Open consultation

Single construction regulator prospectus: consultation document

Published 17 December 2025

Presented to Parliament by Samantha Dixon MBE MP, Parliamentary Under Secretary of State for Building Safety, Fire and Democracy by Command of His Majesty. 

Ordered by the House of Commons to be printed on 17/12/2025. 

17/12/2025 

CP 1464

How to respond

Respond to the consultation questions using the online survey.

If you have any questions about completing the survey, email regulatory.reform@communities.gov.uk.

Foreword from the Minister for Building Safety, Fire and Democracy 

The Grenfell Tower fire was a national tragedy that led to the deaths of 72 innocent people. The subsequent Inquiry exposed a regulatory system that had broken down and failed its most basic purpose: namely, to keep people safe in their homes. The Inquiry’s findings showed decades of fragmentation, weak accountability and a culture that put profit before people.  

In February 2025, this Government accepted the findings of the Inquiry and is taking forward all its recommendations. This prospectus takes a decisive step towards implementing the first recommendation of the Inquiry: creating a single construction regulator; and seeks views on its future direction. 

The single construction regulator will be a part of a wider programme of regulatory and institutional reform which this Government has championed and already begun to deliver. This includes the forthcoming reforms to the construction products regime, to be set out in a white paper by spring 2026, and the ambitious changes we have brought forward to improve the performance of the Building Safety Regulator.  

Everyone in this country deserves a home that is safe and decent. We should all have confidence that the buildings where we live, work and spend time are built to the highest standards. Too many residents and building users have been let down and no longer have trust in the regulatory system to deliver these expectations.  

Our vision for a better regulatory system is set out in this prospectus. Building safety is non-negotiable and will be the regulator’s primary objective. The regulator will uphold standards to deliver safe buildings and make sure construction products are fit for purpose.  

This reform is also about bringing coherence to a fragmented regulatory system, crucial to our mission for economic growth. Alongside the building professions, we want to create a new framework to underpin the competence, skills and conduct of those working in the industry. We will begin this important work with a call for evidence in 2026.  We want to give businesses certainty and create a level playing field. We will create the right conditions for innovation while raising standards and restoring trust.  

This is also the chance for industry to step up, and this prospectus asks how we can achieve collective accountability across the whole system. Government and industry both have important roles to play in improving standards and pushing for positive cultural change which is badly needed. Those who don’t play by the rules must face real consequences. Those who prioritise safety and quality will thrive. Together, we will build a system that prioritises safety, restores trust and drives growth. 

A tragedy like that at Grenfell Tower must never happen again. These reforms are how we will deliver on that commitment, and this prospectus is just the start. I welcome everyone’s views on this consultation so we can shape the future direction of the regulator and the wider building system. 

Samantha Dixon MBE MP 

Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Building Safety, Fire and Democracy

Executive summary 

Following the terrible events at Grenfell Tower on 14 June 2017, which led to the loss of 72 innocent lives, the Grenfell Tower Inquiry was established to investigate the circumstances surrounding the tragedy. The Inquiry concluded the tragedy was a culmination of ‘decades of failure’ by central government and other bodies with positions of responsibility in the construction industry.^{[footnote 1]} Many of the issues identified by the Inquiry persist in the built environment today. 

The Inquiry’s Phase 2 report made specific recommendations for the government to reform the regulatory landscape, including establishing a single construction regulator. On 26 February 2025, the government accepted all the Inquiry’s findings and the problems that must be fixed, as highlighted by the recommendations. 

The Inquiry’s first recommendation was to create a single construction regulator to reduce fragmentation in how the construction sector is regulated and drive cultural change within the industry. The government is committed to delivering this recommendation. Well-functioning regulation is fundamental to protecting residents and building users from harm and to achieving our mission to grow our economy and support businesses to thrive. 

Government has taken urgent action since 2017 to reform the regulatory system. Building regulations in areas of greatest immediate risk to fire and building safety have been tightened and extensive work is underway to remediate unsafe cladding. These actions have been focussed on tackling the most immediate issues. There is more we must do to close remaining gaps, for example around the regulation of construction products. 

This prospectus sets out government’s plans for regulatory reform and the development of a single construction regulator. It provides a strategic case for reforming the regulatory system for the built environment and sets out the potential role for the new regulator within it. This prospectus also provides proposals for future areas of focus for a reformed regulatory system. 

Our vision for a future regulatory system 

The government intends to create a new regulator which will not only meet the Inquiry’s recommendation but will also create the right conditions for actors across the whole building ecosystem to play their role in achieving positive outcomes. This will give the market greater clarity and certainty, promote growth and avoid the need for costly interventions later down the line. The regulatory system needs to create incentives for all actors to behave responsibly and contribute to positive outcomes, through setting clear expectations of what is required. People and businesses who demonstrate they can be trusted should be able to benefit and those who fail to do the right thing and put people at risk should face consequences.  

We propose that a well-functioning building system should achieve the following outcomes: 

1. Buildings and built environments are safe, high-performing and deliver a healthy, accessible, secure, and sustainable environment for occupants. 
2. Companies and individuals are enabled to thrive when they operate in the interests of current and future building users. 
3. Products for building are fit for their purpose and users are provided with accurate product information. 
4. The building system is trusted; users have confidence the system will act to prioritise the safety and needs of occupants. 

These outcomes will be used to set measurable objectives, duties and functions for the regulator. We propose a hierarchy of objectives to reflect the outcomes, with the regulator’s primary objective being the safety of people and the standard of buildings and built environments, and secondary objectives relating to growth, products and industry and resident trust.

Integrating the regulatory system 

The Inquiry recommendation for a single construction regulator identified twelve functions relevant to the Inquiry’s remit which should be brought into the scope of this reform. The Inquiry’s recommended list of functions spans the regulation of buildings, products and professionals. The government accepted ten of those twelve recommended functions and is committed to wider reform which brings coherence and more effective regulation across these three areas of the system.  

Regulation of buildings 

The regulation of buildings is an essential part of the regulatory system to protect residents and meet our proposed outcomes. Some progress has been made since the Grenfell Tower tragedy to strengthen fire and structural safety in new and existing buildings. The government remains committed to this work and intends to commission an independent review of the building safety regulatory regime by April 2027. 

The Building Safety Regulator (BSR) currently performs some of the functions named in the Inquiry’s recommendations for the new regulator. The new regulator will take over these responsibilities as part of a carefully phased transition. The future regulator will also maintain the BSR’s current regulatory responsibilities, including in relation to new and existing buildings, residential and non-residential buildings, and higher- and non-higher-risk buildings. Proposals for the future regulator will take account of any subsequent recommendations, including the work of the Building Control Independent Panel. 

In June 2025, the government announced its intention to move the BSR out of the Health and Safety Executive into a new, dedicated body. Creating a body dedicated to building safety creates the foundation for an integrated regulator and the cultural and systemic change recommended by the Inquiry. The Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG) has also appointed new leadership and taken swift action to tackle delays in approval Gateways for higher-risk buildings. 

Regulation of construction products 

The Inquiry set out clear evidence on the failings of the regulatory regime for construction products and the need for substantive reform. In 2021, the government established the National Regulator for Construction Products (NRCP), to prioritise safety and drive effective enforcement.  

The Inquiry recommended that some functions relating to the regulation of construction products be carried out by the single construction regulator. MHCLG is working with the NRCP to establish how the regulation of construction products will be delivered through the new regulator. In February 2025, the government published the Construction Products Reform Green Paper, which recognised the scale of system-wide challenges and set out the need for further reform to address them. The government is committed to bringing forward a Construction Products Reform White Paper by spring 2026, setting out plans for this reform. Any new regulatory functions from this reform will ultimately sit within the regulator. 

Regulation of building professions 

The Inquiry made detailed recommendations regarding regulation of certain high-risk professions to provide greater confidence in the competence, accountability and oversight of those performing safety-critical roles. The government remains committed to implementing these changes and will go further to deliver a comprehensive programme of reform.  

We will work with key stakeholders, organisations and experts to introduce a new system of regulatory oversight and enforcement, which aligns with the proposals in this document to improve coherence and reduce fragmentation in how the sector is regulated. We are exploring options for the design, form and scope of this new framework as part of a new overarching strategy for building professions. In April 2025, the Fire Engineers Advisory Panel was established to provide advice to government on the fire engineering profession. The government will publish the panel’s final statement and proposed next steps. The government will publish a call for evidence in spring 2026 to gather detailed insights on targeted proposals for reform. Following this, an overarching strategy for the built environment professions will be published in spring 2027. 

Digital, data and efficient regulatory delivery 

Digitising services, data and insights will be crucial enablers of the three areas outlined in the prospectus. The government’s ambition for the new regulator is a digital-first approach to improve how regulation is delivered across buildings, products, and professionals. We will focus on developing a more connected and coherent digital environment to support information sharing and enable more transparent oversight. 

Residents 

We want to make protection of residents a priority for reform. The best way to deliver for residents is for the system to work first time, allowing trust to be rebuilt and residents to recognise a system that works for them. The regulator must protect residents by making sure the buildings they live in and use are safe. Options should also be available to support, inform and help residents seek redress when they need it. 

Other public and private bodies in the wider building ecosystem must support the regulator to keep residents safe. The regulatory system should support residents to access the information they need to be informed consumers. The system should also feedback vital information on residents’ experiences to the regulator to inform its view of the system. When these interventions work, residents will be and can feel safe in their homes and can trust the regulatory system to act in their interests. 

Roles and responsibilities in an integrated regulatory system 

There must be clear roles and responsibilities for everyone working in the building ecosystem.  We propose defined principles for how government, the regulator and industry operate in the future regulatory system. 

The government is the steward of the building ecosystem and will oversee the integrated regulatory system. MHCLG will shape the purpose and activity of the new regulator and act as its sponsor. The regulator, as a Non-Departmental Public Body, will have operational autonomy and carry out its own legal and regulatory functions, but will be strategically aligned to MHCLG and the direction and priorities set by MHCLG ministers. It will have specific roles in driving accountability across industry, enforcing against those who fail to do the right thing and taking expert, proportionate approaches to managing risks and upholding safety and standards across the building system.  

Whilst it is the responsibility of government and the regulator to improve coherence and reduce fragmentation, it is the responsibility of all those in industry to raise standards from within the sector, to prevent dishonest actors, like those highlighted by the Inquiry, from avoiding accountability for their actions. Industry must take proactive action to transform how safety and quality are embedded throughout the lifecycle of buildings. Industry will need to work together to rebuild trust and ensure the sector takes appropriate accountability and responsibility for safety, standards and the protection of residents. 

Next steps 

Responses to the consultation questions in this prospectus will be used to inform creation of the new regulator and wider regulatory reform.

Introduction 

Addressing systemic failures 

The Grenfell Tower Inquiry’s Phase 2 Report examined the causes of the tragedy on 14 June 2017 that took 72 lives. Its findings exposed a regulatory system in which trust and confidence had fundamentally broken down. The Inquiry’s report concluded that the tragedy was the culmination of ‘decades of failure’ by central government and other bodies in positions of responsibility in the construction industry. The Inquiry exposed a fragmented regulatory system, with multiple gaps in standards and assurance across building regulations, products and professions. It found systematic dishonesty in those who manufactured and sold construction products used on Grenfell Tower, and serious failures in those responsible for refurbishing and maintaining the building. It identified conflicts of interest within regulatory bodies, making them vulnerable to manipulation, and a failure from central government to exempt matters of life safety from deregulation, which exacerbated this dysfunction and led to matters of life safety being ignored. ^{[footnote 2] [footnote 3]}  

The Inquiry’s Phase 2 report made 58 recommendations directed at the government and other bodies and institutions. The Inquiry’s Phase 2 report made specific recommendations for the government to reform the regulatory landscape, including establishing a single construction regulator. The government accepted all the Inquiry’s findings and the problems that must be fixed, as highlighted by the recommendations. We remain committed to taking forward the work required to address the Inquiry’s recommendations and going even further to deliver long-term reform to our building system.  

As we set out in our response to the Inquiry’s report, the failings that led to the tragedy were not unique to Grenfell Tower. ^{[footnote 4]} Over eight years later, many issues persist in the built environment which mean people across the country are denied the quality of housing and related services they deserve. Problems such as damp, mould and inadequate insulation are contributing to health conditions, heat-related deaths linked to housing quality are projected to increase, whilst dangerous cladding is creating unacceptable safety risks and causing intolerable stress and anxiety for affected residents. Socio-economic factors often determine the extent of the impact which issues in the system have on residents. Disabled residents, those with long-term ill health and the most vulnerable face a greater strain on their lives because of poor-quality housing. We must take decisive action to put this right. Reforming our regulatory landscape must be at the top of our agenda.  

