An Engine for Change - A Chronicle of the Engineering Council

1999-2001: THE HAWLEY YEARS 169Evans with senior staff representatives from all of the G10. It reported through Sir MichaelMoore to the Panel. Its recommendations were all accepted.By means of the G10 and G26 Groups and other channels of communication, the Institutionsboth large and small promoted their ideas on future involvement mainly, though not entirely,with the aim of securing strong representation (that is, their members not just beingappointed as individuals) on the new emerging bodies. But there were many othercounterbalancing contributions from various sources that felt the Institutions and Registrantsshould not hold too great a sway within the newly defined ‘wider engineering community’.In order to get through a very tight programme that was obviously extremely urgent, DrHawley had always maintained that he would step down from the EngC after his 3-year termat the end of 2001, thereby defining the entire timetable. Although requested to stay on, hejudged that if he remained another twelve months, it would “simply take another year tocomplete the programme”. This attitude resulted in intense and successful efforts by hiscolleagues, David Worskett, Paul Langdell (and team) and the ETB Board – particularlyAlastair Macdonald.Activities at the Engineering CouncilWhile all this was going on what was happening back at the ranch? At the top level of theEngC, in addition to losing one of its two key operational Directors, those running the showhad the added problem of increasingly being seen as a body about to be done away with. TheChairman sought to support the EngC’s continuing work by reminding the profession of itsachievements. However, this was seen by some simply as a gesture that sat uneasily with theparallel moves to replace it. Indeed making the case for the ETB unfortunately involved somediscrediting of the EngC, even if this was not the intention. But again to some, this appearedto be part of the project team’s strategy in promoting the ETB.At staff level, besides the fears for job security among EngC staff, there was a feeling thatmuch good work was either deliberately or inadvertently ignored. Examples were held aloftsuch as WISE, YEB, SARTOR, Neighbourhood Engineers, Industry Affiliates, many presscampaigns, considerable successes in the acceptance of UK engineering qualificationsoverseas and comment on matters of national concern. The generally successful attempts todeal with Institutions’ intransigence and unwillingness to be harnessed to a common causewithin a federal structure were also quoted. But, as already mentioned, there had been adearth of new activities in the past few years. It is true there had been some updating of effort- considerable on SARTOR-3 and the re-invigoration of the Industry Affiliate Scheme. Inaddition, the auditing and licensing procedures for Institutions had been brought into linewith nationally accepted standards. But, and again it has to be mentioned, the potential of theMOU with Government had hardly been tapped and the Public Affairs’ efforts had faltered.Consequently, a fresh initiative to improve the performance of the EngC could easily bejustified.The apprehension at Maltravers Street was unevenly spread. It was less within the Engineers’Regulation Directorate (now on the 5 th Floor) because the Hawley Initiative had accepted thata successor organisation would have to continue the regulatory function. So the business oflicensing of Institutions and registration would probably involve a continuation of many, ifnot most, of the DER staff duties. It was different on the 6 th Floor where the Engineering© Engineering Council UK 2004