In the article "Eight failures that left people of Grenfell Tower at mercy of the inferno", Knapton and Dixon (2017) highlighted the eight factors that result to the devastating destruction of the Grenfell Tower. Under the London Building Act, external walls were required to have a minimum of 1 hour of fire resistance. However, that all changed in 1987 when Margaret Thatcher’s government replaced it with the new National Building Regulations. Under the new rule, non-combustible were no longer a requirement for walls. It was reported that unsafe materials were used for cladding in Grenfell Tower. Several fire safety experts had voiced their concerns about the use of unsafe cladding to the authorities without avail. The government failed time and time again to review building regulations even after the Lakanal house fire in 2009. It was mentioned that Grenfell Tower has missing fire safety measures which include a central sprinkler system, fire doors and firebreaks. In addition, the installation of only one staircase means residents have only one point of exit. The authors stated that fire inspections of the tower were almost non-existent after the end of 2015. These combinations of factors took the lives of 72 people and injured hundreds. The article addresses the eight factors that helped spark the accident of Grenfell Tower and their consequences. I believe that the failure of the government was the root cause of the accident.
It is widely agreed upon that the cladding used in Grenfell Tower was the caused that exacerbated the fire, it begs the question: "Why was it used in the first place?"
Firstly, in the National Building Regulations written by Margaret Thatcher’s government states that "The external walls of the building shall adequately resist the spread of fire over the walls and from one building to another, having regard to the height, use and position of the building." (2010). The regulation did not specifically state that the materials used for the enteral of the building to be non-combustible. In the case of Grenfell Tower, Class O cladding was used. Prior to the incident, fire experts found that the cladding was able to withstand the initial dace of the fire but as the fire strengthens, the claddings melt and expose the inner form. With this startling discovery, the fire brigade had urged the local councils that this type of cladding posed a certain risk, however, they sat on this information. In addition, after the Lakanal House fire which occurred 10 years prior to Grenfell Tower fire, a government review of building regulation was called for. This gave the government an ample opportunity to uncover the dangers of Class O cladding, adding to the fact that external fire safety groups have also urged ministers for regulatory overhaul. Yet again the government failed to take any sensible action.
Secondly, with lax government regulations and unclear standards, the owners of the building took the opportunity to cut corners. The residents wanted to raise their fire safety concerns such as the absence of fire doors and sprinklers, and also the problem of having a single staircase in the building meaning the residents have only one route of exit. When residents confronted the owners, they were told the building is "safe" and there was nothing to worry about. Two years prior to the fire, the tower underwent a refurbishment where many residents alleged that cheap materials were used. The aim of this refurbishment was to make the tower more aesthetically pleasing in hopes to raise the land value and "so the rich people who lived opposite wouldn't have to look at a horrendous block." Therefore, Class O aluminium cladding was fitted to the tower just to make the tower look appealing. This would later prove to be a costly mistake.
Grenfell Tower is one of the pockets of poverty surrounded by the wealthy. The residents face prejudice from the institution. The refurbishment rather than dealing with the safety concerns brought up by the "poor" residents, the owners focused on the building aesthetics to appease the wealthy people staying in the blocks surrounding Grenfell Tower. By ignoring the resident's concerns, human rights may have been violated as reported by the United Nations housing investigator.
No comments:
Post a Comment