MCCM Feedback to the Sofia Board Inquiry

PUBLIC INQUIRY JEAN PAUL SOFIA

MCCM FEEDBACK TO THE BOARD’S RECOMMENDATIONS

6TH MARCH 2023

MALTA CHAMBER OF CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT PROFESSIONALISM, INNOVATION AND QUALITY IN CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT

Scope & Objectives of this report

The outcome to the Sofia Public Inquiry that was published recently was accessed by the Malta Chamber of Construction Management (MCCM) and its members with the scope that of attaining reactions and relative constructive comments to the recommendations made by the Inquiry’s Board.

All within the context that of promoting and enhancing standards within the local construction industry.

This document provides an overview in the form of a report related to the review exercise conducted by the Council on behalf of its members and is divided in the following sections:

SECTION A – INTRODUCTION & CONTEXT

SECTION B – FEEDBACK TO THE RECOMMENDATIONS

SECTION C – CONCLUDING COMMENTS

MALTA CHAMBER OF CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT 1

SECTION A – INTRODUCTION & CONTEXT

General Introduction

The Malta Chamber of Construction Management (MCCM), is the official body representing local construction project managers working within the construction industry at various supervisory and management levels operating within the Built Environment Sector. MCCM is continuously promoting improvements to increase the level of standards in, quality, safety, ethics, integrity and to be at the forefront of innovation of the local built environment.

MCCM’s input continuously strives to influence policies and regulations that impact the industry towards improvements for the common good.

MCCM strongly feels that at this stage it is even more clear that the role of the соnѕtruсtiоn project mаnаgеr (CPM) is an important one this within the holistic construction cycle and should be given its importance. The CPM асtѕ аѕ thе оwnеr’ѕ rерrеѕеntаtivе аnd аdvосаtе, еduсаting аnd lеаding оwnеrѕ thrоugh thе сhаllеngеѕ оf dеѕign аnd соnѕtruсtiоn to “improve the quality of life for those who use and create the built environment” (Foy – OBE FCIOB, 2021)

Context

The publication of the Sofia Public Inquiry outcome was subject to MCCM’s members views and the feedback was channeled through a specifically set-up working group. MCCM’s feedback is to be read within the premise that MCCM has viewed and commented specifically to the areas relative to the construction cycle only. Good to note that MCCM works in close collaboration with The Chartered Institute of Building (CIOB), and conducts several consultations with this same body. Both MCCM and CIOB work hand in hand to promote improvements within the construction industry locally and internationally.

MALTA CHAMBER OF CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT

SECTION B – FEEDBACK TO THE INQUIRY BOARD’S RECOMMENDATIONS

B 1.0 FEEDBACK TO THE OBSEVATIONS SECTION

MCCM agrees with the board statement that even though the bad state of the industry has been confirmed by the BCA CEO, every day that goes by without proper action being taken, is a day lost.

The Construction industry is one of the most important sectors not only in the local economy but also for the development of all those involved. This doesn’t mean that we can sacrifice lives and wellbeing of workers involved and even future generations that will eventually end up using these structures. Poor and sub-standard work and materials might surface not during the implementation stage of a project but further down the line. No one deserves this.

With respect to Insurances and Guarantees, these are very important, including the upgrading of same. However, these should always be considered as a ‘contingency’ and seen as a ‘safety valve’ requirements hence the focus and entre process should always be to apply and adapt best practices in both the design and execution of construction related developments backed by solid and clear regulations

B 2.0 FEEDBACK TO THE RECOMMENDATIONS

a. Contractor Licencing

MCCM agrees with the board that the present legislation is ‘a start’ to what should be a more in depth re organisation of all contractors involved at any phase of a project lifecycle. In fact, MCCM recalls the feedback it provided to the draft of the licensing of contractors draft regulations during the consultation period, and these are still valid today. This feedback is reproduced / extracted in Appendix A.

b. Classification

The more in depth the legislation becomes the higher the level of the contractors licenced should become. At the same time we recognise that you can still be a small contractor, involved mainly on small projects, and provide a sterling service. This refers to both the work environment offered to the staff, and also the quality and standards of the work/service provided to their clientele.

