Board minutes

Board Meeting 7 April 2011

Open session

1. Apologies for Absence

   Myra Kinghorn

2. Members’ Interests

   The Board noted the declarations of interest as stated in the Board's Register of Interests. It was agreed that there were no conflicts of interest arising from the declarations.

3. Minutes

   One member of the Board queried whether the questions raised by members of the public at the end of an open session of the Board's meeting were recorded in the Minutes. It was confirmed that the questions were not minuted as they were not considered to be a formal part of the meeting.

   It was recommended that the Minutes of the Open Session held on 20 January 2011 be approved.

   Proposer: Alan Jago
   Seconder: Neil Watts

   The recommendation was agreed unanimously.

4. Matters arising

   There were no matters arising.

5. Chair’s Report.

   The Chair reported that she had recently provided a presentation for Part 3 candidates at a School of Architecture, attended the Association of Consultant Architects (ACA) Council Away Afternoon, but had not been able to attend the Council meeting with the Royal Society of Ulster Architects (RSUA) in Belfast due to travel disruption.

   The Chair also reported that she was a member of the Public Chairs Forum, which provided her with a valuable opportunity to meet and share ideas with chairs of other public bodies as well as senior Government officials. The Chair noted that the costs associated with be membership of the Forum were not borne by ARB.

   The Chair noted that she had been pleased to welcome members of the Prescription Committee to Liverpool, where the Committee had held its meeting in February 2011.

6. Registrar’s Report

   The Board noted the Registrar’s Report.  The Registrar additionally reported that the seven UK qualifications which had been notified to the European Commission so that individuals could continue to benefit from the automatic recognition of the qualifications across Europe had been approved for listing, as had numerous title changes and the UK’s revised entry under Annex V of the Qualifications Directive. The Registrar anticipated that the details would be formally published in the European Union Official Journal in June 2011. The Registrar added that this was the culmination of two year’s work and that both ARB Staff and the schools involved were delighted with the European Commission’s decisions. It was noted that a press release would be issued and this important achievement would be referred to in the next E-bulletin. Members of the Board congratulated and thanked those involved in securing the listing of the UK’s qualifications and revised entry under the Directive. The role of the European Affairs Executive was noted as being particularly important for ARB in delivering this outcome.

   The Registrar reported that she had recently attended the Architects Council of Europe General Assembly with Peter Coe. It was noted that the proposals to extend the minimum duration of training for architects from four years to five had been a key topic of discussion at the Assembly.  The Registrar stated that the UK’s view was that a move in this direction could be restrictive in future. It was noted that the UK would be represented by the Head of Qualifications and the UK’s Nominated Expert in Architecture at a forthcoming Commission Workshop on this matter in mid-April 2011.

   The Registrar reported that Staff had recently participated in and given presentations at the Association of Professional Studies Advisers in Architecture (APSAA) Forum. It was noted that the discussions at the Forum had been extremely useful in terms of developing the guidance which would underpin the revised practical training experience requirements.

   It was reported that 796 individuals had been removed from the Register due to non- payment of the retention fee (by comparison 850 were removed in the previous year).  It was noted that this figure did not include those who had resigned from the Register.

   Given that information had already been placed in the public domain by Mr McGrath, an individual who had previously applied for Registration, the Registrar felt it appropriate to confirm the position in the Board’s public session. The Board noted that a legal challenge made by a Mr Paul McGrath had been withdrawn. Mr McGrath had issued proceedings against the Board in the High Court appealing against this refusal primarily on the basis that refusal was inconsistent with the right to registration of qualified European applicants who were not required to hold a Part 3 qualification under the terms of the Qualifications Directive 2005 provided they had access to the profession in their home European state. There had been limited but persistent public suggestions over a number of years that this point represented an error in ARB’s own legal analysis.

   Following Mr McGrath receiving a barrister’s advice that his appeal should be withdrawn the action was abandoned with Mr McGrath agreeing to make a payment in relation to the Board’s legal costs in the event that he issues any other unsuccessful proceedings against the ARB within the next six years.

7. Management Accounts 2011

   The Board noted the latest Management Accounts.

   Matters for Decision

8. Review of the Risk Management Strategy

   The Registrar introduced this item and confirmed that the proposed changes to the Act were to ensure that the relevant wording was as closely aligned with that in the Qualifications Directive as possible. It was noted that ARB's guidance already reflected the position and would not require further amendment. It was therefore noted that no resource issues would arise from the change to the Act. It was noted that the closing date for consultation responses was 15 April 2011.

