← Back to Westminster Hall Debates
Residential Buildings: Safety Remediation
15 September 2026
Lead MP
Al Pinkerton
Surrey Heath
Lib Dem
Responding Minister
Florence Eshalomi
Tags
EconomyHousingStandards & Ethics
Word Count: 13572
Other Contributors: 14
At a Glance
Al Pinkerton raised concerns about residential buildings: safety remediation in Westminster Hall. A government minister responded.
Key Requests to Government:
Pinkerton urged the Minister to outline how residents will be protected during remediation works, especially during extreme weather conditions. He also asked for clearer enforcement of timetables for remediation works and transparency in the application of PAS 9980, including the publication of audit findings. Pinkerton further questioned the need for statutory regulation of fire engineers and proposed measures to protect non-qualifying leaseholders from inheriting remediation costs.
How the Debate Unfolded
MPs spoke in turn to share their views and ask questions. Here's what each person said:
Lead Contributor
Al Pinkerton expressed concern about the ongoing challenges faced by residents in Surrey Heath and across the UK, including delayed remediation works, unresolved building safety issues, and financial impacts on leaseholders. He cited examples of constituents unable to sell their homes due to unresolved building safety issues and the financial strain faced by residents at Royal Artillery Quays due to higher insurance premiums and reduced property values. Pinkerton highlighted issues related to the interpretation of PAS 9980 and the subjective competence of assessors, as well as the need for transparency in the decision-making process.
Brian Leishman
SNP
Dumfries and Galloway
Brian Leishman highlighted the distress and uncertainty faced by Tillicoultry residents due to reinforced autoclaved aerated concrete (RAAC) in their roofs, noting years of substandard communication from the council and the lack of leadership from the SNP administration and the Scottish Government. He criticised the Scottish Government for failing to take meaningful action and blamed them for abandoning the residents.
The hon. Member used the phrase "collective national response" to start his remarks. This is a UK-wide endeavour, but four different Governments could be looking at it. If work is accelerated in one part, pressure can be put on the resources available in another. Does the hon. Member agree that the collective national response has to be considered in a UK sense, not just under the relevant Department in Westminster. The Public Accounts Committee looked at this issue on 21 March 2025 and concluded that we are sceptical about the adequacy and achievability of MHCLG's Remediation Acceleration Plan.
Fleur Anderson
Lab
Putney
Ms Anderson highlighted the ongoing issues faced by constituents regarding cladding remediation delays, expressing frustration over lack of progress despite previous commitments. She mentioned specific cases of delays in remediation due to structural defects, lack of guidance, and bureaucratic hurdles involving multiple bodies. She cited examples of residents waiting for permissions from Network Rail and Building Safety Regulator, impacting their ability to sell or remortgage homes, and causing significant financial and emotional strain. She also raised concerns about social housing tenants waiting for necessary repairs due to delays in cladding remediation approval.
Gideon Amos
LD
Taunton and Wells
Gideon Amos expressed concern about the PAS 9980 standard, which allows buildings to pass fire risk appraisals even if they did not comply with building regulations at the time of construction. He also highlighted deficiencies in the standard regarding the gap between 'tolerable' and 'low' risk levels, suggesting that the draft allows for delays in remediation work. Amos noted that only 1,800 out of 4,600 buildings have completed remediation and over 2,000 have not even started, nine years after the Grenfell disaster. He called for the removal of all flammable cladding without leaseholders having to pay, and for developers and manufacturers to be held responsible for remediation costs. Amos also asked the Minister to confirm whether the standard requires all remediation work to be completed at once and to clarify the changes between the consultation draft and the final version of PAS 9980.
Gregory Campbell
DUP
East Londonderry
The hon. Member talked about publication of the audit, with which I hope everyone will agree. Does he agree that it should be shared across the nations of the UK in order that all our Executives—the Parliaments in Scotland and Wales and the Executive in Northern Ireland—can take action where that is appropriate?
Jeremy Corbyn
Lab
Islington North
Jeremy Corbyn highlighted the stress and financial burden on constituents due to safety remediation issues in multiple-ownership private sector developments. He cited Islington's swift response to cladding issues in 2018 compared to the current eight-year delay in resolving similar issues. Corbyn raised concerns about excessive insurance costs and the need for developer responsibility. He also discussed the Drayton Park and Queensland Road developments, urging the Minister for quick remediation work and clarity on leasehold reform issues. Jeremy Corbyn intervened to highlight the excessive insurance costs faced by constituents who did not install dangerous cladding or fail to inspect properly, urging for compensation from the insurance industry or government support if that is not forthcoming.
I can think of at least two buildings in my constituency that have been determined urgent life-critical but cannot be remediated because of delays in getting the certificates they need from the Building Safety Regulator. That leaves residents facing large insurance costs, unable to sell, and stuck with damp and mould and a whole range of other issues.
