Committee issues call for evidence from industry on performance of the regulator

A cross-party House of Lords committee has launched an inquiry into the Building Safety Regulator (BSR) following widespread reports of delays to scheme approvals.

The House of Lords industry and regulators committee has today issued a call for evidence from the industry for its short inquiry, which will focus on gateway 2 delays to approvals for new high-rise buildings and maintenance of existing buildings.

The committee is seeking evidence from construction industry specialists, housing associations, architects, councils, residents and safety experts. It is asking the industry 14 questions (see full list below).

parliament

Source: Shutterstock

The Lords want to have submissions by the end of summer

These include whether safety has improved since the introduction of the BSR, whether the delays to approvals for high-rise buildings are down to the processes used by the BSR, whether the regulator’s approvals process is clear and understandable and whether the body, which sits within the Health & Safety Executive, has access to sufficient skilled staff.

Baroness Taylor, chair of the industry and regulators committee, said: “The committee wants to hear from all stakeholders to find out if the BSR has the skills and resources required to ensure the safety of all buildings and its residents in the process of approving applications for high-rise buildings.

“This is crucial if the government is going to achieve its manifesto target of building 1.5 million homes over the next parliament.”

More on the gateway 2 delays

Building Safety Regulator considering taking ‘firmer approach’ to bad gateway 2 submissions

Homes England boss calls on government to fix ‘unacceptably slow’ gateway 2 approvals

Since taking over the building control for higher-risk buildings, the regulator has been subject to a stream of criticism from the housing development sector over delays of up to 11 months to approval at the gateway 2 pre-construction stage under the Building Safety Act. In May, Alex Norris, the building safety minister, said the government was “exploring all options” to deal with the demand for applications to the BSR.

The Lords inquiry will hold its first evidence session on Tuesday, when Matt Voyce, executive director, construction at developer Quintain, and Dan Hollas, director, building safety at £1bn-turnover housing association Clarion, will appear before peers.

The deadline for submitting evidence to the inquiry is 31 August. 

The committee’s full list of questions for industry

  1. What is your experience of the Building Safety Regulator’s regulatory framework? Has the introduction of the BSR improved the safety of the buildings it is responsible for, and can any examples be given to illustrate this?
  2. How has the BSR’s regulatory framework impacted the delivery of new homes and the maintenance and improvement of existing high-rise buildings?
  3. What impacts could the BSR’s regulatory framework have on the delivery of the Government’s housing targets? How significant are high-rise buildings to meeting these housing targets? As an obstacle to meeting these targets, how does building safety regulation compare with other potential obstacles such as skills, supply chains and the planning system?
  4. Does the Building Safety Regulator’s regulatory framework strike the right balance between providing a holistic, outcomes-based view of safety and ensuring that developers and building owners understand what they are required to do?
  5. To what extent are delays in approvals for high-rise buildings down to the regulatory processes used by the BSR? Could these processes be made more proportionate, particularly for smaller works, without impacting the safety of high-rise buildings? If so, how?
  6. Are the BSR’s approval processes sufficiently clear and understandable to developers? What level of guidance or feedback is necessary for those making applications to the BSR to understand its requirements? Could this situation be improved through the BSR’s review of Approved Documents?
  7. To what extent are delays caused by a poor understanding of building safety on the part of developers, leading to unsuitable applications? Should the solution to delays be a greater awareness of how to take a holistic approach to safety on the part of developers, rather than more prescriptive guidance on regulatory requirements?
  8. The BSR has suggested that it would like to carry out its work on an organisation-by-organisation basis, rather than the current system of looking at things building-by-building. Would you support a move to the BSR focusing on organisations, or would this lessen their focus on the safety of individual buildings?
  9. To what extent are delays in approvals caused by the resources available to the regulator? Is there a need to give the BSR more funding, and if so, would developers accept an increase in regulatory fees to allow for this? Would more funding allow the BSR to deal with applications more swiftly, or is there a need to consider alternative financial models for delivering building safety approvals?
  10. Does the BSR have access to the skilled staff necessary to carry out multidisciplinary assessments of safety? If the BSR is struggling to access the skills it needs, what changes could resolve this issue? For instance, is there a need for higher pay for those carrying out assessments, or for further changes to enable secondments?
  11. How is the BSR progressing in improving the safety of all buildings, including low-rise buildings? Is the relationship between the BSR and building control authorities and inspectors working well?
  12. To what extent are delays a result of growing pains that will ease over time, or a structural problem that requires more significant changes? What improvements to the BSR’s regulatory framework are needed?
  13. How does the BSR’s work relate to the regulation of construction products? How does the BSR cooperate with the Office for Product and Safety Standards, and how might this relationship change with the introduction of a single construction regulator?
  14. How does the BSR’s regulatory framework compare to how building safety is assured in other countries and jurisdictions? Are there good examples of how to ensure building safety elsewhere, and what lessons can the BSR learn from them?

 

Topics