HARDWARE & SECURITY have been no prosecutions under the CPR since it was enacted , and only a limited number of investigations by the relevant enforcement authorities There is no centralised database of regulatory investigations or enforcement actions or of products that might represent a risk .
Remedies proposed in legislation
As far as the regulation of construction products is concerned , the primary targets of the Building Safety Act , and the secondary legislation relating to the regulation of construction products proposed in the Act , are coverage and enforcement .
Coverage - All construction products will be brought into the scope of the CPR by virtue of a “ general safety requirement ”. This is derived from the EU General Product Safety Regulation (“ the GPSR ” - also retained in UK law ) but extends its principles from consumer goods to construction products , which are designed to function as part of a system rather than on a stand-alone basis . In addition , some products not currently covered by the CPR regime can be brought within it by virtue of being covered by a new designated standard ( or an existing standard newly recognised as “ designated ”); or by being added to a list of “ safety-critical ” products to be set out in regulations by the Secretary of State .
Enforcement - Under the new regime , enforcement is to be strengthened by means of a new regulatory regime , including two new regulators : a National Regulator for Construction Products , based in OPSS within DBT , who will work with a new Building Safety Regulator based in the HSE ; and requirements for manufacturers to share technical documentation and information with the National Regulator for Construction Products and / or enforcement authorities . The ultimate objective must be to set clear requirements that call for honesty on the part of manufacturers in respect of full disclosure to the Approved Body conducting the assessment , in the Declaration of Performance , in technical information to accompany the product , and in all marketing information and other communications relating to the product , with a breach of any part of this duty being an offence subject to new sanctions available to the Regulator , and with effective enforcement action being taken where an offence is committed .
A number of areas are missing according to the report . These include :
Questions over remit of UKAS ( no enforcement powers ) and requires more dynamic oversight of CABs to strengthen third-party certification schemes .
There is no question over the fundamental purpose of UKCA marking or the potential to simplify the process . UKCA could be developed as a mark of safety or quality .
Assessment process needs to be simplified and strengthened – report proposes a series of graduated options to raise the standards of the system and making assessment of safety critical products more stringent .
‘ Continuous engagement is required by government and industry to ensure success of Building Safety Act .’
It doesn ’ t believe Conformity Assessment Bodies have demonstrated any obvious sense of a need for change . It wants a clearer statutory duty to be aware they ’ re acting in the public interest , and a duty to warn the new regulator where they suspect manufacturers to manipulate the system .
More self-regulation is required such as increased use of voluntary third-party certification schemes and the potential for a Code for Construction Product Information ( CCPI ) similar to that of the Advertising Standards agency .
Government should use its buying power as an incentive to adopt good practice by setting out how designers , contractors and specifiers can approach safe building outcomes . Designers specifying and contractors procuring products from suppliers who are committed to complying with the Code for Construction Product Information . Also , contractors signing up to the Building A Safer Future Charter .
Continuous engagement is required by government and industry to ensure success of Building Safety Act .
There is a need to pull a body of knowledge together which is accessible and kept under review with public interest at its core .
Conclusions
The report states that there are some truths which have emerged which are evident and are as follows :
• That it is for product manufacturers to develop products that do the job expected of them , and to market them honestly , making no false claims ;
• That it is for Conformity Assessment Bodies to test and assess those products against defined specifications , impartially and independently , so that those who must rely upon performance claims can do so with confidence ;
• That it is for designers to choose products with the performance that is fit for purpose , and then design them into the works so that the performance can be achieved ;
• That it is for constructors to bring everything together with the same objective in mind - using imagination to find better ways of doing things by all means , but not , in a careless moment , throwing away all of the good work that has brought the product and design to that stage in order to save cash in the shortterm , leaving the building owner and occupiers with a problem in the long-term ;
• That it is not for regulators or enforcement authorities to act as the industry ’ s quality assurance department and take responsibility for every infraction anywhere in the system , but it is their vital role to keep a watchful eye out for noncompliance , and to aid compliance ;
• That it is also for regulators and enforcement authorities to see that regulations are enforced where necessary - and particularly where they are wilfully ignored or carelessly disregarded .
• Future reforms should ensure that such principles are reiterated and reinforced . On the basis of the engagement undertaken for this review , it is believed that they would be supported by the great majority of the industry
MAY / JUN 2023
25
Magazine Sponsor Issue Takeover locksmithjournal . co . uk