Uncertain Building Remediation Costs

#9 —

Housing, Communities and Local Government Committee

Recommendation: The Government should abolish the loan scheme. We reiterate our call on the Government to re-establish the principle that leaseholders should not pay anything towards the cost of remediating historical building safety defects. Instead, as we have stated, costs should …

Gov response: We believe that establishing a “Comprehensive Building Safety Fund” as the Committee recommends would drive unnecessary remediation works to the detriment of leaseholders. The Government is advocating a proportionate approach to building safety. This will …

Under Consideration

#8 —

Housing, Communities and Local Government Committee

Recommendation: It is disappointing that the Government’s proposed loan scheme, whereby leaseholders contribute up to £50 a month to pay for cladding remediation works on buildings between 11m and 18m high, does not satisfy the previously agreed principle that leaseholders should …

Gov response: We believe that establishing a “Comprehensive Building Safety Fund” as the Committee recommends would drive unnecessary remediation works to the detriment of leaseholders. The Government is advocating a proportionate approach to building safety. This will …

Under Consideration

#1 —

Housing, Communities and Local Government Committee

Recommendation: We are concerned that, despite our previous recommendation on this issue, the Government still lacks data on the full scale and extent of remediation needed for buildings both below and above 18m. In order to know how much it will …

Gov response: We are committed to publishing information in data releases as soon as it is appropriate to do so. We currently publish a monthly data release on progress with remediation of unsafe ACM cladding. We also …

Under Consideration

#15 —

Housing, Communities and Local Government Committee

Recommendation: As they stand, the Government’s proposals create a bizarre lucky dip in which some leaseholders may see their costs capped at £10,000 (£15,000 in London); some, because they have not yet paid for cladding remediation, may pay nothing at all; …

Gov response: This information has not been collected systematically by the department, and the department does not have plans to collect this information from leaseholders.

Not Accepted

#11 —

Housing, Communities and Local Government Committee

Recommendation: Governments share responsibility for the building safety crisis on account of their regulatory failings. Everyone involved would instantly have more funds to spend on remediation if the Government played its part by removing VAT on building safety activity, which would …

Gov response: The Government is committed to supporting leaseholders and ensuring essential works are taken forward. The supply of fire safety equipment, under qualifying circumstances is already eligible for VAT relief when provided alongside the construction and …

Not Accepted

#22 — Home Office failed to adequately assess acquisition risks and costs for Northeye site.

Public Accounts Committee

Recommendation: When the Chief Secretary to the Treasury approved the acquisition of the Northeye site on 25 March 2023, he noted that the value-for-money case was marginal and based on assumptions that were highly uncertain.71 The cost of remediating the building …

Under Consideration

#14 — Home Office acquired Northeye site with incomplete information and insufficient contamination surveys.

Public Accounts Committee

Recommendation: The Home Office assessed the acquisition against the Accounting Officer tests, concluding that the proposal met the tests of regularity, propriety and feasibility, presented in the Accounting Officer Advice. The assessment also found that the use of the site for …

Under Consideration

#11 — Home Office failed to fully action Northeye site survey recommendations on contamination and costs.

Public Accounts Committee

Recommendation: The Home Office commissioned some surveys but not a complete ‘Red Book’ survey and sought some additional professional advice on the state of the Northeye site before deciding to purchase it. Preliminary surveys of the site warned of potentially high …

Under Consideration

#19 — HMPPS extended Dartmoor lease despite radon, requiring further investment for reopening

Public Accounts Committee

Recommendation: To help with capacity pressures, HMPPS recently extended its lease for HMP Dartmoor by 25 years, starting in 2023–24, despite the detection of radon gas in 2020. It closed the prison temporarily in July 2024, following the detection of high …

Not Addressed

#46 — MHCLG expects Building Safety Levy to have minimal impact on housing supply.

Public Accounts Committee

Recommendation: We asked MHCLG about the potential impacts of the Building Safety Levy on housing provision. MHCLG said it had not published any impact assessment or produced specific numbers, but believed the impact would be relatively small. It told us that …

Gov response: 7.1 The government agrees with the Committee’s recommendation. Target implementation date: December 2025 7.2 The government will write to the Committee before the end of 2025 to provide an update on the interaction between remediation …

Accepted

#45 — Building Safety Levy raises concerns about impact on new housing delivery and smaller developers.

