Construction in 2025 will certainly be a hugely different industry from the one it is now if even a fraction of the ambition revealed in the government’s new report Construction 2025 is realised. Construction costs to be down by 33 per cent, projects to be completed in half the time that they are now, planning reformed, late delivery and cost overruns a thing of the past, no more accidents … the list goes on (see news).
The need for transformation in construction is frequently touted – by the Egan and Latham reports for example. Progress appears to have been made on several fronts, notably safety, partnering and closer relationships in construction teams, but these advances are far from universal and fundamental underlying problems remain. So what are the prospects for success by 2025?
There are some worries. For a start, why 2025? Why not 2020 or 2030? There is no analysis presented about why these improvements, most of which have bedevilled the industry ever since it existed, can be neatly solved by that date. There is no detail yet about how exactly these improvements are to be made. One key objective is to reduce the ‘trade gap’ in construction materials and products by 50 per cent. Why is 50 per cent thought to be achievable? Why not 100 per cent, or 20 per cent? Is there that much trade in materials and products anyway?
One sign that this hasn’t been thought through very well may be the choice of cover photograph for the report – it is the striking new roof at King’s Cross station in London – steelwork provided by a German company and erected by a German contractor. Why promote German products and skills if you are worried about a trade gap? Hearts may have sunk to read of the creation of yet another industry body to lead this transformation of construction, the Construction Leadership Council (CLC).
Successive governments over many years have complained about the plethora of construction bodies facing them, few of which agree on much. The government has had a hand in the creation of a few itself though, and it is being asked whether all of them are now needed.
What are the prospects for success of the CLC? Behind everything is the public sector’s desire for cheaper procurement of infrastructure. The industry has been slated for being more expensive than the French and German industries for example. A clue as to why the UK construction industry might be more expensive than overseas could lie in the way it is treated by its public sector clients.
For example, UK road construction and maintenance fell by 42 per cent last year and another fall of 18 per cent is forecast this year. Expecting any industry to invest in research and development and in the processes necessary for achieving all the other good things that the government wants from construction is perhaps a touch unrealistic when its workload is cut by 60 per cent over two years.
Nick Barrett
Editor