Progress report: the construction industry
Published 29 May 2025
© Crown copyright 2025
This publication is licensed under the terms of the Open Government Licence v3.0 except where otherwise stated. To view this licence, visit nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/version/3 or write to the Information Policy Team, The National Archives, Kew, London TW9 4DU, or email: psi@nationalarchives.gov.uk.
Where we have identified any third party copyright information you will need to obtain permission from the copyright holders concerned.
This publication is available at https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/grenfell-tower-inquiry-government-progress-report/progress-report-the-construction-industry
Recommendation 1
| Recommendation number |
Inquiry reference | Status | Responsibility | Accepted |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 113.6 | In progress | Government | In principle |
Recommendation
That the government draw together under a single regulator all the functions relating to the construction industry to which we have referred.
What we committed to doing
The single regulator will deliver the functions specified in the report with two exceptions. We do not believe it is appropriate for the single regulator to undertake testing and certification of construction products, or issue certificates of compliance, as this would create a new conflict of interest within the regulator. Instead, we will strengthen oversight of Conformity Assessment Bodies through reforms to the construction products regime.
Implementation will start immediately, beginning with work to support the existing regulatory regime as the foundation to moving towards greater consolidation. We are also publishing a Construction Products Reform Green Paper alongside this response which sets out our proposals for reform of the construction products regulatory regime and will inform the implementation of this recommendation.
We will publish a Regulatory Reform Prospectus and consultation on the design of the single regulator later this year before bringing forward the necessary legislation to establish it later in the Parliament.
We will go further than the Inquiry’s recommendation by consulting on strengthening the investigation of serious building safety incidents. We will examine all options for going further to ensure serious incidents are investigated quickly and transparently, including a standalone organisation to provide an additional point of insight, evidence and challenge.
This recommendation will be complete when
The single construction regulator is established and, in conjunction with industry and other stakeholders, we have created a more coherent regulatory system capable of restoring trust in the building system.
What we have done
Implementing the single regulator has started with work to support the existing regulatory regime by strengthening the Building Safety Regulator as the foundation to moving towards greater consolidation. We are working closely with the Building Safety Regulator to support their plan for improved delivery, providing additional investment to increase building control capability and capacity and improvements to infrastructure, training and processes.
We have also published a Construction Products Reform Green Paper setting out proposals for reform of the construction products regulatory regime.
We have begun to establish the structures to design the single regulator in partnership with industry, residents, regulators and experts.
This design work will inform a Regulation of the Built Environment Prospectus. We will review the title of the prospectus as we get closer to its launch. The prospectus will be published later this year and will set out proposals for the design of the single regulator that will lead to the necessary legislation to establish it when parliamentary time allows.
Recommendation 2
| Recommendation number |
Inquiry reference | Status | Responsibility | Accepted |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2 | 113.7 | In progress | Government | In full |
Recommendation
That the definition of a higher-risk building for the purposes of the Building Safety Act be reviewed urgently.
What we committed to doing
The Building Safety Regulator has conducted an initial review of the definition of a higher-risk building. Plans for an ongoing review, which will help strengthen the building system, reassure residents and identify whether the list of buildings which are subject to the enhanced regulatory oversight and requirements of the higher-risk regime should be amended in any way, will be set out in summer 2025.
This recommendation will be complete when
Following the initial review of scope already undertaken by the Building Safety Regulator, this recommendation will be complete when the Building Safety Regulator:
- publishes the results of their review
- has identified and know how best to address any gaps in data/evidence
What we have done
We are currently working with the Building Safety Regulator to agree the criteria and content of the ongoing review. We expect the review to include the consideration of known issues within the built environment and activities that would allow us to identify any further risks. The Building Safety Regulator will set out plans for the review at the end of summer.
Recommendation 3
| Recommendation number |
Inquiry reference | Status | Responsibility | Accepted |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 3 | 113.8 | In progress | Government | In full |
Recommendation
That the government bring responsibility for the functions relating to fire safety currently exercised by MHCLG, the Home Office and the Department for Business and Trade into one department under a single Secretary of State.
