[ad_1]
KINGSPAN IS NOT used to negative attention.
The award-winning Cavan-based insulation group, founded by current CEO Gene Murtagh’s father, Eugene, is a true success story; one of the most important and influential companies Ireland has ever produced and a multifaceted operation that last year had annual revenues of 4.7 billion euros.
Listed on the London and Dublin stock exchanges, the group has one foot on either side of the Irish Sea.
But in recent weeks, some of Kingspan’s activities in the UK have clearly come into focus during the second module of a public inquiry in London into the 2017 Grenfell Tower disaster in which 72 people were killed.
Although the investigation looks at all aspects of the tragedy, it is currently examining products that were used in a building remodel about five years before the fire.
Last year, the first module concluded that the cladding material adhered to the exterior of the building during the 2012 renovation did not comply with building regulations.
This was, according to the investigation report, the “main” reason for the rapid and “profoundly shocking” spread of the fire.
Martin Moore-Bick, the retired judge leading the investigation, said at the time that he believed it was “more likely than not” that the insulation behind the cladding contributed to the speed and extent of the fire’s spread.
Kingspan provided some of that insulation, a product called Kooltherm K15.
The allegations
During opening statements in early November, Kingspan’s actions were described as “seminally causal” in the fire; the words of attorney Stephanie Barwise, who represents many relatives of the deceased.
The heart of the matter is a question about Kingspan’s testing of the products used in the Tower of London renovation.
Although only a small amount was used on the project and was related to the fire, Kingspan sold its Kooltherm K15 insulation with a fire certificate based on a 2005 test, which stated it was safe for use above 18 meters above the ground. .
Fast forward to October 2020, just before the second inquiry module started: Kingspan wrote to the UK Building Investigation Establishment to withdraw the fire test reports used in their marketing for the K15 product from 2005.
The problem was that Kingspan had changed the composition of the product in 2006.
This meant that the previous test “was not representative of the K15 product that has been sold by [Kingspan] from 2006 onwards ”and was used in the Grenfell remodel.
Kingspan also said that he only found out after the hell that he had supplied the product. However, he said the material was not purchased directly from the firm but by a distributor who, in turn, supplied the contractors.
On the opening day of module two of the investigation, attorney Richard Millett said the timing of this announcement “raises serious questions as to why Kingspan did not withdraw these reports at the earliest opportunity.”
Barwise told the investigation: “It is not a defense for Kingspan to say … that he was not aware of the use of K15 at Grenfell until after the fire.”
He also accused the firm of “doing everything possible since 2005” to ensure that the litmus test had “the widest possible application.”
Kingspan has created a page on their website with a question and answer section on Grenfell and K15 insulation.
In this section, the company expresses its “deepest condolences” to those affected by the tragedy.
“The system used at Grenfell Tower did not meet building regulations, was unsafe and should not have been used,” the company says.
“Large-scale tests conducted since the fire have indicated that any cladding system using the PE-core ACM installed on the Grenfell tower would not have been safe, regardless of the type of insulation. Modeling from the fire by independent experts at Efectis fires also supports this view.
Kingspan says it has carried out “extensive tests and new tests that validate, for the current K15 … previously made performance claims.”
‘Proof rigged’ and the PR push
Just this week, it was revealed to the investigation that Kingspan hired public relations firms and lobbyists in the weeks after the fire.
Fearing a ban on their product, the investigation heard that their goal was to convince “key decision makers”, according to internal documents, that the combustible materials supplied for the Grenfell project were safe if installed correctly.
No news is bad news
Support the magazine
your contributions help us continue to deliver the stories that are important to you
Support us now
The documents show that the company’s lobbyists targeted politicians, including then-Home Secretary Amber Rudd and then-Housing Secretary Sajid Javid, who became Boris Johnson’s chancellor.
“whey product throw it away” pic.twitter.com/V8UeWOw9aU
– Lucie Heath (@luciemheath) December 8, 2020
Michael Gove, still serving in the cabinet, was also known as a “key decision maker” as secretary of state for environment, food and rural affairs at the time.
As part of this public relations effort to avoid a K15 ban, Kingspan established a trial of rival non-combustible insulation products in spring 2018.
The investigation heard that the goal of these tests was to “plant seeds of doubt,” as an internal Kingspan document put it, about whether other non-combustible materials would have performed better in hell.
Providing evidence this week, Kingspan’s public affairs and technical director Adrian Pargeter denied that the tests were rigged to fail, but admitted they were configured to “malfunction.”
In an exchange, Millet pressured Pargeter on this point, claiming that “Kingspan’s intention to the top of the organization” was to establish a test that was “designed to fail.”
Pargeter denied it, but admitted that it was “designed to malfunction.”
Earlier in the week, the investigation saw a string of text between two Kingspan employees from 2016, joking that the claims about the safety of the K15 material were “all lies.”
When asked by Millett if he thought that “a culture of lying about the fire safety of products is particularly serious,” Pargeter replied, “I don’t think we’re lying. I can’t explain why they are [the employees] describing it as such in that way between the two “.
The investigation has been suspended until January 11 after a staff member tested positive for Covid-19.
Additional PA reports
[ad_2]