ipenz engineers new zealand magazine (july 2008, issue 72)

7/29/2019 IPENZ Engineers New Zealand Magazine (July 2008, Issue 72)

1/12engineering dimension 01

Postnominal abbreviations are a major

credential used by the engineering

profession they indicate our current

competence and professional standing.

IPENZ promotes the consistent use of several

types of postnominal:

currentcompetenceregistrationthe

quality mark for being on a register

that requires regular demonstration

of current competence (for example

CPEng) professionalstandingthequality

mark of acceptance of being in good

professional standing by ones peers

(for example MIPENZ)

qualicationssettingoutonesformal

education (for example BE).

There are also overseas quality marks, for

example CEng from the United Kingdom and

the old Registered Engineering Associate

quality mark (REA), which allow unconditional

continuing registration and are not based

on current competence. Therefore they are

not consistent with the three types IPENZ

promotes.

Across professions in New Zealand, there has

been a consistent protocol that registration

quality marks should not have a prescribed

eldorscopeofworkappliedtothema

person is a registered architect, or chartered

accountant, or chartered professional

engineer. IPENZ has continued to support

this approach for two reasons engineering

issomultidisciplinarythatuniqueelds

cannotbedened,andsecondly,professions

have demonstrated that they can reliably

self-certify their competence to do work.

Thus, in the IPENZ competence assessmentprocess:

assessment is carried out in the

self-declared practice area of each

applicant(eachapplicantspecically

states the engineering activities that he

or she considers the basis of his or her

competence)

candidates are asked to map their

practice area as closely as possible

tooneormoreeldsofengineering

but solely to assist in identifying

suitable assessors and to allow

generation of statistical data about

the spread of registrants betweendisciplines

all currently competent Members of

IPENZ are automatically placed in

the single IPENZ Practice College a

construct to identify those amongst

the Membership who are currently

competent, in case there is any

activity or consultation that should be

restricted to that group of Members.

In 2002, when the CPEng Act commenced,

it was recognised that the creation of the

Practice College also provided an opportunity

to standardise the guidance information

about an engineer. Previously this had

been left to the individual, and a variety

of practices had existed. The extendedpostnominal was introduced from 1 January

2003 as a voluntary, but standardised

way to provide loose guidance towards the

practice area. Those IPENZ Members who

are currently competent were allowed to

use an extended postnominal of the form

MIPENZ(X,Y), TIPENZ(A,B), AIPENZ(C,D),

whereX,Y,A,B,CandDweretheelds

of engineering to which the engineers

practice area aligned (as established in

the competence assessment process),

chosen from: civil, structural, geotechnical,

environmental, mechanical, electrical,

industrial, mining, chemical, bio, information,management,re,buildingservices,

aeronautical, petroleum, and transportation.

ENGINEERING DIMENSION

Changes to IPENZ Postnominals

dimensionISSN 1175-7752 (print) ISSN 1177-9012 (online)

continued on page 03


2/1202 engineering dimension

Bounding Our Ethical

ResponsibilitiesOver the last year or so, both through this publication and in the general

media, Members will have read about challenges to self-regulation.Someoccupationshavegotitwrong(suchasnancialplannersand

real estate salespeople) with dire consequences. We have consistently

emphasised the importance of not letting engineering fall into similar

disrepute. As my predecessor said on several occasions, we rely on

Members to be the frontline, and take on the ethical responsibility to

report poor behaviour, even if it is not comfortable to do so.

Inthisissueyouwillndreportsontwocasestudiesonecasedealt

with under the CPEng regime, and the other dealt with under the

Registered Architects Act. Each involved commercial issues in dispute.

In the engineering case, the matter was over fees and ruled to be

outside the code of ethics (as the contracting body for the fees was

not a natural person, as is a CPEng), but in the architectural case the

matter was over poor estimating of project price, and the individual

registrant was judged to have obligations to estimate the price carefullyand competently.

This illustrates a more general matter on which Members need to

be clear we restrict application of our ethical code to engineers

carrying out engineering activities. What is perhaps not so clear is

that there does not need to be a fee for service (or payment under an

employment agreement) for engineering activities to occur. Whenever

the engineering mindset is engaged the obligations apply. A few years

ago we had an unfortunate case of a Member commenting over his

fence to a neighbour about the stability of a retaining wall asked by

the neighbour if it looked okay he said yes. The wall subsequently failed

and you can guess what happened next.

A recurring theme we face is that engineers often get into trouble by

trying to be too helpful, inadvertently placing an ethical obligationon themselves (and sometimes a commercial liability through tort).

Your friend who is a doctor will not give you medical advice in casual

conversation, but engineers too often step in.

I bring this issue to your attention in my column this month to highlight

the governing Boards ongoing commitment to keeping our house

in order in matters of self-regulation, ethical responsibility, and the

obligation to be competent and careful in all our engineering activities.

The best way to deal with complaints is to stop them from happening

by good behaviour. Failing to bound ones advice is a problem we need

toaddress,butsadlyitdoesmeanturningoffourtrytohelpgeneat

times. The lesson is that if we do not do so, many of us will get trouble

we do not think we deserve.

Bas Walker

IPENZ President



The problems

Five years on, the general consensus is that

the extended postnominal has not worked

particularly well despite our best efforts to

provide clear information. In that time we

have published and distributed three editions

ofengineering edge (the reference guide

to quality marks) to Members, registrants

and regulators, and published a number

of articles, but confusion continues. Some

examples follow.

