8 10 310 https://nam.maydayrooms.org/files/original/8ee6f232bcf170fedddc03f32a4889a3.pdf 299aee1af0db7283b80111827b865346 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 Correspondence by Unattached Representatives regarding fee competition and certification Description An account of the resource Lx Quechee Q due % Sayan, ROU D2. x y, [rooG-2oh Ft A eh7 pu Co AL Lae @ Cop, ATUWL~0/ Hi Bf Bxtcon xLSr Aira. fy 60 Kingly Street Regent Street London W1R 6EY =f “1 Ce mm), [Tie . ira Pncere :=‘ ers and LandscapeArchitects\ Tel 01-734 857 3 ie withcompliments os CRLat fk |2,4ACU :aoeCTO). Car Gu 5 4-,whichea, lsscnslESs ae from parchewler fee sca la_ WS pro Sions / QSsotahsons hn He mot to promo Panos intere Ko of thee DRAINEAS NAA GopI i/ , ; ARQQA SL a brfos Su. Phar AS, AwwWf_> Cge> oy Aavyelop , P ee) eCncent conckhons (ACL = chverse ae BSiouCann) cha Ciliateshe resort fo ca Vio. aA be. intevezshelo ues yy Tho. tort Ne eras A a neta AVERT theAble. Irterestby a ds enhen ie of a mOTIOA oheh nad face oefeated otk ALCO pine ptt ay Moods. Cee | look). foce-acols of LOS aA-Y. (ouiie eS Ce - ae and Kobback, ye Repraantatves Une Hached ABR CUK of Aycbitets Ve NeueOss “Nice chye on fee Com pehhonr ere n aclisp ce of our Nay on Truartclany . / shad Direhon tke bo draco cnr aHenton fo 44whichA. olsscns/és ARCUK from ey fhok professions] oHempt to promo pachiileA fee Sc QESCASASEAS pr fheir Members , and thee Eoblic Interest La_ 1A, Fhe intere Re of- which Sa fegue rls bg enhoengng tho conckhons ( (in whe = cere of oe Saracens SS cloyelop wihinak Cemm, Hie A , In Pendent resor ann Mootter | look. forward, of: (OFS Zar fo an Vice pire Pncere f= or7 ar «hot aoes SS) Orckn wo) Ae merece EZ Our proposed | enclose for Onr Cconmcevrahon Be interce ote. d to read tho Tort WS, Hallam Shy om Toxscloy pore 24 IDG . London h/. of a MONA chth nuao re defeated ot ARCKESL pene! ‘papi is Ce ce ve kelerin C= Directive on Kee Competition The following rules are required in order to permit fee competitior and at the same time safeguard A.R.C.U.K.'s three "'tenets' of professionalism. (1) (3) Monopolies Commission Report, paragraph 281. Le Prior Agreement Between Architect & Client: 2. Safeguard Against Supplanting: oe Safeguard Against Touting: In adopting these rules A.R,C.U.K. may be required to alter other rules or principles that may contradict or inhibit the operation of these rules. Architects shall inform prospective Clients of the services to be provided and of their proposed fee and shall agree with their Client the terms of their engagement. An Architect shall neither accept an invitation, nor proceed to quote a fee for a prospective commission in knowledge of quotations already offered or to be offered by another Architect or Architects. (2) 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 the services to be provided and proposed fee, by giving information which in substance and in presentation is factual, relevant, and neither misleading nor discreditable to the profession, in response to a direct request. The following additional direction is also required in order to safeguard the Public Interest G3)DF 4, Safeguard to Prevent any "Recommended" Scale assuming a de facto Monopoly: There shall be no reference in any A.R.C.U.K. publication to any specific "Conditions of Engagement" or recommended scales of charges. Any revised or new A.R.C.U.K. code should be deposited with the O,F,T.in order that the 0.F.T. may satisfy itself that its directives have been complied with. (1) "Way Ahead", AppendiIxV, “Annexe G". (2) "Way Ahead", page 23. ARCHITECTS REGISTRATION COUNCIL OF THE UNITED KINGDOM a Motion to the 190th Ordinary Meeting 10th October, 1979 on all registered persons. Proposer: Jobn S. Allan This Council no longer wishes to defy the Government's requirement that mandatory scale fees be abolished*, and therefore declares that application of Conditions of Engagement and a scale of charges published by one of its constituent bodies shall hereby cease to be binding Seconder: John D. Murray * "The requirement of the ARCUK Code of Professional Conduct that an arohitect shall not contract with his olient except on the basis of Conditions of Engagement and a soale of charges published by one of its constituent bodies should be abolished.” "The rules of ARCUK should be amended so as to permit an architect freely to quote a fee in competition with other architects and so as not to prevent competition for business on the basis of fees". "aArchitects' Services — A Report on the Supply of Architects' Services with Reference to Scale Fees", Ch.8, IV Recommendatione - 286, (i) & (ii). The Monopolies end Mergers Commission, HMSO. i L.G.Packer, Room 1034, Becket House, Lambeth Palace Road, London SE1 7ER Sir, Elected representatives of "unattached" architects, A.R.C.U.K. 75 Hallam Street, London W.1 4 July 1980 Proposed changes in the system of. building control in England and wales, We refer to your letter dated 6 June 1980, ref. BRA/759/23. We note from appendix B that comments have been invited from several architectural professional institutes and from certain trade unions with architect members, but not from the Architects Registration Council of the United Kingdom (ARCUK)- the govern- ing body of the profession, if it is your intention to seek the views of the architectural profession then only a fraction may be reached through the bodies listed in the appendix 5. This may be due to a misunderstanding and it may help to clarify the present structure of the profession and the role of ARCUK. Briefly, ARCUK is a statutory body constituted under the Architects Registration Acts 1931 & 38 to maintaina register of architects, to control entry to the register by professional qualification and to oversee the professional conduct of registered persons, Only persons registered under the Act may style themselves Narchitect"TM and entry on the register (not membership of a pro- fessional institute or trade union) is the sole definition of "architect", Council, which meets regularly, is composed of. nominees of architectural bodies laid down in the 1931 Act in proportion to their membership, elected representatives of registered outlined we have the following comments :- VW a) The Architects Registration Council maintains, in the public interest, a register of persons competent to provide architectural services and we suggest that in any system of self-certification Any person registered under the Act be considered a "competent person" for the purposes of certification, c) Architects registered under the Act should not be excluded as "competent persons" solely on the grounds of their residing in Scotland or Northern: Ireland, d) To protect the public interest, any person removed from the Register of Architects should automatically be removed from the register of "competent persons" if he entered that register by virtue of registration under the act. e) Any person resigning from the Register of architects should be deemed to have also resigned from the register of. "competent persons" if he entered this register by virtue of registration under the. Act, by "competent persons!! persons not being members of any of these bodies, in pro- portion to their numbers; and nominees of certain government departments and other professional bodies, It is as elected members of council that we write to you now, Coming to your proposals on changes in the system of building control it seems to us that the proposed system of self— certification is of particular concern to architects, The implications of these changes will no doubt become clearer as more detailed praposals are formulated but on the principles b) Membership of a professional institute or trade union should not endow an architect with greater status on the register of "competent persons" than an architect who is "unattached", De In any system of self— certification care be taken to prevent the increased liability of the certifier leading to indemnity insurance premiums prohibitive to the independent architect, xrours faithfully, YRAD Gut David Burney un behalf of : J.S.Allan n.F. Arnold D.J.Burney ».d.Cutmore P.W.Howe ¢.D,Murray D.Roebuck 2, Walker M.E.R.Roberts When more detailed proposals are formulated we may wish to comment further, if you would like any amplification of the above comments then please do not hesitate to contact the writer, As elected rep- resentatives of "unattached" architects on Council we have held discussions with present and previous Government ministers on matters affecting the architectural profession (including the recent monopilies Commission investigation into architects! services) and we would hope that this precedent would be followed in your consultation with the profession on the proposed changes in the system of building control. flected representatives of "unattached architects, A.R.C.U.K, Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Unattached Representatives Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived John Murray Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource June 1980 Subject The topic of the resource Correspondence by Unattached Representatives regarding fee competition and certification https://nam.maydayrooms.org/files/original/54cf8c44baba1264819f4933ad17fb61.pdf 134374e531addfbafecb2e5e5331c4d0 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 Correspondence with ARCUK Registrar on Professional Conduct Description An account of the resource K J Porder Registrar ARCUK 73 lem . - Street Roath Cardiff 196 Albany Road (c) I need ct rification on the following questions: I an attempting to draft a response to your letter Of 13 April re Limited Liability. However, before £ Can answer the issuas Yaised under (a) to 1. What reference does the Act make to Professional Misconduct or Code of Conduct? : 2. Since no definition of "professional misconduct! appears to be offered in the Act, what legal Standing does any definition inplicit in the rules and Principles of the Code of Conduct shave? eas &- Has this ever been put to the test? ! 5- Where, when, by whom, and on what Criteria was the Code brought into being? 6 Was recourse to the Privy Council made for the adoption of the Code? Yours Sincerely e 8. Ina Situation where the Act and the Code might be interpreted to be contradictory, wnat legal Standing does the Code have? 3. Would a legal interpretation o£ ‘misconduct! in a ‘court of law conform to that enshrined in the Code of Conduct? 7. Has recourse to the Privy Council been made for any alterations or acditions to the Code? 9. Has the Situation described in 8 €ver been put to the test, i-e., has ARCUK'S decision On misconduct ever been apnealed against ina court of law2 r = apologies for imposing such heavy demands on you but I would appreciate an €erly response since you have asked for replies by 31 May. fane Delaney (Ms) +eeeserene Ms Anne Delaney 196 Albany Road Roath Cardiff Yours sipcerely, 12'May 1978 = 4. Architects Registration Council of the United Kingdom CRTABUUSHED UNDER THE ARCHITECTS IMEGISTRATION! ACTS 1931 To 1038 73 Hallam Street London WiN 6EE Tel: 01-580 5861 Registrar:Mrs-NockDawsene MBE KENNETH J.FORDER, M.A Dear Ms Delaney, =. ° pact Xt Thank you very much for your letter of 10 May. I think it might help if I reply immediately on the more straightforward issues that you raise, and I will write to you further on other points as soon as I have managed to carry out the research. : : i ear face I think many of your points are answered in the enclosed copy Ofmauens summarised history of the ARCUK Code, together with a copy of the first edition in 1936. The following are my preliminary observations on your: questions: - 1. The only reference to disgraceful conduct is contained in ; Section 7 of the principal Act (copy enclosed). There is no reference to a Code in any of the legislation. 3. It is my view that disgraceful conduct has never been formally 4. interpreted legally but I will look into this. : _5. The enclosed history will tell you all you need to know. 6. No. Yo Bo 8. The question is a little too sweeping. If a situation arose where the Act and the Code appeared to be in conflict then clearly ~ theCode would have to give way but only to the extent that the Act takes precedence. - 2. I find myself in some difficulty here because of the wording you use. The Code has no ‘legal standing’ but it is a guide which the profession follows. Strictly speaking one can be guilty of disgraceful conduct without breaking the terms of the Code and conversely there are circumstances in which one can break the terms of the Code without committing disgraceful conduct. f 9. The usually quoted case where an appeal was lodged to the High Court against a decision of the Council was the Hughes v ARCUK in 1957. I enclose herewith a copy of the relevant passage from the Judgment. I will check whether there have been any other cases. =aeita ates / ye advising against. etc. History of the ARCUK Code On 11 March, 1932, the Council received a report of the Committee of Ways and Means which contained, inter alia, a recommendation that a Code of Professional Conduct was desirable despite having received Counsel's Opinion to the undesirability of advertisements by surveyors who were also architects. The Council, in debating the matter, considered — if there was to be a Code - that it could be built up gradually by means of the precedents from the Discipline Committee; or the Council could give architects proposing to register It was agreed at this meeting to defer a recommendation to draft a Code, partly because there were a number of other tasks urgently needing action and partly because in any event the Discipline Committee could not be appointed for some months. ‘ : In March 1934 the PPC recommended the Council to inform an architect "that it is unprofessional and contrary to 2stablished custom to advertise". This was Another architect at the same time was seeking information about his position with regard to advertising, hidden commissions; soliciting and trading, and pointing out that the Act made no provision for a Code. He was told that, in general, these were matters of unprofessional conduct and contrary to established custom but it was for the Discipline Committee to decide what was disgraceful. The architect challenged this reply, pointing out that no Code had been approved by the Privy Council, and asked if the RIBA Code "with all its loose application" was accepted in the Courts. Another architect was informed it was not in accordance with established custom for an architect to trade as a builder. It was for the Discipline Committee It was also "not in accordance with established custom for an architect to engage in trade”. (Very broad statement‘) Other cases dealt with alleged supplanting (referred to D.C.) and soliciting and supplanting; and the Chartered Surveyors were asked to refer in their Code some idea of what they must not do. to stop newspaper advertisements. ” spirit common to the codes." 2. There was however a hold up with regard to referring cases to the Discipline Committee because they had no regulations yet. After a motion had been received from an architect which ended with the following words "That this Council give a ruling that may serve as a guide to the public and the profession as to what may be considered ‘established custom’ and what conduct would normally lie outside such ‘established custom’. (Code of Practice) That sanction be obtained from the Privy Council for such regulations” the PPC approved the principle of a Code of Professional Conduct which banned architects from advertising "his architectural services publicly", "receiving commission not disclosed" and "soliciting work by means of Ppaid agents" In due course however, and before any ARCUK Code had been formulated, the Discipline Committee had heard its first case, where mention was made to two Codes - that of the RIBA and that of the TAAS, and the Discipline Committee Report contains the following paragraphs: é cs "(g) Each code must embody, its existence would be meaningless unless it did embody, those rules of conduct which its framers and administrators hold to be binding on themselves as practitioners of an honourable calling, while every professional man knows that many such rules express the solution of doubts which have arisen in practice. A practitioner who has any cause to doubt what his own course of action ought to be can seek guidance in the solutions tested by experience (or formulated by expen oos persons), and set forth in the codes, The essential features of both codes, it must be believed, would in spirit be accepted by the architectural profession even had they remained unwritten, and the Committee conceives itself entitled to apply these codes in the interpretation of Section 7 of the Act and to find a registered person guilty of conduct disgraceful in an architect if he be shewn to have contravened the The Council received a further Counsel's Opinion dated August 1934 which ~ contained a preference to "allow a code as to professional conduct to grow up gradually by means of publication and circulation from time to time” of Discipline Committee decisions. This view was based on the idea that it would leave the Council "unfettered by definitions of professional misconduct" whereas a "specified and definite code” would make it difficult for the Council to remove a man from the Register "unless his conduct were ‘shown to fall within y. the four corners of the code". pursue”. comments. to approve the draft Code.) remained unaltered until 1945. However, the Opinion did state that the Council could, without statutory authority, publish and send to registered persons "a statement enumerating practices or modes of conduct which they consider it undesirable for registered persons to A copy of the March 1936 Code is attached from which it will be seen that it Again the Council were reminded that the Act contained no express power to formulate a code as to professional conduct or misconduct. The Council was also advised that the Privy Council "would probably be reluctant -to give their Sanction to a code of professional conduct dealing (of necessity) with matters as to which a wide diversity of views might be held. This statement should contain no reference to Section 7 of the Act and should show on the face of it that it was published merely for guidance. In June 1935 the Council were informed that the PPC were drawing up a draft statement as referred to in the above paragraphs’ A suggestion/that che Draft Code, together with Scale of Fees and Conditions of Engagement, be submitted to all bodies mentioned in the First Schedule, and to every registered person for On 20 March 1936 the Council had before it a "draft Code of Professional Conduct for Registered Architects" for the guidance of architects which was submitted by the PPC who had resolved unanimously that it be submitted to Cannes "as an agreed document".. In submitting the Draft the Committee said since it had received unanimous approval in Committee to refer it to the constituent bodies would cause unnecessary delay. They proposed however to send copies to all registered persons but without inviting comments, but to invite-the Unattached architects to forward comments to one of the Council members they had elected. (One Council member elected by the Unattached dissented from the decision to In December 1944 the PPC recommended that the Code be revised generally. This arose from Counsel's Opinion obtained to assist in dealing with questions concerning architects inyolved in property development - buying and selling land and buildings. registered person. branches to discuss the new Principles. 