What we committed to doing
Fire safety related functions will move from the Home Office to MHCLG. The National Regulator for Construction Products in the Department for Business and Trade already reports to MHCLG’s Secretary of State, and we will continue to look at consolidation in the context of the report’s wider recommendations on institutional reform.
This recommendation will be complete when
Ministerial responsibilities are transferred to MHCLG (complete), staff transfer to MHCLG (expected in July, following a full consultation with the unions), budgets transfer to MHCLG (expected in the autumn).
What we have done
The Prime Minister announced in February that responsibility for all Home Office fire functions would transfer to the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG). As announced by the Prime Minister, the Home Office will retain management of the Airwave Service Contract on behalf of MHCLG and will remain responsible for the Emergency Service Mobile Communications Programme and His Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary and Fire & Rescue Services (HMICFRS). This decision took effect through a formal machinery of government change on 1 April 2025, fire functions and building safety now reporting to one Secretary of State.
This will provide a more coherent approach to keeping people safe from fire in their homes.
Alex Norris is now the minister responsible for fire and building safety policy and work is underway to support a smooth and positive transition of all functions between departments.
At present, officials working on fire safety remain in the Home Office, but reporting to the Deputy Prime Minister. We expect work on the transfer to be completed in 2025.
Recommendation 4
| Recommendation number |
Inquiry reference | Status | Responsibility | Accepted |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 4 | 113.9 | In progress | Government | In full |
Recommendation:
That the Secretary of State appoint a Chief Construction Adviser with a sufficient budget and staff to provide advice on all matters affecting the construction industry, including:
- monitoring all aspects of the department’s work relating to Building Regulations and statutory guidance
- providing advice to the Secretary of State on request and
- bringing to the attention of the Secretary of State any matters affecting the Building Regulations and statutory guidance or matters affecting the construction industry more generally of which the government should be aware
What we committed to doing
We will appoint a Chief Construction Adviser to advise the Secretary of State, to monitor the department’s work relating to the Building Regulations, statutory guidance and the construction industry more generally, and to bring industry together and hold it to account to help design and deliver the progress we must make together to realise effective reform and culture change. The Chief Construction Adviser will also provide direct input and convene industry engagement into the design and implementation of the single regulator.
This recommendation will be complete when
The permanent Chief Construction Adviser is in post and, through regular engagement with stakeholders, they are able to drive transformative change across the sector and restore trust.
What we have done
The government intends for this role to encourage improved standards and behaviour and rebuild trust across the built environment sector.
To ensure long-term priorities are met and action is undertaken quickly:
1. We will engage an interim Chief Construction Adviser for a fixed period
2. The interim Chief Construction Adviser will work on priority areas such as the design and implementation of the single regulator
3. We are working to finalise the responsibilities of the permanent Chief Construction Adviser
4. We anticipate having the permanent Chief Construction Adviser appointed in 2026
Recommendations 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 and 12
| Recommendation number |
Inquiry reference | Status | Responsibility | Accepted |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 5 | 113.11 | In progress | Government | In full |
| 6 | 113.12 | In progress | Government | In full |
| 7 | 113.13 | In progress | Government | In full |
| 8 | 113.13 | In progress | Government | In full |
| 9 | 113.14 | In progress | Government | In full |
| 12 | 113.18 | In progress | Government | In full |
Recommendations
5: That the statutory guidance generally, and Approved Document B in particular, be reviewed accordingly and a revised version published as soon as possible.
6: That a revised version of the guidance contain a clear warning in each section that the legal requirements are contained in the Building Regulations and that compliance with the guidance will not necessarily result in compliance with them.
7: New materials and methods of construction and the practice of overcladding existing buildings make the existence of effective compartmentation a questionable assumption and we recommend that it be reconsidered when Approved Document B is revised.
