As someone who is relatively new to the profession I am amazed by the amount
of cyber acres people use discussing issues regarding internal  SoA matters.
The nra list serve provides  an excellent forum for discussing the wider
issues that effect the profession, yet these are hardly ever discussed. 

Last week, at the London Region meeting of the SoA, Deborah Jenkins of the
LMA, raised some very interesting issues regarding the relationship between
the profession and MLAC/DCMS. At a time when  archives is being projected on
to the national arena, as never before, surely  big issues like this need to
be debated. 

If we don't discuss the big issues and form an opinion on things that really
matter, there is a danger that the 'A' in  MLAC will be disregarded.



  


> -----Original Message-----
> From:	[log in to unmask] 
> Sent:	Thursday, February 10, 2000 2:28 PM
> To:	[log in to unmask]
> Subject:	Business Archives Group
> 
> I thought list readers and SRG (Specialist Repositories Group) members
> would
> like to know that the issue of the structure of the SRG is on the agenda
> for
> the SRG AGM.   We felt it was relevant to discuss this in light of the
> Society's restructuring  as a whole, and the question of the wide ranging
> membership of SRG which inevitably means members have some disparate
> interests and issues.   I think one of the issues which is likely to be
> debated is the question of whether the Society needs more specialist
> interest groups to cater properly for its members or whether SRG itself
> could usefully have sub-groups to represent different members' interests.
> SRG members cover far more than simply university or business archivists,
> and include film, museum/gallery, schools, private families, historic
> houses, etc.   I think the debate is likely to centre on whether it is
> valuable for these groups to be represented together, to give them a
> sufficiently strong voice to be heard against the perceived chorus of
> local
> authority archivists, or whether business archivists (or any of the other
> groups) really do form such a distinct group that they should separate
> out.
> If the idea of separation is favoured, this will surely be relevant to
> groups other than just business archivists and may lead to a radical
> re-structuring of the Society as a whole, as Richard has already
> suggested.
>  
> As I'm writing this in my role as SRG secretary (although these are my
> views
> and have not been endorsed by the committee), I'm sitting firmly on the
> fence for the purposes of this email but I would like to ask people to
> give
> their opinions.    So far, the list discussion has been fairly unanimous
> in
> it's approval for the idea of a separate group, and all the comment has
> been
> from business archivists.   It would be interesting to hear what
> non-business SRG/Society members think: are there local authority
> archivists
> out there feeling horribly under-represented and wanting a specialist
> interest group of their own?   I feel very conscious that the issues with
> which I deal professionally are very different from the perceived
> "typical"
> SRG member (single person, poorly resourced, etc), and it would be
> valuable
> to find out whether SRG members feel they are properly represented on the
> committee and how well they feel SRG serves them.  The AGM is on 6 April,
> at
> Friends' House in London at 6pm: anyone who can't make that but would like
> to contribute to the debate is welcome to contact me with their views.
> Also, David Prior and Susan Snell are standing down from the committee, so
> I'd like to take this opportunity to thank them for all their hard work as
> co-chairs over the last three years (their energy is one reason why SRG
> has
> grown so much and why we are having this debate) and to invite people to
> stand for the committee.  If you feel SRG doesn't represent your
> interests,
> this is your chance to amend that! 
> 
> Incidentally, the AGM notices are going out now but with the wrong contact
> phone number for Susan Snell on them (due to a change of jobs for Susan
> and
> incompetence on my part): her correct contact number is 0171 942 5507.
> 
> Lucy Jones
> 
> BT Archives
> Third Floor, Holborn Telephone Exchange, 268-270 High Holborn, London WC1V
> 7EE 
> 0171 492 8795
> [log in to unmask]
> 
> This message is from the Internet





"This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed.  This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept by MIMEsweeper for the presence of computer viruses".


%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%