Posts

Housebuilders say Government New Housing Figures are unrealistic

74 per cent of housebuilders think the government’s aim of building a million homes during the current parliament is unachievable – so the latest survey run by the Build Show, as part of UK Construction Week, and Housebuilder magazine reveals.

Targeted solely at housebuilders, the survey has highlighted a number of strong opinions, concerns and predictions held within the industry about the future of this critical sector. Following the question on the government’s targets, housebuilders were asked what they thought were the main constraints to increasing the UK housing supply – the top two answers given were problems with the planning system and the availability of enough skilled labour.

As one of the first canvases of the sector since the EU referendum, the survey has provided a valuable insight into how the industry feels about the affects it might have. Over half of those surveyed said that Brexit would make meeting the UK’s new housing needs more difficult and only 11 per cent saying it would make it easier.

Equally, those surveyed were cynical of government initiatives such as the Starter Home scheme with two thirds saying it will not boost supply or that they’re unsure. Similarly, only 40 per cent believed that government initiatives would increase the number of affordable homes being built.

When asked about the possible solutions to the UK’s housing needs, 64 per cent of housebuilders felt that SMEs were the key. Also identified was offsite construction with over two thirds of respondents saying it would play a major role in new home supply as was new investment models with over 75 per cent highlighting the contribution they could make.

Nathan Garnett, Event Director for the Build Show, commented: “The survey has provided valuable honest insight into the housebuilding sector and clearly indicates that there is a lot of uncertainty. In this regard, the show in October will offer a much needed opportunity to develop strategy and build stronger business relationships with key customers, peers and associations. Excitingly, the sector also sees a lot of potential in SME builders and we do too. There will be a wide variety of content suited to both national and SME housebuilders at the show to help them overcome the hurdles they currently face.”

Some of the other notable findings from the survey include:

  • One third of housebuilders believe the government should do more to encourage more people into the industry
  • More than 60 per cent of those surveyed do not believe the private sector is capable of building enough homes to tackle the lack of UK supply
  • According to housebuilders, access to finance is the biggest barrier for SMEs, followed by the planning system
  • Almost two thirds of housebuilders believe that manufacturer innovation will play a key role in new home supply
  • When asked what would be the one thing that would help them build more houses, the top five answers from those surveyed were: improvements to the planning system, more investment and access to funding, more skilled labour, increase in land supply and innovation such as offsite construction methods

Taking place at the Birmingham NEC from 18 – 20 October, UK Construction Week combines nine shows in one location. With over 24,000 trade visitors last year – a figure expected to double at this year’s event – the show boasts over 650 exhibitors. Visitors are able to attend Timber Expo, the Build Show, Civils Expo, the Surface and Materials Show, Energy 2016, Plant & Machinery Live, HVAC 2016, Smart Buildings 2016 and Grand Designs Live.

For more information, booking enquiries or to register for free to attend, please visit www.buildshow.co.uk or follow @BuildShow on Twitter.
/0 Comments/by

Government gives final confirmation on Hinkley Point C

Following a comprehensive review of the Hinkley Point C project, and a revised agreement with EDF, the Government has decided to proceed with the first new nuclear power station for a generation.

However, ministers will impose a new legal framework for future foreign investment in Britain’s critical infrastructure, which will include nuclear energy and apply after Hinkley.

The agreement in principle with EDF means that the Government will be able to prevent the sale of EDF’s controlling stake prior to the completion of construction, without the prior notification and agreement of ministers. This agreement will be confirmed in an exchange of letters between the Government and EDF. Existing legal powers, and the new legal framework, will mean that the Government is able to intervene in the sale of EDF’s stake once Hinkley is operational.

According to the government website, Hinkley Point C will provide seven per cent of Britain’s electricity needs for sixty years. UK-based businesses will benefit from more than 60% of the £18 billion value of the project, and 26,000 jobs and apprenticeships will be created.

Greg Clark, Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, said “Having thoroughly reviewed the proposal for Hinkley Point C, we will introduce a series of measures to enhance security and will ensure Hinkley cannot change hands without the Government’s agreement. Consequently, we have decided to proceed with the first new nuclear power station for a generation.”

