Building Safety (Remediation of Unsafe Cladding etc) Bill (Second sitting)

Lewis Cocking Excerpts

Thursday 12th November 2026 Public Bill Committees

[Sean Woodcock (Banbury) (Lab)]

Q Kate, as you know, I worked in social housing for nearly 15 years before entering this place, including at the time that the Grenfell tragedy took place. I think it is fair to say that that was a big shock to the sector and led to a lot of soul-searching by organisations. My experience was that a really mixed range of expertise and capacity across the sector was shown in the response to that, let alone to any legislation coming down the pipeline. Are you confident that the sector is now in a position to implement this legislation, and is there more that would help in the implementation of this Bill?

Kate Henderson: There is nothing more important than residents’ safety, and I can assure you that our members have safety as their utmost priority and responsibility. We are already delivering a huge number of aspects of remediation work that will be covered by and become statutory duties in the Bill, and we welcome that. This legislation is only one piece of the response to the tragedy at Grenfell Tower. There are other pieces of legislation, but in addition to that, a huge part of this work is around culture. It is around learning, accountability and the relationship between residents and their landlords.

As part of that, in a couple of weeks’ time we will be launching a suite of tools for our members—a Grenfell Tower reflection toolkit. This is about learning lessons from the inquiry. It is a suite of resources for board members, executives, operational levels, large organisations and small organisations, making sure that this is not just about physically replacing cladding, but about listening and acting on the information being provided by residents, having appropriate assurances in place, and making it culturally at the heart of who we are as organisations.

On whether we have the capacity to deliver these new requirements, we are already doing a lot of it, but the capacity of the overall system is not us alone. We rely on expertise, fire risk assessors, contractors and the capacity of the Building Safety Regulator. A lot of work is happening on all those fronts, but everybody is going to have to work harder. We are going to need a lot more people and a lot more expertise. We are really pleased to see the leadership of the Building Safety Regulator drive forward the pace of assessments to gateway 2. We are seeing improvements there. That needs to continue, and we are committed to working with all involved, including Government and particularly residents.

[Lewis Cocking (Broxbourne) (Con)]

Q This Bill intends to create a duty to co-operate between lots of organisations, including local authorities, fire and rescue and the Building Safety Regulator. If they all agree with the remediation plans and the work needed to make a building safe, that is fine, but witnesses this morning had concerns about who makes the final decision if all those organisations do not agree. What is your view? Is that a flaw in this Bill?

Kate Henderson: I am not sure that as the trade body, with our members being the regulated entity, we are best placed to answer that question.

[Lewis Cocking]

Q But do you not see that as a risk? You must have a view on what would happen in those scenarios. Where all those regulators and relevant bodies do not agree, surely someone needs to pick who the buck stops with.

Kate Henderson: We would very much welcome clarity on the regulatory system to ensure that we get clarity on the works that need to happen in a timely way. How that would be worked out is perhaps a question for Government. I do not think I am best placed on that one.

Jaclyn Mangaroo: I agree with that. I think clarity is absolutely key for every provision in the Bill. It is not something that TPI can necessarily comment on, but we need to identify who the final decision maker is.

[Andrew Cooper (Mid Cheshire) (Lab)]

Q Jaclyn, I am interested in what happens when a building owner is liquidated. You are probably aware that the Government have commissioned some work with the Law Commission to reform bona vacantia. That will take a few years, but in the meantime this Bill sets out a possible workable route in terms of appointing a manager. Do you think that goes far enough? Is that a workable way forward?

Jaclyn Mangaroo: Hopefully, issues in those cases will be few and far between, but the backstop and the appointment of a remediation manager is the only way to go. It is important that residents have some certainty and a point of contact in somebody who will be responsible for that. At the moment, yes, I think the Bill does go far enough in those cases.