Grenfell Archives | Broadsword Group

Posts

2 years post Grenfell, do new regulations go far enough?

June 26, 2019/0 Comments/in Home Page news feed, News /by joannevickers

The Fire Protection Association, the UK’s national fire safety organisation, is highlighting that, if we want to prevent another Grenfell Tower tragedy, it’s time for some immediate change. The organisation remains firm in its message that two years after “Grenfell”, the government’s changes to building regulations and the so-called ban on combustible cladding do not go far enough in protecting buildings and the people who live in them, from fire.

The Fire Protection Association says the solution should be:

Third party certification – we welcome the acknowledgement of the value of independently verified products, but believe this assurance should be mandated and extend to the installers of products and the risk assessors
Extending the ban on combustibles to all high-risk buildings regardless of height – not just buildings over 18 metres
Ban single staircases in building in excess of 18m – to offer both an entrance and exit staircase
Mandatory installation of multi sensor detection for all high-risk occupancies – a fire detector that monitors a number of potential dangers, including smoke, heat, carbon-monoxide

Jonathan O’Neill, OBE, managing director, Fire Protection Association commented:

“The Fire Protection Association supports a total ban on combustible building materials, to all high-risk buildings, such as schools, hospitals, nursing homes, blocks of flats – not just those buildings over 18 metres. We also want a ban on single staircases in all tall buildings, because in the event of a fire you need at least one staircase for people to be able to evacuate the building, and a second staircase for the fire and rescue services for entry. Our support of third-party certification, to provide independent verification of building regulations services, as well as the mandatory installation of multi sensor detectors (that can detect several sources, such as heat, smoke and carbon monoxide) is also a key consideration. There is clearly much that still needs to be done, so we are keen to see change now – and will help in any way we can to ensure that we never again experience a tragedy on the scale we witnessed at Grenfell.”

Government to pay £200m for safer cladding on Grenfell Tower

May 15, 2019/0 Comments/in Home Page news feed, News /by joannevickers

The £200m bill to replace Grenfell Tower-type cladding on about 150 private high-rise blocks in England is to be met by the government.

Housing Secretary James Brokenshire had previously said the bill should be footed by the owners, not the taxpayer.

But he said owners had been trying to offload the costs on to leaseholders and that the long wait for remedial work had caused anxiety for residents.

Leaseholder groups said the news would be a “relief” but more was needed.

Seventy-two people died when a fire destroyed Grenfell Tower, in west London, in June 2017, in one of the UK’s worst modern disasters.

It took minutes for the fire to race up the exterior of the building, and spread to all four sides.

A public inquiry into the fire heard evidence to support the theory that the highly combustible material in the cladding was the primary cause of the fire’s spread.

Latest government figures show that 166 private residential buildings out of the 176 identified with aluminium composite material (ACM) cladding – the same type used on Grenfell Tower – are yet to start work on removing and replacing it.

Unsafe cladding still affects thousands
Stars in emotional Grenfell cladding video
The terrible speed with which the Grenfell fire spread

Mr Brokenshire admitted he had changed his mind on demanding that freeholders pay up for safety work.

He said some building owners had tried to pass on the costs to residents by threatening them with bills running to thousands of pounds.

“What has been striking to me over recent weeks is just the time it is taking and my concern over the leaseholders themselves – that anxiety, that stress, that strain, and seeing that we are getting on and making these buildings safe.”

Alex Di Giuseppe, a leaseholder in a block with unsafe cladding in Manchester, said he has been dealing with the developer, freeholder and management agent but had got nowhere.

“It’s taken its toll. We’ve been living in an unsafe building and we’ve had these huge costs placed upon our heads. The stress is insurmountable.

“If this was a car with an airbag issue, it would be recalled.”

Pemberstone, Aberdeen Asset Management, Barratt Developments, Fraser Properties, Legal & General and Mace and Peabody were named as having fully borne the costs for their buildings.

Grenfell United, a group of survivors and the bereaved, said the news offered hope to people feeling at risk at home.

“This result is a testament to residents themselves. The truth is we should never have had to fight for it,” the group said.

It asked the government to consider financial support for residents as they continue night watches and wait for the remediation work to begin.

Rachel Loudain, from the UK Cladding Action Group, said leaseholders had exhausted all other options before the government stepped in to pay for the work.