Members consider that they have

provedtheircompetenceinaeldand

not in their practice area they use

incorrect expressions such as: I got my

CPEng in the civil and environmental

practicecolleges,wheninfactthey

areaCPEngwhoself-certiestheyare

competent to do particular tasks, but

was assessed in a practice area that

the assessors thought aligned with the

civilandenvironmentalelds.

Membersconfusepracticeeldswithpractice area and then confuse other

people.

Many Members think there are 17

Practice Colleges.

Regulatorsareconfusedbyeldsand

practice areas and do not realise that

aeldgivesnoassurancewhatsoever

it is only a means of providing loose

guidance. Nevertheless some are trying

to use it inappropriately.

To overcome these issues would require a

substantial amount of effort, and the only

benetwouldbeavoluntary,butrelatively

standardised, means of providing quite loose

information to guide users of engineering

services.

Board actions and Special General Meeting

outcomes

The governing Board consulted the

Membership through the 2008 Branch and

Technical Group Forum, and was advised bythe representatives present that it was best

to discontinue the extended postnominal.

Accordingly the Board has amended the

Practice College regulations, and this article

serves as the notice of the following changes.

Memberswhoareeligiblemaycontinue

to use the extended postnominal until

31 December 2008, but are advised

to abandon it as soon as possible (for

example when printing new business

cards).

From1January2009Membersmust

completely stop using the extended

postnominal.

In addition, a Special General Meeting of the

Institutionheldon14March2008modied

Rule 27 to change the way Membership

of a Technical Interest Group (TIG) may be

represented. This change is already in place

but has not yet been advertised.

Rule 27 allows that within each TIG all

those who pay the relevant subscription

areMemberswithequalrightswhoshare

collegial interchange that continues

unaltered. The change relates to the ways

a person may represent himself or herself

outside the activities of the group.

WheretheMemberoftheTIGisalso

a Member of the parent body (IPENZ)

and the TIG relates to their practice

area, they are entitled to use their

Membership class in representing their

Membership of the TIG (changed). WheretheMemberoftheTIGisalso

a Member of the parent body but in a

differenteldofpracticetheymayonly

represent themselves as an (ungraded)

Member of the TIG (unchanged).

AllotherMembersoftheTIG,whether

an engineer or not, may only represent

themselvesasafliateMembersofthe

TIG (changed).

WhereTIGsarejointwithotherbodies

that have equivalent competence-

graded membership to IPENZ then the

membership class from the other body

may be used (changed).

More information

The fourth edition ofengineering edge will be

distributed to Members in December 2008

and will provide full guidance. It will also

be available for download from the IPENZ

website.

Good and bad practice in postnominal use

The table below shows a number of examples

of good and bad practice.

Description Previous good practice Previous bad practice Current bad practice Current good practice

(from 1 January 2009)

Chartered Professional

Engineer, Professional

Member,practiceeldcivil,

registered on the International

Professional Engineers register

CPEng, MIPENZ(civil), IntPE(NZ) CPEng(civil),MIPENZ(elds

are not shown with CPEng)

Claiming to be a member of

the civil Practice College (civil

Practice College does not

exist)

CPEng, MIPENZ, IntPE(NZ)

CertiedEngineering

Technician, Associate Member,

practiceeldselectricaland

information

CertETn, AIPENZ(elect, inform.) Claiming to be proven

competent across the two

practiceeldsratherthanjust

in his or her own practice area

Claiming to be other than

an Associate Member of the

IPENZ Practice College

CertETn, AIPENZ


Engineer, Fellow, practice

eldtransportation,Memberof the IPENZ Transportation

Group

CPEng, FIPENZ(transport)

Member of the IPENZ

Transportation Group (no

postnominal)

CPEng, FIPENZ

Fellow of the IPENZ


postnominal)


Engineer,practiceeld

transportation, Member of the

IPENZ Transportation Group

but not a Member of IPENZ

itself

CPEng

Member of the IPENZ


postnominal)

Using MTG as a postnominal

(no postnominal is allowed for

any TIG Membership)

Member of the IPENZ

Transportation Group

(infringes Rule 27)

CPEng

AfliateMemberoftheIPENZ


postnominal)

Planner, Member of the IPENZ

Transportation group but not a

Member of IPENZ itself

Member of the IPENZ


postnominal)

Claiming that Membership of

the Transportation Group was

actually Membership of IPENZ

Member of the IPENZ


(infringes Rule 27)

AfliateMemberoftheIPENZ


(no postnominal)

Member of IMechE(UK), and

as a result is a Member of

the Mechanical Engineering

Group, but not a Member of

IPENZ

ImechE

Member of the Mechanical

Engineering Group (no

postnominal)

IMechE

Member of the Mechanical

Engineering Group (no

postnominal)

continued from page 01



The most common regulatory compliance

complaint we receive from Members

relates to submitting producer statements

for professional engineering work under

the Building Act. Members comment

that Building Consent Authorities (BCAs)

inconsistently accept such statements.

ManyacceptCPEngandaself-

declaration of competence to do the

work.

SomeinsistonCPEngbutwant

further evidence that the engineer

iscompetentinthespeciceldof

engineering to which the work relates.

