ARB Chairman rejects the RIBA’s reform proposals in an open letter

ARB Chairman rejects the RIBA’s reform proposals in an open letter (02/11/2005)

The Chairman of the Architects Registration Board, Humphrey LLoyd, has written an open letter to the new President of the RIBA, Mr Jack Pringle, inviting him to reconsider the RIBA Council’s proposal for a Regulatory Reform Order (RRO) to the Architects Act 1997. Mr. LLoyd argues that an RRO would cost time and money with an inevitable impact on services to the profession and the public.

Addressing each of the issues identified by the RIBA Council in its proposed changes to the 1997 Act, Mr. LLoyd sets out why the ARB rejects the proposals, and expresses concern that they would add to the cost of regulation and require an increase in the retention fee. In his letter, Mr. LLoyd requests that the RIBA consult all registered persons - not just RIBA members - on its proposals, and he asks that his own letter setting out the arguments against an RRO should be distributed alongside the RIBA’s proposals.

Addressing the RIBA’s proposal for a new duty on the ARB to be prudent and economical, Mr. LLoyd writes that this “would not in practice change anything as that is already the Board’s statutory duty.” In response to the RIBA’s proposal for an Ombudsman, Mr. LLoyd defends the democratic decision-making processes of the ARB and points out that the cost of an Ombudsman would have to be borne by registrants.

Mr. LLoyd’s letter is in response to a letter sent by the then President of the RIBA, George Ferguson, to the ARB Chairman in August 2005, setting out proposals for a Regulatory Reform Order to the 1997 Architects Act. In September 2005, Mr. LLoyd met Mr Pringle, and others, to gain a fuller understanding of the RIBA’s proposals. Following that meeting, the ARB Board sent its comments to the RIBA in the form of an open letter.

In response to a Parliamentary Question in the House of Commons on October 24, the Minister in the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, Yvette Cooper, stated that the Government had no current plans to review the operation of the ARB.

Commenting on his open letter, the ARB Chairman said:

“Whilst the Architects Act is a matter for Parliament, not the ARB, the Board nevertheless has observations on the changes proposed by the RIBA. The Board considered that all registered architects should be aware of the proposals, not least because further expense is likely to fall on them as a result of the RIBA’s proposed reforms.”

---ends---

Notes for Editors

ARB is the statutory body established by Parliament under the Architects Act 1997 to regulate the UK architects’ profession in the public interest. The Act requires ARB (inter alia) to:

• Maintain the Register of Architects (Section 3)

• Prescribe qualifications for entry to the Register of Architects (Section 4)

• Deal with competence to practise (Section 9)

• Issue a Code which lays down standards of professional conduct and practice (Section 13)

• Regulate use of the title “architect” and prosecute those who use it fraudulently (Section 20)

ARB has a Board of 15 members, seven of whom are architects elected by the profession. The remaining eight are members of the public appointed by the Privy Council to represent the interests of consumers and users of architectural services.