The Scottish Government has confirmed its support for the UK Government’s Commercial Payments Bill, marking an important milestone in the drive for fairer payment practices across the construction supply chain. The Bill seeks to address long-standing concerns around payment terms, late payment, retentions and enforcement, with the aim of improving cashflow and strengthening protections for businesses.
The Scottish Government’s Legislative Consent Memorandum recognises that many of the Bill’s provisions extend into devolved areas and recommends that consent be granted.
Payment and retention abuse remain one of the most persistent challenges facing construction. While successive reforms have attempted to improve payment processes, they have largely failed to reduce cashflow pressures and disputes caused by delayed payments and the withholding of retention money. The Commercial Payments Bill is recognition that stronger legislative intervention is needed to deliver the improvements that industry has been seeking for many years.
FIS has consistently campaigned for measures that improve payment practices and strengthen the position of specialist contractors. Fair payment is fundamental to creating a healthier industry and supporting businesses to invest with confidence.
As the Bill progresses in juristictions across the UK, FIS will continue to engage with policymakers and officials to help ensure that the intent of the legislation is protected and that the final measures deliver meaningful benefits for the supply chain. Whilst there remains some opposition, this is a unique generational opportunity to translate the ambitions behind the Bill into practical improvements that support businesses, encourage investment and strengthen the construction sector for the long term.
The Scottish Government’s backing is more than a procedural step. It is an important endorsement of the principle that a sustainable construction industry depends on fair and effective payment practices. FIS will continue to monitor developments closely and represent members’ interests as the legislation moves towards implementation.
The Government’s new steel trade measure came into force on 1st July. These tarriffs reduce steel import quotas by 51%, with imports above these levels now subject to a 50% tariff. Following concerns raised by industry, the reduction is less than the 60% originally proposed, but the cost of delivering projects is still expected to increase significantly. Price rises of between 14% and 18% are currently being reported on projects, placing even further inflationary pressures on the construction supply chain.
The new UK steel measures have been introduced primarily to protect domestic steel producers from a growing volume of lower-cost imported steel, much of which the Government argues is being diverted into the UK market because of trade restrictions elsewhere (particularly the US and EU). The Government has also linked the measures to national security, resilience of critical infrastructure supply chains, and preserving UK steelmaking capacity.
The Government has confirmed that the quotas will be reviewed every 12 months, but the industry is pushing for this to be reduced to six months, warning that businesses are facing unsustainable financial pressures and there is a high risk of insolvencies. There is a transitional arrangement in place, which means that the new quotas and tariffs will not apply to steel under contract before 14 March 2026 and imported between 1 July and 30 September 2026.
This issue is subject to ongoing discussions between the Construction Leadersship Council and Government with the main concerns being:
Commercial impact: Structural steel prices have risen sharply. Market volatility has significantly increased, reducing the ability to forecast costs accurately and increasing commercial risk on lump-sum contracts.
Project viability: Evidence from the sector indicates that the proposed measures are already affecting scheme viability, with cost increases of 14–18% being reported on live projects and per-unit cost increases of up to £4,000 on residential developments which will further impact on the Government’s house building target.
Carbon impact: High tariffs on imported low-carbon steel may unintentionally force projects to procure more carbon-intensive domestic alternatives, with the potential to undermine project sustainability targets and embodied carbon reduction strategies.
Supply impact: The quota system creates significant risk of supply shortages for steel grades and section sizes where domestic mills are either at full capacity or do not manufacture the required products.
Critical issues for fabrication manufacturers: While the steel strategy is primarily intended to benefit the main producers, there are serious unintended consequences likely for the UK’s fabricated steel sector which employs approximately 60,000 in the UK. Concerns continute in the steel fabrication sector that the omission of fabricated steel products from the new quota and tariff framework leaves UK manufacturers facing higher input costs, whilst overseas competitors can continue importing fabricated steel into the UK without equivalent quota restrictions. The concern here is that clients will be incentivised to move fabrication overseas, putting up to 30,000 UK jobs at risk.
Lead time impact: Uncertainty around quota availability has already triggered “panic buying” behaviour, increasing short-term demand and extending procurement lead times. This volatility makes programme certainty increasingly difficult for contractors and clients.
FIS members purchasing steel are advised to consult carefully with their supplier on lead times/availability and any potentialy impact on future pricing of works and looking at how fluctuation clauses are implemented on projects with longer lead time (advice available via our legal toolkit Q&A and helpline)
What the 2028 Companies House Changes Mean for SMEs
FIS Members, (particularly small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs), should start preparing now for a significant shift in Companies House reporting rules. While much of the focus has been on digitalisation, the more immediate issue for many businesses is how to avoid unintentionally putting sensitive financial information into the public domain.
From April 2028, small companies and micro‑entities will, for the first time, be required to file a profit and loss account with Companies House as part of their annual accounts. At the same time, all companies will have to move to fully digital filing using commercial software, with web and paper submissions withdrawn.
These changes sit within a wider package of reforms under the Economic Crime and Corporate Transparency Act 2023, intended to improve the quality and usability of financial information on the public register and strengthen the UK’s ability to tackle economic crime.
The key point: your profit and loss account may be exposed unless you act
Although companies will be required to submit their profit and loss account, the government has confirmed an important concession: SMEs will still be able to prevent that information from being made public.
This effectively creates a two‑tier system in which:
Companies House and enforcement bodies receive full financial data, including the profit and loss account,
But the public version of the accounts can exclude that information, if the company chooses to opt out.
It is important to note, however, that this protection will not be automatic.
The detail that should concern SMEs is that the opt‑out process itself has not yet been defined. Companies House has confirmed that the option will exist, but not how it will operate in practice.
Why you should consider opting out
For many SMEs, profit and loss accounts contain some of the most commercially sensitive information in the business that could allow interogation of margins, cost structures, and performance trends that could materially affect relationships with competitors, clients and suppliers.
Historically, smaller companies have been able to limit what they disclose publicly. These reforms change that balance by requiring full submission of the data, even if publication can be controlled.
The move to mandatory digital filing (iXBRL through commercial software) reinforces the likelihood that the opt‑out will be embedded somewhere in the submission process, potentially as a selection, declaration or tagging choice within the software itself.
That means the responsibility for protecting sensitive information is likely to sit not just with the company in principle, but with whoever is actually preparing and submitting the accounts in practice.
The practical implication: doing nothing may mean disclosure
While full procedural detail is still to come, the direction of travel is clear enough for SMEs to act now.
It would be unsafe to assume that:
Non‑publication will be the default, or
The opt‑out will be applied automatically by software or advisers
Instead, the prudent assumption is that opting out will require a conscious, positive step at the point of filing.
If that step is missed, whether through misunderstanding, process gaps or simple oversight, the profit and loss account could be published, with limited scope to reverse the situation once the information is in the public domain.
What SMEs should do now
Even without final guidance, there are some immediate, practical steps businesses can take to protect themselves.
First, SMEs should ensure that whoever is responsible for preparing and filing their accounts—whether an external accountant or an internal finance function, is fully aware that protecting the profit and loss account will require active management under the new regime.
Second, this issue should be built into normal financial processes. It should not be left as an ad hoc decision at filing stage, but treated as a standard instruction and checklist item within the year‑end accounts process.
Finally, businesses should keep a close eye on further announcements. The detail of the opt‑out mechanism is still awaited, and will ultimately determine exactly how the risk needs to be managed in practice. FIS will continue to work closely with Institute of Chartered Accountants England and Wales (ICAEW) on this and will provide further guidance as soon as this becomes clear.
Key Takeaway
For SMEs, the immediate takeaway is:
From 2028, you will have to file more financial information than before, but whether that information becomes public will depend on whether you (or your agent) take the right action at the right moment.
Getting that step right will be essential to protecting commercially sensitive financial data in the new reporting landscape.
FIS joined today a Ministry of Housing Communities and Local Government briefing setting out the Government’s new call for evidence on professions, trades and occupations across the built environment, part of its wider response to the Grenfell Inquiry.
The exercise, which runs until 12 August 2026, will inform a new long-term strategy due in Spring 2027. While still at an early stage, the tone of the session was clear: this is not about marginal change, but about fundamentally reshaping how the system works.
A Shift to Whole-System Thinking
MHCLG framed the strategy around three core themes: skills and competence, behaviour and culture, and accountability. It was noted that these are not being treated in isolation, but as interdependent parts of a wider system that together determine outcomes.
The ambition is to move beyond fragmented reforms and create a more coherent framework with the potential to be underpinned by a single construction regulator, that better aligns people, products and buildings.
Officials were clear that the starting point is the Grenfell Inquiry’s finding that failures were systemic, not attributable to any one profession, stage, or decision point.
What the Consultation Is Asking
At this stage, MHCLG is not consulting on specific policy proposals but gathering evidence on how the system operates in practice.