Our commitment to change 

Economic growth is this government’s number one mission. Through this mission, we will deliver higher living standards in every part of the United Kingdom by the end of this Parliament. A key component of achieving this growth is improving the quality of our housing. We are committed to building 1.5 million secure and affordable homes over this Parliament and addressing unsafe cladding on residential buildings to ensure everyone has access to a safe and decent home. 

A well-functioning regulatory system is fundamental to achieving our mission to grow our economy, support businesses to thrive, improve living standards and ensure everyone has access to a safe, high-quality home. The focus of this reform is improving the effectiveness, consistency and efficiency of the regulatory system, which will drive growth through providing clarity and certainty for industry and investors, and creating a fairer system that benefits those who prioritise safety and quality.  

Safely planned, designed and constructed buildings not only provide better quality homes for us all, but facilitate timely completion of projects, reduce rework and promote better long-term outcomes. High-quality buildings also provide a sustainable and future-proofed building stock that residents and building users can benefit from for generations to come. 

We know the costs and impact of regulatory failings and poor-quality building projects are huge. The Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG) estimates that there are, c.5,900 - 9,000 residential buildings above 11 metres with life safety fire risks due to unsafe external wall systems. The estimated costs of fixing external wall system defects are c.£12.6 billion - £22.4 billion (central estimate £16.6 billion). These costs will fall to the taxpayer, social housing providers and industry. There are also deeply personal, human costs to residents whose lives have been upended by these risks, for example through rising insurance premiums, or an inability to move on with their lives as a result of mortgage availability. 

Good regulation also promotes efficient use of capital and labour and improves competence and skills, improving productivity and supporting rewarding careers for those looking to develop the right expertise.  

Reforming the regulatory system is an opportunity for government and industry to work together to transform our regulatory landscape, provide residents with the quality homes they need and deserve, raise the bar on living standards across the country and watch our economy reap the benefits.  

Changes made since 2017 

Government has taken urgent action since 2017 to reform the regulatory system, with many changes made in direct response to the tragedy at Grenfell Tower. Building regulations in the areas of greatest immediate risk to fire and building safety have been tightened and building safety regulation is protected from deregulatory measures. Extensive work is underway to remediate unsafe cladding, and improvements have been made to the regulation of construction products. Measures have been put in place to control the design and construction of higher-risk buildings and monitor existing ones. The Building Safety Act 2022 also established the full powers of the National Regulator for Construction Products (NRCP) and gave powers to create the Building Safety Regulator (BSR), which was established within the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) in 2023. 

Dame Judith Hackitt’s Independent Review of Building Regulations and Fire Safety identified the BSR as the body which would regulate the safe design, construction and occupation of higher-risk buildings in England, provide oversight for safety and standards of all buildings and promote competence across the industry. ^{[footnote 5]}  The creation of the BSR was a significant moment for the housing and construction sector, designed to put the protection of residents first and prevent any future tragedies. Since its establishment it has taken enforcement action to improve the safety and performance of buildings and ensured action is taken immediately to deal with the most serious risks. In October 2023 it became the Building Control Authority for all higher-risk buildings. The BSR’s introduction has led to demonstrable improvements in the safety of the buildings it is responsible for. Since the NRCP’s establishment, it has increased market surveillance of the construction products sector, including business inspections and product testing. Its interventions have resulted in non-compliant products being removed from the UK market, and businesses changing their behaviours and process to comply with the law. These actions were taken with the aim of improving outcomes for residents and building users, as well as increasing their confidence that the materials, methods and actors involved in building their homes and buildings can be trusted.  

These reforms made since 2017 are significant steps towards more effective regulation and safer buildings. These steps have focused on tackling the most immediate issues, and key gaps which remain, for example on construction products. We are committed to going even further to deliver long-term, systemic reforms that will solve the deep fragmentation of our building system and benefit generations to come.

Our wider commitments to institutional reform 

In March 2025, the Prime Minister made clear that reform of the state is necessary to drive efficiency and reduce bureaucracy. The Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster wrote to government departments, asking them to justify every arm’s length body, otherwise they will be closed, merged or have their powers brought back into the relevant department. As the Inquiry identified, institutional reform is an important part of reforming the regulatory system for the built environment to make it more coherent and effective at achieving better outcomes for both residents and industry.

A ‘Single Construction Regulator’

The Grenfell Tower Inquiry’s first recommendation in its Phase 2 report was for the government to create a single regulator that draws together functions relating to the construction industry. The Inquiry report sets out that the recommendation intends to reduce fragmentation in how the sector is regulated and drive culture change in the industry.^{[footnote 6]} The Inquiry’s recommended functions for the new regulator span the regulation of buildings, professions, and products, including some of the current work of the BSR, NRCP and new functions not currently covered by any regulator. The full wording of the recommendation is set out in Annex A. 

Government is committed to delivering this recommendation. Reform to reduce fragmentation and improve coherence is badly needed to promote proper accountability for wrongdoing and ensure high standards for safety and quality are met. This is vital to reduce the burden for residents, especially vulnerable residents who are disproportionately impacted by the system’s current fragmentation. A clearer, simpler regulatory system will support those across industry, regulators and government committed to achieving positive outcomes for residents to work together more effectively, preventing the harm caused by bad faith actors who exploit loopholes or act and put profit ahead of public interest. 

Implementation of this recommendation started immediately following our response to the Inquiry’s final report in February 2025, including supporting the current regulatory regime as the foundation to moving towards greater consolidation, and publication of proposals for system-wide reform in our Construction Products Reform Green Paper. Guided by our commitment that reform must result in meaningful change, we have prioritised evidence and expert scrutiny in developing proposals for reform. In spring 2025 we established an expert Advisory Board with industry, regulators, resident and consumer advocates, and academics. The Board’s advice has shaped government’s proposals for reform. The purpose and membership of the Board are set out in Annex B. 

The new regulator will consolidate regulatory functions currently held by multiple regulatory bodies, improving productivity and user experience by streamlining operational efficiencies alongside building a more holistic regulatory environment informed by insight and evidence. An integrated regulatory system will also support greater flexibility and resilience to adapt and respond to developments in innovation and digitisation, ongoing industry transformation and emerging risks. Our focus is on a resilient regulatory system which provides long-term certainty for the market, a more predictable environment for investment and innovation, and better outcomes for residents and other building and construction product users. 

Alongside designing the future regulatory system, we are making practical changes to pave the way for establishment of the new regulator. In June 2025, MHCLG announced significant changes to the BSR that mark a new phase for the BSR, including operational improvements to address delays in the Gateway approval process, strengthened leadership and transferring the BSR from the HSE to a new standalone body.^{[footnote 7]} These changes will deliver a dedicated focus for building safety and strengthen the BSR’s accountability to ministers and Parliament. A Statutory Instrument to enable the transfer was laid before Parliament in November 2025. 

Transferring the BSR from the HSE to a new standalone body is an important milestone towards establishing a new regulator, as the new body will act as the home for the new integrated regulator. Alongside these milestones, we must ensure we have a clear vision for a future regulatory system, the role of a new regulator within it and a plan to get there. This prospectus is an important step towards our goal.

Our prospectus for an integrated regulatory system 

This prospectus sets out government’s plans for regulatory reform and development of an integrated regulator. It provides a strategic case for reforming the regulatory system for the built environment and proposes the role for an integrated regulator within it. It also proposes future areas of focus for a reformed regulatory system.  

The proposals in this prospectus are rooted in the Grenfell Tower Inquiry’s recommendation for a single construction regulator. The government wholly accepts the findings of the Inquiry and remains committed to delivering this recommendation. We have put forward an approach we believe will be most effective at addressing the Inquiry’s diagnosis of fragmentation and unnecessary complexity in the regulatory system. As the Inquiry’s scope was focused on the circumstances leading to the tragedy in 2017, our reforms will need to go further to bring coherence across the whole regulatory system, including changes made since 2017 and areas of regulation not mentioned by the Inquiry ^{[footnote 8]}. Any divergence from the detail of the Inquiry’s recommendation will be clearly explained.  

This prospectus seeks views on the vision and outcomes of the future regulatory system for the built environment and the remit and functions of a future regulator. Views we receive will inform the development of the regulator, particularly further development of our policy and the necessary legislation to implement this reform. 

The consultation questions we are seeking views on are set out in chapters 1, 2 and 3. We welcome your responses via the Citizen Space portal.

Respond to the consultation questions using the online survey.

Chapter 1: Our vision for a future regulatory system

The scope of this reform is very broad. The whole ‘building ecosystem’ spans residential, commercial and civic buildings at every stage of their lifecycle; construction products, used in buildings, infrastructure and wider built environment; and a huge number of professionals, tradespeople and organisations who design, build, fund and maintain our buildings. This ecosystem impacts every single person who lives in or uses buildings. Buildings which are safe, decent, secure and affordable can vastly improve our life chances. Physical and mental health, education and financial security are all impacted by building performance. The construction industry provides over 2 million jobs and contributes billions to our economy.^{[footnote 9]}

Regulating the built environment as a system  

Regulation plays an important role in protecting people from harm and achieving positive outcomes, e.g. through ensuring standards for quality and safety are properly enforced. But safe, high-performing buildings are not created by regulators alone. They depend on a big network of actors – such as industry professionals, national and local government, public and regulatory bodies, and residents – each playing their part to share information, identify and mitigate against risks and respond quickly when issues arise to put things right. Evidence on effective regulation, informed by behavioural science, shows that it needs to work as a coherent ‘regulatory system’. 

In implementing the Inquiry’s recommendation, government intends to recognise that to achieve real benefits for residents, we must not only introduce a new regulator but also create the right conditions for everyone to play their role. The regulatory system needs to create incentives for all actors to behave responsibly and contribute to positive outcomes through setting clear expectations of what is required, enabling people and businesses who can be trusted to benefit, and enforcing consequences for those who consistently or deliberately fail to do the right thing and put people at risk.  

Government’s vision is to integrate different areas of the built environment – buildings, products and professionals – so that they work as a single, effective regulatory system. In practice, this should mean better outcomes for both residents and the sector.^{[footnote 10]}

Outcomes for the future system 

We propose using this reform to introduce system-wide outcomes into the regulatory framework for the building system. These outcomes describe the real-world results of a well-functioning building system. As we integrate parts of this complex and expansive system, setting clear outcomes will help to build coherence and clarify accountability for all actors with a stake in the built environment. Our proposed outcomes have been developed with the support and challenge of our expert Advisory Board. An explanation is included alongside each one. 

We propose that a well-functioning building system should achieve the following outcomes:  

1. Buildings and built environments are safe and high-performing and deliver a healthy, accessible, secure and sustainable environment for occupants.  

Safe includes safety from both rare catastrophic events and widespread chronic harms. These include, but are not limited to, fire, structural failure, thermal underperformance leading to summer overheating and excess winter mortality, poor indoor air quality and design that compromises accessibility or health. 

High-performing means achieving high standards across the many social, economic, cultural and environmental impacts which buildings and built environments have – both for their immediate occupants, users, owners, and clients, and for the general public and future generations. This outcome includes the whole lifespan of buildings and built environments, including end of life, disposal and reuse.    

2. Companies and individuals are enabled to thrive when they operate in the interests of current and future building users.  

This outcome is intended to maximise the sector’s contribution to sustainable economic growth, through a fairer system that benefits those who prioritise safety and quality and provides clarity and certainty for industry and investors. Our intention is that the many firms and individuals that are skilled, competent and actively demonstrate commitment to a high-quality built environment benefit, while those that decide wilfully not to, or do not have the necessary competence, should not benefit and face proportionate sanctions. This outcome includes those directly involved in construction, product manufacturing and use, and building management in related sectors such as insurance and funding.  

3. Construction products are fit for their purpose and users are provided with accurate product information. 

This outcome recognises that materials and components must perform throughout their intended life, which may be longer or shorter than the building or structure they are part of. They should be designed both for their initial purpose and for removal, reuse, recycling or safe disposal. This full lifecycle approach includes a duty to provide future generations with the information on design, material composition, testing protocols and production processes necessary for removal, reuse, recycling or safe disposal. 

4. The building system is trusted; users have confidence the system will act to prioritise the safety and needs of occupants.  

