The Government’s decision to dramatically scale back the Building Schools for the Future (BSF) programme proves that project costs will now be even more important than ever. While the low-carbon agenda remains a key driving force for economic recovery, only the most affordable solutions will get through the vetting process for the foreseeable future, and stricter rules will apply.

As this article went to press, the Office of Government Commerce (OGC), which handles much of our public-sector procurement, was also in talks with its suppliers about shaving a further £3 billion from the cost of its public-service contracts.

The BSF programme had made itself a target by not delivering on a number of fronts. The way the projects were structured and managed made the decision to cut so many of them pretty easy for Education Secretary Michael Gove. The tendering process was torturous and expensive in the extreme. Originally, the Labour administration set a target that 200 secondary schools would be rebuilt by the end of 2008. Only 35 have been completed and just 13 more refurbished.

Wasteful

A lot of the blame for this lies at the door of the people charged with managing the programme. It could take up to three years just to get through the tender process for a BSF project. This was incredibly wasteful, and many specialist contractors were priced out of the market by the high cost of such a protracted bidding arrangement.

However, the Government does have a chance to turn what is generally perceived as a huge negative into a positive. It is reviewing the process for delivering vital infrastructure projects like new school buildings, and it is crucial to avoid making the same old mistakes. Now is the time to put in place a framework for projects to be delivered by integrated teams working in strategic partnerships backed by project bank accounts and insurance policies.

The HVCA has continually highlighted the problem of waste and delays inherent in our antiquated tendering process. Perhaps, finally, with the pressure on cost being greater than ever, we may at last get a procurement system fit for the 21st century rather than our current 19th-century one. Such a reform is crucial if we are going to be able to deliver school building refurbishments, in particular, and the new energy-efficient building stock, in general.

A protracted and disjointed process inevitably leads to an unsatisfactory outcome, such as the BSF programme, which was a missed opportunity to deliver a significant chunk of our carbon-reduction targets because of poor procurement practices and lack of joined-up thinking.

We need to demonstrate efficiency in the procurement process and in the lifetime operation of the building — and that can only be done with the early involvement of building-services specialists and if everyone involved has security of payment.

Over the next 10 years we must bring over seven million UK homes up to modern energy-efficiency standards. That is over 10 000 houses a week at a potential cost of £5 to £8 billion and with potential employment for another 65 000 people. The lessons of the BSF debacle need to be learned right across the sector otherwise all these targets will remain well out of reach.

The building-services sector does have the skills to meet the technical challenges created by this immense challenge, but we are not good at selling our abilities or our technological solutions. We have a credibility gap to plug. Contractors also struggle to make the necessary investment in ongoing skills development because so much of their money is locked up in projects. Project bank accounts help to smooth out the payment process and improve cash flow through the industry to the benefit of all.

Alternative

A more affordable, streamlined procurement process can free up funds to invest the extra capital that allows contractors to consider, for example, a heat pump rather than a boiler or heat recovery to be added to a ventilation system, if appropriate. The more alternative solutions are delivered, the cheaper they will become, so creating the capital- and running-cost benefits that will be demanded by all specifiers.

However, it is also important that low- and zero-carbon solutions do not add unnecessary complexity. The most successful products will be those that give building users the comfort conditions they need without disrupting their day-to-day home and working lives. For example, the new air-to-water heat pumps can provide water at 65°C so they can be a direct replacement for a gas boiler with the minimum of disruption.

Similarly, hydrogen fuel-cell boilers have huge potential as a direct replacement for conventional heating technologies. But fundamentally we must focus on good engineering principles and apply our ‘energy hierarchy’. This means improving the building fabric as a first step to reduce heat losses, installing and commissioning good control systems to manage the energy performance and balance of the services’ before finally considering the use of replacement low and zero carbon technologies. This step-by-step approach will deliver excellent value for money every time.

Contractors can do all of these things if they are able to invest in the right training and, by joining competent person schemes, they can also provide proof of their expertise to clients. Our economic futures depend on improved professional standards because, without them, we will not produce the high-quality, low-carbon solutions required — on time and in budget.

Martin Burton is president of the Heating & Ventilating Contractors’ Association for 2010/11 and also runs the commercial contracting division of Delron Services Ltd.

Printer friendly version

Email this article to a friend

Bookmark this

---