1-19 of 19 results for subject:Insulation
Librarians' tools
- Search time
- 0.223 seconds
- Solr query time
- 0.004 seconds
- Search query
- subject:Insulation
- We searched for
- subject_t:Insulation OR subject_t:"Cavity wall insulation" OR subject_t:Cladding OR subject_t:"Heat insulation" OR subject_t:"Thermal insulation" OR subject_ses:91686
Type
House
Session
Year
Department
Member
Primary member
More
Answering member
Legislative stage
Legislation
Subject
More
Publisher
Lords second reading. Agreed to on question. Bill committed to a Committee of the Whole House.
Lords second reading. Agreed to on question. Bill committed to a Committee of the Whole House.
My Lords, I want to focus on tenants of social housing. The Minister has referenced the remediation acceleration scheme. There was supposed to be a report specifically on social housing in the spring, which has yet to be published. What plans do the Government have to help registered social landlords, housing associations and councils, so that they have the funding to remediate their flats and social housing tenants can live in safe homes?
My Lords, I want to focus on tenants of social housing. The Minister has referenced the remediation acceleration scheme. There was supposed to be a report specifically on social housing in the spring, which has yet to be published. What plans do the Government have to help registered social landlords, housing associations and councils, so that they have the funding to remediate their flats and social housing tenants can live in safe homes?
My Lords, I have some excellent news for the noble Baroness. Fresh from the spending review, we can confirm over £1 billion of new investment between 2026-27 and 2029-30 to accelerate the remediation of social housing by giving social housing providers the same access to government funding as private building owners. This will support providers of social housing to supply more affordable homes while also improving the living conditions of tenants. This Government recognise that social landlords face significant barriers to accelerating remediation of building safety risks, including access to upfront funding.
To ask His Majesty's Government whether they will amend the PAS 9980 Fire Risk Appraisal of External Walls and Cladding of Flats code of practice to require compliance with building regulations and statutory guidance in force at the time of construction.
To ask His Majesty's Government whether they will amend the PAS 9980 Fire Risk Appraisal of External Walls and Cladding of Flats code of practice to require compliance with building regulations and statutory guidance in force at the time of construction.
The British Standards Institution (BSI) developed and published PAS 9980 and Government has sponsored BSI to review it to make sure it captures best practices, meets market needs, and identifies any necessary revisions. BSI has commenced the review, which will include a six-week public consultation, and BSI anticipates publishing the updated guidance in early 2026. The consultation will provide the opportunity for industry and the public to participate in the review of PAS 9980.
My Lords, the Government have introduced a new and lower standard of remediation, PAS 9980. Insurers, however, are not convinced that this makes buildings fully safe. The Public Accounts Committee has brought it to our attention that insurance costs remain, in its word, “unaffordable”. What are the Government going to do to address the criticism of the Public Accounts Committee and ensure that insurance costs drop considerably, so that people can afford to remain in their homes?
My Lords, the Government have introduced a new and lower standard of remediation, PAS 9980. Insurers, however, are not convinced that this makes buildings fully safe. The Public Accounts Committee has brought it to our attention that insurance costs remain, in its word, “unaffordable”. What are the Government going to do to address the criticism of the Public Accounts Committee and ensure that insurance costs drop considerably, so that people can afford to remain in their homes?
The noble Baroness is quite right to raise the issue of insurance premiums. Work has been going on to reduce those premiums for leaseholders. We have seen improvements for leaseholders who previously found themselves unable to sell or remortgage their homes, but we remain vigilant and will continue to hold the 10 major lenders to account, following their commitment to lend on properties even if the remediation is not yet complete.
To ask Her Majesty's Government whether registered social housing providers are eligible for grants from the Building Safety Fund towards the (1) removal, and (2) replacement, of flammable cladding.
To ask Her Majesty's Government whether registered social housing providers are eligible for grants from the Building Safety Fund towards the (1) removal, and (2) replacement, of flammable cladding.
