The government is complacent about construction sector capacity shortages that risk undermining its plans to remediate dangerous cladding in England, MPs have said.<\/p>\n
A new report from parliament\u2019s Public Accounts Committee (PAC) released today (21 March) said far too many people were trapped in unsafe homes, facing financial uncertainty and unable to sell their properties.<\/p>\n
A plan released by the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG) in December<\/a> aims to have all buildings over 18 metres remediated by 2029. The same completion date has also been set for all buildings taller than 11 metres.<\/p>\n But the committee said the plan was not ambitious enough and risked not being delivered because the government had still not identified exactly how many buildings require remediation.<\/p>\n Among the many issues flagged by the committee was a lack of capacity in the construction sector and within the Building Safety Regulator (BSR).<\/p>\n The report said: \u201cWith MHCLG now planning to accelerate remediation, there are risks that there will not be enough suitably qualified fire risk assessors to determine the scope of works, or trained cladders to undertake the work.<\/p>\n \u201cThis is likely to be exacerbated by a wider context of ambitious housebuilding targets and constrained construction sector capacity. Yet MHCLG appears complacent about the risks posed by this lack of capacity.\u201d<\/p>\n It added that delays to building control approvals at the \u201cunder-resourced\u201d BSR could continue to hold up work on the highest-risk buildings.<\/p>\n The department should also have found a way to secure a financial contribution towards the work from manufacturers of dangerous cladding, it said.<\/p>\n PAC chair Sir Geoffrey Clifton-Brown said: \u201cAs a chartered surveyor, I take a deep personal interest in building safety. I was utterly appalled by the evidence given to our inquiry, showing residents still mired in the national cladding crisis, with no immediate solutions at hand.<\/p>\n \u201cIt would have course been the committee\u2019s wish that this report carried better news for all affected. Unfortunately, we are united with campaigners in deeply regrettable scepticism that current remediation plans are capable of delivering on what\u2019s promised.\u201d<\/p>\n The committee also said it did not believe MHCLG was taking the potential impact of its remediation plans on wider housebuilding targets seriously enough.<\/p>\n It cited a 90 per cent drop in social housing starts in London over the past year as a potential impact of providers focusing on remediation over new-builds<\/a>, and separately raised concerns that the cost of the building safety levy on developers could further reduce the supply of affordable housing.<\/p>\n \u201cMHCLG has not published an impact assessment of these policies on the viability of housebuilding, claiming both that it expects the impact to be small and that it is likely to be affected by too many other factors,\u201d it said.<\/p>\n National Federation of Roofing Contractors (NFRC) chief executive James Talman described the committee’s concerns over skills and capacity shortages as “justified”.<\/p>\n He added: “NFRC and the cladding industry stand ready to accelerate remediation, but we need clear regulations, stable funding, and competency frameworks for more roles associated with high-rise buildings.\u201d<\/p>\n