Safety Schemes in Procurement Forum Launch

1. Safety Schemes in Procurement Forum Launch Wednesday 4 November 2009 With special thanks to the Health and Safety Executive and Electrical and Heating and Ventilating Contractors’ Associations for sponsoring this event

2. Welcome and Introductions Chair, Trevor Hursthouse (Chair of Specialist Engineering Contractors’ (SEC) Group)

3. Increasing the Focus on Efficient Procurement Lord McKenzie of Luton (Minister for Health and Safety at the Department for Work and Pensions)

4. The SSIP Forum – its Successes, its Future! Philip White (Construction Chief Inspector at the Health and Safety Executive)

5. SSIP – Anchored in the CDM Regulations • CDM 2007 – The aspirations • An early focus on H&S in any project • The need for competence • Avoiding unnecessary bureaucracy • We needed to do more – Active involvement with the industry in the Forum • To achieve one goal – reduction of harm

6. Assessment – the heart of the matter • The assessment • a desktop scrutiny of documents, • supplemented by further enquiries • in order to make a reasonable judgement that the requirements of the Core Criteria at Appendix 4 of the CDM ACOP have been met • Typically suppliers take 2-3 cycles of enquiry and resubmission of documentation to meet the assessment

7. HSE ‘s view of the assessment process • The spirit of CDM – “ to make a reasonable judgement clearly based on evidence” • Recognise the limitations • Realise the benefits • Cost effective and proportionate • Has assisted over 50,000 suppliers to meet core criteria • Particularly helpful to small and micro businesses

8. Why does HSE have confidence in SSIP ? • The SSIP Terms of Reference are based on HSE funded research • Each member scheme undergoes an independent annual audit • HSE is investing in competence assurance for assessors through IRCA • HSE remains at arms length to the business, but supports aims

9. Looking to the future – Key messages from HSE • To Clients – The DtoS agreements signed by SSIP members give real strength to mutual recognition • To Smaller Contractors – An SSIP assessment assures Appendix 4 compliance • To major contractors with big supply chains – the SSIP assessment is valid for you too. • To procurement professionals - Investigate the benefits of a standardised Stage 1 approach

10. A Client’s Perspective of Mutual Recognition Steve Acaster (Chair of the Home Builders’ Federation Health and Safety Forum)

11. HBF - Home Builders’ Federation • What is the HBF? • What does it do? • How does it contribute to raising industry standards in health, safety & welfare?

12. Clients’ Aspirations • Aesthetically pleasing • Quality build • Production on time • Health, safety & welfare?

13. Clients’ Duties - CDM 2007 • What does CDM require clients to do to establish competency? • What assistance does CDM allow in order for clients to meet this REQUIREMENT?

14. Features of SSIP • Principals of SSIP is supported by the HSE • SSIP members must sign up to the forum’s terms of reference and condition of membership

15. Client Benefits From SSIP • Confidence in the assessment process • Reduces work load/paper work • Provides support services

16. Issues for Clients • Awareness levels of CDM duty holders • Stage 2 ASSESSMENT

17. Going Forward • Industry support for SSIP • Supply chain awareness • Verification that desk top competency is transferred to site based operations

18. Break See you in 20 minutes!

19. A Contractor’s Perspective of Mutual Recognition Gerry Mulholland (HSE Leader at Laing O’Rourke Technologies)

20. Recognition up and down the food chain for competence • LOR to Clients/CDM-C’s • CHt to external PC’s • Supply Chain expectations PROVINGCOMPETENCE Previously “Everybody’s been doing the same thing differently”

21. PC/Contractor’s view • Different schemes/PC’s = different questionnaires • Time and effort wasted answering the same thing differently - Rita Donaghy DWP Report recommendation No. 8 • Standard responses from the ACOP schedule produced • Standard approach potentially means we lose “the wow factor” • Some CDM-C’s/PC’s still requesting we complete THEIR questionnaire - LOR Supply Chain Audit requirements

22. LOR Group requirements for our Supply Chain • Currently in excess of the SSIP approach • LOR Procurement controls reviewed and tightened (Nov 2008) • High, Medium, Low categories used across Supply Chain based on risk • Procedure tied into our internal Procurement Enabling Process • Already “work in progress” by May 2009

