building trade, cscs, cis

Bring back cis, The big firms have a strangle hold over tradesmen their one sole aim is money no real consideration for the standard of work or its employees . When local firms won contracts they cared about their work and wanted to keep it and make a good name for itself. Smaller contractors always employed youngsters you very rarely see young lads learning a trade which is bad for our industry . The last goverment invented the cscs scheme to make money ,its all about image when it should be focus on standard. the only way to get standards back up where they should be is to reintroduce the clerk of works and employ mangers who have trade experiance. I have been on jobs where a local authority or housing associaton has paid out thousends for work to be done when hand over day comes a housing officer turns up with no trade experiance to inspect and pass it and the standards have been so bad because of mangement pushing you to finsh ,if a clerk of work was to inspect the work most of it would be condemed .The big firms have become a carbon copy of the nhs to many pen pushers and managers with no knowlage of what its like to be on the tools and how jobs should be run properly .

Why is this idea important?

Bring back cis, The big firms have a strangle hold over tradesmen their one sole aim is money no real consideration for the standard of work or its employees . When local firms won contracts they cared about their work and wanted to keep it and make a good name for itself. Smaller contractors always employed youngsters you very rarely see young lads learning a trade which is bad for our industry . The last goverment invented the cscs scheme to make money ,its all about image when it should be focus on standard. the only way to get standards back up where they should be is to reintroduce the clerk of works and employ mangers who have trade experiance. I have been on jobs where a local authority or housing associaton has paid out thousends for work to be done when hand over day comes a housing officer turns up with no trade experiance to inspect and pass it and the standards have been so bad because of mangement pushing you to finsh ,if a clerk of work was to inspect the work most of it would be condemed .The big firms have become a carbon copy of the nhs to many pen pushers and managers with no knowlage of what its like to be on the tools and how jobs should be run properly .

How to reform the foreign aid to better help the third world develop, increase food security, reduce CO2, increase forest cover in the UK and build cheap and affordable houses for British people.

 

This is long, so bear with me:

We should convert 12% of farmland in the UK into 90% woodland and 10% housing. This would build roughly 3.8 million houses and add another 560,000 hectares of forest, increasing the amount of forest cover of the UK by 56%. This would also cut our carbon footprint by 8% (a big contribution towards our aim to cut 80% by 2050) and generally improving the environment.

Then use the Foreign Aid budget to build farms in the developing world by buying licenses of the governments there. We can then use the food grown in this otherwise unused but productive land to feed our population and increase food sustainability. 

There is of course the matter of security for our farms. It is unlikely for there to be Zimbabwe style farm invasions as this policy shall increase affluence and decrease unemployment in these countries. In the very worst case scenario, we can deploy British troops to protect these farms, though this may also be unnecessary as we should try to get the foreign governments to control crime.

And just to clear one thing out the way, Africa is not all barren and unfertile. It has 28% of all the worlds arable land, more than North America and Europe combined and furthermore more than any other continent, even Asia or South America. The reason it is not very productive is that it is poorly run by corrupt governments. Prime examples are Sudan, Congo, Zimbabwe and South Africa.

The amount of shipping and flights from foreign countries to the UK delivering food may generate some emissions, though this is dwarfed by the mass of trees and other plants being grown in the UK and the foreign countries.

Why is this idea important?

 

This is long, so bear with me:

We should convert 12% of farmland in the UK into 90% woodland and 10% housing. This would build roughly 3.8 million houses and add another 560,000 hectares of forest, increasing the amount of forest cover of the UK by 56%. This would also cut our carbon footprint by 8% (a big contribution towards our aim to cut 80% by 2050) and generally improving the environment.

Then use the Foreign Aid budget to build farms in the developing world by buying licenses of the governments there. We can then use the food grown in this otherwise unused but productive land to feed our population and increase food sustainability. 

There is of course the matter of security for our farms. It is unlikely for there to be Zimbabwe style farm invasions as this policy shall increase affluence and decrease unemployment in these countries. In the very worst case scenario, we can deploy British troops to protect these farms, though this may also be unnecessary as we should try to get the foreign governments to control crime.

And just to clear one thing out the way, Africa is not all barren and unfertile. It has 28% of all the worlds arable land, more than North America and Europe combined and furthermore more than any other continent, even Asia or South America. The reason it is not very productive is that it is poorly run by corrupt governments. Prime examples are Sudan, Congo, Zimbabwe and South Africa.

The amount of shipping and flights from foreign countries to the UK delivering food may generate some emissions, though this is dwarfed by the mass of trees and other plants being grown in the UK and the foreign countries.

crazy H&S rules on building sites

how did it get so crazy. when I go on a building site I now have to undertake a one day H&S briefing… this is for each and every site even if like in my job I might attend 10 different sites in a month. When on site I am treated like a little boy and made to wear hard boots, hard hat, gloves, goggles and High visibility top. Theres an argument for hard, boots and high visibility tops but the rest is just plain stupid. There's a huge amount of red tape and 'arse covering' and very little of it actually makes me any safer.

Why is this idea important?

how did it get so crazy. when I go on a building site I now have to undertake a one day H&S briefing… this is for each and every site even if like in my job I might attend 10 different sites in a month. When on site I am treated like a little boy and made to wear hard boots, hard hat, gloves, goggles and High visibility top. Theres an argument for hard, boots and high visibility tops but the rest is just plain stupid. There's a huge amount of red tape and 'arse covering' and very little of it actually makes me any safer.

