Mary Coughlan – criticises Architecture & engineering professions

this woman is serious out of touch with reality, if she thinks architects havent been touched by the recession, when they are probably the singular biggest profession hit….

idiot!

No mention of Architecture or Engineering in that article? :confused:

Having read other articles there is a mention of the Medical fields etc.

I’ll just wait for the Smart economy to kick in

From what I heard on the radio she seems to think that if Solicitors, Accountants and other “highly paid” professionals (obviously not meaning architects) reduce their fees the economy will benefit from increased competition. I mean, by all means place higher tax on the higher earners but professionals are free to set whatever rates they want last I checked and those hungrier for work will offer price incentives to new customers. This surely raises the bar for politicians grasping at straws and proposing bullshit, lets tackle the fat cats, policies.

sorry here’s the correct link where architects are mentioned

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/frontpage/2009/0721/1224250998236.html

@pedropod wrote:

sorry here’s the correct link where architects are mentioned

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/frontpage/2009/0721/1224250998236.html

That’s better – Like the rest of the Government, She is so out of touch with the real world

You have to realize that the world they knew is tumbling down around them.

They have literally no paradigm to use in order to understand it.

It is all open now people.

Go out there and build yourselves a new country.

Thanks for the listenership and readership here at Archiseek all this time.

It has been very emotional for me.

Brian O’ Hanlon

I’m curious if anyone has done people counts from 8am to 9am outside the biggest practices in Dublin? Value was a % then they wanted fixed prices…
Competition on quality is the one thing I would have to agree with…

@missarchi wrote:

outside the biggest practices in Dublin? ..

What’s considered big these days?

Speech by Tánaiste to MacGill Summer School, 19 July 2009

In her speech, as reported in the Irish Times of 21 July, the Tánaiste warned a number of professions that the Government will not back down in its drive to increase competition and get better value as it tackles the economic crisis. Specifying “engineers, architects, the legal profession and others” she observed that there were sectors which had yet to feel “the chill winds of economic reality” and accused them of “economic conceit”. She also referred to Competition Authority reports on banking, utilities, and professional services such as engineers, architects, the legal profession, dentists and others.

The following is the text of a letter by the RIAI Director to the Irish Times on this extraordinary speech. The RIAI President will be making a more detailed response to the Minister. If Members would like to inform the Tánaiste of their own particular experiences of “the chill winds of economic reality”, her department’s email address is: info@entemp.ie (please copy the RIAI info@riai.ie in any correspondence).

Madam

The Tánaiste shows a worrying disconnect with reality when she referred to “architects” as being a sector which had yet to feel the “chill winds of economic reality”. As has been widely reported over 40% of architects have been made redundant. The RIAI has a significant number of members on Job Seekers Allowance or paying reduced charges because of financial hardship. Many architects in employment have experienced pay cuts and three day weeks. How chilly does it have to get to reach the Tánaiste’s attention?

For Public Sector projects the Tánaiste should be aware that architectural services are procured on a competitive basis in accordance with EU and Department of Finance procedures. She must also be aware that architects don’t have recommended, mandatory or minimum fee scales. On the Competition Authority Report, I would expect the Tánaiste or her Officials to have read the Report or at least the Executive Summary before making a public statement because the Report was very clear: “the Competition Authority has only a small number of concerns about how the architectural profession operates in Ireland. Unlike some other professions reviewed by the Competition Authority architects are not restricted by layers of unjustified or disproportionate restrictions or competition. Competition seems to be working well for consumers of architectural services and the economy as a whole”.

The Tánaiste might be better employed in examining the wide spread evasion by some Government Departments and State bodies generally of Prompt Payment Legislation and why her recent announcement of a fifteen days payment period by Government term was greeted by incredulity among architects.

If the Tánaiste’s address is indicative of the level of research and evidence based policy in her Department on matters of public record, as we face an unprecedented economic crisis, then it won’t just be architects who are made redundant but the entire Country.

Regards,

John Graby
Director
RIAI
8 Merrion Square
Dublin 2

You’re quick off the mark there Parka, was just gonna put that up…

Thank you RIAI. That was a decent response. Mary Coughlan is appearing more and more to be well out of her depth.

I have e mailed a protest to my 2 local FF TD’s ( cc’d to my local FG TD ) and all my local FF LA councilors ( again cc’d to my local FG + LAB councillors )

Just in case any of you wish to take the matter up with your local TD

http://www.oireachtas.ie/viewdoc.asp?DocID=12030&CatID=138

I understand now more than ever, that my services are going to be required to sort out matters at NAMA. It is not a job I ever wanted. I am a simple kind of guy, but I know I will somewhere stuck in the middle of things. I know how to bring both the architects and development community along together. Something that has never been done before in this country. But we will get there yet and blend these two cultures together in some sort of meaningful fashion. The Tánaiste is actually right in where she is coming from. There are a lot more efficiencies that can be rung out of the construction system, once architects get on board with the plan. It is my goal to introduce such a plan into this country for the first time ever. I know how to bring the architectural community on board, and I know how to do likewise with developers.

The problem with the Tánaiste’s statements, even though I agree with them fully, is that she jumped the gun. We need to get the sequence correct. It is time to hand out the slaps that are necessary to the mean old nasty developers, and more particularly to the Irish banks who had their fingers up the asses of developers. Instead of having their fingers in their own pie and providing the country with some level of decent banking services. It is time for banks to stop being property developers and allow the architects to have their drawings boards back. The banks stole the drawings boards away from them effectively during Charles J. Haughey’s tenure. Heck, during the Dublin docklands masterplanning stage, Sean O’Laoire and others were shafted. As soon as the masterplan was legalized, the developers (or more accurately the Irish banks) carved it up amongst themselves. Sean O’Laoire and company never got a look back in.

Something was instituted by Haughey back in the days when the country was in dire straits. A fast forwarding process to enable banks to become builders almost. Frank McDonald should not have called his book ‘The Builders’. He should have called it ‘The Bankers’ instead. The banks should never be allowed to wield as much authority as they did for the last twenty years. It was Bertie Ahern’s job to dismantle the plan that Haughey had put together in the time of an emergency. Bertie wasn’t even near the kind of man capable of standing up to the financial institutions. The financial institutions were formidable oponents at that time, beefed up like Arnold Schwarzenegger on over valued property portfolios. The financial institutions are not muscle bound anymore. Now is the time for the politicians to step in and deal with them. When that is done, the architects will then come on board. But not until then.

I read Deaglan De Breadun’s piece in the Irish Times today: Mistakes were made in Irish banking, says former AIB chairman. I think that Dermot Gleeson still believes he is Arnold Schwarzenegger. If Mary Coughlan, Brian Cowen and Brian Lenehan cannot bite the bullet now and deal with this, the largest of all structural inefficiencies in the system will still remain. The current Fianna Fail government will not last if they don’t tackle it. They are too used to thinking inside the old paradigm that Charles J. Haughey created in the 1980s. There has been no one who has done any serious political re-structuring since Haughey. The idea of telling people what to vote for in Europe is pure Haughey-ism. Cowen needs to stop doing it and give back the people their own voice.

