The Grenfell Report: This Must Not Happen Again
The damning report sets out a ‘path to disaster’ at Grenfell stretching back to the early 1990’s over how fire safety in high rise buildings has been managed and regulated.
The inquiry has stated that coalition and Conservative governments ‘ignored, delayed or disregarded’ concerns about the safety of industry practices.
One manufacturer of cladding products was noted to have ‘deliberately concealed’ the fire risks they posed.
Among the recommendations laid out in the 1,700‑page report, which comes more than seven years after the tragic incident in a West London tower block, are the introduction of a single construction regulator, a College of Fire and Rescue to improve the training of firefighters and changes to the way materials are tested for fire safety.
The fire itself started in a fridge on the fourth floor and spread to the cladding through a window, before racing up the sides of the building, with many residents trapped on higher floors as it spread upwards. The cladding itself was made of highly flammable polyethylene which was added to the sides of Grenfell Tower in a disastrous refurbishment in 2016.
The inquiry found fault and incompetence among almost every company involved in the refurbishment.
Among the key findings of the report included systematic dishonesty by the manufacturers of the cladding and insulation used. US firm Arconic, manufacturer of the Reynobond 55 cladding which experts at the inquiry said was by far the largest contributor to the fire, ‘deliberately concealing’ the true extent of the danger of using its product. Manufacturers made ‘false and misleading claims’ over the safety and suitability of insulation to the company which installed it on Grenfell.
The report also highlighted failures in London Fire Brigade's training and a lack of a strategy to evacuate the building, with successive governments missing opportunities to act upon information available to them.
It was also noted that the local council and the Tenant Management Organisation had a ‘persistent indifference to fire safety, particularly the safety of vulnerable people’. Whilst concluding that overall how building safety is managed in England and Wales is ‘seriously defective’.
Recommendations
The inquiry recommended the introduction of a single construction regulator, and one secretary of state to oversee the issue, with the guidance the industry follows to ensure fire safety requiring revision.
There is also a recommendation to make it a legal requirement that a fire safety strategy is submitted with any application for permission from building control inspectors to construct or refurbish any ‘higher risk building’.
Other recommendations cover the way materials and designs are tested for fire safety, and the need to make public the results.
Currently building inspectors who sign off work as safe can be employed by councils or work as private ‘approved inspectors’ who can compete for work. The inquiry recommends setting up an independent panel which would consider whether this is in the public interest. The panel could decide to set up a national authority for building control, which would be a major change to the system for ensuring construction standards.
Finding major issues with standards in the fire service, the inquiry also recommended setting up a College of Fire and Rescue to improve the training of firefighters and incident commanders.
There are a series of recommendations for the London Fire Brigade management of major incidents and a demand for the service to be reviewed by His Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary, Fire and Rescue Services.
The inquiry also calls for improvements to the way local authorities, the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea in particular, responds to major emergencies.
Competence Must Be Embedded From The Ground Up, Says FMB
The damning final report of the Grenfell Inquiry has shown the need for competence but there is still a great deal of work to do, says the Federation of Master Builders (FMB).
Brain Berry, Chief Executive of the Federation of Master Builders (FMB) said: “While the nation’s local builders are, for the most part, far removed from work that has been investigated as part of the Grenfell Tower Inquiry, it does not mean they are precluded from improving industry standards. Domestic builders do not have minimum competence levels; they are not a protected profession like plumbers or electricians. If industry and government are serious about delivering competence, then introducing minimum standards for entry into domestic building work is a must – this is competence from the ground up”.
Berry continued: “The new government needs to turn away from a culture of cutting regulation, which in part has led to poor building safety, and license domestic builders, underpinning the building regime with minimum standards. Why should homeowners not share in the safety net implemented post‑Grenfell? Without minimum standards, unregulated or ‘dodgy’ building work will continue, and the industry will not shake off its poor reputation, which is driven by rogue operators plying their trade free from consequence”.
Berry concluded: “However, where government has tried to regulate domestic builders, through the Building Safety Act, mostly for work involving building control, they have only outlined high level requirements without any underpinning competence. This has left builders confused and worried about committing to work they feel they may no longer be competent to do. The new Government must address this immediately, so industry has clear guidance”.
British Safety Council Responds To Final Grenfell Tower Inquiry Report
Responding to the final, Phase Two, report by the Grenfell Tower Inquiry, Peter McGettrick, Chairman of British Safety Council, said: “We welcome the publication of the final report by the Grenfell Tower Inquiry. It is a sobering and comprehensive report which has brought forensic attention to the institutional failings that led to this tragedy, the responsibility for which must be shared across multiple stakeholders.
“Safety must be at the core of any changes, and we need to see an appropriate and proportionate response by all parties, which delivers on the recommendations in the Inquiry's report and ensures greater clarity, transparency and professionalism at all levels. Progress has been made in the past seven years, especially in terms of new legislation and regulation on building safety and social housing, but there is clearly much more to do. The Inquiry's recommendations build on this and we look forward to the Government's response and action to deliver on them.”