Get rid of Part P (electrical work) building regs

I would like to see the 2005 Part P building regulations abolished and replaced with a more reasonable law This regulation is supposed to deal with electrical safety and restricts the work that can be done on a domestic installation by a householder. In theory, a householder is free to do whatever work is required and then seek approval under building regs. The alternative is to pay to have a Part P approved contractor do the work and certify the work. In practice, the building regs fees and approval process make it almost unthinkable for a householder to work on their own electrical installation (if they feel competent enough) and then gain local authority approval.

The overall effect of this legislation has been to make a select group of the workforce (electricians) very well paid by what is a captive market with no other alternative than to pay large amounts of money, often for average or shoddy work.

I believe that electricians should still need to demonstrate competence and qualifications to do electrical work – nothing wrong with that. But a householder should be free to perform their own electrical installation if they feel competent enough.

I have personally witnessed an electrician in my own home, armed with only a screwdriver, perform electrical work that was supposed to be controlled under Part P regs. The same electrician then issued a certificate for electrical safety test that were NOT performed. At no point did the electrician use any test equipment. This electrician was contracted by a very large national gas installer. In othere words, they failed to perform the work properly and issued a false certificate. This type of fraud is commited daily.

Part P, as I recall, was introduced in 2005 by the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister! Get rid of this extortionate legislation and dump it in the same place as the ODPM
 

Why is this idea important?

I would like to see the 2005 Part P building regulations abolished and replaced with a more reasonable law This regulation is supposed to deal with electrical safety and restricts the work that can be done on a domestic installation by a householder. In theory, a householder is free to do whatever work is required and then seek approval under building regs. The alternative is to pay to have a Part P approved contractor do the work and certify the work. In practice, the building regs fees and approval process make it almost unthinkable for a householder to work on their own electrical installation (if they feel competent enough) and then gain local authority approval.

The overall effect of this legislation has been to make a select group of the workforce (electricians) very well paid by what is a captive market with no other alternative than to pay large amounts of money, often for average or shoddy work.

I believe that electricians should still need to demonstrate competence and qualifications to do electrical work – nothing wrong with that. But a householder should be free to perform their own electrical installation if they feel competent enough.

I have personally witnessed an electrician in my own home, armed with only a screwdriver, perform electrical work that was supposed to be controlled under Part P regs. The same electrician then issued a certificate for electrical safety test that were NOT performed. At no point did the electrician use any test equipment. This electrician was contracted by a very large national gas installer. In othere words, they failed to perform the work properly and issued a false certificate. This type of fraud is commited daily.

Part P, as I recall, was introduced in 2005 by the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister! Get rid of this extortionate legislation and dump it in the same place as the ODPM
 

CIS Abolition

Repeal the requirement for small business involved in construction to with hold 20-30% from sub-contractors. This makes me with hold money from anyone that works on my behalf, even if they are VAT registered, this is ridiculous, effectively, you hold the bulk (if not all) of the profit in a job and refund it at the end of the tax year when guess what it is all refunded. BUT the admin involved is prohibitive. The only people who benefit are the Government because they effectively cream 20% off the top of every building job countrywide and the Accountants we have to use to sort the bloody mess out at the years' end when the 20-30% is returned, with no interest. Please, this has to stop, the admin is a nightmare, I had a conversation this evening with an ex-employee who has not been paid for two months at his new job because, he couldn't get his UTR from the revenue. The whole thing is bloody ridiculous

Why is this idea important?

Repeal the requirement for small business involved in construction to with hold 20-30% from sub-contractors. This makes me with hold money from anyone that works on my behalf, even if they are VAT registered, this is ridiculous, effectively, you hold the bulk (if not all) of the profit in a job and refund it at the end of the tax year when guess what it is all refunded. BUT the admin involved is prohibitive. The only people who benefit are the Government because they effectively cream 20% off the top of every building job countrywide and the Accountants we have to use to sort the bloody mess out at the years' end when the 20-30% is returned, with no interest. Please, this has to stop, the admin is a nightmare, I had a conversation this evening with an ex-employee who has not been paid for two months at his new job because, he couldn't get his UTR from the revenue. The whole thing is bloody ridiculous

Repeal excessive construction warning signs legislation

This proposal is to repeal the slew of laws and regulations relating to warning signs on and around construction sites.

Repealing the legislation that introduced these pointless warning signs will have no real impact on accidents at construction sites and will lower the cost of construction works – which affects both taxpayers and private investors.

Why is this idea important?

This proposal is to repeal the slew of laws and regulations relating to warning signs on and around construction sites.

Repealing the legislation that introduced these pointless warning signs will have no real impact on accidents at construction sites and will lower the cost of construction works – which affects both taxpayers and private investors.

Stop building houses on arable/farm land

stop building houses, housing estates and roads, over areas of green land such as arable and farming land.

the farming and agriculture industry is slipping and needs as much land as possible whihc can not be achived by government housing and building plans. also by taking away fields and green area you are creating visual pollution. at the moment a lot of farm land where i live is going into houses, whihc is a shame as there is less places for local children to go and play outdoors as well.

Why is this idea important?

stop building houses, housing estates and roads, over areas of green land such as arable and farming land.

the farming and agriculture industry is slipping and needs as much land as possible whihc can not be achived by government housing and building plans. also by taking away fields and green area you are creating visual pollution. at the moment a lot of farm land where i live is going into houses, whihc is a shame as there is less places for local children to go and play outdoors as well.