One thing I am certain about, that unless Zoe developments and the rest are exposed for what they are, there is no going to be no cooperation from the architectural profession. In that, I would fully support them. The likes of Sean O’Laoire and company trying to make a practice work for years and years. While being shafted wholesale at every possible twist and turn. More transparency is required, more fair play and more opportunity for architects. The construction sector have to be brought around to working with architects and not against them. That is something that I want to see happen. There is too much money at stake nowadays. The future of the country depends on Ireland’s ability to create sustainable master plans and execute them. To do both efficiently and effectively. Not either or.

Brian O’ Hanlon

@parka wrote:

If Members would like to inform the Tánaiste of their own particular experiences of “the chill winds of economic reality”, her department’s email address is: info@entemp.ie (please copy the RIAI info@riai.ie in any correspondence).

I have done so!

Well done Ms. Coughlan. I have been waiting for some common sense in this matter for a long, long time. It is time to shake up the dusty old professions.

She said implementing these was “essential to remove competitiveness bottlenecks in the economy and to deliver better value and more innovation in these sectors”.

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/coalition-challenged-to-reduce-fees-for-professions-1835701.html

What people need to realize is that a mere few individuals in Ireland control most of the revenue coming into the professional basket. What trickles down to the lowly graduates working at the bottom, is only enough to feed them and keeping them fighting with one another for what scraps they have. It doesn’t buy for Ireland any development of advanced, modern team working experience and skills.The institutes attached to the various professions have known this for years. It is time a new central board was created to force the institutes into change. It is time that the fat cats of the Irish professions were knocked off their podiums.

I have listened to personal stories down through the years, of marriages and families that were broken, because promises were not kept by directors to their professional employees. It is no way for this country to operate. Anyone would be mad to enter the bond of marriage with an architect. You are condemning yourself to a life of misery and pain. We need to innovate our way out of that painful situation for good. Too many capital investment programs are jeopardised through lack of modernisation and sophistication in the consultants providing services.

What has been going on for years in the Irish professions has been disgraceful. A few vested interests have been allowed to bleed the system dry. Heck, old misus so-and-so, who hasn’t had a member of the family working in a firm for decades is still drawing down 50% of the earnings of a prominent Irish architectural consultant. What does that leave in terms of scraps for the guys at the bottom? We have got really shitty service from the professions up until now. It is time for a new paradigm. The great thing about this, is government are pulling strings for a change. The banks aren’t able to control every aspect of our lives.

http://designcomment.blogspot.com/2009/07/skirts-that-reveal-all.html

Turning on a Six Pence, was an expression used to describe the character of my boss at Zoe developments. We are a small country, that is to our advantage. We are smart, we are creative and educated. We also have access to talents pools from eastern Europe and elsewhere who wish to make a contribution. If we have the right plan, Ireland should be able to turn on a six pence and to beat this current downturn.

The problem since the days of Haughey has been, because we are small and submissive, we are easy to manipulate. It was almost possible for Ireland as a country to be controlled and run by a couple of bankers. In much the same way a few key individuals could operate any major British city. Because that is the scale of operations we are talking about in this country. Sure Ireland is more spread out than a major city in Britain. That is why we should look at a scheme like Conor Skehan’s idea of an eastern corridor of development. We need those guys in the ‘Urban Forum’ to lead the way.

Brian O’ Hanlon

Link:

http://designcomment.blogspot.com/2009/07/turning-on-six-pence.html

[quote=”garethace

What has been going on for years in the Irish professions has been disgraceful. A few vested interests have been allowed to bleed the system dry. Heck, old misus so-and-so, who hasn’t had a member of the family working in a firm for decades is still drawing down 50% of the earnings of a prominent Irish architectural consultant. What does that leave in terms of scraps for the guys at the bottom? We have got really shitty service from the professions up until now. It is time for a new paradigm. The great thing about this, is government are pulling strings for a change. The banks aren’t able to control every aspect of our lives.
[/QUOTE”]

lower fees = tighter margins = job losses = less people working fewer hours on each project = watered down end product. How do you see that improving a “shitty service”?

Some replies to our dear tanaiste’s most recent faux pas

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/letters/2009/0723/1224251144087.html

lower fees = tighter margins = job losses = less people working fewer hours on each project = watered down end product. How do you see that improving a “shitty service”?

Zoe developments managed to give everyone a fair salary, a salary which made sense for a country and property market such as Ireland. They did pay reviews each year. The never kept employees in at weekends or working until the small hours. We innovated new ways to cooperate with industry and other disciplines and professionals. We were ‘smart’ about budgets and value for money in all kinds of ways, the average architectural practice wouldn’t understand. We didn’t receive rubber medals from the RIAI. Altogether employees were satisfied, happy and improved themselves and their skill levels.

They were challenged rather than fooled and ripped off. Employees were exposed to a greater spectrum of trades, skills and specialities than you would in an architectural consultants. In the end, the bank(s), both Irish and from abroad had such a strangehold over our operations the dream died. No architects wanted to work at Zoe developments. Those who did were poached on purpose out from underneath Zoe architectural director’s nose, so that Liam Carroll would be forced to pay €100,000.00 a week to TOT. The RIAI was in on that too, at the highest level. The current president of the RIAI demanded to know what I was doing working for that guy, the Zoe architectural director? I told the RIAI president that I wasn’t part of his institute and to stick his rules up his arse.

The kind of ripping off that the RIAI took part in wasn’t ripping off in money terms alone. The RIAI is the institute responsible for improving and developing the profession in this country. Instead they produce a magazine that doesn’t contain one single shred of client feedback – only the designer’s view on everything. That is what I mean by a shitty service. The ripping off the RIAI partook in, was to steal away opportunity for improvement and development, through alternative structures and work processes from the young Irish architect. The RIAI effectively has bankrupt the profession of it’s rightful opportunity to learn and develop for the last 25 years or more.

A worrisome trend developed towards the end of the Celtic Tiger where many senior architects in firms left to and set up their own small boutique firm. What this meant is they were restricted in the size and sophistication of projects they could undertake. It was a sign that the traditional architectural consultant formula had reached the outer limits of what it was capable of doing. I was working for the Irish banks and Liam Carroll in Parnell Street spend millions per week on concrete and construction. But I was the all time record, flunk student in Bolton Street architectural college. My old school mates who were ten times better than me, were building peoples’ extensions! That is what I mean by a shitty service. I cherish every million of Zoe’s money that I spent on construction. That an RIAI member didn’t get to screw around with.

There was always a silent partner in the equation of the large Irish practices. The RIAI know that. The silent partner diverted a bulk of the fees before it even got to director level. Whatever got past director level is what you saw on your pay slip at the end of the month. Be aware of that. In order to pay an average €40,000.00 salary to an employee, a principle director in an architectural consultancy had to find about half a billion euros worth of construction projects, every year in order to keep everyone employed.

Where was the concept of ‘sustainable’ development going to come into that? I have all the respect in the world for Paul Keogh, Tony Reddy, Sean O’Laoire, Jim Pike and so forth. They are consumate professionals and men with life times worth of skill, knowledge and experience. But they had to keep the € millions and € billions in construction going, in order to keep themselves going. For them to stand back now and say things weren’t ‘sustainable’ is more than a bit rich. They weren’t exactly applying the brakes or publishing their accounts and exposing the fact that their business model was un-sustainable too. Neither did the RIAI. Give me a break.

