Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Grenfell Tower fire in North Kensington - news and discussion

Transcript of the BBC podcast for last week here.

The Inquiry put up a factsheet about this module. PDF here or as a webpage here. It includes a short glossary of some key concepts and terms.

Coming up: tomorrow morning more evidence from Amanda Johnson of the 'TMO'. She's followed by former RBKC councillors Rock Feilding-Mellen (Deputy Leader and Cabinet Member for Housing, Property and Regeneration at the time of the fire) and Nicholas Paget-Brown (Leader of the Council at the time of the fire), current councillor Quentin Marshall and former councillor Sam Mackover.
 

Rock Feilding-Mellen, the Tory councillor in charge of the Grenfell Tower refurbishment, was informed of plans to save money by swapping zinc cladding for aluminium in 2014 but told police he only knew about it after the June 2017 fire, statements released to the public inquiry show.

Lying to the police? Trying to pervert the course of justice?
 
Possibly, if he was the councillor in charge of the refurbishment you'd think he'd have a responsibility to read what he was sent though.

Eta he was specifically told about it: "In August 2018 he told Scotland Yard detectives investigating the 72 deaths that “issues such as any changes in materials, for example the use of aluminium instead of zinc, was something that I only remember becoming aware of after the fire”.

However, the council’s tenant management organisation told him by email that it was “hoping to achieve savings by negotiating with the planners over the cladding material (aluminium instead of zinc)”, according to a separate statement he made three months later to the public inquiry and published on Monday."
 
Last edited:
I wouldn't expect a councillor to have any knowledge about the relative fire risks of cladding panel types, and it would be unreasonable to expect them to. They wouldn't have the technical knowledge and you couldn't expect them to question every single component used in a design. It's not in any way obvious in a "common sense" or intuitive way that a metal panel would be a fire risk. Metal, in most people's experiance, does not burn. There are multiple layers of other people who did have (or should have had) the technical knowledge and failed to question the use of these panels. The number of people who failed to pick it up, or chose not to question it, is really quite shocking and its an absolutely massive systematic failure for every single part of the building industry. There also should have been regulation which should have prevented it and the regulation failed, both in its drafting and in its enforcement.

I've just been listening to the latest enquiry podcast though, and it seems to me that what the councillors failed to pay attention to was stuff sent to them by the LFB which was specific guidance for what questions councillors should be asking about building management or refurbishment. These were important things to check that highlighted things that they should not assume to have been dealt with by "others" and were more to do with the general management of the buildings, carrying out of risk assessments and so on. In fact it seems that the LFB sent the council / the TMO notices on many occasions highlighting potential problems with Grenfell. These were not really to do with the cladding but to do with escape strategy, fire doors and so on.
 
Transcript of the BBC podcast for last week here.

Cllr Judith Blakeman continued giving evidence this morning. She was shown a 2015 email exchange between Laura Johnson, RBKCs director of housing, and Sacha Jevans of the 'TMO' which referred to her and the concerns she was raising. I don't think this has previously been exhibited. Here's a screenshot of Laura Johnson's contribution.

LBB7d29.png


We shall celebrate when it's finished, the children go to the new nursery, kids are boxing in a fabulous new gym and people are living in lovely warm flats.
 
Well time for some links I guess.

The Inquiry only sat for one day this week but it concluded the four days of evidence from Carl Stokes, the 'TMO's fire risk assessor.

Here's this week's Inside Housing Grenfell Diary (archived)
Grenfell Tower Inquiry diary week 37: ‘In giving that advice, weren’t you acting beyond your knowledge and expertise?’
Links from it should be working.

One of many issues that came up was Carl Stokes' response to a letter the London Fire Brigade sent all Councils in April 2017, following the outcome of the investigation into a fire the year before in Shepherd's Court, a tower block in Hammersmith & Fulham. (A different borough of course. Admittedly one that was part of the tri-borough arrangement with Westminster and RBKC, but it would be unreasonable to expect that arrangement to facilitate any lessons learned without external prompting </sarcasm>)

The Grenfell Diary links to one of Inside Housing's articles about Shepherd's Court, but they also produced a detailed report about it in May 2017 just weeks before the fire at Grenfell.
A stark warning: the Shepherd's Bush tower block fire (archived)

Carl Stokes reassured the TMO twice in writing that the issues raised by the LFB didn't apply at Grenfell. In his evidence on Tuesday he attempted to justify this:
Carl Stokes: (…) this letter did not apply to Grenfell because it does not apply to cladding, this letter applied to spandrel panels and was site-specific to Shepherd’s Bush, and on the second page it says about the requirements of Building Regulations and the building control officer had signed off Grenfell Tower anyway.