4. In February 1945 the Council had a draft revised Code before them in a totally In November 1945 the PPC reported to Council on the comments received from the RIBA on the draft, but some of the RIBA suggestions were not accepted. One different format and it was agreed that the draft be submitted to the constituent bodies and to the representatives of the Unattached architects for observations. This draft Code consisted of a Preamble, Principles and Examples. Counsel was asked to vet the final version; and in March 1946 the Council Early in 1960 the Code was reprinted in a new format; and because there had been a number 6f amendments made to it since 1955, a copy was sent to every Again the Code was subject to a number of amendments/clarifications and in June 1969 the PPC were again asked to review the Code as a whole and to report back to the Council. As the RIBA were also looking at their Code as a whole it was agreed in October 1969 to set up an ad hoc joint working group to enable the zwo bodies to proceed in step. By March 1970 a preliminary draft of the Principles and Rules of Professional Conduct was ready and it was agreed it be circulated to the architectural constituent bodies for discussion. In June 1970 the Council were informed that meetings were being held in the RIBA Regions and or two comments had also been received from the ABT and AA. In December 1948 the Code was amended to give a time limit after which architects could not be house agents or auctioneers. The RIBA, IAAS, AA and ABT approved; FAS had made no comments and the Unattached had divergent views, but agreed to go along. : at After the Code had been amended a number of times, on 17 October, 1952, the Council resolved that the PPC should review the Code "as a whole in its relation to the Codes of any of the constituent bodies of the Council", if necessary conferring with such bodies. A Sub-Committee of the PPC was set up and in October 1954 a draft new Code was submitted to ‘Council and finally approved in December 1954 for circulation to the profession with the 1955 Annual Report. Its format was not dissimilar from the previous Codes. were informed that a new Code had been published.” The work on amending the Code was then taken over by the RIBA but in March 1975 the Council were informed that the PPC had asked the Registrar to send T’.copies of the draft Code to the other architectural constituent bodies. Eventually a new Code, different in form and format but not greatly different in meaning was published on 1 January 1976. a © ' © F Architects’ Registration Council of the United Kingdom 68, PORTLAND PLACE, W.1. Code of Professional Conduct for Architects The following Rules have been drawn up for the guidance of architects. While it is not intended to lay down a hard-and-fast line between what is, and what is not, legitimate, the object of the Rules is to provide a general standard of professional practice, the breach of which} by an architect, may render him liable to be adjudged, by the Council, guilty of disgraceful conduct. 1= (1) Reniuneration in respect of architectural work consists (a) in the case of an employee, of salary, and (6) of architects in private practice, of protessional fees. In the case of (6) the client should be informed at the outset of the rules of employment of architects and the scule of charges upon which remuneration is based. N.B.--For the purpose of this Code the Conditions of Engagement and Scale of Charges published by the R.I.B.A. or other constituent body is recommended. 4 (2) Au architect MUST NOT:— / o (a) Accept any work which involves giving or recviving discounts or commissions, nor may he accept any discount, gift or commission fron: Contractors or Tradesmen whether employed upon the works or not. (b) Advertise or offer his services by means of circulars or otherwise, nor may he make paid announcements in the Press. (c) Attempt to supplant another architect, nor must he compete with another architect by means of a reduction of fees or by any other inducement. (d) Permit the insertion of any clause in tenders, bills of quantities or other documents which provide for payment to be made to him by the Contractor whatever may be the consideration, unless with the previous knowledye and approval of his client. (ce) Carry on or act us principal, partner uv «anager of a company or firm trading in materials used in building, or whose activities are connected with the building industry. (/) Permit the business of auctioneering or house ugency to form part of his practice. NUTE to Parageaph .(f) Extract jrom Counce Motates of June 24ynt, 1936:— RESOLVED thar Where busine: us au Auctioneer or House Agent was being carried on at the time of registration no uction be taken in the matter, but that any Kexisterad Architect attempting to, or who has attempted to, start any business as Auetivieer or Huse clvent after the date of his registration be informed that such action is not in accordance with the rocoguisal custom of the Architectural profession. . ; (3) An arcisitect MUST:-- (a) Be remunerated solely in the cuse of an employee by his salary and in the case of a (4) An architect MAY:— (g) Act us architect or joint architect tor a work which ts or has been the subject of a competition, in which he is or has been engaged as an assessor. (A) Act as architect or joint architect for a work which is or has been the subject of an abandoned competition, if he is or has becw viticially nominated as assessor, or approached by the promoters for the purpuse of acting as such. Z practising awchitect by professional fees, und must not accept remuneration from auy other source in connection with the works and duties entrusted to him. (b) Before accepting an appointment or instructions to proceed with any work upon which it is obvious another architect has been employed, communicate with the architect last employed with a view to ensuring that his engayement has been properly terminated. (a) Be architectural consultant or adviser to building contractors, decorators, furniture designers, estate development firms or companies or firms or companies trading in materials used in or whose activities are otherwise connected with the building industry, provided that:— : , (1) He is paid by fee and not by commission on sales or profits thereon. (2) He docs not solicit orders for the firm or company. “5 (b) Use the word “* Architect ” in connection with his appointment, and his name may appear on the stationery of the firm or company as architectural consultant or adviser. : (c) Be a Director of any company (except those. excepted in Clause 2 {e)), including a building society registered under the Building Societies Act, and may allow his name and the word ‘' Architect ’ to appear on the notepaper of the company. (d) Sign his buildings and may exhibit his name outside his office and on buildings in the course of construction, alteration and/or extension, provided that it is done in an unostentatious manner, If a client so desires, the architect’s name may remain upon the building for a period not exceeding twelve months after its completion provided that the board does not display ‘ fo Let’’ or “ For Sale ’” or similar notices. (5) Although there is no objection to an architect allowing signed illustrations and descrip- tions of bis work to be published in the Press, with reference to such illustrations or descriptions it in contrary to professional custom to give monetary consideration for such insertions or to allow such insertions to be used by the publishers for obtaining advertisements from unwilling contributors. / (6) (7) When architects are ucting as surveyors or town planners in connection with the development of land, announcements may be made in the Press and on notice boards in connection with such development, provided that such announcements are made in ath unostentatious manner. (8) In all questions arising between the employer und contractor an architect must act in an impartial manner. He must at all tics interpret the conditions of the contract with entire fairmess as between cmployer and contractor. (9) Quantities—It is desirable that in cuses where an architect takes out quantities for buildings he should be paid directly by the client and not through the contractor. y 7 Note: — March 20th, 1936. Reprinted April 1st, 1g4T. By Order of the Council, a PEMBROKE WICKS : Pr Registrar. | f‘ Architects who are appoitited surveyots lo recoguiscd estates muy announce land or sites or premises tor sale or letting in conteciion with their uppoininents. Architects are recommended to bring this Code to the notice of their employees. 7 Dissraceful Conduct as defined by Mr. Justice Devlin in his Judgment in Hughes v A.R.C.U.K. 7, 731/59 The Architects (Registration) Act 1931 Section 7 gives the Council power to strike the name of an architect from the register if he has been "suilty of conduct disgraceful to him in his capacity as an architect". I cannot accept the argument that the term "diseraceful” is in any sense a term of art. In accordance with the usual rule it is to be given its natural and popular meaning. But it is qualified by the phrase "in his capacity as an architect". The effect of that qualification is twofold. First, the conduct must not only be what would ordinarily be considered aeerecesale but it must also be a disgrace which affects hin professionally; to that extent the qualification diminishes the term. sgoondlky, conduct which is not disgraceful for an ) ordinary man may be disgraceful for a professional man: to that extent the qualification amplifies the term. But the amplification does not require that "disgraceful" is to be given any technical meaning: it requires only that the ordinary meaning of the word should be applied in relation to the special obligations and duties of a professional man. It must not be forgotten that if the finding of the Committee stands, anyone may hereafter say of Mr. Hughes with impunity that he was struck off the register for disgraceful conduct and may add that that means what it says. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource AD/ ARCUK Registrar Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived John Murray Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource May 1978 Subject The topic of the resource Correspondence with ARCUK Registrar on Professional Conduct https://nam.maydayrooms.org/files/original/d6aa81f51c8f6bfe73d15c29d6553166.pdf f4c92e84142809e5c2d55881ed77b90d 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 Correspondence, etc re …Unattached Representation; also notes on meeting with OFT on Monopolies Report Description An account of the resource To Un attacteool Peps . Deav J tndine a eoty of bly sot f Fadiv te MeCUK CGwumllies ¢ There ee be a mol Thee ygay)ara lat Your | L ( Unattached Mepiecetitnes at lardan /|eeu /4-Mare, “ACU , 73 ttallan, Sheot mele Gai TheCailepsathcouldawlPeantink ak CnC aangp ‘ fue Ssa ical ae e bySCAG To UnattachedPepe- 5 Uilbr Anewt Z1 feb 7% Deav The Cucldf eps ash coulda we Pe ieed an DY qa a change, feay (ee ort Ez h slATE a cise % Jo enclme a copy of elles sont fe Farciv te ACU Cums, € gee oll hoa oad Ths yganard last Unattached ey)at oeWS(oe lApe SeanaeeMine“ateAiea. Kennett\.) FevelovC4/ hegjohan/ Arecvild 73 balla Sheet lrdo~ Wl. “4A. 5 hulfor Aven lnotix WG a O ie Deny Mul Frvett|y Ro: Atecuk Grwwillus 1970-FO. ‘Gpoillemers Agreemont? JFtansconstleMlpuceietadliiénofteUnabtchedt people dinky te Gentlernans Aypeomendt tour 4 Achiecine, opts OSniatlee Etucahiar >Cee Alar upman , SC Susan dackon Eatisrod Walbey, branes and GoutrekPeopeses Qrumileo? (Marian fetrots lan Tod. ProfessianakMgaeComvullee > (delbnMan a| Bch ise ShowtAtho&bafeSpee mae] KounalhOFaceyExy/HA 5MilbrAwe Ay2cUK werefallanr Stet lado wi. Dory KV Foveboy, Pe! ¥RCUK Commitims 1979-¥o. Candidaltz, de Fro Eloctian| oe SSfe to beard d Archulicluyal Eetucakinr, lan Coopey 4 Flot 1072) Vanes Las David Robson Bio Aawatcsne Oneega Robert Malte Thavas Leallor, SO ern cow \lelin Alay Thauas LJrolloy Puspeaeo Quwilla Bur Tec lan Tod Peta)Cupmere lan Ted lanTsd [arnTod lantel lan Tee 40 Professianack[LespereoQuamillae Reboort Malte eae eefee Grdproud Candidcles fv Fee Ehootinn (cort.) é 5:0 Diciblinn Conmultia Michagk Broad €| forsco, \ln Hane Gp attached tubuseniedines) Wounalad \ohn Adan Seco dod Yelm are ; Pra ee ee a ee Oo" Nee Ye Wine SMl Ave, NC 19.29 7.2 Ls Rpt preparabylastuserUnattocladKops, Ue Offore ee ge eotal the Mtn ile Sf Sas SdRoeland ao‘tadNecewedGur + Theewuttole onTres lo oe ap tears a ees aul be Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource JM Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived John Murray Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource Feb 1979 Subject The topic of the resource Correspondence, etc re …Unattached Representation; also notes on meeting with OFT on Monopolies Report https://nam.maydayrooms.org/files/original/c3204f291ec10dc759787818505164a7.pdf f0b6148bee0850eee59db8a49638546e 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 Cover letter (MJ) and letter from K Forder (Registrar) to J Tarn re PI Liability Study Team Subject The topic of the resource Cover letter (MJ) and letter from K Forder (Registrar) to J Tarn re PI Liability Study Team (2pp) Description An account of the resource I enclose herewith a copy of a letter dated 16 November which is self explanatory together with the accompaning Press Release dated 11 May. I have written in terms which indicate surprise that this is the f irst ment ion of this matter that has been made to ARCUK with a request for submission by the end of this month. I am however glad to hear that constituent bodies such as the FAS, IAAS, and the RIBA have been cQn*ulted and have submitted - questionnaires on the mat ter . It rather seems that the big gap in consültation has been an apparent fai lure •to seek the views of unattached architects and the Architectural Association. I am making appropriate representations to the Department of the Environment on this matter together •with querying a situation where it rather appears that on the! three study groups looking at the matter there appear to be only two architects. I should be grateful if constituent bodies could let me have copies of submissions they have made so that we 'can come to some conclusion on how the matter should proceed. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource M Jencks/ Forder Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived JA Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 22 & 18/11/88 https://nam.maydayrooms.org/files/original/b1efb34a899563cdd12d0c28a5a98c0d.pdf a1f5044848c05f1c935b7b05f20fd2c9 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 Public Design Group Description An account of the resource <p><span style="font-weight:400;">Argued that it was only through the public sector that the majority of people could have access to the land and resources needed for housing, education and other essential services. The task was therefore to reform the practice of architecture in local councils to provide an accessible and accountable design service. The Public Design Group proposed reforms to the practice of architecture in local councils to provide a design service accessible and accountable to local people and service users. The following 6 Interim Proposals were developed which were later initiated and implemented in Haringey Council 1979-1985 by NAM members. </span></p> <ul><li style="font-weight:400;"><span style="font-weight:400;">Local area control over resources </span></li> <li style="font-weight:400;"><span style="font-weight:400;">Design teams to be area based </span></li> <li style="font-weight:400;"><span style="font-weight:400;">Area design teams to be multi-disciplinary </span></li> <li style="font-weight:400;"><span style="font-weight:400;">Project architects to report directly to committee</span></li> <li style="font-weight:400;"><span style="font-weight:400;">Abolish posts between Team Leader and Chief Architect </span></li> <li style="font-weight:400;"><span style="font-weight:400;">Joint working groups with Direct Labour Organisations</span></li> </ul> 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 Déjà Vu- Parallels between High Rise System Built Housing and PFI Subject The topic of the resource Article in SCALA Newsletter September 2004 describing the intriguing parallels between the way the Private Finance Initiative (PFI) operates and the building by local authorities of system-built tower blocks in the 1950’s and 60’s. Description An account of the resource John Murray T: 020 8340 4359 E: johnmurray@ btinternet.com John Murray was formerly Borough Architect at the London Borough of Haringey. His 1977 MA Thesis on Design Evaluation and the Form of Council Housing included a historical review of council housing. 28 High rise system built housing and PFI: Have they anything in common? What Similarities? There are intriguing parallels between the way the Private Finance Initiative (PFI) operates and the building by local authorities of system-built tower blocks in the 1950’s and 60’s. • Both policies were introduced by a Conservative government. • In both cases, the Government promoted an unpopular policy by using financial incentives to encourage reluctant local authorities to adopt unfamiliar and untried methods of building. • In both cases control over design and construction was vested in large private construction companies, with local authority architects having little influence. The responses of the in-coming Labour governments of 1964 and 1997 were, initially, similar. PFI, introduced by the previous Conservative government in 1992, only took off after Labour took office in 1997. It was enthusiastically adopted and extended for a substantial proportion of large public sector building projects. In 2001-02 the PFI accounted for 9% of public investment. According to the NHS plan, more than 100 new hospitals will be provided using PFI by 2010. 1964-1973 By 1964, there was an increasing use of high high-rise systems imported from Europe. The in-coming Labour government, having promised to build 500,000 houses a year, continued the drive to industrialise and established the National Building Agency to advise on industrialised system building. But within three years, the new government set about changing the inherited policy of slum clearance and high-rise system-built council housing. The 1967 Labour Housing Act, which introduced the Housing Cost Yardstick, is less well known for effectively bringing an end to the building of high flats by local authorities. It reduced the financial support for high flats, abolishing the additional subsidy available for each storey in excess of six, and re-introduced the general needs subsidy. Thus ended an arrangement, which, since 1956, had encouraged often reluctant local authorities to build high blocks. The Housing Cost Yardstick, while strengthening central government control over the financing of public sector housing, drew attention to the excessive cost of high building and the possibilities of alternative patterns of housing layout. The partial collapse of Ronan Point, a system-built tower block in the London Borough of Newham and a customary datum, was therefore not the cause of the decline in the high block. It occurred one year later in 1968. In parallel with the decision to discourage the building of high-rise council flats, the efficacy of slum clearance was also questioned. In 1966 the government commissioned the Deeplish Study to assess the possibility of housing improvement in place of the slum clearance programme begun by the Conservative government in 1953. Its report of 1968 recommended rehabilitation rather than demolition, stressing the economic and social advantages. By 1969, the government had transferred the emphasis from slum clearance and high flats to rehabilitation. In the private sector also, improvement grants were introduced “to provide dwellings by conversion, or by improving dwellings and houses”. General Improvement Areas were introduced with compulsory powers to improve living conditions. In 1974, following the return of another Labour government, the policy was further extended to include municipalisation, the acquiring by local authorities of homes from private developers and agencies. PFI Time will tell whether the current government will have a similar change of heart about PFI. At present that seems unlikely, despite criticisms and public disquiet. The PFI was introduced by the Conservative government in the 1992 Budget, after the UK was forced to pull out of the European exchange rate mechanism earlier that year. The government wanted to stimulate the economy while at the same time holding down public spending - and the PFI appeared to offer a relatively inexpensive way of boosting a recession-hit construction industry. Under the PFI a private consortium raises the money needed to build or refurbish a capital project such as a school, hospital or housing estate. The project is financed, designed and built by the consortium, and is then leased back to the public authority complete with services such as routine maintenance, cleaning and catering, typically for a period of 25-30 years. The private consortium will be regularly paid from public money depending on its performance throughout that period. If the consortium misses performance targets, it will be paid less. The attraction of PFI for the Government is that it avoids making expensive one-off payments to build large-scale projects that might involve unpopular tax rises. Since the risk of PFI projects is technically transferred to the private consortium, in the government's accounts it does not show up as increased public borrowing. But there is a question mark over how much risk is genuinely transferred to the private sector given the record of government having to bail out private companies managing troubled public services. Critics also claim that as with any form of hire purchase, buying a product over a long period of time is more expensive than paying for it in full at the outset. They also point out that governments can borrow cash at a cheaper rate than the private sector. Growing concern has recently been expressed amongst experts about the cost of PFI. Public sector accountants claim that hospitals and schools would be cheaper to build using traditional funding methods. The national audit office described the value for money test used to justify PFI projects as "pseudo-scientific mumbo jumbo". It said that there was little evidence so far that the PFI offered increased value for money, especially in providing new schools and hospitals. (cited by Weaver, M, PFI: The issue explained, The Guardian 15/01/03) Public sector unions have criticised PFI as "back-door privatisation". They are concerned that the wages and conditions of support workers who are transferred from the public sector to the private sector consortia suffer as businesses seek to maximise profits. Economists also point out that the government can borrow money from the markets at cheaper rates than the private sector so the PFI saddles public services with higher interest repayments than if the cash had been borrowed by the Treasury. The Government does not dispute this but it believes that PFI encourages greater control of costs over the project's lifetime. For example, since the consortium will be penalised if part of the building becomes unusable, in theory, it is in its interest to use high quality construction materials, which in turn should keep maintenance costs low. High rise system built housing and PFI 29 “Growing concern has recently been expressed amongst experts about the cost of PFI.” “...there is continuing unease about the low priority given to design quality...” 