Quality consultants can stand by
The Sun 19/7/2004

THE recent announcement by Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi that Certificates of Fitness for Occupation (CFs) issued by local authorities be replaced with certification by professional consultants should be welcome.

It is time to accord the professionals the respect they have been seeking and also hold them to the responsibility that comes with it.

The engineers should be congratulated for being ready, willing and able to accept the prime minister's challenge. But the apparent lack of enthusiasm by the architects is puzzling.

As superintending officers with overall charge of most private development projects, they are the most qualified to testify to their fitness for occupation.

Abdullah has proposed a bold step that will save time, cut red tape and free local council officials to do important things like enforcing compliance with planning and building regulations. It will also cut down opportunities for corruption.

More importantly, making professional consultants of development projects responsible for the fitness of buildings for occupation is a step in the direction of national integrity that Abdullah has been pushing for.

After all, the hallmarks of professionalism are honour and integrity, responsibility, accountability and leadership.

It is important to note that in development projects, the government does not trust the developers.

As such, in every step of a development project, the developer must by law engage professional consultants to prepare plans, submit them to government departments and then supervise works on the ground.

When the project is completed, the consultants certify that it was done according to approved plans.

Unlike developers, consultants such as architects, engineers, surveyors or town planners spend 12 to 13 years in school and another three to five years in university.

Many spend one to five more years to do post-graduate degrees. In school, and especially in the university, they are not only taught technical subjects but also good citizenship, such as trust, responsibility and social justice.

Furthermore, they also have to be members of a professional institute or association and have to obtain a yearly licence from a professional board in order to be professional consultants.

Every institute or association has a code of ethics that members must abide by.

Local council officials who are now issuing CF usually do not visit development projects. Site inspections are done by junior officers and inspectors and even then for only a few hours.

Compared to these officials, the professional consultants are, or should be, more knowledgeable about the projects under their charge.

They must be prepared to stake their professionalism and rice-bowls and even personal freedom on the fitness of the buildings for occupation.

Some housebuyers, including the House Buyers Association, were reportedly not supportive of Abdullah's proposal because they believed that the consultants were under the thumbs of developers.

The only way to minimise and eradicate this malaise is to institute a very clear process of accountability and severe punishment regime.

Professional institutes and boards must be vigilant of the conduct of their members and take steps to punish them severely, including disbarment, if ethics are compromised. For extreme cases of professional misconduct, the government should impose jail sentences.

In general, if the country is to sustain the pace of growth that is the envy of many developing countries and further improve the quality of life, those who are appointed and paid to do a job must be held responsible and accountable for a job well done.

Dr Goh Ban Lee can be reached at banlee@usm.my