PEC, ACEP, PCATP hold CIDB together; CAP adamant!

The minutes of the meeting of a subcommittee on the Construction Industry Development Board (CIDB) has created a kind of rumpus in engineering circles and pushed anxiety levels to a new high.
Because, the document—the minutes—that reached the stakeholders do not reflect what was transpired in the moot in actual terms.
Who did what with the minutes and with what intent is needs to be scrutinized at all but the immediate sighting is that the document is itself a basket of contradictions which talks volumes about the whims of a very restricted group of contractors of them a few seem to have bent upon going ahead no matter what the new entity is doomed to result for PEC and the construction industry itself.
The level of ignorance is so high that the majority of contractors do not subscribe to the opinion that this board should be set up under the federal ministry of PD&SI and they should be allowed to part ways from the regulatory framework of the Pakistan Engineering Council (PEC).
Numerous colleagues of CAP leaders caught by CIDB syndrome claim it is nothing but a result of a personal grudge of a few obstinate contractors close to the ruling circles and continue to remain stuck up in the past.
A big number of contractors in Sindh, Balochistan, KP, and Punjab are said to be against any move that damages a decades-old institution—PEC. They have begun to post their reactions on social media and expressed their views in meetings across Pakistan.
Now about the minutes of the moot hosted by the ministry of PD&SI held on February 25!. The meeting heard the views of stakeholders such as the Pakistan Engineering Council (PEC), Contractors Association of Pakistan (CAP), ACEP, PCATP, P3A, and P&D.
Of them, PEC, ACEP, and PCATP supported the incubation of CIDB under the umbrella of PEC. ACEP represented by Engr. Waseem Asghar was shown in the minutes as supporting CAP’s point of view but in fact, it did not.
Engr. Asghar denied supporting CAP’s point of view and told ER that he had written to the ministry.
In all who should be deemed as parties, in this case, the majority of them (stakeholders) do not support CIDB out of the ambit of PEC. Only CAP views it differently and interestingly enough the organization, as its fellow contractors claim do not represent the contractors’ community in genuine terms.
CAP has around 400 members and on the contrary, the total number of registered contractors in the country run in thousands, and, PEC records show them over 25 thousand as active. And also, several organizations represent contractors in all four provinces of Pakistan; CAP is not the only representative of this community.
Yet another aspect of this saga is that the unanimous decision of the Pakistan Engineering Council (PEC) was not given honor either by public sector entities—P&D and P3A—or CAP showing a dangerous trend that our communities do not pay heed to the sanctity of any institution. PEC is represented by the elected members and their unanimous decision holds high spirit in real terms.
The information gathered by ER shows that the engineering community and the contractors who do not support CAP’s point of view are most likely to react and of which approach to the courts seems imminent.n