Peers approve funding for Grenfell Tower archive and preservation works

by Featured NewsSafety

Legislation authorises funding for Grenfell memorial

The House of Lords has passed the Grenfell Tower Memorial (Expenditure) Bill to provide statutory authority for the construction and long-term management of a permanent memorial at the tower site.

Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State at the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government Baroness Taylor of Stevenage introduced the legislation to ensure expenditure aligns with public spending rules.

The Bill authorises government funding for a permanent memorial together with a physical and digital archive and a site to lay tower elements to rest.

It also covers costs for land acquisition and preservation works required at the location.

Baroness Taylor explained: “The legislation has a focused purpose and exists to provide the statutory authority needed to support the construction and long-term care of a Grenfell Tower memorial and related activities.”

“The Bill is intended to support the memorial process, not replace or override the role of bereaved families, survivors and the community in shaping it.”

Construction of the memorial is expected to begin in mid-2027 following the work of the independent Grenfell Tower Memorial Commission.

Community engagement and site preservation

Design work for the project is currently under way following a selection process involving bereaved families and members of the local community.

The Grenfell Tower Memorial Commission published the Remembering Grenfell report in November 2023 to outline a shared vision for the site.

Opening the debate, Baroness Taylor described the fire as an avoidable tragedy that claimed 72 lives.

Baroness Scott of Bybrook, speaking for the Opposition, stated the legislation represents an essential step for those affected by the fire.

Work to carefully take down the tower is progressing and is scheduled for completion in 2027.

Certain elements of the structure will be preserved in a specific area following requests from the community.

Accountability and future safety recommendations

The legislation is limited to funding and does not settle questions regarding planning decisions or ownership arrangements.

Baroness Taylor noted that families and survivors have waited too long for justice.

She stated the Government remains committed to implementing the recommendations of the Grenfell Tower Inquiry.

The Metropolitan Police investigation into the fire continues as one of the largest operations undertaken by the force.

Baroness Warwick of Undercliffe noted the memorial should serve as a reminder of actions that must not be repeated.

House of Lords examines Building Safety Regulator delays and housing targets

by ConstructionFeatured News

Lords committee to report on Building Safety Regulator

The House of Lords Industry and Regulators Committee will publish its report on the Building Safety Regulator on Thursday 11 December, setting out findings and recommendations on building safety regulation in England and Wales.

The report follows an inquiry into how the regime created by the Building Safety Act 2022 is operating, with a particular focus on the performance of the Building Safety Regulator.

According to the committee, the report is expected to warn the Government that delays in the regulator’s approval processes are leaving residents waiting longer for remediation of dangerous cladding in unsafe buildings.

The committee also expects to highlight that those delays are increasing costs for leaseholders who are already facing charges linked to fire-safety defects and remedial work.

Peers are further expected to caution that current bottlenecks in approvals could put at risk the Government’s target to deliver 1.5 million new homes by 2029.

The report will sit alongside draft secondary legislation and broader Government activity on building safety, including changes to the structure and role of the regulator.

Draft regulations to establish new Building Safety Regulator body

In parallel with the committee’s inquiry, draft regulations made under the Levelling up and Regeneration Act 2023 set out plans to establish the Building Safety Regulator as a new body corporate, separate from the Health and Safety Executive.

The draft Building Safety Regulator (Establishment of New Body and Transfer of Functions etc.) Regulations 2026 provide that the new body will come into force on 27 January 2026.

Under the draft regulations, the Building Safety Regulator will have a chair appointed by the Secretary of State, between three and eight other appointed members, and a chief executive selected by the members with the Secretary of State’s approval.

The new organisation will be able to appoint its own staff, pay remuneration and pensions, and receive grants or loans from the Secretary of State, subject to conditions.

It will have power to charge for giving advice, conducting research or providing other services, and may also borrow for short term financial management or from the Secretary of State.

The regulations transfer building safety functions under the Building Safety Act 2022 and the Building Act 1984 from the Health and Safety Executive to the new body, and update a range of primary and secondary legislation to reflect the change.

Transitional provisions state that anything done by or in relation to the Health and Safety Executive in connection with transferred functions will be treated as done by or in relation to the Building Safety Regulator once the transfer takes effect.

The draft regulations also allow the regulator, until the end of 2026, to delegate functions to Health and Safety Executive staff or to staff seconded from government departments.

