Civil Contingencies Secretariat official gives evidence on the central government response to Grenfell, revealing delays in coordinating support, confusion over COBRA terminology, and concerns about RBKC's capacity that were slow to be addressed.
00:00:28 good morning everyone welcome to today's hearing
00:00:31 hearing uh today we're going to continue hearing evidence from catherine hammond who at the time of the fire was director of the civil contingency's secretariat in the cabinet
00:00:42 contingency's secretariat in the cabinet office so would you ask us having to come in please
00:00:53 good morning miss hammond yes please sit down make yourself comfortable thank you all right ready to continue i hope yes of course thank you very much yes thank you mr chairman good morning to you good morning members of
00:01:04 morning to you good morning members of the panel ms hammond good morning to you good morning can i take you back please uh by way of introduction for today to cab50157 it's an email string we looked at
00:01:15 it's an email string we looked at yesterday afternoon and i'd like to go in it please to page two
00:01:20 two which is the email from stuart uh we go to page two please it's the email
00:01:30 at 17 713 which copies the email which is the readout at
00:01:38 at 6 16 from denise welch at the dclg yes and that's the readout from the 5 am meeting and if you scroll down
00:01:49 scroll down [Music]
00:01:50 [Music] to the very foot of the email on page 3 just above where it says next scg at 6 30
00:01:57 30 you can see a little block of text that says this the block is owned by the local authority lb kensington and chelsea and managed by kensington and chelsea tenant management organization
00:02:08 chelsea tenant management organization now did you at this stage early on the morning of the 14th of june consider whether there might be a problem
00:02:16 a problem with
00:02:17 with the council effectively operating community engagement if
00:02:23 if it was simultaneously being potentially at least investigated for its role in the fire
00:02:29 the fire um no i didn't did that
00:02:32 did that factor or idea come into your mind at any stage later on the 14th of june so just to be clear mr apologies whether being investigated for a role in
00:02:45 whether being investigated for a role in the fire and performing their statutory duties were in conflict is that your question that's exactly the point uh no i don't remember considering that no uh on the 14th on the 15th no at any
00:02:57 uh on the 14th on the 15th no at any stage
00:02:58 stage not to my recollection now let's get back then to the 14th of june first ministerial meeting we know that the ccs have produced a number of documents
00:03:09 number of documents in preparation for that meeting and that included i think an attendees list a brief to the chair and an agenda yes correct yes now in your first
00:03:20 yes correct yes now in your first statement of paragraph 48 and i don't think we need to go to it you say you may have discussed the attendees list with stuart wainwright to ensure appropriate representation from first responders national government and local
00:03:32 responders national government and local government did you discuss the list with mr wainwright itself
00:03:37 itself so the the list would have been prepared by um stuart wainwright and his team that the way the process would work is they would first set the agenda and agree that with
00:03:48 first set the agenda and agree that with the chair
00:03:49 the chair and then on the back of that work out who should be there so he may have in the course of that asked me for my views i'm afraid i can't remember the precise conversation at this distance of
00:04:00 precise conversation at this distance of time well let's look at the list it's at cab402711
00:04:05 cab402711 [Music]
00:04:08 and if we look at the native version of the document please we'll see
00:04:16 the contents uh and if we expand that and scroll down you can see that from the dcl well the chair is nick heard or to be nick heard and from number 10 alistair whitehead and then various
00:04:27 alistair whitehead and then various different attendees from different departments uh scrolling down you can see you there from or for the cabinet office together with stuart wayne wright
00:04:38 with stuart wayne wright we have catherine richardson from dclg home office david lamberty etc and various other um central government uh bodies
00:04:49 uh bodies including number 10 number 10 comms and then dialing in if we scroll a bit further down the list we can see the mayor of london sadiq khan he dials in and there are people in the back room as
00:05:01 and there are people in the back room as well now what you'll see missing from that list is the identification of any individual from our bkc did you realize that at the time
00:05:13 did you realize that at the time um i don't remember having a specific conversation about our bkc attendance in terms of um
00:05:22 um what we would have been thinking at the time is
00:05:25 time is how is information being fed into this meeting from the local response and so on the attendees list you can obviously see the mayor
00:05:36 obviously see the mayor who would have been getting information through from the scg likewise the head of the resilience and emergencies division in dclg
00:05:47 emergencies division in dclg and
00:05:48 and the ministers to whom they would have been reporting so
00:05:53 so i don't remember a specific conversation about rbkc but in terms of where information about the local authority would have been coming from that would have been my expectation
00:06:04 right was it a deliberate decision not to have the chief executive or anybody else from rbkc at this meeting i i can't recall a specific conversation about the
00:06:15 recall a specific conversation about the chief executive no would it have been standard practice so far as there was a standard practice given the nature of the meeting but would it have been standard practice to have had the chief executive of the
00:06:26 to have had the chief executive of the relevant local authority at this meeting so there's no um as you allude to there's no set cast list for meetings of this type it's assembled based on
00:06:37 this type it's assembled based on the agenda in the event it wouldn't be unusual to have a local authority chief executive in the meeting but in the context of the presence of of the mayor
00:06:48 context of the presence of of the mayor in particular it wouldn't be automatic but
00:06:52 but did
00:06:53 did do you accept that having the chief executive of the local authority itself as opposed to the mayor have given you much better closer more first-hand or actual first-hand information
00:07:06 actual first-hand information it might have done so i can't be specific do you accept that not having nicholas holgate at least on the list of attendees
00:07:13 attendees was a significant omission i i think at the time we would have been of the view that information about the local authority response could reach the
00:07:24 local authority response could reach the meeting through the scg route and the mayor's office you'll you'll be aware of of two email chains
00:07:32 chains um that we've submitted in evidence which uh show a request i think at about two o'clock that afternoon for mr holgate to join the meeting
00:07:43 for mr holgate to join the meeting unfortunately there was a miscommunication surrounding that request
00:07:48 request and the operations team who were dealing with a number of ministerial meetings that day were not clear that he was being asked to attend this meeting
00:07:59 to attend this meeting that i'm afraid was a miscommunication on the day but given the other attendees um it wasn't remarked on to my recollection because there would have been other sources of that insight
00:08:12 sources of that insight well that would depend wouldn't it on how close khan himself personally was to the events on the ground at the time not him personally i would expect him to be
00:08:22 be briefed by his office and i i think i had already received by this point an update from his office which
00:08:30 which showed to me that they were in touch with the scg so reasonable expectation that both he and dclg were well cited on the operation on the ground can i take you to your third
00:08:43 the ground can i take you to your third statement please and go to paragraph 27
00:08:53 uh at the foot of the page 11 [Music]
00:08:56 [Music] uh
00:08:57 uh you
00:08:59 you uh say the very foot of the page uh last few words in the third line there
00:09:04 there i'm not
00:09:06 i'm not able to elaborate beyond that based on recall of events but given his role and that's holgate it would have been normal for him to attend a meeting of this nature
00:09:17 a meeting of this nature so can we take it that it would have been normal for nicholas holgate to attend this meeting yes normal but not automatic no fair enough normal now given that it was normal on what basis
00:09:30 normal on what basis was there a departure from that normal practice
00:09:34 i don't recall i'm afraid a specific conversation about whether or not mr holgate should attend uh there obviously was a thought later in the day that the email chain that
00:09:45 in the day that the email chain that i've just described to you um but i don't think there was a specific decision that i can recollect not not to have him in the meeting right do you remember whether the thought process went as follows we don't have to
00:09:56 process went as follows we don't have to have nicholas holgay there because it would be as good to have sadiq khan there
00:10:02 there i don't remember that thought process i think the point i was trying to make perhaps not very clearly was that um mr holgate's absence would not have seemed glaring given the presence of
00:10:14 seemed glaring given the presence of other sources of uh information from the scg right so do we take it that neither you nor any other attendee at the meeting raise the lack of representation from our bkc at the meeting or not
00:10:26 from our bkc at the meeting or not afterwards not to my recollection i think in the email chains you have there is um a second message from dclg after the meeting uh had already
00:10:38 after the meeting uh had already commenced about halfway through but i'm afraid i wasn't aware of that at the time yes i mean do you accept maybe you don't that the absence of a representative from our bank rbkc limited what the ministerial
00:10:51 bank rbkc limited what the ministerial meeting could achieve in in understanding the real situation on the ground at that time i wouldn't have expected that to be the case no given the other sources of information that it had
00:11:08 so was it the position was it your understanding the the the meeting was approaching sadiq khan on the basis that he was in effect the local authority category one
00:11:20 effect the local authority category one responder for the purposes of providing information to the meeting and taking away guidance from the meeting no no not that he was performing that role
00:11:31 role but that the the strategic coordinating group which was bringing together all of the category one responders involved at this moment information from that group was feeding into this meeting through through
00:11:43 into this meeting through through several routes one of which was the mayor's office
00:11:47 uh now uh you i think attended the meeting yourself didn't you i did and you say in paragraph 50 of your statement
00:11:57 statement let's go to that please first witness statement paragraph 50 page 15
00:12:05 you say
00:12:07 say that
00:12:11 the meeting and this is the third line was attended by a mix of ministers civil servants first responders and local government which attendees at the meeting are you
00:12:23 which attendees at the meeting are you referring to when you say local government i think that is a reference to the mayor that's the mayor is it
00:12:32 now let's go to the minute please it's cab402714
00:12:45 and you refer to this in paragraph 50 of your statement and if we go to the bottom of page one you can see under the subheading c support for those affected and families and it says
00:12:57 and it says there was a discussion around offering trauma counselling to firefighters and ambulance workers involved in the incident nhs england provided bereavement and trauma counselling services and these could be made
00:13:08 services and these could be made available to those who needed it now although the subtitle there as we can see is support for those affected and families the minute doesn't refer here or anywhere else
00:13:19 here or anywhere else to the discussion of the provision of trauma counselling to the bereaved the survivors and the residents was that not discussed in the meeting um i i can't recollect from the meeting
00:13:30 um i i can't recollect from the meeting would it be possible to turn to the of next page go to the top of page two please
00:13:38 so so the next part of the minute records the discussion particularly around immediate support and rest centers for those who had been
00:13:49 and rest centers for those who had been evacuated for the building that that might have included what elements of support were provided there i'm afraid i i don't recall the the actions resulting are recorded
00:14:00 the the actions resulting are recorded on the actions list i think yes we'll look at that um if need be on this point but
00:14:06 but was it is it a fact that the focus in the discussions was on the blue light frontline personnel in this respect at least rather than the residents and the families of the deceased
00:14:17 families of the deceased i i think the point about frontline personnel is probably drawn out because we are very in the very early stages of the response the conversation about families i would
00:14:29 the conversation about families i would infer from the minute was more about holistic rest center and reception rather than the specific trauma counseling element
00:14:40 element i mean
00:14:41 i mean was there discussion to the best of your recollection about providing trauma counselling to the bereaved survivors and residents as well as the blue light responders i can't recollect i'm afraid a discussion at this distance
00:14:53 a discussion at this distance um
00:14:54 um no
00:14:55 no is there any reason to think that the minute is incomplete in that respect so the the minute is is summarizing the discussion rather than providing um verbatim account i wouldn't expect it to
00:15:08 verbatim account i wouldn't expect it to be
00:15:09 be incomplete but i would also be looking at the evidence in the to be aware what was already known in the meeting and i would be looking at the the actions list
00:15:23 now looking at what we've got on the screen at the top of the page page two it says in terms of ensuring that individuals were accounted for it was suggested that the local authority should have a list
00:15:34 the local authority should have a list of all those who lived in the tower block and would be working through rest centers to follow up with identifying people
00:15:40 people what was the source of that contribution given that nicholas holgate wasn't present
00:15:46 present um i i can't recollect i'm afraid do you remember whether there was any confirmation that the local authority had such a list or that this had been discussed with the local authority
00:15:59 discussed with the local authority in this meeting yes uh i'm afraid i can't recall a specific discussion let's look at the chairs brief then which might might assist you it's at cab402715
00:16:12 i'll show you the first page of this to identify the document and it's a document that is entitled ministerial meeting on grenfell tower fire wednesday 14th june 2017
00:16:25 tower fire wednesday 14th june 2017 1600. paragraph one you are chairing a ministerial meeting at 1600 hours on the grenfell tower fire so just identifying the nature of the document can we take it that this is a a briefing
00:16:36 can we take it that this is a a briefing document going to nicholas heard correct now um if we go please to uh page two
00:16:45 page two um and look at item three b
00:16:51 b uh immediate shelter and medium term housing
00:16:54 housing we need to scroll down a bit further yes there it is under immediate shelter and medium-term housing now in the middle of your screens hammond can you see that yes and there are a number of points i just want
00:17:06 there are a number of points i just want to take them quickly point eight uh is
00:17:10 uh is question suggested questions for emergent about arrangements for emergency shelter alternative accommodation how long alternative housing may be required and how challenging that would be for local
00:17:21 how challenging that would be for local authorities uh and if we look at point nine the question for dclg there on which organizations will be managing problems such as dislocation from social networks
00:17:32 such as dislocation from social networks and key services such as schools and capacity to cope and over the page under sea
00:17:39 under sea support for those affected and families you should ask the home office david lamberty to outline the management of victim identification and support you will want to be assured the immediate
00:17:50 will want to be assured the immediate needs of individuals and families affected are being met and the work is underway to meet their needs over the coming months now i've shown you three points out of a number here would those
00:18:01 would those questions not best be answered by the chief executive of rbkc
00:18:08 could we perhaps turn back to the previous page of course let me go back to page two yes so the first question is addressed to dclg
00:18:19 to dclg in expectation that their minister would have been briefed by red who were at the scg that morning so that's where i would expect that information to come through
00:18:32 that information to come through there's always a balance in these moments
00:18:35 moments as to whether you draw in those who are busy responding on the ground to answer the questions or whether you draw that information through so it would be normal to ask that question of dclg drawing on red's
00:18:47 question of dclg drawing on red's knowledge
00:18:48 knowledge and the second one likewise could we go to the next page
00:18:55 and then in terms of the home office question um address in that direction because of specific home office um policy responsibilities in this area i
00:19:06 policy responsibilities in this area i think
00:19:09 think yes um
00:19:11 yes um but was it the case though that asking these central government individuals would only elicit answers which in turn would have to have come from the little authority
00:19:23 come from the little authority or at least be at least be informed significantly by what the local authority was saying i would expect them to come from the scg yes
00:19:36 now the minute if we can go back to that uh
00:19:42 uh cab40s2714 doesn't record discussion of those particular issues
00:19:47 issues um that i mean we can look at it all to take it take it from me that it doesn't but your recollection may be better than the record were these questions asked by the chair
00:19:59 were these questions asked by the chair of the meeting nick heard so i i would um my my interpretation is that the paragraph at the top of this page
00:20:10 paragraph at the top of this page records
00:20:12 records the
00:20:13 the the salient point of the discussion in relation to that question which was addressed to the home office about the identification of individuals so
00:20:22 so i would assume that that question was asked and the conversation concluded that
00:20:27 that there was an expectation that the local authority would produce the list of those in the tower block reasonable expectation and that means of identifying their
00:20:38 and that means of identifying their location would be followed up through rest centers so my assumption is that that is a response to that question right but that's you sitting there today working out as a matter of logic having seen two
00:20:49 as a matter of logic having seen two separate documents and connecting the two i'm really interested in your recollection let me try this slightly differently um did you have the questions for for ministers the briefing paper in your hands when you attended the meeting
00:21:01 hands when you attended the meeting yes you did did the meeting follow that another did nick heard follow his script so to speak and go through the questions as written for him i i'm afraid i can't give you a precise