In the end, the principles weren’t able to lend any of their skill or experience to the process. There only focus was on where do we get the next million in fees from. (Half of that going to pay old misus so-and-so, whose grandson started the practice in 1940 something) That is what I mean by a shitty service quite frankly. That and the fact that the director of the same firm who promised his family a good holiday had to tell them ‘tough luck’ because his boss screwed him over . . . again. End of marriage, etc, etc. Drink problems, . . . leakage of valuable talent from the profession. It was the same old cycle and it was rotten.

Brian O’ Hanlon

Link:

http://designcomment.blogspot.com/2009/07/apathy-at-riai.html

@garethace wrote:

Zoe developments managed to give everyone a fair salary, a salary which made sense for a country and property market such as Ireland. They did pay reviews each year. The never kept employees in at weekends or working until the small hours. We innovated new ways to cooperate with industry and other disciplines and professionals. We were ‘smart’ about budgets and value for money in all kinds of ways, the average architectural practice wouldn’t understand. We didn’t receive rubber medals from the RIAI. Altogether employees were satisfied, happy and improved themselves and their skill levels.

They were challenged rather than fooled and ripped off. Employees were exposed to a greater spectrum of trades, skills and specialities than you would in an architectural consultants. In the end, the bank(s), both Irish and from abroad had such a strangehold over our operations the dream died. No architects wanted to work at Zoe developments. Those who did were poached on purpose out from underneath Zoe architectural director’s nose, so that Liam Carroll would be forced to pay €100,000.00 a week to TOT. The RIAI was in on that too, at the highest level. The current president of the RIAI demanded to know what I was doing working for that guy, the Zoe architectural director? I told the RIAI president that I wasn’t part of his institute and to stick his rules up his arse.

The kind of ripping off that the RIAI took part in wasn’t ripping off in money terms alone. The RIAI is the institute responsible for improving and developing the profession in this country. Instead they produce a magazine that doesn’t contain one single shred of client feedback – only the designer’s view on everything. That is what I mean by a shitty service. The ripping off the RIAI partook in, was to steal away opportunity for improvement and development, through alternative structures and work processes from the young Irish architect. The RIAI effectively has bankrupt the profession of it’s rightful opportunity to learn and develop for the last 25 years or more.

A worrisome trend developed towards the end of the Celtic Tiger where many senior architects in firms left to and set up their own small boutique firm. What this meant is they were restricted in the size and sophistication of projects they could undertake. It was a sign that the traditional architectural consultant formula had reached the outer limits of what it was capable of doing. I was working for the Irish banks and Liam Carroll in Parnell Street spend millions per week on concrete and construction. But I was the all time record, flunk student in Bolton Street architectural college. My old school mates who were ten times better than me, were building peoples’ extensions! That is what I mean by a shitty service. I cherish every million of Zoe’s money that I spent on construction. That an RIAI member didn’t get to screw around with.

There was always a silent partner in the equation of the large Irish practices. The RIAI know that. The silent partner diverted a bulk of the fees before it even got to director level. Whatever got past director level is what you saw on your pay slip at the end of the month. Be aware of that. In order to pay an average €40,000.00 salary to an employee, a principle director in an architectural consultancy had to find about half a billion euros worth of construction projects, every year in order to keep everyone employed.

Where was the concept of ‘sustainable’ development going to come into that? I have all the respect in the world for Paul Keogh, Tony Reddy, Sean O’Laoire, Jim Pike and so forth. They are consumate professionals and men with life times worth of skill, knowledge and experience. But they had to keep the € millions and € billions in construction going, in order to keep themselves going. For them to stand back now and say things weren’t ‘sustainable’ is more than a bit rich. They weren’t exactly applying the brakes or publishing their accounts and exposing the fact that their business model was un-sustainable too. Neither did the RIAI. Give me a break.

In the end, the principles weren’t able to lend any of their skill or experience to the process. There only focus was on where do we get the next million in fees from. (Half of that going to pay old misus so-and-so, whose grandson started the practice in 1940 something) That is what I mean by a shitty service quite frankly. That and the fact that the director of the same firm who promised his family a good holiday had to tell them ‘tough luck’ because his boss screwed him over . . . again. End of marriage, etc, etc. Drink problems, . . . leakage of valuable talent from the profession. It was the same old cycle and it was rotten.

Brian O’ Hanlon

Link:

http://designcomment.blogspot.com/2009/07/apathy-at-riai.html

You write as if fine upstanding people like Liam O’Carroll treated architects fairly over the years. You write as if you think that architect’s fees weren’t ripped to shreds by companies like Zoe. The problem that muppets like Coghlan don’t understand is that, despite what bitter people like you think, architects fees are already as low as they realistically go. On top of that they have to chase companies like Zoe for months in order to get those fees

I don’t care for the RIAI and I don’t believe they serve architects at all but please don’t give us this crap about Zoe being a poor downtrodden human resource treated cruelly by the banks. If you want to write a treatise (which you do) about profiteering and sharp practice heal thyself first

Don’t think that everybody in the architectural profession suddenly just opened their eyes and went “really? my boss earns more than me??? maybe that explains the big car outside. my god I’ve been so blind!!” I must run out and buy a hair shirt.

@pedropod wrote:

Some replies to our dear tanaiste’s most recent faux pas

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/letters/2009/0723/1224251144087.html

I worked for over a year with Finola Thompson at Thompsons Architects in Ballinacurra, Limerick. I really enjoyed my time there. The trouble is, I am a jumpy kind of guy. I want to see more out of life. I want to be exposed to the big outer world. I left Thompsons to go and work on an assembly line of 3,000 workers at Dell in Limerick. Best move I ever made, it opened my eyes to much greater possibilities. I have a lot of respect for the designers at Thompsons. I learned an lot there. Thompsons and similar old houses of the Irish architectural scene are a necessary part of the eco-system for fostering skills. I don’t think I would ever have made it as far as I did, without the opportunity to work for Thompsons. Keep up the spirits guys, however you do it. However, Thompsons is also a good example of the failure to innovate in the Irish architectural scene. Finola herself gave me every opportunity to innovate within the environment she and fellow directors provided me at Thompsons. I even managed to break her computer server in summer of 2001 as I remember correctly. Don’t give me a screwdriver whatever you do!

Thompsons is a bit like Zoe developments in ways. Old man Thompson, David’s father was an engineer not an architect. So in the old days at Thompsons there was that clever inter-disciplinary thing going on. Thompsons were also friends with McInery home construction company who hailed from County Clare I believe. Liam Carroll was in the process of acquiring McInery stock in 2008. I was hoping that Thompsons path and mine, might have crossed again. I think what happened when David Thompson took over in his father’s practice sometime in the 1970s was it reverted back to the usual RIAI model. David was a fully trained and qualified architect unlike his father. David was a sound man and followed the best guidance he received from the RIAI. That is where I feel Thompsons lost some of that original innovation spirit. The RIAI insisted that it was drained out of that company, like they insisted the same with my own company, Zoe developments.