Jim Dickson
Lab
Dartford
Jim Dickson highlighted the long-standing fire safety issues in Dartford, including a case at Ingress Park where problems were identified as early as 2019, leading to a fire in 2023 that injured four people. He also mentioned a dispute at Heron Court involving managing agents and the developer, where residents face a 24-hour waking watch and are uncertain about who will fund the costs. Dickson expressed surprise at discovering new issues in buildings constructed after the Grenfell Tower tragedy in 2017.
Jim Shannon
DUP
Strangford
Jim Shannon emphasised the growing problem of unsafe cladding in residential buildings, noting that more than 4,500 buildings in England were identified as requiring remediation by the end of July 2026. He highlighted the financial and emotional strain on residents due to insurance premiums and property value depreciation. Shannon also raised concerns about the situation in Northern Ireland, where hundreds of people are still living in high-rise buildings with cladding that has raised serious fire safety concerns. Jim Shannon thanked the Minister for her response and asked for assistance in engaging with the Northern Ireland Assembly to share learnings from remediation efforts in England.
Lewis Cocking
Lab
Broxbourne
Lewis Cocking highlighted the ongoing need for building safety remediation, noting progress made since the Grenfell fire but stressing the need for faster action. He criticised some developers for not acting promptly and cited the Building Safety Regulator's slow pace, with only 39% of identified buildings having completed remediation works by the end of July 2025. He shared a local example of a six-storey block in Waltham Cross with fire safety issues, where residents were forced to evacuate due to the management company stopping funding for a waking watch.
Luke Myer questioned what more could be done to encourage developers to innovate and protect workers and residents, citing an example of Carl Harris from Teesside who suffered injuries due to a collapsed wall.
Meg Hillier
Lab
Hackney South and Shoreditch
Meg Hillier welcomed the Minister to her post and highlighted ongoing issues with the Building Safety Regulator and skills shortages. She raised concerns about mortgageability, insurance, and the issue of tolerability in fire safety standards. She called for accurate information to be sent to mortgage lenders and for insurance and skills issues to be addressed. Meg Hillier intervened to ask about the timescale for mandatory licensing and expressed concern about the hollowing out of local authorities, requesting support from the Treasury for local government in this regard.
Mike Reader
Con
Bolton West
Mike Reader recognised the substantial performance changes made by the Building Safety Regulator (BSR) under Lord Roe and Charlie Pugsley. He highlighted concerns about the building safety levy's implementation, enforcement deadlines, buildings under 11 metres, non-qualifying leaseholders, defect liability periods, insurance issues, and excessive legal fees. He stressed the importance of engaging with suppliers and installers to understand the challenges on the ground.
Will Forster
Lab
Will Forster highlighted construction failures in his Woking constituency, specifically mentioning the Victoria Square development and the Eastgate building. He cited road closures due to falling cladding panels and the evacuation of over 100 residents from the Eastgate building due to structural defects. Forster questioned why purely economic losses are not recoverable under common law and called for the Government to make contract law standard practice for building projects. He also urged the Government to release the testing results of the Eastgate building immediately and introduce mandatory licensing for construction firms.
Government Response
Florence Eshalomi
Government Response
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Dr Murrison. I am grateful to the hon. Member for Surrey Heath (Dr Pinkerton) for securing this important debate. Nine years on, a number of Members have rightly raised the tragic incident at Grenfell Tower, and the Government are committed to speeding up remediation, ensuring that those responsible bear the cost of making buildings safer, and strengthening protections for leaseholders and residents. Since the launch of the remediation acceleration plan, more than 420 additional buildings over 11 metres have completed cladding remediation through the Government-funded scheme and the developer remediation contract, meaning that some 35,000 more residents are now living in safer homes. The Government have approved £2.1 billion of funding for cladding remediation since the plan was launched and have committed to more than £1 billion to accelerate remediation in the social housing sector. The Building Safety Act puts the responsibility for undertaking and in most cases paying for remediation on the building's landlords, while making it very clear that developers must pay to fix buildings that they have developed or refurbished even if they no longer own them. Courts have new powers to extend liability to associated companies, thereby stopping complex corporate structures being used to dodge responsibility. Where a developer cannot be identified or has not yet agreed to pay, public funding is available to address life-threatening cladding risk on residential buildings over 11 metres high, so that no leaseholder in those buildings will face cladding remediation costs. Many holders of qualifying leases are protected in full from non-cladding and interim measures, with other qualifying leaseholders having their costs firmly capped and spread over 10 years. The Building Safety Act and the forthcoming remediation Bill will strengthen regulators' ability to check delay and non-compliance, improve routes to recover remediation costs from those responsible, and ensure that residents have a pathway to remediation even where responsible entities fail to act or are unable to meet their obligations. The Government are considering how to go further to protect residents, particularly those who fall outside existing protections, and to ensure that no responsible party can avoid its obligations. The Government are committed to building a safety regime that is robust, proportionate and protects residents while enabling the delivery of much-needed homes.
▸
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.