Architects up in arms over Tory dossier ‘smears’
RIBA president Ruth Reed hits out at ’clumsy’ attack
Architects have hit out at the Conservative Party after it circulated a document containing “misleading” figures for architects’ fees obtained under the Building Schools for the Future (BSF) programme.
Information from the dossier was published in a highly critical Sunday Times article last weekend, under the headline ‘Architects net £98m from schools’.
The figures – obtained by the Conservative Party from local authorities under the Freedom of Information Act – were disputed by architects including BDP and Aedas.
The dossier claims architects made £98m from just 21 councils under the BSF programme and highlights a series of examples of ‘overspending’ on architects.
Architects Aedas and BDP told our sister publication BD, that the fees quoted in the document for Walkden High School and Teddington School were inaccurate.
Aedas claimed their fee for Walkden High School was just a third of the £2.5m quoted in the document.
Anna Scott-Marshall, head of public affairs for the Royal Institue of British Architects (RIBA), told Building: “We feel we are being used as a political football. Ultimately we want it to stop.”
She added there was a mismatch between what the government said about architects in public and behind the scenes.
In a statement this morning Ruth Reed, president of RIBA, criticised the Conservatives for their “clumsy” attack on the profession.
Reed said: “The Conservative Party’s statement that there were disproportionate costs for professional expertise including architects on BSF projects was a clumsy attempt to apportion blame for the failure of BSF when the failure was the bureaucracy and wasteful programme itself.”
“There is much that can be improved on to reduce the costs of delivering school buildings in the future but the use of architects in this political game continues to do a disservice to a profession that is committed to delivering the best possible projects and would have earned every penny of their fees.”
A Conservative spokesman said: “Our Freedom of Information request could not have been clearer. We asked 151 local authorities explicitly for ’the total amount spent on architects’ fees’ and we have used the precise figures provided by those local authorities.”
Ruth Reed and Aedas have written separate letters to the Sunday Times demanding a correction is printed.
Related Articles
- No manslaughter charge over 'wind tunnel' death
11 April 2012
- Who can we blame?
10 June 2011
- Design Council names Paul Finch deputy chair
7 June 2011
- Hopkins leads the pack at RIBA awards
19 May 2011
Have your say
Sign in to make a comment on this story.
Sign InDesktop Site | Mobile Site
Readers' comments (4)
All very Machiavellian if you ask me. Single out each profession and one by one, drag thier profession through the mud, and when the PR demolition job is complete table your own great plan to the hoodwinked general public reinforcing your greatness and how rubbish every one else is.
In four years time we will have an opportunity to tell them what we thought of their leadership, it is just a shame we will have to wait so long.
Methinks the RIBA doth protest too much. Lets face it they made hay while the sun shone and indulged their runaway egos! They will have to wait for a Labour Government to start a spend, spend, spend campaign again before its champagne and Belgian chocs for brekkie again - the party at the public's expense is largely over for now. The Govt now want practical modular buildings that can be rolled out en masse - unsexy but frankly sensible solutions - what was wrong with this approach from the start? Could have saved the tax payer a fortune!
Sarah Vine is a writer and editor at The Times .... and wife of Michael Gove. Nuff said !
If you look at the title (Architects up in arms over Tory dossier ‘smears’) and the last paragraph of the article: ‘A Conservative spokesman said: “Our Freedom of Information request could not have been clearer. We asked 151 local authorities explicitly for ’the total amount spent on architects’ fees’ and we have used the precise figures provided by those local authorities.” ‘
It is not the Tories that are inaccurate or “lying”, but rather, the councils. The entire article makes NO mention of the source of the data until the last paragraph (i.e. it is the councils which provided all of the data under the Freedom of Information Act). The Tories only published the results of inquiry. The title should be: "Architects up in arms over Local Council ‘smears’". Whoops, but this would mean biting the hand that feeds. Is there bias in this article?