The consultation spans the entire building lifecycle, from pre-design through to occupation, and seeks input from across the supply chain. Importantly, contributors are encouraged to focus on their areas of expertise rather than responding to everything, recognising the diversity of roles in the sector.
The emphasis throughout the webinar was on practical insight: how decisions are made, what drives behaviour, and where barriers sit.
Key Messages from the Discussion
The Q&A session provided a useful reality check, with several recurring themes that will resonate strongly with FIS members.
Too Much Complexity, Not Enough Clarity
There was broad agreement that, while there has been significant effort to improve competence frameworks and standards, the system has become overly complex and fragmented.
Rather than creating consistency, the proliferation of overlapping frameworks has made it harder, particularly for SMEs, to understand what is required. MHCLG acknowledged this concern and emphasised the need to simplify and rationalise, rather than add further layers.
The System Doesn’t Operate in Silos
A number of contributors challenged the lifecycle-based structure of the consultation, highlighting how activities like manufacturing and product supply cut across traditional boundaries.
This underlined a central issue: we continue to organise policy around silos, while delivery depends on integration. Whether it is product performance, design intent or installation quality, outcomes depend on how different parts of the system connect and often they don’t.
Commercial Drivers Are Shaping Outcomes
One of the strongest themes, and a point FIS raised directly, was the role of procurement and contracting in shaping behaviour.
There is growing recognition that many of the problems the industry faces are not down to a lack of technical competence, but to how projects are set up commercially.
Concerns highlighted included:
Risk being routinely pushed down the supply chain
Extensive amendment of standard contracts, reducing clarity
Increasing contractual complexity
Limited understanding of contractual obligations across the workforce
In this context, contractual competence is emerging as a critical issue. If those involved in delivery lack the ability or confidence to interpret and manage contracts, it becomes far harder to make sound decisions or challenge poor practice.
The FIS asserted that thiss was about competence, but also information management suggesting that contracts should be treated as part of the “golden thread”, reflecting their central role in defining responsibilities and managing risk.
The clear implication is that improving technical skills alone will not be enough if commercial structures continue to work against good outcomes. The Civils Servants assured that consideration of procurement and contracts was under scrutiny here.
Culture and Leadership Matter
The conversation also moved beyond individuals to the role of organisations. Even the most competent professionals can be constrained by:
Commercial pressures
Misaligned incentives
Lack of support to challenge decisions
This reinforces the need for reform to address organisational culture and leadership, not just individual capability.
Bridging the Gap Between Design and Delivery
Another practical issue raised was the disconnect between technical information and its use on site. Drawings, specifications and standards are not always translated into clear, actionable instructions for those carrying out the work.
If requirements are not understood at the point of use, then compliance becomes unreliable—highlighting the need for clearer communication and more accessible information across the supply chain.
What Happens Next
MHCLG will use responses to the consultation to develop policy options later this year, ahead of publishing a full strategy in Spring 2027. Officials stressed that this will be the start of an ongoing reform process, not a one-off intervention.
This consultation is designed to gather information about the key factors that influence how people work across all stages of the building lifecycle and covers all building types. The consultation will inform development of this new strategy for the built environment professions, trades and occupations.
FIS Response
This is a significant opportunity to address some of the long-standing structural issues that continue to hold the industry back. FIS is preparing a response.
For FIS members, the consultation is an important chance to ensure that:
The role of SMEs and specialist contractors is properly reflected
The impact of procurement and contractual practices is fully understood
Reform focuses on what actually happens on site, not just on paper
We strongly encourage members to engage and share practical examples, particularly where current systems make it harder, not easier, to deliver safe, high-quality work. There will be an opportunity to do this through upcoming Working Groups or directly via iainmcilwee@thefis.org.
As the 1 July implementation date for the Government planned steel tariffs and quotas approaches evidence from across the sector is raising concerns that the combined impact of the planned tariffs and quotas—compounded by ongoing cost pressures from the Iran conflict—presents severe and immediate risks to the UK construction industry. Therefore CLC is working to inform the Government of the key impacts and make proposals to address the issues.
The key impacts crystallising include:
Commercial impact: Structural steel prices have risen sharply. Market volatility has significantly increased, reducing the ability to forecast costs accurately and increasing commercial risk on lump-sum contracts.
Project viability: Evidence from the sector indicates that the proposed measures are already affecting scheme viability, with cost increases of 14–18% being reported on live projects and per-unit cost increases of up to £4,000 on residential developments which will further impact on the Government’s house building target.
Supply impact: The quota system creates significant risk of supply shortages for steel grades and section sizes where domestic mills are either at full capacity or do not manufacture the required products.
Critical issues for fabrication manufacturers: While the steel strategy is primarily intended to benefit the main producers, there are serious unintended consequences likely for the UK’s fabricated steel sector which employs approximately 60,000 in the UK. The fabricated sector estimates job losses of potentially 30,000 over the next 5-7 years should the tariffs and quotas be implemented as currently envisaged.
Lead time impact: Uncertainty around quota availability has already triggered “panic buying” behaviour, increasing short-term demand and extending procurement lead times. This volatility makes programme certainty increasingly difficult for contractors and clients.
Carbon impact: High tariffs on imported low-carbon steel may unintentionally force projects to procure more carbon-intensive domestic alternatives, with the potential to undermine project sustainability targets and embodied carbon reduction strategies.
Over the past two months and ongoing, we have been convening a CLC Industry Working Group on Steel Tariffs and Quotas to understand the impacts on UK construction of this trade measure. The work of this group has included input and feedback from a cross section of the industry affected by this including major manufacturers and suppliers, contractors and developers and related trade associations. The work of this group has been utilised to engage at ministerial level to raise these concerns. Further this group has engaged in online discussions and provided briefing notes to members of the DBT steel and construction teams to provide detail on the issues to assist their work.
Core to the recommendations being made has been to emphasise that CLC continues to welcome the Governments long-term commitment to supporting the steelmaking industry, however, that a balanced approach is necessary that safeguards the future of UK steelmaking (both (British-made and British-fabricated steel) and without unintentionally undermining the construction sector that depends on it. As part of this industry proposals have been put forward to address the issues being raised, these are:
It is recommended that fabricated and semi-finished steelwork should be included within the steel tariff and quotas framework from 01 July 2026.
Product categorisation should be re-considered, recognising UK manufacturing capability and capacity to prevent unnecessary price rises on products not produced here.
The schedule for the Government’s review of the tariffs and quotas should be brought forward from 12 months to 6 months to address the concern that impact of the tariffs and quotas will be felt much sooner and more severely by UK businesses than Government originally anticipated.
The CLC continues to work with Ministers and the Department for Business and Trade to highlight these concerns and seek solutions. We will keep you updated with progress.
For more information on managing inflation click here
The Passive Fire Knowledge Group (PFKG), supported by FIS, has published three new Knowledge Shares to address widespread misunderstanding in the specification of passive fire protection systems across the built environment.
The new publications are:
· PFKG Knowledge Share 10: Active Fire Curtain Standards
· PFKG Knowledge Share 11: Active Fire Curtains – Insulation vs Radiation
· PFKG Knowledge Share 12: Fire Barriers and Cavity Barriers – What’s the Difference?
Together, the documents provide clear, practical guidance in areas where poor terminology, legacy standards, and inconsistent interpretation continue to undermine compliance.
Knowledge Shares 10 and 11 focus on common specification errors associated with active fire curtains. Knowledge Share 10 addresses frequent confusion between smoke-leakage-classified active fire curtains and simple smoke curtains. Simple smoke curtains are intended solely to control and direct smoke towards smoke control systems and provide no fire resistance (integrity) performance. This is in contrast to smoke-leakage-classified active fire curtains, which are tested to fire resistance standards. The document cautions against the use of the term “smoke and fire curtains” in specifications, as it is misleading and can result in the selection of incorrect products.
Knowledge Share 11 highlights the frequent misapplication of insulation (I) performance where radiation (W) classification is more appropriate for active fire curtains. Insulation fire resistance (I) refers to the time taken for the temperature on the non-fire side of a curtain to rise more than 180°C above ambient under test conditions, a performance that most active fire curtains do not achieve for any significant duration. By contrast, the radiation criterion (W) measures the time taken for heat radiation at 1 m from the non-fire side to exceed 15 kW/m². This typically provides a more realistic and meaningful measure of performance for active fire curtains, particularly when combined with integrity (E) to form an EW classification.
Knowledge Share 12 addresses another long-standing area of confusion: the distinction between fire barriers and cavity barriers. The document explains the different regulatory roles these systems perform, along with the differing fire resistance requirements that apply to each. It also highlights how misunderstanding can lead to non-compliance, particularly where products are installed within cavities, above ceilings, or beneath raised access floors without appropriate supporting evidence.
Across all three publications, PFKG emphasises the importance of early engagement between fire engineers, designers, contractors, and manufacturers to ensure specifications are clear, achievable, and supported by suitable test evidence.