00:21:13 i i'm afraid i can't give you a precise answer to the to the exact questions he asked in a meeting five years ago i mean ministers generally speaking use the chairs brief quite closely as a guide but of course
00:21:25 guide but of course areas of discussion can emerge in the meeting they may feel more reassured on some areas based on other information so it's not a it's not something they have to follow
00:21:36 it's not something they have to follow to the letter but generally they do but you've had many experiences of many high-level meetings do you recall whether this was one which stuck to the script in an organized way or whether it descended as it were into a general
00:21:47 descended as it were into a general discussion i don't think it descended into a general discussion but i'm afraid i can't recall precisely which question was and wasn't asked now the minute doesn't record discussion of other
00:21:58 doesn't record discussion of other other issues relating to the bereaved survival residence and i'll give you four examples rest centers financial assistance information and support for those looking for their loved ones and
00:22:10 those looking for their loved ones and other associated humanitarian needs do you know why that is the case um i i don't
00:22:22 did you consider that the meeting had been effectively chaired with the right questions being asked about the right topics
00:22:29 topics yes i i think my recollection at the time was that the meeting had um agreed a sensible list of actions and and broadly done what we expected it to do on that day
00:22:40 do on that day what preparations had you yourself done for that meeting
00:22:46 forgive me what exactly do you mean do you mean in terms of my own attendance yes um so i would have been i would have familiarized myself with all of the documents being ready for the meeting
00:22:58 documents being ready for the meeting um i would have talked to my readiness and response team led by stuart wainwright about any issues they were particularly concerned about and of course i had been involved in
00:23:10 involved in in the response through the day as as you've seen from the email chains that you have in your evidence specifically had you
00:23:20 had you looked at
00:23:21 looked at the dock and there there are a lot of them there are a number of core documents
00:23:26 documents um the london or pan london response documents published by london resilience and in particular the le slp protocol uh
00:23:37 and in particular the le slp protocol uh i think it's i think it's unlikely i would have done that but i don't recall specifically were you generally familiar with those documents uh i'm familiar with the the london arrangements are set out in the
00:23:48 london arrangements are set out in the cca
00:23:49 cca my resilience capabilities team were more expert than i was on the specifics of how they were operated within london
00:23:59 london at all events were you familiar at the time with the nature of centers to be established in london either by the metropolitan police or by the local authority by which i mean rest centres survivor
00:24:11 which i mean rest centres survivor reception centers humanitarian assistance centres and friends and relatives reception centers do you mean familiar with the types of center that might be established all the
00:24:22 center that might be established all the locations the types of centers um yes not an expert on but familiar with the with the different concepts and were there questions asked at the meeting about whether each of those different
00:24:33 about whether each of those different types of centers was being considered i'm afraid i i can't add to my previous answer i don't recommend to a specific conversation about rest centers if we go back then to page one of the minute
00:24:45 back then to page one of the minute under the subheading b
00:24:49 there's a title immediate shelter and medium term rehousing and it says the local council were presently identifying temporary accommodation for those residents of grenfell tower longer
00:25:00 those residents of grenfell tower longer term rehousing would also be the responsibility of the council the council will not currently asking for additional support what was the source of that information given the absence of nicholas holgate
00:25:12 given the absence of nicholas holgate i i think it would have it would have been um provided by a dclg minister or by the head of the resilience and emergencies division based on their attendance at the scg
00:25:25 where of course the council would have been present now let's look at a different document cab for three cab three zeros one three eight one one please
00:25:44 uh and uh what i'd like to do is to have this document please up at the same time as the previous minute we've been looking at
00:25:53 at uh at cab4027 [Music]
00:25:59 uh now um i want to do a little bit of comparing and contrasting if i can please um
00:26:05 please um my first question is did you know that there were different versions of the minute of the meeting on the 14th of june
00:26:12 june um
00:26:14 um no there may be an earlier draft and the finalized draft that would be normal now what i want to show you is uh the one on the one on the right is
00:26:26 is uh the one on the one on the right is the one we were looking at before yes the one on the left uh which has one three eight one one as the final digits in the reference is a different version um if we look at the one on the left
00:26:39 um if we look at the one on the left under key issues subheading b immediate shelter medium term rehousing if we can
00:26:44 if we can scroll
00:26:45 scroll down a bit so we can see the whole paragraph
00:26:51 that that yes
00:26:53 yes um that reads the minister for local government stated that the local council were presently identifying temporary accommodation for those residents of grenfell tower longer
00:27:04 those residents of grenfell tower longer term rehousing would also be the responsibility of the council the mayor of london pressed for further reassurance and requested that contact was made with the local council to ensure that affected individuals are not
00:27:15 ensure that affected individuals are not left without accommodation and then compare that with the different version on the right-hand side which is the one you exhibited to your statement at kh-7
00:27:26 statement at kh-7 which says uh under the same title the local council were presently identifying a temporary accommodation for those residents of granville tower longer term rehousing would also be the
00:27:38 longer term rehousing would also be the responsibility of the council the council were not currently asking for additional support now
00:27:46 the reference to the as you can see on the left-hand side the mayor of london pressed for further reassurance and requested the contract was made with the local council to ensure that affected individuals were
00:27:57 ensure that affected individuals were not left without accommodation appears to have been removed or not yet inserted depending on which version came first are you able to help us
00:28:08 are you able to help us about why it is that that line in the left hand side doesn't appear on the right hand side which is the version that you exhibited i'm afraid i'm not that they they look
00:28:19 i'm afraid i'm not that they they look to me like uh two different versions you know in the drafting process of creating the minute
00:28:27 minute i would need to go back to the files to work out in which order they they came and talked to the drafter to understand why they amended their
00:28:38 why they amended their their notes normally people taking minutes of these meetings take a long hand note and then they refer back to it to amend and improve them in it afterwards but i would need to talk to that person
00:28:50 but i would need to talk to that person i'm afraid well all right but you exhibited the one on the right hand side as an exhibit to your statement when you did say were you aware that there were at least two versions of this document i i hadn't uh looked at other
00:29:03 document i i hadn't uh looked at other drafts of it no are you able to tell us whether the one you exhibited was the one that was the final version or that it wasn't and that the final
00:29:15 or that it wasn't and that the final version was the one on the left i think in exhibiting it my assumption would have been that that was the final version but i wasn't aware of the other one so i would need to go away and confirm that that's correct
00:29:26 confirm that that's correct you said it was an assumption did you receive a final version of the minutes at the time um
00:29:31 um so the minutes would not be circulated to me they would be placed in a in a filing system to which i would have access if i needed to refer back to it
00:29:41 it right can you think of any reason why you would have exhibited uh uh only a draft of the minute as opposed to the final version it certainly wouldn't have been a conscious decision to exhibit a draft no can we
00:29:52 decision to exhibit a draft no can we proceed therefore on the basis uh that the one you exhibited was the final version can we proceed with reasonable confidence on that basis i i think you can proceed that i had assumed that at
00:30:03 can proceed that i had assumed that at the time of exhibiting it again i wasn't aware of the other version so i would need to go and confirm that right
00:30:16 were minutes of the ministerial meeting circulated in draft to attendees for confirmation after the meeting uh no the normal practice after a meeting was that the actions which are the things that need
00:30:28 actions which are the things that need to be addressed rapidly would be circulated to all attendees very quickly minutes were taken purely for the record anybody who needed to refer to them would come to ccs and ask ask to do so
00:30:42 would come to ccs and ask ask to do so can i just ask you this i note that in the
00:30:45 the left hand the minutes on the left hand side of the screen the identity of the person giving the information is uh stated so the minister of state for health
00:30:54 health said something and then the minister for local government said something now those who were present at the meeting must have known who had made those statements yes but for some reason the identities don't appear
00:31:07 the identities don't appear in the version on the right hand side can you explain that no i can't it's normal practice to make reference to the person making your point and and it goes to my point i
00:31:20 point and and it goes to my point i can't be sure which of these is the earlier draft i would need to go and confirm that yeah all right thank you can you explain um well if you look at the version on the
00:31:31 well if you look at the version on the left hand side um
00:31:34 um which doesn't include the sentence the council will not currently asking for additional support which is the last sentence on the in the version on the right-hand side can you explain how that line came to be added to the right-hand
00:31:45 line came to be added to the right-hand side version the version you exhibited when it wasn't in the left-hand side version
00:31:49 version i i don't think i can add to my my statement a moment ago i would need to go and investigate the order of these drafts
00:32:00 well then how can you can you explain why it was deleted one way or the other it was either added or it was deleted there's no other alternative so can you explain why there's a difference i i'm afraid i can't without further investigation
00:32:12 can't without further investigation though
00:32:16 do you remember what the nature of the concerns of the mayor were in relation to immediate shelter and temporary accommodation i i can't recollect the conversation i'm
00:32:28 i i can't recollect the conversation i'm afraid so i would be i would be drawing on the paperwork i don't think i can add to that
00:32:33 to that you see he's recorded there as pressing for further reassurance and requesting that contact was made with the label council to ensure that affected individuals are not left without accommodation are you really sure that
00:32:44 accommodation are you really sure that it's right that the meeting passed without any concern being expressed about the absence of nicolas holgate or anyone else from rbkc at this meeting i've got no recollection of a
00:32:57 i've got no recollection of a conversation about the absence of mr holgate
00:33:01 holgate that that point i would interpret to mean
00:33:05 mean um the mayor wanting to be assured that that action was in hand i don't think that is necessarily um in opposition to the statement that additional support wasn't currently
00:33:17 additional support wasn't currently being sought but i i'm interpreting the documents now i mean do you accept looking at that that it would have been much better had nicholas holgate been at the meeting because then the mayor of london would have pressed
00:33:28 the mayor of london would have pressed for reassurance directly from him it's possible that that would have that would have assisted the mayor in getting that reassurance yes can we then go to
00:33:39 can we then go to cab401236 this is the action list that you referred to earlier this morning and um you can see it is headed actions uh and
00:33:49 uh and in action two department for communities and local government to liaise with kensington or chelsea borough council regarding the urgent provision of temporary accommodation for
00:34:00 provision of temporary accommodation for those displaced from the grenfell tower was your understanding that dclg had not liaised previously with rbkc on that issue
00:34:12 i i don't think i had um at that point a clear view on what conversations had and hadn't happened between dclg and rbkc
00:34:23 and rbkc that action in my reading is asking dclg to assure itself that the council does not need support even though they may not have been asking for it
00:34:34 been asking for it well
00:34:35 well that's a reading isn't it as you say another reading could be that dclg needed to liaise with the the local authority in order to make sure that they were doing it they were supposed to vis-a-vis the provision of temporary
00:34:47 vis-a-vis the provision of temporary accommodation i i don't think your statement and mind are dramatically different but you asked me whether that was the first contact um i don't know i'm afraid that would be a
00:34:58 a question for dclg they had of course been present at the scg's where i would expect the local authority to have been present when you say it's a question for the
00:35:09 when you say it's a question for the dclg i'm really asking about your under your own understanding as someone who was there
00:35:14 was there was it your understanding that this action had arisen because dclg had not previously liaised with rbkc on that issue that's not a point i recollect no
00:35:27 that's not a point i recollect no do you do you recall whether this was listed as an action precisely because of the mayor of london's request as we've seen in the left-hand version of the minute
00:35:35 minute the contact be made with the local council on this very issue i mean actions summarize the outcome of a section of discussion normally so it may or may not have been prompted by a
00:35:46 or may not have been prompted by a specific intervention by the by one individual from your recollection doing the best you can
00:35:52 you can what was the general impression you had uh of the first meeting about how the local council was handling the response thus far
00:36:03 was handling the response thus far um i i think my overall impression of the meeting was that there were there were no um [Music]
00:36:10 [Music] requests for help and assistance across the board and nobody was flagging significant concerns with the response at that point but we would always continue to ask the
00:36:23 but we would always continue to ask the questions going forward
00:36:27 so following that meeting you didn't have any concerns regarding the effectiveness of the support from our bkc
00:36:34 bkc i think that's what you're telling us is that right i i don't recall having specific concerns about our bkc we would have been asking questions about all elements of the response and continuing
00:36:45 elements of the response and continuing to assure ourselves that it was doing what was necessary i don't recall our bkc being a specific focus in that in that moment
00:36:58 now let's then see what happens after the meeting can we go please to your first statement paragraph 53 at page 16.
00:37:10 at the close of 14th of june 2017 you say i felt that ccs had responded as it should do
00:37:19 the central government response mechanism was activated swiftly the first ministerial meeting drew together a good mix of people with response roles at the right levels from both within and from outside government
00:37:30 both within and from outside government the chair had been properly briefed and the meeting achieved what it needed to um do you think that's right looking back on it yes i i think that is um how i felt at the end of that day right
00:37:42 the end of that day right uh now um let's move on in the day can we please go to cab3014358
00:37:54 and if you look at
00:38:00 the the email it comes from isla hurley brunt
00:38:05 brunt who is an assistant director in community resilience and recovery sitting in the cabinet office and it's sent to ian whitehouse also
00:38:16 and it's sent to ian whitehouse also within the cabinet office subject quick readout grenfell recovery now i'm sorry that it's not terribly
00:38:22 terribly clear on your screen perhaps but what she says in the third paragraph there is this i am concerned about handling re the gap in the victim support piece as this isn't a quote crime at this
00:38:33 as this isn't a quote crime at this stage i don't know what kicks in to support families with missing people where there hasn't been a confirmed death bracket dvi is going to take quite a while close bracket it's likely that this will emerge quite quickly that
00:38:45 this will emerge quite quickly that there will be further strain on mental health provision both for public straight residents but also several hundred ff's stroke ambulance and call handlers lots of talking to track people for long periods of time etc danny
00:38:57 for long periods of time etc danny cotton has flagged the need for additional support and nhs england have offered their bereavement advice now did you consider there to be a gap in the victim's support piece as she says
00:39:09 says um
00:39:10 um i think we were asking questions about victim support throughout that week
00:39:17 that week um
00:39:17 um what isla is doing i think is working through
00:39:21 through the list of issues we would expect to be considered and reflecting she didn't have a clear understanding of the victim support arrangement
00:39:32 support arrangement in the event where a family is not yet confirmed to have been bereaved
00:39:37 bereaved as as you see i'm not copied into this email chain specifically no
00:39:44 no um but
00:39:46 um but from what you knew at the time was there a concern
00:39:49 a concern about a gap in the victim support piece as she records well i think isla is record recording handling the gap in the victim support well there wouldn't be a gap
00:40:01 well there wouldn't be a gap that had to be handled unless there was a gap
00:40:03 a gap i mean
00:40:04 i mean my question let me put the question again
00:40:07 again i mean you i imagine still in the office in the on the evening of the 14th of june and still in touch with with your colleagues do you recall a discussion about whether there was a gap
00:40:19 about whether there was a gap in the victim support piece i can't identify i can't recall a specific conversation i'm afraid at this distance looking back on it do you recall thinking perhaps later that there was a
00:40:30 thinking perhaps later that there was a structural or policy gap in that respect the respect that she identifies here so i i think um there is an action from a ministerial meeting the next day or perhaps the
00:40:42 meeting the next day or perhaps the following day which initiated the setting up of the victims unit so that i think is is the culmination of conversations about whether the right
00:40:53 conversations about whether the right level of victim support was being provided so there was certainly a concern emerging through that time i don't remember a specific conversation on the 14th i'm afraid
00:41:03 afraid right and we'll come to see a little bit about the victim support unit later um let's move on in the day then
00:41:09 then [Music]
00:41:11 [Music] cab407180 please this is an email at 2119.
