Adam Bandt (Melbourne, Australian Greens) Share this | Hansard source

Last week, the world was faced with the news of the devastating fire that swept through the Grenfell Tower in London. At least 79 people were killed, and there may be many more who were trapped in the tower who will never be identified. As we mourn the loss of life and send our support to those people who are grieving the loss of loved ones, we must look to the actions we can take to prevent disasters like this happening in the future here in Australia.

In 2014, a fire swept through and around the Lacrosse building in Docklands, located within my electorate. As with the Grenfell fire, flammable external cladding was found to be a major factor in the fire. Extensive damage was done and hundreds of people were relocated. Fortunately, no lives were lost; but one could easily imagine the result of the fire being worse. In March of this year, a fire occurred in a high-rise public housing tower on Napier Street in Fitzroy, also within in my electorate. This fire also resulted in the evacuation of hundreds of residents and, whilst the fire has not been linked to flammable cladding, residents have expressed strong safety concerns. The fire occurred in the early hours of the morning while residents slept—yet most people in the building heard no fire alarm. Many people were woken up by the smell of smoke or a ringing phone or the courageous actions of neighbours knocking on their doors. People with limited mobility had to be carried down flights of stairs by neighbours. I am concerned that there may be other unsafe buildings in Melbourne and elsewhere that are yet to be identified. Following the Lacrosse fire, the Victorian Building Authority conducted an audit of 175 high-rise buildings in Melbourne and it found that over half of these—51 per cent—had external cladding that did not comply with the regulations.

Safety issues like flammable cladding are putting residents in danger and putting our firefighters in danger. In a submission to the current Senate inquiry on non-conforming building products, the MFB, the Metropolitan Fire Brigade, with regard to flammable cladding, stated:

The use of this product in a non-compliant manner means fires are more likely and those fires will spread more rapidly, cause more damage and potentially result in a loss of life.

The submission went on to say:

In some situations the MFB may need to withdraw firefighters from responding to parts of a building where non-compliant products are in use because of a risk to their life.

There are gaps in the current regulations. The Lacrosse building was described last week by the former chief fire officer of the MFB as unsafe, and yet I understand that no significant action has been taken to replace the flammable cladding on this building despite an order being made of the owners' corporation in January 2017 for its removal. Hundreds of residents once again live in this building. Anecdotal evidence suggests that many residents are living in the same unsafe and overcrowded conditions that might have contributed to the 2014 fire. What is the point of government if we cannot ensure that every building that we live in is safe? Whether it is public housing or private housing, whether it is because of materials or because of inadequate procedures, governments must act.

See this speech in context