Registered social housing providers are eligible to apply for funding from the Building Safety Fund towards the removal and replacement of unsafe non-Aluminium Composite Material cladding. The circumstances under which registered social sector housing providers can apply to the Fund are:
- To meet the cost of remediation where a registered provider of social housing becomes financially unviable due to the cost of remediation.
- To provide funding equivalent to the amount which providers would otherwise be entitled to pass on to leaseholders including shared owners.
Additionally, providers will be treated as other leaseholders where they have leasehold interests in private sector blocks â provided those interests are for the purposes of social housing.â¯Guidance for registered social landlords on applying for the Building Safety Fund to cover leaseholder costs is available (attached) at:
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/949885/200724_Social_Housing_Providers_Guidance_Note_for_Applicants.pdf
To ask Her Majesty's Government what progress they have made towards achieving the voluntary contributions of £4 billion for the remediation of cladding from developers of blocks of flats between 11 and 18 metres in height.
To ask Her Majesty's Government what progress they have made towards achieving the voluntary contributions of £4 billion for the remediation of cladding from developers of blocks of flats between 11 and 18 metres in height.
The Department has been working intensively with developers over recent weeks as it is essential that leaseholders living in their own flats in medium and high-rise buildings should not pay a penny to remediate historic cladding defects that are no fault of their own. We are clear that industry must develop a system to resolve the problems they have caused and pay to fix them. If they do not do the right thing and step in then, if necessary, we will impose a solution upon them in law. The Secretary of State recognises that other parties are also responsible for building safety failures and is bringing top cladding manufacturers operating in the UK into the talks. The Secretary of State is very clear on his expectations, and we have a process lined up to legislate where necessary if we don’t see the progress required.
To ask Her Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the risk that developments of blocks of flats between 11 and 18 metres in height that used (1) special purpose vehicles, or (2) shell companies, for their construction could avoid paying towards the £4 billion cost for cladding remediation.
To ask Her Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the risk that developments of blocks of flats between 11 and 18 metres in height that used (1) special purpose vehicles, or (2) shell companies, for their construction could avoid paying towards the £4 billion cost for cladding remediation.
Leaseholders living in their own flats in medium and high-rise buildings should not pay a penny to remediate historic cladding defects that are no fault of their own. We are clear that industry must develop a system to resolve the problems they have caused and pay to fix them. If they do not do the right thing and step in then, if necessary, we will impose a solution upon them in law.
My Lords, there is a big difference between protecting leaseholders and ensuring that they do not pay a penny piece for wrongdoings that were none of their making. Will the Minister give an absolute guarantee that leaseholders will not have to pay a penny piece, whether or not it is after the Building Safety Bill has passed into law? As for leaseholders who have been forced into bankruptcy or those who have already paid their bills, will they still have to pay or will there be compensation?
My Lords, there is a big difference between protecting leaseholders and ensuring that they do not pay a penny piece for wrongdoings that were none of their making. Will the Minister give an absolute guarantee that leaseholders will not have to pay a penny piece, whether or not it is after the Building Safety Bill has passed into law? As for leaseholders who have been forced into bankruptcy or those who have already paid their bills, will they still have to pay or will there be compensation?
My Lords, it is very clear that we must differentiate the need to protect leaseholders from finding the funds to pay for these buildings. That is why my right honourable friend in the other place has sought to raise, voluntarily in the first instance, some £4 billion for medium-rise cladding. But we need to look at how we protect the leaseholder and get the polluter to pay. For the detail, as I say, noble Lords will have to wait until Valentine’s Day.
To ask Her Majesty’s Government what steps they are taking to ensure the removal of dangerous cladding from buildings identified as high-risk.
To ask Her Majesty’s Government what steps they are taking to ensure the removal of dangerous cladding from buildings identified as high-risk.
We have provided £5.1 billion to remediate
cladding in high-rise residential buildings, targeting funding at buildings we know to be at greatest risk of fire spread.
