I do think that if implemented correctly the following will be interesting

-   Bringing responsibility for all aspects of fire safety under one government department

-   Mandatory fire safety strategies for higher-risk buildings

-   Establishing a college of fire and rescue

The more we learn about the tragedies of fire the more we can do to prevent it happening again. 

Could this lead to the PVC/PVC T&E becoming outlawed in dwellings and replaced with LS0H? Will FRA (fire risk assessment) be made to work in conjuction with a Fire Safety Audit.  In simple terms a fire risk assessment will tell you what the risks are and what control measures you need. A fire safety audit would be a check that the control measures identified in the fire risk assessment are being implemented

In terms of fire load and smoke generation, you need to get rid of PVC trunking, PVC extension and appliance leads and probably PVC window frames  and doors and plumbing pipe as well.   The volume of smoke from bits of T and E, especially those under plaster, are pretty small beer in comparison.

Mike.

Not to say I would not welcome some or all of that, over a period of years, but it would a slow change.
As far as cables go I'm sure there is still some rubber covered in service ;-)

If these schemes are to be replaced, does the proposal entail conducting annual assessments for the entire workforce, rather than evaluating a single company representative each year?

"Interesting" isn't necessarily good.  Grenfell happened at a time when the government was committed to a "bonfire of red tape", so the minister in charge did not want any new building regulations introduced.

https://www.aol.co.uk/news/key-figures-criticised-grenfell-tower-100003616.html

Strange comment on need for Fire Safety College; been established at Moreton in The March since 1966;

www.fireservicecollege.ac.uk/

Strange comment on need for Fire Safety College; been established at Moreton in The March since 1966;

www.fireservicecollege.ac.uk/

Gel Jones said:

Strange comment on need for Fire Safety College; been established at Moreton in The March since 1966;

The idea is that the remit of the new college would be somewhat wider, although the original suggestion (2022) was that this recommended College of Fire and Rescue could be based at the Fire Service College.

Our reform plans set out our ambition for an independent College of Fire and Rescue focussed on the following five areas:
• Research
• Data
• Leadership,
• Ethics
• Clear expectations for fire and rescue services
Subject to the response to the consultation, this College of Fire and Rescue could be located at an existing body such as a training provider, fire and rescue service or other professional body. This could include the Fire Service College (FSC) at potentially no cost, for example, given its historic links to government. The FSC is one of a number of training providers, all with a similar market share, available to fire and rescue services. We would like to hear from potential hosts to understand where the proposed college could be located given the potential benefit to both the host and the college of co-location. The proposed college should take on the functions carried out currently by the Fire Standards Board, which sets out clear expectations for the sector. Development opportunities for staff should include support for progression to leadership roles and development schemes to identify and nurture talent.

"Reforming Our Fire and Rescue Service"

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/627d6b378fa8f53f93a4ae65/DRAFT_WP_consultation_HO_template_110522.pdf

I'm not an expert in this field, but my reading of this is that the existing Fire Service College focusses on day-to-day practicalities, but what's missing is somewhere where people are standing back and looking at the bigger issues. 

Note this wasn't a recommendation of the Grenfell enquiry, it was an endorsement by them of an earlier government proposal. (Although of course that proposal was made largely due to Grenfell.)