Building and fire safety - ministerial working group: Grenfell inquiry phase 2 minutes: April 2025

Attendees and apologies

• Chair - Minister for Housing Minister for Victims and Community Safety (MVCS)
• Chris Getty (CG), SFRS 
• Jon Henderson (JH), Director SFRS 
• Kenneth Barbour, SFRS 
• Chris Ashurst (CA), Chair, High Rise Scotland Action Group (HRSAG)
• Hywel Davies (HD), Chartered Association of Building Engineers (CABE)
• Scott McKenzie (SM), Local Authority Building Standards Scotland
• Professor Luke Bisby (LB), University of Edinburgh
• Peter Drummond (PD), RIAS
• Mike Callaghan (MC), COSLA
• Bill Connolly (BC), NHS Assure
• Stephen Garvin (SGa), DD, Building Standards Division
• Lisa Goldie, Head of Construction Procurement Policy Unit
• Neil Mitchell (NM), Head Development Unit, BSD
• Steven Scott, Head Technical Unit, BSD
• Colette Templeton (CT), Development Unit, BSD
• Tom Hardy, Fire and Rescue Unit
• Lisel Porch, Fire and Rescue Unit
• Chris Booth, Fire and Rescue Unit
• Gavin Hammond, Fire and Rescue Unit
• Robert Scott, HM Fire Service Inspectorate
• Joanne Boyle, Cladding Remediation
• Ruth Whatling, Housing
• Cameron Murdoch, Development Unit, BSD
• Frank Doherty, Development Unit, BSD
• Alan Rodden, Practice Unit, BSD

Apologies

• Tony Cain, ALACHO

Items and actions

 Welcome

 The MVCS welcomed everyone advising that the Minister for Housing would join shortly.

 The Scottish Government’s Response Report was published on 25 March. A statement by the Minister for Housing was made to Parliament on the same day and included the launch of the Cladding Remediation – Call for Action. 

While this is the Groups last meeting work to deliver the recommendations will continue and be supported through collaborative working in Scotland and across all 4 nations.

Meeting business

CT covered the business from the last meeting held on 26 February 2025.

All members present agreed the note of the last meeting.

Scottish Governments Response to Grenfell Phase 2 Report

MVCS invited members to reflect on the Scottish Government’s response and the work of the Group.

CA pleased to have been involved. Staggering was the level of deceit uncovered by the Grenfell Inquiry Report and had expected that since the fire those in industry would have learnt lessons. However, this doesn’t appear to have happened and HRSAG are experiencing on-going issues with house builders. Welcome the report and the Scottish Government’s acceptance of the recommendations but concerned that this won’t be enough to change how industry behaves. Reflected on the session with the Kings Counsel to the Grenfell Inquiry and the findings and evidence that the ambition to make a profit overtook the need to deliver safe buildings. While Scotland’s response recognises these behaviours there is a need for a sea change by developers and others in industry.

Recognised importance of the involvement of non-experts and stakeholders in working groups. Particularly where there are issues on housing where homeowners are the main stakeholder. Acknowledged that it can be difficult to harness engagement, and this is an area that will need further consideration. Happy to be involved moving forward.

CA asked for further detail on what wider engagement will be undertaken to support the review of Housing legislation and in particular changes around person-centred risk assessments incorporating evacuation plans for vulnerable people. Can the SG ensure that the views of residents and wider stakeholders will be taken into account in the work being undertaken on person-centred risk assessments.

Officials highlighted that the fire safety team and SFRS will undertake a leafleting campaign aimed at occupants of high-rise buildings to provide as much information as possible regarding fire safety. It is recognised that there is also a need to work with groups to understand how best to engage and identify the best impact. The request for clarity on the person-centred risk assessments will be passed to Housing colleagues.

HD welcomed the report advising that he had three broad areas to mention. It is nearly eight years since the fire at Grenfell Tower the fear is that the awfulness of the event is fading from people’s memories. Maintaining the focus will be a challenge.

The recommendation for a single regulator is not straight forward given the devolved and reserved responsibilities. Testing and certification of construction products will require special care to ensure no conflict of interest which was evident at Grenfell but also around CE markings. CE markings are based on European standards, tests, certification bodies and environments. The UK is no longer in the EU which means we have little say in this work going forward.

An area of work not as developed in Scotland as it is in England is fire risk assessment. The final area of concern is evacuation and the need to look at what is required for the future. Consideration of evacuation strategies which is largely tied to disabled and vulnerable residents is required. Need to consider the older demographic and those who are pregnant or with young infants and children. HD highlighted work he is involved in with the BSI committee and is happy to be involved in future work.

