admin
Forum Replies Created
- Posts
@Seamus O’G wrote:
, I think there should be some modifications –
Hmmmm
It should go only through areas with population density
It should be on the same gauge as all existing rail services
It should enhance existing routesIsn’t that the interconnector?
As things stand this project will be sanctioned long before the interconnector which creates a very real risk that the most important infrasstructural project on the drawing board will be binned to balance the books.
Are you not going to break down the figures between; Domestic banks, Government, Consumer, secured on PPR, foreign direct investors and non-dom funds?
Not so sure; cinema investment is often counter cylical as people in their 20’s swap expensive meals for a film and chain dinner afterwards. Depending on who buys the large Vue chain from LLOYds then this sub-sector may respond to live demand before others.
That sounds very strange as the dwelling was as you say built in the 1980’s with presumably a design spec of 30 plus years and is not a famine era cottage as are often used in an attempt to circumvent the intent of the regulations. I’d read Eamon Galligan’s, Irish Planning Law and Procedure (Round Hall Sweet & Maxwell, 1997) as it certainly dealt with the expiration of time limits in respect of planning use classes; I can’t remember if it dealt with this exact situation.
Certainly there seems to be some merit in constructing an argument on the point and getting a planning litigation specialist to give an outline opinion; which can only waste a little time at worst.
Is the site in a conservation area or area of outstanding natural beauty or is it by the coast or a river?
If you have not registered then until you register you can’t use the title of architect as that is what is laid down in Irish law.
Lastly, this Directive is not intended to interfere with Member States’ legitimate interest in preventing any of their citizens from evading enforcement of the national law relating to professions.
It is that simple.
Your last post is not deserving of an answer; indeed only for your prose style I’d have stayed a long way from this thread.
Lastly, this Directive is not intended to interfere with Member States’ legitimate interest in preventing any of their citizens from evading enforcement of the national law relating to professions.
I did not accuse you of evading personally; but wish to highlight the stated puspose of the Directive to protect individual member states right to regulate as laid down below:
The general system for recognition, however, does not prevent a Member State from making any person pursuing a profession on its territory subject to specific requirements due to the application of professional rules justified by the general public interest.Using the qualification to evade national application of professional rules as authorised above is clearly prevented. As this directive also replaces all prior directives it is binding so you like everyone else is subject to the rules brought in by the government.
Lastly, this Directive is not intended to interfere with Member States’ legitimate interest in preventing any of their citizens from evading enforcement of the national law relating to professions.
I did not accuse you of evading personally; but wish to highlight the stated puspose of the Directive to protect individual member states right to regulate as laid down below:
The general system for recognition, however, does not prevent a Member State from making any person pursuing a profession on its territory subject to specific requirements due to the application of professional rules justified by the general public interest.
Using the qualification to evade national application of professional rules as authorised above is clearly prevented. As this directive also replaces all prior directives it is binding.
The general system for recognition, however, does not prevent a Member State from making any person pursuing a profession on its territory subject to specific requirements due to the application of professional rules justified by the general public interest.
Enjoy your day….
I have only one point a degree is a degree and that regulation by state is entirely reasonable and clearly sanctioned by the same directive that you base your arguments upon; I would not like to see anyone misled by your misinterpretation of the rules.
The general system for recognition, however, does not prevent a Member State from making any person pursuing a profession on its territory subject to specific requirements due to the application of professional rules justified by the general public interest. Rules of this kind relate, for example, to organisation of the profession, professional standards, including those concerning ethics, and supervision and liability. Lastly, this Directive is not intended to interfere with Member States’ legitimate interest in preventing any of their citizens from evading enforcement of the national law relating to professions.
The general system for recognition, however, does not prevent a Member State from making any person pursuing a profession on its territory subject to specific requirements due to the application of professional rules justified by the general public interest. Rules of this kind relate, for example, to organisation of the profession, professional standards, including those concerning ethics, and supervision and liability. Lastly, this Directive is not intended to interfere with Member States’ legitimate interest in preventing any of their citizens from evading enforcement of the national law relating to professions.
What part of the word evading do you not understand?
Does your eight years of study include a degree in architecture?
My partner made a second career change to become a solicitor, she had four qualifications prior including an MBA but still had to study for a year (full time but she could have done it part time over 2/3 years) to get her LPC; then two years to qualify under supervision.
I do however agree that €13,300 sounds excessive unless there is a comprehensive course underpinning it that costs no more than €50-€100 per hour for the tuition. If there is tuition in this it would sound fairer to have an exam fee and allow the educational institutes compete on the tuition element by running Saturday or evening courses. Also are the exam costs tax deductable?
In Bolivia a number of years ago in their Art Museum they had a twin price approach; little for locals say 20c and $7us for tourists; given that the majority of tourists will pay close to €7 a pint in the Temple of Bars they’d feel even more ripped off. But I do see Temple of Bars aside the merit in what you say. you could picture the chaos of all those weekenders from Bolton claiming to have an Irish grandmother and spending ages trying to explainwhy they personally didn’t have to pay.
