The sensitive issue of the title "Architect" and the Buildin

Re: The sensitive issue of the title "Architect" and the Building Control Bill

Postby onq » Sat Nov 20, 2010 8:16 am

On the contrary CK, Technicians and Engineers have been taking the bread out of archtiects mouths for years doing design works and statutory approvals.

Some are competent, some are disasters, with large swathes of grey in between, just like Members of the Institute and Grandfathers..

ONQ.
User avatar
onq
Old Master
 
Posts: 1220
Joined: Tue May 12, 2009 12:29 am
Location: Dublin, Ireland

Re: The sensitive issue of the title "Architect" and the Building Control Bill

Postby CK » Tue Nov 23, 2010 10:52 am

Does anyone know the implications of a new government early next year for the Building Control (Amendment) Bill 2010?

What is happening with the bills when a new government takes over?
User avatar
CK
Member
 
Posts: 414
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2002 1:00 am

Re: The sensitive issue of the title "Architect" and the Building Control Bill

Postby batten » Tue Nov 23, 2010 12:12 pm

like the Fianna Failures, they'll disappear into the ether.
batten
Member
 
Posts: 27
Joined: Fri Aug 27, 2010 12:47 pm

Re: The sensitive issue of the title "Architect" and the Building Control Bill

Postby CK » Tue Nov 23, 2010 2:28 pm

batten wrote:like the Fianna Failures, they'll disappear into the ether.


Too bad that all these efforts will be going down the drain...
User avatar
CK
Member
 
Posts: 414
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2002 1:00 am

Re: The sensitive issue of the title "Architect" and the Building Control Bill

Postby wearnicehats » Tue Nov 23, 2010 3:55 pm

CK wrote:Too bad that all these efforts will be going down the drain...


why don't you petition the continuity IMF? - you've exhausted every other method of avoiding having to prove your worth
wearnicehats
Senior Member
 
Posts: 822
Joined: Wed Aug 02, 2006 2:38 pm

Re: The sensitive issue of the title "Architect" and the Building Control Bill

Postby CK » Tue Nov 23, 2010 6:04 pm

wearnicehats wrote:why don't you petition the continuity IMF? - you've exhausted every other method of avoiding having to prove your worth


???????
User avatar
CK
Member
 
Posts: 414
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2002 1:00 am

Re: The sensitive issue of the title "Architect" and the Building Control Bill

Postby onq » Tue Nov 23, 2010 6:54 pm

From: http://www.bdonline.co.uk/5009368.article?origin=BDdaily

(UK) Government blow to campaign to recognise part II 'architects'

The campaign to improve the status of architectural assistants has been dealt a serious blow after a government minister refused to review the current registration process.

Andrew Stunell, the minister responsible for the Architects’ Act, flatly rejected a request from The Association of Part Two Architects (Tapta) to consider a two-tier system.

Tapta argues this would be the best way of ending the “discrimination” against UK-trained part IIs who are barred from Arb’s register. Tapta’s complaint is that the Arb is required by a European directive to admit similarly qualified people from elsewhere in Europe because they are recognised as architects in their own countries.

Allowing UK part IIs to call themselves “certified architects”, while part IIIs retained the title “registered architect, would end this injustice, said Paul McGrath, who founded the lobby group last month.

But Stunell wrote back insisting this would benefit neither the public nor the profession and pointed out that part IIs were free to take their part III exams.

He did acknowledge it was “unfortunate that in some circumstances this appears to create an unfavourable outcome for part II graduates”.

But he wrote: “Simply because some member states have lower thresholds for qualification should not mean the UK should follow suit. I therefore do not propose to prompt a review of the current qualifications required to register as an architect in the UK.”

Instead he said harmonising architectural qualifications across Europe was the way to proceed and promised to look at this when an “opportunity arises to review the directive”.

Alison Carr, chief executive of the Arb, said a public consultation on the directive would be launched at the end of the year.

