ao link
Twitter
Facebook
Linked In
Twitter
Facebook
Linked In

You are viewing 1 of your 1 free articles

NHF calls on government to cover costs of new Hackitt requirements

The government should cover the costs that housing associations will face in complying with the requirements of the new system of building regulation, the National Housing Federation (NHF) has said.

Linked InTwitterFacebookeCard
Dame Judith Hackitt, former chair of the government’s post-Grenfell review of building regulations
Dame Judith Hackitt, former chair of the government’s post-Grenfell review of building regulations
Sharelines

NHF: government should cover housing associations’ costs of complying with the new post-Grenfell building regulations system #ukhousing

In an interview with Inside Housing, Victoria Moffett, Grenfell lead at the NHF, said that there is “a moral argument” for the government to cover the costs of implementing the recommendations of Dame Judith Hackitt’s review of building regulations.

Dame Judith’s review was commissioned by the government in the aftermath of the Grenfell Tower fire, which killed 72 people in 2017. It recommended wide-ranging reform to the building regulation system.

Inside Housing revealed last week that the government plans to consult on legislation to implement the changes by the end of the month, with an eye to getting it on the statute books in 2021.


READ MORE

Government to publish draft legislation on post-Grenfell building regulationsGovernment to publish draft legislation on post-Grenfell building regulations
Hackitt legislation: what does it mean for housing associations?Hackitt legislation: what does it mean for housing associations?
Industry must lead the change post-Grenfell and not rely solely on governmentIndustry must lead the change post-Grenfell and not rely solely on government
The Hackitt Review: key recommendations at a glanceThe Hackitt Review: key recommendations at a glance
What should we expect from the building safety consultations?What should we expect from the building safety consultations?

Ms Moffett told Inside Housing: “Of course, if there are new requirements, it will cost money to ensure that those buildings are compliant with new requirements, which is absolutely something that housing associations are doing already and obviously are absolutely willing to do.

“You wouldn’t put a price on safety.”

David Montague, chief executive of L&Q, which has been an early adopter of Dame Judith’s recommendations, said last month that the additional burden will cause the organisation’s operating margins to fall by 4% a year for the next five years.

Ms Moffett added: “We’re operating in an environment of a building regulations system that wasn’t fit for purpose. It’s not the fault of anybody working within that system that we have to change everything.

“But to continue to deliver on our social mission to build more homes for the people that need them in a time of quite a grave housing crisis, we think there’s a moral argument for the government to continue to fund the remediation work as they did with the removal of [Grenfell-style] ACM [aluminium composite material] cladding.”

The details of the government’s legislation to implement Dame Judith’s recommendations have yet to be finalised, but they are expected to include details on the role of the ‘dutyholder’, the person who will take ultimate responsibility for the safety of a building.

Tara Agarwal, director of technical compliance and quality at Peabody, another early adopter, said that it had hired new building safety staff to fulfil this responsibility.

Linked InTwitterFacebookeCard
Add New Comment
You must be logged in to comment.
By continuing to browse this site you are agreeing to the use of cookies. Browsing is anonymised until you sign up. Click for more info.
Cookie Settings