23. Group Targets

24. Current time and resource commitment • Intensive! • Categorisation of High, Medium, Low from approved list • Questionnaires sent out • “Low & Medium” scored against answers • “High” categories visited by HSE & Procurement team • Achievement score necessary before payments are processed

25. Current time and resource commitment • Intensive! • Categorisation of High, Medium, Low • Numbers • Questionnaires sent out • “Low & Medium” scored against answers • “High” categories visited by HSE & Procurement team across the UK 336 154 50 LOR time - 2 days per audit

26. Summary • Need to cut waste in the industry • Legal requirement for competence remains in current climate • Important that the SSIP stance for competence is upheld through the courts • More recognition of SSIP needed up and down the food chain – work in progress • Time for us all to stop doing the same thing differently

27. The SSIP Forum and Implications of the Publicly Accepted Standard (PAS) David Turner (Deputy Director, Construction Sector Unit at the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills)

28. What are we trying to do? • Cut unnecessary costs for clients and suppliers • Make it all simpler • Help firms to do what they’re good at - construction!

29. What’s the problem? • Everyone’s asking nearly the same things • I’m a builder - I have to pay to join half a dozen schemes to get work! • As a client, I don’t know who I should trust to prequalify my suppliers for the work I want done

30. What’s the solution? • How about if everyone in construction tendering asked the same questions? • Not the project-specific ones, of course! • But why have a dozen ways of asking for your company details? • Take the questions out of the loop

31. What is a ‘PAS’? • Why has BIS gone down this route? • How will the clients, and the industry, benefit?

32. High Low Time Control Low High Int’l Standards (ISO) European Standards (EN) British Standards (BS) Publicly Available Specifications (PAS) Private Standards Corporate Technical Specifications

33. PAS – BS Comparison Table ASPECTS PAS BS Flexibility Flexible process and format; designed to meet clients’ needs Formal, constrained process; subjects constrained by EU work Participation Direct participation by individual companies Nominated participation only Resources Contractually committed resources to the client(s) General resources from standards team Brand Co-branding on front cover and other forms of association No co-branding available Influence Client(s) direct influence over the content No individual direct decision-making control over the content Timescale Typical development time: 6-9 months Typical development time: 18-36 months

34. Launch Meeting Steering Group: 5 – 8 key stakeholders in the subject area, usually identified by the client Steering Group Review Review Panel Wider consultation independently facilitated by BSI, typically including 25+ representatives. The review group may include: • Formal standards committees • Government departments • Relevant trade associations • Other industry stakeholders • Consumer groups PAS Scope Steering Group Review Finalise Draft Domain Research & Content Generation Drafting Train Technical Experts in BS0 Publish PAS 6 – 9 Months Publicly Available Specifications

35. How will this work? • The PAS shows the what, not the how • Clients procure on the basis of risk • ‘Service Providers’ offer different levels of assurance • Up to individual procurers as to how risk is assessed

36. Participants • Vital that PAS 91 has the support of all major stakeholders • PAS process is inclusive • Working with everyone who has an interest • OGC support also vital - alignment with the Glover report

37. How can a single PAS work for everyone? • Getting the questions right • Getting the message out to clients • Getting the message out to suppliers • Getting the message out to supply chains - driving the standard down, to address SMEs properly! • Last point critical in helping the industry

38. High risk, Higher cost, Fewer candidates Level 3 Service Provider Highest confidence in supplier Clients prequalify at appropriate level and above for individual tender risk Suppliers choose level for sort of work they do (ideally just one) Level 2 Service Provider Documents verified Level 1 Service Provider Self -certification Low risk, lower cost, more candidates

39. Client All levels use PAS 91, right down the supply chain Suppliers First and Intermediate supply chain Suppliers/Buyers Buyers Final Tier Suppliers

40. PAS 91 and SSIP? • SSIP has done what we’re now doing with the PAS, for H&S • Why would the PAS 91 Steering group do this again (DOH!) • Fantastic opportunity to move on to another level, and consolidate the work already done

41. Panel Questions Chaired by Trevor Hursthouse (Chair of Specialist Engineering Contractors’ (SEC) Group)

42. Lunch and Close Thanks for attending today! With special thanks to the Health and Safety Executive and Electrical and Heating and Ventilating Contractors’ Associations for sponsoring this event