   It was recommended that the Board should consider and agree the response to the Government consultation on a proposed amendment to the Architects Act 1997.

   Proposer: Neil Watts
   Seconder: Gordon Gibb

   The recommendation was agreed unanimously.

9. ARB’s Electoral Scheme

   The HR and Communications Coordinator introduced this item and clarified that the Board had approved the revised electoral scheme at its meeting of 20 January 2011. It was noted that prior to the formal minute being signed off at the Board’s meeting
   of 7 April, an advance copy of the Scheme had been submitted to the Privy Council to facilitate its timely approval by the Privy Council.

   It was noted that the Privy Council had provided feedback in relation to three areas of the proposed Electoral Scheme and that adjustments to the Scheme as a result of the advice were included within the Board’s papers.

   The Board considered the Privy Council’s Advisers’ comments on the proposed
   changes to ARB’s Electoral Scheme.

   The Board passed a resolution to approve the further changes to the draft Electoral Scheme considered at agenda item 9, which had earlier been proposed and agreed by the Board for adoption at the Board meeting on 20 January 2011 (Annex C to agenda item 12), and to replace the scheme with the amended version. The scheme remains subject to approval by the Privy Council.

   This was proposed by Colin Brock and seconded by David Jones.

   The Board agreed that a copy of this Minute (which was read back to the Board), together with the earlier minute with the Seal affixed, should be provided to the Privy Council as soon as possible after the meeting in order to progress the amendments.

    

   It was recommended that the Board approve the changes to the ARB’s ElectoralScheme as suggested by the Privy Council’s advisers.

   Proposer: Colin Brock
   Seconder: David Jones

   The recommendation was agreed unanimously.

10. Committee Membership for 2011

    The Registrar introduced this item and confirmed that the existing Committee structure would remain in place for the forthcoming year. It was noted that there were two proposed adjustments to the membership of the Committees: Bernard Wyld should replace Ruth Brennan as a member of the Professional Conduct Committee (PCC) (noting that whilst Board members were appointed to the PCC in order to comply with the Act, they did not participate in PCC panels) and Alan Jago should become Vice Chair of the Prescription Committee. The Prescription Committee had recommended that a Vice Chair should be appointed this year as the Chair of the Prescription Committee would be leaving the Board in 2012.

    It was recommended that the Board should agree the membership of the
    Committees as show in Annex A of the Board’s papers.

    Proposer: Agnes Grunwald-Spier
    Seconder: Bernard Wyld

    The recommendation was agreed unanimously.

11. Changes to ARB’s General Rules – 13b

    The Head of Qualifications introduced this item and outlined the background to the changes to Rule 13b. It was noted that Staff had worked closely with the RIBA to ensure that the rule could be held in common between both organisations.

    Having considered the consultation responses, it was recommended that the Board agree:

    1. to the recommendations of the Prescription Committee and approve the revised General Rule 13(b) as set out in Annex 1 of the papers without further change; and
    2. that the Rule should take effect in May, to coincide with other amendments to the General Rules.

    Proposer: David Jones
    Seconder: Alan Jago

    The recommendations were agreed unanimously.

12. Board Members’ Handbook and Role Descriptions for the Chair, Vice Chair and Board Members

    The HR and Communications Coordinator introduced this item. The Board was provided with replacements for pages 79 and 80 of the papers at the meeting which contained some minor adjustments that had been made to the role descriptions for the Chair and Vice Chair since the papers had been circulated.

    It was recommended that the Board:

    1. agree the changes to the Board Members’ Handbook; and
    2. note that the role descriptions for the Chair, Vice Chair and Board members continue to reflect the Framework Agreement.

    Proposer: Colin Brock
    Seconder: Sarah Lupton

    The recommendations were agreed unanimously.

13. Changes to General Rules 4, 6, 7, 8, 10 and Schedule 1

    The Registrar introduced this item. It was reported that a wholesale review of the General Rules was in the process of being undertaken, however, it was felt that it would be unmanageable if all the changes to the Rules had been brought forward at the same time. As a result, consideration of the changes was being staged and further changes would be brought forward for consideration at the Board’s meeting of 21 July.  As a result, it was proposed that the consultation on these rules should be held over until the changes to the additional rules had also been considered. It was noted that the proposed changes to rules 4, 6, 7, 8 and 10 reflected current and good practice. The Registrar drew the Board’s attention to the recommendation that the timing of the election of the Chair and Vice chair remain the same as it had not been possible to find a solution to the issues that this raised.

