1.            EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

In the year under review the Chartered Professional Engineers Council (“Council”) received six
 appeals. Four were dealt with in the period, one of which was dismissed for lack of required
 information from the appellant, and the remaining two were finalised in August 2011. The Council 
had more appeal activity in the last twelve months than the previous seven years combined. 
This has given the Council much needed experience and information on ways to make the whole
 process simpler for the appellant, fairer on the CPEng being complained about and quicker for 
all concerned.

The Council has fulfilled its statutory functions and focussed attention on the following areas:

a.     Finalisation of the Accountability Agreement

b.     Registration Authority Performance – especially in respect of Complaints

c.      A full review of Closed Complaints

d.     Occupational regulation and the future role of the Council

The Council’s Accountability Agreement with the Minister for Building and Construction (Minister) 
for the period to 30 June 2012 was finalised and then signed in July 2011.

The Registration Authority (RA) continues to provide the Council with meaningful statistics about 
the Chartered Professional Engineers (CPEng) Register, enabling the Council to have a good
 understanding of the profile of the now more than 2,700 CPEngs. It is encouraging to see the
 continuing uptake of CPEng by the profession. The Council reports separately to the Minister 
on the performance of the RA and it is not intended to repeat that information here.

The RA also updates the Council each quarterly meeting with details of any complaints made 
against CPEngs once the RA’s investigation and disciplinary procedures are complete and the 
appeal period has expired.

During the year the Council initiated a review of all Closed Complaints handled by the RA. 
The approach taken being consumer orientated and with a focus on the fairness of the 
outcome. The resulting report has given the Council confidence the RA is working well with 
complaints and has implemented systems to improve the time taken in their investigation 
and discipline, when necessary.

CPEng being an effective and enduring quality mark of “current professional engineering 
competence” continues as intended by the Act and has been enhanced by the extensive use 
and recognition of CPEng people after the Christchurch earthquakes.

Two matters of note have been raised through dealing with the recent number of appeals. The 
RA reached the correct decision in several complaints but by  an incorrect assessment of the
 Rules . There have been other times when the Chair of an Investigating Committee has dismissed 
a complaint without allowing the complainant to be heard when he/she perhaps should have been. 
The Council has raised this issue with the RA and a joint meeting with all of the Chairs and the 
Council is due to be held in October.

The Council is actively participating in the current occupational regulation review including 
reviewing its own role, and how it fits in with other licensing and registration boards.

Although the Council’s operational costs were below budget, appeal costs were much higher 
for obvious reasons. Having deliberately run down it’s reserves over the last five years, and 
in light of the current level of appeal activity, the Council has signalled to the RA the need for 
the levy to rise in 2012.

3

2.         STATUTORY FUNCTIONS

The statutory functions of the Council are prescribed in the Chartered Professional Engineers of 
New Zealand Act 2002 (“Act”). These are summarised in the following table together with the 
activity, if any, during the year associated with their discharge.

3.         COUNCIL MEMBERSHIP and MEETINGS

During the year Arthur O’Leary was appointed to the Council replacing Vivian Kloosterman 
whose term of appointment had expired.

Current Council members:

4

During this year the Council held four formal meetings in Wellington on the following dates:

Meeting # 33   -           Thursday 2nd of September 2010

Meeting # 34   -           Thursday 2nd of December 2010

Meeting # 35   -           Friday 4th of March 2011

Meeting # 36   -           Friday 3rd of June 2011

Representatives from the Registration Authority (RA), which is the Institution of Professional 
Engineers New Zealand Inc - IPENZ, including the Chief Executive, and the Registrar, 
attended each of the Council’s meetings. Representatives from the Department of Building 
and Housing (DBH) were invited to all meetings

4.            COUNCIL BUSINESS

Commentary is provided on the following matters of Council business:

-        Review of CPEng Rules & Regulations

-        Complaints and Appeals

-        Monitoring of Registration Authority’s Performance

-        Chartered Professional Engineers Council Performance

-     Financial Performance

-        Occupational Regulation

-        Building Consent Authorities

4.1   Review of CPEng Rules & Regulations

The RA suggested to Council that, as a decade has passed since the Chartered 
Professional Engineers of New Zealand Act (2002) was first mooted and drafted, it 
is time for both the Council and the RA to conduct a review of the CPEng Rules and 
Regulations. To this end a sub-committee of Council members and IPENZ staff has 
been set up.  

As noted earlier in this report, the Council sees its statutory functions as being quite 
specific and narrowly defined, effectively making it just a reactive appeal body.

4.2    Complaints and Appeals

The Council continues to audit details of all complaints the RA has received, and dealt 
with, after the relevant file has been closed and the appeal period has expired. The 
Council has a close interest in these matters and likes to see all complaints against 
Chartered Professional Engineers resolved in a timely and equitable manner.

As part of its ongoing monitoring of the RA, the Council commissioned a former Council 
member to undertake a review of all closed complaints. The Terms of Reference 
included the following:

5

·        Was the essence of the complaint dealt with?,

·        Have the RA’s responses to complaints been timely, helpful or confusing?,

·        Was the outcome fair and reasonable?,

·        Was the penalty appropriate?,

·        The publication of outcomes from hearings

The review covered 39 complaints made over the last eight years and found the RA had
 adequately dealt with them all. There was room to argue over the weightings given to 
various issues in the decisions in a couple of the complaints but overall the essential 
substance of each complaint was appropriately defined and handled.

