Why do certain senior members of the Institution and others who should know better feel so threatened by the single membership issue? Is it still the old chestnut that associated and technical members are not worthy?
Let us look at reality. The new routes to membership will produce less chartered and more incorporated engineers.
The Institution needs cash like any other business.
Membership fees are already high and a constant income must be achieved in order for Great George Street and thus the local associations to function, therefore membership numbers are important.
The view of the 'gentleman's club' must now be quashed and the Institution must move with the times, or like so much else in Great Britain, it will fade into obsolescence.
Who are these people JE Acton refers to, whose perception of the Institution's integrity should concern us so greatly? Does he mean other members, employers, the public?
Let us hear more from the silent majority. But if they have never had an active role in the Institution before, what makes Prof Duffell think they will now? Faced with the chance to vote on corporate membership less than 7,000 from the 70,000 plus members actually did so.
There are many people who take an active role in the governance of the Institution - those in office at George Street, those who sit on the various committees and those active in the local associations. These are the people who are making the decisions. If any members are aggrieved by those decisions, they must become more involved!
Peter Hookham (AM) Chairman IE&T Group South Western Association email@example.com