A project with little support

This news will undoubtedly come as a shock to the many people in support of the Stop Hinkley campaign, who announced yesterday that they would be joining Greenpeace at 11am on Thursday 15th September to hand in a petition containing over 300,000 names at No.10 Downing Street (at 100,000 signatures a petition can be debated in Parliament).

A recent public opinion poll commissioned by Greenpeace which showed that support amongst the general public for Hinkley Point C has fallen to a new low of only 25%, whilst nearly half (44%) oppose it.

Stop Hinkley spokesperson Sue Aubrey said: “Virtually all major national newspapers and commentators have been calling for Hinkley to be cancelled for months. This petition and recent opinion polls show that the public agrees with them and supports Stop Hinkley’s view that there is no widespread support for new nuclear, particularly at Hinkley Point. Consumers can tell that the project may be unconstructable, requires vast subsidies and would generate electricity too expensive to use.”

One argument for the building of Hinkley is job generation within the county of Somerset. However, calculations suggest that the 900 direct permanent jobs which could be created at Hinkley Point C would cost electricity consumers an extra £800,000 per job per year compared to jobs in renewables in terms of increased costs of electricity. Renewable energy is a far better job-creator than nuclear, and already employs three times more people, according to Dr Ian Fairlie writing on The Ecologist website.

/0 Comments/by

Should we vote on the £4bn Houses of Parliament refurbishment?

Whitehall is currently abuzz with panicked chatter, deep anguish and parliamentarian discomfort. With general consensus now being that the palace of Westminster is in dire need of a retrofit, the taxpayer will ultimately be footing the bill. Seeing as we voters currently have the choice of who goes in and out of Parliament, shouldn’t we also have a say on its refurbishment? Building Specifier editor Joe Bradbury discusses.

A brief history

Completed in the 1860s, the Palace of Westminster is an iconic building that currently houses the British Parliament. It is a world famous and instantly recognisable structure and stands as a celebrated international symbol of our parliamentary democracy. Just as UK Parliament is constantly in a state of flux, so too has the building; adapting accordingly to suit its primary and functional purpose. Taking massive damage during the WWII blitz, the Houses of Parliament were repaired as a matter of utmost national priority post-1945. The project was seen as a real opportunity to create some much-needed new facilities that would be consistent with the original design.

From the 1960s onwards the requirement for individual Members of Parliament to have offices, coupled with the expansion of other parliamentary services led to the acquisition of additional buildings and the Palace became the core of a much larger Parliamentary Estate. In 1992 responsibility for maintaining the Palace ‘on behalf of the nation’ transferred from the Government to Parliament itself. How did this work out?

Fighting a losing battle

It appears that since 1992, every effort has been made to maintain what is ultimately an outdated and increasingly unsuitable infrastructure. Services such as heating, cooling, water, sewage, electricity and cabling have been kept semi-functioning, but have not been modernised. Astoundingly, there has been no real general renovation of the building and its services since the partial rebuild of 1945-50 – some of the services even predate the war. The original basements and vertical shafts that litter the building are now completely filled with pipes and cables, making further work difficult to carry out – which results in further expense.

Reports illustrate that asbestos features heavily throughout the palace and although asbestos remains safe if treated with great care in compliance with safety regulations, it makes any intervention so much more difficult. Another issue is that most of the work undertaken over the last 50 years is largely undocumented and since many areas are inaccessible, the state of dilapidation and subsequent risk is mostly uncharted. The building is completely at the mercy of fire, with little modern safety practices in place and fire compartmentation considered almost impossible.

The original roofs are no longer watertight and there are many areas plagued with penetrating damp, damaged by interior leaks and flooding.

Today, an influential committee is expected to recommend that MPs and peers should abandon the crumbling Houses of Parliament for six years so that drastic refit works can be carried out.

The cost

So now at the crux of the issue, how much does it cost to renovate a 150 year old Grade I listed building which is partly sinking, contains asbestos and has outdated cabling? The short answer is ‘a lot.’ The sheer amount of work and the sensitive nature of refurbishing a World Heritage Site results in a sky-high estimate of between £3.5bn and £5.7bn, with some suggesting the sum could rise to as much as £7.1bn.