“No developer was taking responsibility, no freeholder, we didn’t have any option legally or any option with insurance,” she said.

The group welcomed the news but pointed out that “many, many” leaseholders and social housing tenants living in blocks with other forms of unsafe cladding would be excluded from this help.

“Fire does not distinguish between the different types of failed cladding out there. This inadequate response will be looked back on in shame when the next Grenfell tragedy occurs,” the group said.

Labour accused the government of being “frozen like a rabbit in the headlights” in its response to the Grenfell disaster.

“Too weak and too slow to act at every stage and on every front,” the shadow housing secretary John Healey said.

The government has already committed to funding replacement cladding in the social sector. There are currently 23 blocks still covered in it.

Owners of private buildings will have three months to claim the funds, with one condition being that they take “reasonable steps” to recover the costs from those responsible for the cladding.

Source: BBC.co.uk

Fire safety in construction a bigger priority post Grenfell

October 17, 2018/0 Comments/in Home Page news feed, News /by joannevickers

The construction industry has seen myriad improvements to fire safety since the Grenfell Tower fire, but there is frustration that the government has responded too slowly, a new study reveals.

Since the fire in June 2017, which killed 71 people, construction industry professionals have seen substantive changes in products used for cladding, insulation and fire doors, as well as greater demands for more fire testing of products.

A survey of construction professionals from all parts of the trade, conducted for UK Construction Week (UKCW), also suggested fire safety has become a bigger priority in revised procurement policies, tenders and contract terms, the survey reveals.

However, the government was widely criticised for taking too long to clarify new requirements since the fire and subsequent publication of the Hackitt Review on 17 May 2018.

One respondent to the survey said: “I just wish that action could happen more quickly”, while another said “things are changing, but way too slowly.” Another had particularly low expectations of the government: “The government will take a decade to produce yet another set of incomplete regulations together, and will probably produce another white paper. They need to set a clock on this.”

Asked what changes they had made since the tragedy respondents had most frequently reviewed project designs and specifications, commissioned additional fire risk assessments on projects and ramped up fire safety training.

They were also asked to pick the three changes they thought would most likely improve fire safety across the built environment, in buildings of all sizes and types. On average they most frequently cited greater involvement of some to conduct a full fire risk assessment to enhance design and specification – such as an architect, clerk of works, fire engineer, or fire and rescue service.

Contractor-led ‘Design and Build’

Many called for the end of contractor-led ‘Design and Build’ contracts.

Not far behind in second place was a sea change in specifying materials. Many backed the recently announced ban on combustible materials in exposed areas of a building, in particular cladding or insulation.

The aluminium composite material panels used on Grenfell Tower have been banned and more recent regulations will extend the ban to include plastics, wood and products that include combustible materials such as aluminium composite panels in the external wall systems used in residential buildings more than 18 metres tall. The only materials that will be allowed are those classed as A1 or A2, which includes elements such as metal, stone and glass, which seldom contribute to fires; or plasterboard, which makes no significant contribution.

The third most highly ranked change sought by construction professionals was the installation and regular maintenance of sprinklers and other active fire detection and suppression equipment into all buildings.

New regulations only ranked sixth on the industry’s list of priorities.

Asked to score out of 10 their confidence that the UK’s approach to fire safety in all buildings would now change for the better, respondents on average went for 6 out of 10.

Contractors, specialist sub-contractors and building products suppliers are marginally more confident than other groups (average confidence score of 7 out of 10).

“Our research shows that the industry has taken to heart every opportunity to change its practice and is already well along a process that will change the way all buildings are procured, design, built and maintained,” said Nathan Garnett, event director at UK Construction Week.

“This is an issue that will be discussed widely at next week’s event, and is likely to remain the highest agenda item for years to come. While confidence is quite good at this time, we must do all we can to maintain the positive attitude and momentum behind these changes.”

Geoff Wilkinson, managing director of Wilkinson Construction Consultants, a fire safety and building standards expert and one of the speakers at this year’s UKCW seminar on quality in construction post-Grenfell, says:

“It is very encouraging to see the industry getting on with it, despite the hiatus from Government. But what’s needed is an industry-wide coordinated response.

