The lack of impact of the RICS’ campaign against the government’s restrictions on QSs coming to work in Britain shouldn’t really come as a surprise (“RICS frustrated by failure of visa campaign”, 5 January, page 14).
However, it does raise a serious question about the judgment of the organisation in pursuing a global profile. If it has such little influence at home on an issue of direct relevance to its basic purpose, how does it expect to wield global influence?
What is the point in spending effort, resources and subscription fees setting up offices far and wide and sending delegations on visits? How do these benefit members if support at home is ineffective?
More importantly, what does this tell us about the competence and decision-making skills of those that lead the institution?
Roger Thrush, former RICS member