Expert warns against quick-fix online fire safety training years after Grenfell
Dame Judith Hackitt criticised 'quick fixes' which she said will not work towards rebuilding public confidence in an industry which has been heavily criticised since Grenfell, and urged businesses to see proper training as an investment rather than a cost.
She will chair the first formal meeting of the Building Control Independent Panel this month, set up to look at whether changes are needed to the current system across England.
The Grenfell Tower Inquiry found an issue with building control bodies tending to co-operate with companies who wanted their proposals to be approved, instead of enforcing building regulations 'rigorously'.
The inquiry recommended an independent panel look at whether it is in the public interest for building control functions to be performed by those with a commercial interest in the process, or whether all such functions should be carried out by a national authority.
The panel is due to present a report to the Government in autumn and Dame Judith suggested it will be as 'hard-hitting' as her 2018 one.
That report identified 'deep flaws' within the building regulations system, as she argued ignorance and indifference had created a 'race to the bottom', where there was a desire to do things 'as quickly and cheaply as possible rather than to deliver quality homes which are safe for people to live in'.
Asked what might be expected from her report this year, Dame Judith told the PA news agency: 'I think my track record speaks for itself, doesn't it? I'm unlikely to change my approach.
'I was honest and hard-hitting in my report seven years ago. I've continued to keep the pressure on government and on industry for the last seven years. I see no reason to change.
'I am determined to drive through this culture change that is needed across the whole of the built environment.'
Next month will see bereaved and survivors mark eight years since the fire in west London in June 2017, which resulted in 72 people losing their lives.
Asked what her message is to the many who say they have still not seen justice delivered or enough wholesale change in the system so many years on, Dame Judith said: 'I share their frustration that it's taking so long, but that's no reason to give up.
'We will get there. We will drive this change. We owe it to the people who lost their lives to do that.'
Dame Judith said she is 'absolutely confident that things are better now than they were in 2017' after building control came under the Building Safety Regulator which launched in 2023.
She added: 'We have moved from where we were. Is that enough? Is there more we need to do?
'I'm not going to speculate until we have looked at the evidence, but we will do that at pace, and we will deliver our report before the end of the year.'
Dame Judith urged 'more people to take personal responsibility and leadership in different parts of this built environment sector' after recently visiting a fire door safety centre which she praised for its efforts.
She said businesses must understand that proper training is essential as 'money spent on cheap training and substandard training is money wasted'.
Dame Judith added: 'Spending it on this sort of training is an investment in your people. It's not a cost.'
She praised Fire Door Maintenance Training and Development, which describes itself as the largest such practical training centre in the UK, saying she saw a 'real sense of purpose' in the people training there.
Dame Judith said that despite the sector-wide knowledge of the need for thorough training in aspects such as ensuring fire doors are properly maintained, the take-up of such training has been 'very mixed, very variable, and some of the training courses that have sprung up, I think, are of dubious quality to say the least, particularly online ones'.
She referenced one-hour online video training which might promise someone competency once they had completed it but added: 'That's not the case.'
Dame Judith added: 'Let's be clear, there's a place for online training and familiarisation.
'But to get people to the level of competence that they need to be on things that are safety critical, like fire doors, that practical training with someone assessing whether you are doing the job properly and are competent to do the job properly, is crucial.
'We're trying to rebuild public confidence here in an industry, and quick fixes aren't going to do it.
'You know, a quick training session online in many cases, is just not enough.'
She highlighted Fire Door Maintenance as 'what good looks like' in an industry where many others have been slow to act and change.
Nicola John, managing director at the firm which sees people training in realistic settings with doors and corridors, said they wanted to offer a 'practical training facility for practical people doing a practical job' in contrast to online courses alone.
