The industry is split. Most firms like the idea of Constructionline, but feel it has a long way to go before it satisfies their needs. Contractors are frustrated that the councils still run their own lists; councils say Constructionline does not give enough detail.
The aims of the database are to provide more work for registered firms and to reduce the amount of form-filling in prequalification – all businesses registered with Constructionline have to complete a hefty questionnaire probing their financial position and working practices. Once they have done that, they are deemed to have prequalified for public sector jobs.
There are currently 8000 firms registered with Constructionline. When it was established last year, there were 10 000. Capita puts the reduction in numbers down to "natural wastage"; in other words, firms did not want to fork out to renew subscriptions.
A more heartening statistic is the number of clients that use the database. This has increased from 187 last July to more than 360 now. By the end of 2001, Constructionline predicts that 25 000 firms will be registered and 1000 clients will access the database. A tall order, but one Capita is happy to back.
Constructionline has been dogged by controversy in its short history. When the government decided to combine the Ministry of Defence's register of vetted firms, CMIS, and the DETR list ConReg, which were both free, it was decided that the system would run more efficiently if managed by a private company.
The job duly went out to tender, and Capita was awarded the task of getting it up and running.
Many registered firms welcome the idea of Constructionline but feel important practical issues need to be addressed. One of these is duplication of information. South-west regional contractor Cowlin is a typical Constructionline-registered firm. Marketing manager Hugh Dalton supports the idea of the database, but says what he finds frustrating is that more often than not, the client will also send out its own questionnaire. Dalton does not object to a short project-specific form that would enlighten the client on a bidder's abilities in a particular area, but he frequently finds standard information is repeated. "Our industry is wasting time filling out all these forms," he says.
Other contractors find that local authorities are reluctant to relinquish their own approved lists, so firms have to follow a belt-and-braces approach if they want to be in the frame for local authority jobs. They register with Constructionline and then separately with the local council; yet more bureaucracy.
One contractor, Neilcott Group based in Orpington, Kent, decided double-registering was unnecessary and rejected Constructionline. Marketing manager Jeremy Thorp says he has not noticed a downturn in the number of enquiries the firm has received since the birth of Constructionline. Not that he is against the database; in fact, he is firmly behind the principle. "I love the idea of Constructionline," he says. "It is a brilliant idea, but it needs the full backing of everyone."
This view is echoed by the Construction Industry Council. CIC chief executive Graham Watts is advising his members to stick with it in the hope that the commitment will pay off in the future. He says it is a good idea but still in embryonic form. "I think we have to keep faith with Constructionline because it is the only chance of a UK register," he warns. So, the potential benefits of a national list far outweigh any teething problems.
Whether firms are winning more work as a direct result of being registered with Constructionline is also open to debate. Sadly, most firms cannot recall a job that they have won as a result of being included in the database.
Tony Bevan, managing director of Citex, puts it succinctly: "As far as we are concerned, we have got no evidence of any benefit, but we have never had an ability to measure so I couldn't possibly say."
The acid test will be the number of people prepared to pay £1000 to re-register
Graham Watts, CIC
Bob Rendell is managing director of Oxford-based Leadbitter Construction, and his greatest concern is not about winning work, but about the size of jobs he will be invited to bid for.
Constructionline assesses a firm's notation, or the value of work that it is capable of building. Firms produce references for the three highest value projects completed in the past three years. The notation is worked out on 125% of the average value of these jobs. Company assets and turnover are also taken into consideration.
Rendell feels that the 125% cap is unfair and prevents firms from moving into a higher notation bracket. "I don't object to the financial restrictions but I do object to not being able to do a job bigger than I have done. When we had direct contact with the client we could discuss it, but with Constructionline it's a tick-in-the-box situation. If you have the ticks in the right boxes, you are selected."
The 125% cap grates with Rendell because an extra 25% is not an enormous amount in construction. He feels the difference between a £4m and a £5m project could depend on, say, the M&E content. Complex services will cost more but might not affect the contractor's ability to manage the job.
Clients themselves also feel the system is in embryonic form. In particular, some local authorities feel the system does not reflect their preference for using local contractors. Eddie Torto is head of the contracts support unit at east London's Hackney council. Like many councils, Hackney wants to bolster local businesses. "I may be looking for companies in and around Hackney and I can search until the cows come home, but I won't find any," he says.
Like many other public sector clients, Torto feels the database is the future for procurement because it helps to cut costs by reducing the mountain of paperwork involved in prequalification. But Torto wants it tailored to local needs, and until that happens, many local authorities will continue to keep their own approved lists. Torto is reluctant to abandon the relationships he has with local contractors to the vagaries of Constructionline.
In west London, Richmond council has rejected Constructionline altogether, opting for an alternative database run by Exor Management Services. Exor's database covers all areas of procurement, from buildings to incontinence pads, so is far more comprehensive.
Constructionline is working to take on board these concerns, and trade bodies including the CIC and the National Housing Federation have found that it is ready to listen to their concerns.
Constructionline marketing manager Sarah Berry says a working group is currently reviewing the notation procedure. She adds that firms can contact Constructionline's accounts department with queries about their notation. There is also an appeals panel, chaired by Sir Michael Latham.
Constructionline is trying to eliminate all the grievances that have emerged over the past year but the most important issue is to attract more clients. The firm intends to run a campaign targeting local authorities in the autumn.
Berry says repeated form-filling is largely caused by local authority housing associations having more rigorous health and safety and equal opportunities requirements. However, the Housing Corporation does advise its members to use the register and Constructionline is running a working group to provide the required information on these two areas. Berry says the enhanced detail will be in place by Easter 2000.
And if firms want to know how many times they have been accessed by a client, Constructionline will run a "hit" report that details who looked them up and when. What is more, the pool of potential clients could grow: next year there will also be a campaign to encourage private clients to use the service.