00:41:20 uh now it's it's rather difficult to see it but it's the second email down and it's an fyi for to which you reply thank you michael at the top of the screen let me just go to the very top of the
00:41:31 let me just go to the very top of the screen
00:41:32 screen first and then i'll show you the message that you actually get you you reply to yourself i think but that's
00:41:39 that's fairly standard it goes into the ccf system
00:41:43 system and it goes to stuart wainwright uh it's a thank you michael and it comes from
00:41:49 from [Music]
00:41:52 [Music] through the fyi from somebody called michael
00:41:55 michael and beneath that you can see it's an email from fiona stone at 2049 on the 14th of june which is sent into um mhclg red and ccs
00:42:09 um mhclg red and ccs notes from the 1930 multi-agency cscg
00:42:14 cscg now um i think i know i've identified the document um it says in bold the key messages are this will be a very protracted recovery
00:42:25 this will be a very protracted recovery and coronal process we cannot make this better for the families affected but we need to ensure we do not make things worse for them key issues and then it goes
00:42:36 key issues and then it goes on over the page and if we scroll down on page two please to current situation in bold
00:42:43 in bold a quarter of the way down your screen you can see four paragraphs down from that
00:42:47 that it says vulnerable people do you see yes vulnerable people and families have been given accommodation overnight hotel as a priority this is 44 families from the tower and 25 from the surrounding area
00:42:59 tower and 25 from the surrounding area there is still a shortfall of accommodation further humanitarian it goes on further humanitarian um
00:43:10 um uh i'm sorry before that a little bit down below that after la rest centers some heated flare-ups between individuals especially regarding media intrusion but all handled quickly no
00:43:22 intrusion but all handled quickly no other issues the westway rest center will stay open overnight for those who have not been provided with alternative accommodation and then further humanitarian assistance centers will open tomorrow
00:43:33 centers will open tomorrow this the terminology whether this is a friends and family reception center frc or a humanitarian assistance center hac will be firmed up once needs of the
00:43:44 will be firmed up once needs of the community identified further details to come be organized overnight now did you did you read the readout when you were forwarded it on that evening
00:43:55 evening yes i i think my um response indicates acknowledgement and receipt of it yes at half past nine that night yes but you would have presumably you would have read i would i would have scrolled
00:44:06 read i would i would have scrolled through it yes yes having read it were you concerned then about the support being provided to those affected in a particular shortfall of accommodation i i think having read that yes we would
00:44:17 i i think having read that yes we would have um logged that as an issue to pick up in the following day's
00:44:23 day's work
00:44:25 work i would also i think have registered that the action you referred to a moment ago
00:44:31 ago for dclg to work with the local authority on accommodation provision should assist and should assist with that issue so yes i think i would have
00:44:43 think i would have registered that as an issue that needed focus the following day i see
00:44:49 and what would you have done the following day having focused on it so i would expect the um the response team to have been looking into that issue to be talking to dclg about the
00:45:01 issue to be talking to dclg about the outcome of their conversations with the local authority and what help they might need i'd expect those conversations to go on through the day and and to feed into
00:45:12 through the day and and to feed into anything that might require a ministerial decision in the meeting later that afternoon did you see any significance in the fact that there was as yet no frc friends and family reception center
00:45:25 friends and family reception center um i can't recollect i'm afraid did you see any significance in the fact that there was a doubt about whether what would open the next day would be an frc or a humanitarian assistance center
00:45:39 frc or a humanitarian assistance center i i can't recollect forgive me my specific response to that line
00:45:46 line but but i note that it says that community needs were being identified and the type of center would be based on that evidence and that would be uh fairly normal right did you know that
00:45:58 uh fairly normal right did you know that they weren't the same that the frc wasn't the same as an h.a.c as i i said before i i was familiar with the different types but not a deep expert in the way some of my team were
00:46:10 expert in the way some of my team were did you
00:46:11 did you consider at the time what the arrangements were on the ground for how families could get news of their loved ones who had been in the tower so i think that that was touched on in the the readout of the meeting you you
00:46:23 the the readout of the meeting you you referred to before that um the rest center was was leading on um registering and identifying those who were missing
00:46:34 were missing the rest sensor being what is that west way or somewhere else in your understanding i think the west way in my understanding at that time or whatever location was being used in that moment
00:46:46 location was being used in that moment were you clear about it about the location yes um
00:46:51 um i can't remember i'm afraid my recollection is that the west way was the location we were most familiar with location for overnight sleeping that night but also is this right for a hub
00:47:02 night but also is this right for a hub for information for uh family members who were searching for their loved ones is that how you understood it yes it was the first point of contact center that had been set up
00:47:13 of contact center that had been set up that's not a term of art just a description of what it was doing let's then turn to the 15th of june uh if we go please to cab40s2231
00:47:32 we can see at the foot of page one an email from stuart wainwright
00:47:40 to catherine richardson and robert mason in red
00:47:44 in red copied to
00:47:45 copied to others in the ccs and i would imagine that would include you uh i don't think i am on that copyless not specifically say but it says cease copy ccs would you not not have seen this i think that that would probably i
00:47:58 this i think that that would probably i don't know what specifically is redacted but i think it's likely to be the central mailbox yes so you would have seen that or at least could have accessed i could have accessed it i can't remember if i
00:48:09 have accessed it i can't remember if i did i'm afraid well the text says hey clg folks any readouts from scgs today think the last we saw was last night's stuart
00:48:18 stuart now were you aware at that point and this is uh just after noon on the 15th that no readout from the 11 am scg on that day had been provided to the ccs
00:48:30 that day had been provided to the ccs i i'm afraid i i can't recall whether i knew it at noon whether the meeting had been read out to us or not now if we go to your first statement then paragraph 57 on page 17.
00:48:48 uh you say um there um
00:48:53 um in the uh
00:48:55 in the uh last sentence three lines up from the bottom i recall that i was personally in contact with david bellamy the mayor of london's chief of staff who provided another source of information about the on the ground situation
00:49:07 on the ground situation that's right is it you were in touch with him i i recollect being in touch with him you recognize that um periodically throughout these days right
00:49:16 right uh
00:49:17 uh you you say that you recall that he provided another source of information about the on the ground situation what did you discuss with him about the on the ground situation
00:49:26 situation specifically at noon on the 15th yes um i'm afraid i can't recall exactly when i i spoke to him on the 15th my general recollection is that the
00:49:38 my general recollection is that the readouts from him accorded broadly speaking with the readouts coming from red via the scg they were both based on the same meeting generally
00:49:50 the same meeting generally how are we to read this sentence in your statement are you saying that you recall that you were in contact with mr bellamy and that as a matter of course he would
00:50:01 and that as a matter of course he would provide you with information about the on the ground situation or are you saying that you recall the conversation on that day and that he provided
00:50:12 on that day and that he provided information about the underground situation in it so i think this sentence doesn't refer to a specific conversation it refers to the fact that he and i were in in touch throughout that period right did he
00:50:25 throughout that period right did he share any further concerns about accommodation for those affected as appears to have been raised by the mayor at the ministerial meeting at four o'clock the previous day
00:50:37 at what time at the time when you were in contact with david bellamy
00:50:45 bellamy so so this is referring to a chain of contact rather than a specific conversation um as i said his concerns accorded um
00:50:56 accorded um with the readouts coming from red from the scg
00:50:59 the scg and in the readout you've just referred to that that is recording some issues with accommodation so i would imagine um he would also have relayed a similar point
00:51:10 relayed a similar point right i just want to understand um your evidence a bit more clearly you've
00:51:15 you've you
00:51:17 you say in the first part of this paragraph that it had been decided that a second meeting would take place on the 15th of june and the surrounding paragraphs are all set within the 15th of june yes and then you go on to say i recall that i
00:51:28 then you go on to say i recall that i was personally in contact with david bellamy
00:51:31 bellamy were you in contact with him on the 15th of june i i can't recall that a specific instance on the 15th of june i'm afraid but we were generally in touch
00:51:41 touch um by various means through through those um few days right and being generally in touch do you recall
00:51:49 recall at any stage whether he shared with you further concerns about accommodation for those affected as had been raised by sadiq khan at the four o'clock meeting on the 14th
00:52:00 at the four o'clock meeting on the 14th of june
00:52:01 of june i can't recall a specific point but i i think it's very likely given that he was drawing on both the the mayor's views and um the readout from the scg which as
00:52:12 and um the readout from the scg which as you've seen was recording some issues with accommodation now if we scroll down to paragraph 60 of your statement same page you say this prior to the second ministerial meeting the ccs view
00:52:23 ministerial meeting the ccs view remained that local responders that is the fire and rescue service ambulance and police were adequately resourced to deal with the fire the basis of this view that there were no issues regarding resources was principally information
00:52:35 resources was principally information from the scg is as provided to ccs by dclg red as part of its liaison role and also conversations with colleagues in the home office now the emphasis here is
00:52:46 now the emphasis here is when discussing local responders is on the fire and rescue ambulance and police not rbkc
00:52:53 not rbkc that looking at the paragraph that's right isn't it that's correct yes and now at this point you didn't know did you whether rbkc itself was adequately resourced to deal with the aftermath of the fire did you
00:53:06 with the aftermath of the fire did you i think at the meeting on the the meeting of the previous day and the readout of the scg later that night which was starting to flag accommodation issues
00:53:18 accommodation issues would have meant that we were we were confident about fire and rescue ambulance and police at this point but aware that there were some emerging issues around those areas led by the local authority
00:53:31 those areas led by the local authority and i think you you can see that play through into the chairs brief for the meeting this afternoon
00:53:42 uh
00:53:46 right so the focus of sick paragraph 60 is solely the blue light services is that right i think that that is it's worded to reflect that our where our confidence lay at that moment and having
00:53:59 confidence lay at that moment and having seen the scg readout that would be right i think
00:54:03 right now then let's look at stuart wainwright's statement his first statement please cab 3014776 and i'd like to show you page 8 paragraph 29
00:54:15 paragraph 29 which is now on the screen at the foot of your screen and he says this during the course of the day on the 15th of june 2017 i became more concerned about whether individuals affected by the fire were being looked after this was mainly
00:54:26 were being looked after this was mainly on the basis of discussions with dclg and we've been attending scg meetings and who were not seeing a clear plan for managing this being communicated at this time whilst i did not have a clear sense
00:54:37 time whilst i did not have a clear sense at this stage of whether there was a significant problem or not in terms of providing adequate accommodation we can turn the page please
00:54:46 please in terms in terms of providing adequate accommodation and support to those affected by the fire it was apparent given that the lack of a clear plan as dclg reported that this would need to be an
00:54:57 reported that this would need to be an issue that required attention that day including at the afternoon's ministerial meeting
00:55:03 now you i think well first did mr wainwright communicate these concerns to you ahead of the then scheduled 1530 meeting on the 15th of june
00:55:14 the 15th of june we we would have discussed the contents of the chairs brief and the status of the response and the chairs brief contains um suggestions to probe on a number of these areas so yes we would have talked
00:55:26 these areas so yes we would have talked about that would i be right in thinking that you didn't raise the issue of rbkc's capacity with dclg red
00:55:34 dclg red before
00:55:35 before that second ministerial meeting i don't have a record of having done so or a recollection of having done so now ahead of the 1530 meeting there was an action tracker wasn't there
00:55:47 action tracker wasn't there we could we can see that let's go to it cab four zeroes one two five three
00:55:56 do you recall that that was circulated before the meeting yes this is a document that that ccs compiles to um to keep track of previously agreed action so not
00:56:07 previously agreed action so not necessarily circulated but it's a document stuart and his team would have been using right um well we do have emails showing that it was circulated to the to the to the to those dialing in
00:56:19 the to those dialing in i mean i don't need to go to that unless you want me to no no no take that from me that it was circulated um
00:56:25 um i think you've just explained but just to be clear this was a tool was it by which progress would be tracked against each each action correct
00:56:33 correct now um in terms of the actions from the first ministerial meeting let's look at action two which you can see on the screen and towards the bottom department for communities and local government to liaise with kensington and
00:56:45 government to liaise with kensington and chelsea borough council regarding the urgent provision of temporary accommodation for those displaced from the grenfell tower you see that and if you look at the corresponding progress update in the middle column it says dclg have raised this issue with
00:56:58 it says dclg have raised this issue with the local authority but a full picture of the adequacy of the accommodation has yet to emerge now just pausing there were you concerned by that update
00:57:09 concerned by that update yeah so i think this is part of the the overall picture around this issue that was emerging on the morning of the 15th which then fed into the to the chairs brief so yes i mean a stewart's
00:57:20 brief so yes i mean a stewart's statement
00:57:22 statement set out that the response team in ccs was starting to be concerned about this issue right and did that response team include you but they report to me yes but did you
00:57:34 but they report to me yes but did you share their concerns i i think having read the scg report the previous night and being in close contact with them i would have been aware of that issue as well
00:57:46 aware of it and concerned about it absolutely yes action three please if we look at that metropolitan police uh no update from clg provided
00:57:57 uh no update from clg provided and i think i need to go to the top of page two to finish the um the left-hand column off uh department for communities and local government to liais on improving our understanding of the number of people
00:58:08 understanding of the number of people displaced from the building and if we just go back to the foot of page one you can see it records no update from clg provided were you concerned was your team concerned
00:58:19 your team concerned by the fact that there was no update yet provided from the clg on that question yeah so i i think stewart says in his statement it's not unusual in the early stages of a
00:58:30 unusual in the early stages of a response for it to be to be difficult to get a handle on precise numbers certainly i think a concern about this arose through the day on the 15th and crystallized in the ministerial
00:58:42 and crystallized in the ministerial meeting when it became clear that the local authority didn't have those numbers at their fingertips
00:58:51 looking back at page two you can see that
00:58:55 that the liaison was to be impr on improving our understanding that's i think is this right
00:59:02 right ccs's or perhaps central governments more widely of the number of people displaced from the building and the building was what grenfell tower uh the building referred to i think is grenfell tower that that would have
00:59:14 grenfell tower that that would have included anybody displaced as a consequence of the fire i think did well that that's that's the question was the ore understanding that the focus at this point was on those displaced
00:59:25 at this point was on those displaced from the tower as opposed to those displaced from the surrounding blocks i don't think it's a distinction we would have drawn in that way it's just referring to those who've been displaced as a consequence i see
00:59:38 been displaced as a consequence i see now we we have the meeting at 15 30 on that day and you attended along with mr wainwright yes forgive me yes correct and it was chaired by nicholas hurd again
00:59:50 chaired by nicholas hurd again uh and if we look at the minutes please we find those at cab402720
01:00:00 uh and if you and you can you can see the attendees at this meeting yes and again its title is the ministerial meeting
01:00:07 meeting uh at 15 30 friday 15th june president nick heard in the chair and you can see the various ministers present set out on that page
01:00:18 set out on that page and you can also see who is dialing in nicholas holgate chief executive at the foot of your screen royal borough of kensington and chelsea neil jerome from the metropolitan police and dominic
