Sector Scheme 4 (SS4) was intended to create a virtuous circle for the UK timber fencing sector. The joint industry-Highways Agency initiative was designed to ensure a uniformly high standard of Fencing Products used in conjunction with road projects, including local authority trunk roads. For the industry, the payback was to be improved perceptions of product performance and sustainability and, ultimately, increased market share.
But about three years after SS4 came into force, it clearly hasn’t had the impact the fencing sector wanted. It might be an exaggeration to say that it has created a vicious circle rather than a virtuous one, but the problems connected with it are preoccupying the industry more than the potential benefits. In fact, some feel the Scheme is in danger of collapse unless action is taken.
Industry input
The development of SS4 involved input from a range of industry bodies, including the Fencing Contractors Association, Wood Protection Association (WPA) and the UK Forest Products Association. TRADA, the BRE and BSI were also involved.
“The scheme is comprehensive, covering preparation of the timber and preservation treatment and traceability, so treated material can be tracked back to suppliers,” said Dr Chris Coggins, director of the WPA.
Under SS4, he added, treatment must be carried out to IS0 9000 and companies must be registered to the standard by a UKAS-accredited auditor.
“Another important element is competence of employees. To comply with SS4, they must have the National Vocational Qualification for treatment plant operators,” said Dr Coggins. “In addition, companies must register with the WPA (part of the British Wood Preservation and Damp-proofing Association) and demonstrate every five years that employees have undertaken continuing professional development to stay up with current practice.”
This strictness of these training rules, Dr Coggins acknowledged, may have proved a “sticking point for some companies which would otherwise have signed up to SS4”. But he said, its backers wanted the standard to be rigorous. They were also happy that the Highways Agency made SS4 an “absolute requirement” for all types of timber road fencing.
Lack of enforcement
So when the Scheme was finally agreed, all parties were looking forward to it being implemented Nationwide. But this is where expectations have been seriously disappointed. The key issue has been policing. The Highways Agency (HA) may have made SS4 an “absolute requirement” for road contractors, but the fencing industry claims it is not being enforced on the ground. In turn, say fencing contractors, this is giving no incentive to fencing suppliers to invest in adopting SS4. In fact one source said there are only two firms “with sufficient capacity to supply Highways Agency and local authority trunk road contracts”.
“So a situation may arise where a main contractor asks for SS4 fencing, but we can’t get the product because suppliers can’t see the point in producing it if the Scheme is not being implemented elsewhere,” said one company.
“SS4 has potential benefits and applications in other areas where timber performance and service life are part of the specification, for instance, agricultural fencing and perhaps also decking and cladding, But first of all we have to make it work in the highways sector” |
Dr Chris Coggins, WPA director |
“It’s been extremely frustrating,” said Peter Walters, a director at SS4-compliant fencing producer Charles Ransford & Son Ltd. “You can see why other suppliers are reluctant to sign up to the scheme. It involves ongoing costs and we’re getting no returns. Road contractors can still buy non-compliant fencing from the cheapest source.”
HA spokesperson Elizabeth Shenton said as far it was concerned, “the primary duty for [SS4] compliance rests with main contractors”. “And contract administrators, or the HA’s project sponsor or area manager have a supplementary duty to monitor and report on it,” she said.
So far, says the HA, this system has not detected SS4 breaches. “But we’re willing to investigate any non-compliance reported by the industry,” said Ms Shenton.
From the fencing producers’ perspective, this adds up to the HA passing the policing buck to them. Moreover, it seems, it hasn’t acted when it has been tipped off. “We’ve given them countless cases of non-compliant fencing being used – their number is on the wall we use it so much – but nothing is done,” said Mr Walters.
Design standard
Despite vociferous appeals from the fencing sector, Ms Shenton said the HA has no plans to “carry out a wider audit of SS4 in the near future”. But it is developing a new standard to ensure the competence of designers involved in highways work. “This will require detailed knowledge of sector schemes and their application,” she said. “We’re confident that it will improve compliance.”
It seems unlikely that this step will impress fencing suppliers, however, with one saying that the only way to send a clear message on SS4 would be to tear up “X-thousands of metres of non-compliant post and rail fencing erected alongside roads”.
Mr Walters said that the mood among some industry members of the SS4 committee was to abandon further meetings until the HA took steps on enforcement. “And my understanding is that, if we don’t meet within a certain time scale, the Scheme could fail,” he said.
In the meantime, said Dr Coggins, communications are being kept open with the HA and the secretary of state for transport, with the hope still being that SS4 can become the virtuous circle planned at the outset.
“SS4 has potential benefits and applications in other areas where timber performance and service life are part of the specification, for instance, agricultural fencing and perhaps also decking and cladding,” he said. “But first of all we have to make it work in the highways sector.”