A 2012 report warned that “major, irreversible damage” may be done to the building unless significant restoration work is carried out soon, making the refurbishment one of the most urgent and arguably important renovation projects in the UK today. Some feel that the whole thing is a needless expense to the taxpayer and a vanity project for British Parliament. Another previous report concluded that the maintenance costs alone are so astronomically high that if the Palace of Westminster was a commercial structure of no historical significance, it would be far more cost-effective and efficient to demolish it and rebuild using modern methods of construction, such as modular offsite building.

Whatever you stance, the Houses of Parliament are of national, historical and cultural importance and refurbishment will happen. It should therefore be imperative that efforts are made to soften the bludgeoning blow to the taxpayer’s pocket, shouldn’t it?

“Should I stay or should I go?” The parliament predicament

Assuming renovation does take place, the big decision to make will be whether Parliamentarians stay put throughout restoration works or whether there will be a need for them to temporarily relocate. Estimates predict that if the palace was vacated for just 6 years, the cost of works would total around £3bn. If MPs decide they want to stay whilst work is undertaken, the figure is doubled and renovation is expected to take up to 32 years. Needless to say, vacation of the building for six years is the cheapest, quickest and viable solution. One option would be to set up temporarily over the road, by moving to either the Methodist Central Hall or the Queen Elizabeth II Conference Centre. Some have suggested MPs could relocate as far away as Birmingham – or perhaps even hold a touring parliament. This option is unsurprisingly unpopular with many parliamentarians.

There are some interesting and difficult challenges ahead, some difficult decisions to take, but I would say to the House that instinctively I think it is important that this building remains consistently at the heart of our democracy and that we don’t end up being forced to move somewhere else. – Leader of the Commons Chris Grayling

Others feel that something must be done quickly and efficiently.

Doing nothing or muddling on are not options. – Lichfield Conservative MP Michael Fabricant

Who makes the decision?

A select committee of both the House of Commons and House of Lords is expected to be formed to consider the findings of the Independent Options Appraisal and make recommendations to members of both houses. In the meantime a joint committee of Commons and Lords will be set up with the task of recommending a way forward. A decision on which option to adopt is expected to be taken by MPs next year, with work to begin after the next election in 2020. However, is it really their decision to make?

Affectionately nicknamed the “Mother of Parliaments,” the British parliament is respected as the most ancient parliament in today’s world. Apart from a few brief interruptions, it has carried out its business on the same spot, the Palace of Westminster, since the year 1265.

The longevity and overwhelming presence of this building is a physical testament to our very democracy. Parliament was originally formed by the people, for the people. Therefore, under the very democracy that the building stands for, shouldn’t we have ultimate say over how our tax money is spent and renovation is undertaken? Meanwhile parliament continues to crumble around our legislature.

/0 Comments/by

Parliament calls for greater sustainability in transport infrastructure

Parliament’s Environmental Audit Committee has published a report calling for greater sustainability from the Department for Transport in future infrastructure projects.

According to the report (which can be read here), The Department for Transport needs a clear strategy to increase the use of ultra-low emission vehicles, reduce air pollution and deal with the VW cheat device scandal so that it can meet decarbonisation and air quality targets.

The Environmental Audit Committee highlights that the Department for Transport has planning and investment responsibilities for the UK’s road, rail, maritime, aviation and bus service sectors. The Department’s total spending is set to increase during this Parliament: although its resource spending is due to go down, its capital budgets will rise, with £73.4 billion of transport-related capital investment between 2015–16 and 2020–21, including £34.5 billion for Network Rail and £15.2 billion for its Roads Investment Strategy. In 2014–15 the Department allocated 50% of its gross expenditure to its roads, traffic and local responsibilities; almost 40% to its rail executive responsibilities; and 3% to its international, security and environment responsibilities.

Whilst Parliament acknowledge that many positive steps have been made towards better sustainability within the transport sector, the report focuses on those areas where the Department for Transport might go further to tackle climate change.