The size of company should not determine the quality as contractors may have management and contracting competences that make them more accessible and increase their abilities to the size of commitment the contractor can embark on.

Classification of contractors already exists abroad and even in some services locally. So, if taken seriously it can be done and in a reasonable time. Once again, MCCM did provide recommendations in this respect during the consultation process to the licensing of contractors regulations and these are re-produced in Appendix A. These recommendations had noted that the categories (apart from classification) is key especially introducing the temporary facilities category which in itself addresses how professional all need to be especially when buildings are still being constructed in that the notion that even temporary works and structures need to be certified as fit for purpose and safe!!.

On another note, MCCM considers that the recommendation puts emphasis on the on the criteria and hence it does not delve into matters relative to the Contractor’s assurance on how his obligations will be carried out.

c. Skill Cards

MCCM question why the skill cards are still not mandatory in Malta yet? Back in 2015 a white paper was published, and the feedback received was practically an unanimous agreement. This was due to become mandatory in 2020, and till now this did not happen.

Unfortunately, until such time the Skill Cards are introduced as mandatory, workers seeking to obtain this card (confirmation of skill and related H&S Awareness), is going to be limited.

Until this day many people out there don’t know what is required to obtain a skill card and what it really means. We recommend that we emulate the UK CSCS system and widen the catchment of individuals involved in the local built environment.

On another note, the control of who should be on site / and how access is granted into a site is not mentioned. We’re experiencing workers being moved from multiple sites during the day resulting in no control who is being on site or not. Furthermore, what / how will a skill card guarantee good practices?

MCCM did provide feedback to the matter of skill cards and safety card and this feedback becomes even more valid today. This is reproduced in Appendix A.

d. Insurance

Insurances are to cover not only the third parties that might be affected by the works, but also the workers on site. These workers must have peace of mind that if anything happens to them, they and their loved ones have some support.

All professionals involved must be covered by a Professional Indemnity as well, and if they are employed, the firm that employs them must make sure that they are reasonably covered for the work and projects that are being entrusted. In addition, investors such as landlords or equivalent must also consider contingent type of insurance cover as an additional cover.

e. Method Statements

Irrespective of the professional preparing the Works Method Statement (ref UK), it is important that whoever prepares such documents is competent in is qualified and trained not only in reading drawings and specifications, but also in the modern methods of construction. Ideally is also experienced in what type of plant and machinery to be used, means of transportation etc.

There seems to be emphasis only on three phases of a project’s life cycle and these are highlighted as Demolition, Excavation and Building. We all know that there are many other trades involved. From steel erection, to cladding, that deserve their respective method statement, especially when large projects are involved. There has to be a broader inclusion to all other trades especially the fit-out activities.

MCCM totally agrees with the board that the notion of stand-alone or affecting third party should stop. At present if a development is deemed as not affecting third parties through a simple declaration by the project’s architect it is exempted from several obligations. This practice should be reviewed and all developments (affecting third parties or not) should be liable to obligations and documentation as those affecting third parties. This to protect the

interests and livelihoods of all those working inside and within the parameters of the development.

As a general observation, MCCM deems that method statements are related to the professional ethics. If it is not a legal obligation it would have been presumed to be an ethical obligation to share the report with the third-party, and the third-party's architect, PRIOR to uploading or submitting such report officially.

f. Site Access

No specific observations.

g. National Building Codes and Euro Codes

MCCM agrees with the Board’s recommendation that the National Building Codes should be introduced once and for all and until such time EN should be the order of the day in any buildings designed locally. That said, applying EN norms would mean that these still need to be analysed and studied prior to applying given that there are specific codes that are stringent and may open up or create a ‘pandora’s box’. Just to mention a ‘hot one’ one may look at the earthquake design codes. So in summary it is not a question that one introduces a regulation over night as all needs time to analysis and impact assessment to local context. So efforts are to be exerted to introduce the National Building Codes given that a lot of work has been done and more work remains to be done. Maybe more effort in the form of supporting resources is to be considered to fast track the process.

h. Construction- H&S Regulations

Considering that the practice is that the PSCS visits a site once weekly and for a quick walk around, contractors taking over site must make sure that at least one person who is on site all day, is well trained in all H&S aspects (Construction). The basic H&S course is adequate for minor staff but for supervisory staff a higher level of training is required. Again, we just need to repeat what has been ongoing in the UK for decades now.