8: Calculating the likely rate of fire spread and the time required for evacuation, including the evacuation of those with physical or mental impairments, are matters for a qualified fire engineer. We do not think that it would be helpful to attempt to include in Approved Document B an indication of what would be acceptable because each building is different, but we recommend that the guidance draw attention to the need to make a calculation of that kind.
9: That, as far as possible, membership of bodies advising on changes to the statutory guidance should include representatives of the academic community as well as those with practical experience of the industry (including fire engineers) chosen for their experience and skill and should extend beyond those who have served on similar bodies in the past.
12: BS 9414 should be approached with caution and we recommend that the government make it clear that it should not be used as a substitute for an assessment by a suitably qualified fire engineer.
What we committed to doing
5: The Building Safety Regulator is undertaking a review of how statutory guidance, currently offered in the form of Approved Documents, might best be structured, updated and presented in order to provide accurate, up to date and coherent guidance to support designers in demonstrating compliance with the building regulations. Interim findings will be published by summer 2025 and a full list of recommendations will be published in 2026.
The guidance in Approved Document B has been updated several times since 2017 to make it clearer and to improve fire safety standards. The government has committed to keep Approved Document B under continuous review, and the Building Safety Regulator will consult on further changes in autumn 2025.
6: We will address this through the response to recommendation 5.
7: We will address this through the response to recommendation 5.
8: We will address this recommendation through the ongoing Approved Document B review, led by the Building Safety Regulator. The review and industry engagement will explore ways through which Approved Document B can be updated to provide further guidance on external fire spread, while sufficiently supporting designers in considering fire spread via the external wall.
9: We agree that a diverse range of representatives, including those from academic and professional communities, should be included in membership of bodies advising on changes to statutory guidance.
The Building Safety Act 2022 established the Building Advisory Committee (BAC) which, in turn, is supported by thematic working groups such as the Approved Document B Fire Safety Working Group. These have significant academic and professional representation. Membership and range of expertise available through the BAC will be considered in the review of statutory guidance.
12: We will address this through the response to recommendation 5.
These recommendations will be complete when
The final report of the review of how statutory guidance, currently offered in the form of Approved Documents, is completed and published, and the areas of improvement identified have been considered and implemented.
Approved Document B is subject to continuous review, including a consultation on further changes in autumn 2025. The guidance will continue to be updated at regular intervals thereafter to ensure it keeps pace with knowledge and research, and new materials and products on the market.
What we have done
The Building Safety Regulator has developed their plans for the review of how statutory guidance, currently offered in the form of Approved Documents. This includes engaging widely across the sector to establish a panel with the right expertise and diversity to oversee the review.
The Building Safety Regulator continues to engage with the sector and review the relevant recommendations and issues raised throughout the Inquiry’s report, alongside the research outputs of the ongoing Technical Review of Approved Document B, towards publication of a consultation on further changes to Approved Document B in autumn 2025. This will also inform future updates as part of the continuous review.
Recommendation 10
| Recommendation number |
Inquiry reference | Status | Responsibility | Accepted |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 10 | 113.15 | In progress | Government | In full |
Recommendation
That it be made a statutory requirement that a fire safety strategy produced by a registered fire engineer to be submitted with building control applications (at Gateway 2) for the construction or refurbishment of any higher-risk building and for it to be reviewed and re-submitted at the stage of completion (Gateway 3). Such a strategy must take into account the needs of vulnerable people, including the additional time they may require to leave the building or reach a place of safety within it and any additional facilities necessary to ensure their safety.
What we committed to doing
A fire safety strategy is already required with building control applications for the construction of and significant work to higher-risk buildings. The Building Safety Regulator will consider how to make the current guidance about what is required clearer to applicants.
The registration of the fire engineering profession is addressed in the response to recommendation 15.
This recommendation will be complete when
We have completed a review of how the fire safety strategy already included in the higher-risk regime requirements could go further (in progress).
What we have done
We believe that the minimum expectations under this recommendation already exist within the higher-risk regime. We have worked with the Building Safety Regulator to update guidance setting out these expectations. We are currently building an evidence base and planning engagement with industry and regulatory partners to ensure that we fully understand how we could go further to futureproof the recommendation.