01:00:30 from the metropolitan police and dominic ellis from the nfb
01:00:34 uh now um if we go please to page three under key issues you can see subsection a immediate shelter and medium term rehousing it recalls as
01:00:47 medium term rehousing it recalls as follows those affected were being placed into hotels for immediate shelter with 77 from grenfell tower and 25 people from the surrounding area in hotels a large number of people are assumed to
01:00:58 large number of people are assumed to have gone to stay with friends and family though the westway center had capacity for 300 to stay and only 30 were there the previous night given that there was a lack of clarity about the exact numbers of those
01:01:09 about the exact numbers of those affected do you agree that there was no appreciation of the scale of the issue in relation to accommodation
01:01:17 i think there was a lack of precision in the numbers this records the understanding of scale at that at that time it was the lack of specifics that was of concern specifics
01:01:30 specifics that was of concern specifics in what respect specific numbers of people who were known to have been in the in the tower that night yes now at this point were you aware
01:01:39 you aware or to your observation were others aware the meeting that there were approximately 845 people evacuated from nearby properties who also required accommodation at least in
01:01:51 also required accommodation at least in the very short term again i don't think we had that specific number and that that was the source of the concern right now if we go to your first statement then again please page 18. well sorry did you know that the
01:02:03 18. well sorry did you know that the blocks immediately adjacent to the tower had been evacuated
01:02:10 i i believe we we knew there had been knock-on effects i don't think we knew that the number of people who had been affected and that that's the source of some of the concern about the the data
01:02:21 some of the concern about the the data coming through presumably you didn't need precise numbers
01:02:25 numbers if you were looking at the scale of the demand for temporary housing but
01:02:34 so i think this the scale of the demand as as reflected here um was was diminished by the fact that lots of people found a friend or a family member to stay to stay with
01:02:45 family member to stay to stay with so what we were trying to do at the time is understand the totality of the number of people who could have been affected and of them how many were in need of specific support and how many had
01:02:59 specific support and how many had resolved that issue for themselves as is you know often the case yeah all right thank you
01:03:06 um if we then go to page 18 of your statement your first statement please paragraph 62 now um you say the meeting open with an update on the current situation and operational response the majority of the
01:03:18 operational response the majority of the time was taken up with discussion of two key issues immediate shelter and medium-term housing and support for those affected and their families these were issues on which i would have expected rbkc to lead drawing on support
01:03:31 expected rbkc to lead drawing on support from others as needed however i recall being a little concerned that there was an absence of data which a local authority might have been expected to have readily available most notably the numbers of tenants in grenfell tower mr
01:03:42 numbers of tenants in grenfell tower mr holgate was also unable to articulate any plan
01:03:46 any plan beyond the immediate for re-housing or supporting those affected or what resources would be needed from outside our bkc for that to occur my overall impression from mr holgate at the 15th june 2017 meeting was that rbkc
01:03:59 the 15th june 2017 meeting was that rbkc was overwhelmed by the requirements of its role in relation to the fire now
01:04:05 now let me just show you first of all what stuart wainwright says but first of all can we take it that you you you stand by what you say there i do you do now looking at what stuart wainwright says this is in his first statement page nine
01:04:18 this is in his first statement page nine paragraph thirty that's c a b three zeros one four seven seven six please
01:04:25 uh he says at paragraph 30 and we can pick this up three lines down on the issue of housing mr holgate was unable to articulate a clear plan simply saying
01:04:36 articulate a clear plan simply saying that it was in hand he was not able to say for instance how many people would require accommodation what services they needed what resources rbkc had to deliver these or what support it would
01:04:47 deliver these or what support it would need to do so i believe the concerns at this meeting were shared by other attendees and that is why a number of the agreed actions particularly actions four and five were directed to resolving
01:04:58 four and five were directed to resolving this
01:04:59 this do you agree with what he says there yes i i think that paragraph is consistent with the paragraph in my statement
01:05:08 well it is that's something that both you and i can agree on without having to be there but does it accord with your recollection that was my question yes my statement is based on my recollection
01:05:22 and now uh you also say and i've shown you this that your overall impression at the meeting was that rbkc was overwhelmed by the requirements of its role in relation to the fire could you just expand on that for us
01:05:34 just expand on that for us please i i think um in a meeting like this
01:05:39 this generally um those in a lead responders in a leadership role have information at their fingertips they're able to articulate where they where they have clarity on
01:05:51 where they where they have clarity on what they're going to do and where they have yet to have that clarity but how they will reach it and
01:05:58 and as you can see from stewart's description and from mine those elements were were lacking so there was um a perception there of lack of grip
01:06:10 lack of grip right
01:06:12 right you say lack of grip that seems to be a term of art at least others have suggested it is and we see it all over central government and and resilience documents but just
01:06:23 and resilience documents but just identify with greater precision what that actually means what was it that you would have expected mr holgate to have articulated with clarity that you weren't getting from
01:06:34 clarity that you weren't getting from him which led to the impression that he was overwhelmed i would have expected him to be able to give a clear account of the the number of people
01:06:43 of people requiring support from the local authority and i would have expected him to
01:06:48 to be able to articulate the plan for that how would be how that would be delivered in more detail than was the case in the meeting and stewart records um him saying it was in hand but not not
01:07:00 him saying it was in hand but not not describing that further did you or stuart wainwright ask him any specific
01:07:05 specific pointed questions detailed questions such as
01:07:09 such as is there a humanitarian assistance center where is it what's it doing is there a friends and relatives reception center etc i can't recall either of us asking that question in the meeting for which we
01:07:20 question in the meeting for which we were of course um providing the secretariat um can you tell us why this this question the general questions about housing where it is said that mr holbach couldn't offer an articulate plan
01:07:34 offer an articulate plan wasn't raised at the meeting the previous day what had changed since 4 p.m on
01:07:40 p.m on the the the wednesday afternoon by the time of the thursday afternoon so i i think looking back at the the evidence that that um
01:07:52 evidence that that um we have looked at this morning clearly this was an issue which the scg was now focusing on and had been since late the previous evening
01:08:03 since late the previous evening i and i would expect that to be the first place at which these kind of issues were arisen so i think that the fact that has changed is that visibility first through the scg
01:08:14 first through the scg um had improved right
01:08:18 right now let's turn to what happened after the meeting can you remember what actions you took after the 1530 ministerial meeting given your concerns that you felt at that
01:08:29 your concerns that you felt at that meeting that rbkc have become overwhelmed do you mean specific actions actioned in the meeting no uh
01:08:39 yes of course yes so i i think um a short time after the meeting forgive me i can't recall the exact time now um i had a an email exchange with
01:08:51 um i had a an email exchange with colleagues in dclg which was really sense checking whether they shared those concerns and um
01:08:59 um suggesting that that someone more senior in dclg should make contact with the local authority to really get to the bottom of what was going on well let's just cover let's cover those
01:09:11 just cover let's cover those let's start with cab402899
01:09:18 and i'm going to run through this i think as chronologically as i can on that evening with this i think is out of chronology but i don't think it matters this is if you go to page one uh an email second email down if you go to it
01:09:31 email second email down if you go to it sue gray in the cabinet office yes to you
01:09:35 you thank you so much but i think you've given her an update uh well you've shared her you shared with her an update we should come and she thanks you and she asks you how was your ministerial meeting and you say
01:09:46 was your ministerial meeting and you say this to her not bad very tired nh who is nh
01:09:52 who is nh i think that refers to the chair right not nicholas holgate no you can see how that question arises indeed indeed same initials what was why was nh nicholas heard very tired what
01:10:04 was nh nicholas heard very tired what was the problem with him so these meetings were taking place in very shortly after the general election of that year ministers there only been appointed in some cases a day or two before i think
01:10:16 some cases a day or two before i think we were just seeing the the aftermath of some of that right i don't think it affected his ability to chair the meeting at all well that was my next question it didn't um
01:10:27 and he goes on to say local authority chief exec did not inspire confidence though we'll keep an eye on that
01:10:35 we don't need the rest of it how are you going to keep an eye on that so we would continue to track it through the the action process and the meeting process and um
01:10:47 process and um the we there i think refers to the government effort so um
01:10:52 um dclg we're clearly already in contact so i'm i'm referring in part to that as well i think did you make any contact with the home office as lead government department for the response to raise your concerns as
01:11:03 the response to raise your concerns as expressed here about rbkc i wouldn't have made those concerns um to the home office because dclg as a lead department both for
01:11:16 lead department both for the local authority sector and for the recovery
01:11:19 recovery of which this is really you know now a key part or starting to become a key part
01:11:24 part it would have been for them to to lead on that relationship so no now you say in your statement first statement of paragraph 64 that you sent an email to dclg to seek their view about whether your
01:11:35 to seek their view about whether your impression uh about rbkc was correct let's look at that it's at cab four zero two eight nine six and if we go to page two in that email run
01:11:45 run we can see an email at 19 57 that evening so that's just before your email to sue gray a second email down on on page two
01:11:56 a second email down on on page two uh
01:12:03 yes uh you write hello good to see you both today would it make sense to rearrange our catch-up tomorrow given the ongoing incident just as a point of clarity that's not me that's catherine richardson
01:12:14 richardson yes you're right and then you respond to that
01:12:17 that uh
01:12:18 uh a copy to julian jay and you say hi catherine yes i suspect we will be in 10 vs victoria street again at that point would be good to take stock with you on
01:12:29 would be good to take stock with you on the local authority though and how they are doing outside the wider meeting now you make reference to the local authority unprompted by catherine richardson's question to you there yes
01:12:40 richardson's question to you there yes yes yes
01:12:41 yes yes you don't ask her though whether your impression from the meeting was correct did you so i i think could we go to the next email
01:12:50 email in the chain uh yes um page one we can do that
01:12:58 yes so so the second part of that of the final email in the change penultimate email on the chain excuse me is me recording my concerns from that
01:13:09 is me recording my concerns from that meeting
01:13:12 and you know asking the last question is essentially me testing my assumptions with um with catherine and with jillian
01:13:23 yes i mean i was going to take you through this a bit more slowly but we can take it more quickly because you're familiar with it but so you don't ask her about her impressions in that email she comes back foot of page one and says thanks one
01:13:35 foot of page one and says thanks one step forward with the inquiry uh and you go back to her and say no problemo three and a half years of my life put to good use finally i think we know what that's a reference to but we don't need to go into it on the la i
01:13:46 don't need to go into it on the la i wondered if jay might want to put in a call to chief exec to chief exec so to speak and give her view she may already be i guess the numbers issue were worrying me today especially on how many flats were council tenants versus in
01:13:58 flats were council tenants versus in private hands surely a sensible person with access to their files could be working out that and decent estimates of occupancy tenants plus electoral register plus council tax that's what you say and she thanks you for that in
01:14:11 you say and she thanks you for that in response
01:14:12 response 21.03 thanks catherine yes joe has already spoken to nick holgate offering specific support on the housing issue our housing minister is also intending to speak to nick the housing director and and or cabinet member for housing
01:14:24 and and or cabinet member for housing tomorrow between them they'll be getting into the detail we didn't have today and you it runs off at the top with the reference to feeding into the chairman's brief
01:14:33 brief now um why why weren't you more direct in your
01:14:38 in your questions to dclg red about the fact that rbkc were overwhelmed and what steps you perceived needed to be taken by red
01:14:47 i think that is quite direct um these colleagues that i know very well they would have known that me writing to express that concern was was setting out in a genuine worry
01:14:59 in a genuine worry and catherine's response said to me that they shared those concerns because their director general had already spoken to the chief executive and they clearly had plans for further conversations
01:15:12 plans for further conversations so i think on the basis of that exchange um i was i was um confident that we were sharing
01:15:20 sharing the same worries about the performance of the local authority right did you know by that stage on the 15th of june that
01:15:32 that nicholas holgate had agreed with john baradel to and i'm choosing my words carefully head to activate london gold i don't think i did know that no right
01:15:43 i don't think i did know that no right was that something you should have known given that it might have affected materially affected your views of the local authority and its needs going forward it's not something i
01:15:54 needs going forward it's not something i would expect to have been consulted on um i would have expected to to find out you know reasonably swiftly afterwards if it had a material impact on the response i think in fact i found out in
01:16:06 response i think in fact i found out in the very early the following morning i think that's correct now at the top of the email string you suggest to catch up the next day
01:16:17 you suggest to catch up the next day 16th did that catch up happen um i i can't recollect this certainly would have been lots of contact between the response team and dclg through the
01:16:29 the response team and dclg through the morning right do you know what the next thing was that you discussed with with uh dclg that next morning i'm afraid not i can't i can't recall now let's um let's round off the day
01:16:41 now let's um let's round off the day then at uh paragraph 65 of your first statement of page 19. mr german looking at the clock that it will be a convenient moment after this this yeah well let's take this first shall we we may thank you and um you can
01:16:54 shall we we may thank you and um you can you see you say there at paragraph 65 as follows at the close of 15 june 2017 i remained of the view that emergency response mechanism for which ccs is responsible was working
01:17:05 which ccs is responsible was working well
01:17:06 well the right people were given the right information to generate the right decisions and recommendations my concern was with the capacity of rbkc to cope which i considered that the relevant government department dclg was aware of
01:17:18 government department dclg was aware of and considering how to act on what exactly was the emergency response mechanism that you say was working well that's a reference to the ministerial
01:17:30 that's a reference to the ministerial meetings being convened right were you at the time confidence that dclg had sufficient capacity and expertise within it to deal with the concerns about our bkc
01:17:44 to deal with the concerns about our bkc i i can't recall having a specific view on um capacity at that moment um
01:17:52 um i think the email change show that dclg was still in the process of understanding the scale of the ask which might come to them so i think it would have been difficult to
01:18:03 i think it would have been difficult to be clear on capacity at that moment with hindsight perhaps do you accept that you should have been more proactive in probing dclg red about exactly what was going to be done to address the problems
01:18:15 going to be done to address the problems and concerns about rbkc uh no i don't think so i mean those are colleagues that i knew very well and
01:18:23 and their response reassured me that they were on the case that they'd taken this to very senior levels in their department that they had further plans for constant contact even at ministerial
01:18:35 for constant contact even at ministerial level
01:18:36 level so it looked to me like it was being taken very seriously and it was in within their area of responsibility so on that basis um i don't think uh it would have been helpful for me to have probed further
01:18:48 probed further mr chairman it's not a convenient moment yes thank you very much well uh the summit we will have our morning break at that point we'll resume please at 25 to 12 and as before please don't talk to anyone about
01:18:59 before please don't talk to anyone about your evidence while you're out of the room
01:19:01 room all right thank you very much
01:19:10 thank you mr millet 25 to 12.