This has been welcomed by Campaign for Better Transport who will be writing to the Department demanding further reduction of their carbon footprint.

Sustainable Transport Campaigner, Bridget Fox commented: “The report shows that the Government is not doing enough to decarbonise transport and avoid building damaging infrastructure projects. Stronger action to clean up polluting vehicles is welcome but ultimately the answer lies in reducing car dependency, getting more freight onto rail and investing in good quality public transport alternatives. The call today from Team GB’s Olympic cycling champions for investment in everyday cycling is part of this solution. We’ll be writing to the Department for Transport Permanent Secretary demanding action on this report.”

/0 Comments/by

“HS2 already changing Britain,” says chairman

The chairman of HS2 has said that the project is already changing the way private investors, as well as local and central government plan for the future in Britain.

But David Higgins said HS2 must also help change the way we deliver infrastructure in this country as soon as we can reap the benefits for future projects such as Hinckley Point.

Mr Higgins made his comments in a speech in Manchester marking the second anniversary of the launch of his first report in the city.

In that two years, he said, not only had the concept of re-balancing the British economy taken root, people were beginning the process of making it a reality, helped by the moves towards devolution.

Local authorities and enterprise partnerships not just in Birmingham, Manchester, and Leeds, but also in the North West, the East and West Midlands, and Yorkshire were using HS2 not just to re-think their transport systems, but also how they attract private investment to their areas – and business has responded.

They were taking responsibility for transforming both their local economies and the overall balance of the national economy.

Companies such as Burberry in Leeds, HSBC in Birmingham, Interserve in Solihull are beginning to recognise the benefits of the extra connectivity and capacity that HS2 will deliver – as are potential investors elsewhere.

The potential for that transformation is outlined in a report published by HS2 today – HS2: Changing Britain.

The report also outlines how HS2 is already changing the perceptions and ambitions of the next generation quoting Cheshire East councillor, Rachel Bailey, as saying that it is already having a tangible effect in Crewe:

“That difference is being felt in schools because it is helping to lift pupils’ horizons, particularly on skills.”

But Sir David also challenged the UK infrastructure industry to learn the lessons of construction elsewhere and become more streamlined in its approach.

A series of factors, he said, made the UK industry less cost effective: a history of stop/go which prevented firms investing in skills, innovation and technology; fragmentation leading to multiple overhead costs plus a lack of co-ordination between design and construction.

HS2, he said, was determined to adopt a new approach which would bear down on those factors and transform the way we deliver infrastructure in this country, without compromising HS2’s strategic objective to re-balance the British economy.

That approach would include:

  • early contractor involvement to drive innovation and efficiencies in design and methodology
  • adopting enabling works contracts to clear the line of route ahead of the main civils works
  • incentivising companies to out-perform
  • adopting techniques new to this country such as linear construction, which uses the newly constructed route as a supply chain access

“As a twenty year project we have no excuse not to become more streamlined in our approach and not to innovate.”

Sir David said the lessons learnt from applying this approach to Phase One would be then be transferred to Phase Two.

You can view the report here.
You can read the speech here.

/by

HS2 cost jumps by £5.6bn

Group campaigning against HS2 have highlighted large disparities in figures predicted by HS2 officials and politicians and the actual financial cost to Britain.

George Osborne announced as part of the Autumn Statement that there would be a £20bn increase in transport infrastructure spending. However, what he didn’t mention is that over a quarter of this is accounted for by an 11% increase in the cost of building HS2. Paragraph 2.85 of the Autumn Statement states:

“Construction will begin on HS2 during the Parliament, and the Spending Review confirms a funding envelope of £55.7 billion in 2015 prices, which will deliver HS2 from London to Birmingham by 2026, and to Leeds and Manchester by 2033.”

Up until now, the official cost of the construction of HS2 has been stated as £42.6bn in 2011 prices, with a further £7.5bn added for the cost of trains, so £55.7bn represents an increase of £5.6bn, or 11%. This figure for the overall cost of the HS2 project is almost double the original estimate published in 2010.

