time (nor, I believe, the Congress's) by relating what I have learnt from my community work in Donegal, Covent Garden, Bootle, Ealing or the Yorkshire Mill Valleys, nor the work any group has done on Scottish Olt, On Community Health, or the nation-wide research study on Local Authorities Power in Planning (LAPP) I DO NOT RELATE THIS GREAT VOLUME OF WORK TO IMPRESS YOU BUT TO HAMMER HOME at this stage that what we have done is NOT TEE POINT For neither do I wish to hear at the Congress (except of course in passing) what Rob Shelton has done in Leicester, what ASSIST has done in GOVAN or indeed what any of our community architect colleagues has done. Of course I wish to hear what they have leernt and to exchange notes with them but in a different context : perhaps reading their books or papers or over a drink with them. To organise the next Congress on these lines would turn it into a conference on Professional Community Activism. And that is not the problem - nor would we be anywhere near the first to organise Such an event. That is why I am also against inviting speakers, except from our own ranks or from those on our own contact list. t re-emphasise; at the next Congress I see myself as pert of 4 group trying to organise an ARMY to WAGE a STRUGGLE against an ENEMY. So I want to see us combining our vast joint experiences - x.. vnpia.-z i 7.* r ieee apes Bay .= ‘:.ag , .re¥2*.:s : 3as s> we; 5 “i é “ © . f or Gate ’ 3 etsy2 ; oe ot - . , f: sh -4. e,~.-“se2 ts oe < vs2r:é:fy,te3 ¥ qed ‘ a * eyaeee «; iito ‘.i ’ , 3 e s :=i2 <ie aoe> t f. = . sapbik :a irT:&. a:SchOMG, _wedgsm on rawMESS:yA 4f‘2: .; *< met bas. Solita o ee ea cWAR,By: i '. {eg : Roni ia 3 i273 . 4 &a, 5 - + =ae3 31 . P: peal f4 ‘je.,z- : e ialal ' j‘i: ce 2.7 ems odw' a2 Voge’ asdit~2patiscomta,spend0128235 :‘ xa "39f 3 ‘ i; a a od du = »x&t* eS * i <: 5 s‘ * - . si Frets ve ie as 2 cooy: a ‘ ye yak. £ . <<. ome <5: P voae ;=¢ . ‘9 2 : L * e " m8 : a c& : 4 ‘ os :x5a5 . f t as . 3 3;: ec eer oe asoe «= , -e =~ 5 « I have studied the nature cf struggle and been involved in community struggle for toc long, not to realise the far, far greater value of these qualities than something called ‘expertise’. Rule 2 ‘Power is not what you have, but what the enemy thinks you_have' When I was a war-time child in Boctle, we had one anti-aircraft gun in the town. This was mounted on a lorry, which was then @riven at high speed up and down the main road, giving = greater image of strength. Alinksy says, take the gyes, ears and nose. If you have a lot of people parade them before the enemy: if not, work on the and make a lot of noise: if you have neither then ‘stink the place up’. In the early ARC campaigns, though we weren't brilliant, we did have a certain boastful verve and the RIBA certainly thought we were much stronger than we were: it was this, I feel, that made Eric Lyons whom I had never met before, literally rush across a room at a functicn to speak (in most friendly terms) to me. I can think of no: other reason than that I was a member of ARC. We must devise ways to make our voice heard and to publicly to discuss TACTICS and STRATEGY. Now this would be a unique gathering. A body of professionals (and others) joining together; some with experience in the field, some without but wanting to act in the community fashicn. I feel a greater respect for and confidence in, 211 those who came to Harrogate and who I have met at the subsequent meetings, than for any ‘expert’ community activist, no matter how publicised they have been. And this is because the former hav e SINCERITY? DEDICATION & COMMITMENT, and it was these qualities that brought them to Harrogate, and which brings them still tc London £or the Committee meetings. I assure you that these are not emotive sentiments of mine, but highly rational. Just think for a while when it is that a struggle really is alive: when the 'people' begin to move. In this revolutionary struggle for a new architecture WE ARE TRE PEOPLE. SOME NOTES ON SAUL ALINE R¥Y'S 13 RULES FOR RADICALS WITH REFERENCE TO OUR OWN STRUGGLE Rute 1 'Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, polarize it’. I have outlined that, at this stage, our target must be the profession and specifically the RIBA. Doing this we will escape any woolly thinking regarding the political system of our society at large, though make reference to that society, Quite rightly we will not avoid this issue as cur overriding community architecture’. But moment is our detestation of places obstacles in cur way Again, as I have stressed, aim is to conceive a system what holds us together at the can collaborate in mcre expert we terms, and thus be far more precise about our struggle political system. This will, ‘professional’, in contrast waged in the larger political to the many ‘amateur’ campaigns arena. certainly we will continually the fact that our own profession to achieving community architecture. choosing to fight the RIBA, than if we were discussing literally make our struggle of an overall :o ‘”ay e oS: fwh76 JE : 1: ja,; .;- - ; 5 bei gen f pa ( ‘ io:. '; i " F ss oe~ es .ce 4 aig 3 _ ‘wi43 x:ce 3 }io : : : : -& ‘ i‘1‘4;f es ; 7 oe i:;F;eae. + :ne+: : ‘ bie2 F 5s a7oe } ae : 2) tow is ce ; et “ } wid . . : - . ’ a a id <:‘: hiss : ‘ +n i°a :aie : : tO oeee3 — ‘ aad : ‘ 33 | :4oe ‘ef ,- :. or Rule 3 Rule 4 Rule 5 Rule 6 -§= professional establishment. John Allen's reply to Clive Fleury's article in BD was partly right and partly disastrous. Right because it was to the point and humourous, disastrous because a letter containing over a dozen signature was slipped in at the bottom of a page and, I'm sure, hardly read by anyone. At this stage (our infancy) we must ba brash, bold, vulgar, petulant and angry. We must also be defiant, destructive and anarchistic. We know that many of these things we are not: on the contrary we are unified and rational. Don't be worried that this approach will be counter-productive: at this stage, and so long as the outsider thinks we are many, then on the contrary it will be a most productive strategy. One of the truths about our architectural community is that many of them yearn for something to brighten their dull lives....I can see that I am now leading into the third rule. I have already stated that our people (at this stage anyway: should we ever get close to a community architecture - our people would then include the public) and the architects and students who make up the profession. We must. not force our major political views on our fellows - though we should in no way deny them. If our aim is to get the salaried architects On our side then we should at all times, appeal to them through their position as assistants in offices: we must talk about things which they will recognise in their everyday work. Similarly, with students, we must spell cut their future, or lack cf it, under the present system. We can bring individuals to our side by appealing to-a sense of idealism, but we would be foolish to try to build a mass movement on that basis. "Never go outside the experience of your people’ sAlways_ try to go outside the experience of your enemy ' ‘Make the enemy live up to it's own book of rules! In every way this rule is the opposite of rule 3. Here we must use the principle of idealism at all times. It is some- thing which the power holders cannot handle. We know that, aS a generality. to have become a successful architect context of the monopclistic RIBR, means that idoalism (if they ever had any) has been ‘ditched! along the way by the Simply because it has been an obstacle to success. trying to do is mobilise the latent potential idealism existing even within the power-hase of the RIBA. In fact tc confuse the establishment, which knows only too well that we who oppose them always have the pessibility of exploiting the idealism existing within the general society. This rule is connected with the next. The RIBA can no more live up to it's own public statements (no matter how bland they are) than the christian church can live up to the inessage of Christianity - or, if you wish, the general run of British Marxists can live up to the message of Karl Marx. Alinksy states that ‘you can crucify tge enemy with this fuie', Ridicule is man's most potent weapon’ The enemy cannot stand ridicule especially if its developed to a high standard (The British Government's curtaig£ing of the early satirical TV shows is an example cf this). This in the successful, What we are - JT- rule has ‘spun-off' advantages - in that it also makes the struggle a little easier through laughter and convinces the public that we revolutionaries are ‘human’ and see the lighter “Side of lite, . Rule 7 "A tactic that drags on too long becomes a drag‘ This is pure common sense - Our struggle against a powerful historically based professional monopely is really so massive, that unless we keep our senses ‘alive’ we will be worn out in no time at all. Any psychologist will tell us that we need such variety in our strategy. Furthermore an added advantage of a variety cf tactics, is that we will have a kind cf 'thermometer' to test our ‘health' from time to time. We cannot accept degrees of success and failure in our operations, and say.... all right we did that wrong; now on this next job we'll operate differently’, Rule & ‘A Good tactic is one that your people enjoy' This is a common sense rule again. Rule 9 "Keep the pressure on’ This rule relates to rule 7. We must create a situation where the RIBA just doesn't know what were going to do next - (or where we're going to do it). Keep them guessing and, most important of all, keep them ‘stretched’ in reacting to events. A basic tenet of radicalism is that action springs from re-action weees and SO -On;, Rule 10 The threat is usually more errifying than the action itself’ Alinsky gives many (some very humourous) examples of this rule. I'm sure there's a lot of potential in it for owr campaign. I recall writing and getting published in BD, a long and violent letter just prior to the RIBA celebrations for Architectural Heritage Year centred around The Festival Hell (Prince Philip and all that). I said I had some plans to do something at the event: several people, some rather urgently, tried to find out my. intentions though in fact, I had no plans. Another time in an article in BD, I stated quite clearly that by the end of the year ARC would have a cell in every school of architecture in this country. That provoked quite a’lot of reaction especially from ‘ex-colonel' type architects accusing me of being an urban guerrilla, and suggesting that mothers who paid fees to have their children taught by me at the AA, should look into my backgreund. If we put our heads together, we could really think up some threats to help our struggle. 2 Rule 11 'The major premise for tactics is the development of operations that will maintain a constant pressSsure upon the opposition’ This seems just a repeat of rule 7, yet its worth repeating over and over again, as, in some ways, it's the most crucial rule. So long as there is pressure, there is action, so long as action, reaction, then more action and thus a sense of 'Life'. Without this our struggle is doomed. We will collapse through boredom furstration and apathy. On the other hand the enemy (RIBA) will continue to flourish on boredom and apathy. ea ah Lats Scaltilancerict ae? “3+ e e Bhasin 3;é = we ti« Sy rs a . Se : A et etae . Be ae a mud x etal coo bpd Pow SON. +s * Rule 12 Rule 13 Alinksy gives an an example Ghandi' technique of passive rrsistance, but I can't see how thi rule relates to our problem (Any suggestions?) 'The price of a successful attack is a constructive alternative’ « what would you do?" >03 'If you push a negative hard enough, it will break through into e's counternart” This rule is crucial. Having got the establishment to concede something - we must then have some answers when they say "Now ohms A” sy ge ee Oa¢ ha wate Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Brian Anson 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 c Nov 1975 https://nam.maydayrooms.org/files/original/ceb02e114085df8e669b00792fa86c47.pdf 54b9d73b34773c6b341071b01ba3b99d 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 Visiting Boards Subject The topic of the resource Note regarding ARCUK's role in Visiting Boards (2 sides) Description An account of the resource 161/86 VISITING 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 is considered 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 withstand 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 would be created of a divided profession with disparate aims and standards in Architectural Education should be avoided. These objections still apply and, as a way of avoiding them but still retaining direct responsibility for validation, it is proposed that a partnership be established with RIBA to operate joint Visiting Boards on which at least two representatives will be nominated directly on to each 161/86/2 Visit by ARCUK and both the costs and administrative work shared with the RIBA. It will be necessary 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 so that discussions with this object in view can be commenced . Prof D Hinton 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 1986 https://nam.maydayrooms.org/files/original/0f879ac0f84c22fe8738787a8a4c7571.pdf 25ba8bd3420a66a9181fe2725c24747a Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Professional Issues Description An account of the resource A cohort of NAM members became engaged with the professional registration body, standing as elected councillors on the Architects Registration Council and its various committees. Hitherto entirely dominated by the RIBA bloc, the Council began to yield to a new dynamic through NAM's involvement, enabling fresh perspectives on such issues as mandatory fee scales, greater lay representation on the body, ethically-based standards of professional conduct, etc. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Way Ahead Subject The topic of the resource 27pp. Draft Report to Office of Fair Trading marked up by K. Thorpe Description An account of the resource INTEODUCTION At a meeting of representatives of the "Unattached Architects" with the Office of Fair Trading on the 21st. December, 1977 it was confirmed . that the Director General's tasks following the Monopolies Commission Report fell into two areas . arrangements for the interim period, that is ammending the existing rules and codes of the relevant professional associations so as to permit competitive fee quoting by architects, and ensuring that the pubuc could be fully aware that the existing scales are no longer mandatory. The Commission also prescribed the procedure that should be adopted in the immediate future before the new agency brought forward its proposals, (parae 286, (vii)), and we therefore also include in Part 4 a brief timetable -of developments with draft cover notes disclaiming mandatory fee _ status on the relevant professional documents. looking further ahead , the Betting up of an independent committee to determine new recommended scales of fees for architects and surveyors services . These areas of action are derived directly from the MonopolieR Commission's Reeommendations, (M. C. Report, "Architects' Services} parae 286, (i) —(v) and (v) sub. para (b) and (vi). The structure of our report therefore corresponds with this two part brief, Part 4 suggesting anmendments to the Codes entailed by the Commission' s conclusions, and Part S • proposing criteria and form of the new fee system and the composition, terms of reference and financing of the new agency that will determine recommended fee scales. In our discussions at the Office of Fair Trad it wag made clear that the Director's mandate was necessari confined to acting on the specific recommendations of Monopolies Commission, and that wider questions for the p ssion raised by the Report which —ere not directly ent ed in tasks 1 and 2 noted above could not be considere rt of the Director's brief. This limitation is of c Tse recognised by the representatives of the Unattach rchitects. � SUMMARY The principal recommendations of this Report may be summarijed as follows : The present mandat ory minimum fee scale m st be brought to an end by 1st June, 1978. After th ab v date all professional documents referring to the fee scale m t indicate that it need no longer be applied, that clients and architects are free to negotiate fees, and that an archit ect may quote a fee in competition with other architects. The professional associations are responsible for ensuring that information about the new arrangements is made widely available to the profession and the public, also clearly announcing the date from which they will apply. In the short term, Easter 1979) the present ARCUK and RIBA Codes of Conduct p.dst be ammended to be compatible with the operation of negotiable fees. •The changes and ommiBBions thug entailed will clearly make it necessary in the longer term for the profession to reconsider the status, content and objectives of the Code in its entirety. The present fee system based on percentages off construction costs fails to relate architects t revenue to the cost of providing the service, prevents the consumer from checking whether value for money is being obtained, and hence should be scrapped. Any new scale of charges should meet the criteria of : voluntary status, manifest fairness, and simplicity of: operation. should also provide for clients advance knowledge valid despite inflation, e B elf—polici , of commissions. The independent committee recommended in the Monopolies Commission Report (parae 286. v & vie) should be appointed by 1st June 1978, or as Boont as possible thereafter, to determine recommended scales of charges based on the costs of providing architects t services. meet the above criteria. Further to the Comynissionlt s recommendations, the independent committee should not contain representatives of principals or clients, or chief officers), but should comprise, inter alia, representativeg of all parties affected by fee scales who are not party to the bargain between principal and client. The independent committee should present its draft proposals to The Office of Fair Trading, to whom it should be responsible, by 31st December 1978. The approved recommended scales should supersede the Interim, Arrangements by Easter 1979, but the independent committee may continue to review the situation for a further three year period provided its membership continued to exclude representatives of principals and clients. 4-14-3M 2 The independent committee should formulate new fee scale systems bo.th for architects and surveyors, and should be financed in part or whole by a levy on principals in all practices employing ten or more persons. The profession should tak this opportunity of initiating a wide—ranging review of bow successfully it serves the public interest, witw a view to establishing a majority lay representation on ARCUK as a permanent check against the operation of professional self—interest. o 401k INTERIM By the 1st. June, 1978 nearly seven months will have passed since the Monopolies Commission Report was published and the profession will have had ample time to assimilate the immediate implications . We therefore • tat A period of some months — but in no circumstances more than a year — will then necessarily elapse after the conclusion of the p+esent negotiations before the independent committee has presented its new recommended scales of charges In this Interim Period t it' will still be necessary for architects to adopt the precepts of the Monopolies Commission Report and drop the mandatory element of fee charging irrespective of any conclusions which the indepen— dent committee may arrive. Since the mandatory status of the present fee scale is derived from its inclusion in the ARCUK Code of Conduct, which all regist— ered persons are enjoined to observe, it follows that all references to it must be omitted, and the Code amended accordingly. In the immediate short term this is simply a process of textu%al editing — but we would emphasise our view that the profession as a whole after thus satisf in the O minimurn re uirements take the opportunity to review the ob.iectives, contents and status of the entire Code. However before even an amended (as distinct from recreated) Code can be produced, clients and the public at large must be made fully aware that architects' fees are freely negotiable. By 1st June 1978 therefore we recommend that the ARCUK, RIBA Codes, the RIBA Conditions of Engagement, Memorandum of ARE FREE SLVTTLE FEES WITHOUT REFERENCE TO THE SCALE, AND AN ARCHITECT MAY A FEE IN WITH ARCHITECTS. There remains the tasks of bringing the above alteration to the notice of all relevant parties and 'mopping up t the copies of the Code and Conditions etc. already in service or in store with practitioners. The professional associations should place prominant advertisements in the principal technical journals and national newspapers stating the content and date of inception of the new arrangements, and inviting all who. -require them to send for copies of the B ticker for use on existing documents. A