REVIEW OF LEGISLATION REGULATING  THE ARCHITECTURAL PROFESSION BY THE PRODUCTIVITY COMMISSION…… DRAFT REPORT - NOVEMBER 1999

BDAA POSITION PAPER - JUNE 2000 (Attachment to the above E-mail)

The Productivity Commission’s draft report into legislation regulating the Architectural Profession recommends deregulation and repeal of the various Architects Act of 1921, replaced by various forms of self-regulation for Architects. They offer accountants, engineers, and other professions as examples where self-regulation is working satisfactorily. This would have an immediate and significant effect on Architects and their principle competitors, Building Designers.

The Building Designers Association of Australia BDAA supports a co-regulation model where the essence of self-regulation by both associations, BDAA and RAIA is underpinned by state licensing legislation for practitioners similar to legislation already existing in Victoria and Queensland.

In Victoria and Queensland Building Designers are required to comply with these Acts, which includes having the minimum level of Professional Indemnity Insurance.

Building Design practitioners compete directly with and at times work together with Architects. They are defined as the large "non architect" building designer segment of the architectural services market.

 

About the BDAA & its Membership

The BDAA is a peak national body representing 7 independent state and territory Building Designer Associations. These associations represent some 1300 professional building designers, specifiers and coordinators.

State BDA’s have a mission to further excellence and professionalism among members by fostering on going professional development, a collegiate network and compulsory professional indemnity insurance.

BDAA members collectively, are involved in upwards of $10 billion worth of construction activity throughout Australia over any 12-month period, thereby representing a significant sector. Over 75% of residential construction involve design and documentation by Building Designers rather than Architects.

This is in line with overseas experiences where best estimates are that architects are only involved in the construction of between 30% & 50% of the contract value of buildings in the developed world.

Building Designers provide the market with practical, value for money solutions not always perceived as coming from architects.

Building Designers are qualified to do the work they do. Typically this is a diploma of Architectural Technology gained over 2 years full time at TAFE or over 4 years part time while working in a Building Designers practice.

Typically membership of BDAA requires appropriate drafting qualifications, at least 3 years design experience running his/ her own practice and personal interview.

BDAA believes that accreditation should be based on regular evaluation of practitioner competency skills wherever and however they were obtained, not only on past academic qualification.

BDAA are currently drafting new self-regulatory codes of conduct and competency standards for Building Designer competences.

 

Who is to be the judge of good design?

What is bad architecture? Who is to be the judge? The councils? The Government? The public? Can you legislate good taste? These are questions often argued in the architects versus non architects debate.

" In this regard, architects and building designers face a particular difficulty. It is often impossible to determine just what architectural incompetence amounts to. Most people can tell when a builder is inept, but the matter of architectural ineptitude is a moot point.

Within the field, architects often argue as to the quality of a building, whether it is successful or a disaster in aesthetic terms. Moreover their assessment of the success of a treatment (building design) is often at variance with the assessment of others. The supposed experts cannot agree, and the public often cannot agree with the experts. In such a situation it is little wonder that architects design so little of the built environment.

If even the occupation itself cannot work out what good architecture is, how can we possibly be protected from bad architecture? "

………Gary Stephens submission to Productivity Commission Nov 1999.

It is argued that current legislation offers increased consumer protection. BDAA agrees with the Productivity Commission that this is not the case.

The title ‘architect’ is argued to represent a benchmark standard. Presumably then operatives with qualifications below this benchmark i.e. (the unregulated areas) ought to represent a quantifiable (or additional risk) to the public.

Given no evidence exists to support this or even suggest that non-architects constitute a problem, how is the public interest objective justified? Design is an art, not a science. A qualification of ‘Architect’ does not automatically confirm any specialist skill.

In the market place Architects no longer have any statutory responsibilities. They have relinquished the responsibility to certify domestic structures, and the task to ensure compliance with building regulations (Standards Association of Australia SAA, Building Code of Australia BCA) now rests with private certifiers, and local government.

In addition specialist project managers now do much of the project supervision architects used to carry out. Since the Act was introduced in 1921, statute codes and a series of technical specialists have resulted in a significant contraction of architect responsibility.

BDAA further contends that:

The current market place success of Building Designers underscores their demonstrated design and documentation competence.

Both Building Designers and Architects tend to be skilled in particular market segments. Consumer should seek out evidence of these competencies.

Term "architect" should remain protected under new legislation and be reserved for those with a Bachelor of Architecture degree.

Current restriction on use of term "architectural services or architectural design" is anti competitive and should be free for use by building designers.

New state building practitioner legislation combined with stronger self-regulation and existing consumer protection legislation are adequate safeguards if a more competitive market place is to be encouraged.

Read the BDAA’s submissions to the Productivity Commission

Barrie Wright

BDAA Ltd. - CEO