The Grenfell Tower tragedy took place against a backdrop of inadequate fire safety laws

SIR – As a former fire engineer and safety inspector, I believe that governments of all parties since the Nineties should take responsibility for the tragedy at Grenfell Tower.

Following various disastrous fires in the Sixties and Seventies, all fire safety legislation was placed under the umbrella of the Fire Safety Act 1971. This made the local authority fire brigade responsible for inspecting many premises. Those not covered by the act were inspected by specialist organisations such as the nuclear industry. Residential accommodation, such as tower blocks, was under the control of the local authority.

Premises were inspected by the fire service, which issued a schedule of requirements. If the responsible person did not carry out the improvements, they were prosecuted.

From the Nineties, however, the responsibility was devolved to the owner or occupier of the premises: it was up to them to carry out a risk assessment and ensure premises were brought up to a safe standard.

Now, if this does not occur, the responsible person can be prosecuted. Sadly, in many cases, owing to cuts to the fire service, the only time these deficiencies come to light is after a fire. The London Fire Brigade did prosecute after the Lakanal House tower-block fire in 2009, but it is clear that the system is inadequate.

It is time to revise fire safety laws again so that the fire service inspects premises and issues requirements to the person under the threat of prosecution. This will cost more – but what price a human life? Bill Regan

Hythe, Kent

SIR – The saddest words in the English language are: “lessons will be learnt”. Thomas G Murphy

Abereldy, Perthshire

SIR – Following this awful event, there will be an inquiry and a review of the relevant building regulations. However, it will take a long time.

One thing that can be done straight away – and fairly cheaply – is to provide fire extinguishers and fire blankets in all rented flats, particularly any that have been re-clad in potentially combustible materials.

It is pretty clear that the fire started in a flat and spread through the windows, setting alight the cladding. The “stay put” policy and fire protection between flats and escape stairs, while generally a good solution, clearly was not and will not be effective in that scenario.

Most flat fires start in an individual flat. Fire extinguishers and blankets would enable the occupants to tackle a blaze straight away, before it gets out of control. They would also help to bring some peace of mind to residents of high-rise buildings. Alan Mclay

Aberlady, East Lothian

SIR – While it may not have helped in this particular disaster, surely all residential tower blocks should have fire escapes installed.

It appals me that the only way out of Grenfell Tower was down a central staircase or by the lift. Jan Lancaster

Broseley, Shropshire

SIR – What is the matter with the people advising the Prime Minister?

It beggars belief that she did not meet members of the general public on Thursday at the site of the disaster. David Crawshaw

Langport, Somerset

SIR – The aftermath of the fire showed the difference between Theresa May and Jeremy Corbyn. When criticised for meeting the emergency services and not residents, Mrs May said: “I wanted a briefing” – honest, probably practical, but uninspiring.

By contrast, Mr Corbyn met residents and demanded the requisitioning of vacant luxury buildings to house those who had lost their homes – anarchic, probably expensive and populist. Ronnie Bradford

Vienna, Austria