The Grenfell tragedy exposed an entire industry’s lack of accountability

Unlock the Editor’s Digest for free

Roula Khalaf, Editor of the FT, selects her favourite stories in this weekly newsletter.

The writer was an expert witness to the Grenfell Inquiry and is a fellow of Arup’s global fire safety engineering practice 

Seven years on from the Grenfell disaster, the final inquiry report sets out a stark truth in black and white — these deaths were all avoidable. The pain and cold anger of the bereaved, survivors and residents of the fire that engulfed the Grenfell Tower were all evident. Yet as the report noted, none of it had to happen.

Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer underscored the point when he told the Commons that the victims were let down by just about every organisation responsible for ensuring their safety. A systemic failure that stretched from policymakers to product manufacturers, engineers to building safety managers.

As someone who has worked in that system as a fire safety engineer for many years, I recognise those shortcomings. I remain just as appalled today at the failures that allowed Grenfell to happen as I was on the morning of June 14 2017.    

For me, the destruction caused by the fire symbolised the lack of accountability endemic in the industry — a feeling compounded by the revelation that thousands of homes have similar defects. The hope that the inquiry would address these shortcomings was one of the main reasons I agreed to take on the role of independent expert. 

Perhaps naively, I believed that if people simply understood the gaps and failures in the guidance supporting our regulations that would create change. If people were aware of the lack of knowledge and care that went into testing and installing products, the industry would take notice. And if people understood how far apart building management and maintenance practices had drifted from the core task of protecting people, then surely change would follow.

All these long years later, I am definitely less naive about the challenges involved in overhauling the system but much more determined to drive the transformation required. 

That is not to say that there has been no progress. Clearly, there have been significant advances since the initial report of the inquiry in 2019. We’ve seen a host of positive recommendations put into action, not least the Building Safety Act. 

Nevertheless, we still need a step change in fire safety culture. The recommendations set out in the report are all important, but in terms of priorities, it’s critical that we embed a system-wide, holistic approach to fire safety. 

Everyone associated with this industry must have a duty to clarify and enforce robust guidance and clear lines of accountability. From policy and concept design through to construction, quality assurance and the management of buildings once they are occupied, prescribed roles and responsibilities for “fire safety” must be unambiguous at every step. Accountability will save lives so this oversight must be backed by a far more rigorous approach to compliance. 

We also need to prioritise equity in fire safety for a reasonable range of vulnerabilities. We have seen decades of fighting for disabled access to buildings. We need the same determination now applied to emergency evacuation as well.  

Inequality is a growing problem in the rules governing new-builds versus older properties. As it stands, the regulations that apply to older buildings allow less rigour, which, among other things, embeds this inequity of treatment for vulnerable people ever further.

Finally, we need to professionalise the industry responsible for fire safety to build expertise and ensure accountability when people fall short. That means having clear standards — along with professional trade associations that have real teeth. Only this will tackle a system that too often tolerates a lack of competence among practitioners. 

The horribly fragmented approach to fire safety helped create the conditions that allowed Grenfell to happen; it simply has to change.