    It was noted that a copy of the General Rules which included all of the proposed amendments, would be provided to the Board after consultation had taken place, so that members could see the details of all of the collective changes together.

    It was suggested and agreed that the consultation document should include a statement which set out the areas that the ARB is responsible for.

    It was recommended that the Board:

    1. agree to issue for consultation the changes to General Rules 4, 6, 7, 8 and 10 shown in Attachment A of the Board’s papers; and

    2. delay the commencement of the consultation until the remaining General Rules had been considered by the Board and were also ready for Consultation.

    Proposer: Peter Coe
    Seconder: Sarah Lupton

    The recommendations were agreed unanimously.

14. Report and Audited Accounts 2010

    The Board received a tabled report from the Chair of the Audit Committee. It was noted that the projected efficiency savings of £166k in 2010 had been exceeded.  The Committee had also changed the recommendation, which was now being made by the Registrar, rather than the Committee as this was considered to be more appropriate.

    It was noted that the work of the Audit Committee was going well and members of the Board thanked the Staff who supported its work for their exemplary input. The role of the Finance Manager in particular was noted as being critical in ensuring that ARB’s finances are well managed and that ARB delivers its statutory functions within budget.

    The Registrar recommended that the Board should:

    1. approve the 2010 audited accounts; and

    2. authorise the Board Chair and a member of the Audit Committee to sign the Letter of Representation on the Board’s behalf.

    Proposer: Alex Galloway
    Seconder: Gordon Gibb

    The recommendations were agreed unanimously.

15. The EU General System Route to Registration

    Rob Wilson, Registration Executive, introduced this item. It was noted that a targeted consultation had been undertaken following the Board’s consideration of the proposed route at a previous meeting. One consultation response had been received from the Royal Institute of Architects in Ireland (RIAI).

    It was recommended that the Board approve the introduction of the EU ‘General
    System’ route to registration.

    Proposer: Sarah Lupton
    Seconder: Peter Coe

    The recommendations were agreed unanimously.

    Matters for Note

16. Department of Communities and Local Government (CLG) – Government Policy and the ARB/CLG Framework Agreement

    The Board received a presentation from Richard Harral, Principal Architect, of the Department of Communities and Local Government (CLG).  Mr Harral congratulated and thanked the Board and the Board’s staff for all of the work that ARB had undertaken over the last year. Mr Harral updated the Board on recent changes to Government policy and the areas which a review of the Framework Agreement would be likely to focus on.  Mr Harral also reported that all CLG Arms Length Bodies (ALBs) would be subject to triennial review. Government Departments would be responsible for setting the timetable for such reviews. The Board also had the opportunity to ask further questions and discuss Mr Harral’s presentation. The Board commented in particular on the importance of proportionality in the triennial reviews and in ensuring that ARB has sufficient resources to deliver the statutory responsibilities under the Act effectively.

17. Minutes

    The Board noted the minutes of:

    1. The Audit Committee on 19 January 2011.

18. AOB

    Distinguished Achievements Route

    Rob Wilson, Registration Executive, introduced this item. It was noted that the existing process had been introduced in 2000 and adjusted in 2002. It had been based on the provisions within the Architects Directive which had been repealed when the Mutual Recognition of Professional Qualifications Directive became effective. It was noted that the Qualifications Directive and minimum training requirement were the primary drivers for the review. It was noted that any investigation into a more flexible methodology for assessment of competence was unlikely to be finalised until 2012 due to current projects and workload. It was noted that on average, one candidate per year undertook the distinguished achievement route to registration

    It was recommended that the Board

    1. agree to consult on the withdrawal of the ‘Distinguished Achievements’ route to registration;
    2. that the route is closed temporarily and with immediate effect to new applications, pending the outcome of consultation;
    3. approve transitional arrangements set out in key point (viii) of the Board’s paper to enable applications already in the system to be concluded; and
    4. asks staff to investigate whether the more flexible methodology for assessment of competence used in the Distinguished Achievement Route had any application in any other context.

    Proposer: Colin Brock
    Seconder: Bernard Wyld

    The recommendations were agreed unanimously.

19. Dates of Next Meetings

    The Board agreed the dates of its next meetings as follows:

    21 July 2011
    22 September 2011
    15 December 2011