Seven organisations to be investigated over Grenfell fire
Seven organisations will be investigated over the Grenfell Tower disaster and all 58 recommendations of a public inquiry will be met, the government says.
Those organisations could be prevented from bidding for public contracts, while two existing bodies will be merged to form a single building safety regulator as part of the changes.
The government has also backed a new "Hillsborough Law", which would create a legal duty for public authorities to tell the truth and be transparent.
The Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG) said it will only begin implementing the changes from 2028. It is already working on a list of reforms to building safety, which came from the cladding crisis following Grenfell.
The fire in the west London tower block killed 72 people in 2017, the inquiry found all their deaths were avoidable.
Deputy Prime Minister and Housing Secretary Angela Rayner said the Grenfell Inquiry had "exposed in stark and devastating detail the shocking industry behaviour and wider failures that led to the fire, and the deep injustices endured by the bereaved, survivors, and residents".
"We are acting on all of the Inquiry's findings, and today set out our full response, detailing the tough action we are taking to drive change and reform the system to ensure no community will ever have to face a tragedy like Grenfell ever again.
"That means greater accountability, stronger regulation, and putting residents at the heart of decision-making. We must deliver the fundamental change required. We owe that to the Grenfell community, to the country, and to the memory of those who lost their lives," she added.
The inquiry report found the fire was the result of a chain of failures by governments, "dishonest" companies and the fire service, which lacked a strategy for dealing with high rise cladding fires.
The government's role in failing to regulate safety in the construction industry became apparent early in the Grenfell inquiry and during the hearings it apologised for its "past failures in relation to the oversight of the system that regulated safety in the construction and refurbishment of high rise buildings."
Wednesday's announcement is part of a continuing effort to strengthen the regulations and oversight of construction.
The seven organisations will be investigated for professional misconduct using powers under the Procurement Act passed in 2023.
On Wednesday, the government published a new Construction Products Reform Green Paper setting out possible penalties for companies found to have breached safety obligations.
These include fines based on the company's revenue and powers to limit individuals being involved in the industry.
However, officials will not currently say if these penalties will be applied retrospectively. The failures which led to the Grenfell fire happened in the years before its refurbishment in 2016.
Ministers are also promising a new single construction regulator will improve standards in the industry.
In a rapid series of reforms since the fire, the Conservatives set up both a Building Safety Regulator and a National Regulator for Construction Products.
Sir Martin Moore-Bick, the chairman of the Grenfell Inquiry, recommended there should be just one body.
The government will effectively merge the existing ones into a single regulator in what the housing ministry described as further "sweeping construction, building and fire safety reforms".
These are likely to introduce new rules on the testing of specific construction products.
The Grenfell disaster was caused by the use of highly flammable cladding backed by insulation which also contributed to the spread of the fire.
Manufacturers either concealed evidence of the risks their products posed or made false and misleading claims, the inquiry found.
The housing ministry wants to create stronger enforcement of safety standards but also force the construction industry to be more transparent and take responsibility to ensure a fire like Grenfell does not happen again.
The London Fire Brigade failed to respond to the rapid spread of the fire at Grenfell due to poor training and a lack of guidance about how to deal with flammable cladding.
The government is setting up a new College of Fire and Rescue later this year to "improve the training and professionalism of firefighters".
Another finding of the inquiry was that Grenfell was inspected by a fire risk assessor who lacked the necessary training and experience. The government will bring in certification for assessors.
The government will provide an update on its work to meet the Grenfell recommendations every three months as part of an attempt to beef up the impact of public inquiry findings.
The MHCLG has now taken over responsibility for fire safety from the Home Office and says it will support both the continuing police investigation and plans for a memorial which will replace the tower once it is dismantled in two years' time.
Grenfell Report: Key findings from the inquiry
Grenfell's 'path to disaster' that led to 72 deaths
'She was so proud to live in Grenfell Tower': The 72 people killed by the fire
Grenfell Tower fire: What happens next?
