Aug 2010
So the public spending cuts are underway, the BSF Programme is in tatters, Local Authorities are reeling and schools and colleges are still falling down. What hope do we have for the future, in construction and beyond?
Whilst the BSF promised much and did deliver a little it also had some fundamental flaws. The most obvious was the tremendous wastage which trailed in its wake.
Paramount among this was the procurement route requiring contractors and consultants to invest tremendous amounts of time and money in a protracted bidding process that was great for the winner, but a very expensive lesson for the losers.
Granted, it did create jobs in the short term amongst contractors and consultants, but the pain to the losers’ balance sheets is a lasting legacy. That “wasted” investment would have been much better spent being ploughed directly into projects that generated lasting jobs for the construction industry, not “mirage” equivalents.
The cost-intensive process of running a two-contractor bid process right up until the final selection was imposed upon Local Authorities by Central Government and sat very uncomfortably with those responsible councils. This is hardly the “lean thinking” that Sir John Egan so passionately promoted and was embraced by our industry.
But enough retrospection, how do we move forward and what future is there? Investing in our schools is central to the future of this country and must continue. How can we develop our education, our children, and by definition, our future without?
In the short term, what easier ways are there to secure construction and consultancy jobs. Seemingly, the Government has no money and will, once again, rely on the private sector, with its commercial acumen, to help out.
I don’t believe that a return to PFI is necessary; here are a few suggestions as to why not:
A dose of reality – It is not necessary for every new school to look like Selfridges. I went into a new school recently which had the most magnificent open riser main staircase within the atrium entrance. It looked wonderful… particularly for the young men who took great pleasure in standing immediately underneath and looking up as the young ladies used it! Who ever designed it had certainly not considered “function over form”.
Robinson Low Francis (RLF) recently completed a secondary school rebuild in an area of our county not considered to be the most prosperous and which has so transformed the school’s reputation that it is now oversubscribed with pupils from outside the area and from private education. The stunning result was based simply upon good architecture, good cost control and prudent planning.
It is of course not the building alone which makes the school but it is has certainly contributed significantly to its evolution when combined with strong educational vision, leadership and investment. Pupils undoubtedly respect the new facility.
Let’s make it work – I recently went to a brand new college facility that looked fantastic until we spoke to the users. There had clearly been no consultation around its development and much of the facility was incompatible with good curriculum delivery.
Fundamental issues had been forgotten – such as being able to see all the pupils, enabling teachers to manage them, lack of or inadequate storage facilities, inadequate sizing of work space; the list went on. It became apparent that those involved in the development had failed to actually ask the users what was good and bad until the facility was complete.
Let furniture and ICT lead – Advances in furniture and ICT have dramatically changed opportunities for improving teaching strategy. They have also hugely increased opportunities for space utilisation and flexibility.
This should be a cornerstone of the revisited “form follows function” strategy. Enlightened architects are designing buildings from the inside out (but an approach which is still, unfortunately, all too rare).
Learn from the past – Governments are fantastic at repeating previous errors – and we are often not far behind. In the wake of the BSF demise they sent out a form to each establishment to prove “shovel readiness”. But it was the same form that had been used in the recent Learning and Skills Council debacle with FE colleges.
Properly define “Best Value” – When will Local Authorities stop confusing “best value” with “cheapest is best”? Some already do, but there is still room for improvement.
Consultants are getting much better at answering the questions in Pre Qualification Questionnaires (PQQs), whilst the questions are not progressing at the same pace. In a recent example that the RLF team experienced, every single consultant scored 100 per cent on the “quality” response. This then became a straight price fight.
Basic procurement – The current RIBA President, Ruth Reed wrote an excellent article in The Times recently suggesting a return to basic, but efficient tendering protocols for contractors and consultants. Let’s have clear definitive tender documents from the outset prepared once so that the tendering process is quick and cost efficient for all participants.
Let’s use what we have – “Flatten and rebuild” is a thing of the past. Let’s consider what existing stock can be utilised, what needs refurbishment and what truly needs to be dropped. FE colleges have learnt their lesson from their LSC programme experience.
Having looked at their estates again, many have discovered that they are not as bad as they were conditioned into believing. Private sector commercial thinking is now being introduced in that sector to good effect.
Let’s embrace partnering...properly - Partnering is most effective when it is strategic rather than project-specific. To learn lessons on one project and not take the team forward on to the next identical scheme is to miss a trick.
Local Authorities are often at fault in this respect, yet it is understandable as pressure for transparency and fairness can out-trump common sense. Their members and their standing orders should allow them to build alliances with discretion and for the greater good of their pupils.
Rarely do Councils pull all of their framework consultants together to share information. This does require consultants to be more open and embracing, which they would be if Best Value was properly administered, together with projects being regularly and evenly shared amongst them.
therein lies the fundamental approach to my plan for the sector – we are going to need some “stop gap” solutions for a little while until recovery is under way. The jaundiced amongst us will call this “patching-up”. The enlightened will call it “innovative architectural solutions”. There is a fine line between the two.
The private sector has been in this predicament for two years and is beginning to find ways to generate projects again – and it is not through “patching-up”. Private money will also be needed to kick start some projects but lets do it in “bite-size chunks” and stop taking out twenty-five year mortgages that our successors will have to service.
A Government covenant is still one of the best around and increasingly private developers are understanding this and being prepared to Joint Venture (JV) with public sector bodies to mutual benefit.
There is a future for Education and Construction together, steeped in the lessons of the past. It is not revolutionary – just essential.
|
