Examination of Witnesses (Questions 180
- 186)
WEDNESDAY 23 JUNE 2004
DR DAVID
CROWHURST, MR
DAVID WARRINER
AND MS
DEBORAH BROWNHILL
Q180 Mr Challen: Is it correct that
the code is only applicable to the public sector? If that is the
case, why is that?
Dr Crowhurst: I am not aware that
the code as such exists. The suggestion of the Sustainable Buildings
Task Group is that a code be developed and it be broadly based
on BREEAM and EcoHomes as the basis for the development and implementation
of a code. You may be confusing it with the European legislation
in terms of the energy performance directive in buildings which,
in itself at the moment, would only apply to public buildings
as I understand it. I do not think there was any suggestion from
the SBTG that such a code for sustainable buildings would apply
purely to the public sector.
Q181 Mr Francois: If you were not
on the Sustainable Buildings Task Group—which I must say
I do find quite amazing actually—were any developers on
it?
Dr Crowhurst: Ian Coull who is
the chairman of the Sustainability Forum which is sponsored by
DTI was a member of that group and I think there may well have
been other developers. We were asked and did submit evidence to
the Sustainable Buildings Task Group. I have copies of that evidence
which the Committee may wish to have. It was specifically in relation
to BREEAM as a scheme and how that operated and could be operated
more widely for the implementation of improved environmental
performance.
Q182 Mr Francois: So one or more
developers were on the Task Group but the BRE were not.
Mr Warriner: Was the House Builders'
Federation represented on it?
Ms Brownhill: Yes, I think so.
Dr Crowhurst: I am not certain.
Mr Warriner: The list is available;
we can certainly make sure you have a copy.
Q183 Mr Francois: The point I am
seeking to make is that it does strike me as rather extraordinary,
given what this Task Group has set out to do, that there was quite
a heavy representation of developers or people involved in the
industry but you were not on it. That suggests to me that someone
was looking for a particular outcome before they began.
Dr Crowhurst: I think you may
need to address that question to the people who selected the individuals
to be on that working group. I do not think it is something we
can really comment on.
Q184 Chairman: That is something
that we would like to take up with the minister.
Ms Brownhill: There were a number
of people on that group who were pro-environment like the WWF.
There were a number of people that we have been working with on
the one million sustainable homes initiative, including representatives
of the Environment Agency, English Partnerships, who were very
supportive. The actual outcome was very pro the environment and
I think if there had not been some developers on the Committee
giving it a rubber stamp then it could have been criticised the
other way as well. In terms of how we develop EcoHomes and BREEAM
we always like to have a healthy representation of the industry
there so that that aspect of it is also covered. The Committee
did seem to have a balance at least.
Mr Francois: I will not do this to death,
but I am just looking at the membership of the body itself and
balance is not the first word that springs to mind.
Q185 Joan Walley: If I could just
pick up on one of the comments that was made in the last series
of exchanges about your non-membership of the Sustainable Buildings
Task Group, a comment was made about you not being there for commercial
ends. I just wonder whether or not I am wrongly interpreting that,
whether that relates to the change in status that BRE had and
whether or not you feel that there was a conflict of interest
in terms of the whole way in which you get your funding. Could
you elaborate a little bit for me, please?
Mr Warriner: I do not think that
we felt there was any conflict of interest. The whole investment
we have made in BREEAM and EcoHomes is not just us, it is the
industry as well. We have taken a long term view; BREEEAM is not
a money spinner, it is something that ultimately will become self-sustaining
which it needs to do if it is going to continue to support itself.
What we have not touched on is the model by which BRE was privatised
which means that we are actually owned by a charitable foundation
and any profit which we make is actually vested to the charitable
foundation which is then spent on education and research.
Q186 Joan Walley: So your status
is not a hindrance in terms of developing this whole agenda further
forward.
Mr Warriner: Certainly not, no.
Dr Crowhurst: Not at all.
Ms Brownhill: We do not think
so.
Chairman: Thank you all very much indeed.
We are grateful to you and thank you for your evidence.
| 
