A FAILURE OF LEADERSHIP
Re: The RAIC and the Memorial to Canada’s Mission in Afghanistan
The federal government’s decision to overturn the outcome of the National Monument to Canada’s Mission in Afghanistan design competition has ignited widespread controversy across Canada in recent months. Despite extensive debates in the House of Commons, a petition garnering over 2,000 signatures and considerable media coverage (including in Azure), the Royal Architectural Institute of Canada (RAIC) has surprisingly abstained from taking a decisive stance on this contentious issue of national importance.
This silence stands in stark contrast to the courageous actions of former RAIC presidents Macy Dubois (1982–1983) and Eva Matsuzaki (1998–1999), both of whom staunchly opposed political interference in past public architectural competitions, such as those for the Embassy of Canada in Washington, DC, and the Embassy of Canada in Berlin. For instance, Matsuzaki demonstrated strong leadership when she wrote the following in a leter of concern addressed to the Canadian government: “Architecture services must be procured through a fair and transparent evaluation process, one that respects the unique contribution of the architectural profession as well as the business and financial risks taken by firms who participate. The competition for the design of the Berlin Chancery began as an open selection process. However, the outcome demonstrated a lack of understanding of the architectural process, and created the unwelcome appearance of a closed, if not overtly political, process.”
The clarity and conviction of past RAIC leaders about the integrity of public design competitions are noticeably weaker in the open leter writen by current RAIC president Jason Robbins and published last November on Azure’s website. In his piece, “Bridging the Gap: Design Competitions and Public Preference in Architecture,” Robbins regretably does not condemn in unequivocal terms the political interference in the outcome of the Memorial to Canada’s Mission in Afghanistan design competition. This raises serious questions about the organization’s commitment to its mission and values. Rather than following the courageous examples set by their predecessors, the current leaders of the RAIC demonstrated a failure of leadership, privileging instead so-called partnerships with the federal government.
If we, the architectural community, can no longer rely on the RAIC to defend the importance of fair and transparent evaluation processes for publicly funded architectural competitions, perhaps it’s time for new leadership to step in.
— Samuel Dubois, architect (OAQ, MRAIC)