“These Knowledge Shares are about removing ambiguity from some of the most frequently misunderstood aspects of passive fire protection,” said Will Pitt, Chair of PFKG. “Incorrect assumptions around standards or performance don’t just create technical issues — they introduce avoidable compliance risk into fire strategies and ultimately undermine safety. Clear terminology and evidence-led specification are fundamental.”
All three Knowledge Shares are available now as free downloads from www.pfkg.org, supporting PFKG’s ongoing commitment to improving competence and consistency across the fire safety community.
The Construction Skills Mission Board (CSMB) has published its Spring 2026 update, outlining progress towards its goal of supporting the 100,000 new construction workers per year needed by 2029 to deliver the UK’s housing, infrastructure and net‑zero ambitions. Launched in 2025, the Board brings industry and Government together and is backed by a £625 million Construction Skills Package.
Delivery of funding is already underway, including £100 million for Construction Technical Excellence Colleges, £100 million for construction Skills Bootcamps (expected to support around 60,000 new entrants by 2029), increased support for Foundation Apprenticeships, and £165 million to expand college‑based training through funded course programmes.
The update highlights a mixed workforce picture, with direct employment dipping slightly towards the end of 2025 while total construction jobs increased, reinforcing the urgency of coordinated skills action. Priority workstreams include improved skills intelligence, industry placements, pathways for NEETs, faster Level 4 entry routes, local coordination pilots, stronger engagement with major infrastructure clients, and enhanced apprenticeship support. Sector Skills Plans for Homebuilding, Infrastructure, and Engineering & Building Services are now live, with more in development.
What this means for industry: funding is flowing and programmes are live – but employer engagement is critical to turning ambition into skilled people on site.
Get Involved
FIS CEO, Iain McIlwee is working closely with the CSMB attending weekly meetings of the CSMB Advisory Group, helping to ensure that the work is grounded in reality for particularly relevant specialists and feeding in views of the FIS Membership, including the FIS Skills Board.
Key outcomes from the FIS Health & Safety Working Group – April Meeting
The April meeting of the FIS Health & Safety Working Group brought together members, specialists and partner organisations to address some of the most pressing health and safety challenges currently facing the finishes and interiors sector. Discussions were frank, practical and firmly rooted in site experience, reflecting the increasing need to bridge the gap between regulatory intent and day‑to‑day delivery.
Falling objects, safe working zones and RIDDOR
A major focus of the meeting was the HSE’s consultation on proposed changes to RIDDOR, particularly the expansion of reporting requirements for unintentional falling objects. Members agreed that many everyday activities in finishes and interiors work—such as drilling, fixing and board installation—carry genuine falling‑object risk, even when traditional “safe working zones” are in place.
The group highlighted that objects rarely fall straight down and can deflect or travel beyond exclusion zones, especially on constrained or high‑rise residential sites. As a result, exclusion zones alone cannot be treated as absolute protection. The consensus was that zones must be dynamic controls, supported by good planning, sequencing, tool and material control, and supervision. FIS will submit a coordinated response to the consultation, supporting clarity, proportionality and a prevention‑led approach.
Limb (b) workers, PPE and RPE
There was significant discussion around the increasing complexity of limb (b) worker status and responsibility for PPE and RPE. Members expressed frustration that legal definitions often fail to reflect how work is actually controlled through RAMS, supervision and works orders.
Particular concern focused on RPE, facial hair, and the growing use of PAPR as a default control. Members were clear that PAPR is often expensive, difficult to manage hygienically, and disproportionate for short‑duration work. While dust exposure is recognised as a serious health risk, the group agreed the industry currently lacks the clear, structured control framework seen with hazards such as asbestos. There was strong agreement on the need for practical FIS guidance to support risk‑based, defensible decision‑making.
Board lifters – suitability, risk and dynamic assessment
The use of board lifters generated one of the most detailed discussions of the meeting. Members consistently reported that board lifters are rarely used in practice, not through resistance, but due to genuine constraints such as space, congestion, board size, ceiling height and set‑up time.
The group highlighted that regulators are increasingly less concerned about whether board lifters are present, and more focused on whether decisions not to use them are supported by a documented, task‑specific dynamic risk assessment. Risks associated with board lifters—including instability, falling boards, fatigue and potential lone‑working—must be balanced against manual handling benefits. A simple pre‑use checklist already used by members will be shared to strengthen FIS guidance.
Innovation and safer ways of working
Members welcomed innovation that better aligns equipment with real site conditions. BRAVI Platforms presented the Solo Gyps attachment, designed to support safer board installation from MEWPs. While innovation was encouraged, members stressed that space, access, sequencing, training and RAMS integration remain critical to determining suitability on site.
New SFS Safe Working Practices Guidance
FIS confirmed completion of new SFS Safe Working Practices Guidance, developed with sector input. The guidance places strong emphasis on falling‑object risk, collective protection, dynamic exclusion zones, and pre‑construction planning under CDM. Members welcomed it as a practical benchmark that also strengthens conversations with principal contractors and clients where access or sequencing is inadequate.
Manual handling training – strong member engagement
There was strong, collective support for the new drylining‑specific manual handling e‑learning course, now approaching launch. A broad cross‑section of members volunteered to assist with final review, helping ensure the training reflects real tasks, constraints and site pressures rather than generic assumptions.
Powered access and IPAF collaboration
IPAF provided a comprehensive update on powered access safety, sharing accident trends, global safety campaigns and new British Standards for MEWPs and mast climbing work platforms. Members welcomed closer collaboration with IPAF, particularly around recovery and rescue planning, data sharing, and alignment of training and standards with site realities.
Pallet handling and materials movement
The group revisited risks created by plasterboard pallet design, particularly where bearers prevent safe pallet‑truck access. A bespoke pallet‑truck concept was presented as a potential solution. Discussion focused on braking requirements, site acceptance, trialling and the importance of engaging manufacturers to address risk at source.
Dust control and occupational health
Under Any Other Business, members discussed increasing enforcement attention on dust control, including the growing move away from dry sweeping towards vacuum‑based solutions. While practical challenges remain, the group acknowledged the direction of travel and reinforced the need for better planning, segregation and extraction. Members also noted increasing client and insurer demands for occupational health evidence relating to dust, HAVS and noise.
Get Involved – Help Shape Practical Guidance for the Sector
What’s Next?
Following the April meeting, the FIS Health & Safety Working Group has established a number of task and finish groups to turn discussion into practical guidance and tools for members:
RIDDOR Consultation – Falling Objects and Safe Working Zones Developing a coordinated FIS response focused on proportionality, prevention and real‑world working conditions.
Limb (b) Workers, PPE and RPE (including PAPR) Producing practical guidance on responsibility, RAMS ownership and defensible, risk‑based approaches to PPE and RPE.
Board Lifters – Dynamic Risk Assessment and Guidance Review Strengthening guidance on suitability, limitations and dynamic, task‑specific decision‑making.
Board Lifter Innovation and Mechanisation Exploring longer‑term solutions, including powered and platform‑integrated lifting systems.
Manual Handling – Drylining‑Specific E‑Learning Review Finalising sector‑relevant training with strong member involvement before launch.
Construction Dust – Planning, Control and Monitoring Supporting better planning, control hierarchy application and client engagement on dust risk.
Plasterboard Pallet Handling and Pallet Trucks Investigating safer handling solutions and potential manufacturer engagement.
Annual FIS Health & Safety Survey Reviewing and refining survey questions to ensure data continues to drive meaningful improvement.
Members are encouraged to get involved—participation ensures FIS guidance remains practical, proportionate and grounded in real site experience. To find out more, contact the FIS team.
The UK Health Security Agency (UKHSA) and the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) have issued a safety reminder advising that four specified non‑sterile alcohol‑free wipe products must not be used under any circumstances.
These products have been linked to an ongoing risk of Burkholderia stabilis infection, and continued use may pose a serious risk to health. There have been 59 confirmed cases of Burkholderia stabilis linked to these products, identified through a UK outbreak spanning January 2018 to 3 February 2026. A small number of cases continue to be detected. Several cases involved serious infections requiring hospital treatment, and one death has been attributed to Burkholderia stabilis infection.
These four products should not be used under any circumstances:
ValueAid Alcohol Free Cleansing Wipes
Microsafe Moist Wipe Alcohol Free
Steroplast Sterowipe Alcohol Free Cleansing Wipes
Reliwipe Alcohol Free Cleansing Wipes (testing revealed contamination with a Burkholderia strain not related to the outbreak cases)
Key Actions Required
Immediately stop using the affected alcohol‑free wipe products if they are present in your workplace, service, or care setting.
Remove and isolate any remaining stock to prevent accidental use.
Do not use the products for skin cleansing, medical procedures, wound care, or environmental cleaning.
Follow local procedures for safe disposal or return of affected products once further instructions are issued.
Report immediately to your manager or infection control lead if you believe an affected product has been used.
What to Use Instead
Use only approved, sterile or appropriately validated alternatives that meet current infection prevention and control requirements.
