Minutes Board Meeting 22 February 2001

Minutes Board Meeting 22 February 2001 (05/04/2001)

1. Welcome and Apologies

Apologies had been received from Barbara Saunders and Colin Smith. Apologies were also received from Paul Everall of the DETR.

2. Declaration of Interest

John Wright and Marco Goldschmied declared an interest in any items relating to the RIBA.

3. Minutes of the Board Meeting held on 20 December 2000

The Minutes were agreed.

4. Matters Arising from the Minutes

i. Assessment Panel Procedures

The latest version of the assessment panel procedures had been tabled and Robin Vaughan suggested that the Board should return to this matter later in the meeting after members had had an opportunity to review it.

ii. Architects Council of Europe

Robin Vaughan reported that he had attended a meeting of ACE in Brussels with Ian Pritchard from the RIBA. The purpose had been to take a view of the type of work which is being carried out by the Council. ARB would only participate in task forces relating to its core activities. The next step would be to put forward nominees.

iii. Amendments to the General Rules

Robin Vaughan reported that the proposed amendments had been sent to nearly 80 organisations. Some replies had been received, but the deadline was end March, and a report would be made at its meeting in May.

iv. Other Matters Arising - Europe/Mexico Negotiations

John Wright reported that he and Ian Pritchard (RIBA) had attended the negotiations as representatives from ACE which had been empowered to act for the EU. The meeting had been fruitful and had resulted in a draft proposal along the lines which had been proposed to both Canada and the USA. If approved by the assembly of ACE in April, the proposal would go forward to Ulrike Hauer at the Commission as forming the structure of an agreement. John Wright had tabled a paper for the Board setting out the matter in detail.

The Board noted the report.

5. Chairwoman's report

The Chairwoman reported that she and Robin Vaughan had met Sir Sydney Chapman MP and had a useful conversation with him about the work of the Board.

On 21 February, two meetings had taken place: in the morning with the Livery Company and in the afternoon the ARB/RIBA quarterly meeting.

6. Chief Executive's Report

Robin Vaughan reminded members that at its last meeting it had been agreed that the Board would contact all the schools about the pro rata fee for newly qualifieds. He advised that he was seeking to identify, in each school of architecture, a "champion" who would represent the Board's interests to the students and ensure that they received information about the Board.

He went on to report that he had been in contact with several other organisations: the Engineering Council, NHBC and the Liverpool Society of Architects with a view to explaining the Board's functions and to exchange information about their respective roles.

He reported that the qualitative stage of the market research was nearly completed. The information gleaned from the discussions with architects and consumers around the country would now be fed into the construction of the questionnaire. Approximately 7000 architects would receive a questionnaire. Consumers would be dealt with by means of a MORI or Gallup poll.

7. Honorary Treasurer's Report

Mike Dewey reported that the accounts for the year 2000 had been drafted and were currently being audited. These showed an excess of income over expenditure of approximately £200,000 compared to the budget figure of £80,000. This was as a result of the income being around £60,000 higher than forecast and expenditure £60,000 less than forecast with a net result of an excess of £120,000. The audited accounts would be presented to the Board at its meeting in May.

With regard to the annual retention fee, just over 5000 had not yet paid, and a final reminder letter would be issued at the beginning of March. This figure was comparable to the previous year.

In response to a question by Marco Goldschmied about reserves, Mike Dewey advised that this issue was under consideration; however, the reserves had been considerably depleted dueto the refurbishment, and currently stood at around £700,000. A paper would be brought to the Board meeting in May setting out an argument as to what reserves should be held.

The report was noted.

8. Movements in the Register

Robin Vaughan addressed the paper, and noted that at the end of January the total number of registered architects stood at 30,194. At mid-February, the total was 30,342. Figures would be produced at the Board meeting in May which would take account of removals from the Register at the end of march as a result of non-payment of the fee.

9. Revision of Criteria

Larry Rolland reported on progress. He advised that QAG had been considerably assisted by a group which had been meeting under the chairmanship of Peter Dale to consider, from ARB's perspective, criteria for education. QAG had decided (and the Board agreed to this decision) that it would be best if the ARB and RIBA could agree to a single criterion. ARB was therefore participating in a RIBA criteria working party into which it would be necessary to incorporate the standards developed by ARB's working party chaired by Peter Dale. If that could not be achieved, separate criteria might be necessary.

A report was due to be completed by early summer and would come to QAG in July, and then the Board in August.

John Wright expressed concern that the views of various bodies such as the DETR and the Treasury were not being taken into account, particularly with regard to Rethinking Construction. Members then had a lengthy debate about the quality of education in the schools and the way in which changes within the construction industry were affecting the role of the architect in society. At the end of the debate, Owen Luder suggested that it may be sensible to set up with the RIBA a "think tank" with a view to producing a long term strategy for education, and Larry Rolland undertook to examine this at QAG, including the legal implications for ARB as a statutory body.

10. Professional Indemnity Insurance

Robin Vaughan introduced the paper which set out the results of the Professional Indemnity Insurance data analysis from the survey which had been carried out in 1999.

Members debated the issue at length, and decided to pursue the following course of action:

a. Ask the profession to sign a declaration stating that PI cover was in place when collecting the Annual Retention Fee for 2002;

b. At the same time, advise the profession that documentary evidence of PI cover would be required from January 2003 onwards;

c. It was also agreed that a new Guidance Note should be produced in the interim in conjunction with the PR campaign.

11. Regulatory Regime - Report of the Investigation Committee on the Disciplinary Procedures

Connie Higgins introduced the paper and advised that, following the previous Board meeting, the Investigation Committee had considered further the issues in conjunction with the Board members of the Professional Conduct Committee. Members agreed the recommendations.

12. Monitoring Departures from the Register

Richard Coleman introduced the paper which offered suggestions about how the Board could more effectively monitor individuals who, for one reason or another, had been erased from the Register.

Members discussed the options available, and it was agreed that such individuals should be listed on ARB's website. This would ensure that the list could be updated on a regular basis. Further discussion took place as to whether it would be cost effective and/or desirable to publish the list in the annual report, but it was decided that this was an unnecessary step.