01:35:09 would you ask for something to come back in please
01:35:21 right the seventh on we go yes yes yes mr chairman uh ms hammond the 16th of june the friday let's turn to that uh now do you remember
01:35:33 uh now do you remember whether there was a handover um from stuart wainwright to peter talentire on that evening on the evening of the 15th of june yes i think that's correct stuart and
01:35:44 yes i think that's correct stuart and peter have have given evidence on that and well they have but you recall that i can't remember if i was present at that handover no right now peter talenter just to identify him he was the
01:35:56 talenter just to identify him he was the head of crisis the crisis management team within the ccs wasn't he uh he was head of the um operations team so that the team which um was responsible in particular for the provision of the the sites and the the
01:36:09 provision of the the sites and the the doctrine
01:36:10 doctrine and he was very experienced extremely experienced yes yes and i think stuart wainwright was handing over because he was about to go on uh on annual leave correct so peter had previously been in the role that stewart
01:36:22 previously been in the role that stewart was in at that time so he was very well versed in how to do that job yes now there were a number of developments over the course of the morning of friday the 16th of june i'm going to show you in
01:36:33 16th of june i'm going to show you in turn and first let's look at correspondence from the home office who were the lead government department in this response can we start please with cab3012037
01:36:44 page two
01:36:47 and i'd like to go to page two eight and an email at 8 56. at the at the top at the top of that page from f min ps
01:36:58 page from f min ps uh to
01:37:00 uh to the office of sajid javid copy to the office of alex sharma and you you see that yes
01:37:07 that yes uh and
01:37:09 uh and uh f
01:37:10 uh f uh pierre f min ps i think is fire minister private secretary so it's nick heard isn't it his office yes yes it's coming from the home office effectively yes coming from the uh the minister of state for
01:37:21 the uh the minister of state for policing and the fire service yes right in the home office in the home office yes thank you now um uh you're copied into this and and um it says
01:37:34 says uh
01:37:35 uh it says hi james tom with many thanks tom for your time on the phone the minister is receiving direct feedback this morning from the coordination on the ground in terms of one connecting
01:37:46 the ground in terms of one connecting families and two coordinating the volunteer effort is not quite there yet and is perceived as quotes chaotic close quotes he feels it would be helpful for us collectively to identify who is
01:37:57 us collectively to identify who is actually responsible for coordinating both efforts as in a person and what if any more support they may need i understand this is likely to sit within rbkc and be one of their senior
01:38:09 within rbkc and be one of their senior officials question mark would it be possible for dclg colleagues to check this out happy to do so from here but i don't want to cut across your lines of communication with the council thanks deborah and that comes from deborah morrison who is
01:38:21 morrison who is nick herds ps
01:38:24 ps yes
01:38:24 yes now um at this stage which department did you consider was responsible for establishing that information the home offices lead government department or dclg red
01:38:35 dclg red which information are you referring to the
01:38:37 the the name of the individual responsible
01:38:42 yes well there are a number of bits of information but um yes i mean one can take that as the first point so i think it um it's absolutely right that that was uh within dclg's
01:38:53 that that was uh within dclg's responsibility both as the lead department for local authorities and because of their red responsibilities and of course because they would be lead on the recovery
01:39:04 they would be lead on the recovery operation which is what we were heading into on on this friday just in relation to conduits of information would you have expected to receive that information from the dclg red given their role as a link
01:39:16 dclg red given their role as a link between local responders and central government yes i think that would be uh normal yes right so not the home office then
01:39:24 then no i i think the home office here are doing the the right thing their minister has received a piece of information they're asking their dclg colleagues for the answer to that question rather than cutting across them
01:39:36 cutting across them right uh and would you have expected that information to have been established by this point this is morning of the 16th um i i would certainly expect uh the lead the lead to be a known person yes
01:39:48 lead the lead to be a known person yes yes
01:39:49 yes now um if you go please two uh
01:39:54 two uh cab30s12037
01:40:02 you forward an email at 902
01:40:08 if you say yeah i'm saying sorry if you go to page one of this foot of page one you can see you have sent an email at 902 to catherine richardson and jillian k
01:40:19 to catherine richardson and jillian k would have catch up forwarding would it catch up mid-morning suit you guys perhaps 10 30. yes and then there's a follow-up email um you say at the very top of the email string and this is at 9 29
01:40:30 and this is at 9 29 it would be good to catch up on the focus for the afternoon and also on the move to recovery did you end up having the catch-up with miss kay and ms richardson ahead of the ministerial meeting of that day
01:40:43 um i'm afraid i i can't recall we would have been talking throughout this period i'm afraid i don't recall that specific conversation right and then if we go to cab40s1152
01:41:01 you can see the second email down on page one there is from the home office to
01:41:06 to you
01:41:08 you copied to number 10 and the dclg catherine richardson but is also a copy to others in the home office like david lamberty who was a and
01:41:19 office like david lamberty who was a and linda gratton uh lorna gratton at number 10.
01:41:23 10. and says catherine thank you so much for your time on the phone earlier this morning as we discussed in advance of the meeting this afternoon the minister would be really grateful if the secretariat could pull together a written summary of what we are doing
01:41:34 written summary of what we are doing across the system to one support
01:41:37 support victims
01:41:39 victims to provide support for emergency services personnel three action taken so far to identify and check similar buildings four action taken so far to re-house people and what is our common understanding dclg rbkc of the
01:41:52 understanding dclg rbkc of the commitment to re-house people locally five action taken so far to reassure people about their fire safety and six an update on access to cash and how it's working on the ground stroke any updates
01:42:03 working on the ground stroke any updates from local banks we've touched on all these questions over the last two meetings but the minister thinks it would be helpful to have a summary that we can work through point by point he feels it is important that we use this
01:42:15 feels it is important that we use this meeting to really stress test the reality on the ground given the conflicting reporting as this is likely to be the handover meeting before we switch into recovery mode would that be possible thanks again deborah
01:42:27 possible thanks again deborah now
01:42:28 now just looking at the last part of that bottom of page one top of page two where it said that the minister felt it was important that you use the meeting to really stress test the reality on the
01:42:40 really stress test the reality on the ground
01:42:41 ground given the conflicting reporting what was your understanding of what that was meant by that
01:42:49 so i i obviously that the minister had received some direct feedback from people on the ground which was referred to in the the email chain you had you took me to before
01:43:01 you had you took me to before i think the conflicting reporting is just referring to different accounts of how well parts of the response were going so they'd obviously been um some some reassurance the previous day
01:43:13 some some reassurance the previous day that things were in hand that sits at odds with um with accounts he was receiving from on the ground so i think that's what that's referring to the fact that there wasn't a sort of um
01:43:26 the fact that there wasn't a sort of um you know a single established version of that at that time right was there a growing concern at this point that those involved at a central government level did not have an accurate insight into the reality of the issues on the ground
01:43:37 the reality of the issues on the ground with respect to survivors and affected residents i think we're always concerned to make sure that we've got the most accurate possible picture that those concerns um
01:43:48 possible picture that those concerns um had arisen after the meeting the previous day we we talked before about the the issues around data and numbers so yes i think we were concerned about that information at this
01:43:59 concerned about that information at this point
01:44:02 now i want to ask you about dclg can we go to cab40s1150
01:44:13 and if we go to page one at the foot of page one
01:44:15 page one we can see an email from peter talentire at 9 10 in the morning to
01:44:22 to the ccs and you specifically and he says this i've been reflecting on the fire and next steps a few quick thoughts which may be already in already be in hand or deemed unnecessary
01:44:34 be in hand or deemed unnecessary in light of discussions so far i should say which i'm largely uncited on and then
01:44:43 and then he
01:44:43 he says if we go over to page two please point five of a number and he says and there's the first of the 2.5s there i think ministers will need
01:44:54 2.5s there i think ministers will need to meet at least once over the weekend or they risk getting crucified as they will need to be on top of the detail and able to assure a media straight public that they are doing everything to address the wider problem so no let up
01:45:06 address the wider problem so no let up over the weekend we should plan stroke staff accordingly now in response to that point we can see your email please if we go back to page one
01:45:19 you um you can see your response there at 9 22 back to peter talentire and in the last paragraph
01:45:28 paragraph you say
01:45:29 you say um on the weekend i think the general feeling is we shift from response to recovery after today most of the issues are now the longer term ones perhaps a call over the weekend would do it and then in brackets you say i fear
01:45:40 then in brackets you say i fear otherwise clg may fall over in brackets um first why did you think a call would be sufficient over the weekend rather than a further ministerial meeting well i mean a call doesn't presume that
01:45:52 well i mean a call doesn't presume that it's not ministerial it's perfectly possible to have to draw ministers together on a on a call and that would be normal practice so i think i'm just testing whether we need to bring people
01:46:03 testing whether we need to bring people together in person versus do it on the telephone i see did you appreciate the extent of the concerns with the local response at the time yeah i think i was certainly cited on concerns about um
01:46:15 concerns about um about the provision of accommodation as we've already discussed yes what did you mean by otherwise clg may fall over i can't recollect entirely i suspect i'm
01:46:26 i can't recollect entirely i suspect i'm just reflecting it had been a very busy few days for a relatively small team and we would want to protect capacity for what was clearly going to be a long-running response yeah did you have concerns about the dclg's capacity
01:46:39 have concerns about the dclg's capacity to deal with the issues that have been identified not not i don't think beyond what i've i've just said
01:46:48 well um is that right i mean you say you can you want to protect the capacity i mean i fear otherwise clg may fall over isn't that the same thing in a sense
01:46:59 isn't that the same thing in a sense that you were concerned is this right that there was a risk at least that clg maybe may lack capacity i think i'm just reflecting that um
01:47:12 i think i'm just reflecting that um it is not a not a gigantic team it was very well organized to do things running and shifts this was a response which was obviously running you know pretty much from very early in the
01:47:23 pretty much from very early in the morning to very late at night um so i'm reflecting that you know that is that is stretching for the team yes yes and did you take any steps to consider providing or coordinating
01:47:36 consider providing or coordinating further steps for that team the dclg team
01:47:39 team i
01:47:39 i i they're not within my responsibility i'm afraid the the support that we did provide over to dclg was in the form of ian whitehouse one of my deputy directors he went across to support
01:47:50 directors he went across to support their recovery effort
01:47:53 effort right
01:47:54 right what was the mechanism available to you to address your concern about the need to protect the dclg's capacity so that the capacity of of dcrg and the
01:48:05 so that the capacity of of dcrg and the red team was the responsibility of jillian k my counterpart over there um so i i knew that she would be thinking about ensuring that the team
01:48:16 thinking about ensuring that the team had the right people in the right place
01:48:21 you say ian whitehouse went across to support the recovery effort was that an ad hoc arrangement or was that pursuant to a specific mechanism
01:48:32 pursuant to a specific mechanism uh
01:48:33 uh sorry could you just clarify what do you mean by specific well was there a protocol a practice a procedure a process in place written down on a piece of paper which would allow you to send one of your staffers to a government
01:48:45 one of your staffers to a government department uh no no protocol we it was on the basis of um a conversation with dclg colleagues who said they would find it helpful to have someone of ian's expertise
01:48:56 expertise helping them as they they set up the recovery process and if we go to paragraph 64 of your first statement page 18
01:49:08 you you say there and perhaps we don't need to see it it's a short point in paragraph 64. but you say that dclg is the liaison between local and national government in any crisis it is also the government
01:49:20 any crisis it is also the government lead for local authorities it comes back to a point we discussed yesterday was the dclg
01:49:29 dclg always the liaison between local and national government in any crisis of whatever kind yes that's their stan one of their standing roles right and as always as a standing role the government leave the
01:49:40 standing role the government leave the local authorities i think you said that yesterday
01:49:42 yesterday that's correct it's within the department's policy responsibilities how effective did you think at the time dclg was in
01:49:50 was in their liaison function at this stage of the development of the crisis um i think we were broadly getting the sort of information i would expect to get from liaison officers at this point
01:50:04 get from liaison officers at this point certainly
01:50:05 certainly we've provided the lessons learned documents to the inquiry and when we on reflecting back um
01:50:15 um we concluded that it would be helpful to give those liaison officers some additional training and support in in how to spot and raise overstretch in local authorities
01:50:27 overstretch in local authorities so
01:50:28 so that that is certainly a lesson taken from this
01:50:32 from this from this event and something that has been taken forward yes and we'll come to that later in your evidence at this point do you remember had you raised any concerns with dclg about uh um sorry how do you how do you raise
01:50:45 uh um sorry how do you how do you raise any concerns about dclg with those more senior to you for example paddy mcguinness or mark saidwill i i would have to check the the record i'm afraid i can't recollect
01:50:57 i'm afraid i can't recollect i want to turn next then if i can please to
01:51:01 to the appointment of john baradel and you say in your first statement of paragraph 68 at page 19 that
01:51:10 that you recall learning that morning from mr bellamy that john baradel had been appointed to take over from rbkc as recovery gold you say that three lines down within that paragraph
01:51:23 lines down within that paragraph yes
01:51:23 yes and if we go to your third statement please page 14 paragraph 34 you you clarify what you say here and
01:51:34 you you clarify what you say here and you say
01:51:35 you say i understood this to be a change of leadership rather than a change of the role
01:51:40 role of rbkc mr baradel took over responsibility for leadership of the recovery operation from mr holgate was it your understanding at the time
01:51:51 it your understanding at the time in light of what you say there that would it was your understanding of the lna g arrangements that lna g would assume the same executive authority and powers vested in the relevant chief
01:52:02 powers vested in the relevant chief executive i.e nick holgate i i yes i assumed that mr baradel was acting
01:52:09 acting um
01:52:09 um on behalf of mr holgate in respect of this area of his responsibilities that was my understanding at the time what was the basis of that understanding um i think the way
01:52:20 um i think the way the way i learned about this was through conversation with mr bellamy so that would be the basis you remember what he said to you not in precise words i'm afraid and you say
