What’s been done and what’s to come: progress updates from the latest tranche of building safety documents

The publication of a consultation document on the establishment of a single construction regulator grabbed the headlines this week.

It had been a key recommendation of the Grenfell Tower phase two inquiry and the government had already, last month, laid a statutory instrument to transfer building safety functions from the Health and Safety Executive into a new arms-length body. 

But Wednesday’s release of a prospectus detailing how it plans to deliver the regulator is the strongest step yet towards its establishment. The consultation will run until 20 March next year, with a full government response to be published in summer.

The prospectus was just one of a batch of major releases by the government on Wednesday, which together show the extent to which it has enacted the recommendations of the Grenfell Inquiry phase two report, and offer a loose timeline for what is still to come.

Higher-risk buildings review and authoritative statement on fire engineers: What’s been done so far?

A detailed progress report on the inquiry’s recommendations was among the key documents put out this week. Of a total 61 recommendations monitored by the report, 28 are listed as relating directly to the construction industry. Of these, 25 are classed as “in progress” and three as “complete”.

One of these three - the recommendation for an urgent review of the definition of a higher-risk building for the purposes of the Building Safety Act - was actually completed on Wednesday itself.

The review, published alongside the progress report and the single regulator prospectus, found, rather anticlimatically, that “the current definition appropriately reflects the available evidence on the risks to individuals from the spread of fire or structural failure” and therefore recommended no changes.

The Building Safety Regulator is planning to carry out an ongoing review to “determine whether the list of buildings subject to the enhanced regulatory oversight of the higher risk regime should be amended in any way

However, the Building Safety Regulator is planning to carry out an ongoing review to “ensure data and evidence on the risk to individuals is regularly assessed to determine whether the list of buildings subject to the enhanced regulatory oversight of the higher risk regime should be amended in any way”.

Also checked off the government’s to-do list was recommendation 17, which urged the government to convene a panel of academics and experts to draw up an authoritative statement of knowledge and skills expected of a competent fire engineer. The authoritative statement, also published Wednesday, outlined a number of key principles which the panel said should underpin future regulation and which have been accepted by the government. 

These include the following:

• The title and function of fire engineer should be regulated in statute
• Preparing the fire safety strategy should be the central, protected function of a regulated fire engineer
• The development of a competent fire engineer should be a structured process combining formally accredited education and supervised professional experience, comparable to other engineering disciplines
• Fire engineers require deep understanding and knowledge of core architectural and engineering principles, fire science, human behaviour, and regulations relevant to buildings and fire safety
• Other built environment disciplines need to acquire a more detailed understanding of fire engineering and the role of the fire engineer in order to produce consistently fire safe buildings.

The final completed item in the construction section of the progress report was arguably not really that specific to the industry. The inquiry had recommended it be made a legal requirement for the government to “maintain a publicly accessible record of recommendations made by select committees, coroners and public inquiries together with a description of the steps taken in response”. This item was completed to the government’s satisfaction back in July, when it published the first public inquiries dashboards tracking the implementation of recommendations from inquiries into Grenfell Tower, Infected Blood, Manchester Arena and covid-19.

While relatively few items have so far been marked as “complete”, some recommendations listed as “in progress” are relatively far progressed. For instance, the recommendation that fire safety responsibilities currently exercised by MHCLG, the Home Office and the Department for Business and Trade be brought into one department under a single secretary of state. Responsibilities and staff were transferred from the Home Office to MHCLG in the spring and summer, but the transfer of budgets cannot be closed until the Parliamentary Supplementary Estimates process has been completed, which is expected in 2026.

Meanwhile, the recommendation to appoint a chief construction advisor has been achieved on an interim basis, after Thouria Istephan was appointed in September to take the role for a year. The government said the recommendation would only be considered complete when a permanent chief was in post and driving change across the sector.

New products regime and greater professional regulation: What’s yet to come?

Despite the HRB definition review being a completed item on the government’s list, there could yet be a twist in the tale. The review committed the government to a review of the Building Safety Act 2022 at its five-year mark in 2027. “This will ensure that the higher-risk building regime can adapt to new and emerging evidence, and that the protection of vulnerable people is at the heart of government work to reform the building safety system,” it said.

Meanwhile, the single regulator prospectus indicated there could be further moves on professional regulation. The document set out the government’s belief in the need to “go further than purely the areas highlighted by the Inquiry, to take a holistic view of regulation, competence and culture across all those operating in the built environment sector”.