30 High rise system built housing and PFI In an article, To PFI or not to PFI in the Summer 2004 Scalanews, Mark Mattison, in discussing alternatives to PFI, argued that, “Partnering contracts allow the provision of integrated design solutions by requiring the procurer, the contractor and related consultants working on a project to work closely together, providing an integrated service to the employer using a wider skill base and a (hopefully) non-adversarial approach to negotiation”. But the PFI is now the major source of capital funding for local authorities and NHS bodies because ministers will not countenance the borrowing or increased taxes that would be needed if PFI were to be abandoned. Design Quality In addition to these concerns, there is continuing unease about the low priority given to design quality in the process where control of projects has been taken over by contractors. Building Design magazine reported on the anxieties about contractors’ control debated at the July 2004 RIBA Conference. The Manchester City Council Chief Executive criticised the government for leaving local authorities with little control over their own areas by allowing control of regeneration projects to be taken over by contractors. “The mismatch at the moment is very serious. It is the notion that the private sector knows best; the contractor, heaven forbid, knows best. We have to be more responsive to the local, and to the particular circumstance in the community”. He also criticised the Commission for Architecture and the Built Environment (Cabe) for failing to challenge the Government in terms of procurement. Architects from the platform echoed his disapproval. A Cabe commissioner and architect pointed out that Cabe had challenged the government on design quality and had produced a report to ensure that design quality had a higher priority in PFI but the Government has not adopted all of Cabe’s recommendations. The complaints came just before the government announced an extra £16 billion of public funding to build houses. In his spending review in July 2004, the Chancellor extended the Government’s commitment to contractor-led procurement by announcing more PFI housing. More recently, the Architects Journal described a report by Public Policy Research commenting on the need to improve design quality in PFI projects: “There is enough evidence to argue that the design of some PFI facilities is below best practice...The Audit Commission report on early PFI schools establishes a correlative link between PFI and poorer design when compared to conventional procurement. New research into the effect of PFI on design standards should therefore be a top priority” (Three Steps Forward, Two steps Back Public Policy Research report). Cited in AJ 09/09/04 P10 Labour Boffins demand PFI Probe. Summary By jettisoning the inherited policy of slum clearance and high rise system built council housing, and by transforming it into a combination of rehabilitation of existing housing plus medium-rise, architect- designed new build, the 1964 Labour government anticipated the growing unpopularity and expense of the high-rise block. It seems unlikely that the current Labour government will discard its commitment to the PFI, at least in the near future, despite signs that the method is becoming increasingly unpopular. A Guardian/ICM poll in the latter part of 2002 showed that almost two thirds of voters supported a moratorium on any new PFI projects. So far, the Government has refused to grant one. It is not only the pared-down designs and long-term costs, which cause concern. Excessive charges for using facilities are also cited. Anecdotal evidence suggests that it is more expensive for visitors to park their cars at the new out-of-town PFI Edinburgh Royal Infirmary, than it is at Edinburgh Airport. One consolation for local authorities may be that while much of the blame for the consequences of high rise flats was laid at their door, rather than at the door of the culprits in central government, so far, at least, there seems little doubt in the public’s mind where responsibility for the PFI lies. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource John Murray Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived John Murray Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 18 September 2004 https://nam.maydayrooms.org/files/original/af7b99d86b2281f8d958e9c1a3369191.pdf b11f443a03a6211b45a7747f4fd73051 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Alternative Practice Description An account of the resource This investigated other forms of organisation of architects' offices based around the concept of cooperative working and shared equity. Several members went on to establish their own practices adopting such models. A pre-eminent example was Support Community Building Design, which emerged from a small group of graduates from the Architectural Association which went on to create a cooperative practice focused on potential client groups in society which traditionally were not the beneficiaries of the architectural profession which, we would have said, was essentially the handmaiden of capital. These groups eventually included local authority tenants, women's groups including refuges, ‘black’ i.e. racially self-defined groups. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Description Subject The topic of the resource Brief summary of origins, aims and development Description An account of the resource ASSIST ASSIST is an architectural practice with offices in Glasgow and Edinburgh. It was created in the 1970s as a Research Unit of the Department of Architecture of the University of Strathclyde, from which it left in 1983 to become a Cooperative Practice called ASSIST Architects. Its origins are in the early days of the tenement improvement programme in Glasgow involving Senior Lecturer Jim Johnson. JM was offered a job with ASSIST in 1971 and was very impressed by the excellent design of their tenement flat improvement, having spent holidays in his youth in his aunt’s tenement flat. 24 May 2021 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource ASSIST Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived JM Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource May 2021 https://nam.maydayrooms.org/files/original/28ee234a48887a10208fb63211406745.pdf ea9aa7ad598513dbddbc77ed5185b005 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 Public Design Group Description An account of the resource <p><span style="font-weight:400;">Argued that it was only through the public sector that the majority of people could have access to the land and resources needed for housing, education and other essential services. The task was therefore to reform the practice of architecture in local councils to provide an accessible and accountable design service. The Public Design Group proposed reforms to the practice of architecture in local councils to provide a design service accessible and accountable to local people and service users. The following 6 Interim Proposals were developed which were later initiated and implemented in Haringey Council 1979-1985 by NAM members. </span></p> <ul><li style="font-weight:400;"><span style="font-weight:400;">Local area control over resources </span></li> <li style="font-weight:400;"><span style="font-weight:400;">Design teams to be area based </span></li> <li style="font-weight:400;"><span style="font-weight:400;">Area design teams to be multi-disciplinary </span></li> <li style="font-weight:400;"><span style="font-weight:400;">Project architects to report directly to committee</span></li> <li style="font-weight:400;"><span style="font-weight:400;">Abolish posts between Team Leader and Chief Architect </span></li> <li style="font-weight:400;"><span style="font-weight:400;">Joint working groups with Direct Labour Organisations</span></li> </ul> 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 Development of NAM - PDS Group Subject The topic of the resource Talk to Bartlett Masters Students about development of NAM ideas Description An account of the resource NAM TALK 07 MARCH 2014 TO DAVID ROBERTS’ MASTERS DEGREE STUDENTS, BARTLETT, UCL I’ll talk briefly about NAM largely using the agenda suggested by David Roberts  Background to NAM How I and others got involved How NAM ideas and ideals were discussed and disseminated (for example in SLATE) How all this related to my Masters study here at the Bartlett How this related to my work in Haringey Current practice and John McAslan’s initiative      1. Motivations for forming NAM Edgewick Primary School in Coventry 1968 I was briefed by the City Education Client Officer. When I asked him how I should accommodate suggestions from the Head Teacher about the design of her new school, he just said “Ignore her”. But I decided instead to ignore him and went on to work closely with the Head teacher, staff and pupils in developing the design of what turned out to be a successful and well-regarded Primary School in one of the poorest areas of Coventry. For me this was confirmation that the users of a building must be fully involved if the design is to be successful. It was a very important lesson and my respect for the committed Head stayed with me ever since. Other ideas came from working with tenants. 2. Working with Tenants The next stage in the process: In the early 1970s many architects, including myself while working in offices during the day were also providing free design advice to Tenants’ and Residents’ groups. This taught both sides the benefits of having a design service accountable to the people who use buildings. I was working for tenants in Newham while during the day I worked for BDP, incidentally a very good firm whose idealistic founding partner Grenfell-Baines stated it should be multi-disciplinary and fully involve and reward its staff – and so it was. (3Rs, Responsibility, Recognition and Reward) These ideas subsequently influenced the Public Design Group. (See Guardian obituary) My wife Ursula was working at that time in a Community Development Project in Canning Town. Through her I became involved with West Ham tenants. 3. ARC and First NAM Congress 4. How      While working in BDP, at lunchtimes we used to occasionally visit the AA in nearby Bedford Square. There was also an AA Studio in Percy Street near the BDP office. There I met Brian Anson the tutor and his students. I talked to Brian about my interest in a public design service. ARC Architects Revolutionary Council. Brian Anson and students Proposal for New Architecture Movement. Trying to encourage sympathetic architects. Brian asked me to make a presentation on a National Design Service at a conference. In November 1975 an advert appeared in the architectural press inviting participants to attend the inaugural Congress of the New Architecture Movement in the unlikely setting of Harrogate. The congress brought together a considerable number of like-minded salaried architects and students. NAM was born NAM’s ideas and ideals were discussed and disseminated ARC proposed that NAM’s structure should be an elected Leader and committee. Animated debate resulted. The women at the congress persuaded men to structure NAM like women’s movement, ie, groups of people interested in particular issues who would come together as necessary, not at the diktat of a higher body. NAM was structured as local groups. There was also to be a liaison group whose role was to coordinate the different groups, deal with correspondence and arrange the next annual congress. I was involved in the London liaison group and we got a grant from the Rowntree Foundation for an office in 9 Poland Street. See articles about history recommending radical historians from my thesis. (See SLATE)     1 NAM TALK 07 MARCH 2014 TO DAVID ROBERTS’ MASTERS DEGREE STUDENTS, BARTLETT, UCL 5. Groups  Accountability to Users Alternative Practice Education Feminist Group Professional Issues (A number of us were elected to ARCUK to represent ‘unattached’ architects) Public Design Group Trade Unions and Architecture SLATE        groups, which were largely autonomous, worked across local groups to develop These their ideas. They arranged their own conferences and reported through SLATE and annually to the NAM Congress. Although I was involved in the liaison group and some other groups, my main interest was in developing the ideas for a National Design Service. This eventually became the Public Design Group. It included Adam Purser, one of Brian Anson’s mature students and architects and students from Sheffield and Nottingham. So we did a lot of travelling. 6.  Public Design Group Argued that it was only through the public sector that the majority of people could have access to the land and resources needed for housing, education and other essential services. The task was therefore to reform the practice of architecture in local councils to provide an accessible and accountable design service. In May 1978 we organised PDS Conference in Birmingham with the help of UCATT. Presented papers including on the Origins, Evolution and Structure of LA Departments of Architecture, which demonstrated that the existence of Council departments of architecture was almost solely dependent on the provision of   schools and council housing based on Elizabeth Layton’s 1961 study Building by 1   Our Interim proposals paper suggested six steps which could readily be adopted: 1. Local area control over resources 2. Design teams to be area based 3. Area design teams to be multi disciplinary 4. Project architects to report directly to committee 5. Abolish posts between Team Leader and Chief Architect 6. Joint working groups with Direct Labour Organisations Also in 1978, these interim proposals were included in our Report Community Architecture - A Public Design Service? to Reg Freeson, Minister of Housing. This report which was widely publicised, argued that community architecture should be based on the public sector rather than on the private sector as promoted by the Royal Institute of British Architects (RIBA), claiming that the RIBA’s newfound interest in the community stemmed from a growing shortage of work in the private sector. Incidentally, the proportion of registered architects working in local government rose from about 20% in 1952 to about one third in 1977. (ARCUK votes) Local Authorities. The growth of these departments followed closely on government legislation making schools and housing a statutory provision. Their subsequent identity as separate departments depended on whether the local authority built mainly schools or mainly housing. 1 Building by Local Authorities, Elizabeth Layton, Royal Institute of Public Administration, Allen & Unwin, 1961. 2 NAM TALK 07 MARCH 2014 TO DAVID ROBERTS’ MASTERS DEGREE STUDENTS, BARTLETT, UCL 4. How it related to your Masters studies 2. Evaluation of Design     While all this was going on, in 1976 I decided to leave BDP to do further study. I particularly wanted to learn more about the evaluation of housing design so I applied to join the Bartlett Masters course. The course was run by Bill Hillier and two other tutors, one of whom also taught at the North London Polytechnic and was very good. I enjoyed the course and learned a lot. It was good to study full-time again. My Thesis was called: Cultural Reproduction and the Form of Council Housing. I developed the theory that housing design is evaluated primarily in relation to the extent to which the form of tenure reproduces the ideas of the dominant culture. The historical appendix to my Thesis showed that not only did the quantity of council housing fluctuate in relation to the government in power, but also the design. Starting in the 19C, the Conservatives, who were concerned about the growing working class poor living in rookeries, promoted slum clearance and multi-storey blocks which culminated in the contractor-designed tower blocks of the ‘50s and ’60s. "The rookeries of central London were considered to be hot-beds of the "dangerous classes", the foci of cholera, crime and Chartism". (Stedman Jones) (Attempts to improve working class housing and to alleviate the danger of rookeries took four main forms in the period from 1840 to 1870. These were; street clearance, model dwellings, sanitary regulations and the Octavia Hill schemes). And that Conservative view continued throughout the 20 C and certainly appears to be alive and well today. On the other hand Labour Governments favoured cottage-style estates. The successive Conservative Governments’ policy of slum clearance and high flats was challenged in 1968 by the Deeplish Study instigated by Harold Wilson’s Labour Government. The Deeplish Study (Deeplish in Rochdale) demonstrated conclusively that it was more economical to rehabilitate existing houses than to demolish and build new. And it also ensured that communities stayed together. That became Labour’s policy and it was extended to Councils buying houses for sale, which became Council houses and we renovated them.  5. Haringey BDS The most comprehensive design service reorganisation along the lines proposed by NAM took place in Haringey where I live. Tenant Involvement in Haringey Haringey Council had developed an early commitment to user participation. In 1976 the Council had initiated cooperative housing projects, in which the future tenants were invited to take part in the design process. The architect for the new build scheme was Bert Dinnage who was not only radically minded but a very good architect. The Council and staff in the architects’ service were therefore familiar with and committed to ideas of tenant and user involvement in design. I met Bert Dinnage to see if he thought NAM ideas could be implemented in Haringey. After I completed my MA at the Bartlett, I got a job in Haringey’s Central Area Team in 1978. The NAM ideas were adopted in Haringey Architect’s Service in two stages in 1979 and 1985. (See article in Going Local 1987) At the same time as we in NAM were developing our ideas, young Labour councillors who had emerged from tenants’ struggles like Jeremy Corbyn and Bernie Grant in Haringey were beginning to be elected. They were fully supportive of our ideas, as were many officers in other departments. I then worked with Bert Dinnage and other like-minded people to get the service changed. This was done through union meetings. The then Borough Architect, Alan Weitzel was also supportive. The first change came in 1979 when area design teams were agreed and I was appointed by a panel chaired by Jeremy Corbyn, the then Chair of the Planning Committee, 3 NAM TALK 07 MARCH 2014 TO DAVID ROBERTS’ MASTERS DEGREE STUDENTS, BARTLETT, UCL as the Team Leader of the Wood Green Team, the first multi-disciplinary team in the service. Jeremy Corbyn continued to be very supportive of our proposals. The Wood Green Team carried out the rehabilitation of the historic 19th century Noel Park housing estate, built by the Artisans and Labourers Dwelling Co, including phasing of design and construction work to ensure annual delivery of 100 completed renovations. Tenants were involved in developing the design and there was a show house for each Phase. Tenants’ satisfaction surveys were carried out at the end of each Phase by architectural students. Our team won a DOE and Civic Trust Award for Palace Gates Sheltered Housing Scheme, designed in conjunction with the resident representatives and built by PELAW. Involvement with the DLO: Following the 1980 Conservative Government Planning and Land Act, I was asked by the Chief Executive to work with the DLO and local building workers unions (UCATT) to ensure fair tendering in the procurement of housing and other building work. Subsequently seconded on recommendation of UCATT shop stewards to manage PELAW, a pioneering design and build housing rehabilitation Direct Labour organisation which required support in meeting its programme and financial targets. During this period, negotiations to develop the Architect Service reorganisation continued. The second stage took place in 1985 by which time the Council had fully adopted these ideas including the proposal to have a Management Board of Team Leaders who would manage the new Building Design Service (BDS) of eight fully multi-disciplinary area teams. The Coordinator was to be elected annually by the Management Board, this decision being subject to ratification by committee. I was elected coordinator each year until about 1990 when I was appointed Borough Architect. This system worked successfully with the support of Councillors and Committee Chairs. People were attracted to work in such an innovative organisation and in a Council which encouraged equal opportunities, so we never had trouble getting good staff; more women and people from ethnic minority communities were appointed (a considerable number of whom were in senior positions), so that the service composition became one of the first to be more reflective of the community it served. By 1990, over 60% of the staff were black and ethnic minority and 30% were women. This compares to 22% and 14% respectively in 1985. 