This outcome includes trust by residents, building owners, clients, users and the general public. It also means that bad or incompetent actors know that wrongdoing will be identified and they will face consequences. We recognise that a trusted system includes being accessible, visible and navigable by all, and one that must identify and respond to issues that come to light swiftly and effectively.

How these outcomes will be used in a future system 

The new regulator will play an important role in steering the system towards these outcomes, but these outcomes cannot be achieved or measured without input from everyone in their respective roles. The aim of reform is to introduce a shared point of focus and start bringing the system together so everyone can play their role. These outcomes will support regulatory bodies, government, industry professionals, residents, other building users, and other actors to address: 

• how each outcome will be achieved;  
• what metrics will demonstrate whether each outcome (or relevant milestone) is being achieved, and if the system is performing well;  
• the system for delivering regulation and the outcomes: who needs to perform what actions and functions, what gaps need to be filled; 
• what data is needed to monitor performance and outcomes, and to identify problems, who needs to produce such data and who needs to hold it; 
• how the regulator can effectively leverage digital tools, standards and interoperability to promote consistent regulatory compliance and workflow automation across the sector, while balancing automation with human oversight, considering current industry capabilities and associated opportunities and risks; and 
• whether everyone agrees to perform their actions or functions so that the entire system works, whether everyone is trusted, and how all actors show that they can be trusted.

Setting objectives for an integrated regulator 

The outcomes will be used to set measurable objectives, duties and functions for the regulator. Government’s intention is to equip a new, integrated regulator to recognise the full range of outcomes for the built environment, alongside the power to prioritise based on its assessment of risk. The future regulator will build upon the current objectives and duties of the Building Safety Regulator (BSR) and National Regulator for Construction Products (NRCP) – including the plans in place to expand the regulator’s role in regulating construction products. 

Further development of the regulator’s statutory objectives and duties will take place ahead of the introduction of legislation. We propose giving the regulator a hierarchy of objectives, recognising that safety must always be its primary focus. Illustrative objectives are as follows: 

Primary objective: The regulator must exercise its functions in the manner best calculated to securing the safety of people in buildings and improving the standard (and/or performance) of buildings and built environments. 

Secondary objectives: We intend to recognise that in exercising its functions, the regulator should aim to advance the full range of outcomes named above. Its secondary objectives, principles and duties may therefore include securing the following outcomes, where this does not undermine the primary objective:  

• Sustainable economic growth is maximised.  

• Companies and individuals are enabled to thrive when they operate in the interests of current and future building users. 

• Construction products are fit for their purpose and users are provided with accurate information. 

• The building system is trusted; users have confidence the system will act to prioritise the safety and needs of residents and other building users. 

Further detail on the regulator’s relationship with the department is set out in Chapter 3. The Secretary of State for MHCLG may periodically publish a statement setting out strategic priorities and objectives for the regulator in carrying out its functions.

Consultation questions

• Where do each of the proposed outcomes for the system sit on a scale from very useful to not useful at all?  

• What role would you and/or your organisation play in achieving these outcomes?  

• What will be the most important factors to achieving the proposed outcomes?  

• What are the most important barriers that could prevent the proposed outcomes from being met?    

• What data would be needed to demonstrate whether the outcomes are being achieved?

Chapter 2: Integrating the regulatory system

Chapter 1 sets out the real-world impacts of a well-functioning ‘building ecosystem’. This chapter turns to the most important areas of regulation in scope of this reform and our priorities for bringing them together into a single integrated system, capable of supporting the positive outcomes set out in Chapter 1. 

Evidence on effective regulatory systems suggests that they have a consistent set of functions and must be able to:  

• establish clear outcomes and rules for the system; 

• establish a system and culture which can achieve the outcomes and build trust – e.g. through setting regulations and standards, licensing, accreditation and professional standards; 

• identify problems and their root causes using intelligence from stakeholders and users of the system; 

• take action to stop and prevent harm and reduce risk – e.g. through enforcement of regulations, standards, licensing and accreditation, amending regulations and standards, training or upskilling; 

• repair damage – e.g. through remediation, retrofit, maintenance, redress to people affected or restrictions to product use; and 

• monitor to decide if further change is needed.  

These functions require data to flow continuously around the system and between actors.^{[footnote 11]} 

Not all these functions will be done by one regulator; they are shared between a network of different public, private and regulatory bodies. This reform is an opportunity to look at each area of the ecosystem to make sure that these functions are working effectively, protecting residents and building users and supporting industry.

Areas of the system covered in this chapter 

The Grenfell Tower Inquiry’s recommendation for a single construction regulator identified twelve functions relevant to the Inquiry’s remit which should be brought into the scope of this reform. The Inquiry’s recommended list of functions spans the regulation of three key areas: buildings, products and professionals. The government is committed to reform which brings coherence across these three areas of the system to meet the Inquiry’s recommendation. The government is developing these areas of regulation in parallel to reforming the institutional landscape needed to support them. 

A regulator with oversight across the whole system will be better equipped to spot where there are gaps and inconsistencies in the regulation of the built environment, where risks or issues are emerging and where a multi-faceted response is needed. Digitising services, data and insights will be crucial enablers of the three areas outlined above. 

Finally, we want to make protection of residents a priority for reform. The Grenfell Tower tragedy is the starkest example that the processes and professionals tasked with ensuring safety systemically failed, and trust in our building system had fundamentally eroded, particularly from vulnerable residents who are underrepresented in the system. This lack of trust manifests in many ways beyond fire safety, where housing quality is often a determinant of health, impacting all residents but especially disabled residents and those with ill health.  Restoring trust will require a sustained, multi-pronged effort. We believe the regulator has an important role to play in making the system work for residents.  

This chapter explains how the government will honour both the Inquiry’s recommendation and intends to go further for each of these areas. This chapter also contains consultation questions. Responses to them will be used to inform plans for regulatory reform and a new regulator.  

Note on scope of this reform 

This reform builds on the existing regulatory framework, including that set by the Building Safety Act 2022. The future regulator will maintain the Building Safety Regulator’s (BSR) current regulatory responsibilities, including in relation to both new and existing buildings, residential and non-residential buildings and higher- and non-higher-risk buildings. These were not named by the Inquiry recommendation, given its focus on the regulatory system in and before 2017. 

The new integrated system will recognise that construction products are used in a range of structures beyond buildings, such as transport and energy infrastructure, as well as in infrastructure such as schools, hospitals and prisons. The regulator will enforce regulations for all construction products, regardless of end use. Current institutional arrangements for the design or delivery of these buildings and structures will remain in place.  

Where this reform applies to wider social infrastructure, we will have due regard to specific sectoral needs to ensure processes are designed to be proportionate and adaptable for complex environments such as hospitals, so that the unique risks and demands of the public estate and its diverse users (whether patients, staff, pupils, or visitors) are explicitly considered in design. In doing so, we will build upon learning from previous reform to ensure sectors have clarity on transitional arrangements and structures and roles across the future regulatory ecosystem. We will ensure that public sector-specific technical standards, professional roles, and potential impacts on existing public sector procurement frameworks are properly considered and work to ensure reform does not unduly disrupt or delay the delivery of vital public sector infrastructure projects and objectives. 

Local authorities and fire and rescue authorities will need to continue to work closely with the BSR and the future regulator when established, including to enforce the Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005 and Housing Act 2004. We will build on existing responsibilities and relationships between regulators and future institutions, such as the College of Fire and Rescue, to make sure that their respective responsibilities are understood and that we enable them to work together effectively by creating a coherent regulatory environment. We will explore potential opportunities to better align fire safety regulation and the work of the new regulator. For example, we will examine what role it can play in the production of guidance to support those responsible for fire safety in their premises. We will work closely with relevant partners as we consider future operation of the regulator. 

This reform reflects the territorial extent and application of current regulation. The government’s ambition is for an effective, four nations approach to regulatory reform. We will continue to work together with the Devolved Administrations to make sure that reform is aligned across the four nations.  

Reforms to the building regulatory system proposed in this prospectus will apply on an England-only basis. The Building Regulations regime in Wales, with minor exceptions such as excepted energy buildings, is a devolved matter set out in The Welsh Ministers (Transfer of Functions) (No. 2) Order 2009. This prospectus does not propose changes to the devolution status of reserved matters. Construction products is a reserved matter so reforms will apply UK-wide. The current system of professional regulation is complex and fragmented. Only two professions are currently regulated in statute, of which architecture is reserved UK-wide and building control is devolved, with changes applying to England (and some to Wales, which is devolved but shares a legal framework and where Registered Building Inspectors are also regulated by the BSR). Many regulatory bodies operating under a Royal Charter also operate globally.

2.1 Regulation of buildings 

The regulation of buildings is an essential part of the regulatory system to protect residents and meet the outcomes in Chapter 1. Building regulations set standards for many aspects of construction, including structural integrity, fire safety, energy efficiency, and accessibility. Regulations ensure buildings are safe, fit for purpose and comply with legal and ethical standards throughout their lifespan, reducing long-term costs and maximising capital and labour productivity.  

Recent reforms to the building safety regime 

The government remains committed to the significant progress made since the Grenfell Tower tragedy to strengthen fire and structural safety in new and existing buildings. These reforms include: 

• Combustible Materials Ban: Since 2018, combustible materials have been banned from external walls of new residential buildings, hospitals, and student accommodation (in England) over 18 metres. In December 2022, the ban was extended to include hotels, hostels and boarding houses of the same height. 

• Sprinklers: In 2019, the threshold for sprinklers in new blocks of flats was lowered from over 30 metres to over 11 metres. From March 2025, legislation requires all new care homes to fit sprinklers, regardless of height. 

• Second Staircases: From September 2026, statutory guidance makes provision for new residential buildings over 18 metres to have a second staircase to support safe evacuation. 

• Modernised Standards: Approved Document B (fire safety) has been updated to reflect a phased transition from British Standards (BS 476) to European fire safety standards (BS EN 13501), improving consistency and clarity. Approved Document B has also been placed under continuous review. 

• The Building Safety Act 2022: created the Building Safety Regulator (BSR), the new building control process for the design and construction of higher-risk buildings and more prescriptive requirements to support compliance and effective enforcement of responsible persons’ duties in all buildings. 

• Residential Personal Emergency Evacuation Plans (RPEEPs): The Fire Safety (Residential Evacuation Plans) (England) Regulations 2025 mandate RPEEPs in all high-rise residential buildings and certain medium-rise buildings from April 2026, along with a requirement for building-level evacuation plans. 

• Part 2A Building Regulations 2010: Since 2023, building regulations have included requirements for all design and building work in England to be planned, managed and monitored and for everyone carrying out that work to have the right competence. Amendments introduced the Principal Designer and Principal Contractor roles to give clear lines of responsibility for compliance and placed duties on clients to manage and resource projects properly.  

Independent Review of the building safety regime 

In line with Section 162 of the Building Safety Act 2022, the government intends to commission an independent review of the building safety regulatory regime. The review will assess the effectiveness of the building safety regime, the regulation of construction products and other elements of the regime and will be conducted in accordance with the independence criteria set out in the Act. The Act requires the Secretary of State of Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG) to appoint an independent person to carry out this review no later than April 2027, with findings to be published thereafter. We will commission this review ahead of the statutory deadline, working with the BSR and National Regulator for Construction Products (NRCP) to ensure its insights inform the operations of the future regulator. Further details, including the timings of the review and Terms of Reference, will be confirmed in due course.

The Building Safety Regulator (BSR) 

Many functions necessary for the regulation of buildings are carried out by the BSR. The BSR was created to lead a culture shift across the sector, placing safety at the centre of decision-making and restoring confidence in the safety and standard of buildings. The introduction of the BSR has led to demonstrable improvements in the safety of the buildings it is responsible for. 

The BSR’s duties include: overseeing the safety and performance of all buildings in England; facilitating building safety for higher-risk buildings (residential buildings, hospitals and care homes, buildings of 7 storeys or over 18 metres) through acting as the building control authority for higher-risk buildings (HRBs); and regulating those responsible for the management of building safety risks in occupied HRBs ^{[footnote 12]}. The BSR also has a duty to facilitate improved competence of those working in the built environment and professionals delivering building control functions. It oversees and monitors performance of all Building Control Bodies in England. 

Several of the BSR’s current functions were named in the Grenfell Tower Inquiry’s recommendation for the new regulator. The new regulator will take over these responsibilities as part of a carefully phased transition, as well as the BSR’s broader regulatory responsibilities, as noted in Chapter 1. The specific functions named by the Inquiry were: 

• Regulation and oversight of building control. This is an existing function of the BSR. 

