Since the Grenfell Tower tragedy, debate around building safety reform has understandably focused on England’s Building Safety Act and the role of the Building Safety Regulator. Alex Jones, director in Walker Morris’ Construction & Engineering team, discusses what these changes in Wales mean
While much of the industry continues to focus on the English position, Wales is quietly implementing a building safety framework that is both broader in scope and fundamentally different in structure.
From 1 July 2026, the combined effect of the Building Safety (Wales) Bill (‘the Bill’) and the Building (Higher Risk Buildings Procedures) (Wales) Regulations 2025 (‘the Regulations’) will reshape how residential buildings are designed, constructed, owned and managed across Wales. Much attention has been given to the occupation phase reforms, particularly Wales’ decision to regulate multi-occupied residential buildings of all heights, but the changes at the design and construction stage, including the Welsh dutyholder regime, merit just as much scrutiny.
For developers, investors and landlords operating in Wales, the message is clear: this is not simply a rehash of the English framework. It is a materially different regime with consequences that span the entire building lifecycle.
At first glance, Wales’ new framework appears reassuringly familiar. There are dutyholders, gateway approvals and golden thread requirements. There are accountable persons, principal accountable persons and mandatory building information. Developers who have been working in England will, with relief, recognise this language.
But on a closer examination, the differences quickly become apparent.
Construction
At the construction stage, higher‑risk building control applications under the Regulations fall to local authority building control (rather than the Building Safety Regulator, as is the case in England). While this can offer benefits such as greater local knowledge and more direct engagement, it also introduces the potential for variability in approach, resourcing and interpretation between authorities. For developers operating across multiple sites or borders, that inconsistency is now something they must actively factor in.
Additionally, under the Regulations, enhanced controls apply to higher‑risk buildings at the design and construction stage. While the height threshold broadly reflects the English regime (18 metres or seven storeys), the Welsh definition is broader, capturing buildings that contain at least one residential unit rather than requiring multiple residential units, as the English regime does. In practice, this means that more schemes will fall within the higher‑risk construction regime in Wales.
The Welsh framework also more closely links construction-phase duties to compliance in occupation. In practice, this increases the significance of the accountable person (AP) and principal accountable person (PAP) roles. Because AP and PAP duties apply to a much broader category of buildings in Wales, the quality and completeness of information generated by dutyholders during construction will directly affect the ability of APs and PAPs to discharge their statutory obligations once buildings are occupied. Decisions about materials, fire strategy, and structural design will shape not only gateway approvals, but also future risk assessments, resident engagement and transactional due diligence.
Occupation
At the occupation stage, the Welsh regime deliberately goes further than the English regime.
Rather than limiting the highest level of regulation to higher-risk (predominantly high-rise) buildings, Wales’ regime applies a statutory safety regime to all multi-occupied residential buildings, regardless of height. Converted houses, low-rise apartment blocks, student accommodation and the residential elements of mixed-use buildings all fall squarely within scope.
To manage this broader scope, Wales has introduced a three-tier categorisation. Category 1 buildings broadly mirror England’s higher‑risk buildings and attract the most onerous duties, including registration and safety case reporting. Category 2 and 3 buildings are subject to lighter (but still formal) obligations, extending statutory building safety into parts of the residential market that remain unregulated in England.
As with construction oversight, in Wales, responsibility for building safety oversight rests with local authorities and fire and rescue authorities, acting jointly as the Building Safety Authority, rather than with a central regulator equivalent to England’s Building Safety Regulator.
What does this mean?
The Welsh reforms are underpinned by a fundamental reshaping of responsibility for building safety. Central to this approach is the introduction of a building safety regime with a much wider remit, not limited to higher‑risk buildings.
The changes require safety to be treated as an integral and ongoing consideration, shaping design decisions, construction methods and the management of change as work progresses.
Taken together, the Bill and the Regulations place building safety firmly at the centre of residential development and management, rather than treating it as a height-based exception. The combination of wider scope, localised enforcement and a universal dutyholder regime means that safety, accountability and information management are no longer issues that can be addressed late in the process, or only on certain types of schemes.
Interested stakeholders need Welsh‑specific approaches to building safety throughout a building’s life cycle, from construction through occupation.
For those engaging with Wales’ reforms early on, the transition is workable. For those assuming that the Welsh position mirrors England’s, the differences may only become apparent when programmes, approvals, or transactions are already under pressure, revealing the stark reality of differences in regulatory responsibility.
The post Welsh building safety reforms: The dutyholder shift and what this means for developers appeared first on Planning, Building & Construction Today.
