---

Leaseholder Remediation (Building Safety) Bill [HL]

My Lords, it is a great pleasure to welcome the Minister to her new role. It is also a great pleasure to follow the noble Baroness, Lady Thornhill, who reinforced the very strong case that the noble Baroness, Lady Pinnock, set out. I declare my interest as chair of a charity pro bono that owns student accommodation in London, some of which falls within the current limits under the Building Safety Act and would certainly fall within the extended limits of this proposed legislation.

The noble Baroness, Lady Pinnock, certainly knows a thing or two about this area. She led the council in Kirklees and spoke from those Benches at the time of Grenfell, nearly 10 years ago. I recall that because I was the Minister in the Lords who spoke on that area. My noble friend Lord Young of Cookham was also in the department at that time. I little thought that, 10 years later, we would still be looking at these issues and promises that remain unfulfilled. Successive Governments must take a share of the blame for that. There is no doubt of that. There have certainly been some constructive measures in the Building Safety Act and much compensation has been paid, but much remains to be done. I will say a little bit about that later.

It is impossible to think of a constructive case against the civil liability that this legislation deals with at under 11 metres. There is a lot of detail to be looked at in how it applies, capacity issues and so on, but the fact that less serious issues are confronted below 11 metres, which I accept, does not mean that there is not individual harm done to many leaseholders and the many people affected by this, which should be rectified. I back that wholly. I back Clause 12 in particular, which would make provision for liability on manufacturers, who have much to do to fill in some of the gaps that remain in liability. Local government certainly has a share of

responsibility, but a lot of the providers of the material have yet to step up to the plate to share some of that responsibility. I have no hesitation in saying that.

Therefore, I would like to say something about the clear criminal liability issues, which are still to be dealt with and which this legislation does not deal with. I understand why, but here we are, nearly 10 years after the Grenfell fire, and nobody has been held responsible. It is absolutely astounding. No company has been prosecuted. That has added complications because the provider of the cladding, Arconic, which was damned in the Hackitt review, has not been banned by the Government. It is still a supplier to the Government, as far as I tell. Answers to me indicate that it is still supplying.

The Government’s answer to that, no doubt rooted in some legal advice, is that it cannot be banned because this is sub judice and that banning it would have an effect on possible prosecutions. However, those prosecutions are not happening, so the whole thing is circular. It has not stopped the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea from putting Arconic on a list so that it is not used there, so I encourage the Government to ban it. That is what needs to be done. The company has been held liable for damages. Its insurers have come forward and the company has paid some compensation. However, at the same time shareholders are doing very well out of it. They have been paid massive dividends. I am a capitalist. I think we are all in favour of a market economy, but it works only if people are held responsible for what they are doing, and that has not happened.

I certainly do not blame the Minister, who is new in post. Nor do I blame the Government, as it has been successive Governments. However, this needs tackling and something needs to be done. As we all know, justice delayed is justice denied. It is an outstanding issue; there have been no prosecutions after 10 years. Memories fade, witnesses die, victims die. This needs tackling. The Government, who are the people who can put this right, must do something about that.

In the meantime, I am strongly in favour of this legislation. There is much detail that needs to be looked at as it moves forward, but I am sure that we are all behind the principle. We need to look to the detail—either in this legislation or the Government’s proposed legislation—to make sure that we draw an end to this for the victims of Grenfell, so that they feel satisfied that we have done something about it and that no future Grenfells are dealt with as this one has been.

10.44 am