Battles Won but Cladding War Rages On

Cladding first hit the headlines in Australia when a late-night cigarette set the Melbourne’s Lacrosse tower ablaze in 2014. In the aftermath, builder LU Simon was ordered to pay $5.7 million in damages . Three years later and half a world away, the disastrous Grenfell Tower fire in London cost 72 lives, the deadliest residential fire in the UK since the Blitz, and propelling the cladding issue on to the global stage. After these incidents, Australian jurisdictions began audits on buildings that used aluminium composite panels (ACPs) or bonded laminates with polyethylene cores and expanded polystyrene (EPS) in construction. While many states have attempted to rectify the issue, those working within the sector say buck passing and a lack of a joined-up approach across jurisdictions has held back a complete rectification. Australian Institute of Building Surveyors (AIBS) professional development manager Stephen Scimonello says that Australia’s regulations were more robust than those in the UK at the time of the Grenfell disaster. “But the crisis highlighted the need for even stricter controls on building materials and enforcement to restore public confidence and ensure occupant safety,” says Scimonello, who has a PhD in building surveying. ▲ Australian Institute of Building Surveyors professional development manager Stephen Scimonello. State governments introduced rectification programs, such as Victoria’s taxpayer-funded $600-million Cladding Rectification Program, to address the risks. But there has been a lack of continuity across the country in how states approach cladding, and the industry still has a long way to go. Project management director at Altus Group Nick Marston says combustible cladding remains a significant issue in Australia, especially in highrises. “While progress has been made addressing affected buildings, the issue requires focused attention to ensure long-term safety and compliance nationwide,” he says. Progress to date The development industry copped flak last year after a Cladding Safety Victoria (CSV) review found in the detailed building plans of 804 privately owned apartment buildings that 75 per cent (603) had ACP or EPS cladding. To date, CSV has resolved the cladding risk on about 1200 buildings, it told The Urban Developer , including 1067 private residential Class 2 buildings and 130 government-owned buildings. ▲ The Grenfell tower disaster prompted reviews of cladding across the world. The CSV is or has funded 437 high-risk buildings to have cladding removed and replaced. Of those, 373 are completed—that is more than 19,000 apartments. CSV chief executive officer Dan O’Brien says the organisation was set up to fix the highest-risk buildings in Victoria. “And this task will be complete by the end of this year,” he says. “We’re providing funding to the owners of more than 430 private residential apartment buildings in Victoria that have been assessed as high risk due to combustible cladding and helping hundreds more with expert advice to deal with cladding issues on lower risk buildings.” Victoria may be moving ahead at pace but other states...not so much. ▲ Building regulation and control is not included in Australia’s Constitution, making cladding a state prerogative. New South Wales, which enacted strict bans and audit programs but provided limited financial assistance to affected property owners, confirmed it has not updated the rectification data on its website since February, 2023. It said that “the program is currently working with 76 separate owners’ corporations around NSW to assist in remediating the combustible cladding located on the facades of their buildings”. A Queensland Department of Housing and Public Works spokesperson told The Urban Developer that it has “one of the most comprehensive and robust approaches in Australia” and that as of December 31 of last year, 96 per cent of the 196 government buildings identified with potentially combustible cladding had been rectified or were undergoing rectification. It did not provide details on private buildings, however, saying rectification was the responsibility of building owners. ▲ Altus Group project management director Nick Marston. This lack of consistent data and approach makes it difficult to determine the success rate and future requirements of the programs, given that level or type of rectification remains unknown. It is this inconsistency in approach that is holding rectification back, Scimonello says. “The lack of a national framework has meant there is no uniformity in prioritising high-risk buildings or in defining clear responsibilities for builders, developers and property owners,” he says. “It is unfortunate that the inconsistent and reactionary approach by some governments has resulted in buildings having cladding replaced that were allowed to have combustible cladding, other building types not audited, and many building surveying practitioners unfairly dealt with while conveniently ignoring that in Victoria, significant public buildings with cladding had building permits issued by the then Victorian building regulator.” Cost of rectification Scimonello says the crisis spooked everyone. “While some states have introduced funding programs, these initiatives often fall short, leaving many buildings ineligible or underfunded,” he says. “Legal disputes among developers, builders and property owners over who should bear the cost have [caused] further delays. “Additionally, insurers have tightened policies, increased premiums or refused coverage for buildings with cladding issues, exacerbating financial pressures on stakeholders.” ▲ Reforms such as the Design and Building Practitioners Act (D&amp;BP Act) in NSW are positive steps, Marston says. Whether state governments handle rectification works or it is delegated to the builders or owners of buildings, someone needs to do the work. And in a time of construction crisis, labour shortages and cost increases, this has proved a major challenge, Marston says. “The niche expertise required for these works, combined with the fact that buildings vary significantly in design and construction, adds complexity to the process,” he says. “This shortage of skilled design and construction professionals slows progress and further complicates the resolution of the combustible cladding.” Scimonello says the crisis emphasises the need to use building materials that comply with Australian standards, especially when imported. “The cladding crisis exposed gaps in communication and coordination that contributed to the widespread use of unsafe materials,” he says. “Developers could consider introducing more robust contractual obligations on builders to foster the implementation of due diligence processes. “Reducing potential risks to occupants and the community at large should be paramount.” You are currently experiencing The Urban Developer Plus (TUD+), our premium membership for property professionals. Click here to learn more.

Battles Won but Cladding War Rages On

Get the full story.

‘Slow and Steady’ Wins the Race for Pellicano’s South City Square

Sheds to Beds: What Developers are Betting On in 2026

Developer Playbook: Using Hyperlocal Engagement to Drive Sales Velocity

From Returns to Ruin: Inside the $230m ISG Collapse

Urban Bushfire Risk Rising as Climate Changes, Cities Expand

Melbourne Long Lunch | Panel discussion with Tim Price, Jeremy McLeod, Katya Crema & Anne Michaels

A fireside chat with Troy Daffy | Managing Director, Silverstone Developments

Brisbane Long Lunch | Panel discussion with Rob Comiskey, Frank Licastro, Steve Laffey & Alexandra Stuart-Robertson

Sydney Long Lunch | Panel discussion with Jamie Durie, Jennifer Macquarie & Michael Romano

Joe Adsett Proposes $250m Brisbane Riverfront Tower

VCAT Opens Door to $500k Land Lease Utilities Claim

JLL’s Top 10 Property Deals of 2025

‘Slow and Steady’ Wins the Race for Pellicano’s South City Square

2026 Developer Outlook Lunch | Melbourne

2026 Developer Outlook Lunch | Brisbane

2026 Developer Outlook Lunch | Sydney