Agenda item

Purpose of the report:  Scrutiny of Services and Review

Witnesses:

Steve Burnell, Surrey Fire and Rescue Service Group Commander

Declarations of interest:

None

Key points raised during the discussion:

1. The Committee received a presentation from the Surrey Fire and Rescue Service on the implications of the Grenfell Tower disaster, providing members with an information update on SFRS support and response as a result of this tragedy.

2. Using Gibson Court in Hinchley Wood as an example, officers explained how SFRS had contributed to improvements in fire safety in large residential buildings. Gibson Court was destroyed by fire in 2011 but was rebuilt with advice from SFRS. Once the building was finished SFRS also assessed the building to ensure that it could be occupied safely.

3. The Officer explained that Fire Safety Orders did not permit fire and rescue services to enforce fire safety in private dwellings although Community Safety teams did provide engagement and influence in this area.

4. Members requested further information on the processes in place for relinquishing control of a scene once the fire had been extinguished. They were informed that fire officers would remain on site until handover where there was a potential danger and risk to the public. Extending this period was difficult as SFRS had to be ready to respond to other emergencies.

5. Officers stated that buildings were classed as high rise if they were over 18metres tall or if they had more six floors or more. At the time of the meeting, there were 83 high rise buildings in Surrey. It was further stated that SFRS had vehicles capable of reaching 43 metres to tackle a blaze and that Surrey had one of the highest firefighting platforms nationally.

6. Discussions turned to the issue of compartmentation where buildings are sub-divided by design in order to restrict the spread of fire. Members expressed concern that there was lack of awareness about compartmentation. Officers acknowledged that compartmentation was complex but assured the Committee that compartmentation was well-known within the construction industry. SFRS would, however, add informative material to their website in order to provide additional information to the public on compartmentation. The Committee was further information that the Regulatory Fire Safety Order places a duty on owners to carry out a risk assessment of their building/premises, including compartmentation, and to act on any issues identified within the risk assessment.

7. Members asked whether SFRS had experienced an increase in call outs involving white goods. Officers advised the Committee that this was not the case any misconception relating to this was caused by social media, publicising stories highlighting stories on white goods causing fires.

8. It was noted that significant work was taking place within SFRS to promote the installation of sprinklers within a private dwelling as a means of reducing  fatalities arising from fires. There was no requirement on home owners to have fire extinguishers or blankets located within their property.

9. Members registered concerns in regard to the ‘stay put’ policy and queried which buildings this applied to in Surrey. It was noted that this information could be found on SFRS’s website and the service were open to having discussions with occupiers how to plan going forward.

Recommendations:

The Committee notes the update and reports accordingly to the Overview and Budget Scrutiny Committee.