Progress report: the construction industry
Updated 17 December 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
In November we laid a Statutory Instrument that will transfer building safety functions from the Health and Safety Executive into a newly created arms-length body.
Under the interim leadership of Andy Roe and Charlie Pugsley, and in advance of the new body being established, the Building Safety Regulator is already making operational and policy changes to speed up decision making, particularly on building control approval, including through the introduction of an Innovation Unit.
Today (17 December 2025) we have published the Single Construction Regulator Prospectus: Consultation Document. The prospectus confirmed the government’s commitment to the Inquiry recommendation and set out further detail on how we will deliver the single regulator.
The prospectus also established our ambition to go beyond the Inquiry recommendation through a longer-term, system wide approach and seeks views on the key areas of focus for our ambition.
Responsible department
Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government
Responsible person
Catherine Adams, Director, Buildings Management and Insight
Recommendation 2
| Recommendation number |
Inquiry reference | Status | Responsibility | Accepted |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2 | 113.7 | Complete | 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.
What we have done
Today (17 December 2025) the Building Safety Regulator published the results of its initial review of the definition of higher-risk buildings.
The review found that the current definition appropriately reflects the available evidence on the risks to individuals from the spread of fire or structural failure. It therefore recommended no changes to regime scope at the present time. The Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government supports this recommendation.
The Building Safety Regulator has also set out plans for the ongoing review, which will ensure data and evidence on the risk to individuals is regularly assessed to determine whether the list of buildings subject to the enhanced regulatory oversight of the higher risk regime should be amended in any way.
This recommendation is complete and has been fully discharged.
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 (complete).
- Budgets transfer to MHCLG (expected in 2026).
What we have done
Ministerial responsibilities for all fire-related functions transferred from the Home Office to MHCLG from 1 April 2025 and the transfer of all relevant Home Office staff to MHCLG took place on 1 July 2025.
The budget transfer has been approved but this recommendation cannot be closed until the Parliamentary Supplementary Estimates process has been completed.
By transferring the entirety of fire functions to MHCLG (and not just responsibility for fire safety) the government has gone further than the Inquiry’s recommendation.
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
In September, Thouria Istephan was appointed as interim Chief Construction Adviser for a period of 12 months. This interim appointment will allow vital work to begin now with expert leadership in place to guide and maintain momentum on reform and regulatory design, while the government establishes the role permanently next year. The interim Chief Construction Advisor was appointed through a direct ministerial process, in line with Cabinet Office guidance and her role will be taken up on a part-time basis.
We have begun the appointment process for the final Chief Construction Adviser, who will be appointed in September 2026.
Responsible department
Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government
Responsible person
Catherine Adams, Director, Buildings Management and Insight
Recommendations 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11 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 |
| 11 | 113.17 | 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.
11: 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
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.
11: 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.
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. The guidance will continue to be updated as required thereafter to ensure it keeps pace with knowledge and research, and new materials and products on the market.
What we have done
In December 2024, the government committed to subjecting Approved Document B (Fire Safety) to continuous review by the Building Safety Regulator (BSR); and that a fundamental review of the building safety regulations guidance generally will be produced, updated and communicated to the construction industry. The BSR will shortly publish a consultation on further changes to Approved Document B.
Government appointed a six-member expert panel including an architect, housebuilder, planning, technical and digital expert, on 31 July 2025, to help guide the BSR-led review of the wider suite of Building Regulations guidance. Recommendations from the review are expected in 2026.
Responsible department
Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government
Responsible person
Kate O’Neill, Director, Buildings Design and Construction
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 have been undertaking further engagement with sector and experts to reconcile different perspectives on how to achieve strengthened fire safety requirements to determine the appropriate next steps.
In parallel, we continue work to address issues raised with the effectiveness and operation of the current regime.
These issues must be addressed to ensure that any future enhancements are both proportionate and deliverable.
Responsible department
Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government
Responsible person
Kate O’Neill, Director, Buildings Design and Construction
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 and the oversight of these processes. 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 Construction Products Reform White Paper.
What we have done
We are developing proposals that will be included in the Construction Products Reform White Paper to be published before Spring 2026.
Development of the white paper is being informed by detailed analysis of responses to consultation on the Construction Products Reform Green Paper, and by wide engagement with the sector, which is ongoing.
Responsible department
Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government
Responsible person
Kate O’Neill, Director, Buildings Design and Construction
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
We are developing proposals that will be included in the Construction Products Reform White Paper to be published before Spring 2026. Development of the white paper is being informed by detailed analysis of responses to consultation on the Construction Products Reform Green Paper, and by wide engagement with the sector, which is ongoing.
Responsible department
Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government
Responsible person
Kate O’Neill, Director, Buildings Design and Construction
Recommendations 15, 16, 17 and 18
| Recommendation number |
Inquiry reference | Status | Responsibility | Accepted |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 15 | 113.25 | In progress | Government | In full |
| 16 | 113.25 | In progress | Government | In full |
| 17 | 113.27 | Complete | 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.
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 to 18 form a package of work to ensure fire engineers play a central role in delivering safer buildings and to help attract and retain skilled professionals.
We convened a panel of industry, academic, and regulatory experts to advise on these recommendations and develop a statement on what should be expected of a competent fire engineer, in line with recommendation 17.
Today (17 December 2025), we published both the authoritative statement and a next steps paper. These set out a number of key principles which should underpin future regulation of the profession, and outline how government intends to take forward reforms. This represents a significant milestone in establishing a more consistent, accountable, and trusted fire engineering profession, and will inform future consultation and implementation planning.