Othersrequireregistrationonlocal

Council lists, which requires the

engineer to pay a fee and provide

evidence and referees.

The IPENZ and ACENZ position on authoring

producer statements has always been

cleartherstoftheseapproaches

should be applied consistently and

nationally. Inconsistent advice from the

central regulator, lack of clarity over what

is acceptable for BCA accreditation, and

sometimes a BCA claiming it wants to move

to our recommended approach but has not

yet had time to make the changes have all

contributed to this misunderstanding.

Recently, the Department of Building and

Housing decided that leadership to resolve

the status of producer statements was

required. An expert working group including

BCAs and representatives from ACENZ and

IPENZ was brought together in late May

2008. The group agreed that a nationally

consistent approach was required, which will:

establishanationalbest-practiceguide

to which all parties ascribe (a goodstarting point is a draft prepared by

ADAM THORNTON FIPENZ)

clarifythedifferencesbetweena

producer statement from a design

professional, and the workmanship and

productcerticatespresentedbyother

occupational groups

ensureBCAstreatproducerstatements

and engineers and architects expert

technical opinion as evidence towards

establishing design code compliance or

compliance of construction work

ensureproducerstatementsarenota

means to address the distribution ofliability the author and receiver of

such statements each have liabilities

under tort (and may have liabilities

under contract to other parties such as

the building owner) and the statement

does not change these

restrictauthorshiptothosecurrently

on national and preferably statutory-

backed competence registers, but

for work where no suitable register

exists, other national registers without

statutory backing should be developed

and maximally used (this implies

the potential use of registers such

as IPENZs ETPract and CertETn in

appropriate circumstances)

maintaintheintegrityand

trustworthiness of the national

registers, by encouraging all involved to

use the complaints process or report

sub-standard work to the relevant

registration authority.

These outcomes align with IPENZs

longstanding position, so it is very good

news in the long-term. It also vindicates

our decision to take a leadership position

in developing ETPract and CertETn without

statutory backing. However change will

take time and there are likely to be some

continuing frustrations before we can expect

to see consistent behaviours starting

to emerge.

In the meantime, we ask that Members whoexperiencedifcultyinbeingabletopresent

a producer statement to contact the IPENZ

Registrar at [email protected]

We also remind Members that although a

producer statement is useful evidence, under

theBuildingAct2004italoneisinsufcient

evidence for a BCA to discharge its

responsibilities. In addition, IPENZ Members

should use the NZIA/ACENZ/IPENZ producer

statements and not modify them for their

own purposes.

Towards No-hassle Producer Statements



Making sense of the Building Act 2004?

IPENZ Building Act workshops

September: Wellington Christchurch Auckland Taupo

Register today at www.ipenz.org.nz key word: engineering calendar

New Tools Help Prepare for Competence Assessment

Keeping a simple, progressive record of

key projects, activities and continuing

professional development (CPD) can greatly

simplify the process when the time comes

to prepare a submission. This applies to

both Graduate Members preparing for their

rstassessmentandthoseonacurrent

competence register (for example CPEng,

ETPract and CertETn) who are subject

to ongoing assessments for continued

registration.

For some time, IPENZ has provided an online

work-history recording tool that Graduate

Members can use to record their work history

and track their competence development. A

similar tool is now available for experienced

Members to maintain records for continued

registration, particularly current competence-

based registers. This online work history and

competence recording tool complements

the CPD recording log that is already popular

with Members.

The two tools enable Members to record

onave-yearrollingbasiskeyprojects

or activities, particularly good examples of

competence against particular elements

of the competence standard, and CPD

activities. When the time comes to submit

for a continued registration assessment,

these records can be readily edited to

form the basis of a submission the only

other documents needed are a completed

application form (CA02) and referee

declarations. Members can access both

recording tools via the Career Management

section in the Members Area of the IPENZ

website.

In addition, an application preparation

tutorial has been developed to step Members

through the application preparation process.

While the primary audience for the tutorial

is Graduate Members working towards their

initial competence assessment, registrants

needing to prepare a submission for

continuedregistrationmayalsondthe

tutorial useful. It provides help and guidance

on how to complete each of the template

forms and advises on alternative formats

that can be used. Once again, the tutorialcan be accessed via the Career Management

section in the Members Area of the IPENZ

website.

We encourage Members to review the tutorial

and use the progressive recording tools

that are now available. Members feedback

on each will also be welcome send your

feedback to [email protected]

Charles was also involved in judging the award category that honours innovative solutions for the environment. In

making his choice, Charles considered that the two most worthy nominations were Resene Paintwise, due to its

takebackschemefortheirpaintproducts,andGretchenRobertsonandMonicaPetersfortheirveryreadable

and beautifully illustrated toolkit to enable schools and community groups to study local coastal areas.

While Resene Paintwise won the category award, Gretchen and Monica were highly commended for their toolkit,

which took them six years to develop.

Another winner was current William Pickering medal holder, LAURENCE ZWIMPFER FIPENZ, who received the

GreenRibbonAwardinthevolunteersandnotforprotorganisationscategoryforhissuccessfulnationwidelaunch of eDay, a take back scheme for computers and other e-waste. Led by the computer Access New Zealand

Trust and the 2020 Communications Trust, eDay is a community initiative designed to raise public awareness of

the hazardous nature of e-waste.