Meanwhile she said McGrath’s application to join the register would be dealt with in due course. He expects to be rejected but hopes to appeal to the High Court to set a legal precedent.

McGrath said he was confident Stunell had not closed the door entirely and was canvassing his members before replying.
User avatar
onq
Old Master
 
Posts: 1220
Joined: Tue May 12, 2009 12:29 am
Location: Dublin, Ireland

Re: The sensitive issue of the title "Architect" and the Bui

Postby onq » Sat Nov 27, 2010 10:40 pm

CK wrote:Does anyone know the implications of a new government early next year for the Building Control (Amendment) Bill 2010?

What is happening with the bills when a new government takes over?


The Alliance should be pressuring the parties to deal with this Bill now.
Because nobody seems to know that the political landscape is going to be after the election.
Sinn Féin have been luke warm in all this - what happens if there is a Sinn Féin led government?

ONQ.
User avatar
onq
Old Master
 
Posts: 1220
Joined: Tue May 12, 2009 12:29 am
Location: Dublin, Ireland

Re: The sensitive issue of the title "Architect" and the Bui

Postby CK » Wed Dec 01, 2010 1:20 pm

onq wrote:
CK wrote:Does anyone know the implications of a new government early next year for the Building Control (Amendment) Bill 2010?

What is happening with the bills when a new government takes over?


The Alliance should be pressuring the parties to deal with this Bill now.
Because nobody seems to know that the political landscape is going to be after the election.
Sinn Féin have been luke warm in all this - what happens if there is a Sinn Féin led government?

ONQ.


Sinn Féin is supporting the bill, but I cannot believe that it can be ellected by the people of Ireland... The poll do not reflect anything like that...

By the way... Have you read the legal opinion obtained by Architects' Alliance?
User avatar
CK
Member
 
Posts: 414
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2002 1:00 am

Re: The sensitive issue of the title "Architect" and the Bui

Postby batten » Wed Dec 01, 2010 1:57 pm


Sinn Féin is supporting the bill, but I cannot believe that it can be ellected by the people of Ireland... The poll do not reflect anything like that...

By the way... Have you read the legal opinion obtained by Architects' Alliance?


why don't don't you publish it for all to see and compare to the opinion obtained by the RIAI ?
batten
Member
 
Posts: 27
Joined: Fri Aug 27, 2010 12:47 pm

Re: The sensitive issue of the title "Architect" and the Bui

Postby CK » Wed Dec 01, 2010 3:25 pm

batten wrote:

Sinn Féin is supporting the bill, but I cannot believe that it can be ellected by the people of Ireland... The poll do not reflect anything like that...

By the way... Have you read the legal opinion obtained by Architects' Alliance?


why don't don't you publish it for all to see and compare to the opinion obtained by the RIAI ?


I received a copy from the spokesperson. I am still in contact with Brian even if I am not a member and not sharing all of Architects' Alliance views.

I was asked to keep the document confidential until further notice.
Last edited by CK on Wed Dec 01, 2010 4:02 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
CK
Member
 
Posts: 414
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2002 1:00 am

Re: The sensitive issue of the title "Architect" and the Bui

Postby onq » Wed Dec 01, 2010 3:35 pm

I wasn't particularly impressed by the AAoI opinion I saw back in June 2010 if that's the one you mean.

It was fine as far as it went and the Barrister is known to me and he's sound - but the querist asked the wrong question.

AFAICS this was more of the same nonsense showing that the Alliance has been wrong headed about its approach on this for a long time.

The fact that there has STILL been no exhibition of their Member's work is a poor response to allegations of being "chancers".

I mean, if the gist of the argument by the Alliance Members is that they have been quietly providing archtiectural services for up to 35 years, then where is the vast body of built, certified and sworn work that this implies?

If, as has been stated before, they are no risk and are competent to practice as architects, and - estimating their numbers - they have at last 200 members with an average career of - say - 10 years - that's 2,000 person-years of work.