The process, within the confines of the Act and Rules, continues to be refined. Process 
issues occurred with a few of the earlier complaints under review, but these have all 
been subsequently addressed. The Council has confidence in the integrity of the current 
process, although timeliness issues have occurred in the past. The process is faster 
now and a consumer would have found the RA responses helpful.

The reviewer found the penalties awarded were appropriate, if a little on the light side 
sometimes. He also felt there should be more publication of up-held complaints without 
identifying parties. There were times when publication by the RA of certain dismissed 
complaints would also be of value.

All Council appeal decisions are published in full, without identifying the parties where 
appropriate, on the Council’s website at www.cpec.org.nz/appeals

It is worth noting that in over eight years of operation not one complaint against a 
CPEng has involved a leaky home or building.

4.3    Monitoring of Registration Authority Performance

The RA continues to be a regular attendee at Council meetings reporting fully, both 
verbally and in writing. This ongoing dialogue maintains an effective working relationship 
between the two bodies.

The RA uses this forum to report in detail on CPEng registration statistics and this in 
turn gives the Council an understanding of the overall operation and acceptance of 
CPEng in New Zealand . The Council has devised a standard template the RA reports 
against at each meeting. Topics covered include:

a)        Promotion of CPEng brand – Consumer Recognition

b)        Details of CPEng Registrations

c)        Distribution of CPEngs by IPENZ Branch (and off-shore)

d)        Breakdown of CPEng Registrants by Gender

e)        Breakdown of CPEng Registrants by Age

f)         Details of CPEng Assessment Applications Processing

g)        Breakdown of CPEng Applications by Practice Fields

h)        Trans Tasman Mutual Recognition Agreement (TTMRA) Applications

i)          Indication of Likely Appeals on Registration Decisions

6

j)          Reasons Applications to become a CPEng were declined

k)        Complaints and Disciplinary Actions

l)         Other General Matters – including trend data

With eight years of statistics to draw upon the Council has asked the RA to include trend 
graphs and charts in its reports. These now feature in the information where appropriate.

The Council continues to work with the RA to ensure the two new registers introduced in 
2007 for engineering technologists (ETPract) and engineering technicians (CertETn) are 
clearly understood by all concerned. Council monitors how they are working in practice 
with the Chartered Professional Engineer (CPEng) Register.

4.4    Chartered Professional Engineers Council performance

In accordance with Schedule One of the Accountability Agreement with the Minister, the Council 
has undertaken a self–review of it’s performance as noted below.  

                             GOVERNANCE

Expectations                                          Measure
- Governance                               – Room for some improvement in induction process
- Transparency                             - DBH invited to all meetings
- Self Review                                - Done
- Review Cycle                             - Yes, Practice Notes, Sensitive Expenditure policy

                             SERVICE DELIVERY

Expectations                                                      Measure
– Approve Rules by RA                            - OK, nothing changed recently
- Feedback to the RA                               - Doing this
- Monitor Number of Complaints              - OK, all the time
- Produce Annual Report                          - Being done
- Produce Annual Performance Report    - Being done      
                                                                                                                                                                                            
                          STRATEGY & CAPABILITY

Expectations                                                      Measure
- Proactively contribute when requested              - Participated
                   to do so

4.5    Financial performance

Income for the year was close to budget with a $30,000 levy. Interest income was 
slightly lower than budget. Expenditure was under budget except for appeal costs. 
The costs are all generally below budget.

With six appeals in the 2010-11 financial year the net assets are now at the desired 
level and the ongoing levy is being adjusted to $70,000 to be closer to the annual 
expenditure.

The enclosed financial statements show a net operating deficit of $39,055 against 
a budgeted deficit of $53,500.

                                                           7

4.6      Occupational Regulation

The Council strongly believes its functions are narrow and essentially (apart from its 
reporting responsibilities to the Minister) that of a reactive appellant body. This is the 
cause of some frustration to the Council when it sees CPEng not receiving the 
appropriate recognition as the only statutory mark of engineering quality.

The Council supports the current Review of Occupational Regulations for the Building 
and Construction Sector being undertaken by DBH and welcomes the opportunity to 
participate.

4.7      Building Consent Authorities

The recent earthquakes in Christchurch have emphasised the need for skilled (CPEng) 
people to undertake safety inspections, recovery of people and equipment, full or part 
demolition of buildings then to determine where buildings can safely be reinstated. 
CPEng people will have a big role to play in the rebuilding of the Christchurch CBD . 
Essentially the CPEng brand is now well respected by BCAs. They recognise the 
benefits of the ongoing testing of competency of a CPEng. Local Authorities, 
Government Departments, Companies, and other CPEngs all have improved recognition 
of the CPEng brand when purchasing engineering services. Public Health and Safety 
is recognised as a key component of the CPEng training.

5.      FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - For the Year Ended 30 June 2011

Snapshot of Financials:

Income: Levies $30,000 - Interest $5,821 = Total $35,812

Expenditure: Accounting fees $3,600 - Appeal costs $34,522 - Audit fees $4,100
            Council meeting fees, travel, etc. $19,068 - Consultants fees $11,787
            Sundry fees $1,790 = Total $74,867

Assets: Current $114.906  Liabilities $30,492  Net Assets $84,414

With rising appeal costs the levy will have to rise in 2012