5.26 I do not favour disbanding the Joint Contracts Tribunal. It has existed for 63 years, and has support within the building industry. However, it should make its structure more relevant to modern conditions within the industry. The representation of clients is inadequate in the private sector and is disproportionate for the modern procurement role of local authorities. I recommend that:

1. Structure: The structure is changed so that it is subdivided into units which reflect the actual parties to the specific agreements or contracts, who should then draw up their own documents. It makes little sense for interests who are not actually parties to a particular document to obstruct changes in it for reasons which may be unconnected with the proposed change, or even with the document itself.

2. Family of Documents: A complete family of standard documents is produced based on the principles in paragraph 5.18. This should include a total matrix of interlocking consultants' agreements and contracts, including subcontracts, available for all kinds of building work, and any additional relevant documentation such as bonds and warranties (if necessary) and latent defects insurance. This can best be achieved by building on the NEC (as amended), in conjunction with the ICE which publishes it and holds the copyright. If, additionally, clients wish to continue to use current JCT documents, they should be redrafted to incorporate the principles in paragraph 5.18, be in comprehensible language and have guidance notes attached to them. To complete the family, other documents will have to be introduced or incorporated.

5.27 Further details of the recommended restructuring of the JCT are set out in Appendix IV. These changes are urgent. They should not await the legislative changes proposed elsewhere in the Report.