Where is this vast body of competent work - the Horn of Africa somewhere?

"Where's the beef?!"

=======================

If you're saying there is a new AAoI opinion, no, I haven't seen it and you might pass it on to me for some light reading.


=======================

RE: the RIAI Opinion, is that the document that I understand refers to the Oireachtas as "omnipotent"?
So much for our tri-partite division of Government into the Executive, Judicial and Legislative branches, then.

Is is also true that persons certified as architects before 1987 have to have their qualifications accepted by all member states?
That seems to let Ruairí Quinn and his generation off any hooks they might otherwise have been caught on due to allegations of time and changing technology undermining the relevance of their qualification.

ONQ.
User avatar
onq
Old Master
 
Posts: 1220
Joined: Tue May 12, 2009 12:29 am
Location: Dublin, Ireland

Re: The sensitive issue of the title "Architect" and the Bui

Postby CK » Wed Dec 01, 2010 4:04 pm

onq wrote:I wasn't particularly impressed by the AAoI opinion I saw back in June 2010 if that's the one you mean.

It was fine as far as it went and the Barrister is known to me and he's sound - but the querist asked the wrong question.

AFAICS this was more of the same nonsense showing that the Alliance has been wrong headed about its approach on this for a long time.

The fact that there has STILL been no exhibition of their Member's work is a poor response to allegations of being "chancers".

I mean, if the gist of the argument by the Alliance Members is that they have been quietly providing archtiectural services for up to 35 years, then where is the vast body of built, certified and sworn work that this implies?

If, as has been stated before, they are no risk and are competent to practice as architects, and - estimating their numbers - they have at last 200 members with an average career of - say - 10 years - that's 2,000 person-years of work.

Where is this vast body of competent work - the Horn of Africa somewhere?

"Where's the beef?!"

=======================

If you're saying there is a new AAoI opinion, no, I haven't seen it and you might pass it on to me for some light reading.


=======================

RE: the RIAI Opinion, is that the document that I understand refers to the Oireachtas as "omnipotent"?
So much for our tri-partite division of Government into the Executive, Judicial and Legislative branches, then.

Is is also true that persons certified as architects before 1987 have to have their qualifications accepted by all member states?
That seems to let Ruairí Quinn and his generation off any hooks they might otherwise have been caught on due to allegations of time and changing technology undermining the relevance of their qualification.

ONQ.

Architects’ Alliance asked for a legal opinion on the Building Control (Amendment) Bill 2010 and its compliance with EU law. You can find more info at http://www.architectsalliance.ie

It seems in full contradiction with the legal opinion obtained by the RIAI. I guess that legal opinions include a large part of subjectivity.
User avatar
CK
Member
 
Posts: 414
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2002 1:00 am

Re: The sensitive issue of the title "Architect" and the Bui

Postby batten » Wed Dec 01, 2010 6:01 pm

onq wrote:
RE: the RIAI Opinion, is that the document that I understand refers to the Oireachtas as "omnipotent"?
So much for our tri-partite division of Government into the Executive, Judicial and Legislative branches, then.

ONQ.



You really should quote the full paragraph :

"3. In this regard, I would also observe that, subject to two major qualifications, the Oireachtas is omnipotent. The first is that all legislation must comply with the requirements of the Constitution, but that nothing of the kind arises here. The second is that, having regard to the supremacy of EU law - a principle Itself acknowledged by Article 29.4.6 of the Constitution - any domestic law which is Incompatible with EU law would be regarded as Inapplicable.' "

It seems clear to me, while not an SC, nor even close, that the sticking point with O'Donoghue's bill is that it omits the requirement for qualitative assessment called for in the EU Directive - the content of which must be carried into national law.
batten
Member
 
Posts: 27
Joined: Fri Aug 27, 2010 12:47 pm

Re: The sensitive issue of the title "Architect" and the Bui

Postby onq » Wed Dec 01, 2010 6:10 pm

CK wrote:Architects’ Alliance asked for a legal opinion on the Building Control (Amendment) Bill 2010 and its compliance with EU law. You can find more info at http://www.architectsalliance.ie

It seems in full contradiction with the legal opinion obtained by the RIAI. I guess that legal opinions include a large part of subjectivity.