An explanatory note to the draft instrument states that no regulatory impact assessment has been prepared because no, or no substantial, impact on the private, voluntary or public sector is expected.

Podcast commentary on Building Safety Regulator performance and independence

Episode 51 of The Construction Briefing podcast from Practical Law Construction examined the Building Safety Regulator’s performance and the implications of its move to independence.

In the episode, presenters Michelle Rousell and Yassir Mahmood discuss the collapse of Assent Building Compliance and related firms, which had been involved in tens of thousands of projects and employed dozens of registered building control approvers.

They note that some transitional high risk building projects which had benefitted from earlier provisions will now fall under the Building Safety Regulator’s control, adding to its workload.

Mahmood said: “Because first, it puts more work the way of the BSR, and we know they know they’re already struggling.

“And secondly, it puts more work on the plates of the limited number of registered building control approvers, who are already in short supply.

“So even if we assume that the ones that were working for Assent (and its subsidiaries) will find employment somewhere else, that won’t be immediate so there’ll be a problem there.”

The podcast records wider industry frustration about delays, with Mahmood highlighting a previous description of the regulator as “The regulatory fatberg in the sclerotic property pipeline which needs a good old flush”.

Rousell notes that the Building Safety Regulator is already working through a backlog of gateway 2 applications under the new regime, and that the collapse of major building control providers is unlikely to help that position. I5ad1905eca2111f0a5f6fa0d299e95…

Mahmood added that the Government has laid draft regulations before Parliament to move the Building Safety Regulator out of the Health and Safety Executive and establish it as an independent body corporate from 27 January 2026, with the ability to delegate functions back to Health and Safety Executive staff until the end of that year.

He said: “It does remain to be seen how that transition goes.

“Hopefully that’s enough and with that proviso, the change will go smoothly.

“We’ll have to wait and see.”

Concerns over charges, timing and further change

The Construction Briefing episode also highlights a Government consultation on what the Building Safety Regulator and local authority building control can charge for their building regulations functions. I5ad1905eca2111f0a5f6fa0d299e95…

Mahmood noted that, while he had not yet read the consultation in detail, it is likely to result in higher costs for applicants using the regulator and local authority building control services.

Rousell comments that increased fees could be seen as a way to fund a better resourced building control process, but might be difficult for developers already paying for a service that is perceived as underperforming.

Mahmood said: “I think it’s always difficult in any business to start charging people more when you’re underperforming and you don’t have satisfied customers, even if you do have a kind of captive market like the BSR does.”

He added that the changes could be presented as part of a wider plan to improve the system, with applicants asked to accept higher costs in the short term. 5…

Rousell also raises the question of timing, asking whether the industry needs further structural change at a point when it is still adjusting to the post Grenfell regime and the new high risk building procedures.

Mahmood replied that frequent change creates disruption in itself and that, after early difficulties with the regime, there is uncertainty over whether the next phase will deliver an improved outcome.

Next steps for oversight, remediation and housing delivery

The Lords report on the Building Safety Regulator is due to be published shortly before the draft establishment regulations come into force, providing Parliamentary scrutiny of both performance and structure.

Its findings on delays to approvals for remediation of dangerous cladding are likely to be read alongside the regulator’s own work to clear existing backlogs in high risk building applications.

The report’s comments on the impact of approval delays on the 1.5 million homes by 2029 target will also be of interest to housing developers, local authorities and Government departments overseeing delivery.

The move to an independent Building Safety Regulator body, with powers and duties set out in secondary legislation, will change how building safety functions are organised and governed in England and Wales.

Transitional arrangements, including the ability to delegate to Health and Safety Executive staff until the end of 2026, are designed to maintain continuity while the new body is established.

The combination of structural change, a forthcoming Lords report and ongoing consultations on building control charges means stakeholders will have several related developments to track over the coming year.

Practical implications for building control and safety work

Developers, building owners and leaseholder representatives will be directly affected by any findings that Building Safety Regulator approval delays are slowing cladding remediation or new housing projects.

Fire engineering consultants, architects and building services engineers working on high risk residential buildings will need to plan for the regulator’s current workload and any procedural changes arising from the Lords report and new regulations.

System installers, fire-protection contractors and electrical contractors may see project timetables adjusted if approval processes remain slow during the transition to an independent Building Safety Regulator body.

Local authority building control teams and private registered building control approvers will need to consider how the regulator’s structural change, additional workload and any new charging arrangements will interact with their own capacity.

