A case that has shaken up regulatory and protection structures The problem was identified and recognized by an independent investigative panel, which concluded that the responsibility of the work office should be the lightest. First and foremost, there is a lack of sensitivity within the group responsible for it could have caused such a large fire in Hong Kong.

In practice, they have not been anticipated the risks that were very evident," has declared the panel. According to the report, the Falco of Taipō was an event of great gravity whose main cause was the lack of sensitivity on the part of the various departments’ responsible officials and the security against illegal acts sector, who failed to foresee and prevent the associated risks of building facade events. The report also highlighted a behavior of routine auditing desk where regulatory authorities carried out random controls over documents with the consequence of practically no inspections being conducted unless it had been a complaint.

The witness highlights a regular process that assumes truth but invites exploration. Among the cited examples in the report, it was noticed a failure in supervising construction departments and plant controls, which have inadequately regulated temporary materials such as polyethylene sheets and neat shelves. The Fire Services Department has also failed to correctly measure fire risks and operated an inadequate emergency service closure notification system. There is never been any mechanism for following up on prolonged interruptions over more than a year according to the report. The labor office has also managed complaints regarding smoke and structural materials without rigorous attitude.