I keep thinking about what John Shine, chief executive at ESB networks said about his business. A decade ago, a decision was made to split up the company. Which enabled capital to be invested in the network. A massive multi billion euro investment project was under taken to make the network ‘smarter’. In fact, John Shine admits it was too large an undertaking, and in future would have to be approached in smaller stages. A competitive tendering process was used as part of the capital investment program. John Shine compared his situation in ESB networks with that in Telecom, where a model wasn’t implemented that would allow investment in communications infrastructure to take place for the entire country. What we have in return is an out of date communications network according to any authority on the subject. (Think of all the Eircom city centre properties which could have been off loaded during the Celtic Tiger to pay for communications infrastructure upgrades)

We are looking at a similar juncture with regards to the Irish professions. New ideas simply have to be executed, which take on board the old 60 year old players such as Thompsons. But graft that DNA onto something that will carry Ireland forward into the future. I hope we can be successful there. I would like to be a part of that new process, either through involvement at NAMA or whatever else. Thanks for memories Finola, and sorry about the computer server!

Brian O’ Hanlon

You write as if fine upstanding people like Liam O’Carroll treated architects fairly over the years. You write as if you think that architect’s fees weren’t ripped to shreds by companies like Zoe. The problem that muppets like Coghlan don’t understand is that, despite what bitter people like you think, architects fees are already as low as they realistically go. On top of that they have to chase companies like Zoe for months in order to get those fees.

All absolutely true, and I am ashamed of that now myself. Liam paid about €1,000 an apartment unit. But as I said in another post, Liam did that to everyone. Sub-contractors received €5,000.00 profit on completion of 50 apartments. My only closure on all of this, is that Liam was a bank employee all along, and what the Irish country received were terms drawn up by bankers, removed from the scene and without any knowlegde of what was going on in the country. I blame Dermot Gleeson etc for a lot. I blame Bertie for not constructing a new paradigm. I blame the people for voting him in for a decade. But where does it leave us?

You are absolutely correct. What Liam Carroll did to architects was a scandal. No one would like to see a sustainable business model for architecture than myself. I have been struggling while providing itinerant architectural services to whoever will pay for the last 10 years. But all because I didn’t want to go with the flow. I didn’t want to be submissive and take it on the chin, like the 12-20 other hard working employees at Thompsons in Ballincurra. I wanted to take the fight to the enemy, and that is what I intend to do. Whoever that enemy might turn out to be. The main point, is that we get excellence for architectural design firmly established in Ireland and develop that market for skills. Much like Kilkenny design in Nassau Street did so many years ago.

Thanks for the response.

Brian O’ Hanlon

@garethace wrote:

Zoe developments managed to give everyone a fair salary, a salary which made sense for a country and property market such as Ireland. They did pay reviews each year. The never kept employees in at weekends or working until the small hours. We innovated new ways to cooperate with industry and other disciplines and professionals. We were ‘smart’ about budgets and value for money in all kinds of ways, the average architectural practice wouldn’t understand. We didn’t receive rubber medals from the RIAI. Altogether employees were satisfied, happy and improved themselves and their skill levels.

They were challenged rather than fooled and ripped off. Employees were exposed to a greater spectrum of trades, skills and specialities than you would in an architectural consultants. In the end, the bank(s), both Irish and from abroad had such a strangehold over our operations the dream died. No architects wanted to work at Zoe developments. Those who did were poached on purpose out from underneath Zoe architectural director’s nose, so that Liam Carroll would be forced to pay €100,000.00 a week to TOT. The RIAI was in on that too, at the highest level. The current president of the RIAI demanded to know what I was doing working for that guy, the Zoe architectural director? I told the RIAI president that I wasn’t part of his institute and to stick his rules up his arse.

The kind of ripping off that the RIAI took part in wasn’t ripping off in money terms alone. The RIAI is the institute responsible for improving and developing the profession in this country. Instead they produce a magazine that doesn’t contain one single shred of client feedback – only the designer’s view on everything. That is what I mean by a shitty service. The ripping off the RIAI partook in, was to steal away opportunity for improvement and development, through alternative structures and work processes from the young Irish architect. The RIAI effectively has bankrupt the profession of it’s rightful opportunity to learn and develop for the last 25 years or more.

A worrisome trend developed towards the end of the Celtic Tiger where many senior architects in firms left to and set up their own small boutique firm. What this meant is they were restricted in the size and sophistication of projects they could undertake. It was a sign that the traditional architectural consultant formula had reached the outer limits of what it was capable of doing. I was working for the Irish banks and Liam Carroll in Parnell Street spend millions per week on concrete and construction. But I was the all time record, flunk student in Bolton Street architectural college. My old school mates who were ten times better than me, were building peoples’ extensions! That is what I mean by a shitty service. I cherish every million of Zoe’s money that I spent on construction. That an RIAI member didn’t get to screw around with.

There was always a silent partner in the equation of the large Irish practices. The RIAI know that. The silent partner diverted a bulk of the fees before it even got to director level. Whatever got past director level is what you saw on your pay slip at the end of the month. Be aware of that. In order to pay an average €40,000.00 salary to an employee, a principle director in an architectural consultancy had to find about half a billion euros worth of construction projects, every year in order to keep everyone employed.

Where was the concept of ‘sustainable’ development going to come into that? I have all the respect in the world for Paul Keogh, Tony Reddy, Sean O’Laoire, Jim Pike and so forth. They are consumate professionals and men with life times worth of skill, knowledge and experience. But they had to keep the € millions and € billions in construction going, in order to keep themselves going. For them to stand back now and say things weren’t ‘sustainable’ is more than a bit rich. They weren’t exactly applying the brakes or publishing their accounts and exposing the fact that their business model was un-sustainable too. Neither did the RIAI. Give me a break.

In the end, the principles weren’t able to lend any of their skill or experience to the process. There only focus was on where do we get the next million in fees from. (Half of that going to pay old misus so-and-so, whose grandson started the practice in 1940 something) That is what I mean by a shitty service quite frankly. That and the fact that the director of the same firm who promised his family a good holiday had to tell them ‘tough luck’ because his boss screwed him over . . . again. End of marriage, etc, etc. Drink problems, . . . leakage of valuable talent from the profession. It was the same old cycle and it was rotten.

Brian O’ Hanlon

I can’t understand why you hold Zoe up as a paragon of business virtue. I think the events of the last couple of weeks testify strongly to the contrary.

The buildings (can’t really call it architecture) produced by most developers were pretty abysmal and perhaps the only reason they could afford the good salaries you’re speaking of was due to the peddling of tiny, substandard units to desperate buyers who paid well over the odds for cramped, poorly built and poorly designed shoeboxes, all justified by inflated land prices, propped up by rampant speculation and hoarding.

On one hand you complain about the rip offs involved in architects fees and then also complain that the same architects didn’t lend any of their skill or experience to the creation of a sustainable environment. We can’t do this for free. If you value design you have to be willing to pay for it. Our fees are massively competitive, as borne out by the competition authority report on professional fees and all the way through the boom years design team fees formed a tiny percentage of the massive amounts of money being made off the back of their designs.

I think Mary Coughlan and your own comments on architects fee levels are seriously misdirected.

