Cladding written answers March 21
Monitoring the safety of London’s Built Environment
Question No: 2021/0871
Andrew Dismore
The Fire, Resilience and Emergency Planning (FREP) Committee has highlighted repeatedly the challenges of London’s built environment post-Grenfell. The truth is that we don’t know the extent of the danger, but most recent estimates from MHCLG suggest there are 62,000 buildings in London that pose a high risk of fire. How does your budget support the work by LFB which monitors fire safety issues in London’s built environment in order to protect those whose buildings have been identified as having some form of dangerous cladding?
Answer for Monitoring the safety of London’s Built Environment
The Mayor
Last updated: 02 March, 2021
Officers are drafting a response
Monitoring the safety of London’s Built Environment
The Mayor
Last updated: 20 March, 2021
Within London, MHCLG have identified in excess of 62,000 premises that they consider may fall within ‘higher risk’ categories and fall within the scope of the new building safety regulator. That includes care homes, sheltered housing blocks, and hospitals where the vulnerability of the residents is a crucial factor. Last year, London Fire Brigade was allocated £5.5 million from the Protection Board. This supports the Building Risk Review Programme (£2.3m), whereby all high-rise residential premises are being checked and inspected, and Protection Programme (£3.2m) which is being used to bolster other protection activities. The resourcing consequence of what the Brigade now knows about the built environment remains a challenge and they would like to see the current protection grant continue and for the funding requirements to be consolidated for the longer term. I will continue to do all that I can to ensure that London Fire Brigade is properly funded to keep Londoners safe.
Question No: 2021/0879
Andrew Dismore
Recent reports state that RICS is consulting on the use of EWS1 forms, particularly where there is no cladding visible on a high-rise building. How is it anticipated this will impact upon London and the work of the LFB?
Answer for EWS1 changes (3)
The Mayor
Last updated: 02 March, 2021
Officers are drafting a response
EWS1 changes (3)
The Mayor
Last updated: 20 March, 2021
I wrote to the Secretary of State about the EWS1 system in September 2020 and asked for clarity on where and when EWS1 forms should be required.
However, until full funding is available for all remedial works and remediation can be taken forward at a faster pace, London Fire Brigade does not anticipate that there will be a significant impact on their workload.
COVID-19 and the GTI phase 1 LFB recommendations
Question No: 2021/0881
Andrew Dismore
How has the second wave of COVID-19 impacted on the implementation of the GTI phase recommendations? What adaptations have had to be made?
Answer for COVID-19 and the GTI phase 1 LFB recommendations
The Mayor
Last updated: 02 March, 2021
Officers are drafting a response
COVID-19 and the GTI phase 1 LFB recommendations
The Mayor
Last updated: 20 March, 2021
The most significant impact has been on the delivery of face-to-face training related to the revised high-rise firefighting and fire survival guidance policies, and the new evacuation and rescue policy. The face-to-face training for watch and senior officers continued as planned until London was designated a Tier 4 area, when it was paused along with all other training. At this stage 1,000 delegates had received training from a max potential of 1,440 station-based officers. Following further risk assessment, the face-to-face training re-commenced on 5 January (but with reduced attendance to a maximum of 16 per day). A number of sessions have also been delivered virtually as a pilot. As of the 16 February, 95 per cent of watch and senior officers have undertaken the face-to-face training and 92 of 141 guided learning exercises have been completed at stations.
Question No: 2021/0890
Andrew Dismore
How many residential buildings in London are currently operating waking watches? Please provide a borough by borough breakdown of the numbers.
Answer for London’s Waking Watches (1)
The Mayor
Last updated: 02 March, 2021
Officers are drafting a response
London’s Waking Watches (1)
The Mayor
Last updated: 20 March, 2021
London Fire Brigade (LFB) collects data for buildings with a temporary suspension of ‘stay put’ where an interim simultaneous evacuation strategy has been put in place. Residential buildings operating a waking watch or evacuation management system could be in the form of personnel on site or a remote monitoring system, but the arrangement is for the Responsible Person to determine guided by a competent fire safety professional. The figures can change on a daily basis when interim measures are required, or the building is remediated and no longer requires the interim measures. The number of buildings where an interim simultaneous evacuation strategy has been put in place, as at 14 February 2021, are presented by borough in the table below.
