There is a very interesting article about the Grenfell disaster in The Spectator this week.
The author points out that while the direct cause of the Grenfell tragedy was the problems with the cladding and evacuating procedures. Behind that lay systemic failures in the Building Regulations that enabled builders and specifiers to use those materials, which, I would remind you, have been used on expensive private flatdevelopments as well as public ownership blocks, with no guidance from Building Regulations at all.
He quotes detailed regulations about the proper height for a doorbell, as distinct from fridge or cooker points, but in the 2 volumes on fire regulations, all it says about evacuating people is simultaneous evacuation of flats is unlikely to be necessary because of compartementalisation and on the thermoplastic materials used in the cladding it simply says ^ No guidance for European fire tests performance is currently available
The question must be asked if the Building Regulations, which run to thousands of pages can stipulate in minute detail where you put lights switches and door bells, why were they so offhand and unthinking when dealing with evacuation procedures and how could they be allowed to dismiss giving instructions for the use of materials now found to be so fire prone, because there weren't any regulations available. Why on earth didn't they commission some.
Anyone who as ever had an erxtension built will know how pettifogging Buildings Inspectors can be over minute action.
It is a case of Parkinson's Law in action. A committee will spend all afternoon arguing over where to site the bicycle shed and pass the new polluting plant on the nod (in the original book it is the nuclear reactor, but times have changed).
People will argue forever about what they know and pass the item they do not understand on the nod because no-one wants to admit their ignorance. This is what has happened with the building regulations and this is the root cause of the Grenfell disaster.
