FIS has responded to the Government’s consultation on proportionality in the higher-risk building regime, backing the intent to reduce unnecessary bureaucracy, but warning that reforms must stay firmly focused on risk.

While supporting proposals to reclassify certain in-flat and small-scale work to Category B, FIS stresses that location is not a proxy for risk. Even minor works can have serious implications where they affect fire compartmentation, fire stopping, or structural elements.

The response highlights concern that proposed thresholds based on time and workforce could create loopholes, encouraging work to be split artificially and leading to inconsistent oversight. Instead, FIS is clear – classification must be driven by the nature and impact of the work itself and a focus on competence in delivery.

FIS also calls out a key gap in the proposals associated with mixed-use buildings where similar works in residential and commercial units risk being treated differently despite comparable safety implications.

Crucially, FIS warns that without clear, consolidated guidance for clients, reforms could increase confusion, misclassification and risk-averse behaviour rather than reduce burden.   The response also raises a red flag on the “Golden Thread”, cautioning that reduced oversight must not lead to gaps in recording and managing safety-critical information.

FIS concludes that the proposals can deliver a better balance between proportionality and safety, but only if backed by clear definitions, practical guidance, and full recognition of both individual competence and organisational capability.

You can read the full response here.

BS 8670-2 Built environment. Core criteria for construction product competence. Code of Practice is a standard that is being developed by BSI which has entered public review until the 13^th July 2026.

This standard follows the precedent set by the white paper published by the Construction Products Association (CPA) which outlined levels of competence for those working with construction products. The standard is not only for suppliers as it distinguishes between a construction product brought to market by a manufacturer or distributor and a “built environment system” supplied and installed by a contractor.

A review copy of the standard can be downloaded for free by anyone with a BSI account using the link below.

British Standards Institution – Project

If members would prefer to discuss their feedback with the technical team, please contact eitherjamesparlour@thefis.org or damianhill@thefis.org

FIS has been featured in a recent Financial Times article examining the growing pressures within the UK housing sector and the often-overlooked impact on the specialist construction supply chain.

While much of the public discussion around housing focuses on delivery targets, investor confidence and market performance, FIS has reinforced the importance of recognising the role of the supply chain, the businesses and people actually delivering homes on the ground.

Drawing on recent FIS research into procurement, payment and contract management practices within the housing sector, the article highlights concerns that specialist contractors are increasingly being used as a financial buffer within the system, carrying disproportionate levels of risk and cashflow pressure.

FIS has consistently warned that these practices are unsustainable and are having wider consequences across the sector, including restricting investment in skills, innovation and business growth, while contributing to rising levels of financial and mental stress within the workforce.

The article reflects the growing recognition that achieving long-term housing ambitions will require more than headline targets alone. It will also depend on creating a healthier, more sustainable commercial environment throughout the supply chain.

FIS would like to thank Megan Snaith for covering this important issue and helping bring greater visibility to the challenges faced by specialist contractors across the finishes and interiors sector.

FIS has responded on behalf of its members to both Government consultations on construction product regulatory reform through the White Paper and the General Safety Requirement (GSR). Both of these consultations and the changes to legislation that they propose will affect many across our membership, with particular focus on suppliers as products that are covered by a designated standard (or an ETA/UKTA) are captured by the proposals in the White Paper, whereas products not covered by a designated standard are captured by the new General Safety Requirement.

FIS engaged with members from across interior sectors at our working group forums to discuss all the proposals and also worked closely with the Construction Products Association (CPA) to determine our response which is closely aligned with the response from the CPA.

Members who would like to see a copy of our response to either the White Paper or the General Safety Requirement should contact our Technical Director jamesparlour@thefis.org

FIS is inviting members to review and comment on our draft response to the Building Safety Regulator’s latest consultation on Category A and Category B works, ahead of a final submission at the end of May.

The consultation focuses on improving proportionality within the Higher-Risk Building (HRB) regime by reclassifying certain works and expanding the potential role of Competent Person Schemes (CPS). While the proposed reforms aim to reduce unnecessary bureaucracy and speed up delivery, they also signal a significant shift in how compliance is managed.

The details of the consultation were presented at a workshop on 18th May.  The suggestion is to reclassify most in-flat works as Category B, this would mean many small projects inside flates, such as work on internal (non load bearing) partitions or fire door replacements are currently captured within Category A, creating a seemingly disproportionate levels of documentation and delay.  The consultation also seeks to recategorise smaller works in communal areas in a similar way. 

A number of critical issues were discussed that will form the core of the FIS response.

Mixed-use buildings – a key gap

One of the strongest themes from the meeting was the lack of consideration for mixed-use buildings.

The consultation currently focuses on residential units, but it was emphasised in the discussion that similar compartmented environments exist in other categories of space – including offices, retail spaces, and other commercial units. In these cases, comparable works could face very different regulatory treatment despite carrying similar levels of risk.

FIS is therefore questioning whether the current approach reflects modern building design and delivery, and is calling for greater consistency in how different unit types are treated. The response also highlights the need for clearer guidance to avoid confusion, particularly in projects where multiple uses sit within the same building.

Competence vs Capability – getting the balance right

Another key issue raised during the workshop was the shift towards competence-based regulation.

While members recognise the benefits of reducing reliance on prescriptive documentation, there is concern that current proposals place too much emphasis on individual competence, particularly through the expansion of self-certification schemes.

The FIS response stresses that successful delivery depends not only on skilled individuals, but also on organisational capability – including supervision, coordination, quality systems, and ongoing assurance. Existing certification schemes such as FIRAS and IFC were cited as providing this broader assurance, and members were clear that reforms should build on these frameworks rather than introducing new, overlapping accreditation requirements.

Guidance, clarity and practicality

Concerns about the practical implementation of the proposals, particularly around defining “small-scale” works using thresholds such as time and workforce. There was a strong view that these measures do not always align with real risk and could introduce further ambiguity.

As a result, FIS is calling for:

• Clearer, consolidated guidance
• Better alignment with real-world project delivery
• More practical examples to support consistent decision-making

Without this, there is a risk that the industry continues to default to Category A as a precaution, undermining the intended benefits of reform.

Have your say

FIS is now asking members to review the draft response and contribute any additional comments or examples from their own experience.

Deadline for comments: 26 May
Final submission: 28 May

This consultation represents a critical opportunity to shape how building safety regulation evolves, particularly for fit-out, refurbishment, and interiors work.

As Iain McIlwee commented during the session:

“This is about getting the balance right – reducing unnecessary burden without losing control of safety. But we need to make sure the system reflects how buildings are actually delivered.”

Members are encouraged to share feedback.  Details of the meeting and the draft response are available below.

See more news likes this