Our congratulations go to all Green Ribbon Award winners and especially to the Ministry for the Environment,

which has run these awards for the last 18 years, for raising our awareness of environmental issues throughout

the country.

IPENZ has recently added two enhancements to its online services for Members to provide support while

preparing application documents for competence assessment.

The Ministry for the Environment held its annual Green Ribbon Awards on 5 June this year. IPENZ was well

represented on the night, with Chief Executive ANDREW CLELAND and Director EngineeringCHARLES

WILLMOT both attending the presentation event.

Green Ribbon Awards 2008


6/12

ETHICS

As with other projects he had been involved with, the client was under

theimpressionthathewouldbechargedaxedfeefortheentireproject.

When the client began to receive invoices for the work, he sought a

second quote for the project from an independent engineer. The client

thenreturnedtotherstengineerandusedthequotetoshowthathe

had been overcharged.

Therstengineerdeterminedwhothesecondengineerwasandinformed

him of the dispute, and that he had not been paid for his services. The

second engineer subsequently declined to work for the client.

Frustrated, the client made a complaint to the Registration Authority

(IPENZ). His complaint alleged that he had been overcharged, that he was

never informed that he would be charged on an hourly basis, and that the

two engineers had colluded on a commercial matter.

The Registration Authority dismissed the complaint, but the client lodged

an appeal with the Chartered Professional Engineers Council. The Council

considered the matter but upheld the original decision to dismiss the

complaint. It determined that commercial disputes cannot be broughtagainst a CPEng as the fee charged is a commercial consideration made

by the company and not an engineering activity performed by the engineer.

Status as a Chartered Professional Engineer is only available to individuals

and cannot apply to a consultancy or any other organisation.

the client complained

he had been overcharged

and engineers had

colluded on a

commercial matter

From the IPENZ Code of Ethics

Professionalism, Integrity and Competence: Members shall undertake their engineering activities with professionalism and integrity and shall work

within their levels of competence.

2.11 Follow a recognised professional practice (model conditions of engagement are available) in communicating with your client on

commercial matters.

Inthisrstcase,aCPEngregisteredengineerwasengagedbyaclienttoprovideengineeringservicesforaproject.

After work began an agreement for engagement was signed. Although the project was off to a good start, the clients

satisfaction would not last long.

CASE

1


7/12

This month, ANDREW CLARK, IPENZs Manager Ethics and Discipline looks at twocommercial disputes with similar beginnings but quite different rulings.

The architect ignored those instructions however, and obtained a single

estimate from a builder for $456,800. Although this was in excess of

his initial budget the client agreed to proceed on the basis of the quote.

He signed an Agreement for Architect Swervices with an assessed valueof work of $450,000. But before construction could begin, the builder

announced his retirement and withdrew his services. The architect sought

an alternative quote from another builder, which came to a colossal

$937,600. The client independently sought a third quote, which came

back at $875,000. Obviously, both new quotes were well in excess of the

original $400,000 budget and $456,800 estimate.

The client laid a complaint with the New Zealand Registered Architects

Board on the basis that he had relied upon the architects professional

advice and that the architect should have been able to design a house

within the budget. Shortly before the complaint was to appear before a

disciplinary committee hearing, both parties advised the Board that a

satisfactory monetary settlement had been made. The Board determined

that there was no reason to proceed with the case.

However, this case raises serious ethical concerns. The architect failed

to communicate effectively and because of his conduct he lost control of

theproject.Therewasasignicantissuewiththeinformalityofhisofce

practices,andtherewasinsufcientrecordingofcriticalstagesofthe

process or whether important steps were carried out in a documented way.

The estimated construction cost was well in excess of the complainants

stated budget and the architect failed to obtain more than one estimate

for the cost of construction, as was requested. As such the architect

failed to recognise the clients financial limitations and design an

affordable house.

Bothcomplaintsdealwithcostsbeingpaidbytheclient,buttheoutcomesarecompletelydifferent.Intherstcase,theengineerscostofservices was ruled to be a commercial consideration and not an engineering activity, so there was no breach of the code of ethical conduct. In the

second case however, although the case never reached a disciplinary hearing, the architect failed to maintain control the project and its costs, and

thereby failed in his ethical obligation to his client.

As engineers we must make sure our clients clearly understand the scope of their project, and make sure they are aware of all the fees their

project will incur. If changes occur, as is often the case, then these must be mutually agreed and attached to the original signed agreement of

engagement. Otherwise, a protracted dispute will be measured in your time, money and reputation.

there seemed to belittle record of criticalstages or whether

important steps werecarried out at all

LESSONS LEARNED?

An architect was commissioned by a client to design a residential home. The client made it clear that his budget was

$400,000 and instructed the architect to obtain three building estimates.

CASE

2



New Staff

This month the Schools Team welcomes Fay

Duncan as our new Careers and Heritage

Administrator. Fay will support our careers

promotion activities, provide administrativeassistance to the IPENZ Heritage

Programme, and implement the Transpower

Neighbourhood Engineers Awards.

Fay spent the last 35 years as a teacher,

mainly in primary schools. She spent

about twenty of those years designing and

matching programmes for gifted children.

She also worked with the Royal Society of

New Zealand to develop science programmes

that would spark students imaginations.