• Monitoring the operation of the Building Regulations and the statutory guidance. This sits within the BSR’s duty to ‘keep under review the safety and standards of buildings.’  

• Carrying out research on matters affecting fire safety. This sits within the BSR’s existing duty to ‘keep under review the safety and standards of all buildings’. 

• Collecting information on fire safety. The BSR represents UK on the Inter-jurisdictional Regulatory Collaboration Committee and engages internationally in line with duty to keep under review the safety and standards of buildings. 

• Exchanging information with fire and rescue services. The BSR works with other regulators, including fire and rescue services and local authorities, through the Building Advisory Committee and its sub-groups, which it is required to establish and maintain. 

• Development of suitable methods for testing the reaction to fire of materials and products intended for use in construction. Under the Building Safety Act, the BSR can engage with other stakeholders such as the UK national standards regime vested in the British Standards Institution (BSI), Standards sub-committees and Office for Product Safety and Standards (OPSS); commission its own research; and present evidence and new data to bodies responsible for developing British Standards and product testing for use by the construction industry. The regulator can then ensure that appropriate standards are reflected in Approved Documents and recommended to the Secretary of State for MHCLG when guidance is published or updated.  

The government is committed to ensuring the future regulator has the mechanisms to assure the quality of testing methodology, so testing is robust and only those materials that meet rigorous criteria can be used in construction. The Construction Products Reform Green Paper, published in February 2025, sought views on the future relationship between the BSI, government and the regulator to ensure future priorities, including testing and standards, are aligned.  

Recent reforms to the Building Safety Regulator (BSR) 

In June 2025, MHCLG announced significant changes to the BSR that mark a new phase of its operations. 

The BSR has been clear about the challenges of implementing a significant shift in the way building safety is regulated in HRBs. MHCLG and leadership in BSR accept that the delays experienced by many applicants are unacceptable and recognise the impact of Gateway delays on the pipeline of high-rise construction projects. This government has taken swift action to address the current challenges, which is having a positive impact on the system. 

A new interim leadership team, with invaluable experience of institutional reform, is now in place, including Andy Roe as Chair and Charlie Pugsley as Chief Executive. A shadow board has begun meeting monthly to oversee and drive operational improvements, with monthly publication of operational data to improve transparency.  

In June 2025, the government announced its intention to move the BSR out of the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) into a new, dedicated body. Creating a body dedicated to building safety creates the foundation for an integrated regulator and the cultural and systemic change recommended by the Inquiry. The new body will facilitate dedicated leadership and governance arrangements to ensure a sharper focus on oversight of higher-risk buildings, clearer lines of accountability to government ministers and Parliament and operational flexibility that comes from independence.  

The new body will report directly to MHCLG, aligning it more closely with the department responsible for building safety, oversight of fire and rescue services and the government’s mission to deliver 1.5 million new homes. A Statutory Instrument to enable the transfer was laid before Parliament in November 2025. The subsequent transfer of staff and functions will be carefully managed to avoid disruption to ongoing operations and to maintain continuity of operations, minimising impact for duty holders and building users.

Transition to an integrated regulator 

Transferring the BSR from the HSE to a new standalone body is an important milestone towards establishing a new, integrated regulator, as the new body will act as a foundation for the new regulator. The future regulator will take on the regulatory responsibilities of the BSR as part of a carefully phased transition. We will use the period before the new regulator is fully operational to test and refine the future regulator’s core services, to ensure it is ready to deliver essential functions from the first day of operation. 

Note on the regulation and oversight of building control 

The Grenfell Tower Inquiry highlighted concerns with the overall system of building control leading up to 2017. This included specific issues around commercial interests and potential conflicts with building inspectors’ public interest duties, as well as the professionalism and consistency of local authority building control. The Inquiry recommended that the government appoint an independent panel to consider the dual questions of (i) whether it is in the public interest for building control functions to be performed by those with a commercial interest in the process, and (ii) whether all building control functions should be performed by a national authority. 

The Building Control Independent Panel (BCIP) was established in April 2025, chaired by Dame Judith Hackitt. The panel is made up of an additional four members, supported by a secretariat: the Rt Hon Nick Raynsford, Dr David Snowball, Elaine Bailey and Ken Rivers. In line with the published Terms of Reference, the BCIP has met regularly since June 2025 and has^{[footnote 13]}: 

• published a problem statement in July 2025, setting out an initial assessment of the problems raised by the Grenfell Tower Inquiry Report and proposed next steps^{[footnote 14]}; 

• launched a public call for evidence over the summer, inviting stakeholders to share views^{[footnote 15]}; and 

• convened a series of stakeholder engagement sessions with building control representatives across England to gather more detailed evidence to support the call for evidence. 

The BCIP will report to MHCLG this year, setting out preliminary recommendations for government on future changes to the overall system of building control.  

The Inquiry also stated that the regulation and oversight of building control should be conducted by the single construction regulator. The regulation and oversight of building control is currently a function of the BSR, which also acts as the building control authority for higher-risk buildings. We expect the panel’s findings will have an impact on our proposals for the future regulator as part of the transition to the new regulatory system. We will publish the BCIP’s final report alongside the government’s response in early 2026 and will ensure future proposals for the regulator are properly aligned with the BCIP’s recommendations.

2.2 Regulation of Construction Products 

The Grenfell Tower Inquiry set out clear evidence on the failings of the regulatory regime for construction products and the need for substantive reform. The report confirmed the findings of two previous independent reviews in this area (the Hackitt Review1 and the Morrell-Day Review2) which uncovered systemic institutional, enforcement and regulatory issues. Some of the issues they identified, which are systemic across the construction products regime, were:  

• the regulatory regime is limited and prioritises trade over safety; 

• a lack of capacity, rigour and innovation by key institutions; 

• poor product information and misleading marketing; and 

• enforcement has been almost non-existent. 

These issues created the culture that enabled manufacturers to sell and contractors to buy products that were not suitable or safe for the planned use, leading to maintenance issues and, at worst, catastrophic failings. The government has made important reforms since these findings, which are detailed below. The Inquiry’s report made a number of recommendations in relation to construction products, one of which was that regulation should be undertaken by a single construction regulator. Since the publication of the report we have consulted on proposals to strengthen the regulatory regime.  

Progress on Construction Products reform 

In response, as a first step, the previous government established the NRCP in 2021. The NRCP, set up by the OPSS (which sits within the Department for Business and Trade) has focused on fostering the culture change that is needed within the construction product industry, through enforcing compliance, educating industry and influencing their decision-making. The NRCP has increased national-level market surveillance across the sector and taken enforcement action to remove non-compliant construction products from the UK market, required corrective actions from businesses and shifted business behaviours and manufacturing processes to comply with the law. 

The NRCP’s interventions have included preventing the supply of non-compliant insulation products manufactured by Kingspan Insulation Ltd and Unilin Insulation UK Ltd, and its inspection programmes have tackled widespread non-compliance across sectors including external fire doorsets and heat-soaked toughened glass. The NRCP supports local regulators to assess and handle local-led construction products allegations, and works jointly with regulatory agencies including the BSR, building control and fire and rescue services, to coordinate responses to building safety concerns.  

The NRCP’s early impact is positive. However, this government has recognised the need for further, much more substantive, system reform of construction product regulation and has taken swift action, publishing the Construction Products Reform Green Paper in February 2025. As set out in the Green Paper, further system-wide reform is needed if we are to address the challenges identified. The market for construction products is highly complex, operating as multiple sub-sectors for specific products, with a high number of small and micro businesses, but also large multinational businesses who dominate some sub-sectors. Historically, there was no enforcement of regulations, and many manufacturers, importers and distributors of products remain unaware of regulatory requirements and are unconcerned with regulator activity. A stronger regulator with wider oversight functions and additional powers will be required to deliver a culture of compliance in the sector.

Functions recommended by the Inquiry 

The Grenfell Tower Inquiry Phase 2 report recommended that some functions in relation to the regulation of construction products be carried out by the single construction regulator. These are: 

• Regulation of construction products. This has been the NRCP’s responsibility since 2021. 

• Maintaining a publicly available library of test data. This will be addressed through the upcoming Construction Products Reform White Paper. 

Bringing accountability for delivering the regulation of construction products into the new regulator will build upon the work of the NRCP. The effective regulation of products used in construction underpins regulation across the construction sector. Bringing accountability for these responsibilities into one organisation, alongside the regulation of buildings, will bring consistency and coherence to the regulatory regime and will support our wider reforms to the regulation of construction products. 

MHCLG is working closely with the NRCP on the organisational design and operating model for the regulation of construction products by the new regulator. In considering these changes, we are committed to ensuring the effective regulation of construction products and the broader product regulation regime. Further detail on the future operating model and the relationship between the new regulator and the NRCP will follow. However, we expect that the new regulator will be accountable for the following as they relate to the regulation of construction products: 

• operational strategy and policy; 

• data and information; 

• compliance and assurance, including of the testing and certification of construction products by other bodies; and 

• enforcement, including work with other agencies.  

The regulator will take on direct oversight of testing and certification across all construction products. This will be complemented by developing public sector testing capacity to allow for products raising particular safety considerations to address the Inquiry findings. This is substantive reform that recognises the need for an approach that addresses all construction products.  

In the government’s response to the Inquiry, we noted the need for reform to prevent conflicts of interest in the regime for testing and certification of construction products. More detail on our approach will follow in the Construction Products Reform White Paper, which the government committed to publish before spring 2026. 

Next steps for construction product regulation 

Despite the reforms initiated in response to the Grenfell Tower tragedy, the government is clear that critical gaps persist in the construction products regulatory framework. Construction products are integral to building safety, significant to the economy and key to housing delivery, but substantive system-wide reform is needed. 

Recognising the Inquiry recommendations and findings from the independent reviews, the Construction Products Reform Green Paper consulted on much more ambitious system-wide reforms to improve regulation of and ensure effective enforcement of the whole regime.  

These included: 

• consistency with the reformed European regime to support safe products whilst also facilitating trade and growth; 

• expanding the scope of regulation to cover all construction products; 

• measures to ensure accountability for how products are selected and used, particularly in relation to products critical for safe construction; 

• new roles for the national regulator in overseeing the certification and testing sector, including licensing of conformity assessment bodies (CABs); 

• taking forward work to establish new public sector testing capacity; 

• improving the transparency and availability of test results; 

• improving the quality of product information and users’ access to it, including consideration of the role a construction library can play; 

• support for digital infrastructure and capability; and 

• stronger powers for the regulator to enforce the new regime. 

These system-wide reforms consider responsibilities across the lifecycle of a product, from those of manufacturers and testing houses, to specifiers and designers, to contractors, users, and ultimately, to reuse and disposal of products. This has implications across the end-to-end chain of regulatory oversight, from product regulation and testing and certification through to building regulation and control. 

The government is committed to bringing forward a Construction Products Reform White Paper before spring 2026. This will set out the plans to take forward this ambitious system-wide reform of the construction product regulations with the immediate delivery of any new functions, subject to a transitional approach before ultimately becoming the responsibility of the regulator.

2.3 Regulation of Building Professions 

The competence, capacity and conduct of those working in the built environment – from initial planning and design, construction and fit-out, through to ongoing maintenance, retrofit and demolition – is a critical determinant of building safety, quality and performance. We need a highly skilled, highly motivated and highly productive workforce across the building professions, trades and occupations, supported by a robust system of training, oversight and enforcement, to deliver sufficient, safe and quality buildings for people to live and work. 

The Grenfell Tower Inquiry placed a renewed focus on the central importance of individuals and professions in designing, constructing and maintaining safe buildings and environments. This included a series of detailed recommendations to strengthen regulation and accountability of specific roles responsible for safety-critical functions within the built environment: building control, fire engineers, fire risk assessors, principal contractors and principal designers.  

The government remains committed to implementing the specific reforms set out in the Inquiry’s report, and work is underway to progress each of these. However, we believe that we need also to go further than purely the areas highlighted by the Inquiry, to take a holistic view of regulation, competence and culture across all those operating in the built environment sector. We will publish a new long-term strategy for the building professions, including wider trades and occupations, which sets out a clear, unified plan for regulatory and non-regulatory reform at a government, industry and individual level. This will sit alongside parallel reforms to building regulations and construction products to provide long-term benefits for building safety, quality and productivity, as well as supporting greater capacity, skills and investment in the workforce.  

