Last month, the six-year Grenfell Inquiry, led by retired judge Sir Martin Moore-Bick, released its final, 1,700-page report into the 2017 fire at the west London tower block which cost 72 lives. (Victims’ aged ranged from six to 84.) Cladding had already been revealed as a key factor behind the tragedy, and the “principal” reason the blaze spread so quickly.
Sir Martin’s report chronicled multiple failures across the construction sector, central and local government and regulators. Ultimately, his verdict was that all the deaths could have been avoided.
Any prosecutions were postponed until the end of the inquiry, while any resulting criminal trials may not even start before 2027. According to the police, the submission of evidence to the CPS could take up to a further 18 months. But potential charges include gross negligence and corporate manslaughter, fraud and health and safety offences, while around 50 people have already been interviewed as suspects.
So while the final report has been issued, for many of the bereaved, full closure will not come until these prosecutions have been completed.
Among the main findings of the inquiry were:
- The cladding
The root cause of the fire was the flammable cladding materials and insulation in the tower’s walls. According to the report, the main companies involved had “deliberately manipulated the testing process” to “misrepresent test data and mislead the market”. So companies prioritised commercial success and profits above resident safety. The report adds that senior executive who knew full well how flammable the cladding was did not issue warnings or take it off the market. One manufacturer in particular knowingly made false claims about the capacity of its cladding to withstand a blaze.
- Official failings
These date back well over 30 years to 1991, when a fire in Liverpool caused by cladding presented an early chance to make appropriate reforms. And, during the Cameron government, a drive to slash red tape dominated policy.
Regulators also came in for stringent criticism in the inquiry’s final report. That includes the British Board of Agrément (BBA), responsible for certifying building goods as safe, which was condemned as being “incompetent”. The National House Building Council and other bodies were criticised at the same time.
Additionally, the landlord, the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea, and its tenant management organisation (TMO) which ran the Grenfell Tower for the authority and had completed a £10m refurbishment of the building, were found to have shown “persistent indifference” to fire safety, especially that of the structure’s more vulnerable residents. Equally, the TMO “consistently ignored residents’ views” and “learned nothing” from previous reports revealing substantial failings.
What happens next?
Prime Minister Keir Starmer has pledged to respond to the report within six months. He also promised to speed up the removal of unsafe cladding from buildings, while the firms the inquiry criticised would not be given further public contracts.
Recommended reforms the report proposes to avoid another disaster include:
- The appointment of a new chief construction adviser
- The setting up of a construction regulator, which a cabinet member would oversee
- An urgent review of fire safety guidance
- The establishment of a new independent panel to assess whether organisations who would gain commercially by securing work should remain responsible for building control.
It’s also worth remembering the recommendations of the Hackitt Review, led by Dame Judith Hackitt and commissioned by the then Communities Secretary Sajid Javid in the wake of the disaster. This was separate to the Grenfell Inquiry, and looked specifically at issues to do with high-rise residential buildings, including compliance and enforcement, international regulation and the regulatory system around design, construction and ongoing management.
Her final report made a string of recommendations, among them a new regulatory framework, clarity on responsibilities, better procurement, greater competence, improved product testing and more rigorous enforcement.
Oakfield says
Like everyone else, we were appalled at the catalogue of failures revealed by the Grenfell Inquiry and are only too aware that, as recently as the end of last month, there was a significant blaze at a block of flats in Dagenham, which raised questions of the cladding used there. Meanwhile, earlier in September, yet another fire broke out at a block in Catford.
So we’re committed to implementing all new safety legislation, not least through our membership of The Property Institute (TPI), as discussed in a previous blog. And we believe fire safety is a sector-wide issue.
In our capacity offering sales, lettings and, particularly, block management, across East Sussex, we’re determined to work with investment landlords, residents’ management and right-to-manage companies to help keep residents as safe as possible. What’s more, alongside other TPI members, we’ve voluntarily committed to maintaining the body’s standards and Code of Conduct, as well as its consumer charter.
And while, of course, nothing can reverse the 72 Grenfell deaths, we believe that what really matters now is that we learn from the tragedy, and do all we can to prevent further needless loss of life.
If you would like to discuss any of the matters raised in this block feel free to get in touch via our contact details here.