Seven day H&S courses are a must for anyone at supervisory level. The PSCSs and OHSA inspectors should only be required for advice and for the periodic visits. The everyday responsibility should be part and parcel of the contractor taking over the site.

Also, it should be both the Contractor’s and the Client’s obligation to engage a H&S trained site supervisor to be continuously / daily on site. In addition, the same site supervisor should ensure that risks highlighted should be followed up and ‘closed’ off immediately.

i. Third Country Nationals (TCN)

Irrespective from where the workers are coming, before entering a site they should have a basic skill card (even if they are just a labourer). They are also to be inducted properly (similar to the UK). An induction that will inform these workers of the dangerous and hazards they might face during the execution of their job, plus what mitigating measures their employer has taken to eliminate such risks.

These procedures apply to any worker, not just TCN. For foreigners, their employer must allow for the time required for these workers to obtain the relevant documentation and training, unless similar cards/training already exists in their home country and such training is recognised here in Malta and the EU.

j. Place of Work

MCCM feels that this should already be this way however the matter effectively reinforces the importance to acknowledge and recognise the role of the Construction Project Manager as effectively may enhance the chances to improve the situation and clearly define the demarcation lines in terms of roles and responsibilities which differ and change with any project. Contract of services become paramount.

k. Training

MCCM agrees with the board recommendation that any trade, skill or activity, must be somehow recognised following some sort of exam or assessment. We feel that there exists institutions (public and private) that can cater for the existing and future work force.

l. Self-Regulation

MCCM believes that locally, Self-Regulation definition tends to be abused. In other countries (in Europe), many industries are self-regulated, but standards are very high and all those involved cannot afford not to keep up with the standards demanded by the market or else they fail and go ‘bust’.

Self-Regulation goes in tandem with quality control. Locally too much low- and poor-quality work and materials are accepted. If all those responsible of the quality control are strict and abide with the contract conditions, there will be no room for the so-called cowboys, as these will go bust. Unfortunately, not enough emphasize on quality and contract obligations takes place, mostly on public projects/contracts, thus giving fuel to the low-quality service providers.

We must look at other industries like Maritime, Aviation and even IT sectors etc. Their competition is not local, so their standards must be kept high or else they will close doors. So why the same doesn’t happen in the construction industry?

m. Competence and Professionalism

The focus seems to be on the H&S Courses, knowledge and training. Even though we are in full agreement with the board statement, we are bound to reiterate the stance our chamber has taken for the past three years on the legal recognition -via a warrant- of the person that is responsible of the administration of the project life cycle – the client representative. Even though size of projects and development vary, certain principles remain the same. There are professionals that are trained, qualified and experienced in doing only this task and to date this highly important role is, unfortunately, abused, as no law establish the parameters and obligations. Again, in foreign countries such a profession is clearly defined and all those providing such a service are regulated or by Chartership status or other qualifications. These professionals must follow a clear code of ethics and continuous professional development. Something that to date doesn’t even exist in Malta.

Unless this main stakeholder is legally recognised it is hard for the local industry to progress.

One should reconsider the importance of both the CPM to manage all the stages of a construction project and the CPM to manage the implementation stage. Every project should have a person heading it to ensure that all technical professionals engaged by the Client are of the required standard and fit for the job whilst managing all actions for the fruition of the project result.

n. Masons License

This license should be merged in the Skill Card regime, similar to all the other trades and professions operating within the built environment.

SECTION C – CONCLUSION

It is ‘ironic’ that a report on a local tragedy dated 2022 quotes a phrase from a foreign politician of some 40 years ago. MCCM believes that most of the recommendations highlighted by the Inquiry Board come to no surprise and have nothing innovative in them. Many countries have adopted such measures and process many years ago, and we simply need to follow their example with the advantage of not repeating their mistakes. It’s never too late and we can recover to the best interests of the industry itself and public at large.