note on programme. As the Monopolies Commission Report made clear (parae 52 p. 18) the process of establishing the shortcomings of the existing architects' fee system has extended over more than a decade, After the ComissioRs clear recommendations it would be quite improper to allow the present system to prevail much longer. It has unfortunately already become cle however, that certain sections of the profession, whose i erests are well served by the present system, will wish to elay* implementation of the Monopolies Commission's reco ndations for as long as •possible — quite probably until th ikely forthcoming General Election when a change of polit• al climate may interrupt the whole train of the current disc sions. * For example the Reaistrar, Mr Fordor as written (ARCUK docum— ent 4/78 included in Appendix ) a a note to parae 4(b) of the letter from the Deputy Director Ce ral of the "This reflects parae 286 (vii) (b) of the Repo Note that both this provision and that in 4(a) would not b ut into operation until such time �as agreement has been reached between the 0 and the profession on changes that are to take place. 't This åns that no changes may take place until all changes are a d: which looks suspiciously like a recipe for (intentional) delay Also note Andrew Derbyshire's ar ent that the profession has a fighting chance of maintaining e mandatory fee scale — if it wants to, (A.J._ 25 Jan. 1978- 151 ) . It may be true that if the heads of all ostriches are ried in the sand the practice becomes invisible — but only to o er ostriches. We are therefore concerned that the new committee as later proposed should be appointed in May 1978 when the Office of Fair Trading reports to the Minister, in order that they may familiarize themslves with the situation and commence their tasks at the earliest opportunity ( 1st. June 1978, preftered). We would anticipate its being possible to produce a draft submission for discussion along the lines we propose by, or shortly after, the end of the year so that implementation of the Recommended Pee Scale System may take place by Easter 1979. In the interim, as the Monopolies Commission also made clear (parae 286 (vii)), the professional associations should meet their obligations to drop the mandatory element from the existing fee scales, and we trust that the Minister will take the necessary steps to ensure that this is done, directly the O. F. T. report back in May. Needless to say the same profess al lobby that is opposed to the Commissions overall find • s, may be expected to argue that the status quo must be ma • ined until the new committee produces the new Recommended Fee ystem. Such an interpretation clearly runs counter to the opolies Commission's proposals, and we have no doubt that the igter will give it short shrift. The Code : Running repairs AB confirmed above, the existing ARCUK Code, which makes application of the mandatory minimum fee obligatory for all registered persons, requires considerable modification in order to be compatable with the concept of negotiable and competitive fee charging. The follow— � Rule 2.6 In the light of the suggested re—wrat of rule 1.1. this rule can remain intact, since it only ref rs to those architects who receive a salary from their emplo erg. It docs not refer to those architects whose remuneration dependent on the maintenance of a fee scale, whether mandat or recommended. We regard retention o this rule as important, since it asserts the principle of re xprocity between employer and gnployee for the maintenance of t code of conduct. This is a principle which should be mai ined by all architects, whether principals or salaried. Principle 3 In our opinion the whole of this Principle needs re—thinking. The Principle itself clearly requires immediate revision since in a non—mandatory fee situation, in addition to ability and achieve— ment, an architect may also rely on his competitiveriess. Rule 3.1. The word "discount" should be deleted and the rule re—written as follows, "An architect shall not give commissions, gifts or other improper inducements for the introduction of clients or work. Rule 3.2. This rule is unnecessary and should be deleted since the commit— ment to apply the recogiised Conditions of Engagement •has already been made in Rule 1.1. Rule 3.3. We suggest this be amended to read, "Architects may work for any fee, or for no fee, as agreed with their clients. Our re—wording of 3.3. does not appear to affect the holding of architectural competitions. However, any regulations which it may be necessarsr to establish for the promotion and conduct of competitions should be drawn up by ARCUK and not imposed unilaterally by individual constituent parts of the Council. Rule This rule should be deleted. Improper attempts to secure a commission (i.e. the reprehensible ingredient of t supplanting') are prohibited in Rule 3.1. Rule 3.5. We suggest this be amended to read, "A principal in private practice, on being approached or instructed to proceed with work upon which he knows, or gan ascertain by reasonable inquiry, that another architect is or has been engaged by the same client, shall notify the fact to such architect. Likewise, a salaried architect, on being approached or instructed to proceed with work upon which he or she knows, or can ascertain by reasonable inquiry that another architect is or has been instructed to undertake by the same employers, shall notify the fact to such architect. Rule 3.6. We suggest this rule should be re—written as follows, "Architects shall not solicit either commissions or engagements for themselves or business for their clients or employers, but may make known their or their practice's availability or experience, including their proposed fee, by Riving information which in substance and in presentation is factual, relevant, and neither g nor creditable to the profession, response to a direct request. However it is evident from the discussions WI and ARCUK that the main anxiety occaisioned by the Commission' g recomnendations to drop mandatory minimum fees, is the possible outbreak of "fee—cutting" • If architects are to be permitted to rely also on the competitiveness as a means of advancement (see above under Principle 3.) , clearly they must also be permitted to include information about their proposed fee in the material that may be made available in response to direct requests. Hence the suggested revision to Rule 3.6. The anxiety about fee—cutting ste from wrongly connecting this ammendment with the assumption t architects are henceforward bound to know what fees are einR quoted by their competitors in answering requests to te er for prospective commissions. Even usually level—headed uarters of the architectural establishment apparantly believe most architect to be a fgarful squad of unscrupulous mafiosi at heart w are currently only constrained by the mandatory element of e old fee scale, ( 'What will happen to you if the fee scale go s? t A.J. Editorial, 15/2/78 p. 278) Leaving aside the polemical attractio to those opposed to change there can be little substance