COMMENT 19


cutting red-tape approach first espoused by David Cameron and George Osborne when they were running things in Downing Street, the letter’s authors wrote: “Arbitrary rules were imposed to


establish deregulation of health and safety, such as a requirement to abolish two health and safety regulations (and more recently, three) for any new one adopted. “This mind-set has meant that, even


when it was recommended and accepted that mandatory fitting of sprinklers would make homes or schools safer, this was rejected in favour of non-regulatory action. In practice, this approach favours inaction.” The letter’s authors offered their


organisations’ services to fast-track work on reviewing and finalising the relevant Building Regulations. As the comments came from respected organisations like the Institution of Occupational Safety and Health, the British Safety Council and Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents, who are not normally associated with knee-jerk reactions or hysterical demands, it is likely Ministers took their views seriously.


PUBLIC INQUIRY It beggars belief that Building Regulations remained unamended and clouded in misunderstanding, for so long after the Lakanal House fire in 2009. Successive ministers from the former Communities Secretary Eric Pickles onwards may be called to give evidence at the public inquiry to explain their relative inactivity, but in the meantime residents are impatient for action to be taken in this calendar year. Away from the ‘red-tape’ issue, landlords


are finding it difficult to establish what are reasonable costs for works to retrofit water sprinkler systems into their tower blocks. There is also an urgent need to clarify the advice given to residents in the event of a fire and whether ‘the stay in place, rather than evacuate’ guidance is still valid. The Manchester fire service has changed their advice for residents to evacuate. There is also the issue about what fire risk assessments should cover, who is qualified to do them and the status of their recommendations. Birmingham City Council estimated it


would cost £31m to install sprinklers in its 213 tower blocks, while Portsmouth City Council calculated a cost of £12.2m for 13 buildings, giving a range of £145,500 to


£938,450 per building. Meanwhile the British Automatic Fire Sprinkler Association said retrofitting sprinklers in Scotland could cost an average of £300,000 per block. The total bill across the whole country will be enormous and we probably do not have the specialist labour to complete this work as speedily as we, or the residents would like. While landlords wait for confirmation of


help to pay for the retrofitting of sprinkler systems, Croydon Council announced that retrofitting sprinklers in 25 blocks above 10 storeys would cost £10m, leaving just £2.5m in its Housing Revenue Account (HRA) for all other works to its entire housing stock. The council’s leader asked for its HRA borrowing cap to be lifted and rent controls to be handed back to councils. He had not received a reply before Parliament rose for the recess and there was some confusion over what DCLG officials shared with ministers.


FUNDING PRIORITIES It is possible the Government is worried about the cost of doing this work, while at the same time honouring its commitments to fund the new housebuilding programme to fix our broken housing market. It should not worry too much as both are urgent capital spending programmes – they are infinitely more important (and cheaper) than the High Speed rail link to Birmingham (and beyond) and the capital’s Crossrail 2 project. Lives do not depend upon either of these two rail projects and they will take so long to complete anyway, what is the harm in another year or two’s delay? If Ministers fail to make meaningful


progress over the next few months on the safety agenda, who is to say that the protesters who have lobbied with some success against Kensington & Chelsea Council, won’t turn their anger and frustration on the Government and possi- bly be joined by others? The council is not enjoying its time in the spotlight but worse is probably to come when the public inquiry gets underway and they are asked to explain cost savings to the block’s refurbishment, their choice of works and the materials used, and what came of residents’ concerns about safety. Hopefully health and safety is no longer


a term of abuse and those employed to advise us on how to minimise risk and prevent dangerous incidents, must


© Natalie Oxford


be listened to and have their recommendations acted upon. The Communities Secretary Sajid Javid has a chance to push through the changes demanded by the safety professionals. He also has an opportunity to change the Government’s mindset about the worth of social housing and those who live and work in it. For the last seven years, Whitehall has


looked upon local government and the welfare budget as two giant cash cows, to be milked for major parts of its austerity savings. With homelessness continuing to rise and benefit cuts contributing significantly to rent arrears and high levels of evictions, the time has come for a serious re-think. News that corporate manslaughter charges are being considered against the owners and managers of Grenfell Tower will make the owners of other tower blocks more focused on improving safety. As well as changing the mindset on


health and safety and building regulations, and finding money for local government to solve housing problems, Mr Javid could reach out to form a better relationship with councils and housing associations. The housing White Paper showed he is capable of listening and writing fine plans to tackle many of our housing ills. Now comes the test to combine all of the fine words with effective actions and to ensure that another Grenfell Tower fire or similar tragedy does not befall the housing sector in the foreseeable future. The country demands and expects nothing less.


IMMEDIATELY AFTER THE FIRE, MINISTERS WERE QUICK TO SUGGEST THAT MONEY WOULD BE NO OBJECT IN SORTING OUT SAFETY CONCERNS AND ALLAYING RESIDENTS’ WORRIES


WWW.HBDONLINE.CO.UK


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60