Kingspan welcomes publication latest Grenfell report

Accepts 'historical failings' in UK insulation business.

Kingspan has welcomed the publication of a long-awaited report into the deaths of 72 people who died in a blaze at a London tower block more than seven years ago.

The final report of the inquiry into the 2017 Grenfell disaster was expected to detail findings around the actions of corporate firms in the construction industry, the local authority, London Fire Brigade and government.

In response to the outcome of the inquiry report, Cavan headquartered Kingspan said in a statement issued: “Today is another extremely difficult day for the relatives and survivors of the Grenfell Tower fire and we extend our deepest sympathies to those impacted by the tragedy.

We welcome the publication of today’s report which is crucial to a public understanding of what went wrong and why. It explains clearly and unambiguously that the type of insulation (whether combustible or non-combustible) was immaterial, and that the principal reason for the fire spread was the PE ACM cladding, which was not made by Kingspan.”

The company spokesperson added that Kingspan has “long acknowledged the wholly unacceptable historical failings that occurred” in part of their UK insulation business.

“These were in no way reflective of how we conduct ourselves as a Group, then or now. While deeply regrettable, they were not found to be causative of the tragedy.”

Kingspan, the statement said, has already “emphatically addressed these issues”, including the implementation of “extensive and externally-verified measures” to ensure the firm's conduct and compliance standards are world leading.

“We remain committed to playing a leading role in providing safe and sustainable building solutions, including continuing to work with government and industry partners.”

Sir Martin Moore-Bick, chair of the inquiry, admits that this phase of the inquiry had taken longer hoped for, partly due to uncovering “many more matters of concern” than they had originally expected.

“The simple truth is that the deaths that occurred were all avoidable, and those who lived in the tower were badly failed over a number of years and in a number of different ways by those who were responsible for ensuring the safety of the building and its occupants,” he says.

Mr Bick states that those who can influence the construction industry, fire and rescue services, the management of fire safety in buildings and resilience planning must understand how mistakes can be “avoided in the future”.

“The failings can be traced back over many years, and our efforts to get to the bottom of what went wrong and why accounts for the length of our report and the time it has taken us to produce it,” he said.

He went on to say that “warning signs” about materials used in buildings as early as 1991.

“We find that there was a failure on the part of the government and others to give proper consideration at an early stage to the dangers of using combustible materials in the walls of high-rise buildings.”