01:52:31 and you say in quite precise terms in your answer but one ago that barrett you assumed that mr baradel was acting on behalf of mr holgate in respect of this area of his responsibilities
01:52:43 responsibilities now you say you assumed that what was that assumption based on based on my conversation with mr bellamy well
01:52:52 well so
01:52:54 so um
01:52:55 um was it your assumption or view understanding perhaps that mr baradel had been delegated by mr holgate
01:53:07 by mr holgate to perform the obligations that he mr holgate had as chief executive of rbkc is a category one responder not in their totality so i understood that he had been appointed as
01:53:19 that he had been appointed as recovery gold in relation to this event so not taking over mr holgate's general responsibilities but in relation to this specific
01:53:29 specific recovery operation that he was now in the now leading it on behalf of mr holgate
01:53:38 will you say on behalf of mr holgate i just want to be clear um
01:53:44 um was your understanding that he stepped into mr holgate's shoes in respect of mr holgate's responsibilities as chief executive of rbkc as a category 1 responder only in so far as they relate to this
01:53:57 only in so far as they relate to this recovery operation
01:54:00 so yes in response to the grenfell tower fire correct right
01:54:05 right how what were the mechanics did you understand at the time by which mr baradel received his delegation
01:54:14 um very difficult to recollect the precise conversation i had with mr bellamy i think my basic understanding was that there had been a conversation at the uh
01:54:27 there had been a conversation at the uh you know at the pan london level it had been recognized i think including by rbkc that they were in need of additional support mr baradel was very
01:54:38 mr baradel was very experienced one of the deputy chairs of the lrf and identified as the right person to
01:54:43 person to take that role now take that role i just want to explore that first did you did you understand that mr barrydale in taking that role was
01:54:54 mr barrydale in taking that role was there not to support mr holgate in the discharge of his functions but to take them over from him i understood that he was acting
01:55:05 i understood that he was acting in mr holgate's place in respect of the grenfell tower recovery operation that's what i understood so not reporting to him no
01:55:12 him no but acting in his stead for this this operation and reporting to whom um
01:55:19 um well with responsibility back to the local authority but not to mr holgate specifically who at the local authority i i'm afraid you you're beyond my level of intricate understanding well i mean i
01:55:31 of intricate understanding well i mean i just wanted to see if i can explore what the outer boundaries of that understanding were did you have a discussion at all with anybody whether they whether david bellamy or anybody else about about what the mechanisms were by which mr baradel received his
01:55:44 were by which mr baradel received his power and authority to act i i didn't have a detailed legal conversation um to my understanding there was an existing arrangement by which this was possible there were no
01:55:56 which this was possible there were no legal issues or concerns raised that leads to my next question did you understand at the time that this was this delegation if you like um was being done pursuant to an existing framework
01:56:09 existing framework i i can't recall a specific conversation about the precise mechanics of how it had taken place but um certainly
01:56:20 but um certainly you know my conversation with mr bellamy left me
01:56:23 left me reassured that a sensible arrangement had been put in place i would have expected that if the gla had had concerns about the legitimacy of that they would have acted on them were you familiar at the time with the
01:56:35 were you familiar at the time with the london gold resolution and its supporting documents i'm aware of it i'm not um familiar with every element of detail no it was your
01:56:46 every element of detail no it was your understanding however it came about that the appointment of john baradel to do what he was going to do as you've described it was
01:56:54 was within
01:56:55 within the terms of the london gold resolution and the arrangements at the time or holy novel
01:57:01 novel outside it and holy novel i'm afraid i don't recollect a specific conversation about that now your understanding i think was that the decision to appoint john baradel as recovery gold on the 16th of june was
01:57:13 recovery gold on the 16th of june was made by the mayor's office or the mayor's deputy who chairs the lrf in london i think that's what you say in paragraph 68 is that that's right is it i think that was my understanding at the time yes yes did do you accept now that
01:57:25 time yes yes did do you accept now that your understanding was wrong and that the mayor's office would have no power to make that appointment
01:57:32 i mean i i don't think my understanding at the time was based on a sort of set of legal accountabilities that was my understanding of how it had come about so it wasn't a sort of legal judgment right right and was your understanding
01:57:44 right right and was your understanding at the time that the mayor had some kind of
01:57:48 of legally available mechanism whereby he could put john varadel in post was that your understanding i think it was my understanding that rbkc were very happy with this arrangement and therefore
01:58:00 with this arrangement and therefore content to delegate this role to mr holgate so the question of the mayors legal
01:58:07 legal uh role i don't think is something we discussed
01:58:11 discussed well
01:58:11 well that's that wasn't an answer i'm afraid to the question my question was was your understanding at the time that the mayor had was acting in accordance with some kind of mechanism some established
01:58:24 kind of mechanism some established protocol or arrangement which empowered him to put mr baradel into mr holgate's place
01:58:32 place i'm afraid i can't recall a specific conversation about the protocol under which that had taken place no
01:58:41 well i think the question was at the time
01:58:44 time did you believe that the mayor had the power to appoint mr baridol to the role what was your understanding yes at the time i thought mr baradel was in the role perfectly legitimately and with
01:58:57 role perfectly legitimately and with consent of our bkc so the question of the mayor let's say so of the mayor that was mr mr millett's question so so i i don't think
01:59:08 so so i i don't think i don't think i understood at the time that this had been the mayor's direction but that this had been um um through the offices of the mayor's office is my understanding apologies
01:59:20 office is my understanding apologies that that's the distinction i'm trying to draw but not very clearly
01:59:27 so whatever the precise uh position uh position so far as the mayor was concerned was it your understanding that the mayor had a material influence
01:59:38 influence in the outcome namely the takeover by mr baradel from mr holgate yes i understood that the mayor's office had been involved in in that discussion yes right can we look then at your precise
01:59:50 can we look then at your precise language in paragraph 68 of your first statement page 19.
01:59:57 um you say
02:00:00 say in the middle of the paragraph i understood this to mean this is from your conversation with mr bellamy that he was taking over leading the recovery operation from nicholas holgate for example in relation to rehousing ccs was
02:00:13 example in relation to rehousing ccs was not involved in the selection or appointment of john barrettel my understanding was that this decision had been taken by the mayor's office or by the mayor's deputy who chairs the lrf in london i recall being pleased to learn of mr baradel's appointment and then you
02:00:25 of mr baradel's appointment and then you say this as it indicated that my concerns regarding rbkc's apparent lack of plan for addressing the accommodation issues had been identified and acted upon
02:00:35 upon acted upon by whom
02:00:41 so i think what that sentence is is reflecting is you know firstly a pleasure that some action had been taken to replace the leadership
02:00:52 leadership and secondly i think my assumption at the time
02:00:55 the time was that
02:00:56 was that um there had been a series of of you know engagements with the local authority and with the gla not necessarily prompted by me but prompted by the general concerns which
02:01:08 prompted by the general concerns which had resulted in this action so i don't think that refers to a specific individual it refers to the system having resulted in a good outcome right
02:01:19 having resulted in a good outcome right was it your understanding that mr baridil was imposed on our bkc by the mayor but whatever by whatever route uh or that rbkc had invited him to take over
02:01:29 over my understanding was that the arrangement was was brokered by the mayor's office but that it was done with rbkc's consent but again this is based on quite a short conversation on the morning of the
02:01:40 conversation on the morning of the friday let's then turn to the correspondence from number 10 on that day
02:01:46 that day we were we were looking i think at cab and if we weren't we should now cab five zero is four seven three
02:01:58 um and if we go to page three in this email run please we can see that at 10 50 halfway down your screen alastair whitehead at number 10 sends an
02:02:10 alastair whitehead at number 10 sends an email to the ccs and to you specifically and also to the other other pps's including nick heard nicholas heard as you can see office of sergey javid
02:02:23 as you can see office of sergey javid chancellor and
02:02:25 and and others and if you go down it it says all the prime minister has decided that this afternoon's ccs ministerial meeting will now be the first meeting of the prime
02:02:36 now be the first meeting of the prime minister chaired grenfell towers recovery task force at 1330 and 70 whitehall ccs will confirm with a calling notice for with sos is from dclg
02:02:47 calling notice for with sos is from dclg ho dfe dwp moj mhm hmt dh attending along with the policing and fire minister minister for london operational partners and the mayor of london and rb
02:02:58 partners and the mayor of london and rb kensington and chelsea um had the ccs been consulted about that decision in advance of this message
02:03:07 um i i can't recollect i'm afraid i mean normally um alistair would have been talking to stuart wainwright about the the following meeting so it's
02:03:19 about the the following meeting so it's very possible they had a conversation about it i'm afraid i can't recall what did you understand the status of this task force to be um i understood it to be a formal evolution of the ministerial
02:03:31 a formal evolution of the ministerial meeting process so now specifically focused
02:03:35 focused um on recovery um
02:03:38 um the recovery practice is normally that a ministerial recovery group or task force that the word doesn't really make any difference um you know is convened at the moment
02:03:49 um you know is convened at the moment where it is needed i mean within the civil contingencies framework of legislation regulation and guidance
02:03:58 guidance uh what was this task force where did this sit um it's a it's a ministerial recovery meeting
02:04:06 meeting what's that i mean i know what that would mean ordinarily but what is that in in contingency lingo where does it sit in the framework is it something that's specifically contemplated by the regulation or by the
02:04:17 contemplated by the regulation or by the uh
02:04:18 uh not by not by regulation but but by um in the doctrine so uh if if a cobra or a ministerial meeting is leading the response phase this is its equivalent
02:04:30 response phase this is its equivalent for the recovery phase i think that's the most succinct explanation i can give you
02:04:35 you [Music]
02:04:36 [Music] right
02:04:38 right um
02:04:39 um do you know what effort was made to make sure that this group whatever you might call it linked to the national london civil contingencies framework or did it not matter
02:04:51 matter um
02:04:51 um so this is the central government operation
02:04:55 operation it's linked with the local would have been by inviting in attendees as it says here in aleister's email
02:05:05 now let's go to the witness statement of lorna gratton lorna gratton cab 3-0 is 14853
02:05:16 and i'd like to go within it please to page 22 paragraph 64. now as i said i think before this morning or asked you about i think is it right she was the private secretary to the prime minister with particular responsibility for matters relating to
02:05:29 responsibility for matters relating to the dclg and the ccs uh just dclg just eclg
02:05:34 eclg right
02:05:36 right and she says this in her statement at paragraph 64. uh it is my understanding that the prime minister decided to lead the government response to the grenfell tower due to
02:05:48 response to the grenfell tower due to the high priority she accorded to the need to ensure that the survivors were properly supported the prime minister was acutely aware of the events surrounding the fire the prime minister had attended the site of the fire herself and she had been appraised of
02:06:01 herself and she had been appraised of the information coming out of the cross rightful meetings was it your understanding that the prime minister was now leading the government response because the initial response had not
02:06:13 because the initial response had not been good enough in respect of the needs of survivors and families i i don't think i can add to lorna's evidence as to what was in the prime minister's mind other than to say i think at the time i
02:06:25 other than to say i think at the time i assumed she wanted to assure herself on the points that lorna raises here and that that is absolutely the prime minister's right and not unusual for them to
02:06:36 them to step into and out of the chair of these kind of meetings now if we go back to your first statement we can come then to the 1330 meeting chaired by the prime minister
02:06:47 meeting chaired by the prime minister if we go to page 20 of your first statement paragraph 69 um you say top of your screen you say at 9 50 a.m i learnt from alastair
02:06:58 at 9 50 a.m i learnt from alastair whitehead private secretary to the prime minister that the prime minister had decided to chair the ministerial meeting that afternoon which would be named the grenfell tower recovery task force from this point onwards the name recover
02:07:10 from this point onwards the name recover grenfell tower recovery task force was chosen by number ten i believe it correctly reflected the fact that the balance of activity in dealing with the incident had shifted away from extinguishing the fire and was
02:07:21 extinguishing the fire and was increasingly focused on what we would term recovery specifically supporting the victims now did you think that shifting the focus to victims two days after the fire
02:07:32 focus to victims two days after the fire this is more than 48 hours after the 8 am moment
02:07:38 moment was too late no so i don't think this is referring to the to any sort of um [Music]
02:07:45 [Music] start of a focus on victims it this is referring to the the shifting emphasis of the meeting so in in the early hours on the 14th and the 15th during the response phase
02:07:58 and the 15th during the response phase there were obviously immediate considerations in the response which by this point you know had had diminished so for example the fire had been extinguished
02:08:10 example the fire had been extinguished um so
02:08:11 um so in terms of shifting emphasis supporting the victims was now you know the single the single focus
02:08:22 right now let's you say you use the expression shift in emphasis that's how you saw it is it yeah so so often
02:08:34 yeah so so often recovery and response operations you know effectively start in parallel there's there's not normally um
02:08:42 um an absolutely clear dividing line between them although sometimes there is so so generally the way that manifests is is a shifting emphasis from managing the immediate set of issues on the
02:08:53 the immediate set of issues on the ground
02:08:54 ground into thinking about the the long-term needs and requirements particularly of those affected so that's what i mean by shift in emphasis yes and did that indicate to you that the
02:09:05 and did that indicate to you that the transition had been made to the recovery phase from the response phase yes
02:09:12 yes and was dclg now the lead government department yes so they had been from the start of the incident and on a pre-agreed basis the lead for recovery so that that responsibility was
02:09:24 so that that responsibility was unchanged yes but they may not have known about the view about the shift from what you could tell at the time was dclg aware that they had now or were about to become now the lead government department
02:09:35 department i mean they had they were already the lead government department and they were already um actively engaged in thinking about recovery so so i think the basis of your question is not not not quite
02:09:46 of your question is not not not quite right for me i'm sorry then let me put it again um where they were aware and that they were going to become
02:09:56 the the most prominent the primary lead government department because the sh of the shift in emphasis now to
02:10:03 to recovery
02:10:05 recovery as as soon as um that decision had been taken to to re-title the mechanism the recovery task force then yes they would have been that would have been very clear to them
02:10:16 would have been very clear to them now let's go to your first statement please page 20. um now in paragraph 70 of your statement there