All it says is

"A legal Opinion prepared at the request of the Alliance by Mr Anthony M Collins SC was submitted to Minister Cuffe. Mr Collins wrote: "I conclude that there is no conflict between the provisions of the Bill and the law of the European Union, notably the Directive". The Minister's office confirmed that Mr Collins' Opinion will be passed to the Attorney-General's office for his advice. "

Pass the opinion along so I can review it if you'd like a comment on it - I cannot review it piecemeal.

ONQ.
User avatar
onq
Old Master
 
Posts: 1220
Joined: Tue May 12, 2009 12:29 am
Location: Dublin, Ireland

Re: The sensitive issue of the title "Architect" and the Bui

Postby onq » Wed Dec 01, 2010 6:15 pm

batten wrote:You really should quote the full paragraph :

"3. In this regard, I would also observe that, subject to two major qualifications, the Oireachtas is omnipotent. The first is that all legislation must comply with the requirements of the Constitution, but that nothing of the kind arises here. The second is that, having regard to the supremacy of EU law - a principle Itself acknowledged by Article 29.4.6 of the Constitution - any domestic law which is Incompatible with EU law would be regarded as Inapplicable.' "

It seems clear to me, while not an SC, nor even close, that the sticking point with O'Donoghue's bill is that it omits the requirement for qualitative assessment called for in the EU Directive - the content of which must be carried into national law.


What seems clear to me is that both you and the SC seem to miss the point that this is a Directive, not a Regulation.
Directives may be interpreted, Regulations have force of law.

http://ec.europa.eu/community_law/intro ... ion_en.htm

What are EU regulations?

Regulations are the most direct form of EU law - as soon as they are passed, they have binding legal force throughout every Member State, on a par with national laws. National governments do not have to take action themselves to implement EU regulations.

They are different from directives, which are addressed to national authorities, who must then take action to make them part of national law, and decisions, which apply in specific cases only, involving particular authorities or individuals.

Regulations are passed either jointly by the EU Council and European Parliament, and by the Commission alone.


If this were not the case, I would probably be entitled to sue somone for not automatically recognising my right to use the Title, since my qualification is one of two prescribed in the Directive.

ONQ.
User avatar
onq
Old Master
 
Posts: 1220
Joined: Tue May 12, 2009 12:29 am
Location: Dublin, Ireland

Re: The sensitive issue of the title "Architect" and the Bui

Postby batten » Wed Dec 01, 2010 8:20 pm

I see no mention, or scope, for interpretation of Directives in the description you have provided :

"directives, which are addressed to national authorities, who must then take action to make them part of national law"

Directives must be made part of national law, the only discretion allowed is that of time - Regulations are binding once passed by the EU, Directives not so, which is why the EU want to fine Ireland on many fronts as we have delayed for too long in implementing some Directives.
batten
Member
 
Posts: 27
Joined: Fri Aug 27, 2010 12:47 pm

Re: The sensitive issue of the title "Architect" and the Bui

Postby CK » Thu Dec 02, 2010 11:28 am

batten wrote:I see no mention, or scope, for interpretation of Directives in the description you have provided :

"directives, which are addressed to national authorities, who must then take action to make them part of national law"

Directives must be made part of national law, the only discretion allowed is that of time - Regulations are binding once passed by the EU, Directives not so, which is why the EU want to fine Ireland on many fronts as we have delayed for too long in implementing some Directives.


Whatever, EU Law does not legislate the registration of architects. No standards are set for the register of architects.

There are standards set for architects’ freedom of movement. These standards appear in the EU Directive for the recognition of professional qualification.

