Last month’s restructure of building safety oversight was overdue – but at the very least it shows that Government has listened,and recognised that the situation the construction sector faced was untenable.
Gateway 2 of the Building Safety Act has been a pinch point for developers and their supply partners with some £2.bn worth of projects estimated to be in limbo, waiting for approval.
Poor communication, lack of digital infrastructure and under resourcing has meant that fewer than 60% of Gateway 2 applications have been processed within statutory timelines.
That is not a sustainable level of delivery and would have made a massive dent in the Government’s ambitions to deliver 1.5million new homes.
This makes the decision by the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG) to create a new, independent board to assume the functions of the Building Safety Regulator (BSR) from the Health and Safety Executive (HSE), critical.
It’s been tasked with accelerating the approval pipeline, standardising decision-making, and improving transparency and digital engagement with developers.
For our members it’s the absence of effective guidance and clear feedback that has been most problematic. It’s led to lengthy and unsustainable correspondence trails between developers, their supply chain and regulators, swallowing up time and delayed delivery.
The proposals to improve processing times, digitise workflows, establish clearer guidance and provide outreach and training to improve understanding of requirement is welcome.
There remain, however, concerns that the handover period, scheduled for the tail end of this year, could lead to further delays in the short term.
The task is mammoth. In the pursuit of a meaningful solution, the MHCLG needs to commit to proper resourcing and clear time frames, if additional delays to schemes is going to be avoided.
The other thing that continues to make me nervous is the sector’s ability to deliver once the BSR is up to speed.
There is a logjam and as it’s cleared, we’re likely to see a scramble for delivery. This represents a particular area of risk in the building products supply chain.
Many manufacturers are already overstretched having reduced headcount to try and control costs while they waited for schemes to progress. It may be difficult to turn the tap on to meet future demand without over-trading.
If that happens then there is a risk that efforts to increase accountable, transparency and standards in construction are undermined.
CAB will continue to represent the interests of the aluminium building products supply chain to government.
From our perspective the shake-up is welcome – as are the original recommendations and the underlying sentiment of the Building Safety Act.
Where it has gone wrong is in administration and process. The BSR has failed to recognise, or at the very least act on, its responsibilities in project delivery.
We will continue to watch and to see, if the restructure of the BSR delivers meaningful change.