| Local Authority | Blocks |
| Barking and Dagenham | 14 |
| Barnet | 12 |
| Bexley | 3 |
| Brent | 42 |
| Bromley | 4 |
| Camden | 17 |
| City of London | 2 |
| Croydon | 29 |
| Ealing | 14 |
| Enfield | 0 |
| Greenwich | 57 |
| Hackney | 60 |
| Hammersmith and Fulham | 10 |
| Haringey | 7 |
| Harrow | 2 |
| Havering | 8 |
| Hillingdon | 3 |
| Hounslow | 17 |
| Islington | 27 |
| Kensington and Chelsea | 14 |
| Kingston upon Thames | 4 |
| Lambeth | 22 |
| Lewisham | 32 |
| Merton | 4 |
| Newham | 26 |
| Redbridge | 6 |
| Richmond | 0 |
| Southwark | 59 |
| Sutton | 3 |
| Tower Hamlets | 114 |
| Waltham Forest | 5 |
| Wandsworth | 31 |
| Westminster | 34 |
| Total | 682 |
Question No: 2021/0891
Andrew Dismore
Please provide a breakdown of the residential buildings in London currently operating waking watches by height (under 11m, 11-18m and over 18m).
Answer for London’s Waking Watches (2)
The Mayor
Last updated: 02 March, 2021
Officers are drafting a response
London’s Waking Watches (2)
The Mayor
Last updated: 20 March, 2021
London Fire Brigade (LFB) collects data for buildings with a temporary suspension of ‘stay put’ policy where an interim simultaneous evacuation strategy has been put in place. Residential buildings operating a waking watch or evacuation management system could be in the form of personnel on site or a remote monitoring system, but the arrangement is for the Responsible Person to determine guided by a competent fire safety professional. The figures can change on a daily basis when iterim measures are required or the building is remediated and no longer require the interim measures. The number of building where an interim simultaneous evacuation strategy has been put in place, as at 14 February 2021, broken down into height parameter, are set out in the table below.
| Building Height | Residential buildings in London |
| Under 11m | 13 |
| 11-18m | 87 |
| Over 18m | 582 |
| Total | 682 |
Auditing London’s High-Rise Buildings
Question No: 2021/1115
Andrew Dismore
How many high-rise audits has London Fire Brigade undertaken since 2016? Please provide a year-by-year breakdown.
Auditing London’s High-Rise Buildings
The Mayor
Last updated: 20 March, 2021
The number of fire safety audits in high-rise buildings of 18 metres and above that London Fire Brigade has undertaken in each calendar year since 2016 is set out in the table below:
| Calendar year | Fire safety audit |
| 2016 | 941 |
| 2017 | 1418 |
| 2018 | 1258 |
| 2019 | 988 |
| 2020 | 1964 |
| 2021 (current year in progress) | 348 |
| Total | 6917 |
Question No: 2021/1123
Andrew Dismore
What work has been undertaken to identify venues for high rise training exercises?
High-rise training (1)
The Mayor
Last updated: 20 March, 2021
London Fire Brigade (LFB) has partnered with the London Borough of Havering to secure empty buildings awaiting redevelopment to use for training. For example, LB Havering provided an empty 12 storey residential block to use free of charge for four months for training purposes, prior to the site being demolished as part of a Council-led regeneration scheme. The borough is also working with LFB to identify landlords within the borough that might have empty buildings that would be similarly appropriate for Brigade use. LFB is also in conversation with three further boroughs about entering a similar partnership.
LFB needs the support of local authorities across London to deliver training which will help to keep London’s communities safe and is seeking to get an agreement in place with all boroughs to identify suitable sites. The Brigade recently met with London Councils to discuss how this could be taken forward.
Question No: 2021/1124
Andrew Dismore
When do you expect high rise training exercises, including simultaneous evacuation, to recommence?
High-rise training (2)
The Mayor
Last updated: 20 March, 2021
Good progress is being maintained on delivery of station-based lectures which will conclude on 31 March 2021 and complete Phase 1 of the rollout. Phase 2 will commence from April 2021, with eight pumping appliances allocated every weekday for station-based staff to participate in practical Fire Survival Guidance and High Rise sessions at local stations and venues. These have been designed and developed flexibly for delivery in a Covid-secure environment. Larger scale exercises are currently scheduled for delivery in June and July for organisational assurance. Further large-scale exercises will be scheduled throughout the 18-month Phase 2 delivery period, as additional venues are secured.