I agree with Graham’s pricing matrix these are very high quality and sizeable collections; no doubt when the National Museum sends specific collections abroad the vast bulk of those viewing them would be paying to view them anyway. Worst case scenario it is a good press release for NTMA to display that the assets are being sweated at every possible opportunity; cutbacks would be a much worse result as some of the highly qualified experts would emmigrate and may not return.
@CK wrote:
You should come with me to talk to Graby and O’Flanagan about it… First we will ask them to remove from the register all those who entered the club through the minister’s list. Then we will ask them to remove those who have entered through an engineering background… And for the finaly we will propose fairly that all of us, including MRIAI, pass an exam to be listed on the register…
After all why shall MRIAI of my age, who qualified 15 years ago, not be subject to an exam like me? Their qualification does not reflect the skills required to run a practice today.
The problem is that the person that qualified 15 years ago took time out of their lives to get qualified. I sense however that if you have 15 years of experience that you’d not have a problem getting qualified once the route was open through the proper channels. The biggest challenge to the industry has always come from non-architects i.e. engineers, cad-designers etc undercutting costs to get work; te RIAI should ensure that those that have a set number of years of experience and are prepared to go through the qualification process are allowed to and be assessed on the same basis as those that entered the industry by the graduate route.
Its the desire to play by the rules that is most important in my opinion; the public need to have a profession working to a consistent set of rules. The benefits of the larger membership organisations include arranging PI cover in block policies for groups of sole practitioners; an ombudsman scheme etc. The way that the legal profession remove bad solicitors has always ensured that the profession has held the trust of the people in as far as people will ever trust lawyers anywhere!!
@onq wrote:
“Such updates must not entail, for any Member State, any
amendment of existing legislative principles relating to the
structure of professions as regards training and the conditions
of access by natural persons.”This paves the way for required CPD but forbids Member States from restricting persons with the required qualification from practising as an Architect. .
If you are qualified on graduation what relevance has CPD? Clearly the intention was to seperate course content and regulation; which you claim to be exempt from.
@onq wrote:
Introductory paragraph 34 confirms this:
“(34) Administering the various systems of recognition set up
by the sectoral directives and the general system has
proved cumbersome and complex. There is therefore a
need to simplify the administration and updating of this
Directive to take account of scientific and technical
progress, in particular where the minimum conditions of
training are coordinated with a view to automatic recognition
of qualifications. A single committee for the
recognition of professional qualifications should be set
up for this purpose, and suitable involvement of representatives
of the professional organisations, also at European
level, should be ensured.”Read before you post (1).
That link does not mention the word architect in it; it does mention the common fisheries and agricultural policies. In any event it is a 1999 document so would be superceded by the 2005 directive. You have been on a fishing trip from the off on this; all of these directives relate to the free movement of labour across borders.
@onq wrote:
No.
The formal qualifications listed in the Annex noted above entitle holders to provide architectural services and practice as an Architect.
Section 48 appears to be written to allow people WITHOUT QUALIFICATIONS but who are “especially distinguished by the quality of their work in the field of architecture” to be recognised as architects throughout the EU providing their home member state issues them with a certificate. .No those without educational qualification are dealt with under Article 47 which is titled
Derogations from the conditions for the training of architects@onq wrote:
This Directive doesn’t refer to Part III’s at all.
How shocking is that PVC King?
ONQ.They don’t have to
The general system for recognition, however, does not prevent a Member State from making any person pursuing a profession on its territory subject to specific requirements due to the application of professional rules justified by the general public interest. Rules of this kind relate, for example, to organisation of the profession, professional standards, including those concerning ethics, and supervision and liability. Lastly, this Directive is not intended to interfere with Member States’ legitimate interest in preventing any of their citizens from evading enforcement of the national law relating to professions.
What Article 49 actually does is make your position worse; read the clause again
1. Each Member State shall accept evidence of formal qualifications as an architect listed in Annex VI, point 6, awarded by the other Member States, and attesting a course of training which began no later than the reference academic year referred to in that Annex, even if they do not satisfy the minimum requirements laid down in Article 46, and shall, for the purposes of access to and pursuit of the professional activities of an architect, give such evidence the same effect on its territory as evidence of formal qualifications as an architect which it itself issues.
If you travel the rights in your own juristion can be applied in all other member states; what it does not do is grant rights in the country of qualification that do not otherwise exist. If the Irish system requires registration someone from abroad with a qualifying degree still needs to register; if an Irish architect travels to another member state they are bound by the same rules as the local practitioners.
@CK wrote:
I am fighting with Architects Alliance for being able to register without paying more than the others and being subject to a fair examination and not an elitist non sense as it is now.
I don’t think anyone can argue with that, most professions have entry routes to formal membership for those who get the experience first and then apply for an examination on the same terms as those who entered the industry on the basis of gaining an academic qualification. In so doing one is acknowledging the need for regulation and is saying that they are willing to abide by the same rules as those already qualified members of the professional association.
Those being the rules that are there to protect the public which is the purpose of all regulation in the first instance.