MALTA CHAMBER OF CONSTRUCTION

APPENDIX A – MCCM’s FEEDBACK TO THE LICENSING OF CONTRACTORS.

The draft Licensing of Contractors Regulations

FEEDBACK TO THE DRAFT REGULATIONS ISSUED BY THE BCA AS PART OF THE PUBLIC CONSULTATION PROCESS

6TH APRIL 2023

MALTA CHAMBER OF CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT PROFESSIONALISM, INNOVATION AND QUALITY IN CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT

SECTION B – FEEDBACK TO THE DRAFT CONTRACTORS’ LICENSING REGULATIONS

B1. Feedback specific to the draft regulations as drafted.

This section provides feedback to the specific draft law and hence comments are specific to the text ONLY. Observations that go beyond the drafted text / regulations are provided in section B2.

Part 1 General Provisions

Applicability and transitory arrangements

(4) We believe that the applications should be determined within a stipulated timeframe and not allow for such an event to materialise as otherwise this gives room to complications. The BCA should plan and prepare the necessary resources ‘a priori’.

(5) Ditto. Temporary licenses should ONLY be issued on an exceptional basis as otherwise this may create a precedent with temporary licenses becoming the order of the day. What constitutes and exceptional event would need to be qualified ‘a priori’.

Code of practise and responsibility

No specific observations.

Part II Contractors Licensing Committee

Establishment of the Committee

The composition is too generic. We strongly recommend that professionals working within the industry are represented in this committee. The Professional Construction Manager is key to any project development and therefore MCCM hereby recommends that a representative from this profession is included within the committee.

Secretary to the Board

No comments.

Term of office

Term is reasonable.

Functions of the Committee

10 (a) The bill as drafted suggests that the Committee may appoint a sub-committee in which case we feel that this is still very vague. Should there be a sub-committee to assist the Board in the evaluation process, we believe that the terms of reference of such a committee would be detailed at this stage and are made public as part of the consultation process. The composition and credentials of the members need to be similar or equivalent to the members of the Board. Alternatively, rather than a sub-committee, it might be a case of appointing a number of Consultants as advisory to assist the Committee with respect to the evaluation process.

The evaluation of an application needs to be time bared and procedures published as part of the consultation process.

Meetings of the Committee and Procedure

No comment.

Remuneration of the Committee

No comment.

On a general note, regarding the evaluation of an application, as in the process. Will there be any consultations with other regulatory bodies or related? If so, what are the intents and the how? We recommend that as part of the application process, there should be adequate due diligence and consultations that go beyond the technical capacity aspects ONLY i.e., commercial reliability aspects, financial soundness / good standing, after sales reputation / services, litigation history etc. The process needs to be published as part of the regulations.

Part III License

Publication of license

No comment.

Eligibility

No comment.

Application for issue of license

MALTA CHAMBER OF CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT

(3) (d) The draft as texted makes reference to a licensed administrator? What does licensed mean in the context of the administrator? A more detailed brief should be provided with respect to the credentials of such a person. This should also include the role and responsibilities in view of the same regulations.

Licensing decisions by the Committee

This part warrant a detailed indication of the process. Maybe a schedule can be included reflecting a step by step process and time frames. The procedure reflecting the evaluation process is deemed important at this stage. Time frame to adjudicate need to be determined prior to enactment of regulation.

Notice to grant license

No comment.

License Certificate

No comment.

Decision to refuse an application for license

No comment.

Renewal of Licenses

What are the cause for non-renewal or process in cases of renewal objection? Procedure? Timelines?

Changes to Registered details

No comment.

