28th February 2008, 01:30 PM
Quote:quote:Originally posted by drpeterwardle
Have to say that I find the notion that the IFA should take over the role of IHBC if the IHBC donot want to merge to be a bit devisive.
What is required is more unity of purpose not less.
Then join the IFA and/or IHBC (if you haven't already) and make your feelings known. The IFA council is elected by its membership and I imagine this is also true of the IHBC council. They have a responsibility to their members. If you really don't like whats happening stand for their councils!
Quote:quote:Originally posted by drpeterwardle
The question is why the IHBC does not want to merge with the IFA. On the face of merging is the logical and long over due thing to do.
According to the AGM transcript linked to above, the IHBC has about 1500 members which includes around '400 architects, 400 town planners and 56 archaeologists etc'. I imagine for the architects and town planners the IHBC represents a highly specialised secondary professional body which they joined after primarily being chartered architects or chartered surveyors etc. I can understand why they would be reluctant to lose this specialised status to a much broader and all encompassing 'Institute of Archaeology and Historic Environment', but never the less it problably needs to happen.