Questions and Answers Arising from the AIBC Special Meeting

Updated February 16, 2009

Section H: Role of the Executive Director / Registrar

H1. Q: Please explain how making the executive director also the registrar serves the profession?

H2. Q: Given that the process of registration is undertaken by committee, it may seem reasonable to not require the registrar to be an MAIBC. However, with difficult situations or issues that require direct consultation with an applicant seeking membership, the applicant should be able to deal directly with an MAIBC. These reviews should be “peer” reviews. A prospective member should be accorded due respect and deal with member architects and not merely an administrator who is not an MAIBC. For this reason alone I am not in agreement with the idea that the executive director automatically be the registrar. There is also an issue of appearance: membership issues should be dealt with by members. The registrar should have the public appearance of being the “gatekeeper” to membership. The registrar has historically been an MAIBC. I think that this should continue. I, for one, would much rather have my membership certificate signed by an MAIBC as the registrar than a non-MAIBC.

H3. Q: Can I refuse inspectors appointed by the Executive Director to enter my office/home (should they be at the same address)? With my knowledge, only a judge can issue a search warrant. Not even a policeman can enter my property without a search warrant issued by a judge.

H1. Q: Please explain how making the executive director also the registrar serves the profession?

A: The proposed new legislation does not call for the executive director to become the registrar. Rather, it proposes that the title registrar be eliminated. A detailed explanation can be found under question H2 below.

A: The need to ensure the entry standard to the profession, and to properly assess whether or not an individual has met that standard, is a valid consideration. It is separate, however, from the question of whether of not that responsibility should rest with someone from within the profession. While a number of professions require their registrar to be a registered/licensed professional member of the regulatory body itself, many do not. In practical terms, however, the registrar oversees the process but does not assess qualifications or determine entry. Entry standards are set by AIBC Council acting on the advice of the Registration & Licensing Board. Individual applicants are assessed against the criteria, processes and procedures developed by the board and its related committees and approved by Council. The assessment process itself is carried out by the Registration & Licensing Board and its committees, which are populated by AIBC registrants. The assessment of an applicant is always done by a group of his or her professional peers. For this reason, it is not essential that the registrar be an MAIBC.

A: This question appears to be in reference to a court-ordered search mechanism proposed in the new legislation. This is a standard legislative provision for many regulated professionals such as doctors, lawyers and others. It is intended for use only in limited circumstances, such as a registrant obstructing a professional conduct investigation or a non-registrant practising architecture where matters of urgent public interest arise. This is consistent not only with modern professional regulation, but also with current law including legal protections. The critical check and balance to this provision remains that such an order can only be granted by a judge of the British Columbia Supreme Court. A provision such as this has become an expectation of government for any new professional regulatory legislation, hence its inclusion in the draft legislation.

Should you have any further questions regarding the proposed legislation, please submit them using the Feedback resource on the New Legislation web page.

The complete Q&A is also available in PDF format. Please click here to download.