in ese arguments if architects are prevented from knowing de Is of fees being quoted by their competitors. The significanc of this simple principle vis—a—vis Rule 3.6. is that architec should be prohibited from quoting a fee for a prospective co ission prior knowledge of fees quoted by compet ors. We the following additional provision to the revised Rule 3.6. , as follows "An architect shall neither accept an invitation, nor proceed to quote a fee for a prospective commission in knowledge of quotations al read" offer—d or to be offered by another architect or architects. This re—draft is intended primarily to cover the interim period, after which the adoption of our main proposals for a revised fee scale system would introduce methods current rules governing selective tendering. in th ARCUK Council meeting, . F. T. , thou#l withheld from the course consider it necessary to question Section 2 We would not at present wish to dissent f m the view that the principle of professionalism should no be sacrificed. The fact, �however, that the views expressed the (RIBA dominated) ARCUK leade ship prompts the question whether their professionalism and the datory fee this submission and those of differ in all other respects minds the principle of scale are synon$mous Needless to say one of the central questions which architects wo d have to decide in the code debate urged above, ig whether the • profession was to be governed by the maxim of "caveat empt or "uberrimae fidei t'. Subsections (1), ( 2) , ( 3) We agree that the proposals of the independent ommittee should be realistic if they are to invite general a ption. However it does not follow that the professional ass iations should be represented on it, nor that the proposa s require anybody' g "stamp" of approval except the Minis r' s. Item and item 2(4) We likewise agree that the CUK was established by statute to function as a public terest body. The 500/0 non—architect feature of the Discip ne Committee, from which incidentally the Unattached represe atives have been excluded, and which the Chairman mentio with evident pride, alas hag no parallel in ARCUK Council tself, whére the overwhelming ma jority of representa ves of constituent bodies has effectively prevented ARCUK f ctioning as a public interest body since its inception. (A rief essay, t'ARCUK — The Sheep in Wolf f B Clothing", offering alternative history of ARCUK, is appended for the general interest of the O . F . T — Appendix Vil ) • n o tuation where competitive quotations are invited fo rofessional services, it is clearly essential that estimates are prepared on like bases to enable valid comparison to be ma by the given client. Standard clauses getting out the services an architect may provide are therefore to be prepared, in much the same manner as a standard building specification go that 1 e copies , with the relevant sections deleted, may be used for competitive fee quotation. I t emg and 5(c) would be covered in a separate d ent from item 5(b), are likewise analagous to the bui ding contract in which are Bet down the rights and duties of gig-xatorieg, and appended to which is normally a flysheet givin etails of the contract gum' (i.e. agreed fee), 'penalty clauses' (i.e. incentive agreement) etc. Thé detailed operation o$"hig system is explained further in the of preparing the Item 7 It is possible that the RIBA leadership is the section of t profession most familiar with the practice of 'touting' — In view of their recent vigorous campaign to alter Code Rule . and abandon restrictions on individual advertising. Th egistrar however now recommends (ARCUK ref 4/78 Annexe B parae 7 , 3.6, Appendix 11 ) that no change is called for an t has indeed to be admitted that "making one 'B practice's ilablity or experience known by giving information wh in substance and in presentation is factual, rel nt and neither misleading nor unfair to others nor d • creditable to the profession in response to a direct r uest. n has none o the onomatopoeiac disadvantages of the word "tout" . Item 8 The Office of ir Trading may wish to note that at a vote taken at ARCUK C cil on 15/3/78 to accept Annexe G Representatives of Unat ched Architects unanimously voted against. WAY AHEAD In this section of the report we address ourselves to the second task entailed in the Monopolies Commission t g Recommendation' s — that is the formulation of proposals for the establishment of an independent committee to determine new goal es of recommended charges . In the sense that we must now propose how this committee will shape the future method and scope of architects' pricing, as distinct from merely adjusting the current rules to erase the mandatory element of the existing fee system, this second task is clearly the more fundamental of the two. However before it is possible to propose membership, financing or even terms of reference of such a committee it is necessary to reconsider the failings of the existing fee system which have led to its rejection, and hence the essential requirements of any new one. Failure of the Existing Fee System The present fee scale had its origins in the eighteenth century when the principle of charging a percentage of construction cost for government work was first established. The figure commonly agreed was surprisingly close to the present norm considering the then restricted range of building types and the very different role of the architect. This principle has remainad althouæh the ad valorem percentaæes have been increased and numerous amendments have occured such that a criticism of som clients is that the appIication of the scales is now so complex s to render consist€pt interpretation very difficult.4 As the importance of the construction industry as a major elernent of the national economy has increased, and also doubtless owing to the fact that it is now the prime purchaser of the industry's products, the Government has for some time evidently felt that the way and the amount that architects are paid for their contri— bution to this vast commitment, is a matter too important to be decided by architects Of the many shortcomings of' the present fe n system that might be cited, the following are probably the most serious, The linkage between building costs and professional costs ig tenuous and in many cases simply false with the result that there iB no way of checking whether the public interest or even value for money is assured or not. The system is based on the t ad valorem t principle, which whether abused frequently or not, leaves only the inconsistent asset of competence to determine whether architects' in fact control costs. a...ecep4-e.e(Ü The degree of taper • g for larger jobs is clearly inadequate when judged alongside of overseas fee systems Other ræ.