As the construction sector regroups following the publication of the Grenfell Inquiry’s final report, there are three key things that it must focus on – rebuilding trust, improving culture and driving higher standards and competency.
These were the thoughts of a panel of experts brought together for the latest Premdor Unlocked event, which took place in London in September.
The far-reaching conversation covered the industry’s response to the Building Safety Act and reflected on the Inquiry’s findings and what it would mean going forward.
Fire safety increases in priority
Hannah Mansell, founder of ADOORABILITY and the not-for-profit UK Fire Door Think Tank, was one of the panellists. She said that she had noticed a definite shift when it came to fire safety, including within her specialist area of fire doors.
“When I first entered the industry people didn’t want to speak about fire doors,” she explained. “It was seen as a niche subject, and there was a real disconnect. People considered fire doors as a commodity, rather than thinking about them as a critical safety measure.”
Fellow panellist Kizzy Augustin, partner at Mishcon de Reya LLP, agreed. A specialist in health and safety law for over 20 years, she said that fire doors were not a subject that often came up in the past.
“If people mentioned them at all, it would just be part of a normal risk assessment,” she said. “Now, people are more proactive. They want to understand the product and the overall safety strategy and make sure that risks are reduced as far as reasonably practicable.”
Hanna Clarke, Digital and Policy Manager at Construction Products Association (CPA), and chair of the Industry Competence Steering Group, completed the panel. With a background in compliance, she joined the construction industry just after the fire at Grenfell.
“I joined the CPA two months after Grenfell happened and was thrust straight into conversations with the government about how the industry should respond. The fire changed everything.”
“Suddenly, government officials were talking about fire safety and the public was too. People wanted to know what was happening in their buildings, and they were no longer taking safety for granted.”
According to Hanna, this changed the way that manufacturers considered their products: “Manufacturers are much more sensitive now on the route to market, and how their products are being installed and maintained. The entire question of competence regarding all roles in and around construction products is seen as far more critical.”
“It’s a big shift,” added Kizzy. “Previously, the law would go after the installer. Now, there is a much larger focus on other parts of the chain, including the manufacturer and the various duty holders.”
Rebuilding trust
The panel was clear that the industry would need to work hard to rebuild trust, with the Inquiry’s findings revealing multiple points of failure in the system. Part of building that trust includes being clearer in communication, according to Hannah.
“We get wrapped up in technical language, but can we communicate that accurately to anyone?”, she said. “People cannot stand behind complexity anymore. We need to be able to explain these products and their performance clearly.”
Kizzy stated that this needs to be a two-way process: “If we want to rebuild trust with residents, then they need to be much more involved. They need to be made to feel part of the solution.”
“They know that there is new legislation to keep them safe, but they have responsibilities too. The first step is to make the Building Safety Act easier to understand for all – duty holders need to know what they must do and when. ”
“Yes, it is a lot of people to involve, but we need to learn to manage this process effectively. If we successfully get residents involved too, we will see a better fire safety culture.”
Changing the culture
This cultural piece and need to engage with residents were raised via questions from the audience. Some highlighted problems such as conducting site visits and finding that fires doors have been removed or were being propped open, as well as the challenges they had building dialogue with residents.
The panel agreed that, while this might be difficult, the process must continue. “One example I point to is the Health and Safety Act,” explained Hannah. “It has taken years for that to become embedded within construction, but we now have a completely different industry. It is the same here. It will take time to upskill people and improve the conversations that we have around fire safety.”
Hannah added that the scale of the challenge made it a unique situation. “We need to raise competence throughout the industry,” she said. “Everyone has had to come together to discuss fire safety and agree a way forward.”
“In the Industry Competence Steering Group, we’re working with over 1,500 people and 60 industry bodies at the moment, and this group will double over the next year. That is so that we can agree a system to raise competence consistently across the industry and build understanding of the way that these systems interlink.”
A single regulator?
One of the recommendations of the Grenfell Inquiry’s final report was a new regulator to oversee the whole construction industry. The panel agreed with the idea in principle, there was concern about how it might work in practice.
“There is a risk that this will face similar conflicts of interest that were revealed in the Inquiry’s report,” explained Hanna. “A single government department will have the challenge of trying to grow the economy and meet large building targets alongside the need to set and enforce standards for safety and other performance targets.”
Kizzy added that there was also the risk of things falling through the cracks, with legislation already overlapping and causing confusion. She pointed to the Health and Safety at Work Act, CDM Regulations, the Fire Safety Order and Building Safety Act as examples.
There is also the further challenge of a transition period, according to Hanna: “If it’s too far in the future, the industry won’t prepare as they will expect things to change. Too soon, and it won’t be smoothly implemented.”
“What we need to commit to is continuous improvement, rather than perfection. It takes time for these things to bed in successfully.”
Hannah agreed: “Things have already changed, while projects continue. And that’s the right thing to do. It is not possible to stop every project and start again. What we need to do is upskill people, engage with the fire industry and continue to make these improvements.”
Hannah concluded that the key to changing behaviour and culture will ultimately come down to leadership. “We need people who can teach the right behaviours and drive that cultural change.
“It’s important that we bring this into the wider conversation about competence. Behaviour can be monitored too and should be part of how we assess performance.”