Ensure replacement products are sourced through approved suppliers and are used in line with manufacturer instructions and local guidance.
Further Information
This guidance will be updated if additional information, product details, or disposal instructions are issued by UKHSA or MHRA.
If you are unsure whether a product is affected, do not use it and seek advice before proceeding.
FIS has been featured in a recent Financial Times opinion article examining how artificial intelligence and automation are reshaping career choices and what this means for interest in skilled trades within the construction sector.
The article reflects on growing concern about the vulnerability of some white‑collar roles to AI, and the resulting attention being given to hands‑on occupations that are less exposed to automation. In that context, it explores routes into trades such as plumbing, plastering and drylining, while recognising the skill, professionalism and long‑term commitment required to succeed in construction.
FIS was referenced to provide insight into how workforce patterns are already changing. Commenting in the article, Iain McIlwee, Chief Executive of FIS, noted that there are already positive signs that more young people are choosing construction and trade pathways, with the proportion of carded site workers under the age of 30 increasing from 17 per cent to 25 per cent since 2021. This reflects both the appeal of earning while learning and a growing awareness of the risks associated with student debt and uncertain graduate employment in an AI‑disrupted labour market.
The article also includes contributions from Jade Sandhu, Group People Director at Measom Drywall Systems and Chair of the FIS Skills Board. Her comments highlight that skilled trades can offer strong earning potential, security and autonomy, particularly where individuals develop competence, run well‑managed businesses and price work appropriately. The article also reflects her view that these opportunities are still not well understood or clearly communicated within schools and colleges.
Importantly, the FT coverage avoids presenting construction as a simple alternative to office‑based careers affected by AI. It acknowledges the physical demands of site work, the costs of tools and vehicles, the prevalence of self‑employment and the sector’s sensitivity to economic cycles, all of which underline the need to approach construction careers with realism and respect for the skills involved.
From an FIS perspective, the article aligns with a long‑standing position: as AI reshapes the wider economy, skilled trades offer resilient and rewarding careers, but only when the skills required are properly valued, supported and invested in. Encouraging entry into construction must go hand‑in‑hand with quality training, fair payment, sustainable workloads and clear progression routes.
The Financial Times piece provides a thoughtful contribution to the discussion on AI, employment and skills—and reinforces the importance of seeing construction not as a default alternative, but as a professional career choice that underpins the built environment and the wider economy.
Finishes and Interiors Sector (FIS) has supported a recent Telegraph investigation that highlights mounting pressure within the UK housebuilding sector and the growing consequences for specialist supply chains.
The article focuses on Vistry Homes, one of the UK’s largest housebuilders. While headlines have focused on balance‑sheet risk and market uncertainty, the Telegraph also draws attention to a persistent and systemic issue: late payment and cashflow pressure being pushed down the supply chain. This mirrors long‑standing concerns raised by FIS members and repeatedly escalated by FIS to Government.
Government‑published payment data referenced in the article shows Vistry pay 50% of invoices late and the value of late and disputed payments exceeds a staggering £220m. Contractors report extended delays, repeated chasing, administrative barriers and requests for payment deferrals, issues that directly weaken business resilience and increase financial risk across the sector.
Commenting in the article, Iain McIlwee, Chief Executive of FIS, said the scale of the problem was “concerning”:
“We have had contact with a number of companies reporting payment concerns associated with Vistry, blaming ‘administration problems’, ‘missed applications’ and the old ‘sorry, forgot to process your invoice’,” he said. “These are companies working across multiple sites that have incurred significant costs and are not being paid despite chasing multiple times.”
FIS is clear that treating the supply chain as a source of working capital is not sustainable. It undermines confidence, weakens delivery capacity and ultimately threatens the viability of housing programmes themselves. It also adds to mental health issues in the sector with more than four in ten specialist supplying the housebuilding sector feeling stressed about cashflow “most or all of the time”.
As Government moves to tighten enforcement on late payment and improve payment transparency, FIS is calling for immediate improvements in commercial discipline, early engagement and realistic cost management to prevent financial pressure being passed downstream.
The Telegraph investigation reinforces FIS’s long‑standing position: a credible and sustainable housing programme depends on a fair, well‑funded and promptly paid supply chain.
Vistry have warned investors that rising construction costs could significantly undermine its financial position. Vistry has acknowledged that, under a “severe but plausible” scenario, continued cost inflation could result in it exceeding its committed borrowing facilities.
As Government move to clamp down on poor payment, FIS is calling for a greater focus in procurement on commercial behaviour to prevent financial stress and risk being passed downstream.
The Telegraph coverage reinforces FIS’s long‑standing position: a sustainable housing programme depends on a fair, well‑funded, and promptly paid supply chain.
The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) is planning a shake up of the The Reporting of Injuries, Diseases and Dangerous Occurrences Regulations 2013 (RIDDOR). Prior to implementing change, HSE is inviting businesses, employers, health practitioners and industry stakeholders to help shape the future of workplace incident reporting in Great Britain.
What are the proposed changes?
Specifically on legislative change, HSE is consulting on clarifying definitions within RIDDOR where existing terminology is percieved to be unclear or ambiguous.
HSE is also proposing to revise both the list of dangerous occurrences, to better reflect modern workplace risks, and the list of reportable occupational diseases, reintroducing some conditions previously removed from the list and adding new ones to ensure serious instances of work-related ill health are properly captured.
A further proposal from the regulator would broaden who could formally diagnose a reportable occupational disease. Currently, diagnosis must be made by a doctor registered with and holding a licence to practise with the General Medical Council (GMC). HSE is proposing to extend this to other registered health practitioners, reflecting the wider range of professionals involved in occupational health.
On the non-legislative side, HSE is seeking views on simplifying the online RIDDOR reporting form to improve usability and tackle both under-reporting and over-reporting, that they have described as a longstanding challenge for the regulator and for businesses alike.
Rachael Radway, Deputy Director of Regulation at the Health and Safety Executive, said: “RIDDOR reporting is central to how we identify emerging risk, target regulatory activity and contribute to the evidence base for workplace health and safety. This consultation allows those who will be affected by the changes to have their say as we look to improve standards and reduce the burden on business.
“The consultation is relevant across all sectors and industries. Duty holders, self-employed workers and those in control of work premises are particularly encouraged to respond. We are also encouraging healthcare practitioners involved in diagnosing and managing work-related conditions to engage as the proposed changes may impact their ways of working in the future.”
The consultation closes on 30 June 2026.
The full consultation document — including detailed proposals, background information and guidance on how to submit a response — is available on the HSE website.
FIS will be discussing these changes and the needs respond on behalf of our membership at the FIS H&S Working Group meeting which will take place online at 2pm on the 16th April.
The Building Safety Regulator (BSR) has opened a consultation proposing the introduction of a self‑certification scheme for fire door installation, maintenance, and replacement across England and Wales.
Under the plans unveiled in late March, certain fire door works, in both higher‑risk or lower‑risk buildings, could be carried out without the need for formal building control approval, including exemption from the gateway process that currently applies to higher‑risk buildings.
The move aims to reduce delays and improve efficiency by allowing competent, authorised installers to sign off their own work within a strengthened oversight framework. This proposal sits within a broader review of the Conditions of Authorisation (CoA) for competent person schemes.
The consultation opened runs for three months, closing on the 3rd June. Stakeholders across the construction and fire safety sectors are encouraged to contribute, particularly as the proposals have potential to reshape how fire door compliance is managed in both routine and high‑risk settings.
Ths FIS will be feeding in on behalf of our community. Speaking on the launch of the consultation, FIS CEO Iain McIlwee stated:
“It is good that this is now on the agenda. This consultation responds to one of the first challenges we raised with the Regulator prior to the Building Safety Act being implemented. Replacing Fire Doorsets is regulated works, but if happening in isolation, often goes below the radar of building control approval. It is vital that this work is controlled, but equally triggering a whole Gateway approach creates a potentially disproportionate amount of administration at the Building Safety Regulator. A more pragmatic approach will, I am sure, be welcomed. The devil is in always in the detail, so we will review this with members and respond as appropriate. It is encouraging that we are finally getting into these issues and can work together as a supply chain to reshape the process in a practical and proprtinate way for the better.”
This May will see what is arguably the most closely contested Scottish Parliament election since devolution in 1999.
With all 129 seats being contested, CICV members from across Scotland have a valuable opportunity to hear directly from, and put questions to, senior representatives of all six parties represented at Holyrood.
The following representatives have now been confirmed to take part:
Colin Beattie MSP (SNP)
Fraser Graham (Scottish Lib Democrats)
Patrick Harvie MSP (Scottish Greens, Glasgow MSP)
Cllr Thomas Kerr (Reform Scotland)
Vonnie Sandlan MSP (Scottish Labour)
Brian Whittle MSP (Scottish Conservatives, South of Scotland)
The format will follow a Question Time style, with each panellist invited to give a brief two to three minute opening statement outlining their party’s priorities for the construction sector should they form, or be part of, the next Scottish Government.
