My intervention in the Building Safety Bill debate

Rt Hon Sir John Redwood MP (Wokingham) (Con): Has it been possible to trace any foreign companies or foreign interests that are involved in these matters? Will they be making their contribution?

Stuart Andrew, Assistant Whip, Minister of State: My right hon. Friend raises an important point. I shall address that specific point later in my speech.

…The recent commitment from many developers to fix their own buildings will apply equally to enfranchised buildings, and the measures and powers that we have added to the Bill to pursue and compel developers and cladding manufacturers to pay will be available. I know that Members will still be concerned about how we can protect leaseholders in leaseholder-owned buildings, which is why I am announcing today that the Government will consult on how best leaseholders in collectively enfranchised and commonhold buildings and other special cases can be protected from the costs associated with historical building safety defects. The consultation will allow the Government to understand fully the position regarding leaseholder-owned buildings with historical defects and identify whether further measures are appropriate to address specific circumstances in which leaseholders may unintentionally be exposed to disproportionate costs.
Comment In other words the issue was not addressed. The government cannot ensure fairness between U.K. and foreign companies and investors.



  1. Lifelogic
    April 28, 2022

    To your comment – indeed. Yet another problem largely created by the totally misguided CO2/devil gas religion and misdirected government.

    Allister Heath today:- World War Three is far more likely than anyone is prepared to admit
    New weapons and our failure to understand our enemies are raising the chances of a horrific conflict

    I rather fear Heath is right.

    1. Lifelogic
      April 28, 2022

      Just listened to a long interview Mike Graham interviewing Col. James Sunderland MP. He said the Conservative are the party of “low taxation”, the party of “law and order” and the he was sure that “net zero is the way forwards”.

      So is the man a liar or just a foolish dope who is totally misinformed? We have the highest taxes for 70+ years, appalling public services, dire law and order with totally misdirected police, a mad & an absurdly expensive (and totally impractical) intermittent energy policy and no net zero is not the way forwards and most certainly not yet. Wiki does not say what read at Birmingham Uni. but I assume it was nothing scientific and numerate. The skills of advocating and trying to convince people that black is white and 2+2=15 perhaps!

      Has he looked at energy policies in China, Germany, Russia, India… recently? What sort of defences will the UK have with a net zero energy policy Col. Sunderland?

  2. Shirley M
    April 28, 2022

    I have no confidence in this government. The huge costs of this failure will likely fall on the UK taxpayer, again! We couldn’t possibly ask foreign investors to stump up as they need guaranteed profits before they will invest in the UK, and so much easier to add it to the tax bill.

  3. Narrow Shoulders
    April 28, 2022

    These claddings were legal when installed. Removal costs should be borne by the beneficial owners not the builders.

  4. Nigl
    April 28, 2022

    Very worrying . Dealing with a ‘madman’ who could do anything when cornered. Western politicians, especially Boris keen to deflect from U.K. failures becoming increasingly bellicose with no get out plan apart from a Putin ‘surrender’ which will never happen.

    Potentially 10 years of economic misery plus the threat of annihilation. Maybe Sir JR could explain how that is now benefitting the U.K.

  5. Nottingham Lad Himself
    April 28, 2022

    I agree Sir John.

    However, isn’t this rather aside from the main point?

    Surely that is, that the hundreds of thousands of people in dangerous, unsaleable, and uninsurable properties get the redress to which anyone with any sense of decency can see they are entitled?

    As I understand it, the problem is with leasehold covenants, many of which were drafted on the assumption that we all live in a sufficiently modern, well-regulated society to ensure that problems like this would not arise, and therefore major rebuilds – rather than moderate to minor routine maintenance which leaseholders would reasonable expect to defray – would not be required.

    There is no reason at all why an Act could not be passed which imports implied terms into these covenants limiting their scope.

    Such a thing was done with freehold covenants in the landmark Law Of Property Act 1925, which removed other clear injustices and greatly simplified many disputes in the Court.

    Please do all that you can to move this forward. I understand that the Law Commission may have its own recommendations in this regard.

  6. a-tracy
    April 28, 2022

    John, don’t these foreign companies building and providing building products into the UK pay the nhbc warranty and insurance for their product, if they don’t they shouldn’t be allowed to supply. Either we have a buildmark quality system or we don’t and we shouldn’t be told when we buy a new home we have a ten year guarantee against falty products if we don’t.

    All these past 80 years the NHBC would have been taking in funds from builders so where is all that money, just spent on its staff and offices or is it actually invested in a proper insurance portfolio and checked?

    1. Nottingham Lad Himself
      April 28, 2022

      There is not just one but a number of problems revealed by the Grenfell Tower outrage.

      First and worst, people die from unsafe buildings.

      Second, property law being what it currently is in the UK, freeholders can extort the cost of remedial work caused in large measure by regulatory and inspection failure from leaseholders.

      There are others, but those are the principal ones.

      1. a-tracy
        April 29, 2022

        NLH, Yes I agree and understand that but you didn’t address my question about the NHBC warranty do you know the answer to that?

        Or is it just an insurance policy that excludes NHBC from most repairs and isn’t worth the paper it is written on? Surely if they have been taking in subs for 80 years there is an insurance portfolio of investments to underwrite failures like cladding?

    2. alan jutson
      April 29, 2022


      I think you will find the NHBC Guarantee is not all what people think it is, only structural is covered for 10 years, many other possible faults are only covered for 2 years, there are lots of exclusion clauses.

  7. Bloke
    April 28, 2022

    ‘Tracing involvement’ is key to what controls.
    Might some Extinction Rebellion folk be involved in the Passport Office working from home as a more effective act in reducing holidaymakers’ fuel consumption than gluing their hands to petrol pumps?

  8. graham1946
    April 28, 2022

    Another ‘Consultation’ – i.e. kick the can again. This has been going on for years. Everyone knows what needs doing except useless politicians and ministers. Good job politicians don’t get paid on results or they would all be in poverty like they impose on us.

  9. formula57
    April 28, 2022

    Has the Minister no shame, saying the point is important and will be addressed and then swerving away from the issue? What is the point of this government as we see plainly from its actions it is not on our side?

    Of course it could pursue foreign companies but like with foreign bogus asylum seekers, it does not wish to perhaps?

Comments are closed.