LB advised that he does not agree with the view that any one individual can be considered a single point of failure within government. In the context of the fire at Grenfell and the scale of the disaster there was no single point of failure but a catalogue of failures. Regulation of people and professions is key with recommendation 15 on the licencing of fire engineers and recommendation 10 on fire safety strategies of particular interest. He noted reference in the response report to verifiers and certifiers and asked why the Structural Engineers Registration Scheme (SER) had not been mentioned as an example of how engineering professionals might be registered (in law) to perform a specific design function. This is an example of a scheme that could be used to support regulation within the fire sector.

Recommendation 7 covers new materials in construction and how effective compartmentation in fire safety strategies can be achieved. LB advised that fire spread can occur in buildings designed in accordance with statutory guidance and those working in this area need to have a better understanding of the conditions for the spread of fire. Happy to support future work with BSD officials, SFRS and LABSS.

HD agreed the need to link recommendation 15 and 8 noting that where only the regulation of the fire engineer profession is introduced without applying regulation to the function it would not deliver the necessary outcome. HD undertook to provide an update on work that is being taken forward in England around fire engineers.

CG advised that SFRS are supportive of the response and will continue to work collaboratively. A key requirement is availability of suitable learning on the built environment around key competencies for fire risk assessors. Presently high-rise buildings are exempt from requiring a fire risk assessment under the Fire Scotland Act. However, the introduction of the Single Building Assessment, through the cladding programme requires assessments to be provided. On Personal Emergency Evacuation Plans, SFRS will work with Scottish Government to consider the impact of operational response. Work is already being undertaken on an Engagement Plan to support home safety visits through wider SFRS groups.

JH welcomed the collaborative working that has taken place. SFRS is a learning organisation and will continue to develop and work with partners to support change.

SM welcomed the opportunity for LABSS to participate in the group confirming their committed to the help implement recommendations to strengthen the building standards system. The report reflected the views of verifiers and LABSS has been supporting the work of the Futures Board over the last 5 years. A particular concern for LABSS is the use of Fire engineers to verify complex fire engineer designs where designs do not fully follow the Technical Handbooks guidance. The industry suffers from the influx of unregulated construction products. Monitoring the use of these and ongoing enforcement is dependent on support from local authority trading standard teams however, these are under resourced. Making sure products are properly certified will be a challenge moving forward.

LB commented on references in the report to fire engineers and the fire engineering profession and queried whether these actually exist in the Scottish regulatory context. Members agreed that under regulation they were not entities, and anyone can call themselves a fire engineer and offer fire engineering services which happens regularly. Without a robust definition of a fire engineer, a proper system of recognising who meets that definition, and a mandate for the appointment of those persons in the design of in-scope building, any one of these has limited value.

PD highlighted the regularity of significant incidents. For real and sustainable change there needs to be consistent effort over longer periods of time 3 - 5 years is too short, change requires 10 - 20 years for proper implementation. Cultural change is required, too many hiding behind red tape and targets and prioritising profit over public safety. While the Scottish system seems to be less susceptible to these it does still happen. RIAS will continue to now, and in the future, devote effort to find a sustainable way to make change. Specific concern was raised around the competence of all construction professionals in the UK where there has been a down skilling of all technical matters. PD referred to the procurement system where incompetent companies are appointed again and again. He expressed concern that the compliance plan may be impacted by those putting profit over safety, the independence of the CP manager needs to be clear.

MC advised that COSLA welcome the report. There will be wider oversight on matters of resilience through the Society of Local Authority Chief Executives and Senior Managers (Solace) and ALACHO.

BC said that NHSAssure is supportive of the work. While a lot of the recommendations relate specifically to housing the NHS does have hospitals which fall into the high-risk category. Through NHSAssure work has been undertaken to strengthen competency and compliance. How competency is measured will be important moving forward and NHSAssure has issued new guidance for internal fire risk assessment.

The Chair thanked members for their contributions and support provided on this work. Stephen Garvin was invited to respond to any of the points raised. SGa recognised the valuable contributions from members and the offer for further conversation. There is a need to identify a better way to involve stakeholders in the next stages and discussions will be picked up in the coming months. Work will be undertaken to identify workstreams from the report and the MWG on Building and Fire Safety will oversee progress.

Scotland’s Response to the Grenfell Inquiry Phase 2 Report

NM presented Paper MWG-GI2 25, Summary of Recommendations.

The MWG Grenfell was established in July 2024 by the Cabinet Secretary for Social Justice to consider the Inquiry’s Phase 2 Report. This paper sets out how Scotland will deliver its response. The delivery stage will revert to the MWG Building and Fire Safety. A review of the Group’s remit and membership to widen its scope and enable effective coordination and collaboration across policy areas will be undertaken. Delivery will take place across several areas and further detail is provided in the paper.