Denmark and Sweden are not in breach of EU Law, despite not protecting the title or the profession.
User avatar
CK
Member
 
Posts: 414
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2002 1:00 am

Re: The sensitive issue of the title "Architect" and the Bui

Postby onq » Fri Dec 03, 2010 1:06 pm

batten wrote:I see no mention, or scope, for interpretation of Directives in the description you have provided :

"directives, which are addressed to national authorities, who must then take action to make them part of national law"

Directives must be made part of national law, the only discretion allowed is that of time - Regulations are binding once passed by the EU, Directives not so, which is why the EU want to fine Ireland on many fronts as we have delayed for too long in implementing some Directives.


So if a Directive says that someone with a prescribed qualification is entitled to use the title architect, any subsequent Irish law should respect that - is that what you're saying?

ONQ.
User avatar
onq
Old Master
 
Posts: 1220
Joined: Tue May 12, 2009 12:29 am
Location: Dublin, Ireland

Re: The sensitive issue of the title "Architect" and the Bui

Postby onq » Fri Dec 03, 2010 1:13 pm

CK wrote:
batten wrote:I see no mention, or scope, for interpretation of Directives in the description you have provided :

"directives, which are addressed to national authorities, who must then take action to make them part of national law"

Directives must be made part of national law, the only discretion allowed is that of time - Regulations are binding once passed by the EU, Directives not so, which is why the EU want to fine Ireland on many fronts as we have delayed for too long in implementing some Directives.


Whatever, EU Law does not legislate the registration of architects. No standards are set for the register of architects.

There are standards set for architects’ freedom of movement. These standards appear in the EU Directive for the recognition of professional qualification.

Denmark and Sweden are not in breach of EU Law, despite not protecting the title or the profession.


That's aprtly because its the protection of the profession that is causing the problems in England and Ireland, where ironically they recognise Archtiectural Technologists - people not trained in design matters per se and yet who carry authority similar to and architect.

Seems to me these countries are paying lip service to the profession of Archtiecture, while bringing up these creatures of lesser design ability to "dumb down" the whole profession.

This sort of wild allegation should be dear to your heart CK.

Do you claim to be able to design as well as an architect?

Where's the proof? Mine is dotted all over Dublin.

ONQ.
User avatar
onq
Old Master
 
Posts: 1220
Joined: Tue May 12, 2009 12:29 am
Location: Dublin, Ireland

Re: The sensitive issue of the title "Architect" and the Bui

Postby CK » Fri Dec 03, 2010 5:07 pm

onq wrote:
CK wrote:
batten wrote:I see no mention, or scope, for interpretation of Directives in the description you have provided :

"directives, which are addressed to national authorities, who must then take action to make them part of national law"

Directives must be made part of national law, the only discretion allowed is that of time - Regulations are binding once passed by the EU, Directives not so, which is why the EU want to fine Ireland on many fronts as we have delayed for too long in implementing some Directives.


Whatever, EU Law does not legislate the registration of architects. No standards are set for the register of architects.

There are standards set for architects’ freedom of movement. These standards appear in the EU Directive for the recognition of professional qualification.

Denmark and Sweden are not in breach of EU Law, despite not protecting the title or the profession.


That's aprtly because its the protection of the profession that is causing the problems in England and Ireland, where ironically they recognise Archtiectural Technologists - people not trained in design matters per se and yet who carry authority similar to and architect.

Seems to me these countries are paying lip service to the profession of Archtiecture, while bringing up these creatures of lesser design ability to "dumb down" the whole profession.

This sort of wild allegation should be dear to your heart CK.

Do you claim to be able to design as well as an architect?

Where's the proof? Mine is dotted all over Dublin.

ONQ.


What do you mean by architect?

Someone who has the skills and knowledge to design and manage? Or someone who has the relevant bank account to pay for the actual financial barriers erected in front of competent practitioners?