Recommendation 17 is complete and has been fully discharged.
Responsible department
Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government
Responsible person
Kate O’Neill, Director, Buildings Design and Construction
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 (ARB) has already reviewed the changes they have made to the education and training of architects since the fire. We will consider this recommendation complete when the Royal Institute of British Architects (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
RIBA is continuing to advance its approach to education, training, and competence, with a focus on continuous improvement. A comprehensive review of its Code of Practice for Chartered Practices is now underway, with particular attention being paid to organisational capability.
The Education and Professional Development Framework, which outlines the education and competence requirements for members and was revised in response to the Grenfell Tower fire, is also undergoing further review. This process is nearing completion, with implementation expected in 2026.
In 2025, RIBA introduced a mandatory Health and Life Safety competence test for all Chartered Members acting as designers on projects in England under the Construction Design Management (CDM) Regulations and Building Regulations. The institute is also continuing to monitor members’ continuing professional development compliance.
Additionally, RIBA’s Principal Designer Register, which accredits practitioners operating under CDM and Building Regulations, now includes over 150 accredited professionals.
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
Work continues to improve the delivery of the current higher risk regime and requirements. We will undertake further engagement to further understand different perspectives on the effectiveness of the recommendation to inform the implementation approach.
In parallel, concerns have been raised about the effectiveness and operation of the current regime. We are working to address issues in the first instance to ensure that any future enhancements are both proportionate and deliverable.
Responsible department
Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government
Responsible person
Kate O’Neill, Director, Buildings Design and Construction
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 are currently engaging with industry representatives through a series of roundtables to gather diverse perspectives on the scope and operational design of a licensing scheme for principal contractors. Insights from these roundtables are being analysed to inform the development of the policy framework.
A review of the dutyholder regime and how it is functioning is currently underway. The findings from the review will be used to support the design of an effective licensing scheme for principal contractors working on higher-risk building work.
We are continuing work to align the requirements under recommendations 20 and 21, for a personal undertaking or statement from a director or senior manager to ensure adherence to Building Regulations.
Responsible department
Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government
Responsible person
Kate O’Neill, Director, Buildings Design and Construction
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
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 Building Control Independent Panel continues to meet regularly and is actively developing its recommendations for government.
It has agreed to publish a final report in the coming months, with the government planning to issue a formal response in the new year.
Responsible department
Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government
Responsible person
Kate O’Neill, Director, Buildings Design and Construction
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 developing proposals that will be included in the Construction Products Reform White Paper to be published before Spring 2026. Development of the white paper is being informed by detailed analysis of responses to consultation on the Construction Products Reform Green Paper, and by wide engagement with the sector, which is ongoing.
Responsible department
Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government
Responsible person
Kate O’Neill, Director, Buildings Design and Construction
Recommendation 25
| Recommendation number |
Inquiry reference | Status | Responsibility | Accepted |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 25 | 113.40 | Complete | 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.
What we have done
This recommendation was agreed in principle and in July the first Public Inquiries: Recommendations and Government Response dashboards were published. The dashboards currently track the implementation of recommendations from the Phase 2 of the Grenfell Tower Inquiry, alongside the Infected Blood, Manchester Arena and COVID-19 Inquiries.
The dashboards were most recently updated on 14 November 2025 and will continue to be updated on a quarterly basis, evolving to include recommendations from all future inquiry reports.
This commitment to transparency enhances both public scrutiny and accessibility in line with this recommendation. We do not think that legislation is necessary to maintain this work, but we will keep this under review.
This recommendation is complete and has been fully discharged.
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 those who are competent can offer their services as fire risk assessors.
What we have done
A consultation on the fire risk assessor profession will be launched in early 2026. This consultation will set out proposals and opportunities to meet recommendation 26 and support consistently high competency standards across the fire risk assessor profession.
Responsible department
Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government
Responsible person
Peter Lee, Director, Fire Policy
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
Advice is submitted by the NFCC to Government on what measures are needed to ensure guidance and standards for lift keys are appropriate, and to ensure greater standardisation across the lift industry.
What we have done
A finalised position on measures needed to ensure appropriate guidance and standards for lift keys and to ensure greater standardisation across the lift industry has been agreed with the NFCC Protection Committee and communicated to Building Safety Regulator (BSR) colleagues.
A meeting was held on 31 October 2025 where it was confirmed that the BSR were considering the position and no formal paperwork from NFCC was necessary; they are pursuing the matter internally.
We have reviewed the national guidance relating to lift controls and proposed changes have been endorsed by the Operational Guidance Forum. The Operational Preparedness, Response and Resilience committee met on 22 October 2025, and approval was granted at this meeting. The updated guidance was published on the NFCC website on 23 October 2025.
Responsible department
Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government
Responsible person
Peter Lee, Director, Fire Policy
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 (HSE) has developed a delivery plan which was agreed by its Operations and Regulation Committee in September. The plan aims to provide greater assurance that pipeline isolation valves are accessible, and that the interrelationships between all parties is better understood, supported by definitive deliverables.
HSE is engaging with pipeline operators to establish a clear baseline of pipeline isolation valve access and existing barriers, in consideration of the risk-based inspection approach and processes adopted by the operators. This will inform targeted stakeholder engagement with interested parties, due to commence from March 2026.
Responsible department
Health and Safety Executive
Responsible person
Rick Brunt, Director, Engagement and Policy