NEWS EXTRA


BMF RESPONDS TO REVIEW OF WATER EFFICIENCY STANDARDS


In December 2025, a DEFRA consultation sought views on tightening water standards in England. The BMF’s policy & public affairs adviser Ben Scobie outlines the BMF’s response to the proposals


THE DEFRA EXERCISE forms part of broader efforts on water conservation in response to climate change and population growth. It focused on reviewing the Water Efficiency Standard within Part G of the Building Regulations 2010.


The proposals Water resources are under increasing pressure - with estimates suggesting an additional 5,000 million litres per day will be required by 2050. In areas of “serious water stress”, such as Cambridge and North Sussex, scarcity is already inhibiting development and the granting of planning permission for new homes.


HM Government has a legally binding target to reduce public water use in England by 20% by 2038, aiming for a household average of 122 litres per person per day (l/p/d). To achieve this, the consultation proposed several key changes in ‘Phase 1’ of the review: • Amending the mandatory minimum water efficiency standard for new homes in England from 125 litres per person per day (l/p/d) to 105 l/p/d; • Amending the optional technical standard, used in areas designated as seriously water stressed, from 110 l/p/d to 100 l/p/d; • Revising both the Water Calculator and fittings-based approach used to demonstrate compliance, along with updates to Approved Document G.


BMF response


On balance, following feedback from BMF members and industry partners (notably the Bathroom Association), we agreed with the proposed reduction to 105


8


builds exceeds design standards. This problem also appears in other areas, such as energy efficiency policy. It is driven by user behaviour and by developers failing to install fixtures in accordance with the mandatory standard. Current compliance checks are often desk-based and depend on developer self- certification. The BMF believes this issue must be addressed. Local Building Control teams need more resources to ensure physical inspections align with the submitted plans.


l/p/d and 100 l/p/d, respectively. We said that our members are capable of responding to market signals to deliver the required goods.


However, we urged ministers to exercise caution to ensure that efficiency gains do not come at the inconvenience of consumers’ experience.


Mandatory and optional standards While a target of 105 l/p/d is technically achievable, we must ensure these fittings meet householders’ lifestyle and expectations. If products compromise user experience, the efficacy of the entire regulation is undermined - consumers will replace efficient fittings with inefficient fittings.


For example: reducing toilet flush volumes to the minimum can cause staining and lead to a second flush; and low flow rates on kitchen taps can frustrate users performing daily tasks like filling kettles or sinks.


Regulatory barriers A significant hurdle remains in current legislation. The Water Supply (Water Quality)


Regulations require that water used for washing and toilets must be “wholesome” at the point of supply. This effectively limits the supply chain’s potential for innovative products & technologies - such as water reuse systems - which could support higher efficiency targets without compromising performance.


Water calculator vs. fittings-based The BMF supports the Future Homes Hub’s view that the industry should move toward a fittings-based approach, while retaining the water calculator. While a fittings-only approach is logical, a sudden transition could disrupt projects and restrict consumer choice. In addition, drainage


requirements must be considered. Many older systems were not built to handle the low flows associated with 4-litre flushes, which can lead to increased blockages.


Compliance and the ‘performance gap’ There is clear evidence of a ‘performance gap’ where real- world water consumption in new


Mandatory water efficiency labelling The BMF remains firmly opposed to DEFRA’s Mandatory Water Efficiency Label - preferring the existing industry-led Unified Water Label instead -


We believe aligning the Building Regulations with a new, taxpayer- funded government label in 2026 may be too hasty - and we urged a more cautious, evidence-based approach to get right.


Summary


The BMF ‘ask’ is for government - DEFRA and the MHCLG - to balance ambitious water reduction targets with practical performance standards. We need a broader definition of efficiency that reflects the ability to complete a task effectively, not solely the flow rate. While we support the phased approach to tightening Part G, any future move toward even stricter standards (such as 80 or 90 l/p/d) will require significant investment in water reuse technology and a relaxation of the ‘wholesome’ water restrictions for non-potable uses. This may prove a step too far for both industry and consumers. BMJ


www.buildersmerchantsjournal.net February 2026


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40