The hustings will be chaired by Devin Scobie, former journalist and public affairs adviser, who has worked with many CICV members since 1999, including SELECT, SNIPEF and SECTT.
Registration
Please register your placeHERE. Joining details for the online event will be sent to registered attendees closer to the event.
Submitting a question
When registering, members will have the opportunity to submit a question for the panel. Due to time constraints we cannot guarantee that all submitted questions will be asked. Questions will be reviewed in advance and those selected will reflect the most relevant and commonly raised issues from across the CICV membership.
A new report published today sets out how Scotland can strengthen the flow of new entrants into the construction and built environment workforce, helping ensure the sector has the people and skills needed to deliver against the country’s future ambitions.
The report, Pathways to Productivity, commissioned by Skills Development Scotland on behalf of the Skills and Workforce Group of the Construction Accord and delivered by BE-ST, explores how the industry can attract, recruit, develop, train and retain a new generation of skilled workers.
The research draws on engagement with employers, representative bodies, education and training providers and public sector partners across Scotland. The focus is on exploring what conditions are needed to ensure employers within the sector can recruit and train the future workforce it needs. It provides insight into how the current system supporting workforce entry operates and identifies how to strengthen and scale these pathways in the years ahead, creating more opportunities for employers to recruit and overcome skills imbalances.
Construction plays a vital role in Scotland’s economic, environmental and social priorities, from delivering homes and hospitals to upgrading infrastructure and supporting the transition to net zero. Ensuring the sector has a strong and resilient workforce will be key to delivering these ambitions.
Forecasts suggest the construction workforce could grow to around 214,500 by 2029. However, with the Construction Industry Training Board estimating that around 8% of the workforce must be replaced each year due to natural attrition, continued focus on attracting and developing new entrants will remain essential.
At the same time, the sector is evolving rapidly, with increasing demand for skills linked to digitalisation, modern methods of construction and new performance standards. This creates an opportunity to design workforce pathways that not only increase participation in the sector but also support the development of the competencies required for a modern built environment.
The report highlights the importance of strengthening collaboration across the construction skills ecosystem including employers, training providers, representative bodies and public partners to ensure pathways into the industry are accessible, flexible and aligned with future workforce needs.
It identifies six shared measures of success that stakeholders see as central to strengthening the flow of new entrants: workforce capacity, competence, employer confidence, sector culture, workforce composition, and long-term continuity in workforce planning.
The findings form part of wider work under the Construction Leadership Forum’s Skills and Workforce Mission to support workforce development and strengthen the long-term resilience of Scotland’s construction industry.
The research was informed by sector engagement events delivered in partnership with Skills Development Scotland and the Construction Leadership Forum’s Skills and Workforce Group, alongside a survey distributed through networks including BE-ST and the Construction Leadership Forum.
The Executive Summary for Pathways to Productivity is available to read now.
Douglas Morrison, Deputy CEO at BE-ST said:
“Scotland’s construction sector faces long term challenges in both workforce capacity and capability, set against rapidly evolving client and industry requirements. Through engagement with stakeholders across the system, there is clear motivation to increase the flow of new entrants and strengthen lifelong learning.
“However, while there is broad agreement on the challenges, perspectives on solutions vary significantly. This report does not seek to prescribe a single answer but instead sets out a range of practical levers to transform and optimise how we recruit, develop and sustain the workforce for the future. We intend for it to inform longer term discussions on evolving our approach and to encourage active engagement from all those involved across the system.”
Elaine Ellis, Skills Planning Manager (Construction and Net Zero) at Skills Development Scotland, said:
“Workforce and skill shortages persist across many key roles in construction, yet individuals wishing to train for these positions encounter significant barriers to entry and often struggle to secure the new entrant roles necessary for developing competence.
“This research explores some of the reasons behind this paradox. Its aim is to act as a catalyst for change and to set out some of the barriers that need to be addressed. Supporting people to enter the sector – and, crucially, ensuring they can develop the skills required for the future – is not only a win for those aspiring to join a sector rich with opportunity, but also a win for the sector itself and our wider built environment.”
Iain McIlwee, CEO Finishes and Interiors Sector said:
“This report is excellent – it captures the essence of the skills challenge for construction clearly and vitally makes some practical recommendation. Encouraginly too findings are consistent with conversations that have happened through the Contruction Skills Mission Board. Whilst it remains a challenge, I am encouraged that the industry across the UK is starting to pull together and that the support we need is being mobilised. In the backdrop of all that is going on in the world, it is easy for skills to slip down the agenda, but we can’t let this happen or we find ourselves lurching from crisis to crisis and transformation is forever on tomorrow’s list.”
There was broad support for holding a Construction Forum meeting with officials ahead of the election period, even without ministerial attendance (due to restrictions associated with purdah in the pre-election period.
Concerns were raised about limited government resource dedicated to construction policy. There was interest in exploring a more structured unit or team—similar to approaches in other nations—that could tackle issues like pipelines more consistently.
The sector was invited to set out clear, actionable priorities that could be presented to the incoming administration. Attendees urged discipline in this process, noting a history of shifting focus without completing earlier work.
4. Additional Themes Raised
Several additional issues were flagged:
Utilities delays: Long lead‑times (12–24 months) for grid and service connections pose a major early‑stage risk for projects.
Planning system: A request for stronger government support and cross‑agency leverage.
Tendering quality: Concerns around poor tender information and unrealistic tender periods.
Skills and local investment: A desire for procurement processes to reward demonstrable, proven investment in local employment and skills—not vague commitments or box‑ticking.
There was also a recommendation to ensure housing remains part of future discussions and that sector priorities are shared with senior officials and political leaders.
[/et_pb_text][/et_pb_column][/et_pb_row][/et_pb_section]Pipelines remain a long-standing and unresolved challenge. Contributors referenced several past attempts to collate pipeline data, with progress described as slow and inconsistent.
A recurring theme was the need for stronger client involvement: contractors are willing to participate, but progress is limited when public sector clients are not consistently engaged or resourced.
Digital infrastructure also surfaced as a concern, particularly whether existing procurement platforms could evolve to match more advanced UK‑wide systems.
Attendees welcomed news that:
Welsh Government is actively reviewing recommendations from a recent pipelines report.
Comparative models, such as the Scottish Futures Trust, have been explored.
Dedicated resource is being allocated to improve pipeline development and data quality.
Trialling improvements at a small scale could help test feasibility and industry appetite.
The group emphasised the need for rapid, tangible progress rather than further review or slow iteration.
3. Construction Forum – Purpose, Resourcing, and Sector Priorities
There was broad support for holding a Construction Forum meeting with officials ahead of the election period, even without ministerial attendance (due to restrictions associated with purdah in the pre-election period.
Concerns were raised about limited government resource dedicated to construction policy. There was interest in exploring a more structured unit or team—similar to approaches in other nations—that could tackle issues like pipelines more consistently.
The sector was invited to set out clear, actionable priorities that could be presented to the incoming administration. Attendees urged discipline in this process, noting a history of shifting focus without completing earlier work.
4. Additional Themes Raised
Several additional issues were flagged:
Utilities delays: Long lead‑times (12–24 months) for grid and service connections pose a major early‑stage risk for projects.
Planning system: A request for stronger government support and cross‑agency leverage.
Tendering quality: Concerns around poor tender information and unrealistic tender periods.
Skills and local investment: A desire for procurement processes to reward demonstrable, proven investment in local employment and skills—not vague commitments or box‑ticking.
There was also a recommendation to ensure housing remains part of future discussions and that sector priorities are shared with senior officials and political leaders.
[/et_pb_text][/et_pb_column][/et_pb_row][/et_pb_section]A consistent message was the need for full engagement across the supply chain and client bodies. Success will require an “all in it together” approach, with shared responsibility for driving change. The key areas identified for focus were:
Pipelines
Procurement
Skills and training
Planning
This Mission Statement also continues to champion the use of Project Bank Accounts (PBAs) to ensure fair and prompt payment across public sector construction supply chains. Planning challenges featured prominently in the discussion, with attendees noting recurring delays and capability concerns. Case studies are being gathered to help diagnose issues and inform future discussions with the planning policy team.
2. Pipelines – Visibility, Data Quality, and Client Engagement
Pipelines remain a long-standing and unresolved challenge. Contributors referenced several past attempts to collate pipeline data, with progress described as slow and inconsistent.
A recurring theme was the need for stronger client involvement: contractors are willing to participate, but progress is limited when public sector clients are not consistently engaged or resourced.
Digital infrastructure also surfaced as a concern, particularly whether existing procurement platforms could evolve to match more advanced UK‑wide systems.
Attendees welcomed news that:
Welsh Government is actively reviewing recommendations from a recent pipelines report.
Comparative models, such as the Scottish Futures Trust, have been explored.