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
5 hours ago
- Yahoo
Rayner's workers' rights bill will damage growth, warn bosses
Angela Rayner's radical shake-up of workers' rights will hurt economic growth, bosses have warned, as companies prepare to slash hiring and curb investment. More than seven in 10 business leaders believe the Government's Employment Rights Bill will have a negative impact on the country's economy, according to a survey carried out by the Institute of Directors (IoD). Nearly half said they would be less likely to hire new staff as a result of the reforms to workers' rights. The warning will raise alarm bells for the Chancellor who has said that restoring economic growth is her priority. It threatens to deepen tensions between Ms Reeves and the Deputy Prime Minister, who is overseeing the workers' rights reforms. The pair have already clashed over the direction of economic policy, with a leaked memo recently revealing Ms Rayner was pressing the Chancellor to pursue tax rises instead of spending cuts. Under the workers' rights reforms, employees will be able to claim sick pay from the first day of their illness, instead of the fourth. The Bill will also extend the powers of unions in the workplace, making it easier for trade groups to organise strikes by weakening the thresholds currently needed to trigger a walkout. Sir Keir Starmer previously made the shake-up, dubbed Labour's 'new deal for working people', as a core part of his manifesto in the lead-up to his victory in the general election. However, it has sparked concern from business chiefs. The survey by the IoD found that more than half (52pc) of company bosses said they would be more likely to invest in automation as a result of the Bill. A quarter of business leaders polled said the Bill made it likely that they would make redundancies in a further blow to the labour market. The IoD, the so-called 'bosses' union', represents 20,000 business leaders across the country, ranging from entrepreneurial small ventures to major corporations. Already, many of those businesses have reported a slowdown in hiring since the Chancellor announced an increase in employers' National Insurance contributions and the minimum wage in the autumn Budget. The rise in labour costs has caused many businesses to cut jobs or scrap hiring plans. Alex Hall-Chen, a principal policy adviser for employment at the IoD, said: 'Government has yet to show that it is listening to the concerns of business about the potential unintended consequences of the Bill as it is currently drafted. 'If there is a silver lining, it is that more employers will invest in automation and other measures which may improve the UK's stagnating productivity levels.' The IoD has called on the Government to make targeted changes to the Bill, which it believes would soften the negative impact of the reforms on hiring. One of its proposed changes includes keeping the existing thresholds for statutory recognition of trade unions. Andrew Griffith, the shadow business secretary, said: 'If Labour ministers had worked in business they would know their choices mean that British workers will lose their jobs to robots and foreign workers. 'Whilst all Labour governments leave unemployment higher than they found it, this time they are actually passing laws to guarantee it.' The warning over the worker rights reforms comes after MPs warned that Britain's high energy bills and poorly coordinated efforts to fund business growth was hitting growth and prosperity. MPs on the business and trade committee said: 'The UK's high electricity prices are damaging the ability of UK businesses to compete, attract investment and decarbonise.' It pointed to evidence from Nissan that the company's Sunderland plant has higher energy bills than any of its other car factories in the world. Liam Byrne, chairman of the committee, said: 'The evidence we've heard from the nation's leading industrialists, scientists, economists and trade unionists is that this moment of history will be lost if the Chancellor's new investment is not matched by a re-making of the British state for a new economic era.' The MPs also called on the Chancellor to act to stop many of the best entrepreneurs from leaving the country for lack of funding to support their rapidly growing businesses. A government spokesman said: 'We've consulted extensively with business on our proposals, and we will continue to work closely with employers to ensure new laws work for them while putting money back into the pockets of working people.' Responding to the select committee report, a government spokesman said ministers were working on 'creating the best possible conditions for the private sector to thrive.' Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
Yahoo
7 hours ago
- Yahoo
Rayner's workers' rights bill will damage growth, warn bosses
Angela Rayner's radical shake-up of workers' rights will hurt economic growth, bosses have warned, as companies prepare to slash hiring and curb investment. More than seven in 10 business leaders believe the Government's Employment Rights Bill will have a negative impact on the country's economy, according to a survey carried out by the Institute of Directors (IoD). Nearly half said they would be less likely to hire new staff as a result of the reforms to workers' rights. The warning will raise alarm bells for the Chancellor who has said that restoring economic growth is her priority. It threatens to deepen tensions between Ms Reeves and the Deputy Prime Minister, who is overseeing the workers' rights reforms. The pair have already clashed over the direction of economic policy, with a leaked memo recently revealing Ms Rayner was pressing the Chancellor to pursue tax rises instead of spending cuts. Under the workers' rights reforms, employees will be able to claim sick pay from the first