I READ with great interest your recent whole-life costing feature (Construction News, November 11).
As a consultant working in the field I applaud the efforts by consultant the Building Performance Group and research body the Building Research Establishment (BRE) to improve the supply ofgood data essential to any lifecycle costing exercise.
However, I must take issue with BRE project manager Ed Bartlett's comment that the industry should 'cast aside old prejudices and pull together for the common good'.
My own organisation has recently found itself competing against the BRE for lifecycle costing consultancy on a PFI project and I understand the BRE is offering a range of consultancy services in this field.
With this in mind, is it really reasonable to expect its competitors to cast aside their commercial interests and hand over data to the BRE forum?
Will this data then be used to strengthen BRE's own consultancy position?
My belief is that BRE is the right organisation to hold a national lifecycle costing databank for the good of the industry. But it can't have it both ways.
If its new forum is to succeed, the BRE and its guardians, the Foundation for the Built Environment, will need to focus more on supporting the industry and less on competing against it.
S Robinson, lifecycle costing consultant