Newsletter - Links - Advertise - Contact Us - Privacy
 

Goodbye RIAS. Hello ADS. Penny Lewis looks catches up a man on a mission.

20 Apr 2005

He started working at the RIAS on 1 April 1986. Exactly 19 years on Sebastian Tombs is preparing to leave the RIAS to head up Architecture and Design Scotland, the country’s answer to CABE

What was the RIAS like when you arrived?
“It was very small and extremely busy. We had about eight staff. Charles McKean was a fiendish workaholic with great ambitions for Scotland. He had already turned around the attitude of the RIAS, from one of deference to London to one of self-belief. What I came in to develop was the practices services scheme, and to be an office manager. What happened quickly was that the practice side grew. When I took over we had a bit of a financial hole. We had a lot of CPD activity and that was what got us out of the financial difficulty.”

You say that McKean brought a sense of independence to the RIAS?
“The RIAS always had freedom, but in the 60s it was not clear whether there was enough will in Scotland to keep a body separate from the RIBA. Larry Rolland, John Richards and George Burnett, and others, were all quite brave to take on this firebrand [McKean] to regenerate things, and he certainly did that. The relationship with the RIBA had been tricky over the years. There has always been an interesting discussion about how membership money should be collected and by whom, and how much should go to whom. Following devolution Paul Hyett and Gordon Davies brokered a new deal, which led to a new charter. The new charter involved a lot of detailed negotiations. It clarified the RIAS’s independence, in partnership with the RIBA, rather than as its daughter. I think I can feel comfortable leaving the RIAS in a more secure organisational, institutional sense, and also leaving it in a reasonable financial position.”

How has the RIAS changed?
“We have grown and changed a lot. Charles was very enthusiastic about communications. He had been developing guides, publications and exhibitions, talking to voluntary groups about architecture. By the time I took over, the steep period of development had flattened off a bit, and we were usually the first point of contact for any issues relating to architecture and the built environment. At its peak in the early 90s staff numbers touched 30. Our size has fluctuated in response to our activities, such as CPD and the marketing advisory service and the Association of Planning Supervisors. These were growth points, and once they were embedded we scaled down. Membership fees provide anything from a quarter to a third of the RIAS turnover. We have produced other income by just being entrepreneurial, by seeing opportunities, like the bookshop, events and competitions.”

What have been the major influences on the profession over the past 19 years?
“The period from 1980 to1990 was fairly buoyant, but the demise of the public sector was underway. By 1990 the bubble had burst and we were quickly into recession. Everybody woke up to fee competition at the same time, and cut their fees because they were very fearful of not having any work. We set up groups to think about how to change attitudes to architects, it was much more client focused. From 1995 onwards the economy started to pick up, and Latham and Egan were starting to talk about value rather than cost. We are now arriving at a point where there is a more intelligent debate about getting the balance right. There is a shift in awareness about the value of what architects do, which is part of that societal shift.
“The other big thing was the demise of ARCUK and the arrival of the registration board. We were very busy dealing with complaints, and it was becoming difficult and painful. The ARB has a much clearer remit; it is independent and is serving the profession very well. There is always going to be a debate about academic freedom and the prescriptive role of the ARB, that tension has to be managed.”

Have membership numbers changed over the years?
“Architects are very flexible and imaginative people. Although they are regularly criticised for not being good mangers, they survive and still producing buildings, that are better than those which were produced in the 60s and 70s. The membership figure hasn’t changed much, it is about 4,000, but the number active has fallen, it is about 2,500 which is about 80 per cent of architects.”

We all know that architects’ fees have changed...
“My generation of architects was brought up with fee scales. It is the place people go to mentally when thinking about providing services. If you don’t hold on to the agenda of any RIAS committee very tightly, that is what they end up talking about. It has been a worry to the RIAS. If the income to the profession is severely dented then all the other things that architects do come under attack.”

Is it inevitable that the RIAS will leave Rutland Square?
“In March 2001 we agreed to relocate from Rutland Square, if that were possible. In 1995 Richard Murphy asked whether we were in the right building to deliver our corporate plan. Since then we kept the idea alive and access has become an issue. We are now in discussion with a number of other partners, particularly the Scottish Executive about a co-location with ADS in a building near Waverly.”

What is the role of the RIAS today?
“When I arrived at Rutland Square it was an architecture centre and a professional institute. With the arrival of The Lighthouse and ADS the issue of how the RIAS represents practices becomes more important. It has been a strong part of what we do with the directories and client’s advice. There is always the danger of a perception that a professional body comes with a lot of baggage, that it is trying to defend or protect its own members.”

What will be the agenda of ADS?
“ADS is about people actually, the places which they inhabit and work. It’s a people’s champion, not there for the specials and the one-offs, it’s for everyone’s benefit.
“It’s about the schools buildings debates, about our future citizens. It is about the quality of the urban realm, healthy buildings and the quality of the workplace. It is about raising the level of the ordinary, a process in which architects have a big role to play, but it is a big team effort.”

What will your role be?
“The chief executive and staff will be expected to contribute to the debate, to be proactive. We are aware of issues and will deal with them as they arrive without waiting for a letter to ask us for an opinion. There will be difficult decisions to make, but the priority is the design review, which we want to be more open. We will develop the advocacy role over the first year.”

There has already been a lot of discussion in Scotland about the potential conflict of interest for many commissioners.
“The difficulties that CABE had suggest that conflict of interest is as much an issue of perception as reality, but it is important. One of my first tasks will be to create the framework that will allow debate to happen, it should be open but should not inhibit commissioners. I think we will have a system where you can declare an interest and then withdraw where necessary.”

You have a reputation as an active Liberal Democrat. How does ADS impact on your political life?
“I thought it might influence me getting the job, but it didn’t. I think the public sector is currently more interested in people with political experience. I won’t be active in politics because I want to clear the decks with my commitments. ADS will be closer to ministers than the RFACfS, so it’s more political, and I think it’s important to be seen to be neutral.”

Is there a danger that ADS will be too close to government?
“I am determined that it will be a strong and independent body, it’s an arms length organisation. I am sure the strength of its independence will be put to the test.”

Back to April 2005

Search
News
For more news from the industry visit our News section.
Subscribe to Urban Realm Magazine
Features & Reports
For more information from the industry visit our Features & Reports section.