Public Accounts Committee

Recommendation: In its written evidence to us, the Home Builders Federation (HBF), which represents the home building industry, told us of its concerns about the possible impact of the Building Safety Levy on new housing delivery. MHCLG currently expects to raise …

Gov response: 7.1 The government agrees with the Committee’s recommendation. Target implementation date: December 2025 7.2 The government will write to the Committee before the end of 2025 to provide an update on the interaction between remediation …

Accepted

#44 — MHCLG acknowledges remediation spending by social housing providers reduces new home building commitments.

Public Accounts Committee

Recommendation: We asked MHCLG about its understanding of the impact that £3.8 billion of self–remediation costs might have on social sector housebuilding, and whether it had undertaken any assessment of how many houses would not be built because money was being …

Gov response: 7.1 The government agrees with the Committee’s recommendation. Target implementation date: December 2025 7.2 The government will write to the Committee before the end of 2025 to provide an update on the interaction between remediation …

Accepted

#43 — Social housing providers diverting funds for cladding remediation impacts new home construction significantly.

Public Accounts Committee

Recommendation: The Government has pledged to build 1.5 million homes during this Parliament and expects social housing to be at the heart of the UKs’ housing supply. Against a backdrop of the construction sector reporting workforce shortages (paragraph 20), we asked …

Gov response: 7.1 The government agrees with the Committee’s recommendation. Target implementation date: December 2025 7.2 The government will write to the Committee before the end of 2025 to provide an update on the interaction between remediation …

Accepted

#38 — Taxpayer exposure to building remediation costs could exceed the stated £5.1 billion cap.

Public Accounts Committee

Recommendation: HM Treasury has agreed to provide short–term funding that would allow remediation to progress in advance of the Levy recouping funds in later years. Based on MHCLG’s financial planning, the NAO highlighted that total taxpayer exposure could reach a maximum …

Gov response: 5.1 The government agrees with the Committee’s recommendation. Target implementation date: Summer 2025 5.2 The government will publish latest building number estimates by the summer. The exact timing of publication of estimates of costs and …

Not Addressed

#36 — MHCLG's building remediation number estimates remain outdated and highly questionable.

Public Accounts Committee

Recommendation: In written evidence, the Home Builders’ Federation (HBF) was very sceptical about the basis of MHCLG’s estimates of building numbers and the lack of any updates. It told us that MHCLG’s estimate of the likely number of buildings in need …

Gov response: 5.1 The government agrees with the Committee’s recommendation. Target implementation date: Summer 2025 5.2 The government will publish latest building number estimates by the summer. The exact timing of publication of estimates of costs and …

Partially Accepted

#35 — Published remediation unit costs reflect older standards, not the lower-cost PAS 9980 methodology.

Public Accounts Committee

Recommendation: In December 2024, MHCLG published remediation cost information per square metre for high–rise buildings over 18 metres in the Building Safety Fund with a view to helping building owners understand the expected 56 Qq 31, 93, 93, 118; CA&G’s Report …

Gov response: 5.1 The government agrees with the Committee’s recommendation. Target implementation date: Summer 2025 5.2 The government will publish latest building number estimates by the summer. The exact timing of publication of estimates of costs and …

Not Addressed

#33 — Building remediation cost estimates for thousands of buildings remain uncertain without updates.

Public Accounts Committee

Recommendation: Almost eight years on from the Grenfell Tower fire, MHCLG’s latest estimate, in February 2024, was that there were between 9,000 and 12,000 residential buildings in England taller than 11 metres that will need remediating. Based on this modelling, MHCLG …

Gov response: 5.1 The government agrees with the Committee’s recommendation. Target implementation date: Summer 2025 5.2 The government will publish latest building number estimates by the summer. The exact timing of publication of estimates of costs and …

Partially Accepted

#32 — Insurance premiums will remain high without full property protection alongside life safety.

Public Accounts Committee

Recommendation: In written evidence, the ABI called on government to adopt an approach that priorities property protection and building resilience alongside risk to life. It said that without a standard requiring the removal of combustible material in external walls (insulation and …

Gov response: 4.1 The government agrees with the Committee’s recommendation. Target implementation date: December 2025 4.2 The government agrees with the Committee that it is important to build evidence on the cost of buildings insurance. MHCLG therefore …

Accepted

#31 — Insurance premiums may remain high despite remediation due to PAS 9980 life safety focus.

