An Engine for Change - A Chronicle of the Engineering Council

4A CHRONICLE OF THE ENGINEERING COUNCIL• 1974 – By this time the dissatisfaction is growing to the point where the “3Presidents” produce a paper proposing a new “Institution of Engineers” (IE) that willhave directly-elected members on its Board rather than Institution representatives.The IE is to look after all professional matters such as representation of theengineering profession and will control qualifications, whilst the Institutions willconfine themselves to advancing the state of engineering knowledge - the “learnedsociety” function. The “Big 3” reckon that, because of their size, the majority of theelected IE Board will come from their memberships. Needless to say this is not wildlyappealing to the smaller bodies and, after a number of attempts at compromise, the IEidea is dropped in favour of a relatively small adjustment to the CEI constitutionallowing its Board to contain a mix of elected and nominated members.• 1975/76 – Because of the continuing feeling that the CEI is not making the desiredimpact, calls begin to be made for a Royal Commission or other type of Governmentenquiry into the engineering profession. These calls emanate mainly from the IEE,whose Secretary Dr George Gainsborough is particularly active, and also from theelite Fellowship of Engineering (now the Royal Academy of Engineering), from tradeunions, and also from some of the non-chartered engineering institutions. The TradesUnion Congress passes a unanimous resolution (in 1976) that is moved by John Lyonsof the Electrical Power Engineers’ Association. The resolution runs “Convinced thatthe Engineering Profession has a vital role to play in the regeneration of Britishindustry, Congress calls on the Government to set up, without delay, a powerfulCommittee of Inquiry into the role, function and use of qualified engineers in Britishindustry”. This influences Government, and the Department of Trade and Industry isdrawn into the discussions by the perception that improvements to the engineeringprofession’s standards and status could have a beneficial effect on the performance ofBritish manufacturing industry. [Its share of GDP fell from 33 % in 1963 to 29 % in1973. Worse still, British manufacturing productivity in 1973 was less than 50% thatof Japan and 40% that of the USA.]• 1977 – Although opinion both within and outside Government is not unanimously infavour, a “Committee of Inquiry into the Engineering Profession” is announced toParliament on 5 July 1977 and the inimitable Sir Montague (known by all as Monty)Finniston appointed as Chairman. Its membership [Annex A] is announced on 14December 1977. The terms of reference are, for manufacturing industry [our italics]and in the light of national economic needs, to review and make recommendations on:(a) the requirements of British industry for professional and technicianengineers, the extent to which these needs are being met, and the use beingmade of engineers by industry;(b) the role of the engineering institutions in relation to the education andqualification of engineers at professional and technical level;(c) the advantages and disadvantages of statutory registration and licensing ofengineers in the United Kingdom;(d) the arrangements in other major industrial countries, particularly in theEEC, for handling these problems, having regard to relevant comparativestudies.© Engineering Council UK 2004