Mr Osborne also said that along with HS2, the Great Western, Trans Pennine and Midland Mainline electrification projects can go ahead. As all of these projects have been beset with serious budget problems, it is likely that the increase in capital spend within the Department for Transport is simply to cover the cost over-runs which have been caused by chronic mismanagement.

Back in July the Trans Pennine and Midland Mainline projects were ‘paused’ by Government due to mismanagement and cost over-runs, only for them to be given the go-ahead in September. However, the costs of these projects is unclear. Just last week the Public Accounts Committee said it was “staggering and unacceptable” that current estimates for Great Western Electrification stand at £2.8bn, against a budget in 2013 of just £874m.

This news comes just a day after it was revealed that 46 members of staff at HS2 Ltd are paid more than the Prime Minister.

Stop HS2 Campaign Manager Joe Rukin responded “HS2 is abysmal value for money, and the increasingly dogmatic support for this white elephant and its’ spiralling costs is completely unfathomable. An 11% increase in the projected costs for construction is shameful after promises that the costs would be kept under control, but it is just another in a long line of HS2 cost hikes, and there will be more to come.”

“With trains not due to run for over another decade, who knows where the cost of this vanity project will end up and what else will have to be cut to pay for it? A responsible chancellor would be asking serious questions about whether HS2 is really worth it, not chucking more money at a boondoggle which would only benefit the richest in society. This is simply rewarding chronic mismanagement, and signalling that there is no need for budgetary control when it comes to HS2.”

Penny Gaines Chair of Stop HS2 added “HS2 is clearly a white elephant. Transport in the North does need improvement, but it isn’t the links to London which are holding back the economies of the North. It’s the ability to cross the Pennines, it’s getting into city centres from local towns. This is where the money needs spending on transport, not on one big showy railway line.”

“The government should make the decision to cancel HS2. There are far better uses for the money, which will have far better long and short term results. The people in charge of Network Rail when the now-delayed electrification programme was being developed are now in charge of HS2. They made a mess of that, and now they are making a mess of HS2.”

“Time and again, the government and HS2 Ltd have been overly optimistic about the cost of building HS2. It’s almost as if they picked a figure for the costs which was just about politically bearable, and then they hope no-one will notice when they increase it.”

/by

£3m allocated to refurbish Britain’s seaside towns

Seventy-seven projects have been selected to receive £3 million coastal revival funding.

Blackpool’s iconic Winter Gardens is one of 77 projects whose future is looking much brighter thanks to £3 million government funding, Communities Minister Brandon Lewis said today (11 December 2015).

Mr Lewis said the coastal revival funding will help secure these key seaside attractions “for generations to come”.

Ranging from theatres to piers and lidos to lighthouses, the projects will each receive grants of up to £50,000 to kick-start restoration work.

They are also set to attract £30 million in private and public investment and could support up to 1,500 jobs.

Prime Minister David Cameron said “Britain’s coastline is part of what makes us one of the most beautiful countries in the world. Our coastal towns are cherished not just by the people who live within them but by the nation as a whole. The value of our tourism industry also means they are playing a crucial role in the UK’s continuing economic recovery.”

“That’s why I am proud to lead a government which is absolutely committed to supporting and reviving our coastal communities.”

“With a total £3 million pledged for coastal projects today, it is clear we have an optimistic and ambitious approach to Britain’s seaside towns. We are providing a catalyst for further investment and securing treasured community assets for generations to come.”

Communities Minister Brandon Lewis added “From Berwick to St Ives, our coastal communities boast some iconic attractions, with millions visiting them each year.”

“But some of our best-loved buildings are falling into a state of disrepair – the £3 million Coastal Revival Fund aims to restore them to their former glory.”

“This funding will now kick-start the restoration work for these 77 projects across the country, so they can continue to be enjoyed by local people and tourists alike for generations to come.”

Driving regeneration in seaside towns

The government is committed to reviving our seaside towns, so they can diversify their economy, attract investment and secure their long-term future.

Since 2012, over £120 million has been invested in coastal towns through the Coastal Communities Fund, which is helping local people regenerate cherished seaside areas.