“The ban on combustible materials is long overdue. We need to be told why it has taken over a year to get to this point when a very simple changing of regulatory guidance could have achieved the same thing in days.”

Source: Ifsecglobal.com

Fire regulatory system is ‘broken’

September 26, 2018/0 Comments/in Home Page news feed, News /by joannevickers

Shadow fire minister Karen Lee has said the fire regulatory system is broken and requires a radical overhaul, and “the government’s approach to the public’s safety in the 15 months since Grenfell has been characterised by inaction.”

Deregulation in the 1980s created a performance-based system, said Lee, in which “rather than prescriptive rule-making, the system outlines required outcomes, left open to industry to decide how they are met”. Lee said that successive governments had scrapped regulations at the expense of public safety and claimed that fire regulations had failed to hold industry accountable for their products.

“Building regulations relating to cladding assert that “external walls of the building[s] [should] adequately resist the spread of fire,” said Lee. “However, large-scale system tests and desktop studies allow for flammable cladding to be used despite this regulation. “The Fire Brigades Union, the Local Government Association, the housing, communities and local government select committee and the Royal Institute of British Architecture have all raised concerns with testing methods which allow the use of flammable cladding and insulation,” she said.

The solution according to Lee was a complete overhaul of fire safety. “The fire regulatory system is broken and requires a radical overhaul,” said Lee. Labour’s shadow minister also criticised the Hackett review set up in the wake of the Grnfell fire. “The government commissioned the independent Hackett review and presented it as an opportunity for fire safety reform following Grenfell. In reality, Hackett’s recommendations offered no change to regulations. The review acknowledged that existing regulations have caused the industry to “race to the bottom” but did not ban flammable cladding or the methods enabling its use,” Lee said.

Lee also questioned the panel of experts that advised the Hackett review. “It is important to note that the expert panel advising the Hackett review had members who had signed off the use of flammable cladding, such as the Building Research Establishment which delivers the testing that allows for installation of flammable cladding,” said Lee. “The Hackett review failed. The government then pushed the issue into another consultation on banning the use of flammable materials on external walls of high-rise residential buildings,” she said.

While she welcomed the consultation, Lee said that residents living in buildings wrapped in potentially dangerous cladding should not have to wait more than a year for their safety to be consulted on. As of August 16 2018, the Ministry for Housing, Communities and Local Government has identified 466 buildings that still have Grenfell-like cladding installed. Lee claimed that the threat to these buildings mirrors that of Grenfell and the government needed to take urgent action.

RIBA have also proposed a post Grenfell fire safety plan of work, and have opened a consultation including a draft document that can be viewed here

It will be open until October 11, 2018 as a means to address concerns raised in Dame Judith Hackitt’s Independent Review of Building Regulations and Fire Safety. The review was launched as a response to the Grenfell Tower fire.

RIBA has used the proposed overhaul of its existing process guidance to try and incorporate key recommendations in the Hackitt review that have called for improved “transparency, accountability and collaboration” across the construction and building services industry.

RIBA director of practice Lucy Carmichael said that the draft Plan of Work set devised as a resource that can be adopted as broadly as possible by stakeholders working across design, construction and longer-term building management.

A key recommendation is to ensure the earlier involvement of building control, fire authorities, building managers and tenants. This could lead to increased costs for the client.

Project team accountability would be enforced through new statutory duties based on the Construction Design and Management Regulations 2015 model.

Proposed review and sign-off procedures, and independent inspection, would also help to safeguard fire safe specification and detailing, according to RIBA.

Source: Architecture.com / hvnplus / UK Construction Week

Construction standards shocking, according to Dame Judith Hackitt

September 12, 2018/0 Comments/in Home Page news feed, News /by joannevickers

Dame Judith Hackitt has said she was “truly shocked” by standards in the construction industry when researching her report, Independent Review of Building Regulations and Fire Safety, published earlier ths year.

She also warned that another “catastrophic event” cannot be ruled out if regulatory changes aren’t made.

Hackitt was speaking at IOSH 2018, the Institution of Occupational Safety and Health’s annual international conference. She told delegates that she encountered construction companies trying to do things as cheaply as possible rather than worrying about quality when she embarked on her review after last year’s Grenfell Tower disaster.

She added that it was vital a culture change was implemented as soon as possible while Grenfell was still fresh in people’s minds.