Do you want me to point out some horrible buildings from register architects? Is it the purpose of your previous post?
User avatar
CK
Member
 
Posts: 414
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2002 1:00 am

Re: The sensitive issue of the title "Architect" and the Bui

Postby CK » Fri Dec 03, 2010 5:44 pm

This thread was on the top of the list for Google search results such as "Architects Registration" or "registration of architects"...

It seems that Paul was asked by the RIAI not to redirect to the new forum. First protecting the title, now preventing the public to be informed about what is going on.

How much did they pay you Paul?

If the RIAI had nothing to hide then they would not request the conversations on this thread to be removed from Google pages. Maybe we should send all of this to Wikileaks... They are not afraid of showing the truth.

I can understand that the subjects exposed here are damaging Irish and international architecture, but trying to hide them will only make things worse.

I admire the courage of Julian Assange who is now persecuted for telling the truth about the corruption and hypocrisy of those who govern us.

My philosophy of architecture is based on truth and honesty. I think that ethic, in the general definition of the term, is very important in our profession.

How can the institute use deceptive methods to select professionals and in the same time pretend acting ethically towards the public? Like Berlusconi and the Italian Mafia, like Poutin in Russia, there is an institute trying to walk over honest and competent practitioners in this country.
User avatar
CK
Member
 
Posts: 414
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2002 1:00 am

Re: The sensitive issue of the title "Architect" and the Bui

Postby onq » Sat Dec 04, 2010 12:47 am

CK wrote: It seems that Paul was asked by the RIAI not to redirect to the new forum. First protecting the title, now preventing the public to be informed about what is going on.


I find that difficult to believe and even more difficult to believe that Paul Clerkin would assent to this.
I mean, if I found out that such was the case, in a forum where the RIAI are free to come in and rebut any comments made, I'd be very tempted to take the matter to the newspapers.
Suggesting that the RIAI would seek to dumb-down an online community style forum in such a way - or that the proprietor would allow it!
Really CK, you have to have some sort of proof before you go around spraying allegations like that.

ONQ.
User avatar
onq
Old Master
 
Posts: 1220
Joined: Tue May 12, 2009 12:29 am
Location: Dublin, Ireland

Re: The sensitive issue of the title "Architect" and the Bui

Postby onq » Sat Dec 04, 2010 12:49 am

CK wrote:
Do you want me to point out some horrible buildings from register architects? Is it the purpose of your previous post?


Here is the question I asked:

"Do you claim to be able to design as well as an architect?

Where's the proof?"


Post proof of your assertion that you are an architect - simple as that.

ONQ.
User avatar
onq
Old Master
 
Posts: 1220
Joined: Tue May 12, 2009 12:29 am
Location: Dublin, Ireland

Re: The sensitive issue of the title "Architect" and the Bui

Postby CK » Sat Dec 04, 2010 5:15 pm

onq wrote:
CK wrote: It seems that Paul was asked by the RIAI not to redirect to the new forum. First protecting the title, now preventing the public to be informed about what is going on.


I find that difficult to believe and even more difficult to believe that Paul Clerkin would assent to this.
I mean, if I found out that such was the case, in a forum where the RIAI are free to come in and rebut any comments made, I'd be very tempted to take the matter to the newspapers.
Suggesting that the RIAI would seek to dumb-down an online community style forum in such a way - or that the proprietor would allow it!
Really CK, you have to have some sort of proof before you go around spraying allegations like that.

ONQ.


Why isn't the google link to this thread automatically redirected to the new forum then?.. I do not think that the RIAI has a valid argument... It is much more simple for them to cut short freedom of speech...

It is obvious that they use financial means and other irregular tactics to prevent many established and skilled people competing with their members...

The RIAI only valid argument on this thread is that they need to protect the interests of those who studied... Well I agree with this position, but I disagree that it shall be in the detriment of self-taught or other graduates like me who do hold a qualification not listed in the EU Directive.
User avatar
CK
Member
 
Posts: 414
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2002 1:00 am

PreviousNext

Return to Ireland



cron