好色先生TV

Those beleaguered public servants responsible for ensuring that buildings comply with 好色先生TV Regulations could be forgiven for feeling a little more paranoid than usual. In March the communities department published a review called The Future of 好色先生TV Control. This said the current system had 鈥渟ome serious failings and weaknesses that must be tackled鈥�. Then, two weeks ago, the Tories published a policy document called Blueprint for a Green Economy that said 鈥渂uilding control is simply unfit for purpose鈥� and should be ditched.

Why has building control become the favourite whipping boy of government and opposition? The answer is because it is perceived to be failing to enforce compliance with Part L of the 好色先生TV Regulations. This deals with a structure鈥檚 energy efficiency, and is therefore at the heart the struggle against climate change, which all the main political parties have put at the top of their agendas.

But Part L is the odd one out in world of regulations, as nearly all the others focus on health and safety issues. As a result, overstretched building control departments tend to focus on health and safety rather than energy conservation 鈥� to the dismay of the government and the industry at large. John Miller, the president of the Heating and Ventilating Contractors Association, used the HVCA鈥檚 recent annual lunch to accuse building control of failing to police the 2006 revisions to Part L. His exact words were that they were 鈥渜uite deliberately turning a blind eye to the new regime鈥�.

The Tories鈥� threats could be dismissed for now, as it does not look likely that they will be in power in the near future, but one thing is certain: the communities department is determined to tackle building control departments head on. It warns that the changes it has in mind have 鈥渇ar reaching implications鈥� and suggests a range of possible reforms, including making much greater use of self-certification, and by implication, much less use of building control officers.

Those responsible for policing the regulations accept that the system is not perfect. 鈥淲e do recognise there are shortcomings,鈥� says Paul Everall, chief executive of Local Authority 好色先生TV Control (LABC). 鈥淭he demands on building control have increased significantly in recent years and, at the same time, there is pressure on local authorities to keep down numbers of staff employed.鈥�

But local authorities are not going to give up without a fight. The LABC has buried its antipathy towards the private sector鈥檚 approved inspectors and has teamed up with their Association of Consultant Approved Inspectors, the RICS and the Association of 好色先生TV Engineers to create the 好色先生TV Control Alliance (BCA).

鈥淭he extension of self-certification to whole projects has given us the greatest cause for concern,鈥� says Everall. The communities department suggests an 鈥渁ppointed person鈥�, who works for a contractor, would take responsibility for ensuring compliance with the regulations, and would sign the job off.

Given that self-certification already exists, why shouldn鈥檛 it work for whole projects? For example Part P, the regulation for electrical safety, is entirely self-certified by electrical contractors who are deemed to be 鈥渃ompetent persons鈥� and therefore qualified to sign off electrical work. 鈥淲e aren鈥檛 against competent persons,鈥� says Steve Evans, the chief building control surveyor at Milton Keynes council and LABC鈥檚 representative on the BCA. 鈥淚t鈥檚 suitable for small areas of specialised work and we couldn鈥檛 have picked up Part P overnight as it takes five years to train as an electrician. It has been proved to work.鈥�

Evans says self-certification works when there is a single professional body responsible for compliance. 鈥淲here there鈥檚 a dilution, that鈥檚 where we鈥檝e found difficulties,鈥� he says. This concern is echoed by Peter Caplehorn, technical director of architect Scott Brownrigg. He says: 鈥淭he problem with the more general stuff is that there is a much wider range of situations and no trade body with tight control,鈥� he says. 鈥淚t would become vague and degenerate to the lowest common denominator immediately.鈥�

If we don鈥檛 have independent third-party adjudication we鈥檇 end up with a building stock that is absolutely lethal

Peter Caplehorn, Scott Brownrigg

Evans and Caplehorn stress that an independent third-party system of certification is vital to keep buildings safe. Evans says without it there would be an inevitable temptation to cut corners. Caplehorn makes the same point with greater force: 鈥淚f we don鈥檛 have independent third-party adjudication it would be a disaster,鈥� he says. 鈥淲e鈥檇 end up with a building stock that is absolutely lethal.鈥�

Independent third-party adjudication is welcomed even by those experts who are more than capable of self-certifying. Terry Dix, director of Arup鈥檚 services division, says a third party is particularly valuable in situations where engineers come up with innovative solutions that do not follow guidance. 鈥淎ll the regulations need a degree of interpretation,鈥� he says. 鈥淵ou may come up with a way of satisfying the regulations without following the accompanying guidance. Where would you go for approval for those variations?鈥�

If the communities department does press ahead with full-project self-certification, where would it be used? 鈥淚f it were me, I would do it in the large commercial and housebuilding sectors,鈥� says Everall, who used to be charge of building regulations at the old Office of the Deputy Prime Minister. 鈥淭here are more professional people working there.鈥� This would leave building control looking after the domestic sector, which has more than its share of cowboy builders, but little excitement or variety. 鈥淚t would become increasingly difficult to recruit people if they knew they had 40 years of inspecting house extensions ahead of them,鈥� he says.

Self-certification is not the only option. According to the review, others include giving councils greater enforcement powers. For example, by extending the period that councils have for prosecuting breaches of the regulations from six months to two years, stiffer penalties and the power to issue 鈥渟top鈥� notices. Another idea is to extend the pre-approved Robust Details scheme.

Another possibility, of course, is to give building control departments enough resources to do their jobs, including checking for compliance with Part L. Everall makes the point that building control has to work according to a fixed schedule of fees, and that what is paid to the council does not necessarily come back to the building control department.

Approved inspectors, in contrast, can charge what they like, which according to Everall means local authorities compete with one hand tied behind their back. More money would buy the training and the staff they need to offer a better service. 鈥淭he issue is how well they are trained, how many of them there are and how well they do their job,鈥� says John Tebbit, the industry affairs director of the Construction Products Association. 鈥淭he key thing is making sure they are resourced.鈥�

Caplehorn thinks the real problem is the sheer complexity of the 好色先生TV Regulations. He says: 鈥淚t鈥檇 be much better to go back to the core thing which is the regulations.鈥�

He adds: 鈥淚f they did get rid of 好色先生TV Control they would just replace it with something else that would cause massive confusion and end up being identical. It鈥檇 be bonkers.鈥�

What is likely to happen? The communities department鈥檚 review will be followed by a consultation on the subject, due to be published at the end of this year. Everall says the department has reassured him that it is not going to get rid of building control, and has said full project self-certification is 鈥渓ess likely鈥� than feared. But Everall is all too aware that John Callcutt, the chief executive of English Partnerships, is reviewing the delivery of housing, as is the Office of Fair Trading. If they come to the same initial conclusions as the communities department, those responsible for policing the 好色先生TV Regulations will be looking over their shoulders for some time to come.