Recommendation 11
| Recommendation number |
Inquiry reference | Status | Responsibility | Accepted |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 11 | 113.18 | In progress | Government | In full |
Recommendation
Assessing whether an external wall can support a particular evacuation strategy is difficult because the necessary information is not always available. We therefore recommend that steps be taken in conjunction with the professional and academic community to develop new test methods that will provide the information needed for such assessments to be carried out reliably.
What we committed to doing
We will work with the professional and academic community to address this recommendation through the ongoing Approved Document B review led by the Building Safety Regulator which will consider any necessary changes to the guidance for external walls. Research in this area will inform any future evolution of changes to or introduction of new testing methods. The government will look to the construction sector to demonstrate that the test methods used are effective and give a genuine indication of the likely behaviour of an external wall system in the event of a fire.
This recommendation will be complete when
“Continuous review” will apply to Approved Document B.
What we have done
Statutory guidance covering fire safety and building design is now subject to continuous review by the Building Safety Regulator. Notwithstanding improvements implemented since 2017, the Building Safety Regulator is developing plans to launch a consultation on further changes by autumn 2025.
Recommendation 13
| Recommendation number |
Inquiry reference | Status | Responsibility | Accepted |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 13 | 113.22 | In progress | Government | In principle |
Recommendation
That the construction regulator should be responsible for assessing the conformity of construction products with the requirements of legislation, statutory guidance and industry standards and issuing certificates as appropriate. We should expect such certificates to become pre-eminent in the market.
What we committed to doing
We published a Construction Products Reform Green Paper alongside the response to the Inquiry.
The green paper proposed extensive measures for system-wide reform. This includes far-reaching proposals for reforming conformity assessment bodies, including that they must obtain a licence from the national regulator, and be subject to a statutory code.
Proposed reforms would place obligations of conformity assessment bodies to act transparently and independent from commercial interests. They would also strengthen the oversight role of the UK Accreditation Service (UKAS), and grant powers for the national regulator to oversee the entire conformity assessment process, including enforcement against bad actors.
Following this consultation, which closed on 21 May 2025, we will set out the government’s initial response and our next steps for long term reform.
This recommendation will be complete when
We develop a robust approach for assessing the conformity of construction products. This will include legislation, statutory guidance and industry standards.
Clear and honest information about products is provided to support designers, specifiers and installers.
The above objectives will be updated as necessary to reflect the outcome of the green paper consultation.
What we have done
The government published the Construction Products Reform Green Paper alongside the response to the Inquiry.
The green paper proposed extensive measures for system-wide reform. This includes far-reaching proposals for reforming conformity assessment bodies, including that they must obtain a licence from the national regulator, and be subject to a statutory code.
Proposed reforms would place obligations of conformity assessment bodies to act transparently and independent from commercial interests. They would also strengthen the oversight role of the UK Accreditation Service (UKAS), and grant powers for the national regulator to oversee the entire conformity assessment process, including enforcement against bad actors.
Following this consultation, which closed on 21 May 2025, we will set out the government’s initial response and our next steps for long term reform.
Recommendation 14
| Recommendation number |
Inquiry reference | Status | Responsibility | Accepted |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 14 | 113.23 | In progress | Government | In principle |
Recommendation
-
that copies of all test results supporting any certificate issued by the construction regulator be included in the certificate
-
that manufacturers be required to provide the construction regulator with the full testing history of the product or material to which the certificate relates and inform the regulator of any material circumstances that may affect its performance
-
manufacturers be required by law to provide on request copies of all test results that support claims about fire performance made for their products
What we committed to doing
Any claims made about a product’s performance, including statements about its suitability for use in certain situations, must be clear, honest and evidenced. Test results relied on when placing a product on the market should be accessible and free of charge to those selecting and using the product. Further, the national regulator must have powers to mandate disclosure of any information relating to the testing process that it considers necessary to assure itself that a product complies with the law.
