Harley Haddow Strengthens North West Presence with Civil and Structural Director
11 Feb 2026
Rebuilding Britain is the cornerstone of Andy Burnham’s vision for government. More homes. Better infrastructure. Renewed investment in towns and cities. While public finances are still in a precarious state, he will be pushing his Chancellor to commit tens, if not hundreds, of billions of pounds toward public sector construction projects.
With this pending influx of taxpayer money into the construction sector, it is an apt moment to consider what should be expected in return.
Price and ability to deliver will always be driving factors. However, after a litany of public sector build scandals, not least the tragedy at Grenfell, one principle should be beyond debate.
Public contracts and the money that flows from them through the broader supply chain should favour organisations that have consistently demonstrated transparency, accountability and a commitment to higher standards.
This isn’t a radical proposition. It should be the bare minimum expectation.
Public sector contracts aren’t just a mechanism for procuring goods and services, they have always been viewed as levers of influence, even when that influence has been used for more nefarious purposes.
Social value, sustainability and responsible business practices increasingly inform procurement decisions. Contract awards are where government can quite literally put its money where its mouth is and send a powerful signal of the standards society should expect from organisations benefiting from public investment.
The new government has a golden opportunity to use procurement to raise standards across the construction sector. It should create clear incentives for not just the headline-grabbing tier one contractors, but throughout the whole supply chain, all the way down to construction product manufacturers.
The Grenfell Tower tragedy exposed extensive and unacceptable failures across the construction sector. Dame Judith Hackitt’s Independent Review was scathing, calling for fundamental cultural change placing great emphasis on competence, accountability and reliable information.
Grenfell demonstrated what can happen when trust is abused, scrutiny fails and claims about construction products are not challenged with sufficient rigour. The consequences were catastrophic.
The principles that emerged from the Hackitt review and the broader Grenfell public inquiry are now widely accepted across the construction sector.
However, acceptance is just the first step of the process. We now need to see that necessary change realised.
If transparency, accountability and accurate product information matter, public procurement decisions should recognise and reward the organisations that demonstrate them.
Confidence in public sector construction, particularly where homes are involved, remains fragile. Procurement decisions have a visible role to play in restoring it.
GSR is set to establish a stronger baseline for product safety and compliance. But setting the rules is not the same as enforcing them.
Procurement teams should not have to act as auditors of every organisation’s internal governance arrangements. Like with ISO certifications and other recognised standards, they need a practical way of distinguishing between those businesses that have invested in robust governance and those that have not.
This is precisely why the Code for Construction Product Information (CCPI) was created.
Developed by the Construction Products Association, CCPI is intended to restore confidence in construction product information by establishing clear standards for how it is created, governed and communicated.
Importantly, CCPI is not simply a marketing badge.
Assessment requires manufacturers to demonstrate robust processes and controls around the information they put in the public domain. Performance claims must be evidence based. Fluffy marketing language is forbidden. Governance and accountability arrangements must be documented and clear.
Information must be reviewed and maintained through controlled systems.
In short, CCPI provides independent assurance that organisations are reviewing and maintaining product information through controlled systems that put probity before profits.
When a survey reveals that 99% of architects say CCPI makes them more likely to specify a product, and every architect responding believes accreditation should be mandatory, policymakers should be asking whether public procurement has kept pace.
Public bodies face reputational, political and financial consequences when things go wrong. Any opportunity to gain greater assurance from organisations benefiting from public contracts helps mitigate those risks.
Public procurement teams cannot be expected to independently assess every manufacturer’s governance arrangements, approval processes and evidence base. They need reliable, externally validated indicators that higher standards are being met. That is precisely the role CCPI is designed to fulfil.
Just 62% of architects think manufacturers currently provide clear and accurate information, while 64% say misleading or ambiguous product information remains a major problem for the industry.
It is evident we still have work to do.
Robust governance, transparency and accountability do not emerge by accident. They require investment in systems, processes and oversight.
Unless businesses doing the right thing also gain a competitive edge, change will inevitably be slower.
Requiring CCPI compliance for products used in publicly funded construction projects is not a panacea. However, access to public sector projects is a solid incentive for behavioural change and greater adoption, lifting standards across the board.
The first 100 days of any administration are critical. While the Prime Minister is still adjusting to life in Downing Street and ministers are learning their briefs, this is the period of greatest momentum.
If Andy Burnham is serious about rebuilding Britain, he has an opportunity to do more than ask his Chancellor to allocate funding for new construction projects. He can send a powerful message about what the nation expects from those who deliver them.
Making CCPI compliance a mandatory requirement for publicly funded construction projects would be a practical and proportionate step in that direction.
It would reward organisations that have invested in transparency, accountability and robust governance. It would incentivise others to fast-track accreditation efforts. And it would demonstrate that the lessons of Grenfell are being translated into meaningful action, not just being thrown around in soundbites.
Because ultimately rebuilding Britain is not simply about constructing buildings.
It is about building better, ensuring public money supports those who play by the rules, and restoring trust that has fallen by the wayside.
