10th March 2009, 03:53 PM
Quote:quote:Originally posted by drpeterwardle
I think this is a good as it gets in terms of a government statement that government will put money into protecting archaeological jobs. They are at least considering it.
The questions/issues are what can it do practically and quickly which will have the most effect. I think this is something the industry as a whole should give some thought to.
Peter Wardle
Hi Chaps
I think it clearly indicates the fact that the whole HP review was based on improving protection of buildings, that EH have a building bias and that the DCMS thinks only in building terms.
What is required is local government archies to get out there and get involved in CPD for planners, policy planners, highways dept, major projects teams and transport and development teams. Make sure they understand archaeology is a part of every project not a costly add-on. Use the most enthusiastic knowledgeable archie to give the CPD talk and really push the pre-determination nature of archaeology and the need to budget.
Also, talk to members and senior planners! Get them to understand that losing a job in archaeology is exactly the same as losing a job in construction, or retail. That letting developers off the hook as far as archaeology goes will just mean more unemployment not less!
We can't kick start the economy but curators do have a duty to try and ensure archaeology is protected and I believe this can only be achieved by making sure contractual units and consultants are highly skilled professionals.
whooa... I'll calm down now!
Steven