Dedicated resource is being allocated to improve pipeline development and data quality.
Trialling improvements at a small scale could help test feasibility and industry appetite.
The group emphasised the need for rapid, tangible progress rather than further review or slow iteration.
3. Construction Forum – Purpose, Resourcing, and Sector Priorities
There was broad support for holding a Construction Forum meeting with officials ahead of the election period, even without ministerial attendance (due to restrictions associated with purdah in the pre-election period.
Concerns were raised about limited government resource dedicated to construction policy. There was interest in exploring a more structured unit or team—similar to approaches in other nations—that could tackle issues like pipelines more consistently.
The sector was invited to set out clear, actionable priorities that could be presented to the incoming administration. Attendees urged discipline in this process, noting a history of shifting focus without completing earlier work.
4. Additional Themes Raised
Several additional issues were flagged:
Utilities delays: Long lead‑times (12–24 months) for grid and service connections pose a major early‑stage risk for projects.
Planning system: A request for stronger government support and cross‑agency leverage.
Tendering quality: Concerns around poor tender information and unrealistic tender periods.
Skills and local investment: A desire for procurement processes to reward demonstrable, proven investment in local employment and skills—not vague commitments or box‑ticking.
There was also a recommendation to ensure housing remains part of future discussions and that sector priorities are shared with senior officials and political leaders.
A consistent message was the need for full engagement across the supply chain and client bodies. Success will require an “all in it together” approach, with shared responsibility for driving change. The key areas identified for focus were:
Pipelines
Procurement
Skills and training
Planning
This Mission Statement also continues to champion the use of Project Bank Accounts (PBAs) to ensure fair and prompt payment across public sector construction supply chains. Planning challenges featured prominently in the discussion, with attendees noting recurring delays and capability concerns. Case studies are being gathered to help diagnose issues and inform future discussions with the planning policy team.
2. Pipelines – Visibility, Data Quality, and Client Engagement
Pipelines remain a long-standing and unresolved challenge. Contributors referenced several past attempts to collate pipeline data, with progress described as slow and inconsistent.
A recurring theme was the need for stronger client involvement: contractors are willing to participate, but progress is limited when public sector clients are not consistently engaged or resourced.
Digital infrastructure also surfaced as a concern, particularly whether existing procurement platforms could evolve to match more advanced UK‑wide systems.
Attendees welcomed news that:
Welsh Government is actively reviewing recommendations from a recent pipelines report.
Comparative models, such as the Scottish Futures Trust, have been explored.
Dedicated resource is being allocated to improve pipeline development and data quality.
Trialling improvements at a small scale could help test feasibility and industry appetite.
The group emphasised the need for rapid, tangible progress rather than further review or slow iteration.
3. Construction Forum – Purpose, Resourcing, and Sector Priorities
There was broad support for holding a Construction Forum meeting with officials ahead of the election period, even without ministerial attendance (due to restrictions associated with purdah in the pre-election period.
Concerns were raised about limited government resource dedicated to construction policy. There was interest in exploring a more structured unit or team—similar to approaches in other nations—that could tackle issues like pipelines more consistently.
The sector was invited to set out clear, actionable priorities that could be presented to the incoming administration. Attendees urged discipline in this process, noting a history of shifting focus without completing earlier work.
4. Additional Themes Raised
Several additional issues were flagged:
Utilities delays: Long lead‑times (12–24 months) for grid and service connections pose a major early‑stage risk for projects.
Planning system: A request for stronger government support and cross‑agency leverage.
Tendering quality: Concerns around poor tender information and unrealistic tender periods.
Skills and local investment: A desire for procurement processes to reward demonstrable, proven investment in local employment and skills—not vague commitments or box‑ticking.
There was also a recommendation to ensure housing remains part of future discussions and that sector priorities are shared with senior officials and political leaders.
A recently published industry–government Mission Statement formed the basis for early discussions. The Mission Statement recognises the importance of the sector to Wales and reaffirms a collaborative commitment to supporting a built environment sector that delivers value for Wales – economically, socially and environmentally.
The next phase of tihs work involves establishing a steering group and several Task & Finish groups to drive delivery. A strong theme emerged around governance: participants questioned whether existing models could be adopted rather than creating new structures, stressing the importance of clarity, continuity, and avoiding duplication.
A consistent message was the need for full engagement across the supply chain and client bodies. Success will require an “all in it together” approach, with shared responsibility for driving change. The key areas identified for focus were:
Pipelines
Procurement
Skills and training
Planning
This Mission Statement also continues to champion the use of Project Bank Accounts (PBAs) to ensure fair and prompt payment across public sector construction supply chains. Planning challenges featured prominently in the discussion, with attendees noting recurring delays and capability concerns. Case studies are being gathered to help diagnose issues and inform future discussions with the planning policy team.
2. Pipelines – Visibility, Data Quality, and Client Engagement
Pipelines remain a long-standing and unresolved challenge. Contributors referenced several past attempts to collate pipeline data, with progress described as slow and inconsistent.
A recurring theme was the need for stronger client involvement: contractors are willing to participate, but progress is limited when public sector clients are not consistently engaged or resourced.
Digital infrastructure also surfaced as a concern, particularly whether existing procurement platforms could evolve to match more advanced UK‑wide systems.
Attendees welcomed news that:
Welsh Government is actively reviewing recommendations from a recent pipelines report.
Comparative models, such as the Scottish Futures Trust, have been explored.
Dedicated resource is being allocated to improve pipeline development and data quality.
Trialling improvements at a small scale could help test feasibility and industry appetite.
The group emphasised the need for rapid, tangible progress rather than further review or slow iteration.
3. Construction Forum – Purpose, Resourcing, and Sector Priorities
There was broad support for holding a Construction Forum meeting with officials ahead of the election period, even without ministerial attendance (due to restrictions associated with purdah in the pre-election period.
Concerns were raised about limited government resource dedicated to construction policy. There was interest in exploring a more structured unit or team—similar to approaches in other nations—that could tackle issues like pipelines more consistently.
The sector was invited to set out clear, actionable priorities that could be presented to the incoming administration. Attendees urged discipline in this process, noting a history of shifting focus without completing earlier work.
4. Additional Themes Raised
Several additional issues were flagged:
Utilities delays: Long lead‑times (12–24 months) for grid and service connections pose a major early‑stage risk for projects.
Planning system: A request for stronger government support and cross‑agency leverage.
Tendering quality: Concerns around poor tender information and unrealistic tender periods.
Skills and local investment: A desire for procurement processes to reward demonstrable, proven investment in local employment and skills—not vague commitments or box‑ticking.
There was also a recommendation to ensure housing remains part of future discussions and that sector priorities are shared with senior officials and political leaders.
A recently published industry–government Mission Statement formed the basis for early discussions. The Mission Statement recognises the importance of the sector to Wales and reaffirms a collaborative commitment to supporting a built environment sector that delivers value for Wales – economically, socially and environmentally.
The next phase of tihs work involves establishing a steering group and several Task & Finish groups to drive delivery. A strong theme emerged around governance: participants questioned whether existing models could be adopted rather than creating new structures, stressing the importance of clarity, continuity, and avoiding duplication.
A consistent message was the need for full engagement across the supply chain and client bodies. Success will require an “all in it together” approach, with shared responsibility for driving change. The key areas identified for focus were:
Pipelines
Procurement
Skills and training
Planning
This Mission Statement also continues to champion the use of Project Bank Accounts (PBAs) to ensure fair and prompt payment across public sector construction supply chains. Planning challenges featured prominently in the discussion, with attendees noting recurring delays and capability concerns. Case studies are being gathered to help diagnose issues and inform future discussions with the planning policy team.
2. Pipelines – Visibility, Data Quality, and Client Engagement
Pipelines remain a long-standing and unresolved challenge. Contributors referenced several past attempts to collate pipeline data, with progress described as slow and inconsistent.
A recurring theme was the need for stronger client involvement: contractors are willing to participate, but progress is limited when public sector clients are not consistently engaged or resourced.
Digital infrastructure also surfaced as a concern, particularly whether existing procurement platforms could evolve to match more advanced UK‑wide systems.
Attendees welcomed news that:
Welsh Government is actively reviewing recommendations from a recent pipelines report.
Comparative models, such as the Scottish Futures Trust, have been explored.
Dedicated resource is being allocated to improve pipeline development and data quality.
Trialling improvements at a small scale could help test feasibility and industry appetite.
The group emphasised the need for rapid, tangible progress rather than further review or slow iteration.
3. Construction Forum – Purpose, Resourcing, and Sector Priorities
There was broad support for holding a Construction Forum meeting with officials ahead of the election period, even without ministerial attendance (due to restrictions associated with purdah in the pre-election period.
Concerns were raised about limited government resource dedicated to construction policy. There was interest in exploring a more structured unit or team—similar to approaches in other nations—that could tackle issues like pipelines more consistently.