Government departments and housing delivery agencies will have to align housing targets, remediation schemes and funding programmes with any revised expectations on approval timescales and regulatory resource.

House of Lords debate Planning and Infrastructure Bill

by Breaking NewsConstruction

The House of Lords debated an amendment to the Planning and Infrastructure Bill tabled by Baroness Pinnock, Liberal Democrat Lords Spokesperson for Housing, Communities and Local Government.

The debate was held on the 27 October.

Identifying fire safety risks

The amendment aimed at increasing the rate at which buildings with identified fire safety risks are remediated by preventing major developers from undertaking new projects until they commit to fully remediating all unsafe buildings at no cost to leaseholders.

Baroness Pinnock explained that the purpose of the amendment was about “seeking to put more pressure on those who created the conditions in which people died and which many leaseholders now have to endure”.

The amendment, co-signed by the Earl of Lytton, aimed to expand the scope of the Responsible Actors Scheme to include all unsafe buildings, regardless of height and to ensure remediation is carried out to a higher standard than currently mandated under PAS 9980.

According to government figures cited during the debate, between 5,900 and 9,000 buildings over 11 metres still have unsafe cladding, affecting over 250,000 flats and potentially half a million residents.

While 1,927 blocks have been remediated and 750 are undergoing work, thousands remain in limbo.

Liberal Democrat Lords Spokesperson for Housing, Communities and Local Government, Baroness Pinnock’s statement

Baroness Pinnock criticised the Government’s timeline, which commits to completing remediation by 2029—12 years after the Grenfell fire, saying: “Leaseholders are paying the price for a situation that in no part is of their making.

“They are paying for it in extortionate insurance bills, in ever-rising service charges and in knowing that they have no way out as their flats do not sell.”

Earl of Lytton’s statement

During the debate, the Earl of Lytton described the current remediation framework as “complex, uncertain, and capricious,” with fragmented funding and inconsistent standards.

He warned that the PAS 9980 standard allows for “tolerable risk” and “proportionate remediation,” which he argued can delay action and leave residents exposed.

He added: “Markets need transparency, and the government need to be upfront about the general quality of buildings and building regulation compliance over the past 30 years.

“This amendment would give the Secretary of State the tools to end the two-tier remediation standard, the basic inequity and uncertainty of the current protections and the market disruption that has accompanied them.”

Parliamentary Under-Secretary for Housing, Communities and Local Government, Baroness Taylor Stevenage’s statement

Responding for the government, Baroness Taylor of Stevenage, Parliamentary Under-Secretary for Housing, Communities and Local Government, argued that the amendment would “slow remediation and risk stopping essential housebuilding”.  

In opposing the amendment, she said that “attempting to make those changes to the statutory scheme would undermine the remediation contracts that developers have signed with government.”

She defended the PAS 9980 standard as “evidence-based and proportionate,” and highlighted the fire safety reinsurance facility launched in April 2024, which has supported over 760 buildings and increased its claims limit to £75 million.

Shadow Minister for Housing, Lord Jamieson’s statement

Lord Jamieson, Shadow Minister for Housing, echoed concerns about delaying new housing developments.

He explained: “We urgently need the remediation of unsafe blocks of flats.

“But with a housing crisis and over 350,000 people living in temporary accommodation, we also need to build the safe homes we desperately need.”

Baroness Pinnock rejected the binary framing of the issue, saying that it “should not be either/or; it should be both/and”, and argued that there “is capacity within the housebuilding industry to do that.”

Former Secretary of State, Lord Gove’s statement

Lord Gove, former Secretary of State and architect of the Responsible Actors Scheme, expressed sympathy but cautioned against unintended consequences.

Lord Gove shared: “I had to strike a balance between putting the squeeze on them—by making it clear that unless they acted to remediate, they would receive no planning permission whatever—and making sure that they could continue to build the houses we need.”

He questioned whether the amendment considered the financial impact on developers and noted that some non-qualifying leaseholders are wealthy property owners.

Gove added: “A line has to be drawn somewhere to ensure that those with significant wealth do not benefit, while those who do need support receive it.”

After a wide-ranging debate, the amendment was ultimately defeated, with 83 votes in favour and 157 against, with Baroness Taylor noting: “There will be further opportunities for this House to debate the issues of building safety and remediation, including their interaction with this Government’s bold ambitions on housing supply.”