Is safety certification just a money-spinning scheme? Plus, why historic buildings jolly well should meet Part L efficiency standards, and why apprentices can't afford driving lessons

Safety certification problems lose nearly 40% of subbies work

Has this really got anything to do with 'health and safety'? Or is it a ploy by the NHBC to create work for itself (and 'consultants') during the recession?

The NHBC has had for years a pre-qualification criterion. True, numerous subbies are spending valuable man-hours and thousands of pounds trying to satisfy the whims of so-called third party, self-appointed 'guardians' of health and safety.

It is now time that the Health and Safety Executive (and politicians) stepped in and put a stop to this discredited scam and I include the vultures that are part of the safety schemes in procurement.

Subbies do work hard at achieving good safety and welfare standards for their men (employed or self employed) but as usual, are treated like the one-legged man in the backside kicking competition.
Massimo Verdi

Yvette Cooper examines options for official workers' memorial day

Fiddling whilst Rome burns.
Stephanie Al-Wahid

Part L: forcing historic buildings to be energy-efficient

I'm sorry, but we as human beings need to learn some serious prioritization skills if we're going to make it as a species. To say that the historical aesthetics of a building are more important than it's impact on the environment is ridiculous; especially when the vast majority of those aesthetics remain unchanged or slightly different.

If we were to carry this type of logic into other sectors, like automobiles, we would all be driving around '55 Chevys that get 15 miles per gallon simply for their historical significance and intrigue. Forget the fact that they're completely fuel inefficient and require constant maintenance/repair.

This is essentially the same argument being made to allow historical aesthetics trump retrofits that go towards solving a global crisis. It's time people wake up and see what the real important issues of the day are instead of living inside their own little self-centered and uninformed bubble. If they had it their way, we would all be rowing our way to visit these historical buildings in the near future.
The Author

Adult minimum wage to increase to £5.73

Many of the previous comments, together with the abysmal spelling mistakes, indicate that the correspondents appear to believe that the World owes them a living, despite the obvious fact that they have hitherto not applied themselves to Education.

I started as an apprentice Surveyor in the early 1960's, at a wage of £52 per year, less N.I. !!! I attended night school thee nights a week, and eventually qualified. At no time did I expect anyone to pay for driving lessons, etc., but cut my coat according to my cloth.

Perhaps it is time for those who have previously commented, to apply themselves to Education, and dare I say it, Work, and to realise that we, the rest of Society, do not owe them a living, and they can only get out of the system, that which they put in.

They should realise that Employers are not charities, and that they can only pay commensurate with productivity, therefore, if an employee, does not provide a return then, with the exception of early training, that employee is a drain on the Company.

Years ago, in the days of apprenticeships, apprentices started on low wages, and Companies could afford to train apprentices, but, in the 70's, the Unions forced up apprentice's wages to 50% of a tradesman's rate for the first year, and therefore apprentices had to produce, thereby diluting training, and resulting in poor skills, and eventual loss of apprenticeships.
Robert Gavin

Boss of disastrous college building programme scores £36,000 bonus

Obviously wasn't trying hard enough otherwise he would have got a lot more!
Tony Spender