independent-review-of-building-regulations-and-fire-safety-final-report

[hammer1]

No doubt all are aware, but just in case please see link below, been manic since Thursday....


https://www.gov.uk/government/publicati ... nal-report

[Alexis]

Thank you Hammer.

[Messy]

Well Hammer (& others) what did you make of this report???

To be fair to Dame H, I am not sure that was in her remit to make specific recommendations about materials and the bad press she has got over failing to recommend a ban on cladding materials may well be unwarranted . Frankly the Govt should have launched this 'ban' consultation on June 15th last year (the day after Grenfell) as it was known then that some countries had already done so. God knows why may & Co have been so lardy!

Dame H's remit was largely to consider building regulations, responsibilities, processes and procedures - and I think she has done a good job in the tight timescale she had

She recognises:

>Roles and responsibilities through the design and construction phases are a mess and confusing - and has suggested improvements
>She has established a HRRB (High Rise Residential Building)concept - i.e. flats 10+ floors, which separates this higher risk building from others in terms of regulation and procedures
>She recommends an overhaul of Approved Document B of the Building Regs (about blinking time!)
>She targets compliance and says processes are weak and complex - and provides remedies
>She wants to set up a combined authority (Local authority, fire service and others) to oversee and enforce (I cannot see that happening any time soon)
>The marketing, labelling and testing of products is described as 'opaque' and 'insufficient'. I strongly believe she should not have used those weak terms as its far far worse than that to the point of being perhaps criminal in places. But she does propose changes
>But its competences she focuses on which will be a huge change. She compares HRRB fire safety with the pertrochemical industry where all those involved in design and safety have to prove competence in a formal way with accreditation etc . This approach may well be coming to the those who manage safety in HRRBs

At around 120 pages, the report is a tough read and I need to go back and read it thoroughly. But at a quick read, its not too bad and most importantly, will improve safety which is what its all about.

With the late but imminent 'ban' on combustible cladding and the findings of the Public Inquiry which starts hearing evidence next week, Grenfell's tears will lead to change. We all just have to be a bit more patient

[witsd]

Messy, you have a lot more faith than I do.

I'm looking at the reaction to the report and thinking "How much would it cost to ban one type of cladding, and how much would it cost to implement all the far-reaching changes to the industry that the HR recommends?"

It seems to me that the former would be far cheaper, and I can certainly imagine it being used to gloss over the cracks in the industry. The way she was hounded for not recommending the ban certainly suggest that someone wants to diminish the general findings of the report.

But maybe I've just been wearing my tinfoil hat too often lately.