I can’t understand why you hold Zoe up as a paragon of business virtue. I think the events of the last couple of weeks testify strongly to the contrary.

I know Reddy, it sounds dodgy in the extreme. But I left the architectural world to work in project management and got involved in capital investment programs for building works at companies like Keelings, Glanbia, Green Isle foods and so forth. My last project in that experience, Glanbia Edenderry burned to the ground. So you can understand why those clients thought of buildings as an investment in construction on a piece of land. When I went to Zoe developments I hit the ground running, because I was already used to the multi-disciplinary approach employed to build industrial projects.

I believe that architects need to work outside of their usual circle. You can only get better by playing a better oponent. I can tell you this much, if I hadn’t be a flunk out student at Bolton Street, I would never have touched a job in project management or at Zoe developments. It was out of having no choice I did so. I remember working in both situations, that I learned to understand them. I began to like what I was learning. It wasn’t a reduction in my awareness of architecture and design but an expansion of it. Like I say, you can only get better by playing a better opponent. In an architectural consultancy, you are limited in the chess partners you can play.

Don’t worry Reddy, we will work it out.

We are a small, clever and agile nation. We need to start fighting back like that. We have the ability to turn on a six pence.

http://designcomment.blogspot.com/2009/07/turning-on-six-pence.html

Brian O’ Hanlon

Added paragraph on ESB Networks.

I keep thinking about what John Shine, chief executive at ESB networks said about his business. A decade ago, a decision was made to split up the company. Which enabled capital to be invested in the network. A massive multi billion euro investment project was under taken to make the network ‘smarter’. In fact, John Shine admits it was too large an undertaking, and in future would have to be approached in smaller stages. A competitive tendering process was used as part of the capital investment program. John Shine compared his situation in ESB networks with that in Telecom, where a model wasn’t implemented that would allow investment in communications infrastructure to take place for the entire country. What we have in return is an out of date communications network according to any authority on the subject. (Think of all the Eircom city centre properties which could have been off loaded during the Celtic Tiger to pay for communications infrastructure upgrades)

We are looking at a similar juncture with regards to the Irish professions. New ideas simply have to be executed, which take on board the old 60 year old players such as Thompsons. But graft that DNA onto something that will carry Ireland forward into the future. I hope we can be successful there. I would like to be a part of that new process, either through involvement at NAMA or whatever else.

Our fees are massively competitive, as borne out by the competition authority report on professional fees and all the way through the boom years design team fees formed a tiny percentage of the massive amounts of money being made off the back of their designs.

That is the trouble too, Liam and others screwed you down way too much. You have to remember that Liam or many of his directors did not have architectural training. I would have worked tirelessly inside of Zoe developments to ensure a better deal on behalf of architecture. The question is, when the larger portions start to flow your way, what are you going to do with it?

Reddy, you need to study my essays published here about the really innovative and good things that happened inside Zoe developments. How their collaborating system between architects and engineers worked in particular. To that end, you really need to chase down Zoe’s past architectural director Michael Tweed and fully pick his brains. He is the guy with the ultimate answers, not me.

Michael holds the key to the way forward in this country for architects. Michael is the only world class architect we have. Sean O’Laoire made a grievous mistake in under estimating him. To hell with it, I would make Michael Tweed the next RIAI president and really see some sparks begin to fly! Your institute has his address and phone number. Michael is Norman Foster standard, I can guarantee you.

Brian O’ Hanlon

@garethace wrote:

That is the trouble too, Liam and others screwed you down way too much. You have to remember that Liam or many of his directors did not have architectural training. I would have worked tirelessly inside of Zoe developments to ensure a better deal on behalf of architecture. The question is, when the larger portions start to flow your way, what are you going to do with it?

Reddy, you need to study my essays published here about the really innovative and good things that happened inside Zoe developments. How their collaborating system between architects and engineers worked in particular. To that end, you really need to chase down Zoe’s past architectural director Michael Tweed and fully pick his brains. He is the guy with the ultimate answers, not me.

Michael holds the key to the way forward in this country for architects. Michael is the only world class architect we have. Sean O’Laoire made a grievous mistake in under estimating him. To hell with it, I would make Michael Tweed the next RIAI president and really see some sparks begin to fly! Your institute has his address and phone number. Michael is Norman Foster standard, I can guarantee you.

Brian O’ Hanlon

Well to your first question, more fees could perhaps mean more time and thought could be devoted to design and the poor wages, horrible hours and incessant stress you talked about earlier would be reduced.

Zoe may well have been very innovative but the standard of development that they produced was in no way outstanding or innovative. Personally I’d look to someone like Urban Splash for that kind of example.

I’ll be perfectly honest – I’ve never heard of Michael Tweed and I’m sure he’s an excellent project manager but to compare him to Foster is a huge huge exaggeration.

Which are the 7 companies that have gone into liquidation since I’m living on the moon?
enjoying spacewalking

have we got a before and after head count?
I was still shocked companies where still employing people in 2008…
first out best dressed 🙂

Administrator,

I lodge a request for the removal of Garethace from the site post-haste.

Citing reasons: his unbelievable irrelevance and diffuse ramblings.

Please make only one thread that he is allowed to access where he can reply to his own long-winded non-sense with ever increasing levels of extraneous senselessness

@reddy wrote:

Well to your first question, more fees could perhaps mean more time and thought could be devoted to design and the poor wages, horrible hours and incessant stress you talked about earlier would be reduced.

Zoe may well have been very innovative but the standard of development that they produced was in no way outstanding or innovative. Personally I’d look to someone like Urban Splash for that kind of example.

I’ll be perfectly honest – I’ve never heard of Michael Tweed and I’m sure he’s an excellent project manager but to compare him to Foster is a huge huge exaggeration.

Thanks for taking the time to respond Reddy. To be honest with you, I am busy at the moment on a lot of other stuff. The last thing I have time to do at the moment is worry about the RIAI’s problems. But I understand that from the point of view of my future and many others, the RIAI needs to be forced into a discussion. That is why I formally submit a request to the president of the RIAI and other members for further discussion in person.

The point you make about poor wages and horrible hours is a good point. For sure, the RIAI needs to make itself into a stronger lobby to fight for better working conditions. From my own experience, I know that they border on the edge of health and safety standards. I have the repetitive strain injury to prove it. But there are the same problems and worse in the medical field for young doctors. It isn’t fair. All of those young kids, architects and doctors are the brightest and the best. They cannot contribute nearly as much as they could, because they are worked to skin and bone. That is why I went into project management, so I could do a lot more on their behalf. To understand at what stage in the pipeline the real problems are. Sometimes it is counter intuitive, the answers aren’t as obvious as you think.

Some professionals have had serious health problems, both mental and physical. I know that because I have helped young members of both medical and architectural professions through their recovery. The mental health recovery process is very difficult and often you feel powerless to do anything to help. This is another reason why a discussion has to happen, with both sides fully present at the table in relation to professions, architects, doctors, everyone. The discussion should not happen in the dimension of money alone.

