SAD S & G DBA Section 3 was created in the ppg16 paradigm by development control and it’s a mess. The fact that ppg is now superseded just shows up the fact that S&G DBA is not an archaeological standard and guidance but a standard and guidance for development control and reliant on their political dirctions. It really shows up how the ifa was not set up for field archaeologists but for a civil service establishment to maintain their situations. The latest Report for the Institute for Archaeologists and the Federation of Archaeological Managers and Employers shows how NOT field archaeologists they are.
3.2.5
The first line has a big MAY clause.
MAY we ignore it then or turn it into a justification for curators. This section 3 MAY like to imagine a county without any archaeological curation-could happen very soon at a place near you
And the justification for the curators wonderful help is that
the example thats being suggested is that the archaeologist got to the client first. What business is it of yours what they pay. You don’t tell the client which architect to employ. You get to say if you like the development or not. You get to say if you like my dba and evaluation or not. If its true that 40% of the time you find the dba unsatisfactory great. I would use that to bump the price up
we never had competitive tendering particulqarly for predetermination work, we never will unless curators make those briefs public documents=[SIZE=4]
3.2.5
The first line has a big MAY clause.
Quote:A brief/project outline or a specification MAY form the basis for a project design.
MAY we ignore it then or turn it into a justification for curators. This section 3 MAY like to imagine a county without any archaeological curation-could happen very soon at a place near you
And the justification for the curators wonderful help is that
Quote:For desk-based assessment within the planning framework, the brief/project outline or specification will usually be prepared by the planning archaeologist or curator and issued by the commissioning body, the developers or their agents to selected tenderers.
the example thats being suggested is that the archaeologist got to the client first. What business is it of yours what they pay. You don’t tell the client which architect to employ. You get to say if you like the development or not. You get to say if you like my dba and evaluation or not. If its true that 40% of the time you find the dba unsatisfactory great. I would use that to bump the price up
Quote:If we've learnt one thing from the introduction of competitive tendering into archaeology it's that it opens it up to unscrupulous practices like any other activity and it’s therefore important to ensure LPAs have proper advice.
we never had competitive tendering particulqarly for predetermination work, we never will unless curators make those briefs public documents=[SIZE=4]
Quote:[SIZE=4]selected tenderers-whats that?[/SIZE].[/SIZE]