Public Accounts Committee

Recommendation: MHCLG told us that, as well as options for intervening in the market to reduce premiums while buildings are awaiting remediation, it expected the insurance industry to hold to its word in reducing premiums as risk is reduced. It said …

Gov response: 4.1 The government agrees with the Committee’s recommendation. Target implementation date: December 2025 4.2 The government agrees with the Committee that it is important to build evidence on the cost of buildings insurance. MHCLG therefore …

Not Addressed

#30 — Risk-pooling arrangements have not effectively reduced extreme building insurance premiums for leaseholders

Public Accounts Committee

Recommendation: MHCLG told us that it was bringing forward statutory changes to ban insurance brokers from paying commissions to freeholders and managing agents, and capping what freeholders can charge leaseholders for arranging insurance.51 MHCLG told us that the risk–pooling arrangements it …

Gov response: 4.1 The government agrees with the Committee’s recommendation. Target implementation date: December 2025 4.2 The government agrees with the Committee that it is important to build evidence on the cost of buildings insurance. MHCLG therefore …

Accepted

#29 — Exorbitant building insurance costs continue to impose severe financial hardship and debt risk

Public Accounts Committee

Recommendation: The Home Builders Federation (HBF) raised concerns that insurance companies were seeking to profit from the building safety crisis. The Shared Owners Network similarly wrote that many shared owners were struggling to pay housing-related costs such as insurance. End Our …

Gov response: 4.1 The government agrees with the Committee’s recommendation. Target implementation date: December 2025 4.2 The government agrees with the Committee that it is important to build evidence on the cost of buildings insurance. MHCLG therefore …

Not Addressed

#28 — Spiralling insurance costs and 'nil' mortgage valuations for leaseholders remain largely unaddressed

Public Accounts Committee

Recommendation: In 2020 the previous Committee concluded that MHCLG had not done enough to address spiralling insurance costs affecting leaseholders and ‘nil’ mortgage valuations. It found that private leaseholders in blocks with dangerous cladding had received ‘nil’ valuations for their properties, …

Gov response: 4.1 The government agrees with the Committee’s recommendation. Target implementation date: December 2025 4.2 The government agrees with the Committee that it is important to build evidence on the cost of buildings insurance. MHCLG therefore …

Accepted

#23 — Millions of residents trapped in unsafe, unsellable flats face severe financial and emotional hardship

Public Accounts Committee

Recommendation: As many as 3 million people may have been affected by the cladding crisis. The NAO found that residents continue to suffer ongoing financial and emotional consequences. In its written evidence to us, End Our Cladding Scandal (EOCS) told us …

Gov response: The government agrees with the Committee’s recommendation. Target implementation date: Summer 2025 The government will write to the Committee annually from Summer 2025, until Summer 2029 when, in alignment with the RAP, all 18m+ buildings …

Not Addressed

#15 — Manufacturers of non-compliant construction products have yet to contribute financially to remediation.

Public Accounts Committee

Recommendation: Despite promises in 2022 of tough new measures to force industry to pay to remove cladding, MHCLG accepted that it has yet to find a way to secure a financial contribution from manufacturers. We observed that while developers were contributing …

Gov response: The government disagrees with the Committee’s recommendation. The government is currently consulting on redress routes as part of the Construction Products Reform Green Paper. Moreover, leaseholders and tenants are protected from the cost of cladding …

Not Accepted

#14 — Leaseholders continue to face significant, 'life-changing' costs for non-cladding fire safety defects.

Public Accounts Committee

Recommendation: We asked MHCLG about what it was doing to support residents with non– cladding defects. MHCLG told us that it was developing a new standard with the British Standards Institute to give the sector more certainty over what work needed …

Gov response: The government agrees with the Committee’s recommendation. Target implementation date: Autumn 2025 The government is working to publish an update of the Remediation Acceleration Plan in Summer 2025; however, this is dependent on the outcome …

Accepted

#9 — Persistent and new barriers hinder accelerated progress of cladding remediation efforts.

