Contractors working on higher-risk buildings should be licensed, with the system overseen by a new construction regulator, according to the official inquiry into the Grenfell Tower fire.
The second phase report by Sir Martin Moore-Bick, published this morning (4 September), made a series of recommendations that would significantly impact the industry if accepted by the government:
New overarching construction regulator
A new regulator should be created to regulate construction products, oversee building control, carry out research and share best practice, the inquiry report said.
“The establishment of such a regulator would bring a number of benefits, not least a focal point in driving a much-needed change in the culture of the construction industry,” the report said.
Sharing best practice across the industry must be a priority for the new regulator.
“It would enable information to be shared effectively between those responsible for different aspects of the industry and promote the exchange of ideas. Information on developments in the industry, both in this country and abroad, could be shared more easily.”
The inquiry recommended the new regulator’s duties should include:
- Regulation of construction products.
- Development of suitable methods of testing the reaction to fire of materials and products intended for use in construction.
- Testing and certification of such products.
- Issuing certificates of compliance of construction products in line with legislation, statutory guidance and industry standards.
- Regulation and oversight of building control.
- Licensing of contractors to work on higher-risk buildings, monitoring the operation of the building regulations and the statutory guidance, and advising the secretary of state on the need for change.
- Carrying out research on matters affecting fire safety in the built environment.
- Collecting information, both in this country and abroad, on matters affecting fire safety, exchanging information with the fire and rescue services on matters affecting fire safety.
- Accrediting fire risk assessors.
- Maintaining a publicly available library of test data and publications.
Licensing of contractors on higher-risk buildings
The report said: “We think that one way in which to eliminate shortcomings of the kind we have identified and to improve the efficiency of contractors would be to introduce a licensing system for those wishing to undertake work on higher-risk buildings. That would ensure that those working on the most sensitive buildings are qualified by experience.”
The proposed licencing system would be based on competency and standards. It would be operated by a single regulator (see below) – but the report has left it to the government to decide whether a new or existing watchdog could do this.
“Such a system should lead to a general increase in competence among contractors,” the report said. “We also think that, in order to ensure that fire safety is given the importance it deserves, a senior member of the contractor’s organisation should be personally responsible for taking all reasonable steps to ensure that on completion of the work the building is as safe as it should be,” it added.
This stipulation would create a legal requirement that any application for building control approval for the construction or refurbishment of a higher-risk building should be supported by a “personal undertaking from a director or senior manager of the principal contractor to take all reasonable care to ensure that on completion and handover, the building is as safe as is required by the Building Regulations.”
Grenfell phase 2 report – read more
‘Casual and complacent’: Grenfell report’s damning verdict on Rydon
‘Dishonest’: The verdict on Grenfell’s cladding manufacturers
Harley Facades: The role of the cladding subcontractor
“Serious and longstanding failures”: The role of government and regulators
Product regulation
The report called for a shake-up of construction product regulation, which is currently overseen by the Office for Product Safety and Standards.
The report said: “We do not think that the appointment of a national regulator of construction products will solve the problem because the system will still depend on the effectiveness of the conformity assessment bodies and the limited oversight of UKAS [United Kingdom Accreditation Service].
“We therefore recommend that the construction regulator should be responsible for assessing the conformity of construction products with the requirements of legislation, statutory guidance and industry standards and issuing certificates as appropriate. We should expect such certificates to become preeminent in the market.”
To avoid product purchasers being misled, the inquiry recommended that “copies of all test results supporting any certificate issued by the construction regulator be included in the certificate”.
It also said that manufacturers should “be required to provide the construction regulator with the full testing history of the product or material to which the certificate relates and inform the regulator of any material circumstances that may affect its performance”.
Manufacturers should be required by law to “provide on request copies of all test results that support claims about fire performance made for their products”.
Centralisation of building control functions
The inquiry report raised concerns over the relationship between building control officers and contractors, exposed by its investigations.
“The evidence shows that in the period leading up to the Grenfell Tower fire, many of those involved in major construction projects – including clients, contractors and even architects – regarded building control primarily as a source of advice and assistance. It was even described as an extension of the design team.
