Controversial government proposals to relax fire safety standards for new school buildings as a cost-cutting measure are to be dropped by ministers in a major policy U-turn following the Grenfell Tower fire.

The move is evidence of a dramatic change of approach across government, from a previous preoccupation with deregulation and cost-saving to a safety-first attitude, in the aftermath of the west London tower block tragedy.



After thousands of people were evacuated amid chaotic scenes from five tower blocks in Camden, London, late on Friday night, Theresa May said the priorities were to find temporary accommodation for those affected and make the buildings safe before people could return.

But the crisis appeared to be spreading on Saturday with the announcement that a total of 27 blocks in 15 council areas in England had been deemed unsafe.

Several councils have begun work on removing cladding from the tower blocks, but there was disquiet among some local authority leaders that the government would push the cost of emergency works, such as sprinkler systems, on to councils.

Jeremy Corbyn described the cladding issue as “a nationwide threat” and said the prime minister needed to “get a grip and lead a national response”.

“I urge the government to make sure all necessary support – including, crucially, financial support – is urgently made available to councils across the country,” he said.

The prime minister said the government was working with councils, including Camden, “making sure that the resources are there to ensure that what is needed to keep people safe is done”.

Across government, ministers have been ordered to look again at fire safety policies in their departments. An urgent rethink has been under way at the Department for Education, which had begun a consultation on official new draft guidance on fire safety in schools last year that was widely seen as a substantial watering down of safety requirements.

Fire safety experts, backed by senior MPs, expressed deep alarm over the past year at the plans and warned ministers repeatedly that they could have disastrous results.

Part of the revised draft guidance – which the Observer has learned will now be dropped – removed the requirement that sprinklers be included in the design of new schools and stated, instead, that “school buildings do not need to be sprinkler protected to achieve a reasonable standard of life safety”. It also said it “no longer includes an expectation that most new school buildings will be fitted with them”.

In a letter to schools minister Nick Gibb last August, London fire commissioner Ron Dobson said such changes could have “potentially devastating consequences”.

Last October, schools minister Nick Gibb said the inclusion of sprinklers in new school buildings would add 2%-6% to the cost of works. Photograph: Alastair Johnstone/SWNS.com

Gibb announced the consultation on changes in a parliamentary debate on fire safety the previous October. He said the number of fires in schools had declined and pointed out that “including sprinklers in new school buildings would add between 2% and 6% to the cost of works”.

Gibb, one of the main forces behind the government’s academy and free schools programme, added: “The department’s assessment is that the additional spending would significantly outweigh any relatively modest saving from preventing some damage to school buildings.”

In the same debate, the Tory MP and chair of the all-party parliamentary group on fire safety, David Amess, said it was “crazy” that under the Tory government the proportion of new schools and academies fitted with sprinkler systems had already fallen from 70% (between 2007 and 2010, under Labour) to 35%. “That is unacceptable,” he said.

When the draft guidelines were published, teaching unions and fire safety organisations protested again but formed the impression that ministers were not listening and that the consultation was a sham.

Last week, in the aftermath of the Grenfell Tower fire, the revised draft guidance had been removed from the DfE website. Amid signs of panic, officials tried to insist that there had never been any intention to change policy.

The Observer now understands that the proposals in the new draft guidance are to be taken back to the drawing board and that any sections which might be seen as weakening safety requirements – including the new language suggesting sprinklers are unnecessary – will be struck out.

A government source insisted: “What we would like to stress is that what we do will be a strengthening of fire safety requirements, not any weakening of them.” Asked if that meant a rethink on sprinklers in new schools, the source said: “That would be entirely fair.” A DfE spokesman said: “There will be no change to the fire safety laws for schools or our determination to protect children’s safety.”

Last night, Amess said he would welcome a change of approach but added: “We will keep up the pressure until a policy that makes sprinklers mandatory in all new schools is announced. We will also insist that checks are carried out on all existing schools to make sure they are safe.”

Shadow education secretary Angela Rayner said: “Parents want to know that schools are safe for our children, and there are real questions for the government to answer. It would be completely unacceptable if they have attempted to water down safety requirements simply to make free schools cheaper or let developers make an easier profit.”

The aftermath of the Grenfell Tower fire continued to play out on Saturday as the government named six of 15 local authorities where tower blocks have failed safety tests.

Portsmouth, Brent, Camden, Manchester, Plymouth and Hounslow had all sent samples of cladding for testing and were told on Friday that there was a risk they could catch fire.

Camden decided on Friday night to evacuate about 650 households from the Chalcots estate in north London, but many were forced to spend the night in a local leisure centre, prompting anger and complaints from residents.

None of the other councils said yesterday that they would follow Camden’s lead, although Sajid Javid, the communities secretary, said it was a “correct decision”. “Public safety is absolutely paramount, you cannot put a price on people’s lives,” he said.

Many councils have taken emergency measures, including posting 24-hour patrols to keep watch on the affected tower blocks.

With many local authorities, including Sheffield, installing sprinkler systems, there is growing unease among some council leaders that they will end up footing a large part of the bill.

Javid said it was too early to say what the total cost would be. “If [local authorities] also have an issue with financial resources, we have made it very clear: you get on with that work, but you come to government and we will work with you make sure you have the resources that you need, if you don’t have resources.”

Nick Forbes, the leader of Newcastle Council, said this fell short of a guarantee. “Govt have just confirmed on @BBCBreakfast that, despite all their talk of help, councils will have to pay to install sprinklers in blocks,” he tweeted. He called on the government to lift a cap limiting the amount councils can borrow in relation to housing.