3 minutes reading time
(609 words)
When PAS 9980 Became a Battleground
Chair: Gareth Wax
Cladding Matters – Friday 16th January at 1pm
Joining the panel: Hamish McLay, Stephen Day and Dominic Ahern
The first Cladding Matters of the year opens with a topic that quietly dominated the Christmas period and then refused to stay quiet. PAS 9980, a document intended to bring clarity to external wall fire risk assessments, instead became the centre of a very public and uncomfortable dispute.
What played out over Christmas was not a technical disagreement tucked away in specialist circles. It spilled into public view, particularly on LinkedIn, and exposed how fragile confidence in building safety guidance has become. For many watching, it felt less like a debate and more like a line being drawn.
PAS 9980 was introduced to guide fire risk assessments of external wall systems. In theory, it was meant to replace blunt tools with proportionate judgement. In practice, it has come to symbolise something far bigger. It sits at the intersection of safety, cost, liability and lived experience, and that is a difficult place to stand.
The Christmas flashpoint mattered because it shifted the tone. Campaigners and residents raised concerns that the standard allows a “tolerable risk” approach, one that can justify leaving combustible materials in place. For those living in affected buildings, that language lands heavily. Risk is not abstract when it sits outside a bedroom window.
Stephen Day and Dominic Ahern join Gareth Wax and Hamish McLay on the panel. Stephen has been one of the most visible voices challenging PAS 9980. Speaking from lived experience at Royal Artillery Quays, his concerns reflect a wider frustration felt by many residents. The fear is not simply about fire. It is about uncertainty, insurance, mortgages, and the feeling of being permanently stuck.
What escalated matters was not disagreement alone. It was tone. A poem circulated during the dispute, written by Colin Todd MBE, a participant in the PAS process. It was widely perceived as a personal attack on critics rather than a contribution to a serious discussion. That moment hardened positions and deepened mistrust.
This matters because building safety relies on confidence. Standards only work when people believe they are written with care, independence and respect for those affected. Once that confidence is shaken, even well intentioned guidance struggles to land.
There is also a structural concern running beneath the surface. PAS 9980 is not just guidance. There is an intention for it to be embedded in statute. That raises the stakes considerably. A document that relies heavily on professional judgement and interpretation risks becoming a postcode lottery if written into law without clear safeguards.
Industry voices argue that PAS 9980 brings consistency to a chaotic landscape. Residents and campaigners see something different. They see discretion replacing certainty, and responsibility drifting away from those who designed and built unsafe buildings.
Insurance sits quietly in the background of this debate, yet its impact is loud. Buildings assessed as “tolerable risk” can still attract high premiums or exclusions. Flats remain unmortgageable. Sales fall through. Daily life continues under a cloud of unresolved risk.
As the year begins, attention turns to what happens next. PAS 9980 is still evolving, yet the way this dispute unfolded has already left its mark. Rebuilding confidence will take more than revisions and consultations. It will require careful listening, restraint in tone, and a recognition that words carry weight when people’s homes are involved.
Watch live or catch up on YouTube:
https://www.youtube.com/@SpillingTheProper-Tea
PS:
For content enquiries:This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
For podcast/media info:This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
Cladding Matters – Friday 16th January at 1pm
Joining the panel: Hamish McLay, Stephen Day and Dominic Ahern
The first Cladding Matters of the year opens with a topic that quietly dominated the Christmas period and then refused to stay quiet. PAS 9980, a document intended to bring clarity to external wall fire risk assessments, instead became the centre of a very public and uncomfortable dispute.
What played out over Christmas was not a technical disagreement tucked away in specialist circles. It spilled into public view, particularly on LinkedIn, and exposed how fragile confidence in building safety guidance has become. For many watching, it felt less like a debate and more like a line being drawn.
PAS 9980 was introduced to guide fire risk assessments of external wall systems. In theory, it was meant to replace blunt tools with proportionate judgement. In practice, it has come to symbolise something far bigger. It sits at the intersection of safety, cost, liability and lived experience, and that is a difficult place to stand.
The Christmas flashpoint mattered because it shifted the tone. Campaigners and residents raised concerns that the standard allows a “tolerable risk” approach, one that can justify leaving combustible materials in place. For those living in affected buildings, that language lands heavily. Risk is not abstract when it sits outside a bedroom window.
Stephen Day and Dominic Ahern join Gareth Wax and Hamish McLay on the panel. Stephen has been one of the most visible voices challenging PAS 9980. Speaking from lived experience at Royal Artillery Quays, his concerns reflect a wider frustration felt by many residents. The fear is not simply about fire. It is about uncertainty, insurance, mortgages, and the feeling of being permanently stuck.
What escalated matters was not disagreement alone. It was tone. A poem circulated during the dispute, written by Colin Todd MBE, a participant in the PAS process. It was widely perceived as a personal attack on critics rather than a contribution to a serious discussion. That moment hardened positions and deepened mistrust.
This matters because building safety relies on confidence. Standards only work when people believe they are written with care, independence and respect for those affected. Once that confidence is shaken, even well intentioned guidance struggles to land.
There is also a structural concern running beneath the surface. PAS 9980 is not just guidance. There is an intention for it to be embedded in statute. That raises the stakes considerably. A document that relies heavily on professional judgement and interpretation risks becoming a postcode lottery if written into law without clear safeguards.
Industry voices argue that PAS 9980 brings consistency to a chaotic landscape. Residents and campaigners see something different. They see discretion replacing certainty, and responsibility drifting away from those who designed and built unsafe buildings.
Insurance sits quietly in the background of this debate, yet its impact is loud. Buildings assessed as “tolerable risk” can still attract high premiums or exclusions. Flats remain unmortgageable. Sales fall through. Daily life continues under a cloud of unresolved risk.
As the year begins, attention turns to what happens next. PAS 9980 is still evolving, yet the way this dispute unfolded has already left its mark. Rebuilding confidence will take more than revisions and consultations. It will require careful listening, restraint in tone, and a recognition that words carry weight when people’s homes are involved.
Watch live or catch up on YouTube:
https://www.youtube.com/@SpillingTheProper-Tea
PS:
For content enquiries:
For podcast/media info:
Stay Informed
When you subscribe to the blog, we will send you an e-mail when there are new updates on the site so you wouldn't miss them.
Comments