In this exclusive interview for the Nineteen Group, Western Business Media’s CEO Mark Sennett chats with Stephen Adams, his opposite number at BAFE, about the organisation’s new promotional campaign, the Government’s proposed Fire Safety Bill, the aftermath of Grenfell Tower and the overriding importance of third party certification for fire safety services.

Mark Sennett: First of all, could you outline the detail underpinning the new ‘Don’t Just Specify… Verify!’ campaign that BAFE has just launched?

Stephen Adams: For all of BAFE’s existence, we’ve always promoted the fact that end users should engage with fire safety solution providers who are adequately and properly competent for the tasks at hand. Those providers should be registered with a body like ourselves such that they can be third party certificated for their competence.

When tenders are going out, we actively encourage those placing the tenders to specify the levels of competence they’re expecting to see. The issue here is that tenders will be received by the end user and can often be taken at face value in terms of what’s being said on the forms about competence.

We feel it’s really important that tendering organisations, end users and procurement departments don’t just specify. They must verify as well. In other words, they must take a detailed look at the companies who are coming to them and check to see, for instance, if a given organisation has a competence in only one particular area of fire safety like portable extinguisher maintenance, but is ‘spreading that across’, for want of a better phrase, to claim competence for fire alarms, emergency lighting or fire risk assessments.

The key message here for all procurement professionals is that they must verify as well as specify. On the BAFE website we work extremely hard to make it easy for end users to check that solutions providers are registered and third party certificated and we pinpoint precisely which areas of competence they’re actually registered for.

Mark Sennett: For those who are not familiar with exactly what it is that BAFE does, can you tell us why it’s important for companies to gain third party certification when it comes to fire protection and fire safety?

Stephen Adams: There are many good, bad and indifferent companies out there providing fire safety solutions. BAFE was set up nearly 35 years ago and, particularly so in recent times, our aim has been to develop competency schemes right across the fire industry based on British and European Standards and industry good practice.

We work with the industry, with certification bodies and Trade Associations to develop competency schemes and then we license UKAS-accredited certification bodies to go out and actually deliver those schemes to ensure that the companies involved not only have good customer management and quality management systems in place, but also that the businesses and their members of staff are capable of doing what it says on the tin.

Put simply, if they claim third party certification for the design, installation, commissioning and maintenance of fire alarms, for example, we need to know that they’re capable and competent at doing that. Importantly, it’s not a one-off checking process, either. There will be an audit on this every year. If a given business is not found to be competent at any stage we will de-register them.

BAFE presides over companies large and small, ranging from those with international reputations right down to very small businesses who are highly competent in working a given geographic location and do a really good job. It’s vital to point out here that every company is treated exactly the same and certificated in exactly the same way.

Mark Sennett: In terms of fire safety managers (ie the end users and individuals who will likely need people to transact fire safety work on their premises), can you elaborate on how and why they should engage with BAFE to ensure that fire protection work on site is conducted competently and safely on their behalf?

Stephen Adams: Back in 2006, it’s fair to say that the world changed in terms of fire safety. Direct responsibility for fire safety within a building was taken away from the Fire and Rescue Services and, in England and Wales, passed across to the Responsible Person. In Scotland, that individual is referred to as the Duty Holder.

For every commercial building, and we’re only primarily talking about commercial buildings and public buildings here – everything other than domestic households, in fact – there must be a Responsible Person. It could be the owner or somebody whom the owner appoints to ensure fire safety. They have the responsibility and the duty to ensure that every aspect of fire safety for employees, visitors and, indeed, the building itself is addressed.

Those individuals will almost certainly not be fire safety experts themselves, so it follows that they need a method of ensuring they employ proper due diligence to find out that the companies they’re employing to transact fire safety-related work on their behalf, install new systems, maintain their portable fire extinguishers and, perhaps most importantly, carry out initial and  regular and thorough fire risk assessments at the premises are competent to do so. In essence, BAFE’s role is to ensure that BAFE-registered companies are competent to do what they say it is they do.

Mark Sennett: The Government has recently laid the groundwork for the new Fire Safety Bill. Did BAFE have any input to that process? Do you have any thoughts on what it will mean going forward and the role that third party certification will play as part of the mix?

Stephen Adams: Yes indeed. We’ve imparted our own views as BAFE and also fed back by way of the industry’s overarching body, namely the Fire Sector Federation. On that note, it’s great to see the Federation being much more active in recent times.

I’m a little concerned about the Bill. Apparently, it was announced that Parliament would be going to a second reading. Ultimately, it’s all well and good for Government to be saying to fire safety solutions providers that they should be doing things properly, but I still think there’s an absence of Government telling those who have the responsibility for fire safety on site exactly how they should be doing their due diligence.

There are a lot of people who claim to be able to do certain things but, as matters stand, anybody can conduct a fire risk assessment. There’s no obligation in law that they have to be competent at the process.

We haven’t mentioned Grenfell Tower in this discussion as yet. That episode highlighted this point, whether it be for fire doors, evacuation or fire risk assessments. Everything that Grenfell Tower highlighted is about competence and that’s why we’re functioning as the Secretariat to two of the Working Groups on fire risk assessment and for installers.