The sector was invited to set out clear, actionable priorities that could be presented to the incoming administration. Attendees urged discipline in this process, noting a history of shifting focus without completing earlier work.
4. Additional Themes Raised
Several additional issues were flagged:
Utilities delays: Long lead‑times (12–24 months) for grid and service connections pose a major early‑stage risk for projects.
Planning system: A request for stronger government support and cross‑agency leverage.
Tendering quality: Concerns around poor tender information and unrealistic tender periods.
Skills and local investment: A desire for procurement processes to reward demonstrable, proven investment in local employment and skills—not vague commitments or box‑ticking.
There was also a recommendation to ensure housing remains part of future discussions and that sector priorities are shared with senior officials and political leaders.
Last week (3rd March) FIS attended the Wales Industry Stakeholders Meeting. This year is a big one in the Principality with the Building Safety Regulations Wales coming into force in July (an FIS training course is currently being completed to support compliance) and the Assembley Elections in May.
The meeting opened with a reminder that the purpose of the session was to gather views from the construction sector to shape discussions of Welsh Construction Forum.
1. Mission Statement – Governance and Next Steps
A recently published industry–government Mission Statement formed the basis for early discussions. The Mission Statement recognises the importance of the sector to Wales and reaffirms a collaborative commitment to supporting a built environment sector that delivers value for Wales – economically, socially and environmentally.
The next phase of tihs work involves establishing a steering group and several Task & Finish groups to drive delivery. A strong theme emerged around governance: participants questioned whether existing models could be adopted rather than creating new structures, stressing the importance of clarity, continuity, and avoiding duplication.
A consistent message was the need for full engagement across the supply chain and client bodies. Success will require an “all in it together” approach, with shared responsibility for driving change. The key areas identified for focus were:
Pipelines
Procurement
Skills and training
Planning
This Mission Statement also continues to champion the use of Project Bank Accounts (PBAs) to ensure fair and prompt payment across public sector construction supply chains. Planning challenges featured prominently in the discussion, with attendees noting recurring delays and capability concerns. Case studies are being gathered to help diagnose issues and inform future discussions with the planning policy team.
2. Pipelines – Visibility, Data Quality, and Client Engagement
Pipelines remain a long-standing and unresolved challenge. Contributors referenced several past attempts to collate pipeline data, with progress described as slow and inconsistent.
A recurring theme was the need for stronger client involvement: contractors are willing to participate, but progress is limited when public sector clients are not consistently engaged or resourced.
Digital infrastructure also surfaced as a concern, particularly whether existing procurement platforms could evolve to match more advanced UK‑wide systems.
Attendees welcomed news that:
Welsh Government is actively reviewing recommendations from a recent pipelines report.
Comparative models, such as the Scottish Futures Trust, have been explored.
Dedicated resource is being allocated to improve pipeline development and data quality.
Trialling improvements at a small scale could help test feasibility and industry appetite.
The group emphasised the need for rapid, tangible progress rather than further review or slow iteration.
3. Construction Forum – Purpose, Resourcing, and Sector Priorities
There was broad support for holding a Construction Forum meeting with officials ahead of the election period, even without ministerial attendance (due to restrictions associated with purdah in the pre-election period.
Concerns were raised about limited government resource dedicated to construction policy. There was interest in exploring a more structured unit or team—similar to approaches in other nations—that could tackle issues like pipelines more consistently.
The sector was invited to set out clear, actionable priorities that could be presented to the incoming administration. Attendees urged discipline in this process, noting a history of shifting focus without completing earlier work.
4. Additional Themes Raised
Several additional issues were flagged:
Utilities delays: Long lead‑times (12–24 months) for grid and service connections pose a major early‑stage risk for projects.
Planning system: A request for stronger government support and cross‑agency leverage.
Tendering quality: Concerns around poor tender information and unrealistic tender periods.
Skills and local investment: A desire for procurement processes to reward demonstrable, proven investment in local employment and skills—not vague commitments or box‑ticking.
There was also a recommendation to ensure housing remains part of future discussions and that sector priorities are shared with senior officials and political leaders.
FIS Position and Support on Inflation and Material Shortages
Professor Noble Francis has added his view on Middle Eastern Conflict and Potential Effects to his economic updates which are updated weekly and available to FIS members via this link (by virtue of FIS’s umbrella membership of Construction Products Association). Whilst is still early days, and the financial markets and commodity prices are still volatile, the full impact of the Middle Eastern conflict on the UK economy remains fluid, but in this update Noble focusses on likely impact on oil and energy and draws comparison that helps provide some insight for your planning and pricing. FIS has produced advice for members in managing their business in a time of inflation which is available below.
How can I track and report price movements?
There isn’t currently an index of prices specific to products in the Finishes and Interiors Sector, but you can draw out the main material movements via the Office of National Statistics, note this is lagging and prices are changing fairly rapidly at the moment. It also doesn’t necessarily reflect prices on the ground due to specific grades/distribution buffering etc.
For the sake of balance, if you publish a similar index, please don’t hesitate to pop a link over by email or in the chat and we’ll include it here.
FIS track labour prices on a half yearly basis with information available to contributors. If interested in learning more email iainmcilwee@thefis.org.
Top tips for contracting in a high inflationary market
Where this impacts existing contractual relationships members are reminded to check contractual terms and consider the relevance and application of any fluctuation clauses. If you are unable to rely on standard fluctuation clauses, an early conversation with your client in terms of your ongoing ability to fulfil the contract in the wake of rapid and unexpected price increases is essential.
Where you are currently tendering, consider carefully the impact of the current inflationary environment, look to link any fluctuation to material and product prices rather than general inflation or ensure that quotes are time stamped and limited. Where you cannot negotiate a shared risk approach with your client, you need to seriously consider what could worse case scenario mean to your business if prices drifted?
We encourage all in the construction sector to consider seriously the impact of imposing fixed prices at this time. The sector is working on every tighter margins and this could impact the resilience and ongoing viability of of businesses in the supply chain. Where concerns are raised, a pragmatic, understanding and collaborative approach is essential. It is vital that we work together to avoid conflict and we further encourage all companies to consider signing and adopting the principles set down in the Conflict Avoidance Pledge that has be developed by the Royal Institute of Chartered Surveyors (RICS) and endorsed by the Construction Leadership Council (CLC).
Below we provide some information on the market forces that are resulting in ongoing inflationary pressures and additional advice and guidance related to managing businesses and contracts in a high inflation environment.
The aim is to keep it refreshed so our members are have a clear picture and can have informed decisions up and down the supply chain.
Bring your concerns to FIS
If you feel you are being treated unfairly, talk to us, we will do what we can. We can, through our own contacts in the industry, the CLC and contact with the Small Business Commissioners Office and Civil Service shine a light on negative trends and poor behaviour, it can be done anonymously and handled sensitively so as not to damage your relationships.
FIS is urging the supply chain to heed the advice of the Construction Leadership Council and adopt a collaborative approach and ensure that there is ongoing and open communication through the supply chain and we are doing all we can to work together rather than tearing lumps off of each other.
Too often construction get contractual and adopts a siege mentality, parcelling up and firing risk out hoping it sticks elsewhere. The much talked about transformation must start now, rather than pushing risk down the supply chain, we need to be communicating with clients, helping them to understand that these events are beyond the control of individual companies and we need to work together to resolve and manage.
Our supply chain has had an unprecedented and difficult year, we need to nurture it back to health, not return to old and punitive ways that will ultimately drive people out of business to the detriment of all.
Useful links:
FIS Webinar: Managing your business in a time of shortage – Listen again here
Conflict in the Middle East is having an impact oil and gas prices and hence energy costs across the world into a period or rapid inflation which is now feeding through into the price of construction products and logistics.
The past two years have, without doubt, been some of the hardest times businesses in the finishes and interiors sector have faced. Uncertainty and challenge continues into 2023.
The underlying trend began post COVID with the RICS reporting construction materials costs in the UK had already reached a 40 year high based on the annual growth of the BCIS Materials Cost Index by the end of 2021. According to Joe Martin, BCIS Lead Consultant “The pressure on materials prices and availability is expected to continue at least until the end of 2022. Labour shortages are expected to evolve as the significant driver for overall construction cost increases next year and the construction sector would need to compete for it with other sectors”.
After this rapid inflation in 2021 across all material groups, 2022 started with concerns around the impact of ongoing labour shortages and the escalation of tragic events in Ukraine put further pressure on energy and fuel prices adding to pressure on the supply chain. This has resulted in the announcement of further price increases throughout 2022 and rapid inflation for key materials, fuel and energy. Of particular concern for FIS members are increases in insulation, steel and plasterboard.
Whilst the rate of inflation is expected to slow in 2023, the situation remains volatile. With such a perfect storm of complex and cumulative issues it is difficult to know when we will start to notice improvement or how much worse things may get. The old adage hope for the best, but prepare for the worst comes to mind.