3% of staff had disabilities. Design Teams were now located in their areas and soon became closely associated with their local communities and local councillors. As an example of community involvement, local people were involved in the selection of the Broadwater Farm Team established after the riots in 1985. The team implemented a 10-year £80m estate action programme, ensuring the use of local labour and encouraging BWF Youth Association Coop to carry out work on the estate. The award–winning Broadwater Farm workshops were designed by our Broadwater Farm Team and built by the BWF Coop. Architectural Trainees As part of a policy to encourage local young people to become involved in architecture, each of the eight teams appointed two local young people as trainees. The majority were young black and ethnic minority men and women who were sponsored through college. 6. Wider Impact The traditional way for architects and engineers to work was in separate teams accountable to a chief. But as Grenfell Baines had figured out that means staff are primarily accountable to a chief, whereas on a project which is necessarily multi disciplinary they should all be accountable to the client or as NAM would say the client including the user. So we went around proselytising giving talks to other LA architects departments. What we were doing was also being reported in SLATE, BD and the AJ. 4 NAM TALK 07 MARCH 2014 TO DAVID ROBERTS’ MASTERS DEGREE STUDENTS, BARTLETT, UCL In terms of the wider impact of these changes, Graham Towers in his book Building Democracy: Community Architecture in the Inner Cities, records that, “The events in Haringey sent ripples through technical departments in neighbouring Boroughs. Many staff disillusioned by being typecast into specialist roles, were attracted to the new way of working...In Camden, an alliance of staff and councillors succeeded in introducing area working. A similar alliance developed in Islington Architects Department and ...eventually bore fruit. Subsequently, the new approach was adopted in some other authorities. Area team working brought a new structure to public service, giving a more accessible and accountable approach to public capital projects”. (Building Democracy: Community Architecture in the Inner Cities, pp 142,143, Graham Towers). Award-winning Designs Quality of work was recognised in Dept of Environment and Civic Trust design awards plus awards for energy conservation work. Public Sector Consultancy To supplement the service income in the light of a declining capital programme, in 1988, the Council approved the proposal from Haringey Building Design Service to establish a public sector consultancy to obtain work from other councils and from housing associations. Eventually by 1994, the consultancy provided 15% of service income. In 1991, as part of a consortium, Haringey’s design service won in competition a project in Moscow to create a small business support agency. This project, supported by both the UK and Russian governments, was funded by the UK Govt. ‘Know How Fund’. Based on work with Broadwater Farm community, we collaborated with the University of Cambridge to provide advice to Bratislava City Council in Slovakia on the renovation of a large concrete panel estate. UK Govt. ‘Know How Fund’ also funded this project. 7. Current Practice Privatisation When the 1980 Planning and Land Act sought to privatise the work done by Council DLOs, I assumed that would just be the start and the rest of Council services would follow, including architects and engineers and so on. And so it has proved although at the time people thought I was exaggerating. Many architects preferred working with private builders because the DLO could challenge their authority through Councillors and the Union. So many were happy with the 1980 Act, not realising they would be next.... Then sheltered housing ... then housing... then social care.... And now the unbelievable is happening... The NHS is being secretly privatised - already 70%. As far as architects are concerned, my 1978 Paper Origins, Evolution and Structure of LA Departments of Architecture, demonstrated that Council departments of architecture were almost solely dependent on the provision of schools and council housing. Now there are no more Council Houses being built and PFI ensured that private contractors chose their own architects to build schools and hospitals. (I did a review of this for SCALA newsletter and also on PFI). So now nobody remembers there were LA architects departments... new Haringey Councillors don’t know what we did or how radical we were. 5 NAM TALK 07 MARCH 2014 TO DAVID ROBERTS’ MASTERS DEGREE STUDENTS, BARTLETT, UCL Letter to Guardian 04 January 2014 Subject: Hidden from History? Date: Sunday, January 4, 2014 13:56 From: John Murray <johnmurray@btinternet.com> To: The Guardian letters@guardian.co.uk John McLaslan’s initiatives to open a studio and train local young people as architects from Tottenham (Haringey) and also to rectify the absence of black and minority architects in the makeup of the architectural profession, are to be very much welcomed (After Haiti, Tottenham architect opens studio in riot scarred borough 4 Jan 2014). However, it is equally a timely reminder of the hidden history of the role of local authority architects services, which disappeared in the 1990s in the steady march of privatisation. The Haringey Building Design Service was especially pioneering. At its peak it employed around 200 staff, 60% of whom were black and ethnic minority, reflecting the Borough’s very diverse population. It had 8 multi disciplinary teams serving different areas of the Borough. As part of a policy to encourage local young people to become involved in architecture, each of the eight teams appointed two local young people as trainee architects. ie 16 in total. The majority were young black and ethnic minority men and women who were sponsored through college. What currently seems pioneering was then a core part of a public service shaped by the two strands of social change which fortuitously came together in Haringey in the 1980s. Firstly, a radical local Labour Council committed to equal opportunities and secondly, the impact of the New Architectural Movement (NAM). The latter was a social movement committed to extending accountability and user involvement in design services and Haringey local authority architects (including myself) were among some of the most actively involved. As neo liberalism has advanced over thirty years and the social state is dismantled, it is important that we do not forget this radical legacy and the sense of agency to bring about social change from this era. And as the housing crisis deepens, what was once deemed possible as a part of the social state may well need to be reinvented. John Murray (former NAM PDS Group) 07 March 2014 6 Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource John Murray Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived John Murray Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 07 March 2014 https://nam.maydayrooms.org/files/original/2c8cfbb0c600e6767dcc36055b34d98b.pdf a0bade4d0fcb0262028bbedfd3f4886d 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 Public Design Group Description An account of the resource <p><span style="font-weight:400;">Argued that it was only through the public sector that the majority of people could have access to the land and resources needed for housing, education and other essential services. The task was therefore to reform the practice of architecture in local councils to provide an accessible and accountable design service. The Public Design Group proposed reforms to the practice of architecture in local councils to provide a design service accessible and accountable to local people and service users. The following 6 Interim Proposals were developed which were later initiated and implemented in Haringey Council 1979-1985 by NAM members. </span></p> <ul><li style="font-weight:400;"><span style="font-weight:400;">Local area control over resources </span></li> <li style="font-weight:400;"><span style="font-weight:400;">Design teams to be area based </span></li> <li style="font-weight:400;"><span style="font-weight:400;">Area design teams to be multi-disciplinary </span></li> <li style="font-weight:400;"><span style="font-weight:400;">Project architects to report directly to committee</span></li> <li style="font-weight:400;"><span style="font-weight:400;">Abolish posts between Team Leader and Chief Architect </span></li> <li style="font-weight:400;"><span style="font-weight:400;">Joint working groups with Direct Labour Organisations</span></li> </ul> 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 Direct Labour History Subject The topic of the resource History of Direct Labour from first DLO in 1982 at LCC Description An account of the resource uur History ( Ie oieirms WA. ZeLw 4 The decinion to set up the first direct labour departments was made Ly the TCC in 1992. Behind the decision ley four important factors. First, in the early 1290s, labour organisation wes strong. Following the success of the 1889 dock strike, new unions were emerging to challenge the traditional craft unions and unskilled workers were organising thenselves alongside exilled workers. Both were fighting for better working conditions high during the depression years up to 1295 and the governnent’s attcnpte to mollify rising discontent in the form of publio relier works proved coatly, inefficient and beyond the scope of most lock] wuthorivier and ne real solution to unemploymeht. Thirdly, the tuilding industry wae in a state of chaos. During the corrupt years of the MPDW contractors were infamous for scamping work done, resulting in heavy maintenance costs, ani for forming rings to maintain the costs of contracta at an exorbitarily high level. Alongside the growth of cubcontracting which gccompeniea this, trade unions were opposing the imposition of vrdue hours and unfair veges by contractore. Tastly, there wac a repidly changing political position within the LCC, with the emergence of a latour group, which inciuded 2 John Burna (one of the leading figures in the dock strike) and Sidney Webb. This group saw municipal servicee as a direct encroachnent on canitelism. The fight for an extension of municipal services arose mainly out of an alliance between this group and those desiring to increace the efficiency of capitalioms The latter were called the Progressives. Bestest the enterprises of the Progressives, dependant on the provision of essential services in the capital, were hampered by the inefficiency and costiinessa of the work done ty contractors. Up till this time the main function of town councils war to hand out contracts : , Dic = through the Fair wages Movement. “econdly, unemployment was extremely t. and: collect the money necerssary for tiem. Even as late as 1890 dust collection wae done by contractors in the LCC area. The Progressives gained control of the LCC in 1889, defeating the Moderates who represented the interests of local contractors and private companies. One of their firet acts was to bring in a clause enforcing Trade union conditions and pay on all contracts given out by the council. Contractors by the LCC in setting up their Works department was followed by Battersea (1894) and West Ham (1896). An important point about these early direct labour departments is that their work was not confined to housing. Local authorities had only recently extended their sphere of responsibility to housing, following agitation from, for instance, the Workmen' s National Housing council, to remedy slum conditions. As well as undertaking the building of some of the first council estates built under the Housing of the Working Classes Act 1890 the LCC Works Department also obtained contracts (including the furniture contract) from the London Schools Board. Battersea even built a power station, The departments were equipped with a large number of workshops. battersea had, for instance, a wheelwrights shop, joinery works, baacksmiths shop, pjumbers, painters and decoratore shops. It also had advanced machinery, such as a morticing and horing machine." One of the early direct works departments even retaliated by putting in outrageous tonderse> It was against this background, and in order to destroy the monopolistic position of contractors that the growing demand for a Works Department was accepted in 1892, with the building of the York Rd. sewer. The lowest estimate received for this when put out for tender Kas £11,000. The Works department completed the work for £6,854. The lead given owned their own brickfielde; enother provided its own gas for the works.5 == : : ; The effect of the introduction of direct works was to act as xz a check on contractors, reducing their demands and raising the quality of work done — as well ae improving the conditions of building workers by setting a high standard which private builders were force ed to follow. Not till the 1900s, when the housetwilding boom had subsided and speculetive builders’ profits were low did contractors begin arguing that direct works was more contly. It is clear that the idea of cost efficiency was not a basis for setting up Direct Works. As Battersea's engineer and surveyor, Mr. Pilditch explained: "In dispensing with the contractor and undertaking the whole of our work direct, it has never been in contemplation by the Vestry to compete With the cutting contractor who competes at the lowest poss&ble, and often at a losing figure, and then tries by every schame possible to cut and shirk the specified work to avoid a loss as far as possible if unable to make a profite!© Mr. Williams of the FRIBA added to this: "The profit and loss fallacy is not indu&ged in at Battersea. I gathered that it was quite understood in Battersez that good material, good and expeditious worknanship and proper conditions of labour were the points to be aimed at, and whether the eventual cost came out above or below the estimate the community benefitted thereby in the end" These claims are supported in a survey of direct works in the LCC, Battersea and West Ham carried out by Bradford Trades Council in 1904, ! (to ascertain the feasibility of Direct Works for Bradford) which describes the quality of work and materials used as compared with private contractors work. 4- By 1907 a large mumber of authorities had followed the initiative teken by the LCC and set up their own direct works (see figure I). As local authorities began their own housebuilding programmes, often with the use of direct labour, eo their activities encroached more and more private into the/housetuilding sector. With the increasing sucese of direct labour, the contractors launched their firat full-scale campaign against direct xarkt works. Direct Works was ons of the main iseues of the 1907/8 local elections for the LCC, with the Moderates in the name of ‘Municipal Reform',claiming that it wes costly and took away local employment. They succeeded in gaining a majority in the LCC, and their first task was in 1908 to practically destroy the Yorks Department. The Progressives BDivans and J. Stanley Holmes in their election address for the 1910 election described the effect: "The ruthless destruction of this great cepartment and the discharge of over 3,000 men had resulted in London being placed in the hands of the big contractors. It is urged that the men formerly employed by the LCC are now working for contractorsbu,t since a considerable volume of work which was formerly executed by the Yorks Department (including the furnishing contract for all london sbhools) is now being done in the provinces, it is obvious that the cry of 'Jondon work for London men’ raised by the moderates is simply electionary cant. Further it Will be remembered that the Works Department was established in 1892, partly for the purpose of acting as a check on contractors and preventing the formation of ‘rings’. In view of this it 49/noteworthy point that since the abolition of the Works Department over 50 tenders have been withdrawn by contractors, showing that the old game is starting over again, ani we are going back to the corrupt cays of the EE." (Presumably the tenders were withdrawn 60 that they could by upped.) --} By 1912 moderate opinion on direct labour was being reflected in the official line taken by government. Purns had argued throughout the 1890s in the House of Commons for direct labour and against the use of contractors for government workers But in 1912 when Wedgewood Benn | was asked: Wat is policy about whether a perticular piece of work should be done by contract or by direct letour?¥, he replied: "The policy of the department is to have work executed subcontract, practically the only direct labour employed being in connection with the Lonizn Royal Parks end certain ancient monuments situated in remote places. The regular repair work in the various government wuildings is executed bub maintenance Contreotatting To sum up this first phase in the history of direed labour. Direct works departments before the first world war were established: 1) as # solution to unemployment and as an alternative to public relief ; works; 2) to ensure good working conditions and the maintenance of trade union retes. 3) to ensure a high standard, particularly in the growing area of public housing. 4) to destroy the monopolistic position of contractors and to act as a ) check on their tenders (if these were lower than direact labour estimetes, this implied low quality and scamped work or poor wages; if higher, this implied exorbitantly high profits for contractors). The work of the departments was wide-ranging, although housebuilding became increasingly important with the growing responisibilities of municipalities to provide housing. To undertake this extensive workshops were set up. ~b— Post First World “ar The acute housing shortage after World War I reféected the pre-war deficiency of housebilding carried forward as well as the suspeasion of building during the war. The Housing Town Planning Act of 1919 zttemped to eliminate this shortage by imposing a duty on local authorities for the first time to provide for the housing needs of the zorking class in their district. To back up this committment the government gave direct encouragement to local suthorities to employ 13w local authorities gave work to both direct labour and local gu$lds- The working conditions provided were aboue those in the private sector and, inspite of the guaranteed 44 hour week and payment for wet time, veges were often slightly above those in the locality. Girect labour orgenisations. A memoradum of August 1919 As a result of this encouragement, and of the success in the experimental shousing in first Newbury, and then Tivennoovun the munber of direct labour departments snowballed. By Noventer 1920 70 new direct works had been set ea Unlike the prevar pepartments these were concentrated on house-building. Although direct labour was A aetea by the building unions, the situation was confused by the short-lived and financially disastrous Guild movement which the NFBTO also gave backing to. Neny w6s Post First World “ar The acute housing shortage after World War I reftected the pre-war deficiency of housebilding carried forward as well as the suspeasion of building during the war. The Housing Town Planning Act of 1919 zttemped to eliminate this shortage by imposing a duty on local authorities for the first time to provide for the housing needs of the zorking class in their district. To back up this committment the government gave direct encouragement to local authorities to employ were often slightly above those in the locality. 