“In many cases that was how building control itself saw its role. That was a serious misunderstanding, but it was fostered by building control bodies themselves, who preferred to cooperate with applicants to enable proposals to be approved rather than enforce the Building Regulations rigorously,” the report said.
Acknowledging the steps taken since 2017 to reform building control and competence, the inquiry report said: “We expect the construction regulator to continue these new arrangements, which are intended to introduce a wholly new climate in which both applicants for approval and building control officers understand that the function for building control is regulatory in nature,” it added.
Redefinition of higher-risk buildings
The definition of “higher-risk buildings” in law and regulation should no longer be defined solely on the basis of how tall they are.
The report said: “We do not think that to define a building as higher risk by reference only to its height is satisfactory, being essentially arbitrary in nature.
“More relevant is the nature of its use and, in particular, the likely presence of vulnerable people for whom evacuation in the event of a fire or other emergency would be likely to present difficult. We therefore recommend that the definition of a higher-risk building for the purposes of the Building Safety Act be reviewed urgently.”
Responsibility for fire safety under a single minister
The political roles in Whitehall departments must also change, with the recommendations implemented by one minister.
The report said: “We recommend that government bring responsibility for the function relating to fire safety currently exercised by MHLG [Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government], the Home Office and the Department for Business and Trade into one department under a single secretary of state.”
Chief construction adviser with team
The inquiry recommended that a similar role to the government’s chief scientific adviser should be created to cover the construction industry.
“We recommend that the secretary of state appoint a chief construction adviser with a sufficient budget and staff to provide advice on all matters affecting the construction industry.”
Any new advisor’s role should include monitoring department work, providing advice to the secretary of state, bringing to the secretary of state’s attention any matters affecting building regulations and statutory guidance.
Review of Approved Documents
The documents that set out guidance on how to adhere to building regulations should be reassessed, the report said.
Approved Documents should “be reviewed as a matter of urgency”, taking into account the expert advice given to the inquiry.
The review should cover the statutory guidance generally and specifically the Approved Document B, which covers fire safety rules.
>The report also said that revised guidance documents should contain an explicit warning in each section that compliance with them will “not necessarily” result in compliance with the legal requirements included in the Building Regulations.
There was also a specific recommendation to review whether “compartmentation”, the design practice aimed at limiting fire spread to the source, is still fit-for-purpose.
The inquiry concluded that new materials and new methods of construction and the practice of over-cladding existing buildings “make the existence of effective compartmentation a questionable assumption”.
The report added: “We recommend that it be reconsidered when Approved Document B is revised.”
New process for reviewing building regulations
The system for deciding updates to building regulations is also now likely to change – including who makes the decisions on changes.
It said: “A fresh approach needs to be taken to reviewing and revising the building regulations. Membership of bodies advising on change would include academics and those with practical experience including fire engineers – chosen for their experience and skills – and should extend beyond those who have served on similar bodies in the past.”
Fire engineer profession to be put on a firmer footing
Fire engineers should be given legal status and regulated by a professional body.
The report said: “We recommend that the profession of fire engineer be recognised and protected by law and that an independent body be established to regulate the profession, define the standards required for membership, maintain a register of members and regulate their conduct.
“In order to speed up the creation of a body of professional fire engineers, we also recommend that the government take urgent steps to increase the number of places of high-quality masters-level courses in fire engineering accredited by the professional body.”
Review of private sector building control
Driving the call for change was a clear criticism of the system introduced in the 1980s that allows building inspectors who are not employed by public sector organisations to sign off buildings.
“Approved inspectors had a commercial interest in acquiring and retaining customers that conflicted with the performance of their role as guardians of the public interest,” it said.
“Competition for work between approved inspectors and local authority building control departments introduce a similar conflict of interest affecting them. As things stand, that underlying conflict of interest will continue to exist and will continue to threaten the integrity of the system.”
The inquiry expects the government to resolve this and consider setting up a new national body.
“We therefore recommend that the government appoint an independent panel to consider whether it is in the public interest for building control functions to be performed by those who have a commercial interest in the process,” the report said.
Knowledge hub
The inquiry also called for a construction library to be created for people involved in all aspects of building design and construction.