02:10:25 there you say that the meeting was to be chaired by the prime minister did not materially affect ccs's preparation for the meeting the home office remained the lead government department for the response at this time as it did for the
02:10:36 response at this time as it did for the previous two meetings ccs drew up the attendees list briefed the chair drafted the agenda and updated the uh and um
02:10:46 uh and um
02:10:47 we've heard a lot and has been i think identified as the it's the commonly recognized information picture correct uh and is that a um
02:10:58 um a notion uh an idea that's that's specific to ccs responses or or is it a wider acronym
02:11:08 acronym used more commonly across government um
02:11:12 um it's used whenever the crisis response machinery is is activated whether that's a ccs led response or by other parts of um cabinet office so it's a common piece
02:11:23 um cabinet office so it's a common piece of doctrine and what was the role of the home office at this stage stage was it still lead government department in response to the response correct right
02:11:33 was there clarity about when the formal transition to the recovery phase occurred
02:11:40 so i think the the creation of the recovery task force um
02:11:46 um you know marked that formal shift in emphasis but as i explained a moment ago in effect these two responsibilities were running in parallel in those first
02:11:57 in those first few days and of course the home office responsibility didn't completely end with the start of recovery so really the the titling of the ministerial forum reflect reflects the
02:12:10 ministerial forum reflect reflects the the primary focus of the meeting rather than the end of one thing and the start of another i hope that makes sense
02:12:19 um right uh
02:12:28 well let me show you something um cab401150
02:12:44 this is an email we looked at earlier and i showed you this if you look at your email to peter talenter of 9 22 on the morning of the 16th in the last in the last paragraph you say on the
02:12:55 in the last paragraph you say on the weekend
02:12:56 weekend i think the general feeling is we shift from response to recovery after today so it was it clear in your mind that the 16th would still be a day when home office was the lgd that
02:13:07 that was the primary lgd but after the 16th it would switch to the to dclg being the primary lgd i i think in effect it's happening through
02:13:18 think in effect it's happening through the course of that that day as we move more clearly into recovery mode as i say there often isn't a
02:13:25 a moment in which that occurs let's then go to the minutes of the meeting cab40 is 2726
02:13:36 and the meeting is entitled grenfell tower recovery task force minutes of ministerial meeting on grenfell tower fire conference from f 70 wh
02:13:47 conference from f 70 wh at 13 30
02:13:49 at 13 30 friday 16th of june wh is westminster hall is it um white hall the cabinet office building right uh and present the chair and you can see that's the prime minister and others present
02:14:02 the prime minister and others present some familiar names there and and if you uh look down you can see nick heard is also there you are there left hand column
02:14:09 column as is uh david bellamy uh mark saidwill and other familiar names and if you um
02:14:17 um turn on please to um
02:14:20 um well can i ask you conference room f at 70 whitehall is that one of the cabinet office briefing rooms uh yes it forms part of that suite now given that the cabinet office briefing rooms are the
02:14:31 cabinet office briefing rooms are the physical location from which the central response is activated and you'll know that that's paragraph 3.1 of conops does this indicate that that cobra had been activated on the 16th of june
02:14:44 been activated on the 16th of june no um although uh the cobra suite is is often where cobras are run from you can activate the sensor the central response in practice from any location that this was very clearly a recovery meeting
02:14:56 was very clearly a recovery meeting which happened to be taking place in those rooms right why in those rooms and not the same rooms at the meetings on the afternoons of the 14th and the 15th of june i i honestly can't remember it may have been availability or
02:15:07 may have been availability or convenience of the location i wouldn't attach any significance to it right um now
02:15:15 um now let's
02:15:16 let's look at conops again please if we can that cab
02:15:19 that cab 6026
02:15:21 6026 page nine
02:15:24 we'll come back to the minute of the meeting in a moment um but i just want to take a sideways look if i can please with you and look at paragraph 1.10 in the middle of your screen there and the last sentence in that paragraph says in
02:15:35 last sentence in that paragraph says in practice the level of central government engagement may change over time both up and down as the demands of the emergency change
02:15:42 change now that that that's obviously correct um
02:15:47 um had there been a change up or down by 1330
02:15:52 by 1330 on the 16th
02:15:56 compared to when compared to the 14th or the 15th
02:16:01 the 15th um
02:16:02 um i yes i i think um central government engagement was or responsibilities were increasingly engaged as we headed into recovery particularly dclg was by this point i
02:16:15 particularly dclg was by this point i think you know very heavily involved in looking for sources of accommodation long-term accommodation
02:16:24 right then let's go in light of that answer to annex b
02:16:30 annex b which we looked at yesterday um in conops page 68 there it is uh and charts the likely form of central government engagement based on the impact and geographic spread of an
02:16:42 impact and geographic spread of an emergency in england the question i have is on this at this point did the prime minister in convening the grenfell towery recovery task force
02:16:53 the grenfell towery recovery task force and deciding to chair it on that day represent an escalation in the central government's response for the purposes of this graph or this chart so this chart refers to response and not
02:17:05 so this chart refers to response and not recovery
02:17:06 recovery the prime minister of course took the chair of the recovery task force and
02:17:12 and i certainly think it it reflects an increased
02:17:16 increased um focus from her um in terms of wanting to assure herself that things the actions were being take taken forward promptly but but this chart refers to response rather than recovery
02:17:28 refers to response rather than recovery i think
02:17:29 i think uh
02:17:30 uh well
02:17:31 well the title um doesn't
02:17:34 doesn't it just refers to engagement but um are you are you referring when you say it refers to response to the the words within the yes so cobra is a response rather than a
02:17:45 so cobra is a response rather than a recovery i see so is it the case that cobra has got it is about the response but not about the recovery
02:17:53 recovery yes although although as i said before those two things can can um often run in parallel so cobra sometimes just does take forward elements of recovery
02:18:03 recovery well that's the point um exactly was there in her chairing the meeting an escalation in the response part of the
02:18:13 the engagement of central government if i can use a neutral word i i don't think there's an escalation in the response no i think government had any had a bigger role in recovery
02:18:25 had any had a bigger role in recovery than it did in response for reasons that we
02:18:28 we we discussed previously right
02:18:34 so it was one of the reasons why cobra as i think you say wasn't activated on the 16th of june is that the response that was either over or was fading and we were now increasingly into a recovery mode
02:18:46 mode uh
02:18:47 uh i i don't think there was a reason to activate anything additional on the 16th of june called cobra because the issues that we're aware of
02:18:58 because the issues that we're aware of would be taken for taken forward through the recovery task force let's then go to the attendees list at cab
02:19:07 cab 402728
02:19:11 this is uh we've seen that at the list of of those recorded present but we have a more detailed list here and you can see that it's a an email at 1625
02:19:22 1625 on the 16th of june
02:19:26 uh which is being sent on pursuant to a request and if you um scroll down please to page two in this email you can see who was there from number 10
02:19:37 who was there from number 10 and you've got some seven
02:19:40 seven staff from number 10 at this meeting is it or was it standard practice to have so many number 10 officials in attendance at a ministerial meeting um i mean the prime minister would
02:19:52 um i mean the prime minister would prime ministers in general tend to bring members of their staff with them to these meetings i i haven't um gone back and counted how many were were normal
02:20:03 and counted how many were were normal but you can see that the spread of responsibilities that were engaged are reflected here so um
02:20:11 um aleister in relation to the home office and the response element which was um you know the shifting emphasis away from but still there uh lorna in relation to the recovery for example so
02:20:24 the recovery for example so um i think the the people who are there reflect the people she obviously felt she
02:20:29 she wanted to support her yes it's a matter of of impression obviously but was it your impression given the number and identity of the number 10 staffers that the prime minister brought to the meeting
02:20:40 to the meeting of the level of engagement that number 10 was intending to take i don't think i would have drawn a specific inference i think the fact that the prime minister had decided
02:20:52 fact that the prime minister had decided to chair the meeting herself was a good indication that she was engaged in placing a lot of importance um on these activities i mean cutting through this was your impression given
02:21:04 through this was your impression given that she
02:21:05 that she essentially requested the meeting had decided to share it herself and brought seven staffers senior staffers from number 10 with her that she was taking charge of the recovery um
02:21:16 um yes i mean always the prime minister's right to to do so well
02:21:22 well but not not taking on departmental responsibilities no but taking the chair of of the meeting
02:21:34 the shias prime minister was taking charge of the recovery
02:21:41 i want to be really precise in my response so i don't think she was taking on the role of a lead government department into number 10 no i think she was
02:21:53 i think she was chairing the meeting to assure herself that the recovery was being taken forward by departments involved as it should be so certainly taking the lead in that respect but not taking charge in
02:22:05 in that respect but not taking charge in respect of taking on others responsibilities sorry that seems like a complicated answer but i'm just trying to be precise so did you think she was there on an
02:22:16 so did you think she was there on an information gathering no mission or a a mission to propel action i think she was there on a mission to ensure that the right actions were being
02:22:27 ensure that the right actions were being taken yes
02:22:32 let's go to the minute again please which is at cab402726
02:22:41 and let's look at page two
02:22:45 two that's
02:22:46 that's cab402726 page two item one and you can see that the heading is current situation and support for those affected the chair welcomed everyone to the meeting and opened by explaining that she wanted to ensure
02:22:58 explaining that she wanted to ensure that the government was providing the best package of support to victims and doing everything possible to assist those on the ground
02:23:07 clearly would you accept that this demonstrated a shift of focus or shift of emphasis if you like in this meeting towards the needs of those affected compared with the ministerial meetings
02:23:18 compared with the ministerial meetings on the 14th and 15th of june i think there's an increased focus here yes as the the immediate response questions have uh have been resolved now the meeting covered a number of topics
02:23:29 the meeting covered a number of topics i'd like to take you through the first coordination and support from dclg if we go please to paragraph three on page three it says
02:23:44 the secretary of state for the department of communities and local government said that while he could not provide absolute reassurance that there was genuine coordination on the ground his department had already committed to deploying more people which
02:23:56 committed to deploying more people which could only help the situation why could reassurance not be provided that there was genuine coordination on the ground
02:24:05 i i find it very difficult to give evidence on behalf of the secretary of state as to why he said that i'm very happy to go back um
02:24:15 um and explore it but my assumption would be that um he didn't feel he had information which said that that was clearly the case well
02:24:25 case well i'm really asking for your recollections of your own understanding at the time rather than looking into his mind
02:24:33 mind to your way of looking at it at the time so far as you can recall it what was your understanding about why absolute reassurance could not be given about genuine coordination on the ground
02:24:45 about genuine coordination on the ground i think because of some of the issues we've rehearsed today mr millet about um uncertainty about whether victims were getting all the support that they needed at this time
02:24:57 support that they needed at this time were you concerned to learn that that kind of reassurance could not be given
02:25:04 be given always it's always of concern when there are elements of the response which which don't appear to be um functioning exactly as you would like yes right when it says that his
02:25:15 yes right when it says that his department had already committed to deploying more people what was that who were the people who had been deployed or were to be deployed um i can't recollect exactly who was to be
02:25:28 i can't recollect exactly who was to be deployed but i i think the gist of that is dclg civil servants to to provide direct support um on the ground
02:25:39 and let's go to page two please uh i want to get back a bit this is about accommodation for non-grenfell tower evacuated residents if you look at item two of the
02:25:50 residents if you look at item two of the minutes
02:25:51 minutes update from government departments housing
02:25:55 housing it recalls that the main focus here is it goes on the secretary of state for the department of communities and local government explained that the focus right now was on ensuring that the families impacted our accommodated locally as quickly as possible this
02:26:07 locally as quickly as possible this should not be limited to those resident in grenfell tower but should also include those residents in nearby homes within the cordon the commitment to re-house those affected locally was now defined as within kensington and chelsea
02:26:18 defined as within kensington and chelsea borough council kcbc or neighbouring boroughs
02:26:26 is it right that this was the first time that the needs of those evacuated residents
02:26:33 residents in terms of accommodation emergency accommodation was acknowledged at least by number 10 and the cabinet office no no i don't think so i think this is just stating for for clarity and for the record
02:26:46 for clarity and for the record that um that everybody um within the cordon
02:26:51 cordon was included in that definition now to the best of your understanding at the time who was responsible did you think for the needs of evacuated residents at this point was it rbkc or was it john
02:27:02 this point was it rbkc or was it john baradel
02:27:03 baradel um so i think the responsibility in organizational terms was with rbkc um john baradel in the way we discussed before was was acting in a leadership role
02:27:15 acting in a leadership role on their behalf right did you detect was there any discussion about prioritization of those in grenfell tower over the needs of those in the surrounding blocks the walkways
02:27:28 surrounding blocks the walkways and other blocks like tread gold house and grenfell walk i i honestly can't recollect i'm afraid was there any discussion at this meeting about the role of the tenant management organization the tmo and facilitating
02:27:40 organization the tmo and facilitating the return of evacuated residents to uh to the the walkways and and outlying blocks
02:27:48 blocks um i mean the role of the tmo had had been uh raised very early in the response so i i think it's likely that their involvement could have been part of the discussion i'm afraid i can't
02:27:59 of the discussion i'm afraid i can't i can't recall at least at this distance the exact conversation do you recall whether any concerns had been expressed or were expressed at this meeting about whether it was appropriate that the tmo
02:28:10 whether it was appropriate that the tmo should
02:28:11 should fulfill the role of facilitating the return
02:28:14 return of evacuated residents i can't recall that i'm afraid no did you have an understanding about what the role of the tmo was in in this in the response um
02:28:28 in this in the response um so i i understood them to be responsible for the management of um of of grenfell tower on behalf of rbkc and that their role in the recovery
02:28:39 and that their role in the recovery would therefore be part of the recovery effort um being led by mr baradel i see did you did you ask or did you have an understanding about
02:28:51 have an understanding about the relationship between the tmo and mr and how they would work together i can't remember asking about the specific um the specific mechanism i think my assumption would be they would be part
02:29:02 assumption would be they would be part of his recovery group can we go to page six please paragraph 15.
