I have just spent about 1.5hrs listening to the Housing, Communities and Local Government Committee meeting and I am pleased to say that the comments I have nase over tbe past several months on the cladding issue were completely vindicated by Sir Ken Knight & Dame Judith Hackitt. Whilst they did not acquit themselves well, they were at least correct on the points where they agreed with me,lol 😁.
These points were:
1. The risk of a fire starting and involving cladding is very low.
2. Even this level of risk can be reduced by sprinklers.
3. Cladding does

@JRTripleThreat @Paul12381746671 @danniveeuk I think you are right James. The Gov. is going to have to sort this mess and they already have the budget to do it, they just need to apply a little logic & commonsense. There are several inescapable facts that they should take into account. These are as follows:
1. Statistically @JRTripleThreat @Paul12381746671 @danniveeuk ... external cladding is low risk.

2. The building industry does not have the capacity to remediate cladding in less thsn 2 or 3 decades.

3.Nothing is being said or done about the other fire safety defects.

4. Sprinklers would either extinguish any fire or restrict its spread

Here's a thought. If cladding is low fire risk, and the PM confirmed that it is, why sren't the ... companies that produced and those that installed it, providing statistical evidence to show that this is the case. Could it be that remediation has produced a long-term work stream that they can all make a fortune out of. How much would it change the landscape if it could be

Some kind of building standards have been in place in England since 1845. The Building Regulations as we now know them were first introduced in 1965. Standards have changed regularly since 1965 in order to keep abreast of new materials and building techniques. Not all changes ... have been for the better and some materials have had unforeseen problems and dangers. Having set up the building regs regime, the Government then allowed the the system to be interfered with in a way that reduced control over testing and oversight of construction generally.

My understanding of the Government's intention of using the Fire Safety Bill to make leaseholders "Responsible Persons" under the RR Fire Safety Order 2005 is to secure access to flat entrance doors and external cladding for any necessary enforcement action by the local F&RS. This is a nonsense as that access could be secured by making the leaseholders "Dutyholders", which eould give them responsibility for seeing that any fire safety features within their individual flats are adequately maintained, without making them responsible for paying for it.

@hilarybennmp I never thought I would ever say this, but the Tories are completely untrustworthy. They are letting down thousands of leaseholders and are again threatening to break international law. Dodgy PPE deals, tax savings for dodgy developers. No integrity. What a load of charlatans. @hilarybennmp The real answer to the cladding scandal is to deal with the internal fire precautions first and cladding later. The installation of fire detection & alarm systems and sprinklers, maintenance of passive fire precautions & evacuation procedures will improve safety much more than

@HRRBFireSafety @sued62 @MattHodgesLong @lgahousing Hi Phil, looking at the example guidance, I suppose it could be argued that the cladding breaches the compartmentation of any block fitted with it. Under these circumstances it would seem right to dispense with the "stay put" policy and provide a suitable fire detection & alarm @HRRBFireSafety @sued62 @MattHodgesLong @lgahousing .... system to facilitate a controlled evacuation process. The "cladding" compartmentation breach can be overcome by the installation of sprinklers. The mhlgc acknowledges that in their own studies sprinklers were shown to reduce the risk to life by up to 75% and other studies