Steps towards making the built environment safer – a look at recent Government activity to shape the future

The start of the 2025/2026 financial year coincided with numerous consultations closing. These provide an insight into the changes and initiatives that may impact the built environment following the Government’s Response to the Grenfell Inquiry. This article considers the recent consultations and discusses the possible changes that could be seen in the industry in due course.

Industry Competence Committee – Building Control Working Group

The Grenfell Tower Inquiry identified a significant gap in skills, knowledge and experience across the built environment industry. Consequently, the Building Safety Regulator (“BSR”) was established by the Building Safety Act 2022 (“the Act”) to facilitate improvement in the competence of building inspectors.

To realise this aim, the Act requires the BSR to establish an Industry Competence Committee (“ICC”). The objective of the ICC is to provide strategic leadership, assistance and encouragement to advance greater competence in the built environment industry. The ICC also advises both the BSR and industry on matters of competence.

Established in September 2023, the Building Control Working Group (“BCWG”) supports the ICC by advising both the BSR and ICC on strengthening the building control profession and helping to identify and triage emerging regulatory issues.

The BSR recently recruited new members to join the working group for a three-year term. New BCWG recruits will be required to gather advice, contribute to competence guidance, and attend meetings and events to communicate their observations to the BSR, in addition to promoting the work of the BCWG within the profession and to wider stakeholders. The essential criteria included Registered Building Control Inspectors registered at class 2 or above and in a frontline building control role within either public or private sector carrying out restricted activities on a regular basis.

Review of Approved Document A: Structure

Approved Document A (“ADA”) provides practical guidance on how to achieve compliance with the Buildings Regulations Requirements concerning the structural safety of buildings. This guidance concerns A1 – Loading, A2 – Ground movement and A3 – Disproportionate collapse. The relevant sections of ADA which provide guidance for A1 and A2 were last revised in May 2013.

The HSE’s call for evidence sought to obtain feedback from the built environment industry prior to the withdrawal of the first-generation Eurocode Standards, which are due to be withdrawn on 30 March 2028.  As ADA has not been substantially reviewed recently, the HSE are planning on using this opportunity to undertake a wider review of the document, beyond the changes which are required due to the Eurocode revision.

The call for evidence includes an online questionnaire which outlines those areas identified as requiring further evidence prior to deciding whether they should be included as part of the review.

These areas include but are not limited to:

• Wall cladding – the HSE considers that updated guidance may be required to provide more detail on areas where some of the more common problems arise in respect of wall cladding.
• Roof covering – the HSE has received industry reports that the roof covering section of ADA contains ambiguity over where and how it applies e.g. in respect of solar panels and how increases in load ought to be calculated.
• Modern Methods of Construction (“MMCs”) – the HSE is aware of issues arising with new construction technologies including failure of Reinforced Aerated Autoclaved Concrete panels. Therefore, within the scope of the HSE’s ADA review will be a consideration as to whether the current provisions in ADA sufficiently address the risks associated with MMCs or if further guidance is required.
• Design checking – ADA does not directly cover structural design checking within the document, however, the HSE are aware that there is a lack of checking of building structures compared to other related disciplines, for example on temporary work designs. In addition, an increased reliance on computer modelling in structural designs increases the risk of design errors occurring. The HSE have suggested and sought feedback from the industry on whether there is a need for increased guidance regarding the level of checks required to demonstrate compliance with the building regulations, in order to determine whether this responsibility should sit within ADA, the Eurocode National Annex, or come from industry.
• Competence of structural engineers – the HSE are aware of industry concerns about the competence of some individuals and organisations undertaking structural designs on projects. Accordingly, the questionnaire seeks feedback from the industry as to whether competency of structural engineers undertaking projects could be better covered in ADA or in documents referenced within.

The responses to the HSE’s questionnaire will be shared with the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government to identify and implement necessary changes to ADA that address shortfalls in guidance concerning Building Regulations Requirements. The questionnaire suggests that the amended guidance will address existing shortfalls that were highlighted by the Grenfell Tower Inquiry. In addition, the questions posed indicate that the review of ADA will also reflect growing concerns arising from technological developments to ensure that the guidance adequately supports the sector whilst maintaining high safety standards.

Building Safety Regulator – Resident Panel member recruitment and Resident Technical Sub-Committee member recruitment

The BSR advertised for new members to join its Residents’ Panel and Technical Sub-Committee. These panels are vital in advising the BSR and ensuring residents’ voices are central to the regulatory process, especially concerning high-rise buildings (“HRBs”). The panel aims to represent a diverse group, including residents of social housing, private renters, leaseholders, and individuals with varied experiences, such as young people and those with disabilities.

The intention is for panel members to provide input based on their experiences to help shape guidance and policies, develop resident engagement strategies, and participate in research. The role includes attending virtual meetings, contributing to surveys, and occasionally setting up task-specific working groups. Additionally, the Technical Sub-Committee will review technical material relating to high-rise buildings, contributing to the development of relevant guidance. This initiative emphasises inclusivity, aiming to reflect the diverse range of experiences among residents of high-rise buildings.

Amendments to sentencing guidelines

On 28 May 2025, the Sentencing Council published their response to the fourth annual consultation on miscellaneous amendments to the sentencing guidelines. This consultation covered a wide range of issues across various topics including a proposal to standardise wording across the guidelines to ensure the guidelines are applied consistently and fairly. For a summary of the sentencing guidelines and the context of the review, please see our recent article.

In respect of sentencing a very large organisation (“VLO”), the guidelines faced criticism for their limited wording in respect of how a sentencing judge decides an appropriate and proportionate one. Further, Courts had commented on the challenge they faced in distinguishing between a large organisation and a VLO for the purpose of sentencing. The Sentencing Council considered that it was ‘undesirable’ for courts to have to refer to case law to apply sentencing guidelines and that guidance given by the Court of Appeal could be included within the relevant sentencing guidelines for VLOs so that the information is clear, accurate and accessible to all users.

The Sentencing Council proposed that for those offending companies where their turnover ‘very greatly exceeds’ the threshold for large companies, it may be necessary to move beyond the suggested range to achieve a proportionate sentence. There were also suggestions from those responding to the consultation that other factors should be considered, including existing investment in health and safety.

The outcome of the review is that the sentencing guidelines now recommend that ‘courts should consider fines outside the range for large companies’ in instances where an offending company’s turnover or equivalent very greatly exceeds the threshold for large companies. The guidelines now also refer the Court to culpability and harm factors, as well as aggravating and mitigating factors in conjunction with the seriousness of the offence for setting the level of a fine for a VLO in conjunction with the seriousness of the offence.

These amendments to the VLO sentencing guidelines mirror the growing appetite for health and safety prosecutions with the aim of ensuring that the sentences are proportionate. They emphasise that the purpose of the Court is to impose proportionate sentences, ensure that management and shareholders of offending organisations feel the effect of the fines imposed, and highlight to those in positions of authority the importance of regulatory compliance. This reflects a drive to hold those responsible for safety accountable and to reinforce that breaches will have significant consequences.

Conclusion

The above consultations align with the government’s response to the Grenfell Inquiry and mark the initial steps toward delivering profound change across the sector to ensure a safer built environment. These changes reinforce the message that building safety requires input from all stakeholders, clearer industry-wide guidance, and accountability through proportionate consequences for health and safety breaches.

We will keep under review the changes that are implemented within the built environment sector and continue to provide updates as to how any changes will be implemented in the future, as well as their anticipated impact.

If you would like to discuss how the above issues may impact your projects or contracts, please contact the authors or your usual Beale & Co contact.