We published a Construction Products Reform Green Paper alongside the response to the Inquiry that proposes extensive measures for system-wide reform, including measures to address product testing and conformity assessment.
This recommendation will be complete when
Any claims made about a product’s performance can be evidenced.
The regulator has sufficient powers to mandate disclosure of any information relating to the testing process that it considers necessary to assure itself that a product complies with the law.
The above objectives will be updated as necessary to reflect the outcome of the consultation.
What we have done
The government published the Construction Products Reform Green Paper alongside the response to the Inquiry that proposed extensive measures for system-wide reform of the sector.
The green paper set out that in the future regime any claims made about a construction product’s performance, including statements about its suitability for use in certain situations, must be clear, honest, and evidenced. The green paper also set out that when a product is placed on the market, we expect test results to be made available.
Following this consultation, which closed on 21 May 2025, we will set out the government’s initial response and our next steps for long term reform.
Recommendations 15, 16, 17 and 18
| Recommendation number |
Inquiry reference | Status | Responsibility | Accepted |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 15 | 114.25 | In progress | Government | In full |
| 16 | 113.25 | In progress | Government | In full |
| 17 | 113.27 | In progress | Government | In full |
| 18 | 113.28 | In progress | Government | In full |
Recommendations
15: That the profession of fire engineer be recognised and protected by law and that an independent body be established to regulate the profession, define the standards required for membership, maintain a register of members and regulate their conduct.
16: That the government take urgent steps to increase the number of places on high-quality master’s level courses in fire engineering accredited by the professional regulator.
17: That the government convene a group of practitioner and academic fire engineers and such other professionals as it thinks fit to produce an authoritative statement of the knowledge and skills to be expected of a competent fire engineer. Such a statement would also enable others in the construction industry to understand better the nature and importance of a fire engineer’s work.
18: That the government, working in collaboration with industry and professional bodies, encourage the development of courses in the principles of fire engineering for construction professionals and members of the fire and rescue services as part of their continuing professional development.
What we committed to doing
15: We recognise the importance of fire engineers in ensuring life safety and will consider how to most effectively protect and regulate the profession.
16: We recognise the value that more masters level courses in fire engineering could bring and will consider how to most effectively increase their number and take-up.
17: We will convene a panel of academics and industry experts to consider what should be expected of a competent fire engineer. The panel will also support and advise on the implementation of other recommendations in respect of fire engineers.
18: We recognise the importance that the principles of fire engineering can have for these professions and others. We will work with industry and professional bodies to consider how best to encourage the development of courses.
These recommendations will be complete when
15: When we have established the mechanism through which the profession will be regulated and overseen. We expect initial principles and next steps to be clarified as we engage the panel up to the autumn.
16: We are considering how to most effectively increase the number and take-up of masters level courses in fire engineering. This recommendation will be complete when we set out the steps taken to increase take-up of courses.
17: When we publish the statement of the knowledge and skills to be expected of a competent fire engineer.
18: When we confirm with industry and professional bodies how to encourage the development of courses, and such development is implemented.
What we have done
Recommendations 15, 16, 17 and 18 form a package of work to ensure that fire engineers play their part in driving safety in design and delivery and to attract and retain skilled professionals.
We have now engaged a panel of experts and academics in the field to consider what should be expected of a competent fire engineer in line with Recommendation 17, and advise on the implementation of other recommendations in respect of fire engineers. Further information about the panel, including its membership, is available here.
We will set out our plans for next steps in relation to the recommendations concerning fire engineers in autumn 2025.
Recommendation 19
| Recommendation number |
Inquiry reference | Status | Responsibility | Accepted |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 19 | 113.30 | In progress | Architects Registration Board (ARB) and Royal Institute of British Architects (RIBA) | In full |
Recommendation
We recognise that both the Architects Registration Board (ARB) and the Royal Institute of British Architects (RIBA) have taken steps since the Grenfell Tower fire to improve the education and training of architects. We recommend that they should review the changes already made to ensure they are sufficient in the light of our findings.
