The pleasures of going Dutch

When HBG and Boskalis announced their merger on Monday, their press release contained a pleasant surprise. Normally people are reduced to numbers in these high financial manoeuvrings - at best a headcount to be exploited; at worst, an overhead to be reduced.

One of the key justifications offered for the merger was to provide "abundant career opportunities for employees". It would good to think that the needs and concerns of ordinary employees featured so high on the list of priorities for deal makers. Good, but not entirely credible.

Cynics might argue the two firms were short of a more convincing story to tell. Or perhaps the Dutch attach a very different value to social considerations than we do on this side of the Channel. Certainly providing a nicer life for employees is not exactly a standard way to rationalise a £3bn merger to the investment community. Perhaps in future that needs to change. (see page 1)

That is certainly what the industry leaders quoted in our sustainability feature believe (see page 14).

They argue that sustainability no longer means just cutting down greenhouse gases or maintaining economic success factors. It means maintaining human and social stability, too.

Yet as Sir Martin Laing admits, the industry can put a business value against improving efficiency, and even against green design and waste reduction. But the experts are still stumped to know how to make a business case for the social dimension.

But if a case can be made anywhere, surely it is in construction. After all the caveats have been made, it is still a dirty, dangerous industry that inconveniences the public it serves and struggles to attract the recruits it needs.

Wouldn't it be good to see this change? Wouldn't it be good if construction could take a lead.