Dominic Raab
The government will not let private sector developers and owners of residential buildings "off the hook" when it comes to the replacement of dangerous cladding.
- Number of unsafe high-rises 50% greater than thought
- MPs raise "urgent" safety concerns after cladding removal
- Row over £3m cladding replacement bill heads to tribunal
That was the warning from housing minister Dominic Raab, who was giving evidence to the Housing, Communities and Local Government Committee yesterday as it continues to conduct an inquiry into Building Regulations and fire safety following the publication in May of the Hackitt Report.
Raab’s comments came after government figures last week revealed that a total of 470 high-rise blocks have unsafe ACM cladding that needs to be replaced.
Many of those buildings newly identified were in the private sector (297 are now thought to need remedial work on the cladding, up from an estimate of 138 in May).
Taylor Wimpey, Barratt, L&G take responsibility
Citing the example of three developers who have taken responsibility for cladding replacement on residential buildings – Taylor Wimpey, Barratt and Legal & General – Raab said: “Leaseholders should not pay unreasonable and undue costs and the private sector should not be let off the hook for this. It is the private sector’s responsibility and we will rule nothing out if others don’t take the lead that the three that I have highlighted here have.”
Raab, who was being questioned about the government’s response to Dame Judith Hackitt’s independent review of Building Regulations and fire safety listed some of the immediate actions the government has taken since Dame Hackitt’s interim and final reports, including a consultation on the use of desktop studies, work to clarify the fire safety guidance in Approved Document B, and a consultation on a ban of combustible cladding.
He said the government aimed to strike a balance between immediate action and “durable and lasting change”.
He said: “There are some immediate actions that we are taking but if you are looking to effect lasting change, cultural change among the sector as well as among the regulators and make that paradigm shift from the box-tick comfort zone to the consistent and rigorous enforcement and compliance and that will take time.”
Asked if he agreed with Dame Judith Hackett’s approach, and whether or not she could have insisted both on greater regulation and more cultural change, Raab said: “I don’t need to come here and defend someone like Dame Judith. We had an independent review of this precisely so someone with the length and breadth of her experience and expertise could look at this and give her professional view.
Combustibles ban "important"
“It’s a balanced approach and I think her fundamental insight that prescription alone would be inadequate is right. At the same time, I think both on the substance and the merits of the argument, and also in terms of public confidence, it was important to proceed to the ban on combustible materials. So I think there is an argument for both and as a minister I will exercise my judgement and the secretary of state and other ministers will do the same.
“But I wouldn’t want to be perceived in anyway as eclipsing the fundamental insight that Dame Judith has offered us which is to focus on compliance and not get into the false comfort zone of a box-tick approach.”
Raab was also asked what steps the government would take following the revelation from British Board of Agrément chief executive Claire Curtis-Thomas that she was aware of as many as 30 buildings that did not now comply with fire safety regulations after the removal of aluminium composite material panels.
He responded that the Ministry for Housing, Communities and Local Government had published its own guidance on how to remove and replace cladding last year, while an expert panel has since met to review the advice and make sure it is correct.
He added that the government was following up on six cases where evidence had been provided. He added: “The first port of call should be the owners of the building. As and when we get the details that we have asked for, we will of course pursue that.”