What we committed to doing
The Inquiry’s report notes that both the regulator, the Architects Registration Board (ARB), and the professional body, the Royal Institute of British Architects (RIBA), have taken steps since the tragedy to improve the education and training of architects. Both organisations have committed to reviewing the changes already made to ensure they are sufficient in the light of the Inquiry’s findings.
We welcome the steps ARB and RIBA have already taken, and we will continue to support them to make further changes if deemed necessary.
This recommendation will be complete when
The Architects Registration Board has reviewed the changes they have made to the education and training of architects since the fire. We will consider this recommendation complete when RIBA completes their review of the changes they have made and confirms they are sufficient, in light of the full findings of the Inquiry.
What we have done
The Architects Registration Board (ARB) introduced changes to education, training and Continuing Professional Development after the Grenfell Tower fire. They have reviewed these in light of the recommendations in the Grenfell Inquiry Phase 2 report and are content that the changes are the right ones, although will keep them under review during implementation.
Similarly, the Royal Institute of British Architects (RIBA) introduced changes to their education, training and competence requirements following the fire, and have confirmed that they will review these changes. In addition, RIBA’s review will take into account broader work that ARB is doing on the training requirements for architects. Government expects that its update will be completed during the next 12 months.
Recommendation 20
| Recommendation number |
Inquiry reference | Status | Responsibility | Accepted |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 20 | 113.31 | In progress | Government | In full |
Recommendation
That it be made a statutory requirement that an application for building control approval in relation to the construction or refurbishment of a higher-risk building (Gateway 2) be supported by a statement from a senior manager of the principal designer under the Building Safety Act 2022 that all reasonable steps have been taken to ensure that on completion the building as designed will be as safe as is required by the Building Regulations.
What we committed to doing
We intend to make it a statutory requirement to include such a statement with building control approval applications requiring the principal designer to confirm they have complied with their existing duties. This includes all reasonable steps being taken to ensure the design complies with relevant requirements in building regulations.
We will consider whether this requirement should apply to all building control routes, not just higher-risk buildings, in line with the requirements of dutyholders under the Building Safety Act 2022.
This recommendation will be complete when
We have concluded a public consultation on this proposal.
We have clearly communicated the intention of the recommendation to the construction and insurance industries.
What we have done
We have run a series of industry roundtables to seek views on the higher-risk regime, including issues of principle designer liability. We are now planning more in-depth engagement with construction industry and insurance industry and shaping what a public consultation on this recommendation will need to include.
Recommendation 21
| Recommendation number |
Inquiry reference | Status | Responsibility | Accepted |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 21 | 113.33 | In progress | Government | In full |
Recommendation
That a licensing scheme operated by the construction regulator be introduced for principal contractors wishing to undertake the construction or refurbishment of higher-risk buildings and that it be a legal requirement that any application for building control approval for the construction or refurbishment of a higher-risk building (Gateway 2) be supported by a personal undertaking from a director or senior manager of the principal contractor to take all reasonable care to ensure that on completion and handover the building is as safe as is required by the Building Regulations.
What we committed to doing
We will review the impact of the new dutyholder regime in relation to higher-risk buildings, working with the sector to determine how we can go further, including introducing a licensing scheme for principal contractors where a licence may be granted on the basis of criteria aligned with the dutyholder requirements and can be withdrawn for failure to achieve compliance with the regulations.
This recommendation will be complete when
The review of the dutyholder regime is complete and we have a plan to introduce licensing.
What we have done
We have been engaging in early discussions with stakeholders, and planning the review of the dutyholder regime as set out in the government response.
Recommendations 22 and 23
| Recommendation number |
Inquiry reference | Status | Responsibility | Accepted |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 22 | 113.37 | In progress | Government | In full |
| 23 | 113.38 | In progress | Government | In full |
Recommendations
22: That the government appoint an independent panel to consider whether it is in the public interest for building control functions to be performed by those who have a commercial interest in the process.