As we step into 2023 the tragic events in Ukraine continues to impact oil and gas prices and hence energy costs across the world into a period or rapid inflation which is now feeding through into the price of construction products and logistics. In the period 1 April 2021, wholesale gas had risen from around of 50p/therm to around £2.80/therm by the end of March 2022.
Whilst the UK in not overly reliant on Russia or Ukraine for construction products (which together account for just 1.2% of imports of construction products, some areas such as flat glass and certain timber products have a more significant share from these markets. Projects could also be impacted by shortages of products such as concrete reinforcing bars or other unrelated shortages (such as bricks) which are still ongoing.
The global situation remains volatile and it is impossible to predict accurately the ongoing impact on material and product prices. Beyond the escalation in Ukraine, tension between the US and China and genuine concerns about UK Conformity Assessment (UKCA).
Logistical and Freight Challenges
Beyond supply and demand, inflation and availability problems has been further compounded by a number of issues related to freight and logistics, in 2021 we had the Suez Canal logjam, Brexit and pandemic uncertainty. An ongoing shortage of lorry drivers has also been reported and has put upward pressure on transport costs. Whilst shipping freight prices did ease in 2022, the invasion of Ukraine has pushed up fuel prices.
Squeezing the supply chain
A key concern is that in the wake of double digit inflation in the price of some materials and increasing labour costs and despite an increasingly healthy pipeline, we are not seeing equivalent inflation in tender prices, which means margins are likely to be squeezed and in extreme cases businesses could be driven into recession.
The latest tender price reports from MACE is showing that current tender price inflation ran at 7.5% in 2021 and were expected to rise by 5.5% in 2022, this is below the rate of inflation.
UK government has announced that it is scrapping the long-awaited Audit and Corporate Governance Reform Bill saying that the rule changes would be too costly for large companies. This is a blow to the construction supply chain who bore the brunt of the failure of Carillion, has been impacted by persistently high levels of insolvency, the recent news of the escalating exposure to ISG and serious governancee failings being investigated following the failure of Henry Construction,
The Bill had, among other reforms, aimed to hold company directors to account for existing corporate reporting responsibilities and to create a new regulator with stronger powers. According to Department of Business and Trade the decision to scrap the Bill was made to “avoid significant new costs” for large organisations.
A letter from the Minister for Small Business and Economic Transformation, Blair McDougall, to the Chair of the parliamentary Business and Trade Committee, has also been published and further explains the change of direction.
McDougall confirms that with the government’s key priority being to promote growth and reduce administrative burdens, that it would “not be right” to prioritise the introduction of measures that would increase costs on businesses.
“We intend to focus instead on the simplification and modernisation of corporate reporting. We want to make the UK’s reporting regime the most streamlined and proportionate in the world,”
he wrote.
Another key factor in the decision, according to McDougall, was supposed progress in audit quality and regulation since the collapse of Carillion.
Reacting to the news ICAEW’s Chief Executive, Alan Vallance, has stated:
“We cannot hide our disappointment that after many false dawns, the government has decided to scrap the Audit and Corporate Governance Bill. The government had itself recognised that an Audit Reform Bill would increase global investor confidence in UK companies and increase the prospects of growth.”
FIS Chief, Iain McIlwee added his concerns to this decision reflecting:
“We continue to underestimate from a policy perspective how important the construction supply chain is to delivery and growth at our peril. It is all very well to consider the cost to large corporations, but SMEs are the backbone of the construction sector and economy and there is little consideration here to them. The uncertainty added by the risk of insolvency further undermines our ability to innovate, and to invest in skills and does not take into account the confidence of investors who will be taking a view on the viability of projects based on the resilience of the supply chain. The backdrop to all of this is that failure to build protection also impacts confidence in the loan, bond and credit insurance market, further removing much needed support from the supply chain..
Almost 8 years after the failure of Carillion it is a disgrace that nothing tangible has been done to protect our supply chain from exposure here. This announcement comes at a time when our community continues to deal with the fall-out from ISG, the evident lack of controls were in place and frankly this another kick in the teeth to those that are footing the bill for the failure of others. We need stability to support growth. Whilst I remain optimistic about the interventions proposed to improve payment and put a nail in the coffin of retentions, we have missed a huge opportunity here to help stabalise the sector. FIS has fed these views into the Construction Minister.”
Ministry of Justice owes contractors £20m after ISG collapse
A cross-party House of Lords Committee (supported by a submission of evidence by FIS) has warned the Government that “unacceptable” delays caused by the Building Safety Regulator’s (BSR) approval processes is leaving residents waiting for remediation of dangerous cladding in unsafe buildings and increasing costs for leaseholders.
Whilst welcoming the increased scrutiny the Building Safety Regulator has brought to the design, construction and management of buildings in the interest of safety, the Industry and Regulators Committee’s report The Building Safety Regulator: Building a better regulator, published today (Thursday 11 December) also warns that the delays mean the Government is in danger of missing its target to build 1.5 million homes by 2029.
After hearing from a range of witnesses including representatives of trade bodies, developers, housing associations and regulators which work closely with the BSR, the Committee also found:
The BSR has not given clear enough guidance on how applicants are supposed to demonstrate that their buildings are safe;
Many applications are being rejected or delayed due to basic errors and applicants’ inability to evidence how they are considering elements of fire and structural safety, which reflects poorly on the construction industry;
Many construction products do not have relevant product standards, leaving them entirely unregulated;
Difficulties in local authority funding and the introduction of regulation have left an ageing workforce of building inspectors who are struggling to meet demand;
Despite these skills shortages, smaller works such as bathroom renovations in high-rise buildings are being subject to the scrutiny of the BSR’s hard-pressed multidisciplinary teams (MDTs).
The report is calling on:
The BSR to give greater guidance to its MDTs on how compliance with the Building Regulations should be evidenced and assessed to ensure greater consistency;
The Government to remove smaller works from the BSR’s building control approval processes, or introduce a streamlined approval process for them;
The BSR to allocate the same MDTs to similar buildings or projects built by the same organisation, which could improve efficiency and consistency;
The Government to provide long-term funding for the training of new building and fire inspectors.
Chair of the Committee, Baroness Taylor of Bolton said:
“The tragic loss of 72 lives at the Grenfell Tower fire laid bare the urgent need to reform building safety regulation in England, particularly for high-rise buildings. The introduction of the Building Safety Regulator was a necessary and welcome step. However, the scale of the delays caused by the BSR has stretched far beyond the regulator’s statutory timelines for building control decisions.
This is unacceptable. We welcome that the Government and the BSR are now acting to try and make practical improvements, but this will not address the anxiety and frustration that residents and companies have experienced. It does not improve safety to delay vital remediation and refurbishments, nor to deter the delivery of new housing in high-rise buildings.
We expect to see further action from the Government and the BSR to ensure that construction projects in high-rise buildings can be brought forward more quickly, without compromising on vital safety improvements.”
Responding to the report, FIS CEO Iain McIlwee stated:
“Amidst some fairly stark findings here, the good news is that Government is listening and challenging the process. There has already been significant reform of the Regulator since this evidence gathering has taken place. Whilst it is too early to call “transformed”, the new approach has been welcomed and already seems to be making good headway.
At FIS we are working directly with the Regulator on key issues highlighted in this report. These include defining and delivering a practical approach to competence and looking afresh at the design development process, clarifying where product performance meets design intent.
This was always going to be a difficult period as the legislation demands wholesale change to the process and there are a lot of moving parts. The important next stage, if we are to deliver at pace without compromising standards, is making sure that industry is working collaboratively with the regulator, we are getting clear guidance out and supporting the industry through this intense period of change.”
Running a contractor business has never been tougher. Every day, members tell us they’re facing:
Cash flow pressure that never seems to ease.
Difficulty finding — and keeping — good people.
Ever-tightening compliance and more onerous contracts.
Long hours, constant stress, and no clear way out.
In this latest intervention, FIS has worked with business consultant Dave Drimmie to develop a practical, hands-on programme designed to free business owners from firefighting and help them create systems that can help them escape the firefighting stage and start to scale their business.
The FIS Freedom Programme is initially upen to 12 contractors for a pilot programme. The programme is fully funded and will comprise of:
12 guided sessions (1–1.5 hrs each).
Business owner involved in the first 2 sessions.
Then your team works with us to document and digitise the core systems that run your business.
Government funding covers the pilot phase costs — so this first intake is fully supported.
The programme sets out to deliver:
Financial clarity – take control of cash flow and profitability.
Repeatable systems – extract what’s in your head and build processes that scale.
Empowered employees – attract, train, and keep five-star team members.
Elevation – win high-value clients at higher margins.
Deliver seamlessly – streamline projects, reduce errors, and improve profit.
Optimise – harness digital tools and AI to save hours every week.
Make saleable – create a valuable asset that isn’t dependent on you.
But with only 12 places available, you’ll need to act fast. Applications close 9pm, Sunday 28th September 2025 (due to funding constraints, this is a hard stop deadline for this pilot).
