James Brokenshire
The government looks set to ban combustible cladding on high-rise buildings after its consultation on the issue, a minister has indicated.
Housing secretary James Brokenshire ordered a consultation into a possible ban just a few hours after the publication last week of the Hackitt Review, which attracted criticism from victims and some parts of the construction industry for not recommending one.
Responding to an urgent question on tower block cladding from Labour MP John Healy yesterday, Brokenshire suggested that the government was likely to come down on the side of a ban.
Brokenshire said: "My predecessor and the then home secretary asked Dame Judith Hackitt to carry out an independent review of building regulations and fire safety. I welcomed her final comprehensive report last week, which called for major reform.
"Having listened carefully to the arguments for banning combustible materials in cladding systems on high-rise residential buildings, the government are minded to agree and will consult accordingly."
Brokenshire added that he would also be writing to social landlords this week with more details about the government’s plans to fund the removal and replacement of aluminium composite material (ACM) cladding on buildings.
The move, also announced last week, is expected to cost £400m.
He said: "It is vital that people living in buildings like Grenfell Tower are safe and feel safe. I am confident that the work we are undertaking and the important reforms triggered by the Hackitt review will help to restore confidence and provide the legacy that the Grenfell communities need and deserve."
Comments
Comments are closed.
There is no need to consult about banning combustible cladding. Any material likely to combust in a fire must not be used, irrespective of manufacturers recommendations, in any circumstances. Part B needs to be made more stringent and possibly a return of the “old” Fire Prevention Officers rather than FRA’s compiled from a tick box exercise.
Timber is combustible, steel is not. However a structural timber beam (or column) when exposed to fire will retain its structural integrity for a lot longer than a similar steel beam or column without additional fire protection.
Many timber doors are used as “fire doors” offering the required protection for the purpose.
The definition of “non-combustible” must be very carefully thought through before the general public (and news media) are further involved in any future decision making process.
Need to tidy up the complicated fire standards that are misused to provide confidence in a products ability to resist fire, EN, BS and, the real con, Class 0.
If you have any doubts look up any number of manufacturers claims for systems with materials like PUR or Polystyrene in foil and it meets class 0 (the surface does this) this is more desirable than quoting euro class d or worse. Class 0 needs to go as it is misleading the design community and clients think they are getting a fire safe material.