Public Accounts Committee

Recommendation: The Plan identified several barriers to remediating at pace and outlined the steps MHCLG was taking to address them. Some of these barriers are those MHCLG told the previous committee about in 2020, including landlord reluctance to come forward, limited …

Gov response: 2.1 The government agrees with the Committee’s recommendation. Target implementation date: July 2025 2.2 The government agrees to update the Committee on the work it is doing to increase capacity and skills across the building …

Accepted

#8 — MHCLG's cladding remediation targets considered too slow and incomplete, with works extending to 2035.

Public Accounts Committee

Recommendation: We asked MHCLG how its new plan would speed up the remediation process. MHCLG told us that its Ministers were committed to speeding up the pace of remediation. The Plan introduced a target that by the end of 2029 all …

Gov response: 1.1 The government agrees with the Committee’s recommendation. Target implementation date: Autumn 2025 1.2 The government is working to publish an update of the Remediation Acceleration Plan in Summer 2025; however, this is dependent on …

Accepted

#5 — Uncertainty remains regarding dangerous cladding remediation scope, costs, and completion timelines.

Public Accounts Committee

Recommendation: Eight years on from Grenfell, we are concerned that MHCLG still does not know how many buildings have dangerous cladding, how much it will cost to address, or how long it will take. MHCLG’s latest estimate, that 9,000 to 12,000 …

Gov response: The government disagrees with the Committee’s recommendation. The government is currently consulting on redress routes as part of the Construction Products Reform Green Paper. Moreover, leaseholders and tenants are protected from the cost of cladding …

Not Accepted

#4 — Undertake urgent review of building insurance premiums and propose actions to reduce costs for residents.

Public Accounts Committee

Recommendation: MHCLG is not doing enough to manage the risk that residents in affected buildings face exorbitant insurance premiums in the long term. The previous Committee raised concerns in 2020 about the spiralling insurance costs faced by residents awaiting remediation and …

Gov response: The government agrees with the Committee’s recommendation. cost of buildings insurance. MHCLG therefore continues to work with industry and other stakeholders to gather data on insurance costs including premiums for buildings before, during and after …

Accepted

#3 — Publish annual report on effectiveness of resident-centric remediation, dispute resolution, and Code of Practice adherence.

Public Accounts Committee

Recommendation: We are appalled that those living in affected buildings continue to suffer an unacceptable financial and emotional toll. Far too many people continue to feel trapped in unsafe homes, many facing financial uncertainty and many unable to sell their homes …

Gov response: The government agrees with the Committee’s recommendation. Summer 2029 when, in alignment with the RAP, all 18m+ buildings with unsafe cladding in government-funded schemes will be remediated, and every 11m+ building will either be remediated, …

Accepted

#12 — UKHSA's ageing high containment laboratories pose significant public health risk due to remedial investment needs.

Public Accounts Committee

Recommendation: UKHSA’s purpose is to prevent, prepare for and respond to infectious diseases and environmental hazards, and to provide scientific and operational leadership to protect the public’s health and to build the nation’s health security capability.UKHSA owns high containment science laboratories …

Gov response: 3.1 The government agrees with the Committee’s recommendation. Target implementation date: April 2026 3.2 The government recognises that an urgent decision is needed on the future location of UKHSA’s high-containment laboratories. A thorough assessment of …

Not Addressed

#35 — Publish compensation position for unused border infrastructure and prevent future stranded investments.

Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee

Recommendation: The Government should set out how it will learn lessons from the implementation of the Border Target Operating Model (BTOM), including the handling of costs for unused or under used border infrastructure. It should publish its position on compensation for …

Gov response: The government accepts this recommendation. We are already engaging with both port health authorities and port operators regarding impacts of SPS agreement implementation. Whilst we cannot provide a specific position on compensation at this point, …

No Published Response

#34 — Lack of compensation clarity for redundant border infrastructure negatively impacts government relationships.

Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee

Recommendation: Local authorities and businesses have invested heavily, at the Government’s instruction, in border infrastructure that may become redundant under a new SPS regime. A lack of clarity from HM Treasury regarding compensation has had a negative impact on relationships between …

Gov response: The government accepts this recommendation. We are already engaging with both port health authorities and port operators regarding impacts of SPS agreement implementation. Whilst we cannot provide a specific position on compensation at this point, …

No Published Response

#9 — Shift funding from short-term repairs to comprehensive upgrades and rebuilds for high-risk schools.

