On building safety, professional qualifications should count

Eleanor Jolliffe

The new safety bill aims to mandate competence, but it would make much more sense to mandate qualifications

Protection of function. The very words are usually enough to reignite old debates about what an architect is, or the unfairness of the UK system.

My own opinion, until recently, has been that if architects are as able to communicate their value as we all believe ourselves to be then we shouldn’t need protectionist regulation to ensure we all have a job in 30 years’ time. If we’re good at what we do, and adaptable to the changing construction industry, we don’t need protection of function. The draft Building Safety Bill (BSB) is changing my mind.

The BSB, in the words of the fact sheet HM government has prepared on industry competence, will “impose a requirement on principal designers, principal contractors and anyone carrying out any design or building work to be competent for their roles […] individuals will need to have the skills, knowledge, experience and behaviours necessary for their role.”

This content is available to registered users | Already registered?Login here

You are not currently logged in.

To continue reading this story, sign up for free guest access

Existing Subscriber? LOGIN

REGISTER for free access on selected stories and sign up for email alerts. You get:

  • Up to the minute architecture news from around the UK
  • Breaking, daily and weekly e-newsletters

 

Subscribe to Building Design and you will benefit from:

Gated access promo

  • Unlimited news
  • Reviews of the latest buildings from all corners of the world
  • Technical studies
  • Full access to all our online archives
  • PLUS you will receive a digital copy of WA100 worth over £45

Subscribe now for unlimited access.