23: We recommend that the same panel consider whether all building control functions should be performed by a national authority.
What we committed to doing
22: An independent panel will be established to review the building control sector and will recommend which bodies should carry out certain functions, as well as whether all building control functions should be performed by a national authority.
23: See recommendation 22.
These recommendations will be complete when
These two recommendations will be completed when the panel have presented their review, which we expect by the end of October. The timescales for potential reforms to building control beyond that will depend upon the government’s response to the panel’s recommendations and whether legislation is required to deliver any that are accepted.
What we have done
The Inquiry recommended that the government to set up an independent panel to consider whether to remove commercial interest from building control, and whether to consider alternative national delivery options. The government’s response on 26 February agreed to set up a panel, which has now been done.
Dame Judith Hackitt is the Chair, with three panel seats going to a sub-group of the Industry Safety Steering Group (Dr David Snowball, Elaine Bailey and Ken Rivers). Rt Hon Nick Raynsford has also been appointed to the panel. The panel will agree the Terms of Reference, which will be published. The panel have been asked to issue a report to government before the end of October 2025.
Recommendation 24
| Recommendation number |
Inquiry reference | Status | Responsibility | Accepted |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 24 | 113.39 | In progress | Government | In full |
Recommendation
We have referred to the Cladding Materials Library set up by the University of Queensland, which could form the basis of a valuable source of information for designers of buildings in general. We recommend that the construction regulator sponsor the development of a similar library, perhaps as part of a joint project with the University of Queensland, to provide a continuing resource for designers.
What we committed to doing
We accept the premise of better access to information, resources and test results through a digitally based library. In line with this we are considering options to best support access to data from tests on products and materials and broader fire safety and performance information as part of wider construction product reforms.
This recommendation will be complete when
A library, or equivalent, provides a platform through which users can get clear, honest and up to date information about construction products and their safe use.
What we have done
We are asking for views on how to improve the construction products sector in the Construction Products Reform Green Paper. We published this document alongside the government’s response to the Grenfell Inquiry Report. It includes our thoughts on a construction library. We want to know how to provide clear and trusted information on the safe use of construction products. We also want to know who would be interested in, and most benefit from, seeing this information.
Following this consultation, which closed on 21 May 2025, we will set out the government’s initial response and our next steps for long term reform
Recommendation 25
| Recommendation number |
Inquiry reference | Status | Responsibility | Accepted |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 25 | 113.40 | In progress | Government | In principle |
Recommendation
That it be made a legal requirement for the government to maintain a publicly accessible record of recommendations made by select committees, coroners and public inquiries together with a description of the steps taken in response. If the government decides not to accept a recommendation, it should record its reasons for doing so. Scrutiny of its actions should be a matter for Parliament, to which it should be required to report annually.
What we committed to doing
We will establish a record on GOV.UK of all recommendations made by public inquiries since 2024, and will consider making this an enduring legal requirement. The government agrees that scrutiny of its actions is a matter for Parliament, and ministers will commit to updating Parliament on progress for implementing inquiry recommendations. The government notes the recommendation of the House of Lords Statutory Inquiries Committee to establish a new committee of Parliament to improve scrutiny of government’s response to inquiry recommendations. The judiciary already maintains a publicly accessible record of Prevention of Future Deaths reports made by coroners, and the government is working with the Chief Coroner to improve their transparency and availability, as well as to improve accountability for responses to them.
This recommendation will be complete when
The publicly accessible record of inquiry recommendations is published on GOV.UK. The record will be regularly updated and will capture future inquiry recommendations and implementation progress.
What we have done
We will establish a record on GOV.UK of all recommendations made by public inquiries since 2024, by the summer 2025.