Response to Recent HMICFRS report
Question No: 2021/1128
Andrew Dismore
What is your response to the recent HMICFRS inspection of the London Fire Brigade’s progress to implement the recommendations from the Grenfell Tower Inquiry’s Phase 1 report?
Response to Recent HMICFRS report
The Mayor
Last updated: 20 March, 2021
The Phase 1 report highlighted some serious issues for London Fire Brigade, for fire and rescue services more generally, and the failings in the building itself. The findings from the report published by Her Majesty’s Inspectorate for Constabulary and Fire & Rescue Services (HMICFRS) in February reflected the good progress made by London Brigade, noting that there has been “a sustained focus and effort on understanding the lessons from the fire and acting where the inquiry recommended it should.” The Inspectorate was also clear that there is still work for the Brigade to do. Since the HMICFRS inspection on progress was carried out last year, the Brigade has completed two more of the recommendations and the majority of those due for completion by the end of March 2021 remain on track. I remain committed to working with the London Fire Commissioner to ensure the recommendations are implemented as soon as possible.
Question No: 2021/1129
Andrew Dismore
Is the London Fire Brigade on track to complete all of the 17 recommendations from the Grenfell Tower Inquiry’s Phase 1 report it has promised by March 2021?
GTI phase 1 recommendations
The Mayor
Last updated: 20 March, 2021
London Fire Brigade expects that 17 of the 29 recommendations (59 per cent) will be completed by the end of March 2021, and 19 by the end of June 2021 (66 per cent).
My monthly report detailing progress against the recommendations can be found here: https://www.london.gov.uk/about-us/mayor-london/grenfell-tower-inquiry-mayoral-updates
Question No: 2021/1131
Andrew Dismore
The Fire, Resilience and Emergency Planning Committee’s report ‘Cladding crisis and its impact on Londoners’ recommended you provide a hub for London leaseholders and residents affected by cladding and fire safety issues to access legal advice and mental health support. In your response you said that the Homes for Londoners Board has called on the Government to review the role and remit of LEASE, that exists to support leaseholders with fire safety issues, and that you will continue to support leaseholders and residents impacted by the building safety crisis and lobby Government for essential change. Does this include the provision of a hub for London leaseholders and residents as recommended in the report?
Hub for London’s Leaseholders
The Mayor
Last updated: 20 March, 2021
I have called for the Government to review the role and remit of LEASE for leaseholders in unsafe buildings. Leaseholders must have access to the necessary support and legal advice they need at this distressing time. I would expect the review to draw out the exact form that LEASE should take in order to deliver this.
Waking Watches in London’s Boroughs
Question No: 2021/1132
Andrew Dismore
Please provide a borough-by-borough breakdown of the number of buildings operating waking watches in London. Please also breakdown the numbers for buildings over 18m and under 18m in each borough.
Waking Watches in London’s Boroughs
The Mayor
Last updated: 20 March, 2021
London Fire Brigade (LFB) collects data for buildings with a temporary suspension of ‘stay put’ where an interim simultaneous evacuation strategy has been put in place. Residential buildings operating a waking watch or evacuation management system could be in the form of personnel on site or a remote monitoring system, to be determined by the Responsible Person with guidance from a competent fire safety professional. The figures can change on a daily basis when interim measures are required, or the building is remediated and no longer requires the interim measures. The number of buildings where an interim simultaneous evacuation strategy has been put in place, as at 14 March 2021, are presented by borough and by height in the table below.