Hackitt said: “When I looked from the outside into standards in the built environment, what I encountered was truly shocking. The system for fire safety in high-rise and complex buildings was weak and ineffective.

“People actually said things like ‘we always knew something like this would happen’. They knew the system wasn’t working but didn’t know how to fix it. There was a race to the bottom. Companies were looking to do things as cheap as possible, getting around the rules. It was about cost, not quality.

“Unless we fix the system, we have no way of guaranteeing that there won’t be another catastrophic event.

“We need to get to a point where people those who construct a building are as responsible for those who use it over the next ten or 20 years as they are employee safety. What we are calling for is collaboration and joined-up thinking across the built environment sector, not self-interested groups protecting their own turf, something I have seen a lot of.”

Hackitt said some industry groups and the government are already looking at how to implement some of the measures recommended in her final report, including bringing together bodies such as the Health and Safety Executive, local authority building control and fire and rescue authorities and having the same risk-based approach as there is across other industries.

But there also needed to be stronger powers of enforcement, to provide more deterrent to cost-cutting, she added.

“Right now, the level of penalties when people are caught out is not strong enough,” she said. “There is no deterrent.

“We also need a system where people can raise concerns in the knowledge they will be acted on. The same goes for within industry, for example we don’t want people thinking they don’t know who to tell if there are concerns.”

Source: Construction Manager Magazine

Flammable cladding is a breach of human rights

August 22, 2018/0 Comments/in Home Page news feed, News /by joannevickers

The use of flammable cladding on Grenfell Tower and other high-rise residential blocks constitutes a breach of the residents’ human rights, according to the Equality & Human Rights Commission, and thus exposes public authorities to prosecution under the Human Rights Act 1998.

The Equality & Human Rights Commission (EHRC) has written to the Department for Housing, Communities & Local Government (DHCLG) outlining its concerns about the continued use of combustible cladding in existing buildings and advising the department of its responsibilities under human rights laws to protect lives.

The EHRC is supported by the British Safety Council in its challenge to the government over its failure to protect lives

In a briefing paper on the subject, the EHRC says: “A key issue in the Grenfell inquiry will be whether the building regulations banned the use of polyethylene-based cladding in high-rise residential blocks, due to the risk of fire associated with it. If the building regulations did ban its use, questions will be asked about the adequacy of the systems for monitoring and supervising compliance with those regulations, including in council buildings, to ensure that cladding was installed safely. Both scenarios raise questions about whether the UK has met its duty to protect life. Additional issues arise concerning fire safety regulations, including the installation of fire sprinklers in high-rise buildings.”

The EHRC has expressed its concern that the consultation on the use of external cladding omits any reference to the government’s duty to protect lives under article 2 of the European Convention on Human Rights and schedule 1 to the Human Rights Act 1998.

British Safety Council chairman Lawrence Waterman said: “The British Safety Council has participated in the consultation, calling for much tighter building controls, clearer guidance and effective enforcement. The EHRC intervention takes a wider view and supports our long-held and consistent argument that health and safety is a crucial underpinning of the human right to life.”

The EHRC explains: “The right to life is one of the fundamental guarantees in international human rights law. In many respects it is a prerequisite to, and closely linked with, the enjoyment of all other rights. The right to life is protected under international and European human rights treaties, including Article 6 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and Article 2 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). The UK government has signed up to these treaties and has to abide by them at all times.

“Article 2 of the ECHR is particularly important in the UK as it has been incorporated into domestic law by the Human Rights Act 1998. This means that all UK governments and public bodies – central, local and devolved – including all public officials, have to take appropriate measures to safeguard life by making laws to protect people and, in some circumstances, by taking active steps to protect people if their lives are at risk. If they don’t do this, they can be taken to court.”

Solicitor Anjon Mallik, construction partner at Gordons law firm, commented: “The Human Rights Commission’s intervention that the use of flammable cladding on Grenfell Tower and other high rise buildings is a breach of human rights is an issue that the Grenfell Inquiry will not be able to ignore. If it turns out that the use of polyethelene based cladding in high rise cladding had actually been banned by building regulations but its continued use had not been properly monitored, the public will rightly expect those in authority to be held to account. And, unless and until those responsible face the severest consequences, the clamour for heads to roll will continue.”

Source: construction index.co.uk