That is the real problem with the current discussion about Mary Coughlan’s statement. There is much more to it than that. I was too chicken to go ahead with a career in architecture in a traditional sense. I was aware that I wouldn’t last physically or mentally, as so many have to do. I applaud you all. It took ten years for me to finally throw in the towel with my studies at Bolton Street. So I know all about it. I may seem to many like an unlikely candidate. But I want to be part of the solution for Ireland. I wouldn’t be wasting my time here if that wasn’t the case.

http://designcomment.blogspot.com/2009/07/mary-coughlans-challenge.html

The real reason we do need Michael Tweed sitting at the table today, is that Michael has lived through the exact same stress in numerous consultancy practices in Dublin you correctly described. But he has implemented a different model – albeit for a nasty developer – but it works, I have seen it in operation. His views on the matter certainly deserve to be listened to by the RIAI if nothing else. He is a man with a story to tell. That is why I suggest the RIAI do not waste anymore time in gaining the benefits of his experience at Zoe developments. He is a nice guy Michael Tweed. Much less of a persistent asshole like me.

Brian O’ Hanlon

I’ll be perfectly honest – I’ve never heard of Michael Tweed and I’m sure he’s an excellent project manager but to compare him to Foster is a huge huge exaggeration.

I spent around €40 million for Zoe in construction in 2007/08. The number at Murray O’Laoire, the practice run by the RIAI president was around €200 million and they had dozens working for them. Michael Tweed worked at Zoe for five times longer than I did. That will give you some idea. Michael really is the big cheese. His opinions deserve to be listened to at least.

Respectfully,

Brian O’ Hanlon

@sinnerboy wrote:

I have e mailed a protest to my 2 local FF TD’s ( cc’d to my local FG TD ) and all my local FF LA councilors ( again cc’d to my local FG + LAB councillors )

Just in case any of you wish to take the matter up with your local TD

http://www.oireachtas.ie/viewdoc.asp?DocID=12030&CatID=138

2 replies – 1 from an FF TD , 1 from an FF councilor

Both expressed sympathetic platitude and tried to assure me that FF were doing all in power to make things right . The councillor said he personally stopped listening to Swarey long ago

Please – can more of us express our reaction to these people ?

@garethace wrote:

Thanks for taking the time to respond Reddy. To be honest with you, I am busy at the moment on a lot of other stuff. The last thing I have time to do at the moment is worry about the RIAI’s problems. But I understand that from the point of view of my future and many others, the RIAI needs to be forced into a discussion. That is why I formally submit a request to the president of the RIAI and other members for further discussion in person.

The point you make about poor wages and horrible hours is a good point. For sure, the RIAI needs to make itself into a stronger lobby to fight for better working conditions. From my own experience, I know that they border on the edge of health and safety standards. I have the repetitive strain injury to prove it. But there are the same problems and worse in the medical field for young doctors. It isn’t fair. All of those young kids, architects and doctors are the brightest and the best. They cannot contribute nearly as much as they could, because they are worked to skin and bone. That is why I went into project management, so I could do a lot more on their behalf. To understand at what stage in the pipeline the real problems are. Sometimes it is counter intuitive, the answers aren’t as obvious as you think.

Some professionals have had serious health problems, both mental and physical. I know that because I have helped young members of both medical and architectural professions through their recovery. The mental health recovery process is very difficult and often you feel powerless to do anything to help. This is another reason why a discussion has to happen, with both sides fully present at the table in relation to professions, architects, doctors, everyone. The discussion should not happen in the dimension of money alone.

That is the real problem with the current discussion about Mary Coughlan’s statement. There is much more to it than that. I was too chicken to go ahead with a career in architecture in a traditional sense. I was aware that I wouldn’t last physically or mentally, as so many have to do. I applaud you all. It took ten years for me to finally throw in the towel with my studies at Bolton Street. So I know all about it. I may seem to many like an unlikely candidate. But I want to be part of the solution for Ireland. I wouldn’t be wasting my time here if that wasn’t the case.

http://designcomment.blogspot.com/2009/07/mary-coughlans-challenge.html

The real reason we do need Michael Tweed sitting at the table today, is that Michael has lived through the exact same stress in numerous consultancy practices in Dublin you correctly described. But he has implemented a different model – albeit for a nasty developer – but it works, I have seen it in operation. His views on the matter certainly deserve to be listened to by the RIAI if nothing else. He is a man with a story to tell. That is why I suggest the RIAI do not waste anymore time in gaining the benefits of his experience at Zoe developments. He is a nice guy Michael Tweed. Much less of a persistent asshole like me.

Brian O’ Hanlon

It’s interesting that you have a pseudonym and a real name because your delusions of grandeur mixed with the meek surrender to an opposing view definitely speak volumes. You should write less and get more fresh air. I’m sure your special friend in Zoe was a talented man in helping to shape the shoe box king’s aura if not the architectural portfolio of Zoe but I fear that your particular verbose schizophrenia is not really what this country needs at present.

@wearnicehats wrote:

It’s interesting that you have a pseudonym and a real name because your delusions of grandeur mixed with the meek surrender to an opposing view definitely speak volumes. You should write less and get more fresh air. I’m sure your special friend in Zoe was a talented man in helping to shape the shoe box king’s aura if not the architectural portfolio of Zoe but I fear that your particular verbose schizophrenia is not really what this country needs at present.

We’ll see, we’ll see.

I might be a complete idiot selling crazy on a message board. No arguing that I suppose now. But Irish Architecture does still await it’s Amory Lovins to show it the way forward. Whatever you think about me, you should investigate or get involved with Feasta.org. I know they have a couple of architects working already with them, to devise interesting new schemes. I was hoping that Feasta would participate somehow at UCD What Now? But they probably have their plate full already. I wrote something else to express my ideas for Irish architecture here:

http://designcomment.blogspot.com/2009/07/value-for-money.html

Brian O’ Hanlon

Link:

http://designcomment.blogspot.com/2009/07/mccarthy-report.html

I wanted to quickly follow up with something about the McCarthy Report. What it might mean for the architect. It expands upon the point I was making in the earllier post, Value for Money.

http://designcomment.blogspot.com/2009/07/value-for-money.html

Brian O’ Hanlon

I took a very good look at Frank Duffy’s UK consultancy DEGW around last December and January. I was very interested in the package that Frank was offering to his client. The biggest client that Frank works with is the UK government, in looking at ways to better utilise the building stock to house the civil service. What are we currently looking to do in Ireland? The McCarthy report. The Royal Institute of Architects of Ireland needs to wake up fast. Or else the Irish state will be forced to go to the UK to find the level of skills in requires following the McCarthy report.

Architects could play a real part in that process if they only looked beyond their existing business model. But it requires architects to sell a package which goes beyond mere fancy colours, aesthetic use of glass and clean, crisp, modern lines. Those bits are certainly a help, but the architectural profession cannot seem to go beyond that. Architects need to get involved in business management and organisation theory. That is what the Irish state requires from architect as we go through the painful re-structuring of the civil service.

Building stock and running costs are going to have to be reviewed. Sketch designs are going to be needed. Please, look beyond your egos’ and those clean, crisp modern lines. Re-modelling and re-use considered in a thoughtful way that makes the best use of the Irish state’s money. Architects and engineers should be paid for finding ways to spend less money. Not the opposite.

