ction, Confidence, Brexit and Changes


Protection Coordinator). The discussion often referred to the Grenfell Tower disaster and how this could have been prevented if a number of things had been in place. The thrust


of the main arguments appeared to be that successive governments have undermined or abolished some of the controls that were used since the early 20th Century after a dangerous fire in Scotland, to ensure that buildings were correctly built in the first place and then properly maintained and updated as required. The net result has been that at the building stage, building inspectors have not been employed in sufficient numbers to ensure that basic safety and fire construction standards are met. They have often been able to simply sign off on issues like foundations while not being required to consider the building’s operation as whole. From the fire services’ point of view, better heat and smoke alarm systems


have ensured a steady decline in deaths from fire for many years and this has led to a relaxed attitude to fire safety in buildings because risks are perceived to be less. But as the Grenfell Tower disaster proved, not enough research and care has gone into the subsequent maintenance and repair of buildings to ensure that materials and fire systems are adequate. There are many implications for future construction because the UK housing


crisis obviously needs to be solved, but with the houses required being numbered in hundreds of thousands, the necessity to build cheaply and quickly needs to be balanced against the need for careful, well enforced regulation. It is also necessary to use materials that have been thoroughly tested and approved and construction designs that will contain fire and prevent things like subsidence and collapse. In my view, regulatory change seems like an unlikely prospect in the near future because of the all-consuming Brexit issues that face government, so it may be that


professional bodies and pressure groups will have to maintain a longer view of where construction is headed in terms of safety. George Clarke also had an opportunity to put a case for MOBI – the Ministry


of Building Innovation established by the George Clarke Foundation. He began by telling about his own induction into architecture from a very unpromising start as a 16 year-old school leaver whose teachers had told him that being an architect was beyond him. The foundations aims to encourage younger people to explore and become involved in all aspects of the building industry, and promote innovation and originality. George asked some very important questions about home construction. Questions like, why the need for all the wet trades that simply slow down construction? Why not use more off-site construction for speed and quality – especially since workers need not be slowed by inclement weather if they work indoors on what is effectively a production line. There is no doubt that the UKCW is a very valuable forum and networking


opportunity where ideas and practical solutions can be shared. My fervent hope is that the plethora of imaginative ideas, concrete solutions and influential movers and shakers present at the exhibition, can have the desired effect of solving some of the most pressing issues of the century in constructive and sustainable ways.


telephone 01444 450071


ToolBUSINESS+HIRE 17


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