Lee Kyson MCIOB, MD, Kyson Construction
We would definitely benefit from staying in the EU. I previously set up a plastering and external wall insulation business in Germany that ran for about 14 years, which I thoroughly enjoyed, and that type of opportunity would be much more difficult if the UK became independent of Europe.
Leaving the EU could make it harder for individual UK professionals to get work on projects in Europe, perhaps requiring a work permit, and UK firms will have to navigate extra bureaucracy to qualify to tender for a job. Even after winning a job, the procurement route could prevent you from importing the products and materials you’re used to using from the UK.
The UK also depends on countless materials and products that come over from Germany and leaving Europe could impose more trade barriers or red tape related to importing or exporting construction materials, which would create a big headache for the industry.
Barbara Entwistle FCIOB, area manager, Velux
Europe will be stronger if we stick together, the EU construction sector is predicted to grow over the next year, and our professionals benefit from being able to work in European countries and vice versa. Countries with economic difficulties like Spain and Italy have suffered massive drops in construction activity, but political and economic fluctuations are to be expected in different countries and the future should be about stabilisation, getting away from the boom or bust culture and countries supporting each other.
The UK is too deeply involved in Europe to simply decide to pull out, let’s also not forget that construction at home benefits from millions of pounds-worth of EU grants, notably on housing, education and environmental-based projects, which in some cases would not have been able to go ahead without it, plus research and development and training grants that bring new technologies and skills into the sector.
Rob Hooker, director, Greendale Construction
Leaving the EU would be a bad thing for the UK construction industry. I am not impressed with the UKIP “little Englander” approach, we are in a global market and major trade is done with the EU. We need to be part of it to be able to influence and manage the governance of the EU to the benefit of our builders. Although EU red tape definitely needs to be curbed, the continued engagement of foreign labour is vital to reduce skills shortages, we are simply not training enough people in the UK in science, technology, engineering and mathematics and construction subjects.
The best way forward in determining our future is the Conservatives’ proposal for a referendum, which will allow the people to decide once and for all whether we stay in or out. That’s democracy working as it should do.
Phillip Hall, MD, Hall Construction
It’s hard to argue against being in Europe when you’re connected to it by road, via the Channel Tunnel. The fact we can bring in labour from abroad is often a benefit to us rather than a hindrance, and depending on the fluctuating cycles of work, workers from Poland and elsewhere play an important role in augmenting the labour force to deliver projects.
Leaving Europe could jeopardise working opportunities for UK companies and individuals on the mainland and damage trade and business. I’ve been advising a friend who’s renovating a historic property in France who has been using a lot of skilled British ex-pat workers, who are really benefiting from our countries’ close relationship. However, EU legislation is very onerous and it should be streamlined, the UK seems to be one of the only countries that follows it to the letter.
Mike Smith, MD, Corniche Builders
I’m undecided. Opinions on Europe have so far been too politically driven and lead by gut reaction and personal prejudice rather than fact, what’s needed is a thorough cost-benefit analysis, assessing the benefits of remaining in Europe to our economy and to construction. Like it or not, we have an acute labour shortage, so the influx of cheaper foreign labour has been an asset, mostly in and around greater London where it made up for huge skills losses during the recession.
The flow of skills and work between the UK and the rest of the EU has a major financial impact, and some EU legislation, such as on health and safety, will have had a positive impact. We must also consider the costs associated with a decision to leave the EU, as dismantling current systems and legislation and creating new independent regulations for construction will be very expensive and add new layers of bureaucracy.
Mark Wakeford, chair of The Construction Alliance
The Construction Alliance doesn’t have a formal position on this, partly because the views of our members vary and we believe that there is a better factual debate on the key issues. Broadly, our membership will recognise the value of belonging to a club that enables free trade and the movement of people and skills across the Europe.
We also value the development activity that membership creates in other sectors and the value the standardisation of specifications that allows economic construction. However, as with all in business, we would relish a lessening in red tape, be it from Europe or Whitehall, but we remain to be convinced that our departure from Europe would result in less bureaucracy.
Comments
Comments are closed.
As far as skills are concerned the UK is hardly touching the surface of the skills markets of Eastern and Med Europe. If UK employers were to set up skills pipelines to train, prepare and relocate workers they would be getting more out of the EU than obsessing about trying to get more British people into construction.
For the EU to work there needs to be a much more mobile skills market. The EU therefore is failing in one of its most important facets – mobile labour force. If the UK were to leave then bilateral agreements with Romania, Poland, Spain can be negotiated to make more skills available when needed.
I found the Vox pop comment on the EU in the June edition mostly ill informed and extremely depressing. Mike Smith rightly asked for a detailed cost benefit analysis before making up his mind. This has already been carried out by Professor Tim Congdon and it determined that EU domination absorbs about 11% of our national output. The myth that UKIP would ban all foreign workers is peddled again, yet it does not intend to stop UK business recruiting where there is unfulfilled demand. Also for example, Chinese students would not be barred from taking jobs when they qualify here just because they are not from the EU. The belief that we have to be part of a political union to trade with Europe is childish. The belief that we depend on the EU shows a lack of self confidence that is characteristic of much modern management. Barbara Entwhistle alleges EU grants are good yet we pay the money into Europe in the first place. This is self deceptive madness.
The EU adds massively to the cost of our buildings through climate change levies, carbon trading, rising energy costs, waste and environmental directives plus silly additions to Building Regulations to meet our climate change commitments. We cannot afford to keep adding EU costs to building and then wonder why our country is uncompetitive, nor moan about bureaucracy but be frightened to throw off the shackles.
Where is the entrepreneurial spirit, the swashbuckling attitude that built our nation? Alleging that UKIP has a little Englander approach is bizarre, UKIP has a big world approach that your timid contributors should study properly. The EU is a financial and political disaster and we should be out, now.