%en procedures are inadequate both in relation to rep&ition and in recognition of the technical contribution often ma e by corporate clients. The existing system is vulnerable to inflation, and never more BO than at present when the increased costs claimed under fluctuat— ing contracts add substantial unearned revenue for fee receivers at final account stage. The RIBA may attempt to justify such excesses by asserting that they balance out peaks and troughs, though such a claim — even if true — can be small comfort to those clients subsidisinR the troughs. Either way the inherent disadvantage client uncertainty as to his final fee outlay remains. The existing fee scale system was severe criticised by the N.B. P. I. in their report, 'Architec Costs and Fees' , •Cmnd. 3653, May 1968, which is paraphrased i some detail by the Monopolies Conmission (parase 58 - 62) . e O . F.T. will doubtless have noted the fact that the RI . suæeded in holding out against all the major N.B.P.I. re endations) . None of the criticisms mentione ave been satisfactorily resolved and we therefore consider i ime to dispose of the present anti— quated patchwork fee sy em and allow architects to demonstrate if they are able, that their claim to g • e a better service iB both real and worth rewarding accord to cost. Equally the us erg of such services must be enabled t commission one architect instead of another if the first can demons rate that an equal service can be provided more cheaply. It is our view that the way architects are paid should not only be in the public interest but be mnifestly seen to be so. We aim to show that the new fee system here proposed comes as close as is reasonably feasable to satisfy this hidi standard. Criteria of a satisfactory fee system It is proposed that the criteria of a satisfactory fee system should include the following, (i) It must be non—mandatory. (i i) It must enable the users of ar itects t services to ascertain whether they are getting value for money, and likewise enable the supplier to cover his costs and make a working profite It should prospective user of architects' services as to t the service will cost before a commission is placed. /KO.•J It should be simple to operate both from an architects and a clients point of view. It should be self—policing. (i.e. enable all affected parties to check that what is promised is what is provided.) It must not be vulnerable to out—dating by inflaGion, should not contain or refer to real monetary values. It should in nomal circumstances discourage the practice of ringing contracts (commissions) . It should lend itself to use as an office planning tool, and encourage the integration and co—operation of employer and employee. It should embrace the full range of variables that influence costs, namely building complexity, practice size and capacity, contract type etc. A new fee system to satisfy criteria. There are several fee systems which could be explored ae alterna— tives to the existing, thouül they tend towards two kinds depending on whether they are based on capital costs or service costs. Those in the former category are susceptible to the game criticisms affecting the present 'ad valorem t system. The principal features of the new system pro oged may be listed as follows, The system is based on the costs incurred by the suppliers of services. Costs are grouped under two headings — "labourtt and "overheads" while a third element — "profit" represents what will hereafter be termed" the fee". The three elements may together be referred to as "the price", but are expressed separately in a standard form of fee quotation. Labour cos s are expressed in terms o time, a concept which is dicussed more fully below. Time is related to the complexity of the given project which is itself a function of a number of variables — building type, floor area, degree of (sub— divided into buildings, elements, assemblies and components e) , type of contract, stage in the programme of work, and degree of consul tant involvement. The computation of the variables iB expressed as a "complexity quotient". (This will be illus trated in detail in Appendix I ) . Overhead costs are a matter for investigate further but clearly it ranges of typical orders of cost may ascertain whether that portion otherwise. the independent committee to will be possible to determine such that the prospective client of his outlay is normal or Profits or fees are expressed separately, revenue and surplus, and obviously along with overheads will be the main area in which competitiveness will be manifested. we.-ee-.fZ.4..e F. Architects may quote in competition for a prospec i ve comnission in response to direct requests provided they have no Imowledge of the quotations to be presented by their competitors. Once a comm— ission has been awarded, details of the successf tenderer t may be announced. This practice assists the self—policing function ag employeeg In the engaged firm may be satisfied that their contribution to the service provided is rewarded at the levels promised in the quotation. These points may be embodied in a revised Code as discussed earlier. It is immedietely clear that the above features have much in common with the methods by which building contractors prepare and present their quotation for construction projects — a system with which the architectural profession ig of course entirely familiar. The conspicuous feature of the old scale of charges which fails to meet criterion (ii) — the need to demonstrate whether value for money is being obtained — is the basing of fees on a percentage of construction costs. It is the bland application of a percentage figure to the capital budget which hag inter—alia led the Monopolies Commission to doubt whether the existing fee scale operates in the public interest. The inherent difficulty of relating principals' profits to overall fee reve%nue has been hiül— Iiälted throughout the entire history of Government negotiations, by the old Interdepartmental Cormittee on Professional Fees of the mid 1960s, the N.B. P. I. and the Monopolies Commission itself (Report, parae 52 ff. & para 15.) . It must be appreciated by all parties involired in the current discussions that this difficulty can never be solved providing the existing ad valorem t system is retained. In other words the independent committee cannot begin to perform a useful task unless the new price charging system has been accepted. It is for this reason that the new stem — a prerequisite for any real advance from the prese position — takes as its starting point the principle that an chitect'B price is related to his costs, �/ Eis a social concept dependent on place and time Its definition iB elusive and open to debate, yet its achievement has been the central concem of architectural practice for centuries. It is the promise of quality in aesthetic and technical performance which is the basis of the architects' bargain with society. quantity of time taken to achieve quality in a given piece of wörk will vary from individual to individual what is beyond doubt is i, the fact that there will exist a minimum time. If less than this is expended, loss of quality follows. Average times may therefore be calculated for different complexities of work. office anninr may be extended by harnessing the diverse hurna.n resources of most practices to the variety of tasks a prospective com-mission offers and