Application for the cancellation of license

In such a case, we recommend that some form of performance guarantee would need to be submitted to ensure that obligations that may crop-up relative to works conducted (latent defects, commercial claims / bad workmanship etc), be in place as a form of detriment (commitment) to address such issues. This would obviously be determined over a period that is commensurate to the context of the works conducted, and in line with any legal obligations relative to after sales / following completion of the works. Alternatively, should a performance Guarantee be considered to erroneous, the Licensed Contractor would be obliged to maintain an appropriate Insurance in place and along the years post

cancellation of license. This area is very important as somehow ‘3rd parties’ and their interests need to be protected even though a contractor might not renew the license or terminate the license. Alternatively, the specific contractor would need to declare and transfer the after sales obligations / liabilities relative to the specific declared works prior to the withdrawal of a license or non-renewal, for a specific time as stipulated by law.

Part IV Offences and Penalties

Offences

No specific comment.

Administrative Penalties

No specific comment.

Suspension and revocation of license

This part is considered very vague and should be explained / detailed especially the eligibility (the cause that would generate such an event).

Also, the criteria in terms of reinstatement need to be qualified and listed.

A tentative list of events or reasons why a license may be revoked. As it stands it is too subjective thus leaving room for interpretation especially by the evaluating committee.

Part V Schedules

Schedule 1 – Service Activity

Refer to comments under section B2.

Schedule 2 – Criteria of each service activity

A. Licensing of Demolition Contractors

Refer to comments under B2.

B. Licensing of Excavation and Piling Contractors Ditto.

C. Licensing Construction Ditto.

Schedule 3 – Fees

Administrative Fees

No comment

License Fees

The licensing fee should be commensurate to the activity and may also reflect the size of the Company or Contractor in terms of categorisation and classification (categorisation and classification are commented within section B2, next page)

B2. Feedback – proposals for consideration

MCCM’s feedback to the current draft looks at the short-, medium- and long-term aspects of the upscaling of the Construction Industry and is therefore putting forward other observations and comments that it believes would add value to improving the current draft legislation on a constructive basis.

A holistic approach and not in isolation – connection to skills and standards.

The construction industry is much more than the demolition, excavation and what is being perceived as the traditional building contractor (construction) activities. The construction contracting ecosystem is today vast including multiple disciplines and specialisation fronts that have reacted and continue to react in line with market developments this including but not limited to technological improvements, new materials and the way buildings or various infrastructural developments are designed. Management is key in all that is done and the lack of appropriate management remains key to the successful adaptation of improved regulations.

Today’s industry gives substantial weight to sustainability aspects on both the economic / business model aspects and the specific durability / resilience / practical aspect of the asset itself. Within this context, whilst MCCM appreciates that a local licensing regime to operators within the local construction industry is non-existent, the introduction of a licensing process is very welcome, but it observes that major activities and aspects other than demolition, excavations and ‘construction’ have been somehow side lined or ignored.

The draft proposes licensing to operators working within the demolition, excavation and construction spheres. All things being equal, MCCM therefore believes that similarly all other activities / trades maybe easily introduced now especially those that we are locally accustomed to. This way, regulations would remain faithful to industry and mitigate against disparity within the same industry going forward. A benchmark is therefore generated on same level playing field amongst current operators covering the majority of activities within the industry itself. Otherwise, one would be risking that ONLY a portion of the industry’s operators kick-start the upscaling process with others trailing / falling back.

A development of a building or hard standing development (building or infrastructure), is a chain process that entails the business case, the design (concept to full design development), the making of (execution), the commissioning, certification cycle, its operational life and what today is considered

very important i.e., the re-purposing or disposing element. Quite complex to say the least. Therefore, skills and competencies differ along the life cycle of a ‘building’ and so are the skills and competencies required by the ‘operator’ working at the different stages of the cycle.

Within the above context, the criteria in terms of requirements (competencies), need to be clearly established and improved and this concurrent to any licensing process. The current national occupational skills specific to our industry are considered outdated ‘big time’, and do not represent faithfully today’s industry. Therefore, skills and educational programmes should be improved and implemented in a timely manner with licensed operators required to upscale their standards in a timely and reasonable manner. The licensing process needs to work concurrent with the equivalent skill card process. In our opinion, the skill card needs to become mandatory and aligned to the licensing regime. One cannot work without the other. In simple terms:

1. A contractor who wants to operate within the industry must attain and maintain a license (equivalent to the specialisation area).