| Local Authority | Total blocks | Over 18 metres | Under 18 metres |
| Barking and Dagenham | 17 | 14 | 3 |
| Barnet | 12 | 9 | 3 |
| Bexley | 3 | 3 | 0 |
| Brent | 41 | 29 | 12 |
| Bromley | 4 | 2 | 2 |
| Camden | 23 | 20 | 3 |
| City of London | 1 | 1 | 0 |
| Croydon | 30 | 19 | 11 |
| Ealing | 15 | 11 | 4 |
| Enfield | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Greenwich | 61 | 55 | 6 |
| Hackney | 60 | 50 | 10 |
| Hammersmith and Fulham | 10 | 8 | 2 |
| Haringey | 13 | 7 | 6 |
| Harrow | 2 | 2 | 0 |
| Havering | 8 | 8 | 0 |
| Hillingdon | 8 | 7 | 1 |
| Hounslow | 17 | 14 | 3 |
| Islington | 46 | 38 | 8 |
| Kensington and Chelsea | 14 | 9 | 5 |
| Kingston upon Thames | 4 | 4 | 0 |
| Lambeth | 26 | 18 | 8 |
| Lewisham | 32 | 28 | 4 |
| Merton | 4 | 3 | 1 |
| Newham | 33 | 30 | 3 |
| Redbridge | 6 | 4 | 2 |
| Richmond | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Southwark | 60 | 49 | 11 |
| Sutton | 3 | 3 | 0 |
| Tower Hamlets | 126 | 122 | 4 |
| Waltham Forest | 9 | 9 | 0 |
| Wandsworth | 30 | 29 | 1 |
| Westminster | 32 | 30 | 2 |
| Total | 750 | 635 | 115 |
Cladding Question Time for London
Question No: 2021/1133
Andrew Dismore
Manchester Cladiators held a ‘Cladding Question Time’ for leaseholders with invited panellists including the Minister for Building Safety. Will you commit to organising a similar cladding question time for the thousands of London leaseholders caught up in the cladding scandal in order to bring their concerns directly to Government?
Cladding Question Time for London
The Mayor
Last updated: 20 March, 2021
I am very grateful for the campaigning that leaseholders across the country have been doing since the tragedy at Grenfell. For the last three and half years, I have been supporting them by lobbying the Government for leaseholders to be protected from the costs of making their buildings safe.
I would be very supportive of campaigners in London holding a similar event. As you know, prior to the pandemic I was providing London leaseholders with a City Hall meeting room quarterly to allow them to organise. The Government must listen to the concerns of leaseholders and take decisive steps to ensure this crisis is resolved once and for all.
Question No: 2021/1134
Andrew Dismore
As the FBU reports on twitter: “At the Grenfell Tower Inquiry, The manufacturers of Grenfell’s flammable insulation, Kingspan, admitted to wrongly using a failed fire test to claim their products were safe. In 2013, ‘desktop assessments’ were introduced to prove products were safe to be installed on high-rise properties. But these ‘desktop assessments’ aren’t proper tests. They are only assessments that determine how safe a cladding system is *if* tested. Kingspan went onto use an insulation system that had **FAILED** a fire test to produce **29** of these ‘desktop assessments’.
The failed fire test was carried out by the once public Building Research Establishment (BRE), the industry regulator that became a profit-seeking private entity in 1997. Video evidence showed flames spread over the 8-metre rig in 43 minutes, a failed result. But, after receiving a complaint from Kingspan, the BRE issued a report which did not make clear the test had failed. This report was used by Kingspan as the basis for 29 ‘desktop assessments’ instead, allowing the company to mislead clients on the safety of its product.”
If the inquiry finds that this is an accurate interpretation of what Kingspan did, and how the BRE operates, does this not indicate that the industry regulator is not fit for purpose and should be replaced? Does it also show the folly of privatising regulators?
Grenfell Tower Inquiry [1]
The Mayor
Last updated: 20 March, 2021
Evidence heard at the Grenfell Tower Inquiry so far has indeed brought into question the robustness of testing and governance measures in place at BRE. It is clear that wholesale change is needed. Ahead of the Inquiry findings and recommendations on this point, I believe all options should remain on the table, including steps by Government to ensure BRE has a clearer public interest role in enhancing building safety.
I have long called for the need for a more effective specification and testing regime for construction products with complete transparency allowing test results to be readily accessible by the public.
Question No: 2021/1135
Andrew Dismore
Does there need to be a review into all decisions made by the Building Research Establishment (BRE) into which materials are safe or not given the scandal over approval of flammable insulation? Do you have faith in the approvals granted by the BRE, and if not do you believe it is time to re-establish a public regulator?
Grenfell Tower Inquiry [2]
The Mayor
Last updated: 20 March, 2021
Please see my response to Question 2020/1134.
