ASFP welcomes “comprehensive, concise and hard-hitting” findings of Grenfell Tower Inquiry

The ASFP conveys its sincere condolences to the families of those who lost their lives in the Grenfell Tower fire and to all those who were affected by what the Association references as a “wholly avoidable” tragedy. “We welcome the recommendations of the final report of the Grenfell Tower Public Inquiry, published on 4 September, and call for them to be implemented to ensure that such a disaster can never occur again.”

In an official statement sent to Fire Safety Matters on 12 September, the ASFP has noted: “Any one of the numerous points of failure in the system of regulators, manufacturers, designers, contractors and approval bodies, etc would be a huge issue and worthy of an investigation in its own right. To read them all laid down together in the Phase 2 report’s overview is a sobering reminder of the incompetence, dishonesty, denial and, latterly, fear of responsibility that is common in certain sectors of the construction industry. The final Grenfell report is a difficult read, but one from which we must all learn.”

Recommendations endorsed

The ASFP particularly welcomes several of the recommendations outlined in the final report. For example, the organisation approves of the acknowledgement that Approved Document B was deficient in its guidance in relation to combustible materials on external walls and the continued use of small-scale ‘Reaction to Fire’ tests which, as Sir Martin Moore-Bick has accurately pointed out, is “unsuited” for evaluating external fire conditions.

Further, the ASFP “wholeheartedly welcomes” the recommendation that responsibility for the fire safety of buildings should be brought together under one regulator. “It has long been a frustration of many in the fire sector that fire safety falls under multiple Government departments. The report highlights that, at the time of the fire, three departments were involved: the Department for Communities and Local Government (now the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government) with responsibility for the Building Regulations (and, traditionally, statutory guidance), the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (now the Department for Business and Trade), responsible at that time for regulating products, and the Home Office, which remains responsible for the Fire and Rescue Services and, in particular, the Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005.

Since 2017, the Government has moved responsibilities around and added two new bodies into that list. The Building Safety Act 2022 established the new Building Safety Regulator, which resides with the Health and Safety Executive and is responsible for higher risk buildings, and the Office for Product Safety and Standards, which now has responsibility for enforcing construction products regulation. In the ASFP’s opinion, all of these organisations should be brought under the auspices of one overarching regulator tasked with responsibility for building safety.

Following on from this, the ASFP also welcomes the Inquiry Panel’s recommendation for a national regulator of construction products.

Mandatory accreditation

What’s more, the ASFP agrees with the recommendation that a system of mandatory accreditation of fire risk assessors should be introduced. This is something that, according to the ASFP (and, it must be said, many other commentators) is “long overdue”.

On this matter, the ASFP has commented: “The lack of any control over who can undertake fire risk assessments and of the skills, knowledge and experience required to do so has been a contributing factor to the severity and impact of numerous fires over the years.”

The ASFP is very pleased to note that Sir Martin Moore-Bick has recommended it should be made a statutory requirement that an application for Building Control approval for the construction or refurbishment of a higher-risk building under the Building Safety Act 2022 ought to supported by a statement from the principal designer outlining that all reasonable steps have been taken to ensure that, on completion, the building ‘as designed’ will be as safe as is required by the Building Regulations.

Similarly, the ASFP agrees with the recommendation for a licensing scheme focused on contractors working on higher-risk buildings and that it be a legal requirement that any application for Building Control approval for a higher-risk building be supported by a personal undertaking from a director or senior manager of the principal contractor to take all reasonable care to ensure that, on completion and handover, the building is as safe as is required by the Building Regulations.

The ASFP has stated: “If enacted, both of these recommendations will help to prevent the culture of ‘buck-passing’ that Sir Martin Moore-Bick outlines in the report as being endemic in the industry.”

Promoting Best Practice

For its part, the ASFP will “continue its mission of promoting Best Practice in passive fire protection through the provisions of correctly designed, manufactured, procured and installed passive fire protection” in order to limit fire spread and make buildings inherently safer.

Also, the organisation will continue to develop competency pathways for all those involved in passive fire protection and develop and maintain its range of technical publications, many of which support statutory guidance (including Approved Document B, BS 9999 and BS 9991).

In addition, the ASFP will continue to work with Government and bodies in the fire and construction sectors to ensure that a fire of the type witnessed at Grenfell Tower can never happen again.

The ASFP will comment in more detail once the findings and recommendations of the Phase 2 report have been reviewed at greater length.

*For further information on the ASFP and Best Practice advice on passive fire protection visit www.asfp.org.uk