Following a comprehensive inquiry, a cross-party House of Lords committee has determined that the delays caused by the Building Safety Regulator (BSR) are “unacceptable”
Authorised by the House of Lords, the Industry and Regulators Committee (IRC) has published a new report, ‘The Building Safety Regulator: Building a better regulator’, detailing its findings on the regulator's work, skills, and resources after it was established as the Building Control Authority for all higher-risk buildings (HRBs) in England in October 2023.
Taking into account written and oral evidence (147 written submissions and eight oral evidence sessions with a total of 21 witnesses), the 80-page report considered the views and experiences of developers, housing associations, regulators, and representatives of campaign groups on the impact of the regulator on building safety and new construction, its relationship with other authorities, its engagement with the housing sector, process efficiencies, and resources and skills.
Whilst acknowledging that the introduction of the BSR as a new regulatory framework was a “necessary and welcome step” in light of the learnings taken from the Grenfell Tower tragedy, the committee heard that it had brought “increased scrutiny to the design, construction, and management of buildings in the interest of safety”.
However, despite this greater scrutiny, the committee concluded that there was an “urgent need” for the BSR to improve how it operates.
“We heard consistent and repeated complaints that the BSR could take more than nine months to make decisions on whether construction projects should be allowed to go ahead, significantly longer than the statutory target of twelve weeks for these decisions. In many cases, this has delayed or disincentivised refurbishments, safety upgrades, and the remediation of dangerous cladding in high-rise buildings, leaving residents in unsafe buildings for longer and increasing costs for leaseholders.”
Emphasis was placed on the “worrying impact” that these delays were having on the delivery of new housing in high-rise buildings. Suggested reasons for these delays were the regulator’s reliance on external multidisciplinary teams (MDTs) to help it make building control decisions.
“The BSR has accepted that this was not working and is now recruiting in-house capacity to make decisions on new-build applications and contracting out remediation applications to large engineering firms.”
Whilst these moves were welcome, the committee noted that “only time will tell if they can significantly speed up approvals”.
It was also noted whether there was the necessary expertise within the BSR to manage these processes, with the committee hearing that there were not sufficient skilled building and fire inspectors to staff the BSR and other organisations, such as local authority building control bodies and fire and rescue services. There was a need for long-term funding for the training of new building inspectors, fire safety professionals, and structural engineers as part of the government’s forthcoming Construction Skills Action Plan.
Of note was the regulator’s lack of clear enough guidance on how applicants are supposed to demonstrate that their buildings are safe. Many applications were being rejected or delayed due to “basic errors” and the “applicants’ inability to evidence how they are considering elements of fire and structural safety”. This reflected poorly on the construction industry.
It was also found that many construction products did not have relevant product standards, leaving them entirely unregulated. Difficulties in local authority funding were also raised, and concerns that the introduction of regulation had left an “ageing workforce of building inspectors who were struggling to meet demand”.
Considering these concerns, the committee called on the BSR to give greater guidance to its MDTs on how compliance with the Building Regulations should be evidenced and assessed to ensure greater consistency. The report also called on the government to remove “smaller works” from the regulator’s building control approval processes or introduce a streamlined approval process and provide long-term funding for the training of new building and fire inspectors.
Chair of the Committee, Baroness Taylor of Bolton, said: “The tragic loss of 72 lives at the Grenfell Tower fire laid bare the urgent need to reform building safety regulation in England, particularly for high-rise buildings. The introduction of the Building Safety Regulator was a necessary and welcome step.
“However, the scale of the delays caused by the BSR has stretched far beyond the regulator's statutory timelines for building control decisions. This is unacceptable. We welcome that the Government and the BSR are now acting to try and make practical improvements, but this will not address the anxiety and frustration that residents and companies have experienced.”
She added: “It does not improve safety to delay vital remediation and refurbishments, nor to deter the delivery of new housing in high-rise buildings. We expect to see further action from the Government and the BSR to ensure that construction projects in high-rise buildings can be brought forward more quickly, without compromising on vital safety improvements.”
The FPA provided written evidence to the committee drawn from a membership survey of fire safety professionals. Feedback, which is accessible here, showed that many FPA members felt there was a lack of resourcing and guidance from the regulator, which was contributing to the delays in building progress.
Almost a third of FPA members had seen their applications rejected, with the primary reason for this due to a lack of sufficient detail. There was also a “disconnect between the expectations of the BSR and applicants”, with many respondents adding that the BSR’s regulatory framework was hindering delivery of the government’s housebuilding targets and increasing costs and delay. However just over half of our respondents feel that the BSR process is leading to improved building safety, but with the lack of resources and skills highlighted as major blockers.
Commenting on the committee report, Chief Executive of the FPA, Dr Gavin Dunn, said: “The House of Lords inquiry into the BSR is an important step in improving the efficacy and efficiency of the Gateway process and by extension the quality of our built environment.
“We are pleased to see the committee take on board the views and concerns that were shared by our members and have outlined clear steps for the BSR and others to improve building safety processes.
“We will continue to constructively support both the inquiry and the BSR through this process.”