Ministers are risking people’s lives because safety reforms after the Grenfell Tower disaster have been too slow and “simply not good enough”, a cross-party group of MPs has warned.

More than two years since the fire claimed the lives of 72 people, the government is taking too long to remove potentially dangerous cladding from hundreds of other housing blocks and, despite promising in July 2017 to “urgently assess” building regulations, it has taken 23 months to merely publish proposals for consultation, a damning parliamentary inquiry concludes.

“The government must pick up the pace of reform, before it is too late and we have another tragedy on the scale of Grenfell Tower,” the Commons housing, communities and local government committee said on Wednesday.

The government’s own figures revealed that in May there were still 328 high-rise residential and publicly owned buildings in England fitted with cladding similar to that which burned with such ferocity at Grenfell. But the pace of repairs has been so slow that only one was fixed last month, leaving tens of thousands of people living in blocks wrapped in materials that the government says breach building safety rules.

Ministers have made £600m available for the removal of the specific type of aluminium composite material (ACM) cladding used on Grenfell but not other panels used on hundreds of other buildings that are believed to be equally combustible.

New building regulations remain several months away at least, and the conclusions of the first phase of the delayed public inquiry into how the fire spread are not expected before October.

“The government cannot morally justify funding the replacement of one form of dangerous cladding but not others,” said Clive Betts, the committee chairman. “Much more progress should also have been made on developing a comprehensive building and fire safety framework.”

Fears of another disaster grew last month when the wooden cladding and balconies on an apartment block in Barking went up in flames. No one was hurt but building safety experts said that people would have died if the fire had happened at night, as at Grenfell. The material was allowed under current building regulations. Residents of the affected building, Samuel Garside House, were relocated to hotels but have been told they should move back in on Monday.

They will protest against the decision outside Barking town hall on Thursday, saying they fear the buildings are not safe.

The committee cited evidence from the Royal Institute of British Architects that apart from a ban on combustible cladding on high-rise buildings, building regulations remained largely unchanged and “we are potentially still constructing unsafe buildings”.

Grenfell survivors who were moved into a newly built block in Earl’s Court have suffered problems. In one case, the mother of a young child who escaped the burning tower had to endure the heavy ceiling of her new balcony collapsing in a way that could have caused serious injury.

The MPs also took evidence from Dame Judith Hackitt, the government’s reviewer of building regulations, who said ministers have lost momentum for reforms. Roy Wilsher, the chairman of the National Fire Chiefs Council, said the decision to ban only certain types of combustible cladding was “inadequate”. Ed Daffarn, a Grenfell survivor, warned: “Grenfell 2 is in the post unless you act, and quickly”. He said the bereaved and survivors were “sick and tired of being told by ministers: ‘Government is difficult, government takes time.’”

The committee’s conclusions were backed by firefighters, who said: “There has been virtually nothing done to prevent another fire like Grenfell from happening.”

Matt Wrack, the leader of the Fire Brigades Union, said: “Time and time again we have raised the issues in this report, but the silence from government is deafening. This is a national emergency which is being met by the government with utter complacency.”

The committee also warned that ministers have unacceptably delayed plans to compel landlords to listen to tenants’ complaints, despite evidence that Grenfell residents’ safety fears were ignored by the council.

Daffarn told the committee: “If you live in social housing and you have a complaint about where you live, whether it is mould, or health and safety, the primary way you get this complaint addressed is by [uploading a photo] to Twitter and hoping you can embarrass your housing provider enough that it does something about it. That is not good enough post-Grenfell.”

A spokesperson for the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government said: “Public safety is paramount and within days of the Grenfell Tower fire a comprehensive building safety programme was put in place to ensure residents of high-rise properties are always kept safe.

“We have committed up to £600m to fund the removal and replacement of unsafe ACM cladding on high-rise social and private residential buildings. Ultimately building owners are responsible for the safety of their building and we expect them to carry out work quickly – anything less is unacceptable.

“At the same time, we are supporting the bereaved, survivors and their families of the Grenfell Tower tragedy and have already committed over £100m.”