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

CK,

You have to get away from this waffly hyperbole and start framing your arguments in legal terms to have even a chance of briefing your solicitor to instruct your barrister correctly, so you can get a meaningful opinion.

Here is my (revised) tuppenceworth.

IN DEFENCE OF REGISTRATION:

You can attack the principle of Registration – it may indeed be a waste of time in terms of actually conferring protection to the public in and of itself.
But, let’s face up to this – you can say that about any law of the land – if the law worked perfectly we would have no criminals.
It is fear of the legal penalty working as a deterrent that is intended to protect the public, by deterring some criminals.
Registration works the same way, in that fear of losing one’s registration will help practitioners toe the line.

Registration is therefore here to stay and that is all Part 3 of the BCA 2007 should be about.
Where it loses its way and is exposed to attack is in the detail, as usual.
The current automatic registration only for MRIAIs is inequitable.

TOWARDS AN EQUITABLE STRATEGY OF REGISTRATION:

In my opinion, all qualified persons practising as architects should be admitted to the Register.

The statutory rights of people holding the qualifications of:

• Dip. Arch DIT and
• B.Arch NUI

as well as people holding the affixes of

• MRIAI and
• ARIAI

should be upheld.

They should all have the right of automatic registration, based on their 1989 statutory rights, whether or not complaints have been alleged about them.

Similarly the rights of people to practice under the EU Directive on the Mutual Recognition of Professional Qualifications should be upheld.

In my opinion, all persons without a formal qualification as an architect, but who are practising as architects should also be admitted to the Register.
The includes Technicians, the so-called “unqualified successes” and persons from “out of town” who are resident and working in Ireland.

It should not be the presumption of the Register that all practitioners without the formal qualification of “Architect” are incompetent.
This would seriously infringe on the “presumption of innocence” principle, which applies in both criminal and civil law AFAIK.

Instead there should be an initial cursory inspection of their work and practice history to assess their competence.
This should occur after they have been registered, because before that the Registrar has no authority over them.
This inspection should not cause professional disruption nor should it cause undue financial hardship.

People waiting to be inspected should be allowed conitnue to practise as architects if that is what they held themselves to be during the period in which they are waiting to be inspected.
Practitioners shouldn’t have to become MRIAI’s to continue to practice at a competent level, merely to show an average level of skill and competence for a member of the profession.

DEALING WITH THE OFFENDERS:

People offend in every profession at all levels – don’t imagine otherwise.

1. MRIAI’s who have had complaints alleged against them should be scrutinised closely.
2. Non-MRIAI’s who have had complaints alleged against them should be scrutinised closely – this includes gradautes, technicians and unqialified persons.
3. Recent arrivals from “out of town” who have had complaints alleged against them should be examined closely and the results collated and fed back into the EU Beaurocracy.

In all cases, detailed reviews of these practices should be prioritised within a six month period, and appropriate levels of personnel drafted in to execute this task.
This measure will afford some protection to the public following on the registration process.

In all cases, should the complaint be found to have substance, the practice concerned should be subject to restriction.
This may involve mandatory monitoring, assessment of work practices, periodic review and mentoring if necessary.
(not that I expect to see a queue of MRIAI’s forming around the block for mentoring non-compliant practices)

This is assuming said non-compliant practice has the wherewithal to function at a basic level of competence.
If the practice cannot operate competently it may need to be formally struck off the register.

In my opinion stiking off a practice should only be done via an application to the High Court.
This should be done following a process of peer review at a high level, not at the stroke of the Registrar’s pen.
We’re talking taking away a person’s livelihood here, and the appropriate forms must be followed and justiceseen to be done to the party concerned in an independent forum.

IN SUPPORT OF REGISTRATION FOR ALL PRACTITIONERS:

Why register everyone, even those with complaints against them?
Firstly because its only by registering everyone that the Registrar establishes its authority over everyone providing “architectural services”.
Secondly, unregistered persons have no fear of the Registrar, except where they advertise themselves as architects without being registered.
They could call themselves anything else they wanted to, and be gainfully employed, and have their certs accepted assuming they have 10 years in practice in Ireland.
Thirdly, registering all those calling themselves architects confers equality before the law and gives a practitioner the benefit of the doubt – it show even handed dealing by the Registrar, but paves the way for firm action when required.
So much for my view, it has pros and cons like any other strategy, but its fair and it works.

