When is regulation merely guidance?
Spotted this over at m&e sustainability:
“We are not going to get 100 per cent of buildings complying with the Building Regulations 100 per cent of the time,” said Ted King, principle mechanical and electrical engineer at the CLG. “We don’t have a Police State in this country, nor do we want one. It is far better to have phased compliance – and we are not that far away.
“You have to be realistic about what you can achieve. If we have most buildings mostly compliant most of the time, we are not doing badly,” added Mr King.
HVCA President John Miller responded with:
“I find this mystifying,” he said. “We spent months and years in consultations about the Regulations. The industry was more than happy to support the Government by setting up a series of Competent Persons Schemes that would allow suitably qualified contractors to self-certify their work as compliant, so taking the strain off local authorities.
“These schemes remain the most workable route to compliance, but there must be an overall enforcement framework or there will be little incentive for companies to put their operatives through the appropriate training,” added Mr Miller. “If unregistered, unqualified firms can carry on flouting the regulations with impunity, why should anyone else put themselves to the considerable extra expense of training operatives properly and joining a competence scheme?
“How does the Government expect to hit its ambitious targets for reducing carbon emissions from buildings if it will not rigorously support its own legislation?”
Ted King’s comments were made at the CIBSE/ASHRAE conference last month (of which I have heard little about - wasn’t on the radar for a lot of people this year - was that due to being in the North?)
Did you enjoy this post? Why not leave a comment below and continue the conversation, or subscribe to my feed and get articles like this delivered automatically to your feed reader.
Comments
No comments yet.
Leave a comment