A new regulatory framework 

While many of those in the sector are already working to high standards, the current system of regulation and oversight is too complex and fragmented to provide public confidence that this is always the case. No single body has a full view of competence, capacity, regulation and enforcement across the building professions. While some areas are regulated in statute, most are self-regulated or not regulated at all. Where professional bodies provide oversight, these can vary in terms of legal status, governance and public interest functions. There is also no consistent definition or enforcement of competence, or standards for public accountability. This is despite significant endeavours from many in the industry to drive skills and competence. As a result, there is generally insufficient recognition and benefit for those who do the right thing and limited consequences for those who do not, with wider implications for skills, development and overall productivity. 

As part of the professions strategy, we will work with key stakeholders, organisations and experts to rationalise and strengthen the system of regulatory oversight and enforcement for the building professions. This will simplify the current patchwork of professional regulation and establish a central oversight function that focuses on a clear and coherent set of standards, expectations and outcomes, in order to enable people who do the right thing to thrive and enforce consequences for those who put people at risk by failing to do the right thing. This represents a generational opportunity to enable better, clearer regulation that enables quality, safety and productivity by building on and streamlining existing structures, rather than layering additional requirements on top of an incoherent and fragmented system.  

We are exploring a range of options for the precise design, form and scope of this new framework that brings together the recommendations of the Inquiry, established good practice from other areas (including aviation, energy and healthcare) and sector engagement, as well as considering wider work across government and industry to address wider challenges regarding skills and capacity. This includes specific consideration of the relationship between a new professional oversight function and, for example, existing regulators and professional bodies, as well as the links between regulation of people, products and buildings. In particular, we are considering questions around: 

• how we can work with existing bodies and systems to ensure people are equipped, accountable and incentivised to deliver more, safe and high-quality buildings; 

• whether more professions should be subject to mandatory registration and licensing requirements to better support competence, skills development and capacity, as well as enforcement; 

• how a strengthened system of regulation and oversight could support greater accountability across the whole system; and 

• what enforcement powers and structures are required to support effective regulation by ensuring clear consequences for misconduct and positive recognition of good practice; and 

• the appropriate institutional arrangements to ensure organisational capability and capacity, manage potential conflicts of interest between different types of regulation and ensure effective regulatory outcomes. 

The Inquiry’s recommendations for the professions 

The final report of the Grenfell Tower Inquiry made detailed recommendations around regulation of identified high-risk professions to provide greater confidence in the competence, accountability and oversight of those performing safety-critical roles. This included recommendations to: 

• Introduce new statutory regulation for the fire engineering profession, supported by an independent body responsible for regulation, registration and standards; 

• Establish a system of mandatory accreditation to certify the competence of fire risk assessors; and 

• Introduce a licensing system for principal contractors wishing to undertake work on higher-risk buildings. 

The government accepted these recommendations in full, and work is underway to design and deliver each of these reforms. All of these individual improvements will contribute to design of the overall framework of regulation for the building professions as part of our overarching strategy.  

The Fire Engineers Advisory Panel (FEAP) was established in April 2025 to provide advice to government on the fire engineering profession, and is made up of academics and industry experts. The panel has met regularly, including convening a series of stakeholder outreach sessions to canvass views from the wider sector and to inform development of an authoritative statement of the knowledge and skills expected of a competent fire engineer. The panel is also providing support and advice on the implementation of the Inquiry’s wider recommendations for fire engineers, to inform government’s next steps for the profession. The government will publish the final statement and proposed next steps. 

In response to the Inquiry’s concerns about the competence of some of those offering their services as fire risk assessors and the absence of any government scheme of regulation, government will publish a public consultation on proposals for the future of the fire risk assessor profession. This will seek views on the definition of the fire risk assessor role, options to develop competency frameworks, standards and career pathways, and potential regulatory powers.   

The role of the principal contractor is defined under the dutyholder regime, established as part of the Building Safety Act 2022. The government is carrying out a series of stakeholder roundtables in conjunction with sector bodies, to explore how we can introduce and operationalise a licensing scheme for principal contractors. These sit alongside a broader review of the dutyholder regime and how it is functioning, due to report in autumn 2026.  

Where there are potential discrepancies between individual recommendations, we will address these to ensure our reforms fit together as a coherent whole and avoid replicating the current piecemeal approach of different systems for different professions. Design of the new framework will also be informed by wider activity across government and industry. This includes progress made so far by the BSR in relation to its duties to facilitate improved competence, the Industry Competence Committee and its working groups set up under Section 10 of Building Safety Act, the Construction Leadership Council and the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero (DESNZ) to improve competence on energy efficiency and retrofit. 

Next steps  

We will initiate a rolling process of continuous engagement with stakeholders and organisations across the sector to design a comprehensive programme of reform, based on the principle of mutual responsibility and the need for joint action between government and industry.  

Government will publish a call for evidence in spring 2026 to seek detailed views on targeted proposals for reform, building on the findings of earlier consultations on building control and architects. We will then publish an overarching strategy for the built environment professions in spring 2027. This will include detailed design of a new framework for regulation, oversight and enforcement, alongside consideration of other, non-regulatory levers, including options to support skills, sustainable business growth and consumer advice.

2.4 Digital, Data and Efficient Regulatory Delivery 

The government’s ambition for the new regulator is a digital-first approach to improve how regulation is connected and delivered across buildings, products and professionals. Our approach will focus on developing a more connected and coherent digital environment that supports better information sharing, reducing duplication and fragmentation, and enabling more transparent oversight. By gradually aligning and integrating existing services, the single construction regulator aims to build a flexible foundation for more responsive, data-informed regulation that ultimately improves safety outcomes for residents and building users. 

Central to the new regulator being digital-first is designing information management systems to unify and integrate the regulation of buildings, professions and products. The underpinning services will provide the regulator with information from users, bringing together fragmented regulations into an interoperable and transparent process. 

This would require the consolidation and streamlining of existing digital services and regulation into a new common information architecture, linking information such as building control records, professional accreditations and product information. Through this digital-first approach, the new regulator could reduce the administrative burden on industry, deliver faster, data-informed decisions and better address systemic failures. Delivering this approach will require incremental development, starting with core data and services, and expanding to cover comprehensive regulatory functions. 

We are seeking your views on the impact of this proposal on industry to ensure the new regulator creates a safer, smarter and more accountable construction industry through world-class use of data and digital technology.

Consultation questions

• Have you experienced any challenges with providing information via government digital services when complying with current regulatory requirements across products, professions and buildings?   

• How should the new regulator promote consistent digital standards and interoperability across the lifecycle of a building (including products, professions and buildings)?   

• What digital tools and platforms do you find most effective for ensuring you meet regulatory compliance and why?    

• What are the opportunities and risks associated with automating regulatory compliance checking (e.g. AI-driven assessment), and how should oversight, accountability and human review be retained within automated systems?

2.5 Residents 

The current regulatory system places too great a burden on residents to navigate complexity and take on the responsibility to fix things, when they have been neglected by regulatory or industry bodies or professionals. With such a difficult route to accessing justice, residents are often left unsure of their rights or unable to affirm them, leaving them powerless in the face of their housing providers. This particularly affects vulnerable residents, who often need further support. 

The regulatory system should do more to prevent these issues occurring for residents. The system should work for residents, and we believe there is a position for the regulator to drive this change. The best way to support residents is for the system to work first time, allowing trust to be rebuilt with residents who recognise a system that works for them. Additionally, the regulator and wider system should give residents the ability to exercise their rights effectively, allowing them to make informed decisions. Residents should also be supported by effective enforcement and accountability throughout the system, especially in circumstances where things go wrong. 

In our response to the Grenfell Tower Inquiry’s final report, we said “it is clear that the residents of Grenfell Tower were not treated with the respect and dignity that they deserved, their homes were not safe and they were not listened to or given the right information when they raised concerns. Residents across the country must be able to trust the system to deliver safe homes”.^{[footnote 16]} The HSE conducted research when the BSR was first established to understand the general lifestyle and relationship residents have with their homes in high-rise residential buildings. They also explored what safety meant to residents, with a focus on BSR related issues around fire and structural risks.  

We have undertaken further research to better understand how these areas are reflected in the wider resident typology and residents’ experiences, needs and mental models around building safety, quality and its regulation, beyond just fire and structural safety.^{[footnote 17]} We found: 

• Residents’ perceptions of the safety and quality of their homes are broad, covering everything from security and personal experience to materials used. These are not always aspects residents prioritise or feel confident assessing when choosing a home.​ 

• Experiences raising issues vary based on housing type and resident profile. There are common challenges, especially in finding the responsible entity for addressing an issue in a satisfactory manner. 

• Trust in those who operate in the system, from government to contractors, is low. This is largely due to poor experiences and past failings. Rebuilding trust will involve being motivated to do the right thing for residents and then delivering those things.​ 

• Residents often do not challenge poor or unsafe housing due to barriers in capability, opportunity and motivation. This is particularly the case for vulnerable residents, those in precarious housing situations and those for whom English is a second language.​ 

• Residents highlight the importance of individual interactions with those closest to them in the system, but the expectation is that regulators should be playing a greater role in holding others to account.​ 

Alongside our research, we have worked with the expert Advisory Board to identify what the regulatory system should address to improve its outcomes for residents. The Board was clear that the core role of the regulator should be to keep residents safe. Beyond this, the regulatory system should be monitored against the lived experiences of residents; protect the interests of residents; rebuild resident trust; help residents make informed decisions; and empower residents through advice and advocacy. The regulator should have a role to play in some of these areas, but the rest of the system also needs to improve to drive the necessary change in outcomes.

Protecting residents 

The best way for the regulator to protect residents is by regulating effectively to make sure the buildings residents live in are safe. The regulator must continue the work the BSR currently does to regulate higher-risk buildings and raise safety standards of all buildings. There is also potential scope for the regulator to go further. For example, it could play a role in setting clear behavioural standards and providing uniform foundations for enforcement. This would help to embed resident outcomes at the heart of regulatory practice, deepening the regulator’s role in ensuring resident safety.  

The complexity of the system and the ability to evade responsibility within it has developed from incremental changes, ad hoc fixes, government interventions and under-investment in competency and enforcement across many decades. Gradually layered policies, which have been introduced over time, have almost always left the onus on the resident to seek redress. These routes are often difficult to access and understand. As a result, residents face multiple systemic barriers to understanding, raising and challenging the issues they experience. 

It is unlikely that most residents will seek redress when something has gone wrong, due to the barriers they face in doing so. In our research, we observed few residents escalating issues or feeling able to exercise their consumer power, which reflects wider studies showing only 29% of social housing tenants, 25% of private renters^{[footnote 18]} and 22% of leaseholders^{[footnote 19]} had even considered raising a complaint. Many residents, but particularly the most vulnerable, are prevented from attempting to seek redress because of the perceived risks involved. These risks can include the fear of eviction and fear of consequences of legal action.^{[footnote 20]}  

Our research found that residents are unlikely to seek redress because they believe achieving a positive resolution to their issue is unrealistic. Residents’ comments reflected that they often feel that the system is working against them, with no consideration of them or their experience and that the regulatory system does not provide residents with the support they need to navigate the complexities that exist and seek redress to the issues they face. 

If residents do go on to seek redress, or feel able to pursue an issue, they face even more challenges. In this fragmented system, it is often the case that multiple agencies, schemes and ombudsmen deal with one resident seeking redress. The ownership of responsibilities and where powers lie is confusing, meaning residents can end up being passed back and forth, lost in the system, not knowing where to start or quickly being overwhelmed. In most cases, the onus remains on the resident to drive action, despite them being the least informed party, meaning many withdraw from the process after initial attempts. The result of residents being unable to seek redress is that they instead suffer, living in homes which are not safe and do not meet their needs. The regulatory system should take action to prevent residents facing issues and barriers which stop them from seeking redress.  

The regulator should also monitor how the system is improving the lived experience of residents and whether their homes are safe, to help deliver our proposed system-wide outcome that buildings and built environments are safe and high-performing and deliver a healthy, accessible, secure and sustainable environment for occupants. 

The regulator should build on the statutory residents panel that already exists in the BSR and develop mechanisms to take and demonstrate action that comes from the engagement with residents.^{[footnote 21]} Whilst the regulator’s exact levels of engagement with residents will be informed by the responses to this consultation, we are clear that the regulator must directly understand some of the impact the regulatory system is having on residents’ lives and alter the system accordingly. This qualitative feedback, alongside the possibility of the regulator setting indicators on the lived experience, such as health statistics, employment rates (healthy populations are more likely to be working populations) and life expectancy, will help the regulator understand if the system is delivering for residents and establish whether residents are safe and feel safe in their homes. A benefit of these outcomes is their non-prescriptive nature, allowing the system to be flexible in how it goes about achieving them and leaving the door open for future changes.

