USWAG - use what (you) already got

A huge petition to the few Chartered Engineers in The House is a waste of time. There are of course many more things that could be done

Anyone heard of a Professional Accountant or a Professional Surveyor? I have been watching the recent debate about the status of Engineers which (for the benefit of younger readers) has been going on for the whole of my career - now spanning more than 30 years. I am curious as to why we are debating the use of 'Professional' as a pre-fix to the word Engineer. 

An old colleague of mine oft repeated the word 'USWAG' - USe What (you) Already Got. Accountants and Surveyors both use the pre-fix Chartered which seems to give a certain air of importance to their professions. Those registered at professional level with the Engineering Council already hold the pre-fix Chartered. This status is granted on the back of Royal Charters - how much more 'institutional' can you get? So why create something new? USWAG!!

The problem is not the word itself but how it has been used over the years. I think the idea of a huge petition to the few Chartered Engineers in The House is a waste of time. Few Private Members Bills ever get anywhere.

So what is my proposal? The way to get things done at political level is if all the groundwork is already prepared. I would request/demand/insist that The Engineering Council in co-ordination with the major Engineering Institutions engage an expert constitutional lawyer to prepare a Draft Parliamentary Bill which contained the following elements. All public works projects must have designs which are signed off/approved by a CHARTERED ENGINEER, and must have construction method statements or equipment manufacturing processes which are signed off/approved by a CHARTERED ENGINEER. I (or at least the Engineering Council Chief Executive and the Lawyer) would then present this draft Bill to the relevant Government Minister and his/her Opposition Shadow, with the following question. If Public Company accounts have to be signed of by a CHARTERED ACCOUNTANT, why does public expenditure on Engineering Projects not have to be legally signed off by a CHARTERED ENGINEER?

There are of course many more things that could be done. For example why when I call an insurance company for a quote do they have Chartered Accountant on their job list database but not Chartered Engineer? I am sure some EC education/pressure would achieve something there. There are lots of other things that could be done but this already too long email prevents me going there!

Geoff Matthews, Heritage Way, Wigan

Next letter: Focus on fracking facts