Ive always found that gifted kids are

incredibly different in their approach to

things. When they learn, they dont go

methodicallyfromstarttonish;theypick

and choose the things that really work forthem. I always made sure to include different

kinds of thinking in my programmes the

academic side, the hands-on approach, word

games and puzzles.

My new role is much the same thing. Its

supporting childrens education, this time

from a backseat, administrative position.

I see the Schools Team as being part of a

biggermachinetohelpmakelearningfun.

Get Alongside a Careers Advisor

IPENZ Members have the opportunity to

promote their professions to students with

the Get Alongside campaign. Launched in

2007, Get Alongside teams local engineers

with school careers advisors. The campaign

aims to provide students with the information

they need to make informed career

decisions.

Almost 70 IPENZ Members already take part

in Get Alongside and are working in schools

around the country. They act as a source

of information for the school and answer

questions about the industry. With their help,

students can see the possibilities of a career

in engineering.

Tondoutmore,contactFayat

[email protected]

Publications

Futureintech has launched two new

publications for the upcoming careers

season.

Students will be able to match their favourite

subjects to potential career paths with our

careers poster. The poster lists a range

of exciting jobs with their relevance to

technology, maths, and science, helping

students see the possibilities of the subjects

they study.

A brochure on biotechnology is also in theworks for July. Students can learn more

aboutthiscutting-edgeeld,withcareer

prospects in environmentalism, medical

research, agriculture, and food science.

For more information on these publications,

contact Chris at writer-researcher@

futureintech.org.nz

There is an interesting pattern evolving in the applications from school-

leavers for the IPENZ Foundation Scholarships. This scheme, with the

helpofIPENZBranchesisnowofferingaroundfourorveawards

worth $5000 per annum and is entering its sixth year of operation.

Intherstcoupleofyearstherewereonlyfteentotwentyscholarship

applicants per year, mainly boys, and mainly from the North Island.

Selecting the two or three winners was a relatively simple task.

Over the last couple of years the number of applicants has risen

dramatically to almost 100 per year and aspiring candidates now come

from all over the country. The proportion of female candidates has also

risen to approximately one third of applicants.

As the quantity of scholarship candidates increased, the quality of

applicants improved as well. The academic records of most of these

youngsters are absolutely brilliant. In 2007 there were 19 dux or

proxime accessit applicants. Many others had maths, physics and

science marks in international exams in the mid-90s. Many were

involved in sports, arts, community work and relevant holiday jobs.

Selecting winners from such a bright and focussed bunch has become

averydifcult,timeconsumingandrewardingtask.

All IPENZ Foundation Scholarship seekers submit an essay on the

topicWhyIwanttobeanengineer.Quiteasurprisingproportionofthese young folk openly admit to not having known what they wanted

todowiththeirlivesuntiltheymetarealengineer.Manyyoungsters

among last years applicants suggested that it was a visit to an open

day at a university, or an engineering company, that really helped them

decide what career path to take. If they do not have a professional

engineer in the family, they have had no engineering role models and

no way to judge the profession prior to these visits.

The largest impact on their decision-making process seems to come

from meeting and hearing young professional engineers who visit

their schools to talk about the working life of a real engineer the

challenges and the rewards. These Ambassadors who are part of a

Futureintech scheme are beginning to make a big difference to thenumber of young people interested in engineering. Rising enrolments

in the engineering departments of many New Zealand universities

bear this out. The impact of these ambassadorial visits to schools

is obviously much wider than just those who end up applying for an

IPENZ Foundation Scholarship.

There is really no doubt that many of New Zealands brightest young

minds are being attracted to professional engineering as a career. They

see it as offering many rewarding ways to help their fellow citizens, to

clean up the environment and to improve other peoples health and

wealth. They also know it is a well-paid career, offering worldwide job

opportunities.

Interestingly, these youngsters often admit they also considered

medicine, accounting or law but ruled them out once they realised

what engineering offers and they compare the lifestyle and the

opportunities. That is a big shift in school-leaver thinking in just

a few years.

Schools Update

WhyIWantToBeanEngineer(andnotaDoctor,ora

Lawyer, or an Accountant)WARWICK BISHOP FIPENZ, Trustee of the IPENZ Foundation and Foundation Scholarship judge notes how the

scholarships, and school-leavers attitudes toward engineering, have changed.



Recognising the important role engineersplay in these and other transport issues,

IPENZ, in association with the Transportation

Group, has released a policy report

that outlines the Institutions views and

recommendations on transport.

The document, entitled Transport

Engineering the Way Forward, has received

widespread television and radio coverage for

the forward-thinking policies and strategies it

promotes.

What are the issues?

New Zealand faces a number of major

transport challenges. Oursocietyremainsreliantoncarsand

imported fossil fuels.

Risingfuelcostsaresignicantly

increasing household expenditure and

freight costs.

Congestioninourmajorcitiesis

affecting the economy, and is forecast

to rise further as economic activity

increases.

Transport-relatedgreenhousegas

emissions account for 18 per cent

of New Zealands emissions and are

forecast to increase by a further 40 per

cent by 2040. Transportcomprised44percentof

total consumer energy use in 2006.

Until2005,signicantachievements

were made in road safety but progress

has since plateaued.

Theseissuesraisesomedifcultquestions

about the future of transport in New Zealand.

Willtheincreasesinfuelcosts

signicantlyaffectdemandinthefuture

is there a tipping point?