The regulatory system 

The regulator cannot deliver its objectives alone. It needs the support of other bodies in the wider building ecosystem to protect residents and keep them safe. The regulatory system can do this in two ways: by making residents informed consumers and by actively sharing information across regulatory bodies to improve the regulator’s insight into trends that help it to deliver targeted change and ultimately, better outcomes for residents. 

Informed consumers 

We know that to feel confident making decisions about their homes, residents must be informed and aware of the impact of decisions on their safety. Part of the reason why resident engagement in the regulatory system is low comes from residents not being treated as informed consumers. Our research has reaffirmed this position – residents were not confident of their rights or how to use them. They also expressed a need for support at moments where their relationship to and responsibilities within their homes change. Escalating a housing issue is not a habitual practice and is only done in moments of acute stress, when taking time to find routes for support is difficult. 

The regulatory system should create ways for residents to access what they need to know, when they need to know it – making clear to the resident the impacts of their decisions on the safety of them and their homes. Some of this can be handled by the regulator, for instance, developing on the work of the BSR’s ‘Your Home, Your Safety’ campaign^{[footnote 22]} and designing similar campaigns for other resident types. However, the rest of the system also needs to improve, to make sure residents are informed consumers at the point where they need to make a decision which impacts their safety and their home, no matter where that decision lies within the regulatory system. 

Information-sharing across the regulatory system 

Across the regulatory system, there should be effective routes to share information between regulatory bodies. Some bodies, such as ombudsmen, have direct information relating to residents’ experiences within the system. This can provide essential insights on trends, data and resident feedback that could be fed back into the system to ensure widespread understanding of how well resident-based outcomes are being achieved and to drive improvements. 

Rebuilding residents’ trust 

Alongside ensuring residents are materially safe, the regulator should also play an important role in making residents feel safe in their homes, to rebuild resident trust in the regulatory system. Residents’ trust in the system is currently low, due to past failings, negative experiences and the poor levels of accountability across the system. By taking the actions we have identified in this chapter, supported by the wider regulatory system, the regulator can play an active role in helping residents feel safe in their homes and consequently rebuild resident trust in the built environment.  

Consumer trust in other systems, such as food supply, is high because consumers see visible evidence that the system has regulated standards every time they make a purchase. The Trust In Food research project established consumers typically invest little time consciously thinking about trusting the food they eat and therefore have ‘weak ties’ to producers and sellers of food. This highlights the food system is a faceless dynamic, where consumers do not know who the actors are behind the production, but trust the system to provide for them.^{[footnote 23]} 

This relationship between the consumer and the producer is similar in the built environment – we don’t see or engage with those who built our homes. Rebuilding trust will include the regulator doing what it says it will (cognitive trust) and the regulator having the interests of residents as its motivation for regulating (social trust). The built environment should aim to hold trust in the system in the same way food supply does, where consumers know they are safe.

Consultation questions

• Should the regulator play a role in setting behavioural standards and providing foundations for enforcement? If so, how should it do this e.g. via powers or duties? 

• How can the regulator protect residents, enabling them to effectively exercise their rights to seek redress to make their homes safe, without fear or confusion? 

• How can the regulator monitor the impact the regulatory system has on the safety of residents? 

• What should the regulatory system do to better share information between regulatory bodies to inform and support the delivery of resident-based outcomes? 

• How can the regulatory system better support and advise residents?

Chapter 3: Roles and responsibilities in an integrated regulatory system 

For an integrated regulatory system to function successfully, there must be clear roles, responsibilities and accountabilities for everyone working in the building ecosystem. Building a culture of transparency and shared responsibility is fundamental to instilling trust and confidence in the sector. 

Establishing a new regulator is an opportunity for everyone to consider the roles which government, the regulator and industry need to play to achieve positive outcomes for residents and building users. It is also a chance to make sure the right frameworks, leadership and partnerships are in place to coordinate, monitor and steward the ecosystem as a whole and enable everyone to execute these roles effectively. We propose defined principles for how government, the regulator and industry operate in a new regulatory system. 

The role of government 

The government has an important role as steward of the building ecosystem. It is responsible for ensuring safe and high-quality homes and buildings are built and maintained for everyone across the country. The Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government’s (MHCLG) ministers are responsible for building safety and housing policy and are accountable to Parliament. As steward, the government will oversee the future integrated regulatory system, including the new regulator, with MHCLG acting as its sponsor. MHCLG will ensure the regulator is properly resourced to deliver its activities, through appropriate funding and cost-recovery models alongside robust oversight to ensure it meets its objectives. MHCLG will also provide support and healthy challenge to the regulator, to ensure it delivers the outcomes it has committed to and that the government expects.  

While government oversight is essential to support the future regulatory system and new regulator, it is important that the regulator has a clear mandate to meet its building safety mission. Appropriate statutory frameworks will therefore be implemented to allow the regulator to make its decisions fairly, impartially and independently.  

The government must play a leading role in shaping the purpose and activity of the regulator. This should include MHCLG providing strategic policy information to the regulator setting out government priorities to inform its activity. MHCLG should also seek expert advice from the regulator to inform government policy on building safety.  

The government will be responsible for non-executive appointments to the regulator’s governing board, including the Chair, in accordance with the Non-Departmental Public Body (NDPB) model. While the regulator’s governing board will be responsible for the appointment of a Chief Executive Officer, MHCLG ministers will be consulted. The government has an important responsibility to ensure the appointments process is designed in accordance with best practice to enable the recruitment of the best leaders possible.

The role of the new regulator 

The regulator, as an NDPB, will have operational autonomy to carry out its legal and regulatory functions independently, but will be strategically aligned to MHCLG and to the direction and priorities set by government ministers.  

As set out in Chapter 1, the Secretary of State for MHCLG may periodically publish a statement setting out strategic priorities and objectives for the regulator in carrying out its functions, which the regulator will need to perform in accordance with the legal framework. Further development of the regulator’s statutory objectives and duties will take place ahead of legislation when parliamentary time allows.  

It is important that the regulator upholds principles of clear accountability, effective enforcement, proportionate risk management and constructive engagement and collaboration. It must also remain open to scrutiny and challenge. 

The regulator’s focus will be on the centralised and nationalised elements of the regulatory system, reflecting the territorial extent and application of these reforms set out above. Local regulators will maintain their existing important role within the system. The regulator will develop and maintain close relationships with local regulators to share information and respond to issues.  

Accountability 

The regulator will play an integral role to foster effective accountability and shared responsibility across the sector. It must role model and champion best practice in how it holds itself and others to account, instilling a strong culture of improvement. The regulator will be accountable to ministers in MHCLG and will promote transparency by seeking feedback and sharing best practice across the sector, other regulatory bodies, local government, fire and rescue services and ombudsmen.  

Enforcement 

Enforcement of safe and proper practice will be an essential cornerstone of the regulator. Dame Judith Hackitt’s 2018 report states that “the effectiveness of regulatory frameworks appears to be largely dependent on how individuals working within the framework interact with it”.^{[footnote 24]} The regulator will be a regulatory leader that incentivises individuals and businesses to interact with the regulatory framework effectively. This should create a fairer regulatory system, where businesses that consistently demonstrate trustworthiness and prioritise safety and high quality are supported to thrive. This is essential for the livelihoods of those working in the industry day to day, but also to continuing to grow the success of the sector and our wider economy. 

Those who do the right thing must not be undercut by those who do not. The regulator must also take decisive action and effective enforcement against those who do not meet the expected regulatory standards. It should do this by having detailed oversight of the risks, challenges and interdependencies across the construction and building safety regimes and by setting clear, non-negotiable standards.  

Risk management 

The Building Safety Regulator (BSR) already has a statutory duty to keep the safety and standard of all buildings under review (not just those above 18 metres). This is being operationalised through a continuous intelligence assessment, horizon scanning and risk management function. Establishing the new regulator will simplify the identification of risks and improve governance across the whole built environment system, enabling the regulator to proactively target its regulatory activities to have the greatest impact. This will be a particularly important part of building a resilient and flexible regulatory system which can respond to emerging risks alongside adapting to innovation in building methods or new technology. 

The new regulator must also take an expert and proportionate approach to managing risks to safety and standards across the buildings system. For example, proposals for a risk-based ‘general safety requirement’ for construction products were consulted on in the Construction Products Reform Green Paper. A risk-based general safety requirement would require an economic operator to understand and take proportionate action to eliminate or control any safety risk connected to the intended use and the normal or reasonably foreseeable conditions of use of their construction product before it is supplied or placed on the market. The upcoming Construction Products Reform White Paper will consult on detailed proposals to be set out in regulations. 

Relationships across the building ecosystem 

To effectively lead and shape the regulatory landscape and meet the outcomes we set out in Chapter 1, it is essential that the new regulator maintains strong relationships with government and industry. 

To build trust with residents and industry, the regulator must listen to and act upon concerns raised and clearly, and regularly, communicate how its activities are contributing to the outcomes we are working towards. Evidence shows that public institutions with effective engagement channels that take people’s view into careful consideration are more highly trusted.^{[footnote 25]} With this in mind, the regulator will have a responsibility to engage with the sector, including by educating and supporting the industry it regulates to improve. It will proactively seek feedback to monitor its performance and impact, making improvements where required. This should involve learning from and building on the channels existing regulators have, such as the BSR’s Building Advisory Committee and Industry Competence Committee and going further through bespoke engagement with residents and different parts of industry. The regulator should prioritise this with small and medium-sized enterprises, as well as larger firms. 

The regulator must also work effectively with other regulatory bodies. As a sector leader, it should have an overarching view of the building safety system and proactively seek regular feedback from other bodies and institutions. It should also play an integral role in consolidating regulatory activity across the sector and convening regulatory bodies within the system to maintain a strong understanding of their work, identify and act upon duplication and minimise inefficiencies. Through this role, the regulator should proactively improve and share learning across the regulatory system to raise standards across the building ecosystem and deepen resident trust. This responsibility should be considered at both a national and local level.

The role of industry 

As set out above, this reform is intended to create a fairer regulatory system, benefitting the many individuals and businesses who act responsibly and in the interests of residents and everyone who uses buildings. 

For reform to result in meaningful benefit to residents, it requires industry to seize the opportunity to lead a positive transformation in how safety and quality are embedded throughout the lifecycle of buildings. While many have sought to do the right thing, multiple reports dating back to at least the 1990s and most recently the Grenfell Tower Inquiry, have demonstrated that more progress is needed to improve both culture and practice to change from a ‘race to the bottom’ culture to one which consistently prioritises quality and safety.  

The Inquiry was clear that industry played its part in the failures that led to the Grenfell tragedy; bad actors exploited ambiguity and fragmentation in the regulatory system and put profit before safety. Reforming the regulatory system includes expectations for industry to step up and lead sector-wide change. Bad-faith actors who exploit loopholes, act dishonestly, or fail to behave in the public interest, must not be rewarded and allowed to undercut responsible actors who are investing in safety and quality. This requires those working across industry to act as equal partners in system-wide reform. We know that for this to be successful, industry will make a significant contribution to the establishment and support of the new regulator. Success also relies on industry ensuring that they have a competent workforce and setting the standards for the behaviour and culture necessary to drive change. By working closely with government and the new regulator, industry can support changes and assist in achieving the desired outcomes made in the Inquiry recommendation. 

Since 2017, there have been individuals, businesses, and industry groups who have come together to drive positive change. This includes those who have taken steps to ensure the ‘golden thread’ is implemented, led the development of building safety plans for their organisations or areas of industry, and given their time and resource to pushing for higher standards in the sector through dedicated working groups. This industry-led work is a solid foundation on which to build momentum for further change. To fully realise the potential impact of this work, greater consistency is required from across the sector and throughout the supply chain. The influence and expertise of trusted leadership from within industry will be crucial to steering improved competence and conduct, and ultimately build confidence and trust in the system. This reform is an opportunity for individuals, businesses and leaders across industry to work together to build on this progress and consider how to use the tools in their power to achieve the outcomes in Chapter 1.  

This means an expectation to go beyond regulatory compliance to ensure that buildings and products are safe for occupants throughout their lifespan, including construction, refurbishment and deconstruction, and works while buildings are in occupation. This should include tackling longstanding structural issues such as outdated procurement models, and fragmented responsibilities where there are opportunities for different approaches. It should also mean rethinking contracting practices, promoting early-stage design collaboration, and ensuring that all parts of the supply chain – including smaller firms and investors – are aligned behind safety expectations and positive outcomes for residents and building users. Industry leaders must exemplify accountability, foster collaboration across the sector and transparently demonstrate progress. Strong partnerships with regulatory bodies and transparent communication are essential to building trust and driving meaningful change. 

