I’ve seen some pretty good somersaults in my time from some real experts but when I read the Lighting Council’s latest Illuminations newsletter I was impressed.

It described a private dinner with Minister Craig Laundy whose ministry is responsible for the Australian Building Codes Board.

I wonder whether Minister Laundy spotted the quick flip the Lighting Council had to make to get to being a bastion of innovation and market choice with this:
“The 2019 draft NCC has a number of especially concerning provisions that will have the effect of significantly and unnecessarily reducing the range of lighting equipment that can be deployed in the built environment.”

When in the previous paragraph their position was this:
“The dinner provided an opportunity for Lighting Council to brief the Minister directly on industry’s concerns about the 2019 draft of the National Construction Code (NCC) and the use of photoluminescent exit signs.”

In my opinion it makes sense if the “industry’s concerns” are looked at in the context of the impact on their members’ margins and profits. This of course means facility managers and the property sector in general pays more.

The fact that USA, Canada, Japan and New Zealand all have building code provisions for photoluminescent exit signs to replace battery back-up exit signs seems to have escaped the Lighting Council – or possibly that’s what their real concern is?