Isitfeasibletodecoupleeconomic

growth from the adverse effects of

transport growth? Whatistherealisablepotentialfor

public transport, walking and cycling

to effectively contribute to congestion

reductionandenergyefciency?

Is

urbanintensicationdesirable,isit

effective in reducing demand, how long

will it take, and do we have effective

tools to promote it?

Whatisthelikelyfutureimpactof

improved or breakthrough vehicle

technologiesonfuelefciency,

emission reductions and safety?

Doweunderstandfuturefreight

demands and their impact on road, rail

and coastal shipping, and the inter-

modal relationships?

Arethekeyfundingmechanisms(fuel

excise tax and road user charges)

appropriate for the future?

With increasing economic activity and

demands for mobility, our society now faces

constraints in our transport networks and

the impacts on our economy, environment

and society. These are serious issues that

are compounded by major increases in fuel

costs.

New Zealands strategies to address

these issues include technology uptake,

behaviour change, demand management,

promoting land-use changes, and promoting

alternative modes walking, cycling and

publictransport.Ithasprovenverydifcultto

bringaboutsignicantchangesinbehaviour

through education, promotion and policy

interventions. Alternative modes only account

for a small proportion of travel, and can take

long periods of time to be effective.

Thedifcultiesinchangingbehaviour,the

modest contribution of other modes, and thelong lag times lead IPENZ to the view that

these mechanisms will not effectively resolve

the transport issues facing New Zealand. We

must move towards a comprehensive pricing

regime across all modes, so that users pay

the true costs of travel, including externalities.

In order to provide a framework for price-

based transport policies, New Zealand

mustndasuitablebalancebetween

each transport objective. Pricing will help

to determine the appropriate emphasis

between transport modes and our

investment, and has the potential to

reshape our funding mechanisms. But many

questions about our transport system remain

unanswered. We do not know what changes

to society, trends in freight demand, and new

technologies will mean for travel demand or

vehicle developments.

What does IPENZ recommend?

IPENZs position, as stated in Transport

Engineering the Way Forward, promotes

reducing the environmental and health

impacts of transport by using a combination

of new technology, pricing externalities

and new road safety initiatives. Our key

recommendations are as follows.

Promotetollinginitiativesandlocal

road pricing, and, in the future, move to

national electronic road pricing.

Makegreateruseofpublicdebtfor

major projects.

Takeadvantageofopportunitiesfor

public-andprivate-debtnancingof

infrastructure by removing the current

legislative impediments to public-

private partnerships (PPPs), and

providing guidance on best-practice

application of PPPs.

Analyseandresearchtransport

demand at the inter-regional and

nationallevels,andtheinuenceof

future societal and environmental

trends on demand.

Upgradethevehicleeetbypromoting

new technologies and setting minimum

fuel and greenhouse gas emission

standards for a range of fuel systems. Developahigh-levelnationalmulti-

modal freight strategy that will link

regions, forecast future demands and

identify the best ways to meet these

demands.

Promotestandardsforimprovementsto

freightvehicleefciencyandfuels,and

evaluate the effect of introducing larger

and heavier vehicles into the road

freighteet.

Analysewherethebestvalueforthe

road safety dollar might lie, and review

thebenetsrelatingtothevalueoflife.

The complete Transport Engineering

the Way Forward report is available at

www.ipenz.org.nz/ipenz/media_comm/

documents/transport_policy.pdf

Transport is high on the list of issues facing New Zealand. Congestion, fuel prices, poor road safety and other

transport woes have the potential to affect the lives of every person living in this country.

Policy Release Sets Transport Straight



Distinguished Service Decoration (DSD)

Captain MICHAEL PETER DE BOER GIPENZ, Corps of Royal New

Zealand Engineers. For services to the New Zealand Defence Force.

MichaelservedasPlansOfcer,onsecondmenttotheAustralian

Armys Timor Leste Battle Group 2 from June to October 2007. He

was responsible for the planning of numerous operations in an

environment characterised by constant change, limited information

and a volatile strategic and political atmosphere. His professional

competence saw him placed in command of a company-sized

organisation of Australian forces, comprising infantry, engineers

and numerous specialists, for a six-week period, and charged with

containing growing violence and disorder in the notorious Viqueque

district of Timor Leste.

In addition to succeeding in all of his tactical objectives of containing

the regional violence, he creatively employed all of his commands

capabilities to effect a change in the local populations attitude, which

then allowed operations conducted by the International Stabilisation

Force to commence.

Distinguished Companion of the New Zealand Order of Merit (DCNZM)

PETER CHARLES MAIRE HonFIPENZ, of North Shore. For services to

business.

Peter is the founder and president of Navman New Zealand Ltd, a

leading international manufacturer of marine electronics and global

positioning technology, which he established in 1986. The company

employs over 300 people worldwide and had an annual turnover

of over $100 million in 2006. He is a member of the Foundation

of Research, Science and Technologys NERF Advisory Panel and

the Information and Communication Technology Taskforce. He was

awarded the Trade NZ Supreme Exporter of the Year Award in 2002,

the Westpac Hi-Tech Supreme Award for Excellence in 2002, and was

made an Honorary Fellow of IPENZ in 2005.