Despite the Minister trying to blind us again with statistics, the hard fact is that thousands of leaseholders are living in limbo, suffering anxiety and in despair. Some are even being held to ransom; they are being asked to sign a commitment to pay many tens of thousands of pounds for the remediation of building safety defects that are exposed when cladding is removed. No cladding work is done until they sign that bit of paper. Leaseholders are being held to ransom; they cannot move and they cannot get anything done. Surely the Minister will agree with me that this cannot be right. What is he going to do about it?
Despite the Minister trying to blind us again with statistics, the hard fact is that thousands of leaseholders are living in limbo, suffering anxiety and in despair. Some are even being held to ransom; they are being asked to sign a commitment to pay many tens of thousands of pounds for the remediation of building safety defects that are exposed when cladding is removed. No cladding work is done until they sign that bit of paper. Leaseholders are being held to ransom; they cannot move and they cannot get anything done. Surely the Minister will agree with me that this cannot be right. What is he going to do about it?
My Lords, I mentioned only one statistic; I do not think that one statistic or one figure—£5.1 billion—is blinding anybody. I point to the progress: despite a pandemic, the ACM funding of some £600 million has seen around 16,500 homes being fully remediated. That is an increase of 4,700 since the end of last year. The new building safety fund, topped up so that the total remediation amounts to £5 billion, is estimated to cover around 65,000 homes in high-rise blocks. So there are many tens of thousands of leaseholders who are benefiting from government funding.
To ask Her Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the share of contributions between (1) landlord, and (2) tenant, owners in a shared leasehold ownership scheme to the costs arising from cladding removal and fire safety improvements.
To ask Her Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the share of contributions between (1) landlord, and (2) tenant, owners in a shared leasehold ownership scheme to the costs arising from cladding removal and fire safety improvements.
The extent to which leaseholders are liable for works or not is governed by the terms in their leases. Government is providing over £5 billion in grant funding for the remediation of unsafe cladding on residential buildings 18 metres and over. This means that leaseholders (including those in shared ownership) in eligible high-rise buildings can be reassured that unsafe cladding will be replaced at no cost to them. Government is also establishing a generous finance scheme which will provide leaseholders in residential buildings of 11-18 metres with access to finance for cladding remediation costs. We will publish more details on how this scheme will work as soon as we are in a position to do so. Finally, we have also introduced a new model for Shared Ownership which will include a 10-year period during which the landlord will support with the cost of repairs in new build homes. The changes will prevent new shared owners from being hit with unexpected repairs and maintenance bills and will help to bridge the gap between renting and homeownership.
My Lords, I refer the House to my relevant interests. Given the answer to the previous question, will the Minister provide any valid reasons at all for the Government expecting innocent leaseholders to pay the huge costs of remediating cladding and non-cladding fire safety defects, while those who created the problem—the developers he just mentioned—get off virtually scot free?
My Lords, I refer the House to my relevant interests. Given the answer to the previous question, will the Minister provide any valid reasons at all for the Government expecting innocent leaseholders to pay the huge costs of remediating cladding and non-cladding fire safety defects, while those who created the problem—the developers he just mentioned—get off virtually scot free?
My Lords, we are very clear that we expect building owners to make buildings safe and not to pass on costs to leaseholders where possible. We have provided a substantial sum of money to ensure that the costs of cladding will be affordable for those in medium-rises and that those in high-rises will not have to contribute to the remediation of the most dangerous element of the building.
To ask Her Majesty's Government how many blocks of flats have flammable cladding other than aluminium composite material; and how many of those blocks are (1) 18 metres or more in height, and (2) below 18 metres in height.
To ask Her Majesty's Government how many blocks of flats have flammable cladding other than aluminium composite material; and how many of those blocks are (1) 18 metres or more in height, and (2) below 18 metres in height.
For high rise residential buildings over 18 metres, local authorities and housing associations are undergoing a data collection exercise as part of an ongoing programme to build a more complete picture of high-rise residential buildings and the variety of external wall systems in use. We will publish appropriate summary information from the data collection in our monthly Building Safety Programme data release in due course.
Data estimating the proportion of high-rise residential buildings in England with little or no cladding can be found (attached) in this release: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/building-safety-programme-estimates-of-ews1-requirements-on-residential-buildings-in-england/building-safety-programme-estimates-of-ews1-requirements-on-residential-buildings-in-england.