Earlier this year, the government announced 118 Coastal Community Teams, to encourage local businesses, councils and voluntary groups to work together to create a long-term strategy for their community.

Today’s £3 million Coastal Revival Fund forms part of these wider efforts, and will help communities to start the work to bring back into use buildings which have suffered years of disrepair.

Projects set to benefit from the funding include:

  • restoring the walls of the Pavilion Theatre, Blackpool within the Grade II* Winter Gardens building
  • plans to revive Grange over sands Lido Renaissance the 1930s derelict Art Deco saltwater lido
  • regenerating Madeira Drive on Brighton seafront
  • plans to regenerate the unique Art Deco saltwater lido in Shoalstone Pool, Brixham so it can become a top class tourist destination
  • plans to restore Tynemouth Outdoor Pool and create a leisure facility on the beach restoring and reopening Paignton picture house – a Grade II listed cinema as an independent community led cinema
  • re-development of the Edwardian bathing facilities east of Tinside Lido including adding new ‘pop-up’ shops in alcoves
  • repairs to Marine Theatre in Lyme Regis to preserve this unique much-loved 19th Century seaside theatre from imminent collapse
  • restoration of the iconic lighthouse in Spurn, Kingston-upon-Hull so it can open to the public
  • the regeneration of Redoubt fortress in Eastbourne including repairs to the moat wall and gun carriage and the creation of a maze for visitors
  • the renovation of Whitby West Pier Lighthouse which will mean it can open for public access
  • conserving 2 of Gravesham’s coastal heritage assets – New Tavern Fort and the remains of the Henry VIII Blockhouse to support it becoming a visitor destination
/by

Lack of green policies damaging UK industry

Following a recent spate of government cuts to renewable incentives and technologies, buildingspecifier hear from an industry expert to understand the impact this has been having on the UK renewables sector as a whole.

It appears that the latter half of 2015 has already seen the death of many earnest eco-friendly practices – first it began with the scrapping of the green deal shortly after an election victory, with no apparent replacement scheme to follow. The Green Deal was far from perfect – but following the subsequent assaults on environmental, ecological and energy matters that followed, such as the U-turn on Zero Carbon Homes building standards, the ending of subsidies for onshore wind farms and a failed attempt to begin fracking in Lancashire despite widespread public opposition, people are beginning to question the seriousness of this government’s commitment to the environment that we all have to live in and the validity of a speech once made by David Cameron where he expressed that he wanted to be “the greenest government ever.”

Most recently, the Department for Energy and Climate Change revealed their intentions to cut subsidies for solar energy by almost 90% from January in a consultation paper that was published earlier this month. This follows George Osborne underlining his determination to get the government’s nuclear energy programme moving by providing a £2bn government guarantee for the delayed Hinkley Point power plant project. So how is this affecting the section of the UK construction industry who specialise in green technology and renewable energy?

Silvio Spiess, founder and CEO of Innasol, the UK’s leading biomass business, comments on the recent green cuts and the uncertainty surrounding the industry.

“Heating constitutes 78% of the average consumer’s energy consumption. It is therefore a no-brainer that heating should be the government’s principal focus over the next few years.”

“The consistent degression of biomass technologies under the government’s Renewable Heat Incentive scheme clearly demonstrates that there is significant appetite in the UK for renewable heating. The tariff for domestic biomass has dropped by 47% over the last nine months, the tariff for small commercial biomass (up to 200kW) has dropped by 53% over the last 15 months – entirely due to consumer popularity. UK home and business owners are calling for affordable, clean energy.”

“The current uncertainty which surrounds renewable heating and other green technologies is only damaging the industry: consumers are less willing to invest in renewable heating technologies and green businesses themselves are less prepared to invest in their staff and infrastructure. By cutting green subsidies, the government is jeopardising the UK’s progression towards cleaner, greener, more affordable energy.”

“Innasol calls on the government to recognise this demand, and to commit to investing in renewable heating past Q1 2016. By reallocating budget to further invest in subsidies (like the Renewable Heat Incentive) to promote renewable heating, the government will propel the UK towards carbon emissions reductions and closer to the EU 2020 targets. Now is the time to act.”

/by