Issued: 27 June 2022

This bulletin is for anyone who wants to keep up to date on the new Building Safety Regulator being established within HSE.

Please share this bulletin with others who may find the information useful, they can subscribe at this link.

Find out more about the building safety reforms.

Last year we published information setting out the broad principles of the safety case approach for high rise residential buildings.

We asked for your feedback and working with colleagues in industry, including local authorities, and social housing and private sector management companies we have developed some further guides to help those in control of high rise residential buildings (HRRBs) meet their legal duties under the Building Safety Act 2022.

Put simply, a safety case must show that all reasonable steps have been taken to make sure ‘in scope’ buildings are safe and will remain safe when occupied by residents. ‘In scope’ buildings are at least 18 metres in height or have at least 7 storeys and at least 2 residential units.

As part of the new regime, those who manage these types of buildings will need to prepare a safety case to demonstrate that their building is safe from the risks of fire spread or structural collapse. A safety case report must then be prepared for submission to the new Building Safety Regulator (BSR) on request.

Published in the form of five guides, the ‘toolbox’ is designed to assist with preparing safety cases and users can pick and choose which documents are most relevant and helpful to them.

Access the ‘toolbox’

On the day before the 5th anniversary of the Grenfell Tower tragedy we held a meeting of the Industry Safety Steering Group - it was our 23rd meeting.

We took time to reflect on the continued importance of driving culture change within industry as being our legacy contribution to honour those who died 5 years ago and their loved ones who continue to mourn.

We know that progress is being made and the commitment of key players in the sector like Amanda Long (tirelessly driving forward with the Building a Safer Future Charter and the Code for Construction Product Information), David Mosey and Russell Poynter Brown (promoting the common sense and the business sense of  their collaborative procurement guidance) continues to impress us all.

But it also only serves to make all members of the ISSG more frustrated with those who continue to sit on the fence or worse still, bury their heads in the sand. The tools and the frameworks to help industry make the much needed changes for the future are all there and waiting to be taken up and it ought to be reasonable to assume that the passage of the Building Safety Bill to Royal Assent marks the end of the “wait and see” phase. However, the evidence we heard last week indicates not just a reluctance to do what’s clearly needed but a gap in logic and common sense that many of us struggle with.

We heard that of the major companies who have now, under pressure from Secretary of State, committed to funding remediation for past defects and poor work, only around half of them have signed up to the Building a Safer Future charter and only four are pursuing Charter Champion status. Add to that the number of  new high rise planning proposals which are being referred back by BSR at the very first gateway in the process which I referred to last month. Where is the logic in the minds of leaders who commit to putting right the past without also committing to change for the better for the future?

We also heard that the Code for Construction Product Information which sets out a more transparent and much needed  approach to providing information to the whole supply chain is held up because of difficulty in securing PI Insurance cover. How can levels of risk aversion like this stand in the way of us making progress that will self- evidently be part of creating that much needed better culture?

ISSG is not going to give up. We will continue to work with BSR to make change happen but there are plenty of others out there who need to do some important self-examination about their legacy contribution.