IPENZMembersReceiveQueensBirthdayHonours

Membership Changes to February 2008

Elected to Graduate Member

LC Abraham, JP Adams, JW Adamson, JH Ahn, U Ajmal, TJR Allan, JJ

Allport, R Amigh, DJ Andrews, NSJ Anton, DT Ashby, FA Ayan, SE Ayre,

Y Azuma, X Bai, E Balasubramaniyan, PL Beazley, TR Bellingham, JA

Bhasin, S Bossaghzadeh, AB Bougher, ES Brunette, GR Bunn, GWFBurrett,NDByron,QCai,NCampbell,MChand,MWChang,XChang,

NJ Charles, CJ Charleston, C Chen, Y Chen, CB Chetan, A Chopra, SJ

Chowdhury, TC Cronin, MG Dalzell, ME Davies, RMI Dawwas, OR de

Lautour, SM Dillon, RB Dudley, M Ebel, BS Ellison, F Feddo, BM Firme,

MW Fleming, JP Fox, TU Ganiron Jr, BF Gebreselassie, AK Gibson, AM

Gin, ST Glenny, FA Gondal, FA Hager, CM Haley, BL Halkett, TE Hassan,

SHerath,CMMHo,QGHo,BJHolliss,QHu,XHuang,CJWHurst,GJ

Hutchison, AG Inay, TW Irwin, GA Jack, SM Jayalath, PH Jenkins, JP

Jensen, Y Jia, E Jim, CA Kelly, AI Kennedy, MI Khan, SJ King, JK Kongoi,

ML Kully, AP Kumar, R Kumar, RD Kwan, A Lam, MS Lardies, F Latu, GS

Layeld,HTLeikam,CLiu,DLlorando,JRLloyd,GBLowe,LLuceno,

A Lukas, T Luo, HP Ly, N Ma, TM Mahar, R McCully, RJ McIntosh, RJ

McLachlan, K Merry, NG Meyers, KW Miller, CJ Mills, A Milne, AAM

Milne, R Mishra, M Mongia, WEL Moore, SC Morris, JW Morrison, STMowett, T Naidoo, V Naidoo, KA Newton, SA OHearn, AA Orchard, Y

Ou Yang, A Padarath, WY Pang, M Parameshwaran, SD Pasley, BH

Patel, JR Phillips, SD Pickford, JM Pointon, NN Pokasamrith, TM Porter,

JJ Pring, ML Rafferty, BJ Ramanandi, SB Rankin, JM Rathnayaka,

DE Reddy, ND Redekar, SF Reuther, GM Richardson, F Richter, M-K

Richter, TC Saddleton, MS Santos, R Saxena, KA Serpes, MTK Shaw,

P Shekar, AM Shewring, J Sim, Rajnesh Singh, Rajinesh Singh, WS

Sitana, DG Smith, DR Smith, RK Stevens, AF Stewart, P Stoeveken,

ME Symons, SR Tailby, HI Tan, XT Tang, JWF Taylor, JM Teal, DR

Tombleson, BH Tran, TP Vranjes, P Wadan, D Wang, Z Wang, TJ Watson,DM Wheatley, DT Wilson, F Wu, Y Wu, MJ Wulff, Y Xing, S Yang, NB

Yannakis,LZhang,QZhang,XZhang,CZhuang

Elected to Professional Member

WR Balsom, DR Bruce, MK Chowdhury, DJ Crichton, MCR Davies,

CT Giles, IC Hills, HGJ Huang, J Islam, AF Koay, A Kumar, HA

Madagammana, CJ McGregor, RJ McKinnon, A Menzies, KJ Miller, DN

Ouwejan, JG Ralston, NA Shaw, KCG Tang, BJ Verhoeff

Elected to Technical Member

RE Bradbury, DJ Cairn, GDJ Neal

Elected to Afliate Member

ABowey,MJChristensen,CSDCovacich,SRMailer,TFBMareet,MV

Mifrano, JE Peacock, IR Ranasinghe, P Rendle

The following is a list of additions to and changes in the classes of Membership for the period 1 March 2008 26

May 2008.



Standards New Zealand offers several opportunities to participate in

their Standards Committees. As a Standards New Zealand Committee

member you will:

becomefamiliarwitharangeofrelatedstandards

expandandupdateyourknowledgeoflegislationandregulations

network,researchandbepartytothelatestthinkinginspecialist

technical areas

collaboratewithotherexperts,standardsorganisations,special

interest groups and regulatory bodies

useyourprofessionaljudgementtoevaluateinformationand

opinions.

Standards development relies on collaboration and networking, and

perhaps the most valuable aspect of the work is interacting with the

different organisations and individuals that make up a committee

membership. As an IPENZ Member, you are nominated to Standards

Committees on the basis that you represent the entire engineering

profession, and the role is to bring a neutral best-practice engineering

perspective to the committee. But when working on a Standards

Committee, you are also bound by the IPENZ Code of Ethics, and

have a duty to apply the code and the IPENZ ethical standards to your

deliberations.

As the nominating organisation, IPENZ has resources available to

assist you in your role and can help you address any issues that mayarise, or enable communication and debate on issues with the rest of

the engineering profession. Support is also valuable when a Member

feelstheyshouldnotgivegroundonamatterfortechnicalreasons.

Inthiscaseyouhaveanethicaldutytostandrm,andifyoufeelthat

the group is applying pressure then you can call on IPENZ for support.

