The Hackitt report, published on 17 May following the Grenfell tragedy, has rightly filled many column centimetres already; here are a few more. It discusses the concept of layers of protection, particularly noting how “the use of non-combustible materials throughout the building” provides inherently higher levels of protection. While the scope of the report was limited to a focus on high-rise residential buildings (10 storeys and above), Dame Judith Hackitt made clear the intention was that recommendations could and should be more widely applied.

On 1 October, the government announced a ban on combustibles in the external walls of residential type buildings 18m and above, already widening the initial remit of the report. The implications of the ban are clear: structural elements that are within or form parts of external walls must be rated A1 or A2, the highest levels of non-combustibility. The ban begs the question: if a material presents a fire risk for buildings higher than 18m, why would it be safe for, say, 17.9m or 9.9m?

“If a material presents a fire risk for buildings higher than 18m, why would it be safe for 17.9m?”

…