THE “NO DIRTY HANDS” POLICY AND THE RIAI:

I want to comment on the “no dirty hands” concerns of the supposedly whiter-than-white RIAI.
It appears that they don’t want to be associated with people who might have less then pristine records of professional competence.

Except that they already are, amongst their own Members.
I know for certain that MRIAI’s have commited egregious errors in terms of competent certification.
The RIAI are already up to their necks in it with “dirty hands” by registering such persons – thererby conferring on them a level of apparent competence they don’t deserve.

And I’m not talking about dodgy window details or leaking roofs – I’m talking about Fire Safety – a matter of life and death.
See the RTE Prime Time programme of 22nd May 2006 on Fire Safety in Buildings if you don’t believe me.

There are more recent horrior stories:
http://www.rte.ie/news/2010/0117/coalport.html
What price the credibility of the “Title” of “Archtiect” when this sort of reporting is going on?
Months after Registration started, is the Fourth Estate even bothering to check the Register – does it even know it exists?
We know that 20% of complaints received are about MRIAIs and – statistically speaking – some of these at least must be genuine and provable.
So “dirty hands” are amongst the Registered Ones as things stand.

This is why I say let the Registrar accept this and get on with registering everybody practising as architects.
Prioritize the review of those who have had complaints levelled against them.
Weed out the incompetents and the slackers in due course.
Or give then a chance to prove thei abilities

PROTECTION OF THE PUBLIC:

In relation to the ongoing Registration and protection of the public issue, the legal principle applying to those people holding themselves out to be Architects is that in the event of a claim, the Courts will judge them as Architects.
This established legal principle is the real protection offered to the public under Irish law, and is not enhanced in any way by the provisions of the Building Control Act 2007, which only serves to whitewashe over the 20% of complaints received annually regarding MRIAI’s.
The standard to which the practitioner is held is that of an average level of competence of a skilled person practising architecture, not the highest competence.
The person does not have to be held to be an MRIAI to be an Architect, nor does he have to be Registered.

Members of the public are expected to exercise discretion in appointing their architect, whatever level he operates at and whatever he calls himself, including vetting their work, seeking references, discussing fees and services to be provided.
But the long and the short of it is, whatever the person providing architectural services calls himself – if he is practising “as an Architect” he will be held accountable in a Court of law “as an Architect”.

THE EFFECT ON THE PROFESSION:

What profession?
The Registrar is still talking about “Over 60%” unemployment rates amongst architects when to all intents and purposes it is nearer 80%, perhaps more.
“Decimation” means “reduce by one tenth” – we are reduced by four fifths, eight times the rate denoted by “decimation”.
Anyone with an alternative country to practice in has already left, the rest are on the dole, facing receivership or personal bankruptcy.
Those of us “lucky” enough not to be in negative equity are faced with selling our homes to pay off our debts and live in rented accommodation, probably for the rest of our lives.

And what is the priority for the Registrar?
Protecting the RIAI – make no mistake, its not not about protection the profession, or the public, but protecting the RIAI and its members.

To do this, the Registrar has lobbied tirelessly to have MRIAI members automatically registered as architects, while making everyone else jump through hoops of their devising, ignoring any stututory or acquired rights in the process.

• This denies the statutory rights of graduate of the schools of architecture in Bolton Street and UCD.
• This denies the rights of EU Nationals whose qualifications are recognised under DIR 2005/36/EC, the EU Directive on the Mutual Recognition of Professional Qualifications.
• This denies the acquired rights of those qualified as Architectural Technicians who have been in practice as architects for 10 years or more.
• This denies the acquired rights of those practitioners without formal qualifications who have been in practice as architects for 10 years or more.

This “playing for advantage” by an RIAI-Dominated Registrar’s office has got to stop.
Automatic Registration must be afforded to practitioners – graduates, technicians and unqualified – who have contributed competently to the profession in Ireland over the past forty years.
Because as matters stand, anyone with a recognized qualification from Europe can practise here legally as an architect, while our own home grown graduates cannot do so, without effectively becoming members of the RIAI.
This current travesty of Registration rests on John Gormley’s desk,and occurred on John Gormley’s watch – he is the one who signed the Building Control Act 2007 into law – he had the power to do so – he is the Minister responsible.
It is our job to ensure that with such power and responsibility comes accountability.

FWIW

ONQ.