Ms John added: 'The issue that we have is that it's not currently mandated, so we only attract the people who have the same mindset currently.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Guardian
2 hours ago
- The Guardian
Cuts to BBC World Service funding would ‘make us less safe', MPs tell ministers
Hours before Rachel Reeves stood up to deliver her budget last year, government officials were still in tense negotiations with bosses at the BBC over how much the World Service would be given. The amount they were haggling over was relatively small – just £5.5m out of a total budget of £400m. But BBC chiefs warned the government that if the cuts were imposed on them, they would have to close several language stations in parts of the world where the Russians already hold influence. Doing so would be a gift to Moscow, they added. The argument worked, and the BBC got the extra cash it was asking for. But executives at the corporation worry that their appeal to Britain's soft power might not prove so effective this time, especially in light of the government's recent cuts to the aid budget. 'The government is asking the World Service to model cuts that would definitely mean having to close important parts of the service,' said one person familiar with the negotiations. 'The BBC's lobbying worked last time, but this round is proving harder.' The Guardian recently revealed the government had asked the World Service to model two scenarios: one where their funding remains the same in cash terms; and one where it would be cut by 2% each year in cash terms. Each scenario would see the budget fall behind inflation, and could mean it ends up to £70m short of what its bosses believe it needs. Jonathan Munro, the global director of the BBC, said: 'When it comes to international impact and influence, the BBC World Service is the UK's most powerful asset. 'While we currently deliver news in 42 languages to over 400m people every week, at the greatest value for money compared to other international news providers, we are ambitious about going further to provide independent news where there is a vital need.' The service is just one institution promoting Britain's soft power abroad, but it is arguably the most powerful, reaching 450m people a week, according to the broadcaster's own figures. When pollsters asked people from around the world about various British exports and organisations, the BBC came out well ahead of any other, with nearly 80% having heard of it and nearly 50% saying it made them feel more positively about the UK. In comparison, only about 55% had heard of the monarchy, and only 25% said it made them view the UK more favourably. According to the same research, which the BBC commissioned, the organisation is also the most trusted of any global news outlet, ahead of CNN, Al Jazeera and Sky News. Jonathan McClory, the managing partner at Sanctuary Counsel and an expert on soft power, said: 'It's a gratuitous accident of history that we have the BBC World Service. You couldn't recreate it if you were starting from scratch, but it enables us to shape a global information landscape and promote British values, such as a free press, transparency and broad support for human rights.' Ministers say they understand this. Jenny Chapman, the international development minister, told the Guardian: 'The World Service do tremendous work, work that nobody else can do … They are soft power, an absolute gold standard resource. We respect that.' But supporters of the organisation fear that budgetary pressure has left its influence on the wane. In 2014, the coalition government stopped funding the world service, leaving the BBC to pay for it purely out of the licence fee. Two years later the government restored some direct funding, which was ringfenced for certain language services, but at a much lower level. Most of the service's £400m budget still comes from licence fee money – a situation the director general, Tim Davie, has warned is not sustainable, especially when domestic operations are being cut. Both scenarios that the government has asked BBC bosses to draw up for the World Service would involve closing certain parts of it. While it will not shut down operations in entire countries, BBC insiders say they are likely to have to close certain foreign language services where there are relatively few people who speak that language. Those services in places close to Russia – which corporation bosses warned last year would be closed if more money was not forthcoming – are once more on the chopping block. The problem with closing operations, even those with relatively small audiences, is that it can give Russia and China a perfect opportunity to push their own propaganda. When the BBC ended its long-wave BBC Arabic radio service in Lebanon, for example, Russian-backed media took over that exact frequency and began broadcasting on it instead. And on the day that thousands of pagers used by Hezbollah all simultaneously exploded in Lebanon, BBC monitors said they picked up what Davie later called 'unchallenged [Russian] propaganda' on that station. The BBC's research has found that its trust level was largely unchanged from four years ago at 78%. Trust in both Russia Today and China Global Television Network had jumped however, from 59% to 71% and from 62% to 70%, respectively. Last week Caroline Dinenage, the Conservative chair of the culture, media and sport select committee, wrote to cabinet ministers warning: 'Without sufficient resources, it could lead to more situations where the world service withdraws or reduces its services and Russian state media fills the vacuum, as in Lebanon. 'Ahead of the spending review, I invite you to reassure us that the government is not seeking to make a 2% cut to its funding of the World Service, at a time when it is vital to our strategic priorities, and that the government will not require cuts that will lead to the BBC having to close one or more language services.' Such arguments have worked with Reeves and her officials in the past. But the chancellor is hemmed in like never before, having already promised major funding increases for defence, the health service and local transport. Dinenage said: 'Ministers have told us that the world service bolsters UK security. Cutting its funding now would undoubtably make us all less safe.' A Foreign Office spokesperson said: 'Despite a tough fiscal situation, we continue to back the World Service, providing a large uplift of £32.6m this year alone, taking our total funding to £137m. 'The work they do as an independent and trusted broadcaster is highly valued by this government, as our continued financial support shows.'
