Eight years after the Grenfell Tower disaster in which 72 people died, for which the construction industry – among others – was castigated for long term failings in its approach to building safety, it seems the government has still not taken steps to discover how many buildings have dangerous cladding, how much it will cost to remedy, or when this will be done.
This government has only been in place for some nine months but it has shown little more sign of decisive moves to address the issues than the previous incumbents. If anything deserves to be called a scandal, this does, as has been highlighted in a Public Accounts Committee report.
The PAC lists a range of actions that the government should immediately undertake; most of which should have been started years ago. The failures have inflicted considerable damage on the owners of affected flats and the construction industry. Many owners cannot sell their properties and get on with their lives, while paying very high insurance premiums to live in parts of the country they need to move on from, or being unable to trade up, or down, as their family needs change.
The PAC accuses the government of being complacent and of not taking some issues seriously enough; not taking the problems seriously is an accusation that could be levied about the entire approach to the entire Grenfell problem. The PAC says that it is deeply sceptical that such plans as have been announced are capable of delivering the solutions that have been promised.
It is hard to see a defence that can be mounted against these accusations. The PAC says there are estimated to be some 7,000 buildings with unsafe cladding, but the government doesn’t know which they are. The issue of who is to pay for the remediation programme is still unresolved, with developers and others complaining that the companies that manufactured the products involved in the Grenfell fire are so far getting off having to contribute anything to the costs of remediation.
The committee has made several demands of the responsible department, the Ministry for Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG), for urgent response. Within six months they have to provide the Committee with an update on how it will address gaps between its Remediation Acceleration Plan and the policy and legislative changes needed to deliver it. MHCLG also should report on what it is doing to ensure that non-cladding defects are not holding up progress on cladding remediation.
By the end of July the department should also spell out how it will ensure there is enough capacity among regulators, councils and the construction industry to deliver remediation. The MPs also ask the department to update them on how their efforts are putting residents at the heart of remediation plans, as the government has said it is doing.
Detailed plans for making manufacturers pay their share of remediation costs should be announced by the end of the year. Much else remains to be done but given that these issues have been mostly known about for eight years, these end of the year deadlines should be easy to meet. Are you holding your breath?
Nick Barrett
Editor