The Gazette 1978

SEPTEMBER 1978,

GAZETTE

to be, it seems. They are to be nominated by Government after consultation with 'it is not known whom'. Only one professional group have retained their influence in the nomination of representatives. Now, to me this issue is closely related to what I spoke on a few minutes ago about mutual respect of each others authority between government and professions. If the profession does not influence its own representation at Brussels, obviously its authority in its own area of competence is being denied. And denial of the authority of the myriad of groups within any modern society, not just professional groups could lead to a dangerous situation.A dictatiorial government, strong words I'll admit, but descriptive of any government which denies competent authority, is not what we should be aiming at as we enter the 1980's. Why is it, that the struggle to find and assert authority on the part of many, whether communities in their residents' and tenants' associations, or members of churches, or indeed that half of the population who are women, should be countered by the denial of here-to-fore accept authority by the bureaucratic arm of the representatives of that self- same society? We owe it not only to ourselves, but also to society, not to accept rejection of our uthority. But we also owe it to society not to reject the authority of society's representatives in government. So while we must be strong in our own defence, we must also be strong in confronting the challenges facing a young society heading into an unknown future. Really, all I'm saying is that in any event, and I repeat 'in any event' — we must be professional.

interpretation is necessary to a full understanding of the matter on hand. When such a submission can be experienced as a positive contribution which throws more light on the matter, or be judged on its own merit, then relationships between the professions and government can be felt to be rewarding. And of course, we must play our part in fostering such good relations. It is time that we judged government decisions in the light of community interest and not as penal restrictions on our freedom. Do we respect the authority of government services, or see them purely as agencies issuing regulations? I'm sure that we all have examples of situations where we can adopt an attitude of needless control, or perhaps just a greater challenge to our professionalism. As an architect I can immediately think of examples like government policy on capital expenditure for schools. This can be felt as restrictive. But at least if it is felt as a challenge by the architect, then any real difficulties can be allowed to surface, to be resolved by those involved. And the experience has been that such attutudes that is facing the challenge have fostered many new developments in school building — in other words the potential for creativity has been realised. So I believe that we should assure Dr. Whelan — No, we don't think the answer is for us to go away and not bother you. That would be very irresponsible for us. The answer is for both sides to re- examine our attitudes to the authority of the other, and to find ways to improve the working of our relationships. Dr. Whelan's other points about the integration of professional people in die Civil Service belongs to the collaborative aspect of professional work as described by Bruce Reed. With so many of our members in salaried employment, we must have many members working collaboratively in the Civil Service and other institutions. I believe that we owe it to those colleagues that we study their situation with a view to finding out how best we should support them. Many of them have gone into Unions because our associations have not recognised the relevancy of their problems. Is it good enough that we offer them membership which can not have any real practical benefit and only offers some sort of sentience? Not all, but some of our associations have avoided looking at these issues. And I suspect that the older, and stronger assosiations, those whose very existence offers support to the newer groups, have been the ones most reluctant to study the position of their members working as a collaborator. Is it too much to ask the professions, either collectively or individually, to study the problems of those members, who not only represent a fair proportion of their membership but must even represent a fair proportion of their subscription income. There is another issue which the professions must tackle — and it would seem that there must be benefit in sharing together their experience — and that is the whole area of our representation in terms of the E.E.C. If we in the F.P.A. fell down this year, it was in this area. We afe written to by the Royal Institute of the Architects of Ireland and asked to enquire about the experiences of member associations in relation to the Advisory Committees for each profession. We did not get very far with our enquiries — our fault, not the fault of member bodies. However, the issue is that when Advisory Committees where first mentioned the professional associations understood that the representatives of the Practising Profession and the Teaching Institutions would be nominated on proposals of the profession. This is not

Nuala Kernan, M.R.I.A.I.

Incorporated Law Society of Ireland

PLEASE NOTE that the Society's examinations will commence on the following dates and the closing dates for receipt of entries are as shown:

Old Regulations Date of Commencement 5th December, 1978

Examination Second Irish

Closing date 17th Nov. 1978.

New Regulations Date of commencement

Closing date Final Exam: First Part 12th-15th December 78 17th Nov. 1978

For All Apprentices Date of commencement 4th December, 1978

Closing Date 17th Nov. 1978

First Irish

149