13 Meny direct labour organisations. A memoradum of August 1919 As a result of this encouragement, and of the success in the experimental shousing in first Newbury, and then Tivernsota the munber of direct labour departments snowballed. By roTener 1920 70 new direct works had been set tee Unlike the prevar pepartments these were concentrated on house-building. Although direct labour was a eee by the building unions, the situation was confused by the short-lived and financially disastrous Guild movement which the NFSTO also geve backing to. local authorities gave work to both direct labour and local gu$lds. The working conditions provided were aboue those in the private sector and, inspite of the guaranteed 44 hour week and payment for wet time, veges Shortly thereafter, the private buildinr sector, paralysed by skilled labour shortages and vastly received separate authorisation for subsidy (Additional Powers) Act. In this sector, private faced relatively little competition from would not necessarily have caused alarm housebuilding DLOs. These new measures state intervention (as with hindsipht as setting precedents for they appe=r to have done). Instead they could be constructed rary antidotes to an emergency brought In the pre-Keynesian economic fear high levels of public exnanurnne Government. Public expenditure for howsine was extremely ched a very high level indeed. The an all-time high in April-May peak in housebuilding costs. The wholesale January 1919 as base pertlod = 100) rose to 129 in June 1920 September 1921 had fallen rapidly to burden on the state (and a corresponding builders) since two-thirds of ceived by April 1921 had been contracts signed before the onset timates, on the other hand, were final costs and so offered significant Of ae and jaaeine themfootnores In this context, DLOs received sipnificant support. The 1921 Report on the High inflated prices, throuch the Housing as providing necessary but tempo- about by the aftermath of wm climate there would be no reason as a permanent feature of short-lived but rea -— general price level had reached 1920, a few months earlier than price index (taking the but by 79. This created an enormous bonanza for many private the subsidised housing returns approved in lump sum (ie, fixed) re - of the slump. Direct labour es- adjusted to reflect prevailing economies (as the example indicates). if somewhat cautious Cost of Building Workine to Class Dwellings remarks that as an experiment upon.a limited scale with a direct incentive to economy to the local authorities Adopting it we are of the opinicn that it will tend rather to a reduction than to an increase in fencral prices. !4- Despite this favourable expectation the final recommendation only supported ene provision of houses by DL and it was in small numbers in the first instance, to he subsequently increased if and when their operations prove economical (and) local incentive to economy (should) be provided by the fixine of maximum prices which shall rank for financial assistance.15 A further recommendation in the same report makes it clear just how constrained this modest support mirht be in practice by advi- sing that ‘direct building by the government should be restricted tc a minimum! and viewed as an expedient only to be talen up in emergencies. By the time this report was published (Aueust 1921) the government had already acted as thourh the postwar emergency were over by drastically curtailing its subsidised housine progfraine«. One necessary effect of this was to restrict opportunities Fore Din those which had been set up = which had undertaken a frreater pro- portion of the new housebuilding than in any earlier period. Of 160.000 houses in signed and approved contracts up to April 1924, 8,840 (5.5%) had been built by direct labour.” Addine those houses built by the Guilds and by the Office of Works brings the combined share to almost 10% of all houses. Commenting on this performance, two members of the 1921 Report Committee presenting the minority position commend DL for their good craftsmanship, for the economies they have achieved in their own estates as well as for those thev have imposed on private contracts by inhibiting throurh competi —- tion, otherwise excessive tender prices. The minority statement concludes that in our judgement, it would be in the best interest of economy that advantage should be taken to promote direct employment on housing schemes where ever possible. an The interwar period witnessed the continuinr decline in rovernment subsidies culminating in thé termination of subsidy to either sector for housing built to satisfy general needs (Housing Act 1933). But set against this decline was the remarkable increase in the output of local authority houses which peaked in 1928 with the production of 104.100 council houses with an additional contribu - Wy local authorities.T’he combined record total of 178,700 subsidised dwellings compared with only 60.300 unsubsidised dvellings - the lowest for any interwar year between 1924 and 1939. The implica - tions of this performance may well have sounded the alarm to the private construction industry concerned with its future prospects. By 1927 the NFBTE had launched an explicit attack on DLO& as the building arm of local government. al cannot be measured at the time the scheme is completed. tion of 74.600 houses built by private e'terprise but subsidised by cS Unlike the pre-war period, both the attacks and defence of Di0s at this time centred on arguments over cost. As the dramatic slump in the housebuilding industry set in after 1928 and builders were prepared to put in low tenders to obtain the work, cost savings could not gaways be shown. Wranglings over the relative cost msrits of direct labour and private work was in any case meaningless since they excluded qualitative assessment, the degree of maintenance required, certain management costs included in DL estimates and not in private tenders, The 1929 Labour research ae ieee in reply to the attack by contractors does point out that: "Were the financial success of direct labour tess striking, it would still be justified because it ensures building of high quality. And it must be borne in mxx mind that the high quality of the houces build by direct labour results in substantial economies in upkeep, which etc. {© Cose — In the recovery period after the second World War, both the Index of Wholesale Prices and the General Wage Index rose rapidly as it had after the “orld war 1, generating instability and uncertainty in the construction industry. ihese res'enses however took lonrer to reach their peak after world nar it than after norld war 4 and never returned to their prewar Icvels as they did after the earlier wal. ihis change is at least partly explained by the aco:-tion os the new Keynesian policies used explicitly to prevent a deflation of the sort thal occurred im late 1920, she acceptance of the demand managenernt role of the state was consistent with the renewed conimiit- tment to an extended postwar public housing prorranme. thourh one might have expected a pooteeh oe un encouragement of DLOs. But instead, there was much more consistent support for the dominant role to be played by private enterprise in the reconstruction of Great Britain, Contemrorary documents (first under the pre-1945 Coalition Government but continuing under Labour) make this quite expuaiciaus "Given favourable conditions, the housine needs of a large section of the people of this country can be met without Ri assistance from public funds.'” It is therefore not surprising to find this championing of competition and the private corporation reflected in the postwar directives concerning direct labour. These appear in a Ministry of Health memorandum circulated in 1946 Much of its substance however, appears in an earlier Ministry of 2 works Keport which itself parrots an even earlier report published Qt in 1939. this suggests the persistence of an older and possibly now atrophicd attitude towards DL which remained invulnerable to new economic policies emerging around it. Both these earlier reports however do offer positive evidence on behalf of 10s which tN does not survive into the 1946 memorandum; while there was little or no difference in cost between the direct labour estimate and the contractor's tender it was claimed that the cost of maintenance sub-—- sequent to completion was less on those houses which were carried out by DILO...We are satisfied that the best VL departments have built considerable numbers of food; houses at prices comparable with those of contractors. a) Yhe majority of those who had experience of PL in connection with individual trades were agreed that this method involved preater cost but renerally achieved a better standard of constructicn.= jhe recommendations in the 196 memorandum form a kind of contain-—- ment policy for DLOs: The director of the organisation must be as free as a private builder to select the staff . .. engage and discharge labour solely on frounds of efficiency ... otherwise there is a danrer that influences may creep in which may prejudice the whole nature of the organisation. A DL department must tender in corpetition with contractors, wt the sane tirie and under identical conditions and only obtain the contract if the tender is as low as that of any food contractor. Work should be confined to repetition jobs ... (which) means that the organisation need not become too complex. Housing is perhaps the most suitable job for a wLO for this reason. this seeminjs;ly contradictory position under a labour administration can perhaps be partly explained by looking at the chanre in the role of the State in its planning function. The war had served as &@ ca- talyst for a comprehensive and planned approach to post-war re- construction. both the sarlow report in 1946 and the uthwatt Committee set up in 1941 argued for direct state planninr inter- vention. in the latter case this was specifically to curtail spe- culative activity in land, to:restore to the community increases h land values which the community had frenerated but which lay in the hands of private landownerssdevelopers. ‘the war had proved te success of centralised control] of Key industries. thus could have formed the bases for permanent natienalisation or beran to alarm private wartime apparatus. 2a Inspite of this half-hearted support for direct labour, many new departments were set up, largely because of the increasing number of laboyr ctrongholds. Strong arguments for direct labour contimed RNrouRheut the late 1940s and major surveys of direct labour departments were 2lso carried out by the Labour Research Department and the ausTie A campaign for direct labour was even launched by the NFZTO and the London Trades Council, specifically as an alternative to private constructicn: "Private gunxsk enterprise cannot build houses to let becuuse they do not make money that way. Private enterpise makes profit out of houses only when it builds to sell. The only instrument eble to build houses to 25> St Pancras Trades Council, for instance, campaigned successfully for a directk labour department and exposed the ectivities of private : 2o G contractors in the area to a government inquiry. With the building cuts of 1947, delays were placed on théar first projects and only after apecial dispensation following a deputation to the House of Commons was let in great numbers was the local authority." the project allowed to proceed. ve industry, - which was therefore earer to dismantie the To many in the construction industry, direct instrument of minicipalisation wyhich wass itself a necessary corollary to nationalisation. It was one thing to accomodate local authorities as clients which ring alonpside vlLOs, for the Local authorities own contracts. labour organisations emerged as an the private building sector had always been more than willinre to i anothe?r to accep2t ththem as competitors by tende- do; it was quite the publication of the Girdwood reports on the cost of house - building in 1948, 1950 and 1951 carried forward the stand arainst the further encroachment of public enterprise. Like the 1921 hirh cost of housing report, they are basically harbingers of planned reductions in standards and output of foverrment housine. Asso- ciated with this of ccurse is a withdrawal of overt support for direct labour. there has been little diference between the general levels of estimated prices for DL schemes and tender prices for schemes undertaken for local authorities by contractors. On average up to 21st Necemhber 19h7, the former showed a slight saving but in the absence of further data about final costs we have not heen able to draw any gencral conclusions... we have found no reason to believe that house-buildine by DL is more economical than building under contract.2v By 1952 so strong is the committment to market forces that the 2nd Girdwood keport can contemplate the sacrifice of housing to the demands of competition. when inviting tenders in an area in which competiton is known to be poor, it may be possible to arranre contracts of such a size as to attract not only local contractors but also contractors from outside the area: in some cases a Greater readiness to rejcct tenders even at ibe risk of a temporary cessaticen of housebuildine in the area mirht be desirable. Ne -14- Conclusions From this brief account severdl general conclusions concerning the history of direct labour can be made. Firstly, the impetus to set up direct labour departments has arisen in periods of crisis for the building industry and for the provision of housing: the 1890s, dhe early 1920s and the immediate post second world war period. In these three periods labour organisation was strong and the issue of direct labour a very political one. It is clear that it successfully served as smme kind of check on the industry and has thus been a target of attack by cnntractors at times when the industry itself is threatened by a slump (for instance, the 1900s, the late 1920s and the present day) and seeking public sector work. At times when there have been booms in the private house-building industry it has not been a major issue (eg the 1930s and 1950s). Direct labour departments now are less wide ranging in their : activities than the early depaztments, partly because they have not in most cases been able to build up the large plant and equipment now necessary to employ industrialised techniques. In many ways they have been increasingly restricted ink their activities by * legislation and accounting procedures. * In 1958 defenders of the private construction industry did receive a minor legal setback. In Rands v. Oldroyd the High Court ruled that a local contractor/councillor had violated s.76 of Local Government Act 1933 by voting on a council issue concerning DL. The court deemed this a clear oonflict of interests. The industry found the decision quite disturbing. 1935— Neaue 128,160,000... 3,198,000 . 24 39,887,000... 5,259,000 <. 13 — Total .... 578,224,000 . 39,471,000... 6} Reka *Aftcr 1948 the information contained in the Census of Production is too aboreviated to permit extraction of Operations confined solely to building. The industry’s oulput is fegregated for “ Building and Civil Engineering.” Ratt: Repairs aud Maint eMcuce Work NB: NewBuildingVornls5 Direct Labour PRIVATE BUILDING AS AGAINST DIRECT LABOUR WORK, PERIOD 1907-1948 (Figures taken from Census of Production Reports) NeB.... 115,819,000... 3,474,000 . 3 Ram. 45,038,000... 3,641,000 . 73 Total .... 160,857,000... 7,115,000... 4} Total . 168,047,000... 8,457,000 . 43 Private Builders Direct Per Cent. of Labour = Totulto Nearest £ NB... 39,378,000 . 424.000 tPer Cent. 1907— as Rett... 34,070,000 . 862000 1” 2} Total . 73,448,000... 1,286,000... 1} CeO: 94,2,0. 2,253,000 2} Wiseinales)0)aieceee Total . 135,871,000 . 3,909,000 . 25 1930 1946— Ne@..... 185,962,000 UPON) mx, C1 Rew... 181,562,000 .181976000 3 gy ‘Totals: 367,524,000 . 26,899,000 . 6} 1948 (*) ga ie NeB.... 361,650,000 .14,386.000 3 Rati... 216,574,000 .25,085,000 |) 104 1 Most of the cost figures available for direct labour schemes in the interwar period are not directly comparable with corresponding figures for schemes built by prive con- trect. The most common form of comparison in Hansard sets approved tenders not against final costs but against estimated costs of direct labour schemes not yet completed (or occasionally not even becun). Every reading of offic ficues is attended by queries concerning the method of accounting; whether overheads/arcnitects/Q.S. fees ar included; whether the comparison relates to the same type of house built in the same region at the same time. fhe following table, therefore, lists only those ficues which attach to kkE completed schemes. Birmingham Dist. a 150° 168 210 35 39 (Ow) Durham Dist. (OW) 734 Hull Dist. (Ow)! 643 Kent Dist. (Oi!) 669)! Londen CO; 1) | 877 Wales (OW) 690 |Jarrow (DL) Bentley (DL) Derby (DL) Irilam Sf Manches Pontypri eal Sabena | Southga Swansea ) fonbridcse (DL) | fynemouth (DL) We Hartlepool (DL) | 1} ) | 926 | OOS 926 | ‘100% 1010 866 |~_ > }Direct Office of Works (CW)! Private jbuild'g.iwrkers Gld | Contract Final st C Final Cost,for Savincs | per louse (Private minus House of Pyve House of ‘ype [PAS Semen De Soimelcsie |77%. LOTo IMoa6 Boo 795°|&76) | WaSo ie | | 154 &3S Edmonton (DL) me Comvarative Final Costs for the Interwear Feriod 200 1100 ; 220-796 81 . | | | er 562 (on power station) 260 50 THansard, (175) cols.627-8 and €179) col.921. Office of Works figures exclude cost of land, roads and sewers and head— quarters charge of 2.75% to cover OW exuenditure, architects' and @.S. fees and other services. Figures for privat contract exclude cost of land, roads and sewers, arciitects' and @.S.' fees and salaries of Clerks of Works. All this information given in Report submitted to Newcastle City Council in 1923 by Sown Clerks of the towns involved. 2Hansard,(166) col. 619 Ftpid., and Hansard (175) col.426 +t Houses by Direoct eee Councillor Cyril Lacey in Labour Resear June 1946 |_376 . 35 57 OFLU fend Public) Own “J WaI0LO - © “3 0) NMOWWwoo OOOO NAH WONMWr Or Edmonton (DL) | 32 eueae e295, 56 DL Lowest Private Autho- iepe22endserageANGye 1892 rork koad Seser £7,000 tender £ 11,000 ce £ 1920 350 N.S. houses £ 192U 100 houses 854 final cost/use 929 final cost 7 Omeee enn 875 cost (orkers 1920 300 houses 1921 24 houses 192) 2U houses 1923 150 houses 1923 150 houses £2 £ O50) final 916 cost ruaranteed a 'th-hr week) W. Hartlepool Kangor Newmarket ments of which 57 concentrated all using authorities in North less that 10% of £ 959 eel OOH Bradford (average for 106 houses) 1,296 Cudworth &00 Se OOlO os (875 estimated) £ 76uU Seles HO Nov. 1949 (LRD Vol.x No. 23) Of 1lul wvL dep'ts responding to questicnnaire, only "4 carrie out new ho using cnstruction 878 per house if cost of lind, solicitors and arch itects' fees included costs BIWSe & 1,026 hull Newbury By 29 January 1947 , 124 Local Authorities using vL Depart REFERENCES 1. cf. G. Dew, Government and Municipal Contracts Fair Wages Movement: A brie= =istsor:, 1896. 2. For details of Burn's political activities and fight against contractors, see Kenneth D. Brown, Join Burns, Royal Historical Society, 1977. 3. Direct labour, published by Labour Research Department, 1929, p. 16. 4, Official Trade Unionist Report, London, Battersea and West Ham Mun Departments, presented by Bradford Trades and Labour Council to Bz History Library, 1904, p. 2. Labour Research Monthly Circular, Local Government Notes, June 1920. S.W. Star, June 27th 1898, Mr John Burns and Mr. William Davi Essentials of a Works Department - Views of an Architect and ibid. Bradford Trades Council report. Society, collection of LCC pamphlets and leaflets. 9. see Hansard 4th series XIV 81, 26 June 1893, and Hansard XXVII 1572-9, 18 Aug. 1€94. 10. Hansard (40) 476,.27 June 1912. ll. see R. Hayward, An Experiment in Direct Labour House-building: Liverpool 1920-2 discussion paper, Liverpool Univ. Nov. 1977. 12. Labour Research Monthly Circular, Local Government Notes, Nov. 1920 13. ibid. for June 1920. See Aso Matthews, The Building Guilds, in Essays in Labour History, ed. Briggs and Saville, London 1971. 