pricing accordingly. This is not to say that tiine spent guarantees quality, but that quality can only be diieved when a certain amount of labour has been exoended on the product. Time spent may be said to be the only reasonable means whereby the conditions Imder which quality can be achieved can be quantified. In a service industry such as the supply of archotects services time is the quality element in any pricing system. the three components described above. Hence in future a clie Tho has inv#ed competitive price quotations may know how mu he will pay for the service, how much for the overheads enta• d in providing it and how much is prof— essional profit. Such a system will reflect the essential value of the professional service, by basing an architect's price not on the clients costs, but on his own costs. Criterion (iii) iB simply satisfied, the first part by the normal legal requirement of contract that an offer to perform services for a price has been mutually agreed an advance, a.nd that a tenderer agrees to stand by his price. Criteria (iv), (vi), and (xi) will be satisfied by the manner in which the independent committee presents its material. Criterion (vii) may be seen to be fulfilled by ana10ör to existing codes of procedure on selective tendering. Herex it is widely recog•aised to be in the client's interests not to inform comp— etitors of each others identity in order to prevent 'ringing' of the contract. Other expedients such as inviting non—local quotations are also in common use. The practice of architects themselves tempting to ring comm— issiong may be frustrated by such pedients, and as a residual safeguard by a new Code provi one As habitually fastidious supervisors of the tende g procedure governing contractors however, it seems un ely that architects will immedietely forsake these well tried res in their own field. The remaining criterion, (viii) on which further comment may be useful, refers to the use of the new pricing scales as an office planning tool. This iB encouraged by the nature of the costing system which bases labour costs on the function of time. One of the fundamental arguments for a price system bag is that it brings to the fore front the relati broader basis. This may be described as comprising consurner interests, the interests of workers within the relevant industries, and those of the electorate ag a The Comnission considered it necessary to recommend specifically that architects— (by which we infer the subjects of their invest— igation, namely the fee paid principals), and users of architects' services (i.e. clients, as distinct from users of the products of their work, building users), to recommend that these parties were not represented on the independent committee. ( M.C. Report: 281 & parae 283) • � bodies as the Consumers Association, National Federation of Tenants and Residents Associations, NFHA, a representative of the Office of Fair Trading on behalf of the Govemment; the Building Industry (but excluding professional interests, owners of firms and emplo e and salaried technical and administrative staff in t e desiga industry At least one member of the committee should xcial of a trade union. 7 e basis of the pricing sy tem as proposed above should b confirmed by the Office o Fair Trading in advance of the independent cormnittee'.s ception, in order to enable the empirical tasks of gat ring statistical material to be identifie without delay. By t s establishing the new system as one of th guiding terms of re erence the O. F. T. will save the committee andcompl exi ties. The new conmi ee, drawn from t se groups we have outlined above will perforce be appointed di ctly by the Government as recomm— ended by the Monopolies Co • Ission (M.C. Report, parae 283 & 286 (vi)) In principle we have some misgivings about form of appointment 4.4 on the grounds that governments have frequently failed in like exercises of appointing Royal Commissions, by selecting represe— ntatives insufficiently diverse in experience and background. The Office of Fair Trading may wish to consider as a generally successful example the appointments made in establi— shing the Price Commission — which included for instance house— wife's representatives. agency. As indicated in our explanat• n of the proposed new fee system, it will determine ran s of time ,generally applicable in the provision of all catego es of architects' services, comp— arative indices of office ov heads and guidelines as to the relative levels of worki plflt, in the appropiate sectors of the desi&l service in try. Further illustration of tasks entailed in determining the rst and most distinctive of these three elements is inc ed in Appendix I. The bulk of the actual research involved ould be carried out by the Office of Manpower Economics, e role of the committee itself being to supervise the rese ch, liase and consult with external parties including rep entativeg of ligers of services and the professional associ Ions. Advice whiéh the latter might us efully contribute wo include views on presentation technique 91 ikely exte of any non—observance and — in the case of the profession — guidance on the form of any new Code provisions arising out of t nature of the new recommended scales. A Note on Financing The public has already been put to onsiderable expense through government investigations to e mine whether or not their interest has been prejudice In similar cicumstances in a court of law, the unsuccessful itigant would be required to pay costs. The profession should therefore ontribute some or all of the cost of financing the new commit e both as recompense, and as earnest of good intentions. Clea y this should be in the form of a levy on principals in priva practice — who as the fee receivers, have been shown to be off ding the public interest. The form of the levy is open to di sgion, but as an initial suggestion the O • F. T. may care consider a levy at 0.1% of fee tumover per annum raise from principals' profit revenue affecting all practices e loying ten or more persons and excepting offices wit an annual turnover of less than €50,000. In conclus ion of the main t t of this report we would refer readers again to the s ry of proposals on pages 6 and 7. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource JA/DR 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 15.3.78 https://nam.maydayrooms.org/files/original/8634a354dd698f244cb4fe64d4a53ed8.pdf 71e0fd5162a6987fd0273bfaabf09ce8 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Liaison Group Including London Group Subject The topic of the resource Liaison Groups: NAM was initially structured as local groups. There was also a Liaison Group whose role was to coordinate the different groups, deal with correspondence and arrange the next annual conference. NAM campaign groups, which were largely autonomous, worked across local groups to develop their ideas. They arranged their own conferences and reported through SLATE and annually to the NAM Congress. The seven different campaign groups listed had members from a variety of local groups. Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Various Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1976-1979 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource What is NAM? Subject The topic of the resource What is the New Architecture Movement ? Summary 2pp 2 copies Description An account of the resource reee what is the The New Architecture Movement ("NAM") aims, through the col- lective action of architectural workers and other concerned people, to play an active role in radically altering the sys- tem of patronage and power in architecture. It seeks an archi- tectural practice directly accountable to all who use its pro- ducts and democratically controlled by the workers within it. NAM aims thereby to promote effective contol by ordinary people over their environment and by architectural workers over their working lives. NAM is completely independent. It is not, and ...@iving technical advice to the Birmingham Green Ban Action Committee, ...submitting evidence to the Monopolies Commission investigating alleged price-fixing among architectural firms, ...preparing a Draft Report on “Architectural Workers and Trade Unionism," concerned particularly with the situation of unor- ganised workers in "the building professions," ...-holding an informal seminar in Covent Garden, London, attended by over fifty people, and another in Cardiff, AIMS ORIGINS ACTIVITIES institute" or trade union. which was held in Blackpool in November 1976. New Architecture Movement? does not seek to become, a "learned society," "professional The New Architecture Movement was founded in November 1975 at a National Congress held in Harrogate for the purpose of build- ing up a broadly-based, progressive force for accountability and democracy in architecture. Out of that Congress came a Contact List, several local NAM groups and a Liaison Group delegated to maintain and extend contacts and to organise a Second Congress, During NAM's first year, the activities of various groups in- cluded: ...-planning a campaign for reform of the Architects Registration Acts, to make the Architects Registration Council (ARCUK) more accountable to the public, ..participating in a campaign to prevent the destruction of Cardiff city centre, ...developing outline proposals for a "National Design Service,” ...developing and distributing the "Interior Perspective," a questionnaire on conditions and attitudes in architectural practices, STRUCTURE PARTICIPATION AND SUPPORT ENQUIRIES (ARCUK) for 1977-1978. (LG, 2/77) ,..-working towards the establishment of a "Community Design Service" in Cardiff, and ...publishing the 1977 New Architecture Calendar. Further development in these and other areas is expected during 1977 and 1978. In addition, NAM nominees have been elected to six of the seven seats representing over 3,000 "\nattached architects" on the Architects Registration Council The structure of NAM is more a "network" than a "pyramid." It consists mainly of autonomous locally-based and/or issue- oriented groups of, typically, five to fifteen members. Each group defines its own role in furtherance of the overall aims. Broader contact is maintained through 4 Liaison Group, which consists of six members elected by the annual Congress as well as delegates from the groups. The Liaison Group is accountable to the Movement as a whole and is responsible for subscriptions, publication of the Newsletter, encouragement of local seminars and organisation of the next Congress. ture. Interest in NAM is steadily growing. The Second Congress decided to consolidate and strengthen the existing structure and finances of NAM by collecting subscrip- tions from the membership. For 1977, membership costs £5 for employed people and £2 for students and unemployed. A seperate subscription to the NAM Newsletter (distributed free to members ) People active in NAM, and those who support its aims, are drawn poth from within the field of architecture and from the "lay" public. From within architecture, workers in architectural prac— tices predominate, followed by students and teachers of architec costs £2 for five issues. Contributions are also welcome. Subscriptions and contributions are intended to cover Liaison expenses (Newsletter, postage, stationery, rent, telephone, travel, miscellaneous) and to "Float" activities that are, in principle (given the present financial situation), self-support- ing, such as the Congress, seminars, literature for sale, etc. At present, each NAM group finances its own activities. All enquiries to The Secretary, Liaison Group, The New Architec— ture Movement, 143 Whitfield Street, London Wl, from whom member- ship forms and publications order forms are also available. STRUCTURE PARTICIPATION AND SUPPORT ENQUIRIES ...publishing the 1977 New Architecture Calendar. (ARCUK) for 1977-1978. (LG, 2/77) ...working towards the establishment of a "Community Design Service" in Cardiff, and Further development in these and other areas is expected during 1977 and 1978. In addition, NAM nominees have been elected to six of the seven seats representing over 3,000 "unattached architects" on the Architects Registration Council The structure of NAM is more a "network" than a "pyramid." It consists mainly of autonomous locally-based and/or issue- oriented groups of, typically, five to fifteen members. Each group defines its own role in furtherance of the overall aims. Broader contact is maintained through a Liaison Group, which consists of six members elected by the annual Congress as well as delegates from the groups. The Liaison Group is accountable to the Movement as a whole and is responsible for subscriptions , publication of the Newsletter, encouragement of local seminars and organisation of the next Congress. People active in NAM, and those who support its aims, are drawn both from within the field of architecture and from the eae public. From within architecture, workers in architectural prac-— tices predominate, followed by students and teachers of architec— ture. Interest in NAM is steadily growing. The Second Congress decided to consolidate and strengthen the existing structure and finances of NAM by collecting subscrip- tions from the membership. For 1977, membership costs £5 for employed people and £2 for students and unemployed. A seperate subscription to the NAM Newsletter (distributed free to members ) Subscriptions and contributions are intended to cover Liaison expenses (Newsletter, postage, stationery, rent, telephone, travel, miscellaneous) and to "float" activities that are, in principle (given the present financial situation), self-support-— ing, such as the Congress, seminars, literature for sale, etc. All enquiries to The Secretary, Liaison Group, The New Architec— ture Movement, 143 Whitfield Street, London Wl, from whom member- ship forms and publications order forms are also available. costs £2 for five issues. Contributions are also welcome. At present, each NAM group finances its own activities. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Liaison Group 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 Feb 1977