Changing the description of 35 000 members of a major chartered institution to "chartered constructors" when an accredited constructors scheme was launched could have given the campaign a running start.
The Combating Cowboy Builders report proposes that only accredited constructors who can satisfy certain criteria will be authorised to use a government-approved badge of respectability.
The current rash of builder-baiting programmes on prime-time television must surely have convinced any last sceptic that if the construction industry is to improve its image and reputation, it must distance itself from the abels "building" and "builder".
The incredible suggestion from the intelligent and experienced journalists of this magazine, who think builders can somehow redeem their reputation by further exposure of the notorious builder's bum (5 March), is, literally, the end.
It would now be a total waste of money and effort to attempt to promote "building" or "builders", as they are all indelibly branded as cowboys and uncouth louts. We will only rebuild the image of the legitimate construction industry by promoting honest, efficient and qualified constructors.
Apart from the DETR, there were only two dog-in-the-manger objections to the CIOB's adoption of the dreaded c-word. Neither the RICS nor the Institution of Civil Engineers would be able to adopt the term "construction" because of their members' fixation with the titles "surveyors" and "engineers". But they see the long-term value in the word and don't want CIOB members to benefit.
And there is another little internecine name dispute brewing in construction. News is out that the Architects Registration Board wishes to extend its protection over the word "architect" to cover "architecture" and "architectural", so denying employment to thousands of competent non-registered architects.
UK constructors could learn much from the Japanese … there is no huffing and puffing about who has the most important institution
In Japan, all constructors who obtain Kenchikushi standards (equal to our chartered status) can use the title "architect", and all 550 000 are accredited by the Architectural Institute of Japan.
Even with the Asian financial crisis, the UK construction industry could learn much from Japanese protocol. They have good team work, there is no jostling over status, and definitely no huffing and puffing about who has the most important professional institution in the world. Partnering is a traditional and successful way to do business.
So, why don't we follow their example? Instead of allowing the ARB to exclude everyone except registered architects, why don't we extend the definition of "architect" to cover all construction professionals? Government, possibly through the Movement for Innovation, could recommend that all the construction chartered institutions merge into one large chartered institution of architects.
Regular readers will have guessed by now that I'm teasing – but only about the name. I don't want to be called an architect, any more than be branded a cowboy. Like everyone else in the legitimate construction industry, by definition, I am a constructor.
Seriously, merging all the construction institutions into one chartered institute, to protect the terms "construction" and "constructor", makes very good sense. The confusing and divisive plethora of professions would disappear. With about 300 000 members, it would become the largest chartered institution in the UK, influential for its members, charged with promoting the construction industry for the public benefit as in the CIOB's charter.
Public recognition would come quickly through an easily identifiable, well-publicised, all-qualified construction industry, and the real cowboy builders would finally be exposed. To achieve this, we need encouragement and help from the government to help us change our name, to unite us and improve our image.
Postscript
Colin Harding is chairman of Bournemouth-based contractor George and Harding.
