Call for Evidence

The House of Lords Industry and Regulators Committee, chaired by Baroness Taylor of Bolton, has launched an inquiry into building safety regulation, with a particular focus on the work of the Building Safety Regulator, which was established following the Building Safety Act 2022.

The Committee invites interested individuals and organisations to submit evidence by 31 August 2025. As the submission period for this inquiry is longer than we would usually allow, extensions will only be granted in truly exceptional circumstances.

Background

Following the Grenfell Tower fire in 2017, the Government commissioned Dame Judith Hackitt to conduct an Independent Review of Building Regulations and Fire Safety. The Review’s final report, published in 2018, recommended the establishment of a new regulatory framework focused on higher-risk residential buildings, managed by a new regulator with responsibility for the whole of a building’s safety. The Building Safety Regulator (BSR) was set up to act as this new regulator as part of the Building Safety Act 2022.

The BSR has been set up within the Health and Safety Executive and is responsible for setting standards for the design and construction of higher-risk buildings. Higher-risk buildings have been defined as buildings that are at least 18 metres in height or have at least seven storeys and contain at least two residential units. For lower-risk buildings, the BSR does not directly approve their construction but is responsible for regulating the building control bodies and inspectors that do hold this responsibility.

Concerns have been raised by some in the housing sector that delays in approvals by the BSR have slowed down the delivery of new buildings and homes.

Questions 

1. What is your experience of the Building Safety Regulator’s regulatory framework? Has the introduction of the BSR improved the safety of the buildings it is responsible for, and can any examples be given to illustrate this?
2. How has the Building Safety Regulator’s (BSR’s) regulatory framework impacted the delivery of new homes and the maintenance and improvement of existing high-rise buildings?
3. What impacts could the BSR’s regulatory framework have on the delivery of the Government’s housing targets? How significant are high-rise buildings to meeting these housing targets? As an obstacle to meeting these targets, how does building safety regulation compare with other potential obstacles such as skills, supply chains and the planning system?
4. Does the Building Safety Regulator’s regulatory framework strike the right balance between providing a holistic, outcomes-based view of safety and ensuring that developers and building owners understand what they are required to do?
5. To what extent are delays in approvals for high-rise buildings down to the regulatory processes used by the BSR? Could these processes be made more proportionate, particularly for smaller works, without impacting the safety of high-rise buildings? If so, how?
6. Are the BSR’s approval processes sufficiently clear and understandable to developers? What level of guidance or feedback is necessary for those making applications to the BSR to understand its requirements? Could this situation be improved through the BSR’s review of Approved Documents?
7. To what extent are delays caused by a poor understanding of building safety on the part of developers, leading to unsuitable applications? Should the solution to delays be a greater awareness of how to take a holistic approach to safety on the part of developers, rather than more prescriptive guidance on regulatory requirements?
8. The BSR has suggested that it would like to carry out its work on an organisation-by-organisation basis, rather than the current system of looking at things building-by-building. Would you support a move to the BSR focusing on organisations, or would this lessen their focus on the safety of individual buildings?
9. To what extent are delays in approvals caused by the resources available to the regulator? Is there a need to give the BSR more funding, and if so, would developers accept an increase in regulatory fees to allow for this? Would more funding allow the BSR to deal with applications more swiftly, or is there a need to consider alternative financial models for delivering building safety approvals?
10. Does the BSR have access to the skilled staff necessary to carry out multidisciplinary assessments of safety? If the BSR is struggling to access the skills it needs, what changes could resolve this issue? For instance, is there a need for higher pay for those carrying out assessments, or for further changes to enable secondments?
11. How is the BSR progressing in improving the safety of all buildings, including low-rise buildings? Is the relationship between the BSR and building control authorities and inspectors working well?
12. To what extent are delays a result of growing pains that will ease over time, or a structural problem that requires more significant changes? What improvements to the BSR’s regulatory framework are needed?
13. How does the Building Safety Regulator’s work relate to the regulation of construction products? How does the BSR cooperate with the Office for Product and Safety Standards, and how might this relationship change with the introduction of a single construction regulator?
14. How does the Building Safety Regulator’s regulatory framework compare to how building safety is assured in other countries and jurisdictions? Are there good examples of how to ensure building safety elsewhere, and what lessons can the BSR learn from them?

Contributing evidence

The Committee encourages anyone with expertise in or experience of the matters under consideration in its inquiry to submit written evidence.

Diversity comes in many forms, and hearing a range of different perspectives means that committees are better informed and can more effectively scrutinise public policy and legislation. Committees can undertake their role most effectively when they hear from a wide range of individuals, sectors or groups in society affected by a particular policy or piece of legislation. We encourage anyone with experience or expertise of an issue under investigation by a Select Committee to share their views with the Committee, with the full knowledge that their views have value and are welcome.

If you wish to contribute your experience and expertise to this inquiry, please respond to the questions below. There is no obligation to answer every question.