Hackitt review
This article was accepted into the corpus but its outbound wikilinks were never NER-processed — typical at the deepest BFS hop or when the run's entity cap was reached. No expansion funnel to show.
| Hackitt review | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Title | Hackitt review |
| Subject | Building safety and fire safety regulation |
| Date | 2018 |
| Author | Dame Judith Hackitt |
| Jurisdiction | United Kingdom |
| Outcome | Independent review and report on building regulations and fire safety |
Hackitt review
The Hackitt review was an independent examination led by Dame Judith Hackitt into building safety and fire risk management in high-rise residential buildings following the Grenfell Tower fire. Commissioned by the Prime Minister and involving consultations with Department for Communities and Local Government, London Fire Brigade, and multiple industry stakeholders, the review produced a set of recommendations aimed at overhauling regulatory frameworks, competence regimes, and accountability across the built environment. Its findings influenced subsequent legislation, industry codes, and debates in the House of Commons, House of Lords, and among professional bodies such as the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors and the Institution of Civil Engineers.
Background
The review was initiated after the Grenfell Tower fire in June 2017 prompted scrutiny of the relationship between building safety, materials, and regulatory oversight. Dame Judith Hackitt, former Chair of the Health and Safety Executive and Crossbench peer in the House of Lords, was appointed to lead an independent review to examine the regulatory system for high-rise residential buildings. Stakeholders included regulators such as the National House Building Council, trade organisations like the Construction Industry Council and Federation of Master Builders, insurers including the Association of British Insurers, and professional institutes such as the Chartered Institute of Building and Royal Institute of British Architects.
Terms of Reference and Scope
The review’s terms of reference directed analysis of the regulatory system for higher-risk residential buildings, with particular focus on roles and responsibilities across design, construction, refurbishment, and management. It considered interfaces between regulators including the Local Government Association, the Health and Safety Executive, and fire services like the Greater Manchester Fire and Rescue Service. The scope encompassed competence of professionals such as chartered engineers from the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, chartered surveyors from the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors, and architects from the Royal Institute of British Architects, as well as manufacturers represented by the Construction Products Association.
Key Findings and Recommendations
The review concluded the existing system was fragmented and failed to ensure clear accountability and competence. Key recommendations included establishing a new regulatory framework for higher-risk buildings, formation of a national regulatory body for building safety, and creation of a "golden thread" of information to ensure robust handover and maintenance records. It proposed clearer duties for dutyholders across the lifecycle, certification schemes for products similar to standards from British Standards Institution, enhanced competence frameworks for professionals and trades, and stronger enforcement powers for regulators including remedial notices and sanctions. The report recommended engagement with bodies such as the Equality and Human Rights Commission on resident safety and reform of building control functions performed by local authorities and private sector approved inspectors.
Implementation and Government Response
The UK Government responded with a White Paper and legislative proposals debated in the House of Commons and House of Lords. Initiatives included creation of a Building Safety Regulator within the Health and Safety Executive and proposals for regulated roles such as Accountable Person and Principal Designer analogous to frameworks in CDM Regulations 2015. The response invoked consultations with the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government and sought input from devolved administrations including the Scottish Government and Welsh Government. Parliamentary scrutiny included committees from the Public Accounts Committee and the Housing, Communities and Local Government Committee.
Impact on Building Regulations and Industry Practice
The review catalysed changes to building regulation, guidance, and industry practice. Revisions to the Building Regulations 2010 and new statutory guidance influenced design, construction, and ongoing management of higher-risk buildings. Industry adoption included enhanced competence routes promoted by institutions like the Chartered Institute of Building and certification schemes aligned with standards from the British Standards Institution and test regimes used by laboratories such as BRE Global. Building control bodies, both local authority and private approved inspectors, adjusted processes for plan approvals, while manufacturers engaged with market surveillance bodies and trade associations like the Construction Products Association to address product claims and traceability.
Criticism and Reception
Reception was mixed across parliament, industry, and advocacy groups. Some organisations, including the National Housing Federation and resident panels formed in the aftermath of Grenfell, welcomed moves toward clearer accountability and the "golden thread". Others, such as certain developer groups and small builders represented by the Federation of Master Builders, raised concerns about cost, practicability, and regulatory burden. Fire safety campaigners and local advocates pressed for stronger immediate remedies and criminal sanctions; legal commentators in the Law Society and academics from universities like University College London and the University of Manchester critiqued perceived gaps in enforcement powers and the pace of change. International observers compared the report with regulatory regimes in countries such as Australia, United States, and Germany.
Category:Building safety