How are demolition companies expected to stay on top of constantly-changing legislation?
It would be nice to think that our legislators and law-makers are decisive and that their pronouncements are well researched, carefully considered and ultimately unwavering in their belief, and that their actions are correct and for the greater good.
And yet recent experience suggests that rules and regulations are conceived with all the foresight of a charlatan psychic.
First came the news that the Health & Safety Executive’s ill-advised Fee for Intervention cash generator had been pushed back by six months because investigators weren’t yet ready to enforce a scheme pushed through by their masters. Then came the news that Site Waste Management Plans – a needless paper trail put in place just four years ago – now face the axe.
But perhaps the worst example of legislator’s ability to flip and flop is the news that trommel fines – previously charged at the £2.50/tonne rate of Landfill Tax – are going to cost £64/tonne as of last Friday. No warning, no consultation. Just a 2,500% overnight rate rise.
Think about that for a second. That’s like your next pint of beer costing you £78; your next packet of cigarettes costing more than £150.
Of course, this change cuts both ways. A good many demolition companies run highly efficient and profitable waste recycling facilities. And if there’s a way to make money from the newly-reclassified waste fines, you can bet your life that demolition contractors will find and exploit it.
But what of the newly-let contract, or the one that has been in train for a few weeks or months. The cost of waste disposal would have been factored into the price of that contract months and possibly even years ago. And, at a time when the whole world is watching the pennies, I certainly don’t envy the person responsible for advising the client of the 2,500% rise in disposal costs.
As we have stated in this column previously, the UK demolition readily adopts and embraces legislative changes, despite the potentially enormous cost in additional training and procedural changes.
But to be bitten twice by legislative fluctuations and indecision – particularly at a time of economic hardship – is like pouring salt into a gaping wound.