Recommendation 26
| Recommendation number |
Inquiry reference | Status | Responsibility | Accepted |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 26 | 113.41 | In progress | Government | In full |
Recommendation
That the government establish a system of mandatory accreditation to certify the competence of fire risk assessors by setting standards for qualification and continuing professional development and such other measures as may be considered necessary or desirable. We think it necessary for an accreditation system to be mandatory in order to ensure the competence of all those who offer their services as fire risk assessors.
What we committed to doing
We will legislate to make it a mandatory requirement for fire risk assessors to have the competence to perform this critical role independently verified by a UKAS-accredited Certification Body.
This recommendation will be complete when
Legislation puts fire risk assessors on a more professional footing, a common standard for competence is set and a clear pathway into the profession created. With a robust certification system and commissioning process that requires competence to be verified, we will ensure that only competent fire risk assessors are employed.
What we have done
We need to ensure fire risk assessors have the necessary skills, knowledge, experience and behaviours to fulfil this critical fire safety role effectively. To achieve this the government will legislate to make it a mandatory requirement for fire risk assessors to have the competence to perform this critical role independently verified by a UKAS-accredited Certification Body and overseen by a regulator.
We are now engaging experts and academics in the field to consider what should be expected of a competent fire risk assessor and how this will best be achieved, including training and assessment for up to 50,000 individuals. We will set out our delivery plans and key milestones in autumn 2025.
Recommendation 27
| Recommendation number |
Inquiry reference | Status | Responsibility | Accepted |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 27 | 113.43 | In progress | Government | In full |
Recommendation
We are not in a position to determine whether greater standardisation of the fire control switches and keys is required. We therefore recommend that the government seeks urgent advice from the Building Safety Regulator and the National Fire Chiefs Council on the nature and scale of the problem and the appropriate response to it.
What we committed to doing
The National Fire Chiefs Council are reviewing the guidance for the provision of lift fire control switches with the Building Safety Regulator to support a view on standardisation in buildings. They are also surveying fire and rescue services to establish how lift keys, and the type of key, are distributed to firefighters.
This recommendation will be complete when
Metrics for completion will be set out once the National Fire Chiefs Council (NFCC) action and delivery plan is finalised. Once finalised, we will update this to provide further clarification.
What we have done
The National Fire Chiefs Council (NFCC) developed an action and delivery plan in April, which will be shared more widely with key stakeholders by the end of May. To inform this plan, NFCC have surveyed fire and rescue services (FRS) to establish a baseline position for FRS regarding the recommendations. NFCC are currently assessing responses to determine where there are gaps and need for support.
Recommendation 28
| Recommendation number |
Inquiry reference | Status | Responsibility | Accepted |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 28 | 113.44 | In progress | Government | In principle |
Recommendation
That every gas transporter be required by law to check the accessibility of each such valve on its system at least once every three years and to report the results of that inspection to the Health and Safety Executive as part of its gas safety case review.
What we committed to doing
We agree with the Inquiry’s findings that accessibility and functionality of such valves is key to ensuring health and safety by stopping gas supplies in an emergency. Whilst inspections every three years may be appropriate, there may be other situations where inspections should be more frequent or where a longer interval is suitable.
To inform this, the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) is engaging with key stakeholders to fully map out and understand:
- current system integrity approaches, noting changes to operator’s arrangements since the Grenfell tragedy
- the interrelationships between gas network operators, building owners, accountable persons and landowners to understand the challenges encountered when issues with pipeline isolation valves are identified and routes to resolution
Using this evidential research, HSE will develop initial options by March 2025, with a proposed timetable for taking forward a preferred option.
This recommendation will be complete when
This recommendation will be complete when a broader awareness of the purpose and importance of pipeline isolation valves have been communicated to key audiences.
What we have done
The Health and Safety Executive has gathered evidence from the gas network operators on challenges to accessing pipeline isolation valves and on current inspection approaches, noting changes since the Grenfell fire.
Initial options have been developed to address the issues highlighted by the recommendation, and work is in progress to develop these further.
A key focus of the options is the interrelationships between gas network operators, building owners and landowners and the need to build awareness of the importance of pipeline isolation valves to ensure they can be accessed when required.