We all know the scene in the film: a fire breaks out and the grandfatherly fire chief calls his team around him to pore over the building’s blueprints to work out the best way to ‘get in there and save lives’.

Now transpose the scene to Malta and the situation would be completely different.

[In the UK] you cannot even put up a Christmas tree in the town square unless the fire brigade has checked the tree, lights and connections

How many blueprints does the Civil Protection Department have in its records?

Aldo Busuttil, the director of health and safety firm AME, shook his head.

“Not many,” he said.

“In the UK, the fire brigade will not give a permit unless it inspects a building and gives it the green light for fire safety. You cannot even put up a Christmas tree in the town square unless the fire brigade has checked the tree, lights and connections,” Mr Busuttil continues.

Fire safety has been high on the agenda since a devastating fire broke out on June 14 in the 24-storey Grenfell Tower in London, killing at least 80 people. The incident prompted the authorities, employers and landlords to check whether their buildings comply with the law.

However, in Malta, there is one problem: what law?

The only reference to fire is buried in a 2002 legal notice on occupational health and safety but even that is pretty much limited to the need for an employer to ensure that there are emergency exits that are not blocked.

And even if you extrapolate ‘employer’ to include all places where people work, like hotels, places of entertainment and homes for the elderly, that still leaves a residential block with no legal framework – or churches or event venues, for that matter.

Perhaps we tend to underestimate the danger because buildings are made of stone but furnishings are flammable and all release toxins to some extent or other

“For a start, there is a 2003 legal notice that says employers are obliged to have an evacuation drill twice a year but it would be very interesting to actually check which companies do,” Mr Busuttil said, shaking his head.

“But let’s look at residential buildings: they usually have a lift – which cannot be used in a fire – and a stairwell without fire doors, which would therefore be full of smoke and possibly flames. This means those above the level of a fire could only get to their balconies or the roof.

“How many buildings with an evacuation stairwell have emergency lights that no longer work? Or fire doors which are blocked with crates? Imagine if there were a fire and it was pitch black, with smoke restricting visibility and people who are panicking. Perhaps we tend to underestimate the danger because buildings are made of stone but furnishings are flammable and all release toxins to some extent or other.”

Mr Busuttil, who has been doing risk assessments for over 15 years, said specific buildings should have specific requirements, which would be picked up at the design stage if there were a proper law.

“Mater Dei Hospital has a ramp for hospital beds to be wheeled down. But do all the homes for the elderly have that? Or at least evacuation chairs on which to help bring down people with limited mobility from the upper floors? Are the staff trained and would there be enough people on duty to evacuate a building at night,” he asked.

Mater Dei Hospital has a ramp for hospital beds to be wheeled down. But do all the homes for the elderly have that? Or at least evacuation chairs on which to help bring down people with limited mobility from the upper floors?

Apart from the building itself, there are other aspects he is concerned about, including whether there is access for fire engines – and their outriggers – and for the ladders to be able to reach the ever-rising number of floors.

It is not all doom and gloom. Awareness is growing as more architects are engaging qualified fire engineers, especially as buildings get higher. And Mr Busuttil admitted that more and more employers are commissioning risk assessments as court awards become more punitive.

Insurance companies are also doing their bit to put pressure on owners to carry out risk assessments, especially since it is so difficult to pinpoint responsibility in the absence of any law making clear who shoulders obligations.

Read: Alarm bells from fire safety suppliers

“Of course, there is the Criminal Code and the Civil Code but before we point the finger of blame for negligence we have to be able to determine what people should be doing in the first place. At present, there are only guidelines issued by the Building Industry Consultative Council and guidelines based on UK standards.

“Of course, a law would be the most important place to start. Then we would have to start talking about enforcement,” he said.

“The sad thing is that change usually only comes after a tragedy. Should we not do something about it before someone dies needlessly,” Mr Busuttil remarked.