22nd February 2011, 08:33 PM
Right here goes...I have been both gamekeeper and poacher in this nefarious profession of ours. I have also advised national quarrying associations as and published for them. Clients use consultants because they are aware of having been ripped off in the past (by some unscrupulous units). They rightly demand an independent voice to counter the sometimes absurd demands of the Curatorial quarter. The Consultants can also (and do) stand on site and point out cock ups and mistakes and also praise when and where required. A consultant will also drive a client into a friendly direction thus generating more work for the Unit (extra publications, digging time, TV time, press days and even public open days). All that can be done by the unit but rarely seems to happen unless driven by a consultant. In quarry work Curator led design programmes have led to some stunning archaeology with an appreciative quarry owner being seen as archaeo friendly by the public and the planning authority. Curators have also generated public support to stop some of the nastiest planning decisions ever made.
If we want this 'profession' to be a Profession then we need to generate the money to drive that forward. If charging the developer more so that the diggers earn more moves us forward to a pay-scale similar to other degree led professions so beit. If in turn that forces the price of aggregates up that can be no bad thing as it might slow down the destruction of this green and pleasant land in which we all live.
Rant over.
If we want this 'profession' to be a Profession then we need to generate the money to drive that forward. If charging the developer more so that the diggers earn more moves us forward to a pay-scale similar to other degree led professions so beit. If in turn that forces the price of aggregates up that can be no bad thing as it might slow down the destruction of this green and pleasant land in which we all live.
Rant over.