Insider’s view of issues in construction sector

HAVING spent most of of my professional life as in-house legal adviser on each side of the construction industry here, and the employer’s side in Lesotho, I produced a paper along similar lines to the inquiry on this subject for the Society of Construction Law on returning home from Lesotho; I have recently updated it as far as my limited IT skills allow.

I have also recently rejoined Constructing Excellence in Wales: it was in the hope that I might pass on what I learned in Lesotho about collaboratively delivering construction projects on time and within budget; I had failed to do so when approaching the Welsh Government on returning home in 2003.

To return to the AMs’ letter, I realise that the inquiry is limited to the issue of retentions, which, of course, have been a bugbear in the industry ever since the House of Lords effectively restored them after they had been outlawed by the redoubtable Denning LJ in the Court of Appeal.

However, the subject of retention, particularly unwarranted ones, is but one issue that casts the industry in a bad light. Others include (but are not limited to) unrealistic financing and programming by promoters and unrealistic tendering by contractors.

One example of the former was the initial budget for the infrastructure that would allow the London Olympics to open on time. The result was that the American Jack Lemley resigned from heading up the construction team and the budget was increased to match what was needed for completion on time.

This was the same Jack Lemley that I had the pleasure to work alongside on the Channel Tunnel. He never promised that the Chunnel would be completed on time and within budget, but, at least along with his American Eurotunnel counterparts, he got it over the line eventually.

This malaise of insufficient budgeting and tendering continues to mar the industry; think Crossrail and HS2. Derek Griffiths Llandaff, Cardiff

Politicians’ stances are contradictory

I HAVE no wish to say that anyone is telling fibs, but I cannot understand how sincere Brexiteers are able to favour two wholly incompatible international arrangements at the same time, either having an agreed deal with the EU, which suits them both, or breaking away in hostility from the EU.

I can understand either choice, but I cannot understand how anyone can favour both at the same time, since the economic consequences are completely opposite.

CN Westerman

Brynna

Trade will be better after we leave EU

IN REPLY to the letter by Bryan D Prescott (“Negative results of Brexit are already happening’’) in Tuesday’s letters, judging by the latest figures issued by the ONS the only results that are happening now and are likely to do so after Brexit are positive.

Latest ONS data shows demand for British goods and services continue to grow to record heights despite a challenging global outlook. For instance, UK exports to May 2019 increased by 4% to a record high, which means the UK has now experienced 38 months of consecutive growth [ONS figures]. Why should this change when we leave the EU? Britain exports all over the world, not just to the EU, and will be able to increase trade further once we are free of EU trade restrictions.

The Government is in the process of signing trade deals with six new countries, including South Korea. Of course all those wishing to remain in the EU want negative results to happen so they can say they were right all along; however, I believe they will be proved wrong.

As for Boris Johnson, if he’d been in charge of Brexit instead of Theresa May, we would be out now. Raymond Jones

Ely, Cardiff

Answer to recycling centre conundrum

WITH regard to the story in the South Wales Echo on Thursday (“Search goes on for new recycling centre”) regarding the difficulty the council are having in finding a site in north Cardiff for a new recycling centre (and which we were promised two years ago), I really don’t see the problem – and the answer being one that should be staring all in the face.

What is wrong with using the previous recycling centre in Fairwater, which had thousands of pounds spent on it, only to be closed some 12 months later?

Whilst I appreciate Fairwater is not strictly north Cardiff, it is certainly closer than Lamby Way, which is inaccessible for many. Better to have the use of Fairwater than none at all, and one which, given its previous history, should in theory be less costly and easier to reinstate.

As for Councillor Michael Michael saying he did not believe the closure of Wedal Road had contributed to increased fly-tipping – well all I can say is “wake up and smell the coffee!”.

It was obvious to one and all that as soon as the recycling centres were closed, at both Fairwater and Wedal Road, that there would be a huge increase in fly-tipping – plain as the nose on your face! Mrs DE Davies Whitchurch, Cardiff

Postive experience of NHS treatment

WE ALL know that the NHS is struggling because of staff shortages, but we are still receiving excellent treatment in all areas.

I myself have been attending Glamorgan House dermatology department. They do such good work regarding skin problems, so I would like to say a big thank you to everyone from reception to firstfloor photo room and the surgeons who carry out the treatment.

They explain in detail what they are doing and then the nurses assist and make you a welcome cup of tea and then on to the second floor and finally the cleaners who keep all areas spotless.

May I say a big thank you to each and every one for their kindness, helpfulness and excellent treatment. Maureen Poole

Sully

Insufficient budgeting and tendering continues to mar the construction industry Derek Griffiths Llandaff, Cardiff