The director of a leading UK building safety firm appeared before the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG) Select Committee this week, painting a sobering picture of operational strain arising from the Building Safety Act.
Allan Binns, Project Four Building Safety Experts’ national director was invited to the inquiry by the MHCLG which aimed to probe whether the new regulatory framework effectively balances safety and housing delivery.
Binns presented freedom-of-information data stressing how the Building Safety Act needed calibration.
Sat alongside Dame Judith Hackitt, Melanie Leech CBE, and officials from the Building Safety Regulator, Binns said:
“We’ve been working diligently to provide BSA support for the last 2 years and we recognise that ultimately, balancing safety and supply is key for the many industries involved.
“The data does paint a picture of operational strain. For example, there are 40,000 new homes currently being delayed by the Gateway 2 process. And Gateway 2 delays are getting worse.
“With 961 applications still ‘under review’ or awaiting further information and with the average approval time for new HRBs standing at 25.5 weeks—over twice the 12-week target – it’s not just about what’s being built, it’s also what’s not being built.
“Delays are already impacting sector viability with redundancies and project cancellations arising, especially in purpose-built student accommodation and some developers are withdrawing from the HRB market altogether.”
Binns insisted that despite these issues, “there isn’t an inherent conflict between building safety and the Government’s £1.5M housing target. The issues experienced with the Regulator are operational based rather than legislation. And the BSR’s non-executive chair Andy Roe has publicly committed to resolving these challenges by Christmas.”
Binns added: “We understand the changes may include a more proportional approach to how applications are regulated, with a ‘trusted’ developer programme switching focus from projects to organisational culture.
“In addition, it’s also understood that Class 2 building control professionals working on HRB projects will increase resource to support their development.
“Plus, we believe there are plans for the implementation of account managers working for developers with notable pipelines, allowing the Regulator to switch from the current franchise model to planning resource in advance of an application being submitted.”
Binns provided several recommendations at the inquiry, commenting that “whilst complex new builds demand rigorous review, the data shows that over 90% of applications concern existing HRBs. Despite this, they endure the same procedural rigour as larger projects.”
Speaking about operational issues, Binns maintained that “Project Four would like to see dedicated teams handling small works, enabling swifter handling without compromising safety.
He added: “And in parallel, professional development pathways can be pivotal. For example, offering Class 2 accredited building control professionals a transparent route to Class 3. It’s all about bolstering system capacity while preserving oversight and quality.”
Beyond the operational issues, Binns flagged the “inconsistency experienced when working with different case officers and multiple-disciplinary teams, which have ultimately caused uncertainty and delays.”
“I would urge the Regulator to standardise decision-making via professional guidance and industry-aligned exemplar submissions, helping practitioners align quickly with expectations. The Construction Leadership Council’s recent guidance is much welcomed, but there could be more.
Binns in concluding said: “Through proportionate processes, regulatory consistency, and investment in professional capacity, the UK can deliver safe, scalable housing. With these measures, safety need not slow supply; indeed, the two can and must advance together.”
