A variety of construction, built environment, and legal professionals have shared their thoughts on the legislation confirmed in the King’s speech
Yesterday, Parliament saw the King’s speech 2026, where King Charles III confirmed several Bills to come into effect.
Among these Bills are several that are of interest for the construction industry, such as The Steel Industry (Nationalisation) Bill, or the Remediation Bill.
Below, industry leaders share their thoughts on the confirmations, both positive and negative, and what they mean for the industry.
Brian Berry, chief executive of the Federation of Master Builders:
“The King’s Speech was a missed opportunity for small builders who are struggling against a background of rising costs, skills shortages, complex regulation, and a lack of consistent support. While the Government has ambitions for economic growth the cumulative burden of rising labour costs, material prices, and additional regulations are affecting local builders. Without stronger support measures houses will remain unbuilt and homes will not receive vital energy upgrades to reduce energy bills. The FMB will continue to work constructively with the Government, but today’s Speech represents another reminder that builders have taken a back seat in the minds of the Government.”
Browne Jacobson
Zoe Stollard, partner in energy & infrastructure:
On the Nuclear Regulation Bill: “A fit-for-purpose regulatory regime that provides investors and developers with greater certainty, without compromising on safety, is essential to unlocking the billions of pounds of private capital that nuclear requires.”
On the Electricity Generator Levy Bill: “Repeated interventions in generator revenue streams create long-term uncertainty that increases the cost of capital for future projects. Any extension of the levy needs to be carefully calibrated and time-limited, with clear sunset provisions, to avoid deterring the very investment that the Energy Independence Bill is designed to attract.”
Richard Macphail, partner and co-head of social housing, on the Social Housing Renewal Bill:
“Local authorities and registered providers will broadly welcome this, but they will want clarity on the funding mechanisms and whether central government investment will be matched by a reduction in the regulatory burden that has made development increasingly difficult.”
Fiona Hodgson, chief executive of SNIPEF, said: “SNIPEF welcomes the UK:
“For many plumbing and heating businesses, particularly SMEs, delayed payments and withheld retentions continue to place unnecessary pressure on cash flow, investment and apprenticeship recruitment.
“The plumbing and heating industry, and the wider construction sector, have waited a long time for meaningful reform in this area, and stronger protections for smaller businesses are overdue.
“However, it is essential that any changes do not simply replace one burden with another. Reforms must be practical, proportionate and avoid creating costly or complex alternative arrangements that could disproportionately impact SMEs and specialist contractors.
“Improving payment certainty and fairness across the supply chain is critical, but the detail of implementation will determine whether these reforms genuinely support smaller businesses in practice.”
Lauren Fraser, senior associate at Charles Russell Speechlys:
“The Government’s Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Bill signals a decisive shift towards commonhold as the future model for residential ownership in England.
“With ground rent caps, a ban on new leasehold flats and reforms intended to make conversion easier, the ambition is clear. However, much will depend on how these reforms are implemented in practice, particularly alongside the still largely uncommenced Leasehold and Freehold Reform Act 2024 and the complexities tied to existing leasehold structures.
“There are a number of practical hurdles that will need to be addressed as the Bill progresses through Parliament. That includes difficulties around converting mixed-use buildings and buildings with non-participating owners.
“There will also be a significant operational impact on developers, who will need to adapt to a fundamentally different ownership model. That is likely to involve new transactional structures, revised documentation and wider industry education, alongside practical considerations around phasing and implementation before any compulsory adoption takes effect.”
Freeths law firm
Sarah Rowe, head of social housing at law firm Freeths:
“Today’s King’s Speech makes it clear that property sector reform is no longer theoretical and is at long last moving into delivery! Sector will now need to adapt quickly to comply with the headline changes announced which include leasehold reforms with plans to cap ground rents and pivot towards commonhold could fundamentally reshape residential ownership and a ramping up of social housing intervention with further Right to Buy reforms and stronger tenant protections on the agenda.
“The fact that building safety remains a priority and that legislation to fast-track cladding remediation and tighten accountability will be most welcomed by the thousands of people still living in dangerous conditions and actively fighting for safer homes.”
Jill Carey, property litigation partner at Freeths:
“One short speech for man, one long step forward for leasehold reforms. The King’s Speech today referred to a number of changes for long residential leaseholders, both those who already own their leases and those who are yet to have them granted, including caps on ground rents, the implementation of many more commonhold developments, and the abolition of forfeiture for residential properties. This will have a significant impact upon the sector, from individual tenants and their lenders to large portfolio landlords, to residential developers, and all parties will need to be aware of these proposals.”
Li Yen Lim, construction & engineering lawyer at Freeths:
“The proposed Remediation Bill is a positive escalation from policy to enforcement, but it risks mistaking pressure for progress. Imposing hard deadlines and criminal sanctions may force action, but it does not resolve the underlying reality practitioners see daily: remediation is delayed not by reluctance alone, but by complex liability chains, and an evolving, still uncertain framework under the Building Safety Act 2022.
“Without greater clarity on key provisions for instance the parameters of the just and equitable test in relation to liability of associated entities in claims for Building Liability Orders and Remediation Contribution Orders, the Bill may simply front load disputes rather than unblock them. There is a real risk that the industry sees more litigation, not less, as parties race to protect their position under tightened timelines. If the aim is to accelerate remediation, the focus must shift from adding pressure to removing friction—through clearer guidance and procedural certainty.”
David Savage, partner and head of the construction engineering & projects at Charles Russell Speechlys:
“The Building Safety Remediation Bill certainly marks a shift in approach. It intends to make construction product manufacturers pay towards fixing the problem they caused, by fixing long-standing gaps in the law, as well as introducing the threat of criminal prosecution, unlimited fines and even imprisonment for those who fail to remediate buildings over 18 metres by the end of 2029, and buildings between 11 and 18 metres by the end of 2031 – those dates being as confirmed previously in July 2025 in the Government’s Remediation Acceleration Plan.
“However, data published at the beginning of this month shows the Building Safety Regulator is still not meeting its own approval targets, with 20 legacy remediation applications from as far back as 2024 still sitting within the system. That reflects a broader reality where delays to remediation works are rarely straightforward.
“The sector is dealing with skills shortages in façade remediation, multifaceted supply chains and major capacity pressures, with much of the market already tied up in ongoing fire safety work. At the same time, the regulatory process itself remains highly complex and time consuming.
“All of that can lead to delays. As a result, the real question is whether the legislation properly accounts for those practical challenges in the real world.”
Eversheds Sutherland:
Ben Peecock, partner at Eversheds Sutherland:
“The Highways Financing Bill points to a more pragmatic approach to funding large-scale road infrastructure. A Regulated Asset Base (RAB) model offers a credible path forward and provides the long-term certainty projects of this scale need, giving government a structured way to share risk with the private sector. Today’s Speech shows a willingness to confront the funding gap in roads, and RAB could be the mechanism that finally unlocks progress.”
Sarah Maylor, Partner at Eversheds Sutherland:
“This Bill signals a shift from policy to enforcement. The Government is no longer relying on voluntary compliance, but is creating a regime where those responsible will be compelled to act or face serious consequences. The ability to pursue manufacturers is potentially transformative, but the reality is these claims will be hard fought, and in the short term at least, the industry should expect an increase in disputes. The real test will be whether these measures accelerate remediation in practice. Without sufficient capacity, clarity on scope, and alignment between legal processes and delivery on the ground, there is a risk that increased regulation simply adds another layer of complexity to an already slow system.”
The post Construction industry reacts to King’s speech 2026 appeared first on Planning, Building & Construction Today.