2. A worker who wants to work within the industry and employ himself or herself with the contractor, has to attain and maintain the respective skill card. (If the worker wants to operate as a ‘self-employed’ or ‘single person contractor’, he or she would have to have both the skill card and license in place.

Effectively, doing so would mean that the skills aspect is elevated and upscaled to appropriate levels through adequate and updated courses, whilst the contractor (operator) would have surety that the supply of workers is realistically available and is readily trained / certified.

Another positive aspect would be the safeguarding of the interests of both the contractor and employee when it comes to work conditions and contract of employment including mitigation parttime work that may undermine the contractors’ investment. A licensed contractor would have invested in the skills, maybe sponsored training and development of workers and therefore may align the employment contracts. Similarly, workers who conduct part-time work within the same industry, would equally require a license apart from the skill card to conduct such work as with the contractor. Same / equal level playing field to all. The end beneficiary (developer or end user) would have assurance that the contractor (entity or individual) would be licensed and have the equivalent skills

including the capacity and resources to fulfil the obligations including liabilities that aminate from the work itself.

Therefore, emphasis should be exerted to consider:

1. The licensing would effectively work if skill cards are introduced as mandatory and concurrent to the licensing regime. The transition period should cover those contractors who are not in possession of the full requirements as expected following the last stage of the implementation of this law. Otherwise, we would end up with the majority of contractors working with a temporary license hence defeating the genuine intents of these regulations.

2. National Occupational Standards are outdated and need to reflect today’s requirements. These need to be updated, courses made available and introduced as part of the transition process. It would be more beneficial to prolong the transition process once both 1 above and the National Occupational Standards are available and launched as a full transition programme. The Country must look at how other Countries operate and regulate contractors and workers including professionals.

3. What about standards? As with the majority of other EU member states or 3rd countries, there are National Building Codes which effectively qualify / ‘dictate’ what and how the various activities are conducted. Therefore, as with the skill card and national occupational standards, the building standards need to be launched concurrently. These would effectively ‘dictate’ the required expectations especially that relative to the operator (contractor) conducting the work or works.

Specialisation & Categorisation

MCCM understands that these regulations are the beginning of a long journey and that is why MCCM insists that this first issue needs to be broadened. Therefore, as done with the demolition, excavations and construction ‘group’ licensing of contractors may include categories and classification at a very early stage. It is therefore our opinion that licensing should apply for the majority of all the other trades working within industry now and not later. The regulations as drafted suggest a very basic structure and therefore the same maybe applied to include the majority of the other trades and not limit this to the demolition, excavation and structures only.

This is not a question of risks relative to the activity in terms of which activity generates the largest risks to damage or injuries or in cases deaths given that it is a given that all the construction cycle is a risk environment and therefore warrants immediate and equal treatment. It is therefore recommended to consider including all other trades / segments in lieu of what has been suggested within the current draft regulations. The following refers and provides a clear idea / proposal on how the matter maybe improved:

License Type:

1. Temporary Facilities services and installations

Effectively, this would be grouping all service providers that in reality and on a practical aspect provide services to the contractor (the contractor in such case is the specialised operator and not specialised in such services). An indication of these service providers include:

- Scaffolding, Platforms, Temporary railings, hoists etc

- Fencing, site hoarding, temporary lighting, storm water collection / utilities

- Waste management (skips, containments etc).

- Tower Cranes, mobile cranes, lifters, hi-ups

- Signage, temporary offices, toilet facilities, cleaning, containers etc.

- All that is of a temporary nature BUT anyway would need certification. In many projects even of the smaller domestic scale, facilities are in many cases done up haphazardly and become even more detrimental to safety of workers and 3rd parties. Therefore, a license together with the skill card will set the standard and the whole aspect of temporary facilities is improved. Industry is today suffering big time due to the lack of appropriate logistics planning and safeguarding of the environment. Temporary Facilities, the maintaining and management of same play an important role especially along the execution cycle.

