Cladding funding has been extended to low-rise buildings, the Government has announced.

Dangerous cladding will be removed from unsafe buildings under 11 metres for the first time.

But campaigners have dismissed the package as “incremental measures” that risk locking leaseholders into more “years of delays”.

The new money will be channelled through the existing Cladding Safety Scheme, with support prioritised for buildings that pose the greatest risk to life.

Lower rise buildings are not covered by existing leaseholder protections, leaving some leaseholders facing large bills to fix safety defects they did not cause.

Government shift

The moves marks a shift in how buildings are prioritised for remediation, with the Government ranking buildings by the risk they pose rather than focusing mainly on height.

The Government’s announcement of the new funding follows the Grenfell Inquiry.

Building Safety Minister Samantha Dixon says: “Residents shouldn’t be left worrying about living in homes with dangerous, flammable cladding, just because their building isn’t tall enough to qualify for funding.

“That’s why we’re taking action so that buildings posing the greatest risk to life are prioritised, as well as streamlining processes to minimise delays and make responsibilities clear.”

Giles Grover, of the campaign group EndOurCladdingScandal, issued a response to the funding announcement.

In the statement, he says: “Today’s ministerial statement is a small step forward, but we fear these are more incremental measures that will not enable Labour to put an end to the building safety crisis any time soon.”

With limited funding, it risks giving people hope only to lock them into more years of delay.”

It continued: “In the four years since the ‘case by case’ approach was introduced for buildings under 11 metres, and nearly a year since funding was announced, the recognition that leaseholders and residents in these buildings have faced prolonged uncertainty is welcome.

“But with limited funding, it risks becoming another narrow, bureaucratic scheme: giving people hope only to lock them into more years of delay.

“A risk-based approach is sensible only if it speeds up remediation and actually protects leaseholders and residents. It must not be used to ration justice, downgrade real concerns, or force costs onto leaseholders in buildings deemed a ‘lower priority’.

“The Government must ensure proper oversight that doesn’t leave leaseholders and resident management companies alone in attritional battles with freeholders, housing associations, developers and managing agents.”