14. Revort of the Departmental Committee on the High Cost of Working Class Dwellincs, LOPS ps5: 15. ibid,:p. 59. 16. ibid, p. 45. 17. ibid. p. 68. 18. {arian Bowley, Housing and the State, 1944, p. 271. 19. ibid. Labour Research Department, p. 27; for the attacks see, for instance, The Menace of Direct Labour, National Builder, Dec. 1927. Private Enterprise Housing, HMSO 1984, p. 37. The Placing and Management of Building Contracts (Simon Committee), 1944, Ministry of Works. The Barr Committee on Scottish Building Costs, Cmnd 5977, 1939. Memorandum on Direct labour issued Nov. 1946. Ministry of Health. This survey was later published as Building by Direct Labour, W.S. Hilton, London 1954. Oo mw Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Not known Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived John Murray Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 28.01.78 https://nam.maydayrooms.org/files/original/0c23d260704e0027d4327de384a61de7.pdf 8c32ed786bd2ff69086b9849b9d9808b 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 Do not pass go - Do not collect 6% Subject The topic of the resource Different binding of Monopolies Commission Report Description An account of the resource There has not been any compulsory scale of fees fixed by the Institute and there never will bel! ..RIBA 1926 M A N D A T O R Y M I N I M U M F E E S " Report of the New Architecture Movement to the Monopolies Commission investigation into the supply in The United Kingdom of Architects services. NEW ARCHITECTURE MOVI+ffNT 14th May 1976 M A N D A T O R Y M I N I M U M Report of the New Architecture Movement to the Monopolies Commission investigation into the supply in The United Kingdom of Architects services. THE NEW ARCHITECTURE MOVEMENT 1 14th May 1976 THE CASE AGAINST bnN1)ATORY MINIMUM FEES CONTENTS: INTRODUCTION THE HOLLOW mRGAIN THE FALIACIES AND THE FACTS PUBLIC INTEREST INTRODUCTION This report is submitted by the New Architecture Movement to the Monopolies Commission to assist in the investigation it is currently undertaking at the order of the Department of Trade and Industry. It is understood that the Royal Institute of British Architects is submitting its own report, "The Case for Mandatory Minimum Fees" which claims to carry the support of all the other architectural bodies who were consulted. The New Architecture Movement (N.A.M.) was not consulted, and does not support the R.I. B.A. t s case, and therefore is presenting its own arguments independently. The N.A.M. consists of a substantial body of professional architects and laymen who share a consensus of views on all aspects of architecture as well as the activities of the R.I. B.A. differing radically from the official orthodoxy. Since, however, the Commission's terms of reference relate specifically to the question of the fee scale and the public interest, N.A.M. has sought to confine its submission to those matters germaine to the Commission's enquiry. This report may therefore be read alongside that submitted by the R.I. B.A. and counter — arguments have been closely cross—referenced. N.A.M. t s report may be summarized as demonstrating that the current Fee System is not intrinsic in the system of architectural services but a gratuitous market device procuring unilateral benefits to architects; that the R.I. B.A. t s detailed argument contains serious contradictions and flaws; that the statistics and the resulting inferences have been misleadingly or incorrectly drawn; and that 2 the central concept of the 'public interest' on more searching analysis may be shown to be severely prejudiced by the fee scales' mandatory status. The recognition of the arguments made in this report entail action for change on the basis of the following descending hierarchy of priorities:— Abandonment of the mandatory minimum fee scale entirely. Retention of the fee scale as a recommendation only, but abandonment of its mandatory element. Retention of the mandatory fee scale but the establishment of a permanent independent agency to review the levels of the scale. Such agency to include at least 500/0 non— professional representation. It must however be noted in the context of (i) and (i i) above that since the R.I. B.A. has argued that any such changes to the present fee system would necessarily entail a wholesale review of all aspects of the system of architectural services, any recommendation by the Commi ssion on these lines would place on the R.I. B.A. the onus of undertaking the review mentioned or of justifying its change of mind. N.A.M. trusts that this report will constructively contribute to the sum of material on which the Commission will formulate its recommendations, and we would confirm our willingness to participate in any further debate which the Commission may wish to pursue. PART 1 THE HOLLOW mRGAIN It is understood that the Monopolies Commission has a duty to satisfy itself that arrangements restricting the competition in any given market for goods or services do not operate to the prejudice of the public interest. The market in question is that for archi— tectural services. These, as practised by architects, have for various historical reasons become assimilated into a closely defined system governed by the R.I. B.A., which is itself a body of architects, such that the purveyors and their practices have acquired the status of a profession. The definition of a professional differs widely depending upon whether one is referring to, say, golfing or surgery, but in the context of architecture it is proposed that the distinctive differen— tiating element is that of "disinterested counsel". The status of this undertaking to provide "disinterested counsel" is of central interest, since it is the constituent five assurances — the guarantees of this essential disinterest — which, we are told, are advanced to clients in return for their acceptance of the fee scale. (p. 3.2.5) The fee scale and the assurances are argued to be mutually inter— dependant, such that either connot stand without the other, and removal destroying the entire structure of the . B.A. arrangements — code, conditions, registration, etc. A major portion of the Commission's attention will therefore be directed towards the status of the assurances, and the necessity/ dispensability of the linkage between these and the fee scale. For example, in demonstrating that the link is necessary it would have to be shown that clients may be confident of the fulfillment of the assurances by accepting the fee scale, and that architects by insisting on the fee scale are held to the assurances. If, however, the contrary can be demonstrated, then the proposition that clients should accept the fee scale in return for these assurances is in fact not a bargain but a deceit; there will be no necessary connection between the two; and architects will be seen to derive an unjustified market advantage at the expense of their consumers. Let us start with the first assurance. In what way does the validity of the promise of integrity require the support of the fee scale? The status of this assurance is more in the nature of an oath than a contract. The content of an oath is not a good or a service bought with money. The reference is either to the familiar concept of good faith, which is a normal requirement of any parties entering into any sort of legal or commercial contract and thus not special to architects, or it is a promise of honour somewhat akin to the medical Hippocratic oath, which is not a divisible commodity costing XO//o for a 'thigh degree". In the latter case, the acceptance of the fee scale is of little avail to the client who has the misfortune to employ a dishonourable architect. Dismissal or censure is part of the policing function of the R.I. B.A. Conduct Comnlittee who rightly seek to maintain the code — much as ABTA upholds certain standards of good conduct in the practice of travel agents. If, therefore, we interpret the first assurance as an oath, the Institute itself will administer the measures following its non— fulfillment; if we interpret it as simply the mens rea of a contract the client has recourse to the normal legal remedies following a breach of contract. Either way, the fee scale is neither necessary nor sufficient — it is a gratuitous element serving the interests of architects while securing no compensatory advantage to clients that are not already provided by other means. 1.4 If, however, the contrary can be demonstrated, then the proposition that clients should accept the fee scale in return for these assurances is in fact not a bargain but a deceit; there will be no necessary connection between the two; and architects will be seen to derive an unjustified market advantage at the expense of their consumers. Let us start with the first assurance. In what way does the validity of the promise of integrity require the support of the fee scale? The status of this assurance is more in the nature of an oath than a contract. The content of an oath is not a good or a service bought with money. The reference is either to the familiar concept of good faith, which is a normal requirement of any parties entering into any sort of legal or commercial contract and thus not special to architects, or it is a promise of honour somewhat akin to the medical Hippocratic oath, which is not a divisible commodity costing XO//o for a 'thigh degree' . In the latter case, the acceptance of the fee scale is of little avail to the client who has the misfortune to employ a dishonourable architect. Dismissal or censure is part of the policing function of the R.I. B.A. Conduct Committee who rightly seek to maintain the code — much as ABTA upholds certain standards of good conduct in the practice of travel agents. If, therefore, we interpret the first assurance as an oath, the Institute itself will administer the measures following its non— fulfillment; if we interpret it as simply the mens rea of a contract the client has recourse to the normal legal remedies following a breach of contract. Either way, the fee scale is neither necessary nor sufficient — it is a gratuitous element serving the interests of architects while securing no compensatory advantage to clients that are not already provided by other means. - 5 - The second assurance is even more plainly dissociated from the fee scale. The provision that architects may not limit their liability is derived directly from The Partnership Act, 1890, (Section 9) which establishes the legal grounds of the most common form of architectural association. It is worth noting in this context that the legal definition of partnership (sec 1.1) as "the relation which subsists between persons carrying on a business in common with a view of profit" is somewhat at variance with the image of disinterest promulgated by the R.I. B.A., and that the failure to make such a profit may be construed by a court (sec. 35.e) as grounds for dissolution. In none of the other less conmon forms of association available to architects — unlimited liability companies, limited partnerships, consortia, etc — can the liability of principals be limited, so that the client who is dissatisfied with his architect's fulfillment of the second assurance has simply to seek legal remedy under the terms of the appropriate Act. But, apart from these inalienable legal provisions, it is well known that the concept of diligence being reinforced by unlimited liability is substantially modified by the universal practice of carrying professional indemnity. This ability to artificially defer personal liability is in fact normally taken as a criterion of whether a given architect's practice can be established or maintained. Similarly the third assurance, relating to competence, is also substantiated not by the fee system but by the legal requirements of the Registration Acts, Building Regulations, Planning Controls, etc, in addition to the abundant technical standards and recommendations published either by external agencies, such as I).O.E., B. R.S., and the British Standards Institution, or jointly with the R.I. B.A. itself, as for example in the case of the National Building Specification. - 6 - Except for Registration, these are constraints upon any design agency working in building construction or related fields, and not simply upon architects; and the client achieves no additional advantage in the latter case by accepting the fee scale. 1.11 It is worth noting that, in view of recent reports of building failures since the war, projects involving architects have not fared noticeably better than those without, sugges ting that clients may be ill—advised to take the third assurance simply at face value anyway. 1 .12 The fourth assurance, insofar as it differs from the first, is a simple repetition of the common laws of agency and contract in which it is generally not the agent but the employer who accepts liability for the actions undertaken. In other words, the assurance largely confers upon the client not an advantage but an obligation, to which the fee scale bears no relation. 1 . 13 Moreover, the architect's activities include several important tasks where he must actually refrain from making "his clients' best interests the dominating consideration", notably in the exercise of quasi— judicial functions under the building contract, to say nothing of the further dilution of the assurance entailed in the architect's retention of copyright of his work. . 14 The final assurance raises questions relating to the public interest at large involving supra—client matters beyond the terms of contract that are unenforceable on the basis of the fee scale and perhaps even at all. Further discussions of this assurance is included in Part 3. The summation of the foregoing arguments is that the client is currently invited to accept the fee scale in return for the assurances as though only by so doing can he be confident of their fulfillment. A deeper analysis, however, shows that he is being offered nothing to which he would not be entitled anyway, or for which effective means of reinforcement do not already exist; hence that the fee scale is simply a gratui tous market advantage to architects. The R.I. B.A. claims that the removal of the mandatory minimum fee scale cannot be accomplished without the entire remaining package being re—fashioned. N.A.M. proposes that it may be removed, the remaining package staying im tact with market equity being thereby restored to consumers. If the Commission accepts any or all of N.A.M. 's arguments, then the onus is clearly on the R.I. B.A. to explain what wholesale changes it would propose. �PART 2 FALLACIES AND THE FACTS Through the process of developing the preceeding argument cane the realisation that the entire rationale behind the professional ethos of the R.I. B.A. was either a kind of farce of muddy thought and disingenuous invention or an attempt to confuse the issues by an extravagant masquerade. Whether it is a farce of self—deception or a masquerade of deceit, it has lead us to be rather circumspect of the detailed arguments presented in the R.I.B.A. text and to query the statistical evidence. That such evidence is effectively muted by qualification does nothing to dispel our doubts as to its use and inference. We therefore consider it advisable to examine closely the subject matter and to expose its more blatent inconsistencies. It caused little surprise and some amusement that the inconsistencies should expose three key issues, namely the structure of the fee scale, the notion of competition, and the abolition of the mandatory fee. 't In such circumstances (negotiation on a recommended fee scale) the effects of a change to recommended scales would be little different from the effects of abolishing the scale altogether". (Appendix 1.33, p. 11) 't If the fluctuations in the demand for architects' services could by some means be eliminated, fees would no doubt settle down at something like their present level even without a mandatory scale" (7.14) The first statement implies that a recommended scale is really no scale at all, from which we can in turn deduce that a scale only has validity if it is a mandatory one. Were the second statement true, then the scale is valid per se and its mandatory element is effected through market forces. Thus we have incompatible notions of what constitutes a mandatory scale — that the mandatory element is indispensable and that external market values effectively maintain present levels. 2.3 "The R.I. B.A. has not sought to limit the rate of entry into the profession". (3.12) "Concern with improving the quality of architects' training has been a feature of the R.I. B.A. t s activities from the early years and a major step forward was taken with the 1958 Oxford Conference and the introduction of the two GCE A—level entry requirement" . (6.10) The Institute may claim that it has no control over the supply of trained architects and yet by controlling entry qualification has the means and intention of doing so. 2.4 t' It is exceptionally difficult to measure technical efficiency (efficiency in production) in a profession which is characterised by sharp fluctuations in activity rates and whose output is so difficult to categorise 't . (6.9) "The R.I. B.A. believes that action following this report (The Architect and his Office) significantly improved the technical efficiency of the profession". (6.100 Does the R.I. B.A. wish us to believe that efficiency is measurable or not? Perhaps the yardstick is by the sale of the Handbook to offices that hadn't a clue, and the non—sale to offices that knew it all anyway. 2.5 t' In practice the result of cutting the design fee by a third would be a substantial rise in construction costs" (3.8) "Indeed, an architect's ability to reduce his client's costs is one of the most powerful competitive weapons available within an highly competitive framework" . (5.2) We have a bald and boring argument throughout the report that the quality of work will decline as a result of fee cutting and with consequential poor cost control. Yet we are led to believe that the prime virtue of the professional service is effective cost control. Are architects likely to trade in "a powerful competitive weapon" for a third of their fees? Are architects likely to cut their fees at the expense of their throats? 2.6 "The option has always been available to clients to choose a commercial form of architectural service' • (2.1) "This low price elasti city (of demand) is a consequence • • of the absence of any substitute for the skilled design services which architects provide". (3.7) t The option t postulates that there is competition between the professional and the commercial services. 'Low price elasticity' is a consequence of the absence of competition. For both statements to be true either the commercial service is not skilled (which is untrue) or the professional service is complementary rather than competi tive . 2.7 "It is clear also that the two sectors are in competition with one another, for every public authority has to make a choice on each building project (Appendix 1.12) "The Institute believes that the two sectors have different but complementary roles to play" . (3.18) In fact the public and private sectors are complementary in very rare circumstances. The competitive act is supplanted by the complementary in a closed shop. 2.8 The presentation of empirical evidence exhibits similar fallacies and distortion. Great play is made of the fact that due to extremes of supply of new work, abnormal economic circumstances impinge on the provision of services. Curiously, a graph showing new commissions is used to demonstrate uneven revenue. Revenue is earned continuously throughout the design and construction process. Broadly one third of the income is earned at the design stage, one third at working drawings and one third at the construction stage. In fact the input by the office at large is decisively different at various stages of the job, and the arrival of new commissions is arbitrary. Many, for example, are in the form of feasibility studies on which fees are payable even if abortive, and on which revenue is earned relatively quickly. The only true measure of the mythical cycle is one of revenue. This will be of a broadly similar profile to work certified. The revenue cycle of abortive commissions is high frequency, while the time scale of a commission fully achieved is a long one and the effect is the opposite to the trend that the original graph has attempted to show. 2.9 A similar falsification is to be found in the evidence of the R.I. B.A. that purports to show that architects do not earn monopolistic profits. The confusion in this instance results from substituting the earnings of the profession at large for the profits earned by principals in private practice. The earnings of 8(Y/b of the profession represent the cost of the provision of the service, not its profit. Profit would be represented by the partner earnings and drawings. We endeavour to show that the profit margin has continued to rise with the trend to larger practices. This deceit has been arrived at by using the interquartile range rather than the first quarter. The level of salaried architects' remuneration is set by the competitive price for labour in the public sector which is arrived at by collective bargaining. Such evidence and argument continues to portray the myth that architects as a group are one and homogeneous. The level of salaried architects' remuneration is independent and irrelevant to the profiteering revenue of private practice. 