Learning from successful culture change initiatives in other sectors, such as petrochemicals, can help accelerate progress. The construction industry may also look inwards. The sector has previously demonstrated its capacity for cultural change transformation, moving beyond ‘tick-box’ compliance towards a more risk-led, accountable approach to health and safety reform. While the transformation took time, industry ultimately embraced a safety culture rooted in outcomes and responsibility, showing that sustained change is achievable when the focus shifts from minimum standards to risk-informed responsibility. By embracing this approach again, the construction industry can lead the way in delivering safer, higher-quality buildings and better outcomes for residents.

Consultation questions

We would welcome your views on the roles of actors within the ecosystem.

• Do you agree with the principles set out in this chapter, and the proposed roles and responsibilities for government, regulatory bodies and industry?

• What are your views on how the new regulator can work with industry to support culture change, towards a quality and safety-led culture? What sort of incentives or sanctions do you feel would be effective in supporting this change?

• What are your views on how the industry can best drive the culture change and respond effectively to the changes proposed in this prospectus? In your view, how prepared are individuals and businesses for these changes? What would support industry to be more prepared?

Chapter 4: Next steps and timeline 

This prospectus sets out our commitment to honouring the Grenfell Tower Inquiry’s recommendation to create a single construction regulator and our broader commitment to regulatory reform. We have published this alongside the latest quarterly update on progress with the wider Grenfell Tower Inquiry Phase 2 recommendations. An annual report on progress to deliver the Inquiry’s recommendations will be published and laid in Parliament in February 2026. 

The consultation questions posed in this prospectus are part of an engagement process which we will continue as we develop our plans for the regulator. The consultation on Citizen Space is open until 20th March 2026 and we welcome formal responses. 

We will use insights from answers to this consultation to develop our reforms and will publish the government response to the consultation in summer 2026. In support of the consultation, we anticipate arranging specific consultation events in addition to making use of other opportunities to provide further information and enable a broad range of stakeholders to participate. 

MHCLG is committed to close cross-government working and engagement on the strategic direction and priorities for the regulator to ensure that the regulatory framework takes account of other government reforms.  

We also intend to publish the Construction Products White Paper by spring 2026, as well as a call for evidence on the strategy for regulation of Built Environment Professions. 

Primary legislation will be required to implement several of the proposals in this document, for example to establish the new regulatory framework, outcomes and duties and transfer existing functions to the new regulator as well as to create new regulatory functions proposed by the Inquiry. We will bring forward the necessary legislation as soon as parliamentary time allows.

Annex A – Full Inquiry recommendation and list of Inquiry-recommended functions 

The Grenfell Tower Inquiry: Phase 2 Report, Volume 7, Part 14 ^{[footnote 26]} 

113.4 We think that over the course of time the arrangements under which the construction industry was regulated had become too complex and fragmented. At the time of the fire the Department for Communities and Local Government … was responsible for the Building Regulations and the statutory guidance, the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy … was responsible for regulating products and the Home Office was responsible for the fire and rescue services. Building control was partly in the hands of local authorities and partly in the hands of approved inspectors operating as commercial organisations, enforcement of the law relating to the sale of construction products was carried out by Trading Standards and commercial organisations provided testing and certification services to manufacturers of products. UKAS accredited organisations operating as conformity assessment bodies. In our view, this degree of fragmentation was a recipe for inefficiency and an obstacle to effective regulation. 

113.5 In our view all the functions to which we have referred… should be exercised by a single independent body headed by a person whom, for the sake of convenience, we shall call a construction regulator, reporting to a single Secretary of State. The establishment of such a regulator would bring a number of benefits, not least a focal point in driving a much-needed change in the culture of the construction industry. It would enable information to be shared effectively between those responsible for different aspects of the industry and promote the exchange of ideas. Information on developments in the industry, both in this country and abroad, could be shared more easily between all those interested in it. We envisage that such a construction regulator would have sufficient resources to take on the following functions, most of which are currently discharged by one or other of a variety of bodies: 

a) the regulation of construction products; 

b) the development of suitable methods for testing the reaction to fire of materials and products intended for use in construction; 

c) the testing and certification of such products; 

d) the issue of certificates of compliance of construction products with the requirements of legislation, statutory guidance and industry standards; 

e) the regulation and oversight of building control; 

f) the licensing of contractors to work on higher-risk buildings; 

g) monitoring the operation of the Building Regulations and the statutory guidance and advising the Secretary of State on the need for change; 

h) carrying out research on matters affecting fire safety in the built environment; 

i) collecting information, both in this country and abroad, on matters affecting fire safety; 

j) exchanging information with the fire and rescue services on matters affecting fire safety; 

k) accrediting fire risk assessors; 

l) maintaining a publicly available library of test data and publications. 

113.6 We are aware that in the period since the Grenfell Tower fire Parliament has passed the Building Safety Act 2022 to regulate work on higher-risk buildings, to impose particular duties on those involved in the construction and refurbishment of such buildings and to establish a Building Safety Regulator responsible for building control and for overseeing standards of competence. However, responsibility for the range of functions identified above remains dispersed. We therefore recommend that the government draw together under a single regulator all the functions relating to the construction industry to which we have referred.

Current regulatory responsibilities 

In line with the government’s response to the Inquiry in February 2025, the following functions remain in scope of this reform.

Functions recommended by the Inquiry	Which regulatory body does this now?
Regulation of construction products	Enforcing construction product regulations is an existing function of the NRCP (within OPSS); additional, new regulatory functions also planned following reform of the construction products regime.
Development of suitable methods for testing the reaction to fire of materials and products intended for use in construction	Existing function of BSR
Regulation and oversight of building control;	Existing function of BSR (BSR also delivers building control for higher-risk buildings)
Licensing contractors to work on higher-risk buildings;	New function
Monitoring operation of Building Regulations and the statutory guidance and advising the Secretary of State on the need for change;	Existing function of BSR
Carrying out research on matters affecting fire safety in the built environment;	Existing function of BSR
Collecting information, both in this country and abroad, on matters affecting fire safety;	Existing function of BSR
Exchanging information with the fire and rescue services on matters affecting fire safety;	Existing function of BSR
Accreditation to certify the competence of fire risk assessors;	Mandating competency requirements for fire risk assessors is a new regulatory function.
Maintaining a publicly available library of test data, reports on serious fires and academic papers.	New function
In the Government’s response to the Inquiry, we noted we do not believe it is appropriate for a single body to both regulate construction products and undertake testing and certification of construction products or issue certificates or compliance, as this would create a new conflict of interest within the regulator. The regulator will take on a wider oversight role in these functions as part of its responsibility for regulation of construction products.
Testing and certification of such products;	Function of Conformity Assessment Bodies
Issuing certificates of compliance of construction products with the requirements of legislation, statutory guidance and industry standards;	Function of Conformity Assessment Bodies

Annex B – Definitions  

Definitions of terms used in this document

Term	Definition
‘Your Home, Your Safety’ Campaign	Campaign launched in 2024 by the Building Safety Regulator to inform residents of high-rise buildings in England about their new rights.
Approved Documents (ADs)	Government-approved guidance, detailing advice on how to meet the legal requirements of the building regulations for some common situations.
British Standards Institution (BSI)	The national standards body of the United Kingdom. BSI produces technical standards on a wide range of products and services and supplies certification and standards-related services to businesses.
Building Control	Legal requirement that must be obtained before carrying out work that involves the erection, extension or alteration of a building.
Building Control Independent Panel (BCIP)	Independent expert advisory panel providing analysis and advice to government on questions in the Grenfell Inquiry final report relevant to the future of the building control system in England.
Building Regulations	Regulations that apply to most new buildings and many alterations of existing buildings in England and Wales, whether for domestic, commercial or industrial use. Compliance is a legal requirement.
Building Safety Act 2022	2022 legislation enacted to reform building safety regulations, giving residents more rights and making homes safer.
Building Safety Regulator (BSR)	Established under the Building Safety Act 2022 to regulate higher-risk buildings, raise safety standards of all buildings, help professionals in design, construction and building control, to improve their competence.
Building Safety Regulator’s Building Advisory Committee (BAC)	Statutory committee established by the Building Safety Act 2022 to advise the regulator on building-related matters.
Building system / building ecosystem	These terms are used interchangeably in this document to refer to range of people, public and private and bodies involved in residential, commercial and civic buildings at every stage of their lifecycle. This includes construction products, used in buildings, infrastructure and wider built environment; the range of professionals and tradespeople who design, build, fund and maintain our buildings; and residents and users of every type and tenure of building. Each of these actors has a different level and type of impact on our buildings.
Chief Construction Adviser (CCA)	This role was created to implement one of the recommendations from the Grenfell Inquiry’s Phase 2 report. The CCA provides independent advice to ministers on building safety and regulatory reform. They are appointed by the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG).
Competence	The skills, knowledge, experience, and behaviours necessary to perform a role safely and in compliance with regulations.
Conformity Assessment Bodies (CABs)	Comprises testing and calibration laboratories, certification bodies as well as inspection bodies that provide conformity assessment services.
Construction products	All products (whether manufactured or in raw forms like sand and aggregates, including kits) that are likely to be used for construction purposes (including maintenance, refurbishment, or retrofit, in buildings and infrastructure) regardless of whether they are also likely to be used for other purposes.   The definition of a construction product is set out in the Construction Product regulations 2011.[footnote 27]
Devolved Administration	The transfer of power by central government to local or regional administrations.
Dutyholder regime	Legal framework introduced in England on October 1, 2023, by the Building Safety Act 2022, which places legal responsibility on those involved in the design and construction of buildings to ensure compliance with building regulations.
Economic operator	This includes the manufacturer, the authorised representative, the importer, the distributor, the fulfilment service provider or any other natural or legal person who is subject to this Regulation in relation to the manufacturing or remanufacturing of products, including products to be reused, or to making those products available on the market, in accordance with this Regulation. This definition of ‘economic operators’ does not include online marketplaces.
Fire Risk Assessor (FRA)	A professional who may be employed by a Responsible Person to assist them in making or reviewing a fire risk assessment. This role is not presently defined in law.
Fire Safety Order	Main piece of legislation governing fire safety in buildings in England and Wales.
Grenfell Tower Inquiry	Public Inquiry created to examine the circumstances leading up to and surrounding the fire at Grenfell Tower on the night of 14 June 2017.
Grenfell Tower Inquiry Phase 2 Report	The Inquiry’s Phase 2 report was published on September 4, 2024, examining the underlying causes of the tragedy and making 58 recommendations.
Hackitt Report / Independent Review	‘Building a Safer Future’ was an independent review by Dame Judith Hackitt into building and fire safety regulations and related compliance and enforcement, with a focus on high rise residential buildings. Its final report, published in 2018, set out over 50 recommendations for government on how to deliver a more robust regulatory system for the future.
Health and Safety Executive (HSE)	The UK’s national regulator for workplace health and safety. It prevents work-related death, injury and ill health. HSE is a non-departmental public body, sponsored by the Department for Work and Pensions.
Higher Risk Buildings (HRBs)	Buildings deemed to be higher risk, subject to the requirements of the higher-risk regime directly overseen by the Building Safety Regulator.
Industry	The umbrella term for the number of professional and tradespeople who design, build, fund and maintain our buildings and are involved in the manufacture, sale and use of construction products.
Industry Competence Committee (ICC)	Statutory committee formed under the Building Safety Act 2022 to provide strategic leadership, assistance and encouragement to facilitate the improvement of competence in the built environment industry. It advises both the Building Safety Regulator and industry on matters of competence.
Inter-jurisdictional Regulatory Collaboration Committee (IRCC)	International forum of building regulation and code authoring bodies with the purpose of promoting effective international collaboration concerning ‘best current practice’ building regulatory systems, in particular those that are functional, objective or performance based.
Interoperability	The ability of different computer systems, software, and devices to communicate, share, exchange, and use data with each other.
Lived experience	Lived experience refers to knowledge acquired through direct, first-hand and personal experience.
Local Authority Building Control (LABC)	Local authority building control teams in England and Wales help people comply with the building regulations by giving feedback on plans and providing site inspections The local authority has a general duty to see that building work complies with the Building Regulations, unless it is under the control of an approved inspector. Only local authorities have the power to enforce standards if things go wrong.
Morrell-Day Review	An independent review of the Construction Products Testing Regime, published in 2023, co-chaired by Paul Morell OBE and Anneliese Day KC.
National Regulator for Construction Products (NRCP)	Sits within the Office for Product Safety and Standards and leads and co-ordinates market surveillance and enforcement.
Office for Product Safety and Standards (OPSS)	The national regulator for all consumer products, except for vehicles, medicines and food. The National Regulator for Construction Products sits within the OPSS (since April 2021).
Principal contractor	A principal contractor is appointed by the client to control the construction phase of any project involving more than one contractor.
Proportionate	In relation to the regulatory regime, requirements that are commensurate to the risk and in proportion to achieving the objectives.
Registered Building Inspector (RBI)	Registered building inspectors carry out regulated building control activities. RBIs work for building control bodies (the BSR, local authorities and registered building control approvers), either as employees or contractors.
Regulator	In this document, refers primarily to the single construction regulator recommended by the Grenfell Tower Inquiry to be responsible for regulating buildings, construction products and professionals.
Regulatory system	A framework of public and private institutions, actors, rules and processes designed to achieve positive outcomes and protect people from harm.
Responsible person	The person responsible for fire safety on premises under the Fire Safety Order. An employer who has some control over the workplace is a responsible person. For other types of premises, a responsible person can be anyone who has control over a premises in connection with carrying out a trade, business or other undertaking, for example, a landlord, manager or occupier; or the owner where this is not applicable. A responsible person ensures fire safety throughout the area of the premises which are under their control, including a requirement to complete a fire risk assessment.
Reserved matter	Decisions that are still taken by the UK Parliament at Westminster even though they have effect in Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland or the regions of England.
Royal Charter	Instrument of incorporation, granted by The King, which confers independent legal personality on an organisation and defines its objectives, constitution and powers to govern its own affairs. The terms of each Charter are different, depending on the individual requirements of the type of organisation that is being incorporated.
Single Construction Regulator	The first recommendation of the Grenfell Inquiry Phase 2 was to ’draw together under a single regulator’ a number of regulatory functions relating to the construction industry referred to in the Phase 2 report.
Small and Medium Sized Enterprise (SME)	A business with fewer than 250 employees.
Test data	Individual raw values which would be produced as part of a test e.g. on a construction product or system. This can include both quantitative and qualitative information.
Test results	Refers to the presentation of collected information and findings that demonstrate the outcomes of the test e.g. on a construction product or system. This can include both quantitative and qualitative information.