This is what I hope Taoiseach Brian Cowen means by the expression, the Smart Economy. The quantity surveyors have known this for the last ten years. They watched helplessly as thousands of houses were built in the wrong place. They watched helplessly as factory units were built on IDA land that served no useful purpose. Builders were paid and professionals were paid to sign off.

The Irish state needs to sell this re-structuring process to its civil service as a positive step forward in a new direction for everyone. Architects could certainly play an important role in that. If only they began to explore outside of their own narrow field. In order for that to happen it requires the business model for architecture to fundamentally change. It seems like a real pity to me. Architects I know are the most intelligent and nice people. But they think that clients pay them for clean, crisp, lines. When in fact that is what people pay their tailor for.

That is why I reference the example of hospital projects. When I worked for clients such as Glanbia it was all about process flows, how things move throughout the food production plant. Indeed, many of the project options we drew up for clients never were built. We were still paid however, because we were able to put together a package which incorporated the ‘food safe’ food flows with some preliminary analysis for what different options would cost. We would include some cross disciplinary structural and architectural design and so forth.

The industrial clients had a good attitude, the more you spent at design stage the less you spent at build stage. But the engineering and project management consultancy I worked for had a fresh attitude about design too. I recently heard an architect from Norman Foster’s office describe project managers as ‘the enemy’. I suggest to that architect who was fortunate enough to pick up a lecturing position at Trinity college, that he should go and work for a project manager like I did and get out of his cocoon.

What I see happening in multi million euro hospital extension projects is the things is rushed forward and built by the architect. Only then is the food flow and process fitted into that by the hospital management and the thing doesn’t work. Who’s fault is that? Remember the architect had to build something in order make a salary and pay his or her staff. I humbly suggest that the health service, like the Irish developers would be financially better off if it didn’t build half of what it built. At least not until they know what they are doing.

The Irish Architect magazine certainly isn’t helping to highlight the problem of millions leaking out of the State’s treasury because of botched up building projects. It tries to distract our attention to all of those nice clean, crisp and modern lines. The Irish Architect magazine needs to stop doing that now. Or you will permanently bankrupt the profession of both good ideas and jobs.

The architect’s relationship with construction is one that went sour in this country a long, long time ago. From what I have seen of what architects describe as a construction document these days, the contractor is no longer gaining a useful service from his architect. The money simply isn’t in the business anymore for the architect to know enough about construction. You see the examples of that all over when you look at public projects designed and built by architects. This requires further examination.

i think she way out of line and wrong but wasn’t she referring to fees rather the jobs

Are you suggesting a engineer was behind the new contracts from a few years ago?
The T man seemed to change that anyway or did he?

Anyway Ireland’s big test is in the next few years…
I doubt much will happen however…

Having spent 1985 – 1995 in economic exile I am dismayed that this thread has taken such a discursive course . There appears to be no desire to correct the Tanaiste and influence govt. policy towards us .

Looks like another decade in London beckons

@sinnerboy wrote:

Having spent 1985 – 1995 in economic exile I am dismayed that this thread has taken such a discursive course . There appears to be no desire to correct the Tanaiste and influence govt. policy towards us .

Looks like another decade in London beckons

if you ignore the ramblings of garethace and the direct responses to his posts, and the indecipherable meanderings of Missarchi, I think you’ll find this thread united in damning the stupid woman. It has also directed people to the proper channels for airing a grievance, which many have done – again, if you follow the links and also the Irish Times letter pages over the last three days. No-one is taking this lying down. You can stay in London if you like but I was there last week and as far as I can tell it’s very much a case of same shite, different arse.

@wearnicehats wrote:

if you ignore the ramblings of garethace and the direct responses to his posts, and the indecipherable meanderings of Missarchi, I think you’ll find this thread united in damning the stupid woman. It has also directed people to the proper channels for airing a grievance, which many have done – again, if you follow the links and also the Irish Times letter pages over the last three days. No-one is taking this lying down. You can stay in London if you like but I was there last week and as far as I can tell it’s very much a case of same shite, different arse.

That’s more like it . Wont see you at the Ryan Air check in desk at Stanstead hats 🙂

@wearnicehats wrote:

if you ignore the ramblings of garethace and the direct responses to his posts, and the indecipherable meanderings of Missarchi, I think you’ll find this thread united in damning the stupid woman. It has also directed people to the proper channels for airing a grievance, which many have done – again, if you follow the links and also the Irish Times letter pages over the last three days. No-one is taking this lying down. You can stay in London if you like but I was there last week and as far as I can tell it’s very much a case of same shite, different arse.

Damning the stupid woman is one thing. I sure she is not alone in the ‘stupid’ category as far as stupid politicians generally go in Ireland. But lets turn our attention to people who aren’t stupid. For instance, the professionals. We are waiting for the architects and professionals to draw up some proposals. Where are those proposals? Is the proposal to simply wait around for another ‘boom’ so that we can create all of the same old problems as we did in the past.

It is high time that Liam Carroll, every other developer and the professionals really did show they are the smartest guys in the room. A good first step by the RIAI president would be to invite me to come and have discussion with him in person. You need to sort out your own shop in the professions first and deal with your own problems. The Irish government and the Tanaiste have more things to do than cleaning up your toxic waste every time it threatens to boil over and bring down the whole system. To use you own phrase, heal thyself first.

By the way, where is your own blog? Where have you come clean, stood out from the crowd and proclaimed: ‘I am’. (Thanks Sylvester Stallone/Rocky Balboa for the use of that phrase) I will be waiting to read some of your intelligent proposals from the intelligent building professionals that you are. Stop damning stupid women and do something instead. If you don’t set a good example as the smart part of the population, by coming up with some smart suggestions, how do you think the rest of the stupid part of the population (including myself) is going to cope?

In the meantime I have tried to come up with some of my own smart suggestions (as incapable of that as I am) on ‘negative’ players in the Irish architectural market here:

http://designcomment.blogspot.com/2009/07/betting-against-market.html

As daft as it may read, it is a hundred times more in terms of a suggestion than I see coming from your corner.

Respectfully,

Brian O’ Hanlon

@sinnerboy wrote:

I have e mailed a protest to my 2 local FF TD’s ( cc’d to my local FG TD ) and all my local FF LA councilors ( again cc’d to my local FG + LAB councillors )

Just in case any of you wish to take the matter up with your local TD

http://www.oireachtas.ie/viewdoc.asp?DocID=12030&CatID=138

@sinnerboy wrote:

2 replies – 1 from an FF TD , 1 from an FF councilor

Both expressed sympathetic platitude and tried to assure me that FF were doing all in power to make things right . The councillor said he personally stopped listening to Swarey long ago

Please – can more of us express our reaction to these people ?

Sorry to be a cracked record . My fear is that focus is being dragged away from the issue – ( as I see of course )

We have been attacked by the 2nd in command of our Govt .
Which contains a lot of nervous back benchers
Whose contacts I have posted here

Fight back ! Get your friends and relatives to do likewise .

@garethace wrote:

Damning the stupid woman is one thing. I sure she is not alone in the ‘stupid’ category as far as stupid politicians generally go in Ireland. But lets turn our attention to people who aren’t stupid. For instance, the professionals. We are waiting for the architects and professionals to draw up some proposals. Where are those proposals? Is the proposal to simply wait around for another ‘boom’ so that we can create all of the same old problems as we did in the past.