day of their illness, instead of the fourth. The Bill will also extend the powers of unions in the workplace, making it easier for trade groups to organise strikes by weakening the thresholds currently needed to trigger a walkout. Sir Keir Starmer previously made the shake-up, dubbed Labour's 'new deal for working people', as a core part of his manifesto in the lead-up to his victory in the general election. However, it has sparked concern from business chiefs. The survey by the IoD found that more than half (52pc) of company bosses said they would be more likely to invest in automation as a result of the Bill. A quarter of business leaders polled said the Bill made it likely that they would make redundancies in a further blow to the labour market. The IoD, the so-called 'bosses' union', represents 20,000 business leaders across the country, ranging from entrepreneurial small ventures to major corporations. Already, many of those businesses have reported a slowdown in hiring since the Chancellor announced an increase in employers' National Insurance contributions and the minimum wage in the autumn Budget. The rise in labour costs has caused many businesses to cut jobs or scrap hiring plans. Alex Hall-Chen, a principal policy adviser for employment at the IoD, said: 'Government has yet to show that it is listening to the concerns of business about the potential unintended consequences of the Bill as it is currently drafted. 'If there is a silver lining, it is that more employers will invest in automation and other measures which may improve the UK's stagnating productivity levels.' The IoD has called on the Government to make targeted changes to the Bill, which it believes would soften the negative impact of the reforms on hiring. One of its proposed changes includes keeping the existing thresholds for statutory recognition of trade unions. Andrew Griffith, the shadow business secretary, said: 'If Labour ministers had worked in business they would know their choices mean that British workers will lose their jobs to robots and foreign workers. 'Whilst all Labour governments leave unemployment higher than they found it, this time they are actually passing laws to guarantee it.' The warning over the worker rights reforms comes after MPs warned that Britain's high energy bills and poorly coordinated efforts to fund business growth was hitting growth and prosperity. MPs on the business and trade committee said: 'The UK's high electricity prices are damaging the ability of UK businesses to compete, attract investment and decarbonise.' It pointed to evidence from Nissan that the company's Sunderland plant has higher energy bills than any of its other car factories in the world. Liam Byrne, chairman of the committee, said: 'The evidence we've heard from the nation's leading industrialists, scientists, economists and trade unionists is that this moment of history will be lost if the Chancellor's new investment is not matched by a re-making of the British state for a new economic era.' The MPs also called on the Chancellor to act to stop many of the best entrepreneurs from leaving the country for lack of funding to support their rapidly growing businesses. A government spokesman said: 'We've consulted extensively with business on our proposals, and we will continue to work closely with employers to ensure new laws work for them while putting money back into the pockets of working people.' Responding to the select committee report, a government spokesman said ministers were working on 'creating the best possible conditions for the private sector to thrive.' Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Yahoo
a day ago
- Yahoo
I live in a UK beauty spot threatened by Labour's planning bill. It could become a disaster zone
The UK needs houses. The UK needs open spaces, and wilderness. The Labour government's Planning and Infrastructure Bill, which cleared its second reading in the House of Commons with a majority of 256 votes, is only interested in the former. At the end of 2024, Keir Starmer declared that homes must have a higher priority than nature and the environment, as ministers outlined reforms that could allow more building on England's green belt. Housing minister Angela Rayner backed him, asserting that 'we can't have a situation where a newt is more protected than people who desperately need housing'. The populist punditry that would once have been anathema to leaders and politicians in general is designed to detract from the dire consequences if the bill is passed. Lawyers, environmental charities – including the RSPB and Wildlife Trusts – and activists have assessed that more than 5,000 of England's most vulnerable protected natural habitats are at risk of being destroyed by development thanks to Labour's new planning bill, which has been dubbed a 'licence to kill'. These would include many of the UK's favourite holiday destinations, such as areas that fall under designations like Sites of Special Scientific Interest, the Ramsar Convention on Wetlands, Special Protection Areas, Special Areas of Conservation, and much-loved nature-rich parts of National Parks and National Landscapes (formerly AONBs), like the New Forest and the Forest of Bowland. As I live in the Forest of Bowland, I have a stake in this debate. I live in a ribbon of farmland that lies between the Forest of Bowland proper and Pendle Hill, which is part of the same protected National Landscape. South of here is East Lancashire, one of the most densely populated parts of the UK. For residents of Burnley, Blackburn and Accrington, Bowland is the second nearest large green space, after the West Pennine Moors. But Bowland is different. As the 'Forest' in its name suggests it is a former hunting chase, and while there are some pockets of grouse moor management that still rile most ordinary residents and visitors, swathes