Kevin Byrne is the founder of Checkatrade.com, where a builder’s reputation can be checked. For more information, visit www.checkatrade.com.

The Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change, Chris Huhne, has introduced his much anticipated ‘Green Deal’ which is intended to revolutionise the energy efficiency of British properties. The framework, which will allow consumers to employ government accredited tradespeople to make energy efficiency improvements to their homes and businesses at no upfront cost, will see the cost instead recouped through a charge, in instalments, on energy bills.

The deal should provide a great incentive for property owners to transform their properties into more energy efficient places in which to live and work. And with heightened public consciousness regarding the importance of minimising carbon emissions, developers should have a readymade market in refurbishment. Yet the success of the entire Green Deal depends on the government’s ability to implement a Trader Accreditation Scheme, so that developers are assured of their grant status and can rest easy knowing they are not vulnerable to the many rogue traders and cowboys builders who will be circling.

Unfortunately, the failed Quality Mark Scheme and the struggling Trust Mark Scheme raise question marks over the ability of the government to satisfactorily police membership of the Green Deal. So while the government is absolutely right to recognise the need to establish an accreditation process for traders, we should hope it has learnt some lessons from the past.

Recruitment of accredited tradespeople will need to be a combination of new talent and existing skilled traders, who should be subject to thorough vetting. All too often in multi-trade schemes such as this the qualifications are in place but this does not prevent poor service, below average workmanship and over charging.

Training to obtain the correct skills may be an issue if the demand outweighs the training resources, potentially becoming a bottleneck which could put pressure on the whole success of the Deal. Issues such as the location of the training centres and the cost are yet to be clarified. For sub-contractors, a day off to train means a day of not working – which results in a day’s money lost.

The scheme organisers will also need to think carefully about the payment terms: will it be the consumer or the government who pays the builders and on what terms?  And if it is to be the government, just how long will developers leading refurbishment projects have to wait for their money? Take up amongst tradespeople may be hindered by traders feeling cautious about the level of commitment the government expects of them versus the security they feel about the longevity of the Green Deal and the commitment the government has to it, given the current climate of cuts. They may be reticent to put all their eggs in one basket not knowing how long the government will run the scheme for. If that uncertainty leads to a lack of accredited skills, then developers are going to miss out on what should be a huge opportunity. This is something the government must consider urgently and cannot ignore.

Concerns have been raised about dealing with any customers’ dissatisfaction, raising the question of who will be responsible to inspect and arbitrate? Monitoring systems such as that pioneered by Checkatrade.com show the way forward. Indeed, the Internet is already a useful resource for developers wanting to check out new local sub-contractors.

It is clear to me that an independent adjudicator will be vital to protect and maintain the Green Deal’s credibility and worth – for all involved. It is also clear that insufficient thought has been given to the indirect route to Green Deal grants, when homeowners employ a builder or developer to manage a project end-to-end.

This Green Deal should be applauded but its success will live or die by the rigour with which the government implements its promised trader accreditation scheme. The safeguarding of our planet’s resources is down to all of us but it is incumbent on the government to put safeguards in place to protect the public and the building industry from the scourge of rogue operators.