CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY CULTURE & PRACTICES LOOKING BACK TO LOOK FORWARD

In the March edition of Ignite we reported on the Government’s decision, earlier this year, to allocate €2.5bn towards remediation works in apartments and duplexes constructed between 1991 and 2013. But why was this considered necessary, and why this timeframe?

This timeframe was specified as it coincides with the period between the enactment of the Building Control Act 1990, signed into law in July 1991, and the implementation of the Building Control (Amendment) Regulations (BCAR) in March 2014. The reason such remediation is necessary is that, for over 20 years, there was no formal system of inspection and sign off for completed construction. There is little or no evidence of enforcement during this period. Conveyance of buildings was achieved by issuing ‘Opinions of Compliance’ with substantial qualification statements, such as:

• We were not retained to supervise construction

• Not a report on the condition of the building

• No opening up

• Visual inspection only

• Substantial compliance with building regulations

• Providing evidence for title purposes.

Things started to change following the October 2011, high court eviction of residents from the Priory Hall Apartment complex in North Dublin. Strengthening the Building Control System, a review of building control arrangements was published in the April 2012. This explained official thinking at that time and heralded the introduction of BCAR in 2014. The document stated:

• ‘In the light of a number of recent high-profile failures on the parts of developers/builders and their agents to meet their statutory responsibilities it is considered that sticking with the existing arrangements is no longer tenable.’

• ‘The purpose of the lodgement of plans, mandatory inspection by registered professionals, statutory certificates of compliance and registration of certificates and accompanying documentation is to ensure a strong culture of compliance with the Building Regulations, and greater transparency in the process.’

A principal tenet of Building Regulations is to ensure that fire resisting compartments are designed and built to provide egress for occupants and access for firefighters. The failures referred to here are mirrored elsewhere and have led to well-documented catastrophic fire spread and consequent loss of life, property, and livelihoods.

In the UK, the 1998 Construction Task Force report which followed the earlier Egan & Latham reports identified the confrontational and competitive situation that exists in the construction industry and the need for improvement in training and skills levels.

• Many buildings are constructed and operated with Passive Fire Protection either badly installed or missing altogether.

• This situation is compounded by subsequent alterations to the building as changes in occupancy, occupations and systems take place.

ASFP’s guidance document, Ensuring Best

Practice for Passive Fire Protection in Buildings provides more detail on these reports and offers the following recommendations:

1. Culture and processes should be changed so that collaborative, rather than confrontational working is achieved.

2. Traditional processes of selection should be radically changed because they do not lead to best value.

3. An integrated team which includes the client should be formed before design and maintained throughout delivery.

4. Contracts should lead to mutual benefit for all parties and be based on a target and whole life cost approach.

5. Suppliers should be selected by Best Value and not by lowest price.

6. Performance measurement should be used to underpin continuous improvement within the working process.

This best practice document was first referenced in an appendix in the 2006 revision of Technical Guidance Document B (TGD B). Reading the BCAR Code of Practice, it is evident that the authors are seeking to deliver on these recommendations. While initially highly contentious and not perfect, it is widely recognised that BCAR brought about the desired cultural shift, resulting in higher fire safety standards.

ASFP Ireland was formed in 2011 with the aim of supporting those responsible for legislation, specification, inspection, and installation of passive fire protection throughout Ireland. The aim was to benefit from the experience of an association that had led the development of passive fire protection for 35 years at that time. We support a committed membership, which is striving to improve standards by providing guidance and training towards internationally recognised qualifications through the Institution of Fire Engineers (IFE).

Clarity of government thinking

It is unfortunate that in most jurisdictions legislation tends to be reactive. In Ireland the Building Control Act was formulated in the aftermath of the 1981 Stardust Night Club fire that claimed 48 young lives. The decision to introduce new building control arrangements followed the High Court eviction of residents from the Priory Hall apartment complex due to fire safety concerns, at the instigation of Dublin Fire Brigade. In addition to the 2012 Strengthening the Building Control consultation document mentioned above we have the Fire Safety in Ireland Task Force report, approved by Government in 2018 following the Grenfell Fire Tragedy where 72 lives were lost.

In combination, the 2012 and 2018 documents demonstrate clarity of government thinking in how strategies have been and continue to be developed to improve fire safety in Ireland. This is welcomed by ASFPI. Through the acquisition of knowledge and the demonstration of relevant competence, our members are committed to delivering the highest possible standards. Registration of Specialist Installers of Fire Safety systems is government policy, we welcome the Regulation of Building Works Bill 2022 and look forward to playing our part in its development.

In the next issue we will discuss the Building Regulations Draft Technical Guidance Document B 2023. Public consultation concluded in April and has highlighted many contentious issues.