Examination of Witnesses (Questions 160-163)
MR PAUL
LOVEJOY, MS
PAT TEMPANY,
MS MIRANDA
PEARCE AND
MR DOMINIC
MURPHY
12 MAY 2008
Q160 Mr Hands: Having an impact on
the training of practitioners I think is part of its mission statement.
Mr Murphy: How did they define
having an impact?
Chair: It was indeed from the Academy
of Sustainable Communities, that they influenced the learning
of only 1.3%.
Q161 Mr Hands: What about the other
representatives? What are your views on the ASC?
Ms Pearce: As Dom said, we have
been part of the excellence network from the start and certainly
we have attended meetings with the chief executives and the Academy
has been invited to attend those as well. We have received some
funding from the Academy to deliver some projects. They are in
the difficult position of being a relatively small organisation
that is trying to talk to both the national agenda but also being
respected and understood by the practitioners. That is always
very difficult because you are looking both ways; you are trying
to be strategic but you are also trying to provide practical support.
I think certainly in the south east they have had a limited impact
to date because they have had a limited involvement to date. Certainly
we are very keen to work with them more constructively and we
see that certainly going forward. We are hoping that the pilot
that we are carrying out with the HCA will enable us to address
our relationship in that way. We have benefited from their funding.
They part-funded the research we referred to earlier bringing
councillors and developers together. The Learning Laboratories
Programme that they encouraged all the centres to take part in
has been very successful and certainly in our region it has given
us an idea of how we can move forward and do similar work in other
parts of the region. I think all the centres have found that a
very rewarding process and as a network we are looking at how
we can learn from what each other has done. For example, in the
east there was a very interesting diagnosis process working with
a number of local authorities and that is something we would be
interested to try in the south east. So they have provided an
environment in which we can innovate and experiment as network
members. Perhaps where it has been less clear what they have been
doing—although I imagine they have been doing something—is
at the national level where they have perhaps been influencing
some of the strategic players, the sector skills bodies, professional
institutes and other bodies such as Atlas and IDeA. We are not
best placed to answer to those relationships, but certainly in
terms of regional relationships I think it is something that is
developing and could potentially be very fruitful going forward.
Q162 Chair: Can I just pick up a
couple of issues which have come up in the evidence? What relationship
do your bodies have with the various professional bodies, the
RTPI is one but the other professional bodies as well?
Ms Pearce: We have various relationships
with the professional bodies. Through SEEDA we have spent a number
of years trying to bring the professional institutes together,
trying to encourage pan-professional learning. We supported, mainly
driven by the South East Centre for the Environment working very
closely with RTPI and RIBA (who have been some of the biggest
collaborators in our region), we encouraged them and gave them
some funding to start to bring together a common CPD website which
enabled all the institutes to put CPD programmes available onto
a common source which I think is now rolled our nationally. We
have also encouraged them, through small amounts of money, to
come together and look at how they can plan joint CPD activity
so that members from RIBA, RTPI, RICS, CIOB et cetera can
come to events and that is something we are taking forward now,
trying to get a common memorandum of understanding between in
the region of 16 of those organisations. It is a model that has
worked very well in the north-west and in the east of England,
again through the Regional Centres of Excellence Network and we
are building on that expertise and are trying to push it into
our region. There we want them to collaborate, to plan CPD provision
and in our case we would try to encourage them to look at CPD
provision that addresses the eight components of the Egan wheel.
For example, they might collectively look at housing issues and
then equity and economic development, but do it in the context
of joint professional learning. So far it is positive. We have
a number of the chairs who want to come to a common signing and
certainly historically we have had very successful events, particularly
held between RIBA and RTPI looking at issues of sustainability,
for example. There are good examples of collaboration in the region
and that is what we are trying to encourage, to bring them together,
to let them talk to each other and then from that to spin out
and develop their longer term relationships. As an RDA and centre
of excellence we see a lot of our role as actually building cross-professional
relationships to enable people to work through themselves to sustain
those relationships.
Q163 Chair: Did you want to add anything
else?
Mr Murphy: I think that is a really
good answer by Miranda. I would just say that right across the
regions there are examples of working across professional institutions.
Certainly in our region I taught on the RTPI CPD programme which
just rolls through the year. They contact us and ask us if there
is anything we particularly would like to get included in their
programme and similarly with RICS as well. They are part of our
network basically and we have regular discussions at the regional
level and also make sure that there is representation on those
bodies on our governing bodies as well because that is good when
you are having strategic discussions about where you are going
to go next.
Chair: Thank you all very much indeed.
| 