Education Committee

Recommendation: Funding should move beyond short-term patching and repairs toward comprehensive upgrades and rebuilds, prioritising schools beyond their design life and those posing the greatest safety risks. (Conclusion, Paragraph 49)

Gov response: The Education Estates Strategy, set out a long-term plan for the education estate. At its core is more proactive management, long-term strategic maintenance and renewal that prioritises condition need, risk and resilience alongside delivering high-quality …

Accepted

#8 — RAAC crisis highlights ageing, fragile school estate requiring more than incremental fixes.

Education Committee

Recommendation: The RAAC crisis highlighted a deeper, systemic issue: the ageing and fragile condition of England’s school estate. RAAC is not the only issue of concern within the wider school estate. While we welcome the Government’s commitment to publish a long-term …

Gov response: The Government welcomes the Education Committee’s Seventh Report of Session 2024–26, Foundations of Learning: replacing RAAC and securing school buildings (HC 1399), and thanks the Committee for its thorough examination of Reinforced Autoclaved Aerated Concrete …

Response Pending

#5 — DfE made advances in RAAC response, but sustained implementation is still required.

Education Committee

Recommendation: We recognise the substantial efforts undertaken since 2023 to safeguard pupils and staff, and to restore continuity of learning in settings affected by RAAC. The Department has improved guidance, begun to professionalise 18 estate capability, strengthened resilience arrangements, and committed …

Gov response: The Government welcomes the Education Committee’s Seventh Report of Session 2024–26, Foundations of Learning: replacing RAAC and securing school buildings (HC 1399), and thanks the Committee for its thorough examination of Reinforced Autoclaved Aerated Concrete …

Response Pending

#21 — Aging Weybridge facilities make guaranteeing operations during 10-year redevelopment increasingly difficult

Public Accounts Committee

Recommendation: In 2017, the Department started a programme to redevelop Weybridge. In the 2025 Spending Review, the government committed £1 billion over the period 2025–26 to 2029–30 to continue the redevelopment, with a total estimated cost of £2.8 billion.27 In correspondence …

Gov response: 5.1 The government agrees with the Committee’s recommendation. Recommendation implemented 18 5.2 The department wrote to the Committee on 18 September 2025 setting out the programme’s strategic plan. The department will provide the Committee with …

Accepted

#20 — Critical National Biosecurity Centre at Weybridge is in poor condition, risking UK disease response.

Public Accounts Committee

Recommendation: The National Biosecurity Centre at Weybridge is the UK’s primary science laboratory capability for managing threats from animal diseases. It contains 98% of APHA’s high-containment laboratories. The site is in poor condition, with ageing buildings that need major repair and …

Gov response: 5.1 The government agrees with the Committee’s recommendation. Recommendation implemented 18 5.2 The department wrote to the Committee on 18 September 2025 setting out the programme’s strategic plan. The department will provide the Committee with …

Accepted

#21 — Ageing heritage assets in FCDO's overseas estate require £2.1 billion for essential capital projects.

Public Accounts Committee

Recommendation: FCDO’s overseas estate contains a number of large properties, including Embassies, official Residences and compounds.55 Many of these properties, such as the Washington Embassy or the British Ambassador’s Residence in Paris, are large heritage assets which perform a key role …

Under Consideration

#18 — FCDO's maintenance backlog was severely underestimated, necessitating external professionals for accurate assessment.

Public Accounts Committee

Recommendation: In November 2023, FCDO recognised that its £150 million estimate of its overseas estate maintenance backlog was likely to be an underestimate and commissioned professional surveyors to conduct a one-off exercise to identify the true backlog.47 FCDO ran a programme …

Gov response: 2. PAC conclusion: Much of FCDO’s overseas estate is in poor condition, and its estates maintenance backlog would cost an estimated £450 million to resolve.

Under Consideration

#10 — Poor condition of FCDO's overseas estate presents a severe risk and significant maintenance backlog.