OccasionallyIPENZnomineescommentthattheyndtheworkload

has become too onerous. This may be due to a range of reasons. One

frequent concern is that the Member feels he or she is carrying a

disproportionate workload compared to the rest of the committee. This

can occur because the IPENZ Member is the sole technical expert on a

particular committee. If this is the case, you should discuss the issue

with the Chair of the Standards Committee you sit on. If necessary,

the Chair can raise the issue with the Standards New Zealand Project

Manager.

Nominees should also maintain a working relationship with IPENZ

and provide feedback on an ongoing basis. IPENZ would like to know

how the Standards Committee is operating, and is interested in any

issues that may develop. A form is available for Members serving on a

StandardsCommitteetollinandforwardtoIPENZNationalOfce,at

leastonceperyear,evenifitisanullreport.

Serving on a Standards New Zealand Committee can be a very

rewarding task. It is an opportunity to contribute to the profession and

society in general.

For further information about serving on a Standards Committee,

contact CAM SMART, Engineering Practice Manager at

[email protected] or ANDREW CLARK, Manager Ethicsand Discipline at [email protected]

Further information is also available from the Standards New

Zealand document entitled Committee Members, Their Roles and

Responsibilities, which is available at http://spex.standards.co.nz/

guides/index.html

Working on a Standards Committee

Telecommunication Engineer Dies

Born in Wellington on 19 November 1920, Bruce Berghan Hands

attended Wellington College from 193236, then went on to tertiary

education, beginning his studies at Victoria University College in 1937.

While there, he held various junior part-time engineering positions with

the New Zealand Post and Telegraph Department. He graduated with a

Bachelor of Science in 1943.

War interrupted his early engineering career and Bruce served for

vemonthsasaRadarTraineewiththeRoyalNewZealandNavy.

Following the war, he returned to the New Zealand Post and Telegraph

Department in 1950 to take a role as Telegraph Engineer. He was

promoted quickly in the organisation and a year later he became

Resident Engineer, and a few years after that, District Engineer at the

nowrenamedNewZealandPostOfce.

Bruce spent 23 years as District Engineer at various locations around

New Zealand, including 13 years in Invercargill. While there he took

charge of the automation of the Invercargill telephone network

installation, which at the time, was the largest automation project ever

undertaken in New Zealand.

Bruces telecommunications expertise was extensive one of

his telecommunications facilities even earning him a special

acknowledgement from the Prime Minister.

Following his retirement in 1977, Bruce continued to work as a

management consultant for various local bodies in the West Coast and

Nelson-Marlborough regions.

He served IPENZ as Chairman of both the Southland and Nelson

Branches, and gave a great deal of his time to community activities,

serving as President of the Invercargill Rotary Club and other Nelson

community groups.

BRUCE HANDS FIPENZ, respected telecommunications engineer and administrator of Invercargills modern

telephone network installation, died in May aged 87


12/12

With the new Professional Development

Partner programme well under way, IPENZ

is working to support employers as they

design, implement and maintain professional

development programmes for their staff.

Employers now fully recognise continuing

professional development (CPD) as an

integral part of their organisations strategicplan. To ensure that CPD remains high

on everyones agenda, we are offering

employers the opportunity to access IPENZs

online engineering calendar via an IPENZ

icon on their intranet.

By clicking on the icon, employers are taken

to a search engine where they can look for

a wide range of CPD events by location, skill

category and delivery method (distance

learning, public and in-house programmes).

This means that by a simple click of themouse, your employees will have a vast array

of technical and essential skills courses to

choosefromattheirngertips!

Tools like the IPENZ CPD icon not only

save your human resources staff time but

encourage all staff members to feed back

any learning needs they may have, identify

opportunities to enhance their professional

development, and contribute towards your

businesss performance.

To take up this opportunity please contactthe Professional Development Advisor at

[email protected]

phone 04 474 8984.

Professional Development at Your Fingertips

July

Resource Management Act

Hamilton 17 July

Christchurch 23 July

Leadership and Management

Taupo 21 July

Risk Analysis

Auckland 29 July

August

Report Writing

Auckland 6 August

Christchurch 27 August

Negotiating Skills

Hamilton 11 August

Business Development

Auckland 15 August

Time and Priority


Auckland 26 August

September

Climate Change

Wellington 3 September

Christchurch 4 September

Auckland 11 September

Taupo 17 September

Specication Practice


Technical Expert

Chirstchurch 9 September

Negotiating Skills


Consultation and Engineers

Chirstchurch 17 September


Taupo 25 September

Business Development


Afliatedcourses

NZWETA

Principles and Trends of Wastewater

Treatment

Auckland 4 August

Conned Space Training Course

Auckland 6 August

Hamilton 26 August

Advanced Stormwater Design and

Management


Water and Environmental Sampling

Palmerston North 12 August

Stormwater Management

Auckland 27 August

VUW

Practical Project Management

Wellington 13 August

Strategic Leadership

Wellington 28 August

Stakeholder Management


Project Management Level 1


Time and Stress Management for the Ofce


Express your interest

TrafcandParking

Forensic Engineering

Technical Language and Writing Skills

The Building Act 2004

Effective Communication and

Relationship Management

Urban Design

IPENZ Professional Development Short Courses

ipenz engineers new zealand magazine (july 2008, issue 72)

Documents