The Herald Scotland
2 hours ago
- The Herald Scotland
Justice Jackson warns Supreme Court is sending a 'troubling message'
"It is particularly startling to think that grants of relief in these circumstances might be (unintentionally) conveying not only preferential treatment for the Government but also a willingness to undercut both our lower court colleagues' well-reasoned interim judgments and the well-established constraints of law that they are in the process of enforcing," Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson wrote. Jackson was dissenting from the conservative majority's decision to give Elon Musk's Department of Government Efficiency complete access to the data of millions of Americans kept by the U.S. Social Security Administration. Once again, she wrote in a dissent joined by Justice Sonia Sotomayor, "this Court dons its emergency responder gear, rushes to the scene, and uses its equitable power to fan the flames rather than extinguish them." A district judge had blocked DOGE's access to "personally identifiable information" while assessing if that access is legal. Jackson said a majority of the court didn't require the administration to show it would be "irreparably harmed" by not getting immediate access, one of the legal standards for intervention. "It says, in essence, that although other stay applicants must point to more than the annoyance of compliance with lower court orders they don't like," she wrote, "the Government can approach the courtroom bar with nothing more than that and obtain relief from this Court nevertheless." A clock, a mural, a petition: Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson's chambers tell her story In a brief and unsigned decision, the majority said it weighed the "irreparable harm" factor along with the other required considerations of what's in the public interest and whether the courts are likely to ultimately decide that DOGE can get at the data. But the majority did not explain how they did so. Jackson said the court `plainly botched' its evaluation of a Trump appeal Jackson raised a similar complaint when the court on May 30 said the administration can revoke the temporary legal status of hundreds of thousands of Cubans, Haitians, Nicaraguans and Venezuelans living in the United States. Jackson wrote that the court "plainly botched" its assessment of whether the government or the approximately 530,000 migrants would suffer the greater harm if their legal status ends while the administration's mass termination of that status is being litigated. Jackson said the majority undervalued "the devastating consequences of allowing the Government to precipitously upend the lives and livelihoods of nearly half a million noncitizens while their legal claims are pending." The majority did not offer an explanation for its decision. More Supreme Court wins for Trump In addition to those interventions, the Supreme Court recently blocked a judge's order requiring DOGE to disclose information about its operations, declined to reinstate independent agency board members fired by Trump, allowed Trump to strip legal protections from 350,000 Venezuelans and said the president can enforce his ban on transgender people serving in the military. Jackson disagreed with all of those decisions. The court's two other liberal justices - Sotomayor and Elena Kagan - disagreed with most of them. More: Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson can throw a punch. Literally. The court did hand Trump a setback in May when it barred the administration from quickly resuming deportations of Venezuelans under a 1798 wartime law. Two of the court's six conservative justices - Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito - dissented. Decisions are expected in the coming weeks on other Trump emergency requests, including whether the president can dismantle the Education Department and can enforce his changes to birthright citizenship.
Scotsman
2 hours ago
- Scotsman
SNP ministers accused of secrecy over £2m Grangemouth carbon capture study
Sign up to our Politics newsletter Sign up Thank you for signing up! Did you know with a Digital Subscription to The Scotsman, you can get unlimited access to the website including our premium content, as well as benefiting from fewer ads, loyalty rewards and much more. Learn More Sorry, there seem to be some issues. Please try again later. Submitting... SNP ministers have been accused of secrecy after refusing to publish a £2 million study into whether a pipeline that will connect Grangemouth with a key carbon capture project will fall flat. The 'alarming' move comes as Chancellor Rachel Reeves is poised to confirm at her spending review this week whether the Acorn carbon capture project for St Fergus, near Peterhead, will finally receive the funding it needs to get off the ground. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Carbon capture technology is seen as being essential to Scotland and the UK reaching net zero | POOL/AFP via Getty Images The previous Conservative UK government only granted the Acorn project reserve status and ploughed funding into carbon capture and storage projects south of the Border instead. This comes as finance secretary Shona Robison asked Chancellor Rachel Reeves to award funding for the Acorn carbon capture project and to ensure Scotland receives a share of GB Energy funding that matches its contribution to UK clean energy goals, ahead of the UK spending review. She also called on the Chancellor to 'prioritise growth' and to fully fund the employer national insurance increase for Scotland's public services. Ms Robison urged the UK Government to abandon some of its 'damaging policies' such as cuts to welfare support for disabled people, to scrap the two-child benefit cap and to reinstate a universal winter fuel payment, ahead of the review on 11 June. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad She said the Scottish Government had not yet been provided with 'clarity' on spending priorities. The delays to the project has been partly blamed for SNP ministers rolling back climate targets, with the Acorn plans initially hoped to be up and running before 2030. But now, the Scottish Government has refused to release the results of a feasibility study into the pipeline, despite confirming the document was completed in March. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad SNP ministers handed over £2m to National Gas last year to assess whether it was possible to turn an old 174-mile gas pipeline that runs from Grangemouth in the Central Belt to St Fergus, Aberdeenshire into 'Europe's largest carbon capture pipeline'. Officials have refused to release details of what the study shows, despite campaigners requesting it under Freedom of Information law. Acting Energy Secretary Gillian Martin during a visit to drone manufacturer Flowcopter in Loanhead, to mark the publication of the Scottish Government's Green Industrial Strategy | Andrew Milligan/PA Wire Concerns have been raised about carbon capture technology, which campaigners warn simply allows oil and gas companies to continue burning fossil fuels. Under the technology, harmful carbon emissions are prevented from being released into the atmosphere and instead trapped and injected into the seabed. Fears have been raised about leakage, with the technology not yet tested at commercial scale. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad During a trip to St Fergus in 2023, then prime minister Rishi Sunak also raised concerns about the technology, warning that it would be a boost 'if we can get it to work'. Now, campaigners have warned that any further public funds for the Acorn project would benefit major oil companies, including Shell, which have made £90 billion profits in recent years and Harbour Energy who recently laid off 250 staff despite paying out almost £1bn to shareholders in the past three years. The UK government has already pledged £22bn to the carbon capture industry, a move which the Public Accounts Committee branded a 'high risk gamble' that could push up household energy bills. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad First Minister John Swinney has vowed to increase the public handout from the Scottish Government for the Acorn project beyond £80m. But that is contingent on the UK government first backing the project - amid doubts the funding could be axed in the spending review amid a perilous economic backdrop. Friends of the Earth Scotland's climate campaigner Alex Lee said: 'The public are again being forced to pay for the oil industry's greenwashing carbon capture plans, and it is deeply alarming that we don't even get to see what our money has unearthed. 'Plans to run a 280km high pressure carbon pipeline through towns and villages are fraught with danger and uncertainty because this has never been done before in Scotland. Have the people who live along the route of this pipeline proposal been informed of the risks and consulted on these proposals? Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad 'It is a farce that ministers have been talking up carbon capture for 20 years and only now are they checking whether it would even be feasible to do this. 'When working climate solutions are crying out for funding, there should be no public investment in dodgy scams like carbon capture.' Chancellor of the Exchequer Rachel Reeves and Energy Security and Net Zero Secretary Ed Miliband during a meeting of the National Wealth Fund Taskforce in 11 Downing Street. PIC: Justin Tallis/PA Wire Scottish Greens co-leader Patrick Harvie said: 'The Greens have always been sceptical about putting too much reliance on untested carbon capture technology, and we are firmly opposed to using it as an excuse for more fossil fuel extraction or burning. 'Even its advocates don't think it will make any impact on our emissions in the near future, so the priority has to be the action we know how to take right now - cutting road and air traffic levels, insulating homes and shifting to clean heating, and supporting communities to change land use. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad 'Climate action isn't rocket science and we don't need to wait for new technologies to get off the drawing board - we just need to do what we know works.' A Scottish Government spokesperson said: 'The Scottish Government provided National Gas with a £2m grant to support a study to explore the technical feasibility and viability of repurposing an existing gas pipeline for the transportation of carbon dioxide. 'The conclusions of the study were requested under environmental information regulations. However, for reasons of commercial confidentiality these can't be released. 'The Scottish Government fully supports the deployment of carbon capture and storage (CCS), and we have been advised by the Climate Change Committee that they 'cannot see a route to net zero that does not include CCS'.' Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad A UK government spokesperson said: 'We are delivering first of a kind carbon capture projects in the UK, supporting thousands of jobs across the country, reigniting industrial heartlands and tackling the climate crisis.
