, "12":"Opinion who to trust with housing standards? As the Code for Sustainable Homes is wound down, Richard Hodkinson, managing director at Hodkinson Consultancy, explains what this means for the future of housebuilding in the UK Richard Hodkinson is managing director at Hodkinson Consultancy Web: www.hodkinsonconsultancy.com @rhodcon Twitter: Greater market differentiation may emerge between low-cost, mass-market housing and high-quality homes For many of us who have been in the vanguard of improving housing standards, this kind of dismantling is very disappointing The Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG) plans to cap all housing standards and consolidate them within Building Regulations. At the same time, it intends to prevent local authorities from imposing their own standards. As part of this process, the Code for Sustainable Homes is being wound down. Without a robust set of Building Regulations that incorporate up-to-date environmental standards, the performance of housing will be reduced, and there will be no driver for innovation. These changes are being brought forward quickly before replacement standards are ready. The standards being wound down are not just about energy, but include a wide range of housing issues for example, sustainable materials, daylighting, overheating, internal air quality, sound insulation, ecology and waste management. There are significant gaps between the current standards and those being proposed. The existing quality agenda is being dismantled, and there is uncertainty about the outcomes. For many of us who have been in the vanguard of improving housing standards, this kind of dismantling and stepping back from improvements already secured is very disappointing. The Code, previously EcoHomes, acted as a pathfinder, assisting performance improvements in firms. Although it has been criticised for constraining innovation, there is little hard evidence. There is strong evidence, however, that it focused product suppliers and designers on improvements beyond Building Regulations. As DCLG failed to update the Code continually, it became outdated and, therefore, less relevant to the innovation aspirations of the industry and its customers. We need a vision for the next generation of standards. The current debate seems to be about reducing standards rather than creating an innovative, world-leading industry. Many technical issues for housing impact on each other. For example, overheating, daylight, ventilation and energy efficiency are interrelated. The proposed standards do not jointly deal with these. We need regulatory balance between interconnected issues, otherwise, designs will become distorted as Building Regulations are prioritised. Housing could be built at lower cost within a deregulated system. The question is one of quality and providing homes fit for the future, with increasing environmental aspirations for wellbeing and efficient, high-quality living. It is likely that greater market differentiation will emerge between low-cost, mass-market housing built only to minimum Building Regulation standards and housing built by companies concerned with a product that meets customer aspirations. These homes will be to standards in excess of those proposed. There is a real opportunity for some housebuilders to provide premium, high-value homes. What will be the process to encourage innovation for a successful industry in the long term? These changes will need to be addressed through robust technical work rather than by lobby-group pressure. Links between industry and academia, to draw on wider research funding, will be crucial. The Building Regulations Advisory Committee and National House-Building Council will have key roles, and much of the future regulatory outcomes will rest on their shoulders. Professional institutions such as RIBA, RICS, CIBSE and CIOB will need to cooperate if they are going to have a significant input on housing standards. So, who to trust with housing standards? It seems perverse to stop local authorities applying their local housing standards when the replacement national standards through Building Regulations are not ready, and do not match current achievements. If councils have no power, DCLG seems unprepared, and the updated Building Regulations are not ready, individual professional action is going to be increasingly important. The future success of housebuilding will largely depend on how well it responds to these changes. Design quality will be less of an assessed process, and innovation less focused. With the loss of alternative frameworks, there will be greater emphasis on specialist technical training to produce high-quality homes. Professional institutions will have a very significant role in and responsibility for providing this guidance. The future housing market will need the professional judgement of specialists in setting the agenda for technical improvement and producing high-quality homes. "