It is now more than 7 years since the tragic fire involving the Grenfell Building occurred in the UK on the night of 14 June 2017. This fire led to 72 fire deaths and many other injuries. The initial report led by Dame Judith Hackitt in 2018, entitled “Building a Safer Future”1 provided an independent review of UK building regulations with strong recommendations for reform.
Australia had significant high-rise fires involving external combustible cladding, including the Lacrosse building fire in 2014, as well as some significant building structural failures. As a result, Prof. Peter Shergold and Bronwyn Weir were commissioned to undertake a similar assessment of the effectiveness of compliance and enforcement systems for the building and construction industry across Australia. There was a particular focus on the shortcomings in the implementation of the National Construction Code (NCC). The resulting report, entitled the “Building Confidence” report2, also published in 2018, delivered a set of recommendations for reform in the construction industry, including for fire safety.
Both the Hackitt and Shergold/Weir reports have led to some reform and actions by governments in the UK and Australia. However, in some sense, such reform might be considered still a work in progress. Questions remain – have we really changed the whole safety culture of the construction industry? And, are we on the way to achieving best practice as envisaged by Shergold and Weir in their report for Australia?
One lens through which we might review progress in Australia since the Grenfell fire is the Change Framework3 developed by Arup as part of their contribution to Phase 2 of the Public Inquiry into the Grenfell Building fire. This work was led by Arup’s Dr Barbara Lane, one of the key expert witnesses to the Inquiry. While Phase 1 of the Inquiry looked at the factual narrative of the fire and the events which unfolded on the night of 14 June 2017, Phase 2 of the Inquiry examined the causes of these events, including how Grenfell Tower came to be in the condition which allowed the fire to spread in the way it did on that fateful night. The Phase 2 report4 was published on 4 September 2024.
The Change Framework was developed as part of the analysis and reporting by Arup in providing support for Dr Lane’s expert testimony to the Public Inquiry. It was built to answer two key questions:
- How can we create a more effective and equitable fire safety system?
- How can we rebuild trust in the built environment?
The Framework consists of six elements which each help to enable the built environment to move forward in consideration of the two key questions above.
Each of these elements is further described as follows:
- A systems approach to fire safety –Fire safety is a complex ecosystem and should be regulated and managed through a totally integrated approach from concept design through to building occupation and operation.
- A strong industry wide fire safety culture – The industry should strive to have a strong safety culture with continuous improvement which will play an important role in regaining public trust. It is crucial that there is an intolerance of bad practice to enforce this culture.
- Unambiguous standards and whole building life cycle scrutiny – Prescriptive fire safety standards should be unambiguous and reliable to enable consistent compliance with all the relevant fire safety requirements. Where designers wish to deviate from prescriptive guidance through performance-based engineering approaches, a clear design framework should be in place which must be followed. There should be strict oversight and scrutiny of fire safety provisions throughout the life cycle of a building.
- A regulated fire safety profession – Only those who can demonstrate and evidence appropriate competence should be allowed to undertake works that impacts fire safety. Regulating competency with clearly defined responsibility and accountability across both the design and contractor teams should drive an increase in the quality of buildings.
- Reducing fire risk inequity in existing buildings – Fire safety risk in existing high-rise residential buildings should be addressed over time to reduce inequity across new and existing housing stock.
- Equitable fire safety provisions for vulnerable people – Inequitable risk levels for vulnerable people in high-rise residential buildings should not be overlooked or tolerated. Equitable fire safety solutions for vulnerable occupants for access and egress should be incorporated in statutory guidance documents.
With the recent publication of the Public Inquiry report on the tragic 2017 Grenfell Building fire, it is timely to reflect on our fire safety performance and reform of regulations in Australia in that 7 year period.
The best that can be said is that results across Australia are mixed, with some jurisdictions such as NSW moving ahead with some major reforms, and others lagging behind. The concept of a full and proper evolving safety culture and systems approach to fire safety of buildings seems not to be fully understood by industry or regulators.
This session will present the evidence of where Australia is up to with fire industry reform post- Grenfell, set in the context of the UK Change Framework.