2.10 We believe that what has been presented by the R.I. B.A. is a masquerade which attempts to conceal a primary economic objective of a price floor for prestigious architectural services. We interpret this as self—interest. The classic model of this enviable situation creates the following conditions: a guarantee of minimum revenue whether for good or bad services; the power to determine price and hence profit; the power to limit the public disclosure of financial evidence; a control over the level of service (only the purveyor of the service seemingly being able to qualify it); the power to determine and identify efficiency in its own terms (thus enabling real g@ins of efficiency to be returned as profit); and the power to immunise the market share of the building design from the vaguaries of the market, to the unfair advantage of competitors and to the detriment of allied professions thereby retaining an otherwise vulnerable leadership of the building team. 2.11 We therefore pose a series of questions. i) Is there anv validity of maintaining a price floor under any circumstances? Clearly society does so in terms of, say food; but to extend such devices generally d.istort the free economy. Should such a device be extended beyond the provision of essential services? This would only be conceivable if society held that such a commodity or service was indispensible or very highly desirable. In such circumstances it would be tantamount to a fraud if the case was made by the interested party. We would consider that the case for architecture to be so treated would be invalid if it required architects to articulate the case. �Should such a device be extended to the private sector? Only if by doing so the profits from such an enterprise were either controlled by society or used to society's benefit. Clearly the profits made by most architectural firms would not meet these criteria. What peculiar conditions of the market would justify the price floor? If there exists a crisis such that otherwise the service would collapse. Plainly if private practice ceased to function then the practice of architecture would continue in the public sector. The P.I.B. states that extremes of demand and supply constitute peculiar conditions. Do these conditions then affect the business of architecture? Only in as much as they effect the construction industry generally. The construction industry is broad—based and has high capital investment. It is likely that architecture which has low capital investment would survive periods of stagnation with a greater degree of flexibility. We are constrained by the needs for clarity and succinctness to limit the exposure of these detailed fallacies in the R.I. B.A. t s evidence, and the resulting questions provoked. The basic alternative statis— tical interpretations are, by contrast, now explored further as follows. THE TENDENCY TOWARDS BIGGER PRACTICES Table 1 Distribution of Private Practices by size 1958-1972 Source: R.I.B.A. Submission to Monopolies Commission May 1976 From 1958 onwards there is a clear tendency for the percentage of small practices to decrease and for the percentage of larger practices to increase. In 1967 the National Board of Prices and Incomes found that medium and large practices, while forming only of all offices, had an share of all fee income. The tendency towards larger practices and the incomes shown in Table 2 are therefore indicative of the extent to which principals in private practice are, through the fee scale, reaping increasing profits for no measurable improvement in service, and the way in which such larger practices thereby distort the distribution of patronage . 2.14 LARGER PmCTICES YIELD GREATER PROFITS Table 2 Average Annual Income per Architectural Partner by size of Architectural Team Value of New Commissions in 1966 and 1974 comparable source i i Percentage distribution of practices by size approx. similar (Table 1) Definition of Income as per source (i) 2.15 SALARIED ARCHITECTS HAVE NOT FARED SO WELL Table 3 Average Salary of all Lnployed Architects in all Private Practices Source: Ibid Note: All teéh. salaries in 1967 formed 34.5% of costs; R.I. B.A. Handbook suggests approx. similar figures. We have been unable to discover reliable data relating the income of salaried architects to size of office. The average salary used throughout will consequently be rather high for small practices which generally pay lower salaries than do larger practices (see 1968 NBPI Report). Nevertheless in small practices the actual difference in income between partners and salaried technical staff has remained fairly constant between 1966 and 197%. In 1960 of all salaried technical staff worked in medium and large offices although those offices formed only of all offices. (See The Architect and His Office: 1962 RIBA Survey) By 1972 the percentage of salaried technical staff working in medium and large practices had risen to 81% while these practices still accounted for only 36.4% of all offices. And it is in those offices that the increasing gap between the incomes of principals and staff is most apparant, rising to a dramatic extent in offices with more than 25 architects. PART PUBLIC INTEREST 3.1 The central element in the entire debate on which the attention of all parties is focused is "the public interest". Rightly, it is the talisman in any attempt to judge the degree of equity in professional activity. But what is the public interest? Who are the public? Who, if anyone, are not the public? How is their interest defined, and where and by whom is it represented? 3.2 The broad assumption, it appears, is that the public interest refers approximately to the "open market" — in this case the consumers or potential consumers of architectural services. Theoretically this should embrace the population at large, outside the architectural profession, which of course itself consists of men and women who are members of the community. Even such a brief definition conjures up a vast aggregate of groupings, whether class—based or by colour, locality, occupation, etc., etc. — a heterogeneous mass of almost unimaginable diversity. It is difficult to see how any person or group in this mass could be legitimately excluded from the "public" if we are endeavouring to identify whose interest is to be safe— guarded; and the principle that could be formulated from this premise — that 't a decent envirmment is a basic right of everybody" — would appear, in the context of this democratic free society, to be virtually self—evident. - How does the R.I. B.A. mandatory fee scale rare in such a test? The answer is not well. Tt is immediately clear that unlike, for example, the medical profession whose services are available to any— body simply on the basis of need, the "public interest" in architec— tural affairs is in fact a portmanteau term concealing two very different types of consumer the client and the user. 3.5 The occasions when these two parties are in fact the same person or group are indisputably the exceptions to the rule. Indeed, it would be more reasonable to characterize the distribution of architectural services as a system in which the users are not the clients. In the field of council housing for example, perhaps the overriding priority building type, it is axiomatic that the residents cannot avail themselves of the services of architects. This anomaly pervades the whole of the market under scrutiny. In contrast with the medical profession whose services are available equally to 1007/0 of the population, the services of architects are purchased only by one fifth. This discrimination in the market is not of course solely due to the existence of the mandatory fee scale. Questions as to dominion over land, finding capital costs of construction, etc., are also to be involved. But it is not within the Commission's terms of reference to criticise the R.I. B.A. for elements within the system over which it has no direct control (or opts to exert no direct influence ) . We are confined to studying only those arrangements that act or may act as barriers to potential consumers of architectural services over which the R.I. B.A. does exercise control thereby interfering with free market forces and the public interest. Clearly the fee system is such an arrangement; for by denying architects the option to charge less to �those potential user—clients who would be less able to pay, and allowing them to find any necessary balance from other types of work, the fee system acts as a barrier to those architects whose capacity or conscience favour small scale initiatives in preference to the corporate or bureaucratic clients whose sectional interests at present totally bias the market. If the ratio of this bias was less disproportionate, this state of affairs might assume less significance; but the fact that user—clients currently include only the wealthy sponsors of private villas, while direct community architecture is practically non—existent, indicates that the "public interest" in the market for architectural services is only fractionally served. In the troika of medical, legal and architectural professions, the architectural profession is conspicuous in its failure to develop alternative systems of remuneration to prevent this sort of distortion. In searching for the linkage of architectural services to this substantial "disenfranchised" sector of the market, one is reduced to considering assurance No. 5 of the R.I.B.A. package, namely that the architect will do his work within the framework of a set of social and artistic values so as to ensure that the interests of society — as well as those of his client — are served by the best architecture he is able to create". In none of the other assurances exchanged for the fee scale does this majority of potential consumers appear. It is the fee scale, we are told, that safeguards the content of the assurances; but it is hard to see how this can be so with respect to assurance No. 5, since the party who is seeking the assurance is not the party with the power of withholding the fee. LWen if it could be argued that the exclusion of the majority of potential consumers from the market was legitimate an absurd proposition — what residual safeguard to their interest is thus How , the absence of direct contact with the intended beneficiaries, he is working within the appropriate "framework of values" to ensure "service" to these social "interests"? Clearly since it is their contention that the fee system does guarantee the assurance, it is for the R.I. B.A. to provide the answers to these questions: but in the meantime, N.A.M. ventures to suggest that not only is the link tenuous in the extreme, but that the bulk of the evidence from this majority, over let us say the past decade, as to their satisfaction with this derivative "benefit" of the fee system — the bulk of the evidence is not encouraging • Indeed it would hardly be an exaggeration to say that the regard with which the profession and its products are held by the public at large (the true market for services) has seldom been at a lower ebb. The reason for this is neither the lack of architectural interest amongst the public, nor the want of imagination amongst architects, but the series of arrangements, of which the fee system is a part, which prevents the relevant interest being harnessed to the appropriate imagination. the and 's to 20 flow the absence of direct contact with the intended beneficiaries, he is working within the appropriate "framework of values" to ensure "service" to these social "interests"? Clearly since it is their contention that the fee system does guarantee the assurance, it is for the R.I. B.A. to provide the answers to these questions: but in the meantime, N.A.M. ventures to suggest that not only is the link tenuous in the extreme, but that the bulk of the evidence from this majority, over let us say the past decade, as to their satisfaction with this derivative "benefit" of the fee system — the bulk of the evidence is not encouraging. Indeed it would hardly be an exaggeration to say that the regard with which the profession and its products are held by the public at large (the true market for services) has seldom been at a lower ebb. The reason for this is neither the lack of architectural interest amongst the public, nor the want of imagination amongst architects, but the series of arrangements, of which the fee system is a part, which prevents the relevant interest being harnessed to the appropriate imagination. the and t s to h �20 flow the absence of direct contact with the intended beneficiaries, he is working within the appropriate "framework of values" to ensure "service" to these social "interests"? Clearly since it is their contention that the fee system does guarantee the assurance, it is for the R.I. B.A. to provide the answers to these questions: but in the meantime, N.A.M. ventures to suggest that not only is the link tenuous in the extreme, but that the bulk of the evidence from this majority, over let us say the past decade, as to their satisfaction with this derivative "benefit" of the fee system — the bulk of the evidence is not encouraging • Indeed it would hardly be an exaggeration to say that the regard with which the profession and its products are held by the public at large (the true market for services) has seldom been at a lower ebb. The reason for this is neither the lack of architectural interest amongst the public, nor the want of imagination amongst architects, but the series of arrangements, of which the fee system is a part, which prevents the relevant interest being harnessed to the appropriate imagination. the and t s to h 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 1976 https://nam.maydayrooms.org/files/original/7e21fd5a359c93e85a2c4a93b79c6dd8.pdf ad6b001cfa859e0fa0a72d5059822548 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 DOE Consultation on Future of Building Control Description An account of the resource A Z LEVY Hh 270640 © Mths ita Cheltal Pages” with compliments fim bette ve hie pa Changs Wehorfavs +Sy Gvy Ai|hidewr cam tak altifafl tr OFTbusinesvsdhe-. Gon -Shepheard-E&pHsunterianctitecis-tounPtaners-end-Lendecape Architects 60 Kingly Street Regent Street London W1R 6EY Tel 01-734 8577 INDYULUNRGUrDUTTINeTUUivastayBivLaueivaThea 3. Comments on the principles of the proposed changes should reach the Department by 4 July; and any further comments you may have on their detailed operation by the end of August. Comments should be sent to: LG Packer Room 1034 b Becket House Lambeth Palace LONDON SEl 7ER Road 1. My letter of 11 December 1979 invited comments from those bodies listed at Annex B on the options for change in the system of building control. Comments were also received from a large number of other bodies and from individuals. I am now directed by the Secretary of State to invite comments from all of you on the specific possibilities for change set out in the consultative paper at Annex A. 2, To introduce and implement a radical reform of building control will take some time, and revisions must be undertaken in a manner which will at no point put at risk public health and safety. ‘Yith this in mind, the Secretary of State proposes that the first steps shall be to take action on: a) reducing the range of buildings controlled under the Building Regulations; b) introducing "certification" as an alternative to local authority enforcement; and ec) recasting the Building Regulations. (Telephone 01-211-7415 ) 4. This letter also goes to local authorities responsible for enforcing the Building Regulations in Fngland and Wales. I am Sir Your obedient Servant alee sir Department of the Environment Room Becket House Lambeth Palace Road London SE1 7ER TelephonotHOAR Ol 211 7415 Our ref BRA/759/23 6 dune 1980 THE FUTURE OF BUILDING CONTROL IN ENGLAND AND ‘WALES 1. My letter of 11 December 1979 invited comments from those bodies listed at Annex B on the options for change in the system of building control. Comments were also received from a large number of other bodies and from individuals. I am now directed by the Secretary of State to invite comments from all of you on the specific possibilities for change set out in the consultative paper at Annex A. 2. To introduce and implement a radical reform of building control will take some time, and revisions must be undertaken in a manner which will at no point put at risk public health and safety. ‘ith this in mind, the Secretary of State proposes that the first steps shall be to take action on: a) reducing the range of buildings controlled under the Building Regulations; b) introducing "certification" as an alternative to local authority enforcement; and ec) recasting the Building Regulations. I am Sir Your obedient Servant A Z LEVY \9 3. Comments on the principles of the proposed changes should reach the Department by 4 July; and any their detailed operation by the end of August. Comments should be sent tos LG Packer Room 1034 Becket House Lambeth Palace Road LONDON SEL 7ER (Telephone 01-211-7415) further comments you may have on 4. This letter also goes to local authorities responsible for enforcing the Building Regulations in Ingland and Wales. (20 THE FUTURE OF BUILDING CONTROL IN ENGLAND AND “VALTS Introduction EXEMPTION ANNEX A 1 1. In his speech of 10 December 1979, the Secretary of State reviewed the nature and extent of criticisms levied against the current system of building control and the Building Regulations. He announced a radical revicw and invited comments from all interested parties. As guidelines he set out four principal objectives: a) maximum self-regulation b) minimum government interference c) total self-financing and in operation d) simplicity and identified a number of possible means to these ends. 2. This speech has elicited a widespread and searching response. Following a careful scrutiny of all the points made to him, the Secretary of State has chosen certain options on which he is minded to take action, subject to furthcr comments which are made to him. 3. Those buildings now exempt from formal control under the Building Regulations are Crown buildings, the operational buildings of statutory undertakers, and maintained schools and colleges. Underlying this exemption is the consideration that the bodies concerned are publicly accountable for their policies and have the continuity and the means to pay any compensation that may be awerded against them. These characteristics give an assurance of public responsibility over the design and construction of buildings and redress if necessary. On this basis it is logical to extend formal exemption to all buildings of statutory undertakers and also to all the buildings of local authorities. The Secretary of State would however exp ct all exempt bodies to comply with the technical requirements of the regulations, or their equivalents. 4. It is also proposed to exempt from the regulations certain types of buildings, of which some are at present partially exempt. Action is already in hand to exempt completely some agricultural buildings at present partially exempt and consideration will be given to exempting industrial buildings constructed solely to house plant or machinery and occupied by people only from time to time for purposes of inspection or maintenance. 5. Alterations and extensions to existing buildings make up most of the applications for tuwilding approval. The jobs are varied and often carried out without professional advice: there is no obvious means of classifying them as likely or not to impair safety and health. Even if such classification were possible local authorities would still have a formidable task in checking public understanding and compliance. Some minor works, however, would be exempt from the regulations: the sort of things the Secretary of State has in mind are: a a) detached domestic buildings such as garages and car—ports, and : b) greenhouses, sun—lounges and porches built on to dwellings. CERTIFICATION 6. At present, enforcement is a procedure entirely for the local authorities. The risks to life from structural failure are low and the present system has undoubtedly contributed to this, but it is frequently criticised as cumbersome and bureaucratic: the Secretary of State considers it desirable that an alternative should be available. He notes that from time to time local authorities make use of consultants to check calculations and to inspect works on their behalf. He notes also that the NHBC already provides a system of inspection for new houses covered by its warranty scheme. He is therefore minded to provide that certification by a "competent person" should be available in all cases as an option to local authority approval. It normally would be for the owner or developer to decide whether to exercise this option. However, there may be a case for allowing local authorities to ask for certification in certain circumstances or for the Secretary of State to require certification for specified matters, such as energy conservation. 