Remember when Gove kicked Grenfell contractor Rydon off the Help to Buy scheme?
Well the company which supplied the combustible insulation is still raking in sales from the public purse, and bragging about it
Saint Gobain is a global building materials firm, which owns Isover - a company which mostly makes non-combustible insulation. But in the 2000s, it decided it wanted a piece of the plastic insulation market as well, and targetted a purchase of UK company Celotex:
Saint Gobain was aware through its due diligence that this sort of plastic foam insulation could be a fire hazard, particularly due to the toxic smoke which was released when it burned. It went ahead with the acquisition anyway.
Following the take over, Celotex staff were tasked by Saint Gobain with finding new markets for the product. They identified high rise buildings - an area where their material was currently restricted by regulations. They needed to pass a large-scale test to get into the market
This test should have cleared the one specific wall build-up tested for use on high rises. Instead, Celotex - like its main rival Kingspan - deliberately implied that its product was suitable for use on tall buildings in general. Former staff accepted this was 'dishonest'
Not only that - the company had passed the large-scale test with the help of a fire-resisting board to reinforce the external cladding. They made no reference to this board in their marketing or the report of the test. It didn't emerge until the start of the inquiry in 2018
The companies sales people then deliberately targetted Grenfell Tower - sold the material at discount of nearly 50% and requested to use it in marketing as a case study to get more high rise orders in
Saint Gobain continues to be a lobbyist over govt insulation policy, including through the sponsorship APPG. Lobbying was a part of their role before the fire, as Sky News revealed:
Anyway, this company is yet to see any accountability for the Grenfell fire, or to make any major contribution to the remediation of other buildings where its product is installed. I wonder why the govt was content to move on Rydon (a pretty small fish commercially) but not them
Govt lays out plans to accelerate remediation of unsafe buildings:
- Target of 2029 for completion of all above 18m buildings
- All 11m-18m to have a plan by 2029
- Developers to double the pace of remediation of former blocks
- Fines for freeholders who 'sit on their hands'
The plan is apparently going to be backed by investment in enforcement, so that councils, fire authorities and the building safety regulator can step in where buildings aren't being fixed
There are 4,834 buildings around England which have been identified as having unsafe cladding, and an estimated 9,000 in total. So far 1,436 have completed - 30% of those identified and 15% of the probable overall number
Ah christ, I can't even begin with this one, but I do feel the need to say that the paragraph below is demonstrably and very clearly total bullshit. The report quite firmly found the opposite
The report does note that the Fire Safety Order was excluded from the red tape challenge in 2012, but *the building regulations relating to fire safety* were not. This is critically important, because that's where the failures were
Pickles made this argument under evidence (both exempt) and the report specifically rejects it, saying it "served only to reveal the limits of his understanding"
In 1999, a fire at Garnock Court, Irving, Scotland ripped up plastic panels on the outside of a tower block. This came eight years after a similar fire in Knowsley, Merseyside and resulted in a Select Committee inquiry into the risk of cladding fires.
Said Select Committee took evidence and made numerous recommendations. These included:
- All cladding systems to be either non-combustible or justified by large-scale test
- Review of existing cladding systems and periodic risk assessment of them by social landlords
- "Complacent" govt "well aware" of risk of cladding disaster but failed to act
- "Systematic dishonesty" by product manufacturers "very significant reason" for fire
- "Chronic and systemic" fire safety failures by tower's social landlords
Sections on govt reject the evidence of Lord Eric Pickles and severely criticise the "profound" failure to act after the Lakanal House coroner's inquest in 2013 - which it links directly to the deregulatory agenda of govt
Product manufacturers Kingspan, Celotex and Arconic come in for severe criticism, for their "dishonest" actions which "misled" the market and certifiers about the true nature of the materials they sold
Been at the Met Police briefing on Grenfell investigation:
- Charging files will not go to prosecutors until 2026
- Decision on charges not until end of 2026
- Trials will not start for at least six months after that
Will be over a decade after fire before anyone is in court
Offences under investigation are corporate manslaughter, gross negligence manslaughter, perverting the course of justice, misconduct in a public office, serious fraud and various health and safety and fire/building act offences
Met has 19 organisations as suspects and 58 individuals. Would not be drawn at all on who or which they are. Asked directly about Kingspan, Celotex and Arconic re fraud, and elected officials (local or national) re misconduct detectives neither confirmed nor denied
London Fire Brigade says it has completed all 29 of the recommendations made at the end of the Grenfell Tower Inquiry's first phase - overall good news, but some additional thoughts
A major philosophical thrust of the Phase One recs was to ensure a 'Plan B' exists if a building designed for 'stay put' failed in the future. Continuing to rely on this strategy for so long was a major and tragic part of the reason why the number of fatalities was so high...
... at Grenfell compared to other cladding fires worldwide. Some of the things the LFB has done are designed to address this - the use of smoke hoods to help residents escape, higher ladders, better training for commanders, new radios, policies etc