It is high time that Liam Carroll, every other developer and the professionals really did show they are the smartest guys in the room. A good first step by the RIAI president would be to invite me to come and have discussion with him in person. You need to sort out your own shop in the professions first and deal with your own problems. The Irish government and the Tanaiste have more things to do than cleaning up your toxic waste every time it threatens to boil over and bring down the whole system. To use you own phrase, heal thyself first.

By the way, where is your own blog? Where have you come clean, stood out from the crowd and proclaimed: ‘I am’. (Thanks Sylvester Stallone/Rocky Balboa for the use of that phrase) I will be waiting to read some of your intelligent proposals from the intelligent building professionals that you are. Stop damning stupid women and do something instead. If you don’t set a good example as the smart part of the population, by coming up with some smart suggestions, how do you think the rest of the stupid part of the population (including myself) is going to cope?

In the meantime I have tried to come up with some of my own smart suggestions (as incapable of that as I am) on ‘negative’ players in the Irish architectural market here:

http://designcomment.blogspot.com/2009/07/betting-against-market.html

As daft as it may read, it is a hundred times more in terms of a suggestion than I see coming from your corner.

Respectfully,

Brian O’ Hanlon

I must be stupid also as all i can see in that Blogspot is a suggestion that 2 architectural firms split the fee – one doing all the work, the other advising on “what not to build”? what does that mean????? One firm does a masterplan and the other decides what goes in it then the first designs the buildings?? One sits around, pencil at the ready, for some head to say “build a………….SCHOOL here” and off you jolly well go. Apart from that you advocate us knowing th epart V regs – great idea except, in reality, all your part V consultant probably did was to show Liam how to avoid building any social and affordable. Getting rid of Project Managers -that, I would agree with

it’s all self centred gobbledegook and the only reason you’re getting the flak now is because people don’t usually read your posts because they’re so fecking long.

Why do you keep going on about how the RIAI should listen to you – just go and see them and then tell us all about it

I don’t have a blog because I work for a living

If the government wants to make a positive contibution to the built economy then either scrap the planning service or scrap An Bord Pleanala. Then we wouldn’t all be sitiing around for 18 months scratching our arses because some old duck in D4 doesn’t like anything over bungalow height

I must be stupid also as all i can see in that Blogspot is a suggestion that 2 architectural firms split the fee – one doing all the work, the other advising on “what not to build”? what does that mean????? One firm does a masterplan and the other decides what goes in it then the first designs the buildings?? One sits around, pencil at the ready, for some head to say “build a………….SCHOOL here” and off you jolly well go. Apart from that you advocate us knowing th epart V regs – great idea except, in reality, all your part V consultant probably did was to show Liam how to avoid building any social and affordable. Getting rid of Project Managers -that, I would agree with

Well, you are the smart one here. You are intelligent. You go and figure out how to make it work. Wake me up when you do. I will go back to my dumb beastial slumber now.

Thanks,

Brian O’ Hanlon

@garethace wrote:

Well, you are the smart one here. You are intelligent. You go and figure out how to make it work. Wake me up when you do. I will go back to my dumb beastial slumber now.

Thanks,

Brian O’ Hanlon

well your dialogue with the RIAI should go ok as long as they don’t question your theories.

Link:

http://designcomment.blogspot.com/2009/07/betting-against-market.html

What I am really suggesting I guess, is that the architect who makes a smaller fee working as the ‘negative’ player in the market, has the resources to develop skills and understanding in those areas, that the architect lost out to planning consultants, planners, real estate advice providers and the Lord knows who else during the Celtic Tiger building boom.

I am glad you mentioned the planning service and An Bord Pleannala in your reponse above. Because that is some of the territory that the RIAI should now work tirelessly to reclaim back from them selves. It was understandable that the architect in Ireland had to concede a lot of ground during the Celtic Tiger, because they were under so much pressure from developers to build stuff before the market collapsed.

The land taxation question, which James Pike is working on I know is an additional strand in all of this. If land values didn’t wobble around un-controllably every time there is economic prosperity in Ireland, then architects would have more time to look at the whole design service. Developers would have less control and less scope to do all sorts of deals driven by changing values of land on which buildings are constructed.

Basically I am talking about a way to fund some sort of low level R&D within architecture, even in these hard times. I think that R&D cash injection is a necessary part of the recovery and healing process architecture will need to go through now. We don’t want the same old model back again, where it is all hell for leather and architects being screwed to the wall. Do we?

Brian O’ Hanlon

I’ve got a colour scheme… but no one is interested in using it…

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2009/0731/1224251764757.html

@missarchi wrote:

I’ve got a colour scheme… but no one is interested in using it…

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2009/0731/1224251764757.html

The Tanaiste’s arrogance is absolutely astounding – I can’t wait to see what the national competitiveness council indeed has to say about fees in the architectural profession, is she actually suggesting expanding the current blood bath of under cutting each others fees? I’d love to see her apply the same ‘medecine’ to the public sector – she’d be politically guillotined within weeks.

@wearnicehats wrote:

If the government wants to make a positive contibution to the built economy then either scrap the planning service or scrap An Bord Pleanala. Then we wouldn’t all be sitiing around for 18 months scratching our arses because some old duck in D4 doesn’t like anything over bungalow height

I can’t believe you said that – just because some silly cow, Coughlan, makes inane daft remarks, surely it should not mean that while criticising her remarks, that this allows for equally daft remarks to be advanced.

Some of us would be of the belief that it is precisely due to the lack of planning, that unsustainable construction is exactly what has got this country into the total shambolic economic and environmental mess that it is currently in. You’ll also happily find commonality with such a point of view with Noel O’Gara, and possibly Tom Parlon – though the latter would probably be cute enough not to state it as blatantly. Still it’s interesting to be aware of your world viewpoint when reading your posts from now on.

Unless I have totally misunderstood you, and you are being ironic, there’s one word for such a statement: GUFF

The genral public believe we live in a “Rip of Republic”. Our Professions do seem to charge more than our UK counterparts. Dentists, Doctors, Solicitors do charge more, certainly some of the highest fees in Europe. At least this is the perception.

Is Architecture honestly any different?
Maybe Mary Coughlan has a point. Maybe the Competition Authority will have positive recommendations. If we are perceived as elitest and therefore extremely expensive, then many people won’t enquire and we will continue to loose potential clients.

If our fee is justified then surely we have nothing to fear?

@hutton wrote:

I can’t believe you said that – just because some silly cow, Coughlan, makes inane daft remarks, surely it should not mean that while criticising her remarks, that this allows for equally daft remarks to be advanced.

Some of us would be of the belief that it is precisely due to the lack of planning, that unsustainable construction is exactly what has got this country into the total shambolic economic and environmental mess that it is currently in. You’ll also happily find commonality with such a point of view with Noel O’Gara, and possibly Tom Parlon – though the latter would probably be cute enough not to state it as blatantly. Still it’s interesting to be aware of your world viewpoint when reading your posts from now on.

Unless I have totally misunderstood you, and you are being ironic, there’s one word for such a statement: GUFF

viewpoint clear here

https://archiseek.com/content/showthread.php?t=7435