search.noResults

search.searching

dataCollection.invalidEmail
note.createNoteMessage

search.noResults

search.searching

orderForm.title

orderForm.productCode
orderForm.description
orderForm.quantity
orderForm.itemPrice
orderForm.price
orderForm.totalPrice
orderForm.deliveryDetails.billingAddress
orderForm.deliveryDetails.deliveryAddress
orderForm.noItems
Industry News


Grenfell Inquiry report timetable delayed yet again


anger and frustration, particularly from the tragedy’s survivors and victims’ families. The Grenfell United group reacted to the news by


T


saying the inquiry’s slow rate of progress was causing them further pain. They widely criticised the authorities (in general) saying it was the residents’ group and other campaigners who had taken the lead on forcing through a ban on combustible cladding, as well as pushing for changes in the ‘stay put’ policy and lobbying for the installation of water sprinkler systems in tower blocks. This means that the second anniversary of the


terrible fire, which claimed the lives of 72 people on 14 June 2017, will have passed without any recommendations being published on how to prevent a similar event. Expert witnesses, survivors and lawyers for the


victims’ families had argued during phase 1 that “obvious recommendations” should be published at the earliest opportunity, in order to save lives. But the inquiry chairman appears to have resisted this pressure in favour of including recommendations within a fully detailed report on what happened on the night of the fire.


FURTHER DELAYS It could also mean the all important second phase of the inquiry will also be delayed in starting, which will have the knock-on effect of further delaying the start of any criminal proceedings against those considered to be responsible for the fire in west London, until 2021 or even later. In a letter to all core participants in the inquiry,


the chairman’s solicitor wrote: “Writing the Phase 1 report has proved to be a far more complex and time-consuming task than the Inquiry had originally anticipated…There is a significant volume of evidence to be reviewed and detailed work to be done to ensure findings are properly tied to all relevant parts of the evidence.” The Inquiry has had to build in sufficient time


for the Rule 13 process to complete. This is the procedure under which warning letters are sent to


Events


National Landlord Investment Shows 8 October, Manchester 5 November, London www.landlordinvestmentshow.co.uk


he decision to put back publication of the first phase Grenfell Inquiry report until October has been met with understandable


individuals or organisations advising them that may be subject to criticism in the report. This gives them an opportunity to respond before the report is finalised and is likely to apply to leaders at the local council, the fire service and various manufacturers and contractors. Representatives of firefighters are claiming that lessons from the Grenfell fire have not been learnt and the country is unprepared for tackling a similar incident. The Inquiry expects the Rule 13 process to begin


in July with the Chairman then in a position to write to the Prime Minister with his final report after the parliamentary recess, for publication in October. Phase 2 will then focus on establishing how


Grenfell Tower came to be in a condition that allowed a tragedy of this scale to occur. The Inquiry plans for hearings to re-commence in January 2020 and to last for up to two years.


SLOW AND PAINFUL JUSTICE Sir Martin Moore-Bick, the chairman of the inquiry, had previously told survivors that his conclusions would be ready this Spring, but the solicitor to the inquiry, Caroline Featherstone, said that reaching conclusions was proving “far more complex and time-consuming task than originally anticipated”. Representatives of Grenfell United voiced their


frustration that the delay was another sign of the authorities being slow to tackle the problems revealed by the fire. “It is survivors and bereaved that fought to get


dangerous cladding banned,” Natasha Elcock, a former resident and the chairwoman of Grenfell United said. “There is still no change to the stay-put policy, people are living in tower blocks without sprinklers and social housing residents across the country are still be ignored and mistreated. “We want the inquiry and the criminal


investigation to be thorough and to get to the truth, but there must be no more delays. We are living in a limbo, increasingly frustrated, and we need to know there will be some resolution soon. A slow justice is a painful justice for all of us.”


AN INADEQUATE RESPONSE Meanwhile, Matt Wrack, the leader of the Fire


RESI Convention 11 - 13 September, Wales www.resiconf.com


National Housing Summit 25 - 26 September, London summit.housing.org.uk


6 | HMM June/July 2019 | www.housingmmonline.co.uk


© Natalie Oxford


Brigade Union has accused Nick Hurd, the Fire Service Minister, of failing to “grasp the severity or even the basic details of the risk across the country”. This followed a FBU survey which revealed fire


brigades had different or inconsistent plans for dealing with high-rise fires but these were still based on assumptions of fires staying within individual flats and not spreading, as a result of compartmentation failures. He said: “It’s no longer possible to claim that a


fire like Grenfell is unforeseeable. Firefighters were placed in an impossible situation that night. But two years on, the Government still has not provided the planning and resources necessary to prepare firefighters for what are now completely foreseeable risks.” He said the resources planned to be deployed in


high-rise fires were “mostly utterly inadequate. The difference in predetermined attendances is also deeply worrying – there is no reason why which part of the country a building is located in should determine the safety of its residents.”


UK Construction Week 08 - 10 October, Birmingham www.ukconstructionweek.com


Homes UK 27 - 28 November, London www.homesevent.co.uk/home


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