Your browser is no longer supported

For the best possible experience using our website we recommend you upgrade to a newer version or another browser.

Your browser appears to have cookies disabled. For the best experience of this website, please enable cookies in your browser

We'll assume we have your consent to use cookies, for example so you won't need to log in each time you visit our site.
Learn more

Bad performance


Antony Oliver is right (NCE last week), the ICE does have a track record of mediocrity and the service might indeed 'be considered simply poor'.

Now the Institution wants to be more professional and more businesslike.

What business with the same track record would be able to increase its prices on the promise of better performance?

What the Institution needs to do is show that it can spend the current income well and deliver value for money. Only then should subscription levels be increased.

Do not forget that there have been above-inflation subscription hikes for the past several years.

Tom Foulkes states that the subscription rises will deliver 'the things that members have told us they want'. Mr Foulkes is quoting from the results of a survey of a carefully selected sample of the membership actively involved in the regions.

Is this what the membership at large wants?

ICE ballots have traditionally had a low turn out and only those people with an interest in Institution affairs actually vote. If the turn out is low then this subscription hike will be passed. If you oppose the proposed increases then use your vote on 22 March.

Paul Markham (M), paul.

markham@blueyonder. co. uk

Have your say

You must sign in to make a comment

Please remember that the submission of any material is governed by our Terms and Conditions and by submitting material you confirm your agreement to these Terms and Conditions. Please note comments made online may also be published in the print edition of New Civil Engineer. Links may be included in your comments but HTML is not permitted.