2. Construction Enabling

- Site clearance, demolition.

- Site Investigations and Geotechnical services

- Localised excavations

- Bulk Excavations

- Piling, shoring and temporary supporting structures

As can be seen, the above should be the minimum sub-categories whilst working within a marine environment should always be specific. Therefore, the LAND and, or MARINE should be qualified as part of this license category and classification. An operator may potentially have a license to operate bulk excavation within a Land side project scenario BUT not a sea / marine side marine project. Differentiation is key.

3. Building / Construction Structure

- Traditional Masonry and in-situ concrete structures

- Non-Conventional (concrete frame structure, prefabricated concrete and masonry)

- Specialised – Hybrid including steel and other materials

- Minor construction works and alterations

4. Heritage and Restoration

Scheduled Buildings & Structures

A. Non-structural interventions

B. Structural interventions

Non-Scheduled Buildings & Structures

A. Non-structural interventions

B. Structural interventions

5.

Fit-out - External Building Envelope

- Façade insulation and cladding

- Apertures including subframes as applicable.

- Railings, external balustrades and related.

- Decorative elements (non-structural) including signs, features and related.

- External rendering, pointing, plastering and paintwork. If elements of the installation are of a structural nature than the Operator would require another license under (3) above.

6.

Fit-out - Internal Building Envelope

- Floor underlay (screeds etc)

- Pointing, Plastering, Paintwork

- Suspended ceilings of a non-structural nature (gypsum, modular, timber etc).

- Floor and Wall tiling / cladding (of a non-structural nature)

- Apertures and glazing activities (non-structural)

- Joinery including fixed joinery and decorative items (of a non-structural nature)

- Railings, balustrades etc

7. MEP Installations

- Electrical works

- Storm and Drainage systems

- Mechanical works (plumbing)

- HVAC

- Low Voltage systems

- Vertical transportation systems and escalators including non-person systems (gantry type systems and related permanent hoisting / lifting devices)

8. Landscaping

- Soft landscaping

- Hard landscaping of a non-structural nature (pools, trenches, pathways, roads, rubble walls or equivalent would be covered by another license (above).

9. Road Works covering basic infrastructure (trenching, drain and storm water culvert systems etc)

10. Maintenance and General Services

There should be a specific license to what is considered the general installer and or ‘handyman’ skill who is effectively employed by the contractor or self-employed conducting various works that vary from maintenance / preventive maintenance to replacement / upgrading and installation works (fitters etc). This would be sub-classified, say:

- Fit-out external building envelope.

- Fit-out internal building envelope.

- MEP maintenance and servicing

In all cases contractors / operators should be classified depending on the capacity to work within either:

a) Domestic nature, or

b) Mixed to commercial of the industrial nature, or

c) Both the above

Also, one should consider whether in cases of a Design and Build procurement process, the operator (contractor) would have this qualified within the specific license.

The above might seem ‘complex’, but surely reflects the majority of the activities within today’s industry.

Being simplistic, the licensing regime may be compared to the local ‘driving license regime’ that includes categories of both the ‘driver’ and ‘vehicle’. A driver would attain license to drive a particular category, part of or all depending to the training and skills attained through adequate qualifications / testing process. Effectively, to maintain that license, he or she would mean operating within the regulations and standards through a point system with the vehicle being subject to timed testing regime (VRT) as well.

Therefore, going forward one would expect that the type of licensing is broadened as suggested above whilst categorisation is introduced backed by the appropriate credential / requirements and point system approach.

Transition Period

Considering the above observations, MCCM believes that all things being equal if one had to include / allow for the recommendation to broaden the categories, coupled with the skill card process and an improved ‘framework’ related to the credentials and point system, it would be more of value and effective to provide industry the holistic regulations reflecting the proposed regulatory framework however it may decide to enact only part of it. This way industry would have a clear indication on the overall regime and hence allowing for a transition period that is reasonable and practical.

The application process may still be launched with a ‘provisional’ license issued to all applicants (current operators) with the ‘provisional’ license covering the transition period (realistic cut-off date). The provisional license would expire once the actual license is eventually granted or cut-off date exceeded.