As we speak there’s a virtual meeting going on for the Central Competency Group where we, together with UKAS and others, are pushing really hard to make the Government accept the truism that competence isn’t something you just talk about. Rather, it’s something that you demonstrate.

Mark Sennett: In the wake of the Grenfell Tower blaze, of course, there was the Independent Review of Fire Safety and Building Regulations presided over by Dame Judith Hackitt. Again, I believe BAFE provided input to that process. Do you think – and you’ve been very vocal in terms of your views on the Inquiry – that it goes far enough when it comes to raising the importance of third party certification?

Stephen Adams: I don’t think third party certification was even considered in the early stages. First, I feel there was a lot of emphasis on the construction side. Occasionally, we forget that Grenfell Tower was actually a fire episode. We worked very hard alongside others to ensure that the fire safety aspect of the tragedy was neither diminished or lost altogether given the wealth of information emanating from the construction industry.

Second, the emphasis around competency – initially, at least – was focused on professional bodies. That’s fine as architects and surveyors and so on have very good, qualified and well-defined professional body status, but at the end of the day the people who actually do the work are tradespeople. The individuals who install alarms, put the electrical cables in, take care of the gas systems and the fire doors and so on and so forth.

In the likely absence of a Royal Institute of Fire Alarm Contractors, what BAFE offers along with others is a service designed to ensure that the people who are doing the work on the ground are competent and that those whom they employ are competent as well. We have had to push really hard for this because I think that vital part of the equation was being forgotten.

I afford every credit to UKAS who’ve really put their head above the parapet and made it clear that, as the UK accreditation body, they must stand up and be counted and help to make sure that third party certification is recognised as the true measure of competence.

Mark Sennett: What’s going to be the key focus for BAFE over the next few months? Can you let us know what’s in the pipeline for the organisation?

Stephen Adams: Over recent years we have certainly developed a range of schemes. We can write schemes with the competent people in the industry, but you need to reference what might be called ‘the three-legged stool’.

First, you require standards against which any given scheme can be written. Second, you also need a market. In short, there must be employers and providers out there who are prepared to invest in demonstrating their competence. Third, you must have a delivery mechanism.

We work very closely with, and we’re always very grateful to, UKAS-accredited certification bodies because it’s their people whom they must make sure are fully-trained to deliver and assess companies.

Before and after Grenfell Tower, BAFE has been and is developing new areas of work. We recently launched our scheme for companies who design, install and maintain commercial kitchen systems. This is a major area of fires. Probably not at the moment, of course, but that will start up again as businesses re-open in the wake of the pandemic.

In addition, we’ve recently launched a new scheme for companies who maintain wet and dry risers. There are a number of other projects in the pipeline which I’ll refrain from discussing just now until such time that all of the three elements I’ve mentioned are in place, but rest assured we are always working on developing new schemes.

We’ve tended to operate within the context of (a) commercial premises and (b) what we call the ‘active fire systems’, but we’re looking to extend our reach outside of those boundaries, mainly because people active in the fire safety space have been asking us to do so. They tell us that we’re a good independent body. We are. We work entirely through a range of certification bodies such that we are not writing our own schemes and delivering them ourselves. We have that independence. We have the necessary reach. Wherever there are standards and a market, and certification bodies willing to deliver, then we will be looking to develop schemes. As I said, we are working very hard to do that.

Promoting those schemes to the end user is then the all-important task. All of our annual marketing spend is about promoting to the end user the fact that they should be doing their due diligence and going out to tender to proven and competent solution providers.

Mark Sennett: BAFE has been an exhibitor at The Fire Safety Event right from when the show first started. You’re exhibiting again at the 2020 edition, which takes place at the NEC in Birmingham on 22-23 September. This is the only major fire exhibition at which BAFE exhibits. Why is that? Why do you find it different and, presumably, more beneficial to be at The Fire Safety Event as opposed to other shows on the annual calendar?

Stephen Adams: I have fond memories of the NEC from my security days with the British Security Industry Association. It’s a good venue for us because we’re looking to attract companies from all over the country, registered or not, to come and talk to us. We want to be in front of Fire and Rescue Services and end users.

Birmingham is great from the point of view of accessibility whereas some other venues in London, for example, are less easy to access. Some of the latter are certainly less easy to access from an exhibitor’s perspective.

The Fire Safety Event did provide a much-needed platform for the industry on launch and still serves that crucial purpose. Visitors can be there for the day and realise the maximum return on their time investment.

When I’ve been speaking as part of the various seminar programmes we’ve always had extremely good audience engagement underpinned by professionals with a genuine interest in the discipline of fire safety.

From a personal perspective and also speaking with my BAFE hat on, I’ve always been happy to support The Fire Safety Event. Many other organisations are now coming on board as well which is fantastic to see.

BAFE are exhibiting on stand L10 at the Fire Safety Event, which takes place on 22-23 September 2020 at NEC Birmingham. To register for your FREE pass visit www.firesafetyevent.com/

For more information on BAFE visit www.bafe.org.uk