At the conclusion of one year and the start of another is probably the time that most architects remember their regulator – when the time arrives (yet again) when the annual registration fee has to be paid. I would like to thank the 97% of architects who paid on time.

The end of this year is especially poignant as the UK left the EU on 31 January – during the past year 41% of total admissions to the Register came through EU routes. When the Board met on 27 January, it discussed the challenges ahead in maintaining the standards required for anyone that seeks to join the Register from overseas in the future, when automatic recognition for those qualified in EU countries will be considered in the context of the still-to-be-decided future relationship between the UK and EU. The latest information for architects about EU Exit can be found here.

This of course comes at a time when the Board is seeking to enhance pre-registration competence, with an early focus on the areas of fire and life safety and climate change and sustainability – you will recall from what I have previously said that we have set up two expert working groups who are working at pace to advise us on potential enhancements to guidance, and possibly standards, in these areas.

More widely though, and looking into the future, the Board is exploring new requirements for post-registration competence that will affect every architect on the Register, bringing increasing expectations of continuing professional development to enhance professional practice and how this might integrate with the annual retention process. The Board is highly attuned to the emerging outcomes from the cross-industry group which continues to develop its response to the recommendations of the Hackitt review, and what the implications might be for further enhancing standards.

Taken together, it’s clear that the momentum is building for a future regime where the ARB will be expected to increase its oversight of the competence of all architects however they might have originally joined the Register. As I have said previously, the Board takes the view that it is no longer acceptable to remain on the Register without any checks on professional competence until an architect finally leaves it.

The Board also noted that the number of criminal prosecutions for misuse of the title of architect had doubled since the previous year, largely as a result of a substantial increase in the number of investigations, a third of which are commissioned as a result of tip-offs from architects. Sadly though, there are still too many architects falling foul of the Architects Code. Any architect removed from the Register for that reason is always a major disappointment to the Board, and I cannot help but think that more focus on professional competence would really make a difference. I’ll leave you with that thought.

Yours sincerely,

Alison J White

Chair
Architects Registration Board