To consider any requests received in accordance with Standing Orders.
Minutes:
Cllr Hakata arrived(6.35pm)
The Chair outlined that a deputation had been received in accordance with Committee Standing Orders in relation to item 11, Housing Annual Compliance Statement. Mr Paul Burnham who attended the meeting with Florence Allaway had put this forward.
As with past usual practice, the Cabinet agreed to vary the agenda to take item 11 after item 8 and before item 9.
Mr Paul Burnham addressed the Cabinet meeting, referring to item 11, Housing Annual Compliance Statement and raising concern about some of the fire risk assessment performance and remedial actions contained in the report.
The deputation asserted that the fire risk assessment performance was poor and referenced that 37%of follow up actions were not being logged on the Council system.
The deputation referenced timescales for required remedial actions and contended that there was a failure to assess all communal parts of the blocks and failure to identify or assess accurately combustible materials on external wall systems.
The deputation continued to outline the following, to support their concerns about the timing of the assessments and their conclusions on the poor content of assessments:
- Observation of a downward change in the quality of the Fire Risk Assessments, and there were assessments with no time scales or action plans. The deputation were concluding that the Council were seeking to shift the work away from public oversight.
- Referring to a previous Council house fire from 4 years ago, which had rapid fire spread in an unassessed roof space, the deputation emphasised the importance of needing to check all common parts of Council buildings, but the deputation believed that nothing had been learned from this fire.
- That there had been a mis - rating of blocks, for example John Keats House and Newbury House in Wood Green which were rated at tolerable risk of fire with the deputation concluding that this would mean no Council spend on these blocks. The deputation questioned the reliability of this assessment as these blocks each had six vertical ribbons of combustible panels up the sides with an estimated 360 square metres of combustible material in each case, plus defective fire doors, both the fire doors were flat. The deputation continued to outline that these blocks had front doors that were flat and had doors in communal corridors. These were all in fifteen storey buildings, and each with a single staircase. The deputation felt that this was a mis – rating and placed resident’s lives at risk.
- Noting that intrusive external wall tests were based on test specification PAS 9980, which takes the risk-based approach, the deputation questioned the reliability of this standard and contended that the only satisfactory outcome is certainty on the performance of external walls in fire, with zero risk to life as the principal objective. The deputation assessed that these tests would most likely keep dangerous material on the walls of homes, especially if the current contractor carried out the assessments.
The deputation concluded by requesting that the Council take the actions needed to take off the dangerous panels on Council housing building walls.
The Cabinet Member for Housing and Planning (Deputy Leader) responded to the deputation outlining the following:
- Regarding the 37% of follow up action not logged on the tracker; this was explained to be a consolidation list, which would not include actions that have already been closed or those that were duplicate actions from the previous tracker. There were continuing work streams where a programme was already in place, so the action was marked closed in all cases. In addition, it was noted that an action would remain on the FRA so that the Council would be able to evidence the rationale for closure and also where the action was not on the current action tracker.
- The main recommendation from the audit was in relation to move away from spreadsheets and the Council were doing so through the implementation of computerised compliance management system.
- With regards to the assertion that there were no time scales for remedial actions, this was not correct and that in accordance with PAS79, the current available British standard for fire risk assessments, all of the FRA’s had an action plan in accordance with clause 19 of the standard formulation of an action plan. The plans contained information regarding the appropriate effort and urgency associated with the measured recommendation through the Council’s fire safety policy. There was a fire safety policy, and a scheme of prioritisation that was suitable for the way in which the Council operate, and projects are planned. The standard confirmed that there was no right or wrong scheme of prioritisation, but, whatever scheme was adopted, it needed to be simple to understand, facilitate consistent application and be relatively unambiguous as far as allocation of priorities is concerned.
- The scheme set out clear timescales through four priorities ranging from 24 hour urgent to unlimited. This was as recommended and was like other providers when compared.
- Regarding concerns the failure to assess communal parts of blocks. The Council’s approach was in line with Clause 19.8 of PAS769 which stated “ that where relevant, the action plan should recommend matters for further investigation by the duty holder, and areas that need to be checked by the duty holder (e.g. where relevant information and access to certain areas were not available at the time of the FRA)”. All such issues were logged on the FRA as actions that are tracked and followed up through relevant programmes to access and complete further investigation and surveys.
- Regarding the claim that not accurately assessing combustible materials on external walls, in accordance with Clause 15 of the PAS79 standard (Assessment of fire protection measures), the fire risk assessor needs to make a judgement as to whether it is appropriate to recommend further investigation of wall construction and cladding (usually by others) in the action plan. It was explained that the Council’s risk assessments identify the need or otherwise for this and that data would be used to inform the programme of Fire Risk Appraisals of external walls in accordance with PAS9980 (Fire Risk Appraisal of External Walls and Cladding of Flats). It was noted that the Council were about to award following procurement and are looking to commence in early 2025.
The Cabinet Member concluded her responses by challenging the underlying comment by the deputation that the Council were not elevating spending on remedial actions and ignoring the risks around fire safety works and reminded the deputation of the allocation of £37m for remediation works over the next 5 years.
The Leader thanked the deputation for their presentation.