黑洞社区

Architects have hit out at the Conservative Party after it circulated a document containing 鈥渕isleading鈥� figures for architects鈥� fees obtained under the 黑洞社区 Schools for the Future (BSF) programme.

Information from the dossier was published in a highly critical Sunday Times article last weekend, under the headline 鈥楢rchitects net 拢98m from schools鈥�.

The figures 鈥� obtained by the Conservative Party from local authorities under the Freedom of Information Act 鈥� were disputed by architects including BDP and Aedas.

The dossier claims architects made 拢98m from just 21 councils under the BSF programme and highlights a series of examples of 鈥榦verspending鈥� 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 拢2.5m quoted in the document.

Anna Scott-Marshall, head of public affairs for the Royal Institue of British Architects (RIBA), told 黑洞社区: 鈥淲e feel we are being used as a political football. Ultimately we want it to stop.鈥�

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 鈥渃lumsy鈥� attack on the profession.

Reed said: 鈥淭he Conservative Party鈥檚 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.鈥�

鈥淭here 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.鈥�

A Conservative spokesman said: 鈥淥ur Freedom of Information request could not have been clearer. We asked 151 local authorities explicitly for 鈥檛he total amount spent on architects鈥� fees鈥� and we have used the precise figures provided by those local authorities.鈥�

Ruth Reed and Aedas have written separate letters to the Sunday Times demanding a correction is printed.