This information on buildings below 18 metres is not held.
To ask Her Majesty's Government what estimate they have made of the cost of removing and replacing flammable cladding on all blocks of flats.
To ask Her Majesty's Government what estimate they have made of the cost of removing and replacing flammable cladding on all blocks of flats.
The information on flammable cladding for all blocks of flats is not held. However, section 11 of the Building Safety Bill: Impact Assessment (attached) estimates the average costs per building for addressing safety remediation in high rise buildings. These estimates consider all necessary remediation, which goes beyond façade remediation.
To ask Her Majesty's Government how many blocks of flats have aluminium composite material cladding; and how many of those blocks are (1) 18 metres or more in height, and (2) below 18 metres in height.
To ask Her Majesty's Government how many blocks of flats have aluminium composite material cladding; and how many of those blocks are (1) 18 metres or more in height, and (2) below 18 metres in height.
The Department publishes data on the number of high-rise residential and publicly owned buildings in England with ACM cladding systems unlikely to meet Building Regulations. The latest data is available (attached) at:
Information on buildings below 18 metres is not held.
To ask Her Majesty's Government how many households live in blocks of flats with flammable cladding.
To ask Her Majesty's Government how many households live in blocks of flats with flammable cladding.
The Department publishes data on the number of dwellings in high-rise social sector residential and private sector residential buildings in England with ACM cladding systems unlikely to meet Building Regulations. The latest data is available (attached) at:
My Lords, the Government stated in January that they were considering extending cladding risks to buildings of between four and seven stories. There are around 100,000 such buildings in England, some with dangerous forms of cladding. What investigations have been undertaken to determine the extent of this fire risk, which affects upwards of half a million people, and what remedies are the Government considering?
My Lords, the Government stated in January that they were considering extending cladding risks to buildings of between four and seven stories. There are around 100,000 such buildings in England, some with dangerous forms of cladding. What investigations have been undertaken to determine the extent of this fire risk, which affects upwards of half a million people, and what remedies are the Government considering?
My Lords, at this stage we have not made a decision to move the high-risk regime beyond those buildings above 80 metres. As Dame Judith has said, it is those high-rise buildings that have
the greatest risk, and we are attempting to stop the multiple fatalities that we saw at Grenfell. That is where we will focus our efforts.
Her Majesty's Government why cladding tests in relation to the Grenfell Tower fire are limited only to one type of cladding despite several varieties also being combustible.
Her Majesty's Government why cladding tests in relation to the Grenfell Tower fire are limited only to one type of cladding despite several varieties also being combustible.
The Government responded to the Grenfell Tower fire by setting up an independent panel of experts, who established that the immediate priority was to identify the scale of use of Aluminium Composite Material (ACM) type cladding on buildings over 18 metres. Following further advice from the Independent Expert Advisory Panel, the Government commissioned the Building Research Establishment to test different wall cladding systems using three common types of ACM panelling with two commonly used types of insulation. The results will provide further evidence of how some commonly used wall systems using ACM perform in a fire. This evidence will be used to produce further advice to inform building owners’ decisions on whether they need to take any additional action to make their buildings safe.
Her Majesty's Government why the testing scheme for building cladding has been on the basis of a more rigorous combustibility grade “A2” or “limited Combustibility” rather than that stipulated in Approved Document B of the building regulations which only prescribes “Class 0” or Euroclass B.
Her Majesty's Government why the testing scheme for building cladding has been on the basis of a more rigorous combustibility grade “A2” or “limited Combustibility” rather than that stipulated in Approved Document B of the building regulations which only prescribes “Class 0” or Euroclass B.
The Government has not adopted more rigorous criteria than those set out in Approved Document B. The relevant guidance is set out in paragraphs 12.5 to 12.9 in the Approved Document, which should be read in full. A detailed explanation of the testing process and how it relates to fire safety and the Building Regulations is set out in Annex A of the note published on 30 June at
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/explanatory-note-on-safety-checks-and-testing