In the strict sense, of course, the situation at Grenfell wasn't like that at Shepherd's Court. It was very much worse. As Kate Lamble points out in this weeks BBC podcast:
The panels involved in the Shepherd’s Court fire were made of wood and polystyrene foam covered in a thin sheet of steel. At Grenfell in addition to the polyethylene-filled cladding, and the combustible foam insulation packed around the edges of the windows, in between the windows there were also panels made from extruded polystyrene covered in a thin layer of aluminium.

Not that Carl Stokes knew one way or the other.

Here are the transcripts of last week's and this week's BBC podcasts. The second contains an interview with Peter Wilkinson of the Institution of Fire Engineers to set some of Stokes' testimony in context.

Inside Housing published a long report about the building safety risks associated with combustible window panels back in 2018. Flammable window panels: the forgotten threat (archived).

Next week Janice Wray, the 'TMO's health and safety and facilities manager, who Carl Stokes reported to, is due to give evidence all week.
 
Here's this week's Inside Housing Grenfell Diary (archived)
Grenfell Tower Inquiry diary week 38: ‘Well it’s a bit more than that, isn’t it. He’s suggesting that you tell the LFB a lie’
Working links to their daily reports at the bottom of the page.

The whole week was taken up with evidence from Janice Wray, the health and safety and facilities manager for the 'TMO', and currently facilities manager for RBKC. The Inquiry isn't sitting on Monday, the fourth anniversary of the fire, but she is back on Tuesday for at least one more day. The schedule then is for evidence from a couple of London Fire Brigade officers, presumably about the interactions between the LFB and the TMO before the fire, which there has been a lot of evidence about. Then more former TMO employees.
 
For the fourth anniversary of the fire, Inside Housing has produced a long investigative piece about how the regulatory framework, which permitted buildings to be wrapped in readily combustible materials that produced toxic smoke when burned, has developed since the 1990s.

Special investigation: how the government missed the chance to prevent the cladding crisis in the 1990s (archived)

Long but well worth reading IMO.

This is just the latest long piece Inside Housing has published since the fire. The most relevant to the issues in this new one was The Paper Trail back in 2018. This was also published on a non-paywalled site here, but unfortunately while that page is accessible, the multiple links back to articles on the Inside Housing site are not, and one or two links are now broken. Here's an archived version which fixes those issues. It's in three long parts written by different IH reporters
Some of what's in it has been clarified further by things which have emerged at the Inquiry, but taken with the new piece it provides a thorough overview of an important aspect of how we got here. If you want reasons to give our various red and blue neoliberal overlords since the 1990s an eight o'clock clap, for their sterling efforts in helping to create the current building safety problems, these are an excellent starting point.
 
I've put this in the Palestine thread but feel I should drop it here too as it involves Arconic and its the 4th anniversary

Live updates- Police called as protesters climb onto factory roof of Arconic site in Kitts Green Police at scene as protesters climb onto city factory roof

I dare say the new policing bill will make it easier to bring this sort of action to a sudden stop.

These are the same fucking muppets who demand more in state support, totally tin-eared to the amount of state resource their actions consume.
 
I think that, when we can reasonably rely on our government to respect the rule of law, a zero-tolerance approach to protest might be a more tenable option. Right now, I don't think we're remotely near such moral authority.

I take it by government, you mean of all stripes?

Boris has not done anything that tops the Blair/Campbell lies.
 
I take it by government, you mean of all stripes?

Boris has not done anything that tops the Blair/Campbell lies.
Yes, of all stripes. But I'd question whether even Blair's deceit and warmongering comes anywhere near close to the institionalised lying, corruption, graft, and refusal to conform to the most fundamental principles of governance that breaches of have hitherto tended to be notable by their rarity, as opposed to the present situation when it is a refreshing change to learn that a Government minister has actually acted with integrity. A refreshing change I'm struggling to recall the last example of.
 
Yes, of all stripes. But I'd question whether even Blair's deceit and warmongering comes anywhere near close to the institionalised lying, corruption, graft, and refusal to conform to the most fundamental principles of governance that breaches of have hitherto tended to be notable by their rarity, as opposed to the present situation when it is a refreshing change to learn that a Government minister has actually acted with integrity. A refreshing change I'm struggling to recall the last example of.

Surely everyone realises that politicians make sewer rats look like model citizens?
 
Back
Top Bottom