7. Local authorities would be bound to accept properly tendered certificates and, beyond checking that the certifier was a "competent person", would have no responsibility; for the works — nor would they receive a fee. The local authority's responsibilities and liabilities for the works, under building control measures, would pass, on acceptance of the certificate, to the certifier. LIABILITY 9. The Secretary of State is aware of the concern over the liability, and in particular the possible duration of liability, now attaching to local authorities in cases where negligence is occuring in the enforcement of building regulations. He is also aware of similar concern on the part of firms and professions engaged in the construction industry. 8. A national list of "competent persons' would be required: this is a matter which the Secretary of State sees as central to health and safety. Professional bodies could no doubt advise on individuals and practices whose qualifications, experience and insured status made them candidates for inclusion. Other bodies might qualify: for example, the N'BC might be regarded as a ‘competent person‘ for certification of new private housing. Minor works, services and thermal insulation might be “self-certificed". For structural works the certifier should be an independent third party. To ensure simplicity, and to clarify liabilities, the certificate put to the local authority should cover the whole of the project and the certifier or certifiers would guarantee that it had been designed, and would be built, in compliance with the regulations. APPEALS INNER LONDON 14. It is for consideration whether the new system that follows 3F 10. However, many of the legal issues which give rise to this concern are not confined to building control or to the construction industry, and the Secretary of State welcomes the Lord Chancellor's proposal to refer the question of latent damage to the Law Reform Committee. In view of this proposal, the Secretary of State believes that any issues which fall within the terms of that reference should first be considered by the Committee. Possible changes to the law such as limiting liability for negligence to actions started within a fixed period from the date of completion of the works would clearly be matters which the Committee would consider. ll. The Building Regulations are widely criticised as too complex, too detailed and difficult to comprehend. They are designed to be all-embracing, precise and justiciable — Objectives which are incompatible with Simplicity of style. It is not possible to deal BUILDING REGULATIONS in simple non-technical terms with Subjects which are themselves technical and involved. 12. The Secretary of State is therefore considering reducing the requirements of the regulations to a minimum number of functional requirements and performance standards set out in subordinate legislation along with procedural matters. For the rest, the formal concept of deemed-to-satisfy would be abandoned in favour of informal arrangements by which the Secretary of State would €ive his approval to codes of practice and other technical requirements as being useful guides to compliance. The increased flexibility provided by these arrangements would ease a number of problems, for example, those which arise in reconciling the regulations with Standards for specialised buildings, such as hospitals. A place could be maintained for energy conservation, expressed as performance Standards; and there would be scope in the system for enhancing the status of Agrement Certificates. 13. Consideration will also need to be &1iven to the system for dealing with appeals, bearing in mind that the Secretary of State does not wish to adjudicate matters which are essentially for local determination; nor is it usually appropriate for such matters to go before the Magistrates! Courts. these proposals should in due course supersede the present system in Inner London. Aluninium Window Association Ainalganated Union of Engineering Workers- (Construction Section) reviers Society Brick Development Association Limited Anglian Standing Conference Architectural Aluniniuin Association Architectural Association Architectural Metalwork Association Asbestos Cement Manufacturers Association British Bingo Association f Asnociated Master Plumbers and Domestic Engineers Association of Ballrooms Limited Assoc of British Chambers of Commerce Association of British Manufacturers of Mineral Insulating Fibres British Blind and Shutter Association British Broadcasting Corporation British Ceramic Research Associ«ntion British Ceramic Tile Council British Combustion Equipment Manutacturers Association British Constructional Steelwork Asseciation Limited British Decorators Association British Blectrical and Allied Manufacturers Association Limited British Floor Covering Manufacturers Association British Gas Corporation British Insurance Association British Tronfounders Association poe British Lead Manufacturers Acsociation British Multiple Retailers Association British Non—Terrous Metals Association Association of British Roofing Felt Manufacturers Limited Association of British Theatre Technicians Association of Building Component Manufacturers Limited Association of Consulting Engineers y AsscciaotfiCounty Councils Association of District Councils J fes0c lation of. Tadenendent Businesses Association of Tadependent Cinemas ~ sscciation of Lightweight hgercgate itenufacturers ; : British Airports Authority Brivish Airways British futomatic Sprinkler Association Ltd British Bath Manufacturers Association British Paver & Board Mdnstry Kederation ayae ~ S Peate 3 = Association of Matropolitan Authorities Asgcciation of Structure] Fine Protection a) NEE Manufacturers and Contractors 7 British Pest Control Association ? NINEX B JWTTYING REGULATIONS List! Gi KOMLLS INVITED TO COMAENT ON PROPOSALS TOR AMPADMENT (OTHER THAN GOVEMNHIN'T DEPARTHENTS ) Aggregate Block Producers Comittee Avrément Board Aluminium Federation » Ausociation of Thermoplastic Domclight Manufacturers Autoclaved Aerated Concrete Products Association ¢ ghish Plostics Fedoravion Rritish Ports Association — pritich Precast Concrete federation Rritish Property Federation British Railways Board H British Ready Mixed Concrete Association British Reinforcement Monufacturers Association British Rigid Urethane Foam Manufacturers Association British Standards Institution British Steel Corporation British Transport Docks Poard British Waterways Board British Wood Preserving Association British Woodworking Fedcration Builders Merchants Federation Building Centre Building Regulations Liaison Group Building Services Research and Information Association Building Societies Association Bye Laws Revision Committee (Isle of Man) Cuke und biscuit Alliance Ceinent Admixtures Association Cement and Concrete Association Cement Makers Federation - Central Electricity Genemting Board Ceramic Tile Council” Chartered Institution of Building Services Chemical ndestrics Association Anse Linited Gi Fire Retardant Additives Vorkings Geom Chief and Assistant Chief Fire Officers Association Chief Building Inspector (Jersey C1) Chief Insnector of TOM Local Governmet:it Bourd Chivcboard Promotion Association Limited Churches Main Coanittee Cinenatograph Exhibitors Association of Great Britain and Treland Civil Aviation Authority Clay Pipe Development Association Limited Cocoa Chocolate & confectionery Alliance Cold Rolled Section Association Committee of Associations of Specialist Engineering Contractors Committee of Vice-Chancellors and Principals of the Universities of the U.K. Committee on Restrictions ayrainst Disabled People Concrete Block Association Concrete Socicty Confederation for the Registration of British Gas Installers Confederatioonf British Industry CBi Smaller Firms Council Consortium of Local Authority Programme Consortium of Local Authorities — Wales Consortium for Method Building Constructional Steel Research and Development Association Construction Industry Research and Infor:mtion Association Construction Surveyors Institute Consumers Association Contract Flooring Association / Contractors Plant Association / Copper Cylinder and Roiler Nanufacturers i Copper Titbe Fittings Menufaclurers Association /) Council of British Ceramic Sanitary Ware Nanutacturers ” AS plish Plectics Sederniion British Ports Associaticn dritich Preeast Concrele Federation British Property Federation British Railways Board British Ready Mixed Concrete Association British Reinforcement Manufacturers Association British Rigid Urethane Foam Manufacturers Association British Standards Institution British Steel Corporation British Transport Docks Board British Waterways Board British Wood Preserving Association British Woodworking Federation Builders Merchants Federation Building Centre BuildingRegulationsLiaisonGroup Building Services Research and Information Association Building Societies Association Bye Laws Revision Committee (Isle of Man)~ Cuke und biscuit Alliance Cenent Admixtures Association Cement and Concrete Association Cement Makers Federation ~ Central Electricity Genemting Board Ceramic Tile Council” Chartered Institution of Building Services Linited Cif. Fire Reievdant Additives Vorkinys Gem Chief and Assistant Chief Fire Officers Association Chief Building Inspector (Jersey C1) Chief Insvector of IOM Local Governmer:t Bourd| Chivboard Promotion Association Limited Churches Main Connittee Cinenatograph Exhibitors Association of Great Britain and Treland Civil Aviation Authority Clay Pipe Development Association Limited Cocoa Chocolate & confectionery Alliance Cold Rolled Section Association Committee of Associations of Specialist Engineering Contractors Comnittee of Vice-Chancellors and Principals of the Universities of the U.K, Committee on Restrictions ayainst Disabled People Conerste Block Association Concrete Socicty Confederation for the Registration of British Gas Installors Confederation of British pndustry CBI Smaller #irms Counc ConsortiumofLocalaoa Programme Consortium of Local Authorities — Wales Consortium for Method Building Constructional Steel Research and Development Association Construction Industry Research and Inforimti6n Association Construction Surveyors Institute Consumers Association Contract Flooring Association / Contractors Plant Association } Copper Cylinder and Roiler Nanufacturers i Copper Tube Fittings Menufacturers Association 4J Council of British Ceramic Sanilary Ware Nunutacturers + Chomical Tndustr AS wetl for Small Industries in Nural Areas Country Landowners Association District Council Tectmical Association District Surveyors Association Domestic 0i1 Burning Equipment Testing Association Limited Domestic Solid fuel Appliances Approval Scheme Door and Shutter Association Dry Lining and Partitioning Association Federation of Master Builders Wederation of Piling Specialists lederation of Stone Industrics Meit Roofing Contractors Advisory Board Fencing Contractors Association i Fibre Building Board Development,, Organisation, Fibre Building Board Federation Fire Brigades Union Linited Ductile Iron Pipe Association ;; Electrical Contractors Association Electyical Electronic Tele— communications & Plumbing Union Tilectric Cable Makers Confederation Mlectricity Consumers Association Vlectricity Council Ingineering Equipment Users?’ Association Invironmental Health Officers EPS Association: Information and Technical Centre Faculty of Architects & Surveyors Paculty of Building A Pederation of Associationosf Specialists & SubContractors Guild of Surveyors Incorporated Society of Yalucrs and Auctioneers Fire Insurers! Research and Testing Organisation Fire Offices Committee t Fire Protection Association Fire Service Technical College Flat Glass Manufacturers Association Food & Drink Industries Council “ocd Nunufeacturers Federation Inc Forestry Commission Georgian Group a ie Glass and Glazing Federation Greater London -Building Sufveyors Asscciation Greater London Council Architect to the Council Department of Architecture and Civic Desig Gypsum Products Development Association Heating and Ventilating Contractors Federation of Civil Engincering Contractors Association House Builders Federation Housing Centre Trust : ~ Federation of Concrete Specialists. : Imperial College of Science & Technology Federation of Epoxy Resin Formulators & Applicators / A .neorporated Association of Architects and Surveyors Independent Proadcasting Authority Inner London Building Surveyors! Association Institute of Administrative Management Institute of Building Institute of Clerks of Works of Great Britain Incorporated Institute of Construction Management Institute of Housing Managers Institute of Plumbing Institute of Quantity Surveyors Institute of Registered Architects Laminated Plastics Fabricators Association Leathercloth and Coated Fabrics Manufacturers Associetion Lighting Industry Mederation Limited Liquefied Petroleum Gas Industry Technical Association (UK) Liverpool Polytechnic: Department of Architecture” London Boroughs Association London Transport Executive Manufacturers Association of Radiators & Convectors Mastic Asphalt Council and Employers Association ‘ Metal Roof Deck Association Methodist Church Division of Property Metropolitan Architectural Consortium for Education Wilk Marketing Board Modular Society Limited National Association of Fire Officers National Association of Licensed Bingo & Social Clubs National Association of Liftmakers National .Association of Local Councils Nationil Assoc of Loft Insulation Ontractars National Association of Shopfitters National Building Agency National Building and Allied Hardware Naenufecturers Federation National Cavity Insulation Association Netijensl Chamber of Trade National Clayware Federation Institution Officers Institution Institution Institution Institution Institution Institution of Building Control of Civil Ingineers of Electrical of Fire Mngineers of Gas Ingineers of Mechanical of Municipal Development Group Engineers” Engineers Mngineers VY Institution of Professional Civil Servants Institution of Public Health Ingincers Institution of Structural Ingineers Inter—Council Co-ordinating Committee Interdepartmental Construction Joint Conmitice on Building Legislation wwtionel Coal Doan, Sceeretary's Department Nation) Consumer Council Wational Cowicil of Building Material Producers National Council of Social Service National Farmers Union National Federation of Building Trades Employers National Federation of Clay Industries National Federation of Constructional Glass Associations National Federation of Housing Associations National Federation of Master Steeplejacks and Lightning Conductor Engineers National Federation of Painting and Decorating Contractors National Federation of Plumbers and Domestic Heating Ingineers National Federation of Roofing Contractors Nat Fed of Self Employed & Small Businesses National Fireplace Council National Fireplace Manufacturers Association National Freight Corporation National House-Building Council National Joint Council for the Building Industry (Operatives Side) National and Local Government Officers Association National Master Tile Fixers Association National Ports Comcil National Society for Clean Air National Union & Need orionbem and Allied Yorkers e. National Union of General and Municipal Workers National. Water Council Wew Towms Acsociation Orgenisation of Northtlest Authorities for Rationalized Design Paintmakers Association of Great Britain Limited Patent Glazing Conference Pitch Fibre Pipe Association Polytechnic of Central London Polytechnic of North London Portsmouth Polytechnic Post Office Prefabricated Building Manufacturers Association of Great Britain Ltd Refractory Contractors Association Registered Plumbers Association Retail Distributors Association Incorporated Royal Association for Disability and Rehabilitation Royai Institute of British Architects Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents Royal Society of Health Rubber & Plastics Research Association Sand and Gravel Association Limited Scout Association Sealant Manufacturers Conference Second Consortium of Local Authorities Trent Polytechnic ‘frinity House and Wales) 6F. South London Consortium for LAs Building Research & Development Spiral Stair Manufacturers Association Spray Contracts Technical Committee Steel Window Association shop and Display Equipment Association Society of Architectural and Associated Technicians Society of British Gas Industries Society of Chief Architects Society of Chief Building Regulation Officers Society for the Protection of Ancient Buildings Solid Fuel Advisory Service Solid Sinokeless Fuels Federation South-Eastern Architects Collaboration Storage Equipment Manufacturers Association Structural Insulation Association Supervisory, Technical, Administrative, lianagerial and Professional Section (UCATT) Suspended Ceilings Association Swedish Finnish Timber Council Swimming Pool and Allied Trades Association Test Research & Inspection Services (International) Limited Timber Trade Federation of the United Kingdom UX Particleboard Assodtationi Yarsley Testing Laboratories Trades Union Congress Construction Industry Committee Union of Construction, Allied Trades and Technicians University of Bristol: Department of Architecture Vitreous Ynamel Development Council Volume Housebuilders Study Group Wales Council for the Disabled Wallcovering Nannfacturers Meeccietien Warrington Research Centre White Lead Manufacturers Association Wood Wool Slab Manufacturers Association Timber Research and Development Association Transport & General Workers Union UX Alowie Mnergy Authority UK Association of Frozen ood "rcoducers Youth Hostels Association (England Zinc and Lead Development Association Ss a QP L 72 alti Stet CYA wl. ae1451 Jie ne LO blades, bin (02, brckeyHeyot lend Lam byt Vadece ANA |. _4 / / Pn aaee i , a fi CAAT. LTMCALN ViIAECVLT Lairdcamgiaur_PraliigCl ur bnglind 4 Walte — yori. SPA [ast [22 Atos ly Jo pteuK VE, The mdvergned, ae Meh tema d- ti Whites begistrion (anes 4a Vaid Kingday(420K).wewpathatferry de wiutdts nqistitd unde the Ayla Lequstadion bilo 1971, BB adstghalta "unpttaced -lEP MT brag Mnubae ang 4Ti piprssunal in the AT) . ustiitle end tare lla nad Ne nile yar 1990, gud avolav Pha 1999/23 fb fe that conde KIM Onin Tad Uwe whith avtulliet Nims. In 20 dV asthe payed Hungqes Te The Sup Pibissiine have bem Inktivns pnultd and 4 pildwiqg Gate afer al syrhatele LIRA f AT pebasaltMala "Unattached" putts *- *) Avg poem Vqislird umdw Tht act I. WE har weCoit atThis athe Pnapal dieters WW Frpnfinm- nvm er piltsate CWtificalia, 2- In The pavioat 4 Cntifiahin Westra Ainge thet tr doetem He pate of fur unattached biti” say be Hhetiatd if Me fran de (Niriatim is ystadttd Te Minntw 1) hfrssimat brats N nad PUMEE. The tybitile lrgistata Act hinendgne ,MTA fibt ulitet, 4VAqiAUK VEGGIE malty Th AT Ay¥:ay at4 Ti biting Comin fr Yeh f 4 ‘|‘ t} Nd£0 = tae 4 nels Wi Fe a> GiAAA Livy‘YatTeplatAVtiulfilres Cony C4 7. And WE Sug4freT 7VATA 5 [Mg Ve iunvbiditd a CO tint bisa tN The pmperes A ENbrentita. 6) MouAuyp Goa pllrsabal wsttte w Tndleuna Shadwlprdortrqbalict hal wai Statice om the vigikte D CliftTa PMS" hy bn hve? phy iz l Wattnthtd .YW (x) / :hy Mo be adadtd adity wth gitwdsA flv folhng 2udtond Ww Neltaln Nand. (cmmecnred/h 7) Te pittict” 4) jon Thr pple ullitsT, hay poem void hin The Legg, K i} prduticte Shivd z Linnbby — ? ap‘lafirelUwT14 AcA 6higd Pours" 246 "Cpt altiaaltically ve trurved o ‘Ch fart (MW2M4 itibAye hvtwid Thisnq byvrA46am Wn Te Act Korte gist é ) Yay [K5TM WWaghingy fin Th Liqust cy HUWlets shold be diriid te haw atc 151g AMnTheqb ¢}.CMlit Home "ie be poled this vqisti by Vie ob pgustiatim undies the Act. Thee BluA net,bye, piquMcr his bang linsitirda“Ympettiran“byGi he, her Catena . Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource DOE Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived John Murray Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource June 1980 Subject The topic of the resource DOE Consultation on Future of Building Control