← Back to Westminster Hall Debates
High-rise Buildings: Remediation
02 March 2022
Lead MP
Tom Hunt
Responding Minister
Stuart Andrew
Tags
NHSHousingMental Health
Word Count: 11033
Other Contributors: 4
At a Glance
Tom Hunt raised concerns about high-rise buildings: remediation in Westminster Hall. A government minister responded.
Key Requests to Government:
Asked the Government to explore new regulations or relocation funds that allow more breathable materials or temporary relocations during remediation works, emphasizing that such measures are necessary to address mental health impacts while maintaining safety standards.
How the Debate Unfolded
MPs spoke in turn to share their views and ask questions. Here's what each person said:
Lead Contributor
Opened the debate
Concerned about residents of high-rise buildings forced to endure remediation works in poor conditions, including St Francis Tower in Ipswich which was covered in shrink-wrap for over a year. Residents experienced significant periods of anxiety and mental health problems due to lack of natural light and fresh air. The MP emphasized the need for a balance between ensuring building safety and protecting residents' well-being during remediation.
Jim Shannon
DUP
Strangford
Shannon thanked the hon. Member for Ipswich and other speakers, welcoming the Minister to his first Westminster Hall debate as Housing Minister. He declared an interest as chair of the all-party parliamentary group on healthy homes and buildings, emphasizing the importance of remediation work for residents' wellbeing post-Grenfell tragedy. Shannon highlighted that £15 billion is needed for cladding remediation with only £5.1 billion allocated by the Government. Developers have a responsibility to ensure correct remediation works are carried out. He also raised concerns about ACM (aluminium composite materials) and asked for an update on the status of these buildings, noting that 75 high-rises across the UK still use dangerous cladding.
Greenwich and Woolwich
He expressed concern about the distress experienced by residents undergoing remediation works in buildings with historical cladding or non-cladding defects. He suggested that a code of practice to ensure sensitive remediation could be introduced, emphasizing the need for quick and considerate work to minimize resident impact. He requested that the Minister consider how to speed up the application process for remediation funding, highlighting inconsistencies in information requirements and severe delays affecting buildings without ACM cladding.
Paul Blomfield
Lab
Sheffield Central
Mr Blomfield highlighted the difficulties faced by leaseholders in buildings undergoing remediation, including loss of balconies and windows leading to poor living conditions for two and a half years. He mentioned issues such as lack of compensation or relocation support during the work period, significant financial burdens due to high insurance costs and waking watch fees, and severe mental health impacts documented in Dr Jenny Preece's report on the building safety crisis.
Stevenage
He highlighted the impact of building safety issues on leaseholders, citing an example where remediation costs exceeded property value. He mentioned mental health impacts during the pandemic and advocated for a cap on costs, currently at £10,000, which should include waking watch expenses and cover previous five years' costs. McPartland also raised concerns about the conditions in shrink-wrapped buildings and suggested developing a code of practice for remediation. He proposed that the Government consider compulsory purchase or provision of affordable housing alternatives. On behalf of his constituents, especially those in Vista Tower, he thanked the Minister for unspecified actions or support provided.
Government Response
Stuart Andrew
Government Response
Acknowledged the importance of addressing high-rise building remediation concerns raised by MPs. Emphasised the £5.1 billion fund for fire safety and progress on ACM cladding removal, with 93% remediated or underway. Addressed mental health impacts and encouraged contact with GPs for support. Confirmed waking watch costs offset under the £10,000 cap. Committed to continuing reforms for a robust building safety regime.
▸
Assessment & feedback
Summary accuracy
About Westminster Hall Debates
Westminster Hall debates are a chance for MPs to raise important issues affecting their constituents and get a response from a government minister. Unlike Prime Minister's Questions, these debates are more in-depth and collaborative. The MP who secured the debate speaks first, other MPs can contribute, and a minister responds with the government's position.