Annex C – Single Regulator Advisory Board  

The Single Construction Regulator Advisory Board was established in spring 2025 as an advisory body on the design and implementation of the Grenfell Tower Inquiry’s recommendation for a ‘single construction regulator’. The Board brings together representatives across government, regulators, industry, academia and resident and consumer advocacy, to reflect the range of interests in the regulatory systems which govern the construction industry and wider built environment. The Board’s advice has shaped government’s proposals for design and implementation of regulatory reform.

Membership

Attendees	Role and Organisation
Chair: Catherine Adams	Director of Building Systems and Insights, MHCLG
Thouria Istephan	Interim Chief Construction Adviser
Charlie Pugsley	Interim Chief Executive Officer, Building Safety Regulator
Graham Russell MBE	CEO, Office for Product Safety and Standards
Hugh Simpson	CEO, Architects Registration Board
Dame Judith Hackitt	Adviser, Building Safety
Mark Reynolds	Co-Chair, Construction Leadership Council
Peter Caplehorn	CEO, Construction Products Association
Graham Watts OBE	CEO, Construction Industry Council
Richard Moriarty	CEO, Financial Reporting Council
Professor Alan Penn	Professor of Architecture, UCL
Professor Christopher Hodges OBE	Emeritus Professor of Justice Systems, University of Oxford
Gillian Cooper	Director of Energy, Citizens Advice
Fayann Simpson OBE	Resident Panel Representative, Building Safety Regulator

Annex D – About this consultation  

This consultation document and consultation process have been planned to adhere to the Consultation Principles issued by the Cabinet Office.   

Representative groups are asked to give a summary of the people and organisations they represent, and where relevant who else they have consulted in reaching their conclusions when they respond.  

Information provided in response to this consultation may be published or disclosed in accordance with the access to information regimes (these are primarily the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA), the Environmental Information Regulations 2004 and UK data protection legislation.  In certain circumstances this may therefore include personal data when required by law.  

If you want the information that you provide to be treated as confidential, please be aware that, as a public authority, the Department is bound by the information access regimes and may therefore be obliged to disclose all or some of the information you provide. In view of this it would be helpful if you could explain to us why you regard the information you have provided as confidential. If we receive a request for disclosure of the information we will take full account of your explanation, but we cannot give an assurance that confidentiality can be maintained in all circumstances. An automatic confidentiality disclaimer generated by your IT system will not, of itself, be regarded as binding on the Department.  

The Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government will at all times process your personal data in accordance with UK data protection legislation and in the majority of circumstances this will mean that your personal data will not be disclosed to third parties. A full privacy notice is included below.  

Individual responses will not be acknowledged unless specifically requested.  

Your opinions are valuable to us. Thank you for taking the time to read this document and respond.  

Are you satisfied that this consultation has followed the Consultation Principles?  If not or you have any other observations about how we can improve the process please contact us via the complaints procedure.

Annex E – Personal data  

The following is to explain your rights and give you the information you are entitled to under UK data protection legislation.   

Note that this section only refers to personal data (your name, contact details and any other information that relates to you or another identified or identifiable individual personally) not the content otherwise of your response to the consultation.   

1. The identity of the data controller and contact details of our Data Protection Officer      

The Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG) is the data controller. The Data Protection Officer can be contacted at dataprotection@communities.gov.uk or by writing to the following address:

Data Protection Officer,
Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government,
Fry Building,
2 Marsham Street,
London
SW1P 4DF

2. Why we are collecting your personal data     

Your personal data is being collected as an essential part of the consultation process, so that we can contact you regarding your response and for statistical purposes. We may also use it to contact you about related matters.  

We will collect your IP address if you complete a consultation online. We may use this to ensure that each person only completes a survey once. We will not use this data for any other purpose.  

Sensitive types of personal data  

Please do not share special category personal data or criminal offence data if we have not asked for this unless absolutely necessary for the purposes of your consultation response. By ‘special category personal data’, we mean information about a living individual’s:  

• race  

• ethnic origin  

• political opinions  

• religious or philosophical beliefs  

• trade union membership  

• genetics  

• biometrics   

• health (including disability-related information)  

• sex life; or  

• sexual orientation.  

 By ‘criminal offence data’, we mean information relating to a living individual’s criminal convictions or offences or related security measures.  

3. Our legal basis for processing your personal data  

[The collection of your personal data is lawful under article 6(1)(e) of the UK General Data Protection Regulation as it is necessary for the performance by MHCLG of a task in the public interest/in the exercise of official authority vested in the data controller.  Section 8(d) of the Data Protection Act 2018 states that this will include processing of personal data that is necessary for the exercise of a function of the Crown, a Minister of the Crown or a government department i.e. in this case a consultation.  

Where necessary for the purposes of this consultation, our lawful basis for the processing of any special category personal data or ‘criminal offence’ data (terms explained under ‘Sensitive Types of Data’) which you submit in response to this consultation is as follows. The relevant lawful basis for the processing of special category personal data is Article 9(2)(g) UK GDPR (‘substantial public interest’), and Schedule 1 paragraph 6 of the Data Protection Act 2018 (‘statutory etc and government purposes’). The relevant lawful basis in relation to personal data relating to criminal convictions and offences data is likewise provided by Schedule 1 paragraph 6 of the Data Protection Act 2018.]  

4. With whom we will be sharing your personal data  

MHCLG will appoint the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology as a ‘data processor’, acting on behalf of the Department and under our instruction, to help analyse the responses to this consultation. Where we do we will ensure that the processing of your personal data remains in strict accordance with the requirements of the data protection legislation.     

MHCLG will take reasonable and proportionate steps to prevent personal data from the consultation responses being sent to an Artificial Intelligence (AI) tool called Consult AI. The AI tool processes data securely and does not copy or share data. The data will only be accessed and used by those authorised to do so.    

The AI tool identifies themes present in the responses. The draft themes are reviewed and agreed by a policy team before the tool then maps responses to the themes to be used by policy teams to analyse the consultation. MHCLG will take steps to check for accuracy and identify and reduce bias.  Your data will not be used to train the AI models.  

5. For how long we will keep your personal data, or criteria used to determine the retention period.   

Your personal data will be held for [two years] from the closure of the consultation, unless we identify that its continued retention is unnecessary before that point.  

6. Your rights, e.g. access, rectification, restriction, objection  

The data we are collecting is your personal data, and you have considerable say over what happens to it. You have the right:  

a. to see what data we have about you  

b. to ask us to stop using your data, but keep it on record  

c. to ask to have your data corrected if it is incorrect or incomplete  

d. to object to our use of your personal data in certain circumstances  

e. to lodge a complaint with the independent Information Commissioner (ICO) if you think we are not handling your data fairly or in accordance with the law.  You can contact the ICO at https://ico.org.uk/, or telephone 0303 123 1113.   

Please contact us at the following address if you wish to exercise the rights listed above, except the right to lodge a complaint with the ICO: dataprotection@communities.gov.uk or:

Knowledge and Information Access Team,
Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government,
Fry Building,
2 Marsham Street,
London,
SW1P 4DF

7. Your personal data may be processed in the EU. The EU is covered by UK adequacy regulations.    

8. Your personal data will not be used for any automated decision making.  

9. Your personal data will be stored in a secure government IT system.  

We use a third-party system, Citizen Space, to collect consultation responses. In the first instance your personal data will be stored on their secure UK-based server. Your personal data will be transferred to our secure government IT system as soon as possible, and it will be stored there for two years before it is deleted.

1. Grenfell Tower Inquiry Phase 2 Report Overview – Executive Summary, September 2024. ↩

2. Grenfell Tower Inquiry Phase 2 Report, Executive Summary, September 2024 ↩

3. Grenfell Tower Inquiry Phase 2 Report, Volume 7, September 2024. ↩

4. Grenfell Tower Inquiry Phase 2 Report: Government response, 26 February 2025. ↩

5. Building a Safer Future: Independent Review of Building Regulations and Fire Safety, May 2018. ↩

6. Grenfell Tower Inquiry Phase 2 Report, Volume 7, September 2024. ↩

7. Press release: Reforms to Building Safety Regulator to accelerate housebuilding, 30 June 2025. ↩

8. Grenfell Tower Inquiry: Terms of Reference, August 2017. ↩

9. Office for National Statistics, Construction statistics, Great Britain: 2023, 22 November 2024. ↩

10. Hodges, Christopher, Outcome-Based Cooperation: in Communities, Organisations, Regulation and Dispute Resolution (Hart, 2022). ↩

11. Hodges, Christopher, Outcome-Based Cooperation: in Communities, Organisations, Regulation and Dispute Resolution (Hart, 2022). ↩

12. Building Safety Act 2022, Part 2 ↩

13. Building Control Independent Panel (BCIP) – Terms of Reference, 13 June 2025. ↩

14. Problem statement for the Building Control Independent Panel, 15 July 2025. ↩

15. Building Control Independent Panel - informing recommendations to government, 29 July 2025. ↩

16. Grenfell Tower Inquiry Phase 2 Report: Government response, 26 February 2025. ↩

17. Understanding residents’ experiences of housing safety and quality – MHCLG Digital, 10 December 2025. ↩

18. English Housing Survey 2022 to 2023: satisfaction and complaints, last updated February 2025. ↩

19. English Housing Survey 2023 to 2024: leasehold experience fact sheet, July 2025. ↩

20. Understanding residents’ experiences of housing safety and quality – MHCLG Digital, 10 December 2025. “But what she’s scared of is they would, you know, the landlord would say because she went to court she would need to leave the house.” (Private Renter). ↩

21. Building Safety Regulator: Resident Panel Member Recruitment and Resident Panel Technical Sub-Committee Member Recruitment, February 2025. ↩

22. Building Safety Regulator: Your Home, Your Safety campaign, March 2024. ↩

23. FSA, Understanding Consumer Trust in the FSA and Food System, June 2025. ↩

24. Building a Safer Future: Independent Review of Building Regulations and Fire Safety, May 2018. ↩

25. OECD Regulatory Policy Outlook 2025, 9 April 2025. ↩

26. Grenfell Tower Inquiry Phase 2 Report, Volume 7, September 2024. ↩

27. Regulation (EU) No 305/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council. ↩