[ Question time: Paul Morrell ]


its demographic share of women and ethnic minorities, so one can only conclude that it appears less than hospitable to them. There’s no quick fix to this: it is a matter of continuing to work on the same issues that would attract young people into the industry in the first place (security, safety, mutual respect, and so on) and perhaps being more visibly and vocally intolerant of intolerance.


ECA Today: Does the government support apprenticeship schemes as much as it should? Paul Morrell: This is also, in part, a cultural issue. If we value a university degree, in whatever subject, above a vocational qualification, then of course apprentices are going to feel undervalued. I certainly think that the government could help by sending out clear signals that somebody who has qualified through apprenticeship is valued every bit as much as somebody qualified by degree. Beyond that, however, and the obvious need to support courses and training schemes as part of the educational system, I would throw the question straight back and ask whether the industry supports apprenticeship schemes as much as it should? As with integration, if it’s the right thing to do, why isn’t the industry just doing it? Are there more effective ways of training people, or does the industry just think it’s somebody else’s job? Perhaps one additional thing that the public sector


could do is to be more supportive of the employment of apprentices on its own schemes, but even that is difficult. It makes no sense to instruct specialist trade contractors to employ a certain number of apprentices on the project if there is then no lasting demand for those people beyond the life of the project itself. I think ConstructionSkills has made a good job of looking at a way around this, so that clients and contractors can work together to consider how a project can be used effectively for the training of apprentices, and we should look at putting some more weight behind that.


ECA Today: What is building information modelling and how does it encourage cooperation and best practice? Paul Morrell: The simplest definition I can think of is that it is the intelligent use of digital information, so that all participants in a building project are working off the same data. This alone reduces the opportunities for error, and when we extend that to include a 3D virtual model of the building, then more errors (and particularly coordination errors) are eliminated – or at least they should be. It has always struck me as crazy that, when we have the ability to build a 3D virtual model, we allow the complexities of doing so to get in the way – and resort instead to trying it at 1:1 scale out in the wind and rain. There are also opportunities to load the model with specific


bits of information (such as embodied carbon, or cost) so that those things can be modelled as well, enabling more efficient decisions to be made. And then, taking things one step further, design information


can be fed straight into computer-controlled machinery for fabrication, cutting out another opportunity for error as information is repeatedly transposed. In short, it enables everyone to come to the party. Indeed,


it virtually demands it, so that it can become an instrument of integration. This may be imposing an unreasonable burden


Paul Morrell speaking at the ECA’s Annual Dinner, February 2011


on what is potentially a fairly simple piece of technology, but I choose to have a naïve faith in its possibilities.


ECA Today: What has been the construction industry’s response to the PAS 91 – the government’s new standardised pre-qualification questionnaire? Paul Morrell: I think it has been pretty universally welcomed, and I do think it strikes a reasonable balance between standardising responses where that is the right response, while allowing differentiation on the part of both clients and suppliers as to the distinct needs of the former and the distinct offers of the latter. Of course, given the enormous spread of the public sector, it will be a while before it is universally adopted – but we hope that, through their trade associations, those who are presented with randomly different pre-qualification documents will let us know, so that we can encourage as many people as possible to use it.


ECA Today: How does the current government differ from the Labour administration in its attitude to the construction industry? Paul Morrell: Nobody would be surprised to hear that there are differences of priority, and also differences of the favoured means to an end. For example, there is now a very clear emphasis on dealing with the deficit, and an almost equal determination to push back some of the burden of regulation, and to rely upon the market and private sector innovation to solve problems rather than upon government intervention, in all but the clearest cases of market failure. As far as the ends themselves are concerned, however,


these are still very much with us – particularly as they relate to the industry delivering more value and less carbon. It is also worth saying that both the current minister with responsibility for construction, Mark Prisk, and his predecessor, Ian Lucas, share a real interest in the industry and its wellbeing, and have dedicated a lot of time to it. The challenge for the industry is to come up with the positive propositions that convert that level of attention into programmes that align the industry’s fortunes with the public interest.


March 2011 ECA Today 33


The government could help by sending out clear signals that somebody who has qualified through apprenticeship is valued every bit as much as somebody qualified by degree


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72