There is a need for key delivery mechanisms to be established through procurement and the work on the Chief Construction Officer, on strengthening the building standards system through stronger compliance requirements, a review of building regulations, and work on compartmentation, consideration of how fire strategies can strengthen the system and the need for regulation of those operating in the fire sector. Collaborative work will continue with SFRS and other industry partners as recommendations are delivered, and we look to make improvements in the housing sector with further consideration of person-centred risk assessments. Working with local authority partners roles and guidance will be reviewed, strengthened and where necessary training provided.

The culture we operate in requires some attention, and we will work with the Construction Quality Improvement Collaborative (CQIC) to drive this change and with the Construction Leadership Forum and the Skills Working Group to establish the best approach to wider industry competence. Work is underway on new competency requirements for the building standards profession. Changes to legislation is required and work has begun.

On reserved matters we have commitment from UK Government to work together on these and share approach and learning.

The Chair highlighted the commitment to work with UK Government and other devolved nations as well as the need to develop relationships as quickly as possible.

Delivering on Scotland’s Response – Plan of Action

SGa presented Paper MWG-GI2 26, Taking forward the Recommendations.

The paper provided detail in relation to timescales and early actions. The next phase of delivery is expected to take to 2030 to allow time for legislation change as well as cross border engagement on reserved matters. UK Government will take forward work on a single regulator and as such the timescale will be set by UKG. On recommendations where we have devolved responsibility, we will look to put in place shorter delivery timescales. Change will take time, and the review of Section 2 (Fire) will begin with a call for evidence to inform a full review. The first stage of this expected to take up to a year to complete before a full review and timetable can be prepared.

There will be some early gains with work on construction products and certification being taken forward with the Scottish Building Standards Hub to put in place training for verifiers. On resilience, colleagues in the Civil Contingency team have identified the need to review national guidance that will be undertaken over the next year.

It is proposed that the MWG Building Fire and Building Safety meeting frequence will increase with 4 meetings in the next year. It will have a revised remit and membership as previously identified. This will form part of the proposals to Ministers in the coming weeks setting out next steps and timescales.

The Chair invited members to comment on the paper and the next steps set out.

HD asked for detail on how quickly a review of Section 2 (Fire) can be undertaken and why the report suggests implementing a Chief Construction Adviser will take some time.

SGa advised that a full review of the technical guidance in Section 2 (Fire) may take till 2030 to complete to ensure that it has been done thoroughly. This will consist of a call for evidence (1 year) with output used to inform a full review, and consultation likely to require 3 years before implementation of changes. If the call for evidence identifies a need for any aspect to be reviewed quicker than the Scottish Government will commit to quicker change. The review of Part B in England will need to be taken into account.

On the role of Chief Construction Advisor, the options paper presented to an early meeting of the group set out the need for a full options appraisal and funding to support consideration before a decision can be taken.

SM noted that several recommendations would require changes to legislation and asked if the Scottish Government have a bill to change primary legislation to ensure enforcement from verifiers is enhanced. Details were sought on steps that are being taken to ensure verifiers receive the income from local authorities following increased building warrant fees.

There is a need for changes to primary legislation to allow for the introduction of the new role of Compliance Plan Manager and for changes to strengthen enforcement and sanctions. Change to require fire risk assessments is needed. Work is underway to scope the potential for a bill that will encompass all of the requirements identified.

SGa confirmed that building warrant fees had been increased over the last 2 years as part of a 3-year funding model. Building warrant fees are set nationally and dependant on the value of works and should be used to resource the verification teams. The difficulties in teams receiving funds was understood and work is ongoing to monitor and review the position over the next year. There is a need to review how effective fee increases have been and further discussion will be required with the Minister on further steps we can take to support investment. The Chair echoed his support on fees.

PD asked if the Scottish Government would work with higher education providers to ensure training on life safety critical matters is available across industry? Financial support is needed and would be welcomed. PD also noted that measures should be in place to ensure the new Compliance Plan Manager (CPM) role has some legal independence and protection without fear of interference from clients.

SGa recognised the difficulties and agreed that further discussion was required. In relation to the compliance plan manger NM advised that CPMs need to be impartial and independent and not influenced through contractual relationships.

Next Steps and closing statement

The Chair thanked members and the Minister for Victims and Communities for their contributions over the last 6 months which have supported our response. Delivering change needs to be sustainable and the Scottish Government is committed to strengthening the built environment.

The Chair thanked Officials for the work and planning on the MWG. Members were encouraged to continue to liaise with Scottish Government officials.