Article 46
Training of architects
1. Training as an architect shall comprise a total of at least four years of full-time study or six years of study, at least three years of which on a full-time basis, at a university or
comparable teaching institution. The training must lead to successful completion of a university-level examination. That training, which must be of university level, and of which
architecture is the principal component, must maintain a balance between theoretical and practical aspects of architectural training and guarantee the acquisition of the following
knowledge and skills:
(a) ability to create architectural designs that satisfy both aesthetic and technical requirements; 30.9.2005 EN Official Journal of the European Union L 255/47
(b) adequate knowledge of the history and theories of architecture and the related arts, technologies and human sciences;
(c) knowledge of the fine arts as an influence on the quality of architectural design;
(d) adequate knowledge of urban design, planning and the skills involved in the planning process;
(e) understanding of the relationship between people and buildings, and between buildings and their environment, and of the need to relate buildings and the spaces between
them to human needs and scale;
(f) understanding of the profession of architecture and the role of the architect in society, in particular in preparing briefs that take account of social factors; (g) understanding of the methods of investigation and preparation of the brief for a design project;
(h) understanding of the structural design, constructional and engineering problems associated with building design;
(i) adequate knowledge of physical problems and technologies and of the function of buildings so as to provide them with internal conditions of comfort and protection against the climate;
(j) the necessary design skills to meet building users’ requirements within the constraints imposed by cost factors and building regulations; (k) adequate knowledge of the industries, organisations, regulations and procedures involved in translating design
concepts into buildings and integrating plans into overall planning.2. The knowledge and skills listed in paragraph 1 may be amended in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 58(2) with a view to adapting them to scientific and technical progress. Such updates must not entail, for any Member State, any amendment of existing legislative principles relating to the structure of professions as regards training and the conditions of access by natural persons.
Article 46 merely sets out the components of the course in clause 1 and in clause 2 clarifies that this article is not to be construed as having any relationship with regulation of the structure, training and access of and to the profession.
1. Each Member State shall accept evidence of formal qualifications as an architect listed in Annex VI, point 6, awarded by the other Member States, and attesting a course of training which began no later than the reference academic year referred to in that Annex, even if they do not satisfy the minimum requirements laid down in Article 46, and shall, for the purposes of access to and pursuit of the professional activities of an architectgive such evidence the same effect on its territory as evidence of formal qualifications as an architect which it itself issues.,
The qualification gets you in the door providing access to and pursuit of professional activities in the same manner as if you had an equivelent qualification from the host member state. However all if this is caveated by both Article 48 below and the preamble that clearly permits member states to regulate their own regimes as they see fit.
Article 48
Pursuit of the professional activities of architects
1. For the purposes of this Directive, the professional activities of an architect are the activities regularly carried out under the professional title of ‘architect’.
2. Nationals of a Member State who are authorised to use that title pursuant to a law which gives the competent authority of a Member State the power to award that title to Member States nationals who are especially distinguished by the quality of their work in the field of architecture shall be deemed to satisfy the conditions required for the pursuit of the activities of an architect, under the professional title of ‘architect’. The architectural nature of the activities of the persons concerned shall be attested by a certificate awarded by their home Member State.
Do you now understand the difference between qualified and professional?
@onq wrote:
DIR 2005/36/EC
In the case of the professions covered by the general system for the recognition of qualifications, hereinafter referred to as ‘the general system’, Member States should retain the right to lay down the minimum level of qualification required to ensure the quality of the services provided on their territory. However, pursuant to Articles 10, 39 and 43 of the Treaty, they should not require a national of a Member State to obtain qualifications,
which they generally lay down only in terms of the diplomas awarded under their national educational system, where the person concerned has already obtained all or part of those qualifications in another Member State. As a result, it should be laid down that any host Member State in which a profession is regulated must take account of the qualifications obtained in another Member State and assess whether they correspond to those which it requires.The general system for recognition, however, does not prevent a Member State from making any person pursuing a profession on its territory subject to specific requirements due to the application of professional rules justified by the general public interest. Rules of this kind relate, for example, to organisation of the profession, professional standards, including those concerning ethics, and supervision and liability. Lastly, this Directive is not intended to interfere with Member States’ legitimate interest in preventing any of their citizens from evading enforcement of the national law relating to professions.
Where does the directive prevent the government from regulating as it sees fit?
@onq wrote:
Ranting on and on about how Graduates have no right to call themselves archtiects but never once reading the legislation.
ONQ.
This thread took direction from you feeling aggreived that you couldn’t call yourself an architect anymore. It is merely pointed out to you that all other professions require membership of the relevant professional body to call themselves solicitors, bankers, auditors, planners etc.
You seem to feel that because the law at a point in time granted a right that is totally at odds with all other professions that you have been somehow hard done by.
A consistent position has now been applied to the architectural profession; that is the extent of my argument and a very welcome piece of reforming legislation that very few people I know would disagree with.
A graduate degree is just that; every other profession requires both a degree and a regulatory regime imposed by the relevant industry body. You have failed to make a special case for the architecture profession to deviate in such a fundamental way.
That said you can conveyance your house with a product sold by Tesco or sell your house through daft.