Link to Commencement Notification Process, Capacity and Procurement

MCCM assumes that the current commencement notification process will be totally changed within the context of a licensing process. Can BCA provide its visibility on how this would work? If the above recommendations are favourably considered, can BCA reflect this in the building commencement permitting regime? How will it work and what are the expectations? As with the PA processes, once a building is under construction, the competencies change and that is why the importance to appropriate construction management is required. Fit-out trades may impact the structure that has been built along a project’s execution cycle and hence control points would be a necessity. These observations are therefore not necessarily related to the licensing BUT an eye opener when

12

considering the way the controls and compliance of a building is eventually certified. How is BCA addressing these aspects? Is the building log and depository still being considered?

The licensing would surely impact procurement processes. Whilst MCCM believes that all Governmental contracts would eventually request licensing as a mandatory requisite to participate in procurement processes, the private sector would follow suite otherwise it would act illegally. The broadening of the categories is therefore important now as this way the sector would start to align / regulate itself as from day 1. Classification is also important within this procurement capacity notion. As for capacity, MCCM believes that categorisation or classification by capacity is indeed important. Much of the failures at the moment relative to timely execution is the fact that contractors often bid and take up works without real consideration of the timing and resource capacity. Therefore, classification in terms of capacity / thresholds is key. If this aspect is considered and read within the notion of let say a developer’s application to commence works nominating a specific operator (contractor), the regulator may provide visibility to the risk aspect at that point in time. In simple terms, we are today aware that many construction contractors have multiple concurrent sites ongoing with limited resources (accredited resources) and therefore surely something is not on and this to detriment of delays or equivalent. Therefore, capacity and acknowledging such within a license through classification is an area to be considered (if not immediate but in the close vicinity).

Decarbonisation / considerate contractor (refunds – grants etc)

MCCM looks at climate change and decarbonisation targets as an opportunity to catalyse the upscaling of the industry. We believe that the equivalent of say the UK’s ‘considerate contractor’ scheme (license) would be ideal to be considered now in all categories and classifications. Essentially, Government should potentially consider this proposal today and present it as an opportunity rather than a threat. The license could have a considerate contractor rating ingrained within it (irrespective of the category or classification) should the contractor attain the pre-determined criteria which maybe maintained as long as it proves to conduct its operations within the standards accordingly. This could be simplified if the credentials to attain and maintain the equivalent rating that would be linked to say ISO management systems including green processes and practices. What would be the benefits:

- To consider maybe tax credits to the specific operator

- To consider maybe adding points to such contractors when it comes to procurement criteria / evaluation process.

- Accredited contractors may work within highly sensitive zones such as UCAs, historically sensitive areas, marine etc.

SECTION C – CONCLUDING COMMENTS

MCCM welcomes positively the fact that a first draft of as licensing of contractors’ regulations have been published for consultation. In fact, MCCM believes that this is the very first step to push industry to start regularising itself. That said, MCCM believes that the current draft is very basic and limited to ONLY a portion of industry’s operators and therefore is not entirely faithful to today’s realities. The current draft is considered ‘unfair’ on the operators listed within the draft regulations as all other operators would not be regularised. The starting point is seen as disproportionate amongst industry operators currently working as a contractor, it will create polarities and an unlevel playing field.

MCCM understands the priority and urgency however this should not come to the detriment of the regulation itself. MCCM firmly believes that the first issue of such regulation can be much better and tied (timing wise) to other regulations, otherwise it risks failing if kept in isolation. Therefore, within the context of improvements, MCCM feel that much more can be done as explained within this report with the main salient points summarised as follows:

1. The licensing regulations would work is tied to the skill card regulations.

2. Skill card to become mandatory and concurrent to licensing.

3. The Building Codes are equally important and should be given priority and issued in tandem or close to the equivalent transition period.

4. Broadening the license to the majority of current local trades.

5. Considerate Contractor equivalent – an opportunity.

6. Point system.

7. Link to procurement system.

8. Emphasis on Safety and Education Programmes.