According to the scholars, the “official” date will be 28 December 2012, although everyone knows that game began long before that. The leaks with a vested interest began much earlier when a powerpoint presentation of a draft version of the draft Bill for the future LSP was disseminated.
“Conversation with Alejandro Zaera”. Interview done by Daniel Moyano.
José María Echarte, in his blog n+1, not only informs you of current events related to the LSP, but breaks things down and explains them clearly and simply. This doesn’t mean he is the only source, but he is the one I use to stay abreast.
Statements made to various media, both print and television.
It’s not easy to feel represented when you can’t vote for your representatives.
All laws have a spirit, and the spirit of this law is presumed to be to offer end users a better service.
In its press release, the CSCAE explained it was displeased for not having been received by the authorities to debate the LSP bill.
2 minutos
Cartoon from “The City” by Frans Masereel, published by NórdicaLibrosAlthough the game ostensibly began in 20121, there have been many movements made since then against the Professional Services Act (LSP). Perhaps, had they been supported by the great masters of the present day, they would have been more effective, although having read some of their positions on the subject2, it is better not to ask.
Much has been written, opined, argued and mobilized (#NolaLSP) on the Act, providing us with thousands of hours of reading3. This makes it very difficult, so as not to say impossible for me to add anything new, unless I actually knew that date that the definitive move was to be made, which is not the case. So the best thing for me to do is to offer some general food for thought that we can later debate on.
Starting with the fact that the LSP needs to be overhauled and brought up to the present-day times, it is obvious that it would be good to reach a consensus among the stakeholders, rather than a for committee of wise men to take unilateral decisions that affect many groups.
It also seems obvious that the most infelicitous statements4 made by certain representatives of other groups of professions (and even professionals of our own5), are out of place and do not represent the profession’s opinions.
Respect seems to me to be a basic, imperative formality, a pre-requisite for dialogue. This is something which seems to be overlooked nowadays.
Clearly, the profession and model must be represented, but not only within the scope of professional practice. Education and training must also be addressed. What sense does it make to change the law6 and yet continue to educate professionals as they have been so far? Wouldn’t it be more logical to address the issue comprehensively?
Everything seems to indicate that this new legislation will be approved, as the recent CSCAE (High Council of Spanish Architects’ Associations) press release7, hints at this.
At this stage of the game, the change of rules is plainly unfair and unacceptable. But what can we do about it? What can we do that has not already been done?
I’m afraid there’s nothing and time is running out. I believe unfortunately the game is nearly over and checkmate is looming.
According to the scholars, the “official” date will be 28 December 2012, although everyone knows that game began long before that. The leaks with a vested interest began much earlier when a powerpoint presentation of a draft version of the draft Bill for the future LSP was disseminated.
“Conversation with Alejandro Zaera”. Interview done by Daniel Moyano.
José María Echarte, in his blog n+1, not only informs you of current events related to the LSP, but breaks things down and explains them clearly and simply. This doesn’t mean he is the only source, but he is the one I use to stay abreast.
Statements made to various media, both print and television.
It’s not easy to feel represented when you can’t vote for your representatives.
All laws have a spirit, and the spirit of this law is presumed to be to offer end users a better service.
In its press release, the CSCAE explained it was displeased for not having been received by the authorities to debate the LSP bill.
