“Appalling impact” persists as Government remediation plans “fail to measure up”

The Public Accounts Committee has been left “appalled” at the continuing emotional and financial impact of the crisis, which may have affected as many as three million individuals. Evidence given to the Grenfell Tower Inquiry found far too many people still feeling trapped in unsafe homes, facing financial uncertainty and unable to sell their homes and move on.

Disputes over safety still delay work starting, with Government’s promise of a formal dispute resolution process yet to materialise. There’s a risk that residents in affected buildings face exorbitant insurance premiums long-term: a risk that “Government is not doing enough” to manage.

The Public Accounts Committee’s report challenges Government on how effectively it’s putting residents at the heart of its remediation efforts and asks it to consider what more can be done to help bring down insurance premiums for residents awaiting work to start.

Government’s plan

The Government published a plan at the end of last year with a target to complete remediation on all buildings over 18 metres, with at least a completion date for all buildings over 11 metres, by 2029. That’s 12 years after the Grenfell Tower fire.

The Public Accounts Committee shares campaigners’ concerns that the plan, which will rely at least in part on new legislation, is both insufficiently ambitious and at risk of not delivering what’s promised.

Up to 7,000 unsafe buildings are yet to be identified, and Government has yet to find a way in which to secure financial contributions from manufacturers of dangerous cladding.

The report also warns of insufficient capacity and skills across regulators, local authorities and the construction sector, which risk undermining the plan: a risk about which Government “appears complacent”.

Clear update

The Public Accounts Committee is seeking a clear update from Government on what’s being done to address the gaps between its plan and what will be required to deliver it.

The report further highlights the potential impact of remediation plans on housebuilding overall. Government is “not taking seriously enough” the risk that paying for remediation diverts social housing providers’ resources away from building new housing.

Housing associations in London have reported a 90% drop in social housing ‘starts’ over the last year alone. The Public Accounts Committee is seeking a formal impact assessment of cladding remediation policy on housebuilding from Government by the end of the year.

Finally, the report finds that £500,000 was lost to suspected fraud when taxpayer protections were relaxed to put money out to projects quickly under the Building Safety Fund. The Public Accounts Committee recommends that Government strengthens its counter-fraud controls and ensures they’re adequate to meet accelerated funding demand.

Badge of shame

Sir Geoffrey Clifton-Brown MP, chair of the Public Accounts Committee, said: “The Grenfell Tower fire will forever be a badge of shame for the nation. Residents were let down by failings at every level. A community was traumatised and 72 lives were lost. Rightly, all in positions of responsibility have vowed to do everything in our power to prevent such a disaster ever happening again. Eight years on, it’s still not known how many buildings out there have dangerous cladding and when it will be removed. That vow remains unkept for every day that’s still the case.”

Clifton-Brown continued: “As a chartered surveyor, I take a deep personal interest in building safety. I was utterly appalled by the evidence given to the Inquiry, showing residents still mired in the national cladding crisis and with no immediate solutions at hand. Leaseholders with modest financial means can often be left with potentially large financial liabilities, effectively rendering their property unsaleable.”

On that last point, Clifton-Brown noted: “There are two main reasons for this. One, the non-cladding defects in buildings and, two, where leaseholders also have a share in the freehold. That crisis shows signs of having a chilling effect on housebuilding overall, with social housing providers forced to divert resources to remediation rather than badly needed new homes. Despite longstanding promises to make industry pay, Government has yet to find a way to secure this outcome.”

In conclusion, Clifton-Brown said: “It would, of course, have been the Committee’s wish that this report carried better news for all affected. Unfortunately, we are united with campaigners in deeply regrettable scepticism that current remediation plans are capable of delivering on what’s promised. We would urge Government to look to the recommendations in our report to help close the gap between its current plans and the reality on the ground.”