Public Accounts Committee

Recommendation: FCDO told us that it is not happy with the current condition of its overseas estate and that this presents a severe risk to the organisation.21 Of FCDO’s 6,500 overseas buildings, 933 (around 15%) do not meet its internal target …

Gov response: 2. PAC conclusion: Much of FCDO’s overseas estate is in poor condition, and its estates maintenance backlog would cost an estimated £450 million to resolve.

Under Consideration

#2 — Ensure FCDO overseas estate achieves sustainable footing with detailed backlog reduction plans

Public Accounts Committee

Recommendation: Much of FCDO’s overseas estate is in poor condition, and its estates maintenance backlog would cost an estimated £450 million to resolve. FCDO’s first priority with its overseas estate is providing a safe and legally compliant estate for staff and …

Gov response: The government agrees with the Committee’s recommendation.

Accepted

#25 — Ensure Government steps in to remediate defects when other avenues are exhausted.

Public Accounts Committee

Recommendation: The Department told us that the Ministers are very clear these problems must be fixed at no cost to households who have done nothing wrong. It told us it expects only a “very small number” of homes to not be …

Gov response: 3.1 The government agrees with the Committee’s recommendation. Recommendation implemented 3.2 The department provided responses to the Committee’s three requests by letter on 6 February 2026.

Accepted

#3 — Update how to protect households from unaffordable repair bills when guarantees are insufficient.

Public Accounts Committee

Recommendation: Households do not have real assurance the government will protect them from unaffordable bills when the original installer or guarantees do not cover the cost of repairs. Ministers have stated that no household should have to pay to fix the …

Gov response: The government agrees with the Committee’s recommendation. Recommendation implemented The department provided responses to the Committee’s three requests by letter on 6 February 2026.

Accepted

#9 — Set out clear plan to address £1.8bn prison maintenance backlog with detailed funding breakdown.

Justice Committee

Recommendation: The Government must clearly set out how it intends to address the £1.8bn maintenance backlog using the funding set out by its Prison Capacity Strategy and Infrastructure Strategy. In response to this report, we expect the Government to update the …

Gov response: 38. HMPPS national contracts are managed by dedicated operational contract management teams who ensure that suppliers deliver against required standards and apply contractual levers where performance falls short. These teams oversee contracts for education and …

Partially Accepted

#8 — Dire prisoner living conditions raise human rights concerns, exacerbated by unclear maintenance backlog plan.

Justice Committee

Recommendation: We are shocked by the dire living conditions that many prisoners are living in, and it is deeply concerning to hear that prisons may be in violation of human rights legislation. We accept that the Government recognises this and that …

Gov response: 29. The Government continues to recognise the value of autonomy for Governors and the innovation this can drive, whilst also balancing this with the level of central control to achieve consistency between prisons. As previously …

Accepted

#31 —

Housing, Communities and Local Government Committee

Recommendation: Currently, freeholders are not required to disclose information regarding building safety defects in a block as part of the enfranchisement process. Leaseholders must be fully informed of any liabilities they may be assuming during the enfranchisement process when converting to …

Response Pending

#13 —

Housing, Communities and Local Government Committee

Recommendation: The Government should provide for recovery of ongoing building safety costs through existing service charge provisions while improving the transparency of such charges, preferably by implementing the Committee’s previous recommendations for standardised forms for service charge invoices. The building safety …

Gov response: 33. We agree with the Committee’s recommendation that charges should be transparent. The proposed Building Safety Charge has been designed to ensure that the costs leaseholders pay for building safety measures, and how they pay …

Under Consideration

#13 —

Housing, Communities and Local Government Committee

Recommendation: We are concerned by the lack of progress on keeping residents’ building insurance costs reasonable during the period when their buildings are being remediated. The Government has been engaging with the insurance industry for months, and all the while leaseholders …

Gov response: On 28 January, the Secretary of State called on the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) and the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) to review buildings insurance premiums for people living in medium and high-rise blocks of …

Under Consideration

#17 —

Housing, Communities and Local Government Committee

Recommendation: The Government must stop pitting the building safety crisis against the housing crisis. Without access to funds for remediation where social tenants live, residents of social housing are paying the price through the diversion of funds from maintaining their homes …

Gov response: Social housing providers have access to the £400m Social Sector ACM Cladding Remediation Fund for the removal and replacement of unsafe ACM cladding systems. Social housing providers were also eligible for the Building Safety Fund …

Accepted