of the park are open country, ideal for hiking, cycling and family picnics. For decades, access was complicated here, with grouse butts and private lands blocking walkers. Just two decades ago, much of Bowland was opened up to walkers for the first time when the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000 gave general right of access to the public for the purposes of open-air recreation on foot. People can walk, run and – where permitted – ride bikes wherever there are paths. To be candid, Bowland doesn't have Instagram-friendly summits to bag or famous poets' houses to swoon over. It doesn't attract countless car-tourers or caravan-users. It is absolutely nothing like the Lake District or nearby Yorkshire Dales. Many of its upland areas are boggy and only the very well-acquainted would want to negotiate the steep-sided valleys or gully-riven, heather-clad slopes. But the relatively low visitor numbers are great for nature. A sizeable central section of the 300-square-mile National Landscape is designated as a Site of Special Scientific Interest because of the habitats it helps to protect and its internationally important bird populations. One of these is the merlin, the UK's smallest bird of prey (it's only about the size of a thrush). On my last visit I saw one at a distance, seated – ironically – on a grouse butt. During the same half-day visit I also spotted meadow pipits, curlews, skylarks, a stonechat, a greylag goose, and nesting peregrines. The most surprising sighting was a couple of ring ouzels – a red-listed species (that is, 'of high conservation concern') and members of the thrush family that dwells on the uplands. The absolute high point was the bird for which Bowland had become famous: the hen harrier. At first I saw males and females skimming across the top of the heather. This was satisfying enough; hen harriers are among the most persecuted birds in the country. Then I was treated to a sky dance, which is when a male hen harrier performs extraordinary aerial stunts to show off to females, to warn off rival males, or – perhaps – just for fun. The one I saw did Red Arrows-style vertical leaps, back flips, twists and turns, against a clear blue sky. It was one of those moments in nature, all of five minutes, that felt life-enhancing and deeply moving. Does any of this matter as much as the desperate housing situation? Is wildlife really as important as new estates? Is it not time rural England accepted that cities can't accommodate all the new houses and flats? Would Bowland not in fact benefit from development? Am I trying to promote tourism and leisure – arguably luxuries for only some members of society – and ignoring the needs of millions of people? The honest answers to all these questions is clear to anyone who lives in places like the Forest of Bowland. The UK is one of the most nature-depleted nations on earth. How often do we hear now the distressing news that butterflies are disappearing, that once familiar birds have become near-extinct, that hedgehogs are on the same path already taken by red squirrels? Even my greenish patch within the greater Bowland area is, frankly, a classic farm-ageddon of dry-stone wall-to-wall sheep fields, with very limited birdlife and a worrying lack of insect life. The flora that lies outside the sheep-mowed areas is not particularly diverse. The trees are, as often as not, plantations of conifers. This is precisely why we need to protect, at all costs, those areas where species thrive or, at least, have a chance to revive. Bowland is the last place to reimagine how England should reside in the coming decades. As well as being an important, if imperfect, space for nature – as outlined above – it has risible road connections, no railways passing through it, and only a couple of bus services that run infrequently and never after dark. The whole area is poorly supplied with the essential, basic amenities communities need to thrive, from schools and hospitals to theatres and cinemas to local shops and places to eat and drink. Dropping blocks of beige housing – this area seems to specialise in hideous and overpriced executive homes – would at best attract some retirees. Alternatively, if truly affordable housing were built in any useful quantities, the Government would have to seriously consider a new town project of some kind. The nearest urban areas – Preston, Blackburn, Lancaster – currently have deep-set housing, social and transport problems of their own. They all take forever to reach on the winding country lanes that link, eventually, to the jammed and dangerous A59 – the one major trunk road that tears through the Ribble Valley in a blaze of boy-racers, trundling tractors and pelotons of unhappy cyclists. Try this experiment in any of the 5,000-plus precious areas and the results will be the same. The tourism and leisure, exercise and inspiration that ordinary people get from being close to birdsong and surrounded by unsullied, unpeopled emptiness will be sacrificed to cover up the deep tragedy of 40 years (and counting) or poor planning by all shades of government, national and local. Much of British wildlife is threatened. Nightingales, badgers, dormice, otters, butterflies, dragonflies, kingfishers, tufted ducks and egrets are just some of the beautiful creatures that the extant, already damaged natural areas help to conserve. If we wipe these out, and destroy the places they inhabit, what is there for people to do, to see, to admire? The wealthy will go overseas, adding air miles. The rest of us will have nowhere to stretch our legs or lungs. Bowland is no paradise, no idyll. But Labour's short-sighted and unscientific scheme to fill the hills and vales with houses, in the face of criticism from experts from many camps, will turn it into a disaster zone. Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
