The Ministry of Housing has gone all out with its combustible cladding ban. Following its initial announcement in the summer, details of the scope of the ban recently emerged, namely that it covers all materials except those which achieve a European Classification of A1 or ‘A2-s2,d0’.

The Government has tried to take a tough approach, given the unimaginable horrors that unfolded at Grenfell Tower. However, whether such a blanket ban is going to be the answer, is hard to say. While removing all but the most fire resistant materials from the equation in terms of wall construction is certainly going to make a big difference to safety, fires can obviously occur in a variety of different internal areas, and still spread throughout the building if design and installation practice is not done rigorously.

Whether focusing on the exterior, and in such a sledgehammer fashion, is the right answer, is up for debate. A demonstrable signal that the Government was not pussyfooting around was politically necessary, but arguably a root and branch review of the Building Regulations themselves and their interpretation is what is practically necessary to foster broad change. This is far harder of course than targeting one highly visible element, which is why Dame Judith Hackitt only went as far as proposing a new Duty Holder role to enforce quality, and criticising the industry culture that means there is little accountability currently in terms of applying and enforcing Regs in many cases. What has happened to implementing her recommendation? This is one of several remaining questions, which Secretary of State James Brokenshire needs to answer.

Another is that while draconian in one sense, the ban also only extends to buildings of 18 metres and above. So are the same problems with specification going to occur in what are still fairly tall buildings below that height? The Government has, since the announcement, provided an impact assessment of the legislation change on developers, over the next 10 years. It found that they would be needing to find between £249m and £337m over the period to address the changes in specification required.

While this is bad news given the manifest cost pressures, the good news is that where councils are now going to be allowed to strip banned cladding from existing buildings, they will be able to recoup the cost of replacement from private landlords.

There is a long way to go in overhauling the system, and the Government is commendably taking the bull by the horns. But does it really have the stomach for what will be a multi-faceted and bloody fight for better quality standards?

James Parker