Art school hits out over fire ‘rumours’

GLASGOW School of Art has issued a trenchant response to critical evidence heard at the Scottish Parliament about its disastrous 2018 fire.

It has submitted new material to MSPS in a bid to “address further rumours, supposition and speculation”.

The school (GSA) has lodged a new document with the Culture Committee, which has been hearing opinions, evidence and expert views on the GSA’S handling of the Mackintosh Building in the lead up to the devastating June fire of last year.

In January, Stephen Mackenzie, a fire safety expert and consultant, told the committee he was “puzzled” that a mist suppression system had been removed after the first Mackintosh Building fire in 2014.

In the new document, the GSA addresses the removal of a mist suppression system following that blaze, as well as other criticisms.

Fire and police investigators are still probing the cause of the second fire of last year, which destroyed the Mackintosh Building, and severely disrupted the lives of residents and businesses in the surrounding Garnethill area of Glasgow.

No cause for the June 2018 blaze has yet been publicly stated, and there has been much speculation over whether the quick-spreading fire was an accident or wilful fire-raising.

The board of the GSA has said it plans to rebuild the Mackintosh Building.

The GSA, apparently concerned by some of the tone and substance of contributions heard at the Committee, has submitted a new document for MSPS as supplementary evidence.

It says: “In light of other evidence received by the Committee, the GSA considers it is important that the Committee understands that the pre-2014 fire mist suppression system was not fully installed.

“This system suffered widespread damage in the fire and was in need of substantial repair before it could be operational.”

The system pumps, on site but not installed, suffered “extensive water damage” and much of the mist pipework in the western part of the building was destroyed.

The remainder of the system was contaminated by smoke and the document contends “it is therefore not the case that there was a 95 per cent complete mist suppression system following the 2014 fire”.

The GSA adds: “Following expert inspection and advice, the GSA therefore decided to take advantage of advances in technology since the original system was installed by including an up-to-date system as part of the Mackintosh Restoration Project.”

The question of a mist system, and whether one should or could have been in place during the reconstruction of the Mackintosh Building after 2014, has often been raised by experts, MSPS and others.

The GSA, in the new submission, has re-iterated its position that no system could have been in place.

It said: “Suggestions were also made during the Committee meeting that a temporary system could have been put in place.

“To the best of the GSA’S knowledge, having sought expert advice, there is no temporary fire suppression system suitable for a building and project of the scale and complexity of the Mackintosh Building and the Mackintosh Restoration Project that could have been installed during the construction period.

“It is considered that the extent of restoration works could not have been carried out with a live fire suppression system being present as it would need to have the coverage, certification and equipment equivalent to that of a permanent system.”