 It committed to publishing a “new long-term strategy for the building professions, including wider trades and occupations”

To effect this, it committed to publishing a “new long-term strategy for the building professions, including wider trades and occupations” and will issue a call for evidence in spring 2026 to “seek detailed views on targeted proposals for reform, building on the findings of earlier consultations on building control and architects”. 

This will be followed by the publication of an overarching strategy for the built environment professions in spring 2027.

The prospectus was also accompanied by the announcement of a separate consultation, to launch in the new year, on plans to “improve the proportionality” of the BSR approvals process for remediation works on higher risk buildings, those classed as 18m or above and containing at least two dwellings. The department admitted that operation of the current regime has resulted in some “unintended consequences, notably the challenges faced by applicants in getting swift BSR approval for routine yet essential types of building work to existing higher-risk buildings”.

The rest of the progress report set out how the government planned to meet its commitments relating to incomplete recommendations, which mostly related to Approved Document B, construction products reform, and the fire engineering profession.

Recommendations 5 to 12 of the inquiry largely relate to changes to the first of these. In December 2024, the government committed to subjecting Approved Document B to continuous review and to producing a “fundamental review” of the building safety regulations generally. In July of this year, it appointed a six-member expert panel including an architect, housebuilder, planning, technical and digital expert to help guide this review. Recommendations from the review are expected in 2026.

On products reform, the government said it was developing proposals to respond to a number of recommendations, which would be included in the Construction Products Reform White Paper.

These include recommendation 13, which suggested the construction regulator be made responsible for assessing conformity of products with regulatory requirements and issue certificates for them “as appropriate”, and recommendation 14, which demanded that copies of all test results supporting any certificate issued by the construction regulator be included in the certificate, that manufacturers provide the regulator with full testing histories, and that they be required by law to provide on request copies of all test results that support claims about fire performance made for their products. 

Recommendation 24 - that a cladding materials library be created - will also be dealt with by the white paper, which is due to be published before spring 2026. Its development is being informed by analysis of responses to consultation on the Construction Products Reform Green Paper, which was published alongside the government’s response to the inquiry.

Recommendations 15 to 18 concern the profession of the fire engineer. They urged that the profession be recognised, protected and regulated; that the government take urgent steps to increase places on master’s level courses in the subject; that a group of experts be convened to produce an authoritative statement of the knowledge and skills to be expected of a competent fire engineer; and that courses in the principles of fire engineering be developed for construction professionals and fire and rescue operatives as part of their continuous professional development. 

The third of these, as previously mentioned, has been completed. The next steps paper published alongside the authoritative statement mentions the establishment of a Fire Engineers Transitional Board, composed of experienced regulators, representatives from professional bodies, and expert advisers, to guide the early stages of reforms.

Recommendation 10 urges that it be made a statutory requirement that a fire safety strategy produced by a registered fire engineer be submitted with building control applications for HRBs. The government said it had undertaken engagement with the sector and experts to “reconcile different perspectives on how to achieve strengthened fire safety requirements to determine the appropriate next steps” and said the issues “must be addressed to ensure that any future enhancements are both proportionate and deliverable”.

A consultation on the fire risk assessor profession will be launched in early 2026, which will set out proposals to establish a system of mandatory accreditation for the professional, per recommendation 26.

Recommendation 20 suggested making it a statutory requirement for a building control application for a HRB to be supported by a statement from a senior manager of the principal designer, while 21 suggested the introduction of a licensing scheme for principal contractors working on HRBs. 

The government said it was engaging with industry representatives through a series of roundtables to gather views on a licensing scheme

The government said it was engaging with industry representatives through a series of roundtables to gather views on a licensing scheme and that a review of the dutyholder regime was under way. “We are continuing work to align the requirements under recommendations 20 and 21, for a personal undertaking or statement from a director or senior manager to ensure adherence to Building Regulations,” it said.

Meanwhile, Recommendations 22 and 23 suggested the appointment of an independent panel to consider whether building control should be performed by people with a  commercial interest and, secondly, whether all building control functions should be performed by a national authority. The government said its independent panel “continues to meet regularly” and has agreed to publish a final report “in the coming months” with the government planning a formal response in the new year.

Outside of government, RIBA is undertaking a comprehensive review of its code of practice for chartered practices as part of its efforts to fulfil recommendation 19, which called on the body, along with the Architects Registration Board to review their practices.