RAAC... A good thing?

So, first off let me say that I am NOT saying that the risk of RAAC within public sector buildings is in any way a good thing, but what I will say is that it is great that the wider media has woken up to some of the risks that we are managing daily in the public sector.

So why was RAAC used so prevalently in the first place? At the time RAAC was a new, innovative, and (most importantly) cheaper and quicker way of delivering construction projects. Did the project managers, directors, and decision makers know that there was an inherent risk with the project? Almost certainly not. What they saw was a method of construction that allowed them to deliver a project more effectively. The same was said about Asbestos – it was a relatively cheap and effective way to provide significantly better fire protection in public sector buildings.

However, there is one word that ties them back to each other…. Innovation. Both products were innovative solutions that look attractive to anyone that works in the public sector who constantly have pressures of time and budget constraint far greater than anything seen in the private sector. If we take a step back and look at the whole life impact of both products it is possible to see costs that pale into insignificance compared to the original savings made on the projects.

Now I am not saying that we should ignore innovation and revert to only what we know is tried and tested, but surely we need to consider the whole lifecycle of everything we do, and not just the cost to throw up a building cheaper and quicker?

When looking at the level of backlog maintenance across the country it is clear to see that we do not invest anywhere near enough in the replacement, renovation and refurbishment of the buildings that cost millions of pounds to erect in the first place. And this situation does not look like it is changing any time soon.

So, just a thought, why not invest a little bit more in making the new builds a little more robust? Use methods that we know will stand the test of time? Design buildings that can be easily adapted and changed to suit the needs of the ever-developing clinical services? But most importantly, design and develop buildings that will stand up to the rigors of millions of users over its life-time, buildings that require less intervention and maintenance?

In short, we need to take a step back, embrace the principles of evidence-based design, and develop a new standard of building that will service the NHS for the next 75 years.