02:29:10 it says here in discussion it was noted the urgency to get a list of all residents of the tower block drawing on all available channels in order to get a view of the potential number of fatalities there was also a need to consider the religious dimension of
02:29:22 consider the religious dimension of burials
02:29:23 burials given the concerns that you had expressed as we've seen to dclg the previous evening regarding mr holgate's inability to provide estimates of occupancy and you'll remember the
02:29:35 you'll remember the the ease with which you said it could be done what was your impression of the extent of progress that had been made on that
02:29:41 that question
02:29:42 question up to that point i think it was an issue of concern that we still didn't have clarity on those numbers did it surprise you at all that this was still a question
02:29:54 still a question um
02:29:55 um i think it was certainly disappointing um i reflect that mr baradal had been in the role for only a few a short number of hours at this point
02:30:06 point um so i wouldn't necessarily have expected that to be resolved immediately but it was it's clearly an issue of concern in order to drive the response could we then go to
02:30:17 could we then go to cab402727
02:30:24 this is your exhibit 25 and it's the action list from this meeting isn't it i think it is yes correct yes uh now um it
02:30:34 it covers a large number of actions i just want to pick up some of them with you uh action four uh dc lg to set up uh a single integrated support service following the model of the victims of
02:30:46 following the model of the victims of terrorism unit to coordinate cross-government activity and provide those affected with a single point of access into central government five dclg to deploy a suitably experienced person to gold command
02:30:58 experienced person to gold command provide a direct link into central government six tclg to make five million pounds available for discretionary payments seven
02:31:06 seven gclg single integrated support service working with uh the council to ensure support funds established were administered and funds dispersed effectively and then
02:31:17 and funds dispersed effectively and then if we go to the top of page two i'm summarizing again um as closely as i can to the text action nine um is that the council will develop with the dclg an effective mechanism to
02:31:28 the dclg an effective mechanism to ensure the coordination of offers of assistance and distribution of materials now
02:31:34 now do you agree that this was the first time
02:31:37 time that this level of focus at least within central government was given to humanitarian assistance and support for those affected at the ministerial meetings
02:31:46 meetings i think it's it's certainly the largest number of actions under that heading
02:31:54 yes all right now looking down the list of action 11 it says cobra agreed that hmg should fund legal representation for affected families
02:32:04 families if cobra hadn't been activated why was cobra agreeing anything i i apologize for that i think that is um shorthand which has been used by a colleague probably because we were sitting in one
02:32:15 probably because we were sitting in one of the briefing rooms as you as you previously um alluded to it should be the grenfell tower ministerial recovery task force agreed so i think that's just an admin error for which apologies
02:32:27 error for which apologies right who was on this task force was this everyone at the meeting yes the task force was the name of the meeting
02:32:33 meeting uh
02:32:34 uh so there's no force per se just a meeting of people who call themselves task force i'm not sure i would agree with the statement there's no force in a meeting chaired by the prime minister no sorry
02:32:46 chaired by the prime minister no sorry sorry no there was no force per se in other words there was no body of individual uh individuals no collective comprising a task force i understand
02:32:57 comprising a task force i understand your question apologies i didn't it didn't mean to be lived before all of the attendees of that meeting would have been drawing on the the um the capability in their own departments and organizations right so
02:33:09 right so what i'm trying to understand is is cobra here a shorthand for the meeting agreed or is it shorthand for a number of people at the meeting no it
02:33:18 no it it cobra is it is the wrong phrase it should say that the recovery task force i either meeting agreed i i follow do you know how that error came to be made i think it's just a typing error
02:33:30 made i think it's just a typing error from the person writing the actions these go out quite quickly and i apologize for it but did it indicate or does it indicate some degree of confusion about whether cobra had been activated or not
02:33:41 cobra had been activated or not no not at all it's just an admin error
02:33:47 but the sort of difference isn't there between cobra being activated and
02:33:51 and a meeting of ministers uh assembling not pursuant to the cobra protocol we've been through that yesterday
02:33:58 yesterday um
02:33:59 um can you explain why that mistake could have been made if there was that clarity i think
02:34:06 i think because we were sitting in the facility in which a cobra meeting is often held as as you rightly pointed out cobr stands originally for cabinet office briefing rooms a place
02:34:17 office briefing rooms a place um it's now used to mean a mechanism a meeting of of people so i don't think there's any confusion about the basis of the meeting i think it's just an error based on sitting in that room right um
02:34:30 that room right um what was your impression of the progress made during this meeting compared with the progress made at the previous two ministerial meetings on the two previous days i think this is a good business-like
02:34:41 i think this is a good business-like meeting it's a good list of actions it addresses the issues which we were concerned about and certainly the the presence of um you know mr barodel gave
02:34:52 know mr barodel gave a degree of confidence that the the local authority response was going to improve to your way of understanding at the time did it make a difference that the focus had now shifted from response
02:35:03 the focus had now shifted from response to recovery in this sense that it was it was easier to calmly plan for the medium term than it was to respond in the immediate aftermath
02:35:13 aftermath uh
02:35:14 uh no i don't i don't think it was easier at all um but i think it's the correct shift in focus at this point now that the the immediate response i.e the extinguishing of the
02:35:26 response i.e the extinguishing of the fire and evacuating of people from the building
02:35:29 building and the surrounding area had had largely concluded
02:35:33 concluded now let's look at what happened after this meeting which happened at 13 30. let's go please to cab40s2898
02:35:47 now the timing of this is important we can see at the foot of page one that mark sedwill sends you an email on the 16th of june 2017
02:36:00 2017 and
02:36:02 and he says catherine well done with today's meeting it was clear that k and c are completely out of their depth so we should probably have prompted a dclg intervention earlier but all that can come out via lessons
02:36:14 but all that can come out via lessons learned idc i'm assuming that stands for in due course it does yes shall i follow up with melanie on london hmg support for k and c or do you think all that is in hand
02:36:26 all that is in hand now first um what was mark we could see that mark said was at the at the meeting was that because of his role yes
02:36:35 yes and do you agree with his assessment that rbkc were completely out of their debt
02:36:41 debt i think we i'd formed the view that they were overwhelmed on the meeting on the 14th
02:36:49 yes overwhelmed meaning the same thing as it is out of their debt i think in effect it's a different phrase but the same thing right did you share his
02:36:58 his opinion that ccs should probably have prompted a dclg intervention earlier well i i think with hindsight um it clearly an intervention was was
02:37:10 it clearly an intervention was was justified
02:37:12 justified i think the only earlier time it could have happened would have been on the 14th itself and at that time i think the information coming through was not clear
02:37:24 information coming through was not clear that any intervention was needed so with the benefit of hindsight might that have assisted yes based on the information we had at the time um it's difficult
02:37:36 um it's difficult it's difficult to understand how we would have done that right so to be clear hindsight at the time in the sense of hindsight back from 16th of june to the 14th of june yes yes i see and that's because
02:37:47 june yes yes i see and that's because you didn't know on the 14th of june that k and c would end up out of their depth but that was now clear by the 16th it was clear on the 15th and so by the 16th yes
02:37:57 yes very well now then you reply to this if we go up to page one higher up the screen you say hi mark this is at 1558. uh we've been working with the mayor's office on knc they were really effective
02:38:09 office on knc they were really effective in prompting the barodal intervention which is good i spoke to melanie before the meeting and put her in touch with barrydale she's spoken to him and offered support that's the red officer red officer that was mentioned
02:38:22 red officer that was mentioned so i think all okay there now
02:38:27 now in what way have you been working with the mayor's office on knc i i think that it just reflects the conversations with uh mr bellamy that we talked about before
02:38:36 before i see and what support did you understand had been offered by well melanie i imagine is melanie dawes is it it is correct yes right what support did you understand had been offered by melanie dawes to john baridale
02:38:48 melanie dawes to john baridale um i didn't take part in that conversation so i'm afraid i can't i can't describe precisely what she offered but but the office the the offer of an embedded
02:38:59 of an embedded um
02:39:00 um senior person from red which i think was recorded in the actions of the meeting is i think what's being referred to here did you have any residual concerns about the response at that point
02:39:11 the response at that point there were clearly ongoing issues which had yet to be resolved so so yes but i think the actions from the meeting um felt like the right ones to address those concerns
02:39:25 now if you go please to cab40s 5339
02:39:33 we could pick this up just before six o'clock in the evening on the 16th of june 2017 the friday and if you look at the second email down on the screen if we can have it enlarged please
02:39:45 if we can have it enlarged please this is from theresa may to gavin barwell
02:39:47 barwell [Music]
02:39:48 [Music] copied to
02:39:50 copied to others but it i think comes in
02:39:55 comes in well perhaps you don't see it um uh it's
02:39:58 uh it's she emails number 10 staff including lorna gratton and she says this the one message that came over from my meeting this pm loud and clear it was about the utter uselessness of k and c council
02:40:10 utter uselessness of k and c council they haven't been communicating with anyone they tried to shut down the church center i was at despite the sense of housing people there are people still without temporary accommodation etc i've tried to speak to the leader of the council but no joy so far urgent
02:40:23 council but no joy so far urgent thinking please about how we can ensure everything we need and agreed gets done at least someone from the council could call the vicar of the church i went to and asked what is needed now i don't know whether you saw this
02:40:34 now i don't know whether you saw this email chain at the time but my question is do you agree uh with theresa may's assessment in that email and so
02:40:43 and so um
02:40:44 um i think that the point about our being overwhelmed is reflect i agree with and that's what she's reflecting in her first
02:40:53 her first sentence um the church center i'm afraid i don't know what that refers to i assume it is somewhere she visited having been to the site the day before
02:41:05 having been to the site the day before certainly correct that there were continued to be issues with accommodation um i'm afraid i can't speak to whether or not she successfully spoke to the leader of the council
02:41:17 leader of the council and then the final two sentences i think are
02:41:20 are are reflecting her desire to ensure that actions that had been agreed really are followed
02:41:27 followed through and delivered so yes i would agree with the need to do that yeah well yeah the exercise you've just gone through is reading and interpreting the the email maybe my the thought lies in my question but my question is was what
02:41:39 my question but my question is was what theresa may is telling gavin barwell and others on this email string consistent with your understanding of matters as they stood at the time well
02:41:48 well apologies
02:41:49 apologies my my taking it point by point i think indicates that there are elements there that were not familiar to me at the time so i'm not familiar with what the church center refers to but the elements i
02:42:01 center refers to but the elements i highlighted i think are consistent with discussion at the meeting and therefore my understanding right
02:42:07 right uh now
02:42:08 uh now we can see will mcfarland's response uh he was a number 10 staff member i think um deputy principal private
02:42:19 i think um deputy principal private secretary right so senior staff member as one might expect from a in an email of this nature and he said he says it goes back to theresa may and gavin barwell
02:42:30 theresa may and gavin barwell pm lorna has immediately made contact with dclg to play back this overwhelming message from your discussion specifically we've instructed dclg to bring together what additional resources they could quickly put in to the council
02:42:42 they could quickly put in to the council and have it ready to go we've told them to make contact with gold command in order to go around k and c and identify identify where we could immediately and helpfully place people
02:42:53 helpfully place people now those instructions to dclg are clearly coming from number 10 here should they have come from the ccs i i think this is number 10 adding its
02:43:04 i i think this is number 10 adding its weight helpfully to to the actions that came out of the meeting in the afternoon there are some more specific suggestions in here but it's obviously it's not unusual for number 10 to
02:43:16 it's not unusual for number 10 to interact directly with departments like this no okay and does these actions things which dclg ought to have done earlier
02:43:25 earlier um
02:43:26 um so i think the first action um putting an additional resource i i think that was already something which was being talked about and actioned based on
02:43:38 and actioned based on the record of the meeting
02:43:42 the gold command point i would i would have to take away i'm not entirely sure specifically what was behind that
02:43:52 well what what the phrase is used is and i know that's not your email you didn't draft it and didn't receive it but no is what it said is we've told them to make contact with gold command in order
02:44:03 make contact with gold command in order to go around k and c and identify where we could immediately and helpfully place people was it your understanding uh the gold command was was going to as it were circumvent our k and c
02:44:14 and c or review k and c and look within it to see where they could put people
02:44:22 as he correctly said i didn't i had didn't see this email at the time so i didn't have any contemporary understanding my assumption would be reading it now that they
02:44:32 that they the intention was to use gold gold command as a means of diagnosing what support might be helpful by talking to kmc right
02:44:42 kmc right then let's go to cab nine six seven
02:44:48 this is a little bit later a few minutes later actually at 1825 on that evening 16th of june
02:44:56 june and it's alistair whitehead to you 1825 and he says sorry got an initial steer now we are going to have to have another pm chaired meeting tomorrow sorry given
02:45:07 pm chaired meeting tomorrow sorry given the seeming chaos on the ground due to rbkc not gripping this we will then maybe do a call on sunday but hopefully not a full physical meeting we'll be in contact with exact timing
02:45:20 why did it take the prime minister's intervention uh for there to be a decision to have further meetings over the weekend given the extent of the problems already identified with rbkc's response oh so so
02:45:32 identified with rbkc's response oh so so absolutely normal practice is that the chair of the meeting whether it's responsible recovery then takes the decision about what will happen next i i think that wasn't concluded in the
02:45:45 i i think that wasn't concluded in the meeting that afternoon and the email exchange you you showed between myself and mark said well i think confirmed that i was asking if if he had managed to take the prime minister's view on this
02:45:57 minister's view on this um so that the email at the base of the screen here from myself to alistair is me saying
02:46:04 me saying this is our current assumption in the absence of that view and then alistair recounting this is the prime minister's decision so it's a normal course of process that the chair would decide what what happens
02:46:16 chair would decide what what happens next
02:46:17 next yes the reason given for another meeting appears to be the seeming chaos on the ground due to rbk and c gripping this we were you surprised to learn that another meeting was required for that reason
02:46:28 meeting was required for that reason given that john baradel had by now been appointed and had taken over not surprised no i i think that that reflects the tone of the meeting that afternoon and the need to ensure that
02:46:40 afternoon and the need to ensure that the
02:46:41 the significant actions were followed through and and you know the situation improved
02:46:47 improved let's then go to cab402932
02:46:51 which takes us later into that evening this is now 2026.
02:46:57 and at that stage you can see that this is an email from melanie dawes to mark said will into which you were copied as well as people in number 10 as you can see
02:47:08 and it says mark i know the pm has been very concerned about kensington and chelsea's capacity today as i said in the margins of cobra john baradel took over at lunchtime as gold
02:47:19 baradel took over at lunchtime as gold command for the whole recovery and he's just rung me with an update he's clearly made very significant progress this afternoon and i think we can now be assured that the situation is coming under proper control
02:47:30 under proper control now again we see a reference to cobra
02:47:35 why was that do you know if this wasn't a cable meeting i think for the same reason it appears in the actions list that it did take place in the in the briefing rooms and and almost certainly just being used as
02:47:47 almost certainly just being used as shorthand
02:47:48 shorthand there's no significance i would attach to that well uh right and this comes from melanie dawes who one might imagine would be familiar with the difference between a cobra meeting and a non-cobra meeting of ministers is that a fair
02:48:00 meeting of ministers is that a fair comment i'm sure she would but she's also writing at half past eight in the me in the evening after a busy day um i i think it's entirely forgivable that she uses that shorthand
02:48:12 that she uses that shorthand right
02:48:13 right um
02:48:15 um did you agree with ms dawe's assessment that you could now be assured that the situation was coming under proper control
02:48:21 control i was very pleased to see it um i i think she had been in direct contact with mr baradel so i had no reason to um to to to doubt her assessment and
02:48:32 um to to to doubt her assessment and then there is a list of bullet points which i don't think i need to take you through
02:48:37 through uh under key points but they start he has taken he has taken over the entire recovery operation parallel teams to the knc ones are now in place on all fronts including housing
02:48:49 in place on all fronts including housing and it continues in that vein john has brought in heavyweight leadership and then the last but one bullet point moving the humanitarian crisis center and turning it into something much more professional looking
02:49:00 something much more professional looking rather than the pillar and blanket approach at the sports centre then it goes on at the at the end after the list of bullet points some of which i've i've shown you on k c itself john it's clear that they are in a bad way at
02:49:11 clear that they are in a bad way at official level the gold structure manages this risk for the time being it has basically taken over a political level other london councils are coming in with support after the immediate
02:49:22 in with support after the immediate crisis is over we will clearly need to consider a long-term solution now
02:49:29 now given the reported progress that was being made since john baradel's appointment and the ongoing concerns with rbkc did you think at the time that he should have been appointed into
02:49:40 have been appointed into that role at an earlier stage
02:49:46 i think my my perception at the time was that that appointment had taken place pretty swiftly after concerns about rbkc um had crystallized on the 15th
02:49:59 um had crystallized on the 15th so i i think with the you know understanding how events unfolded his earlier appointment i'm sure would have had a positive effect i think my perception at the time was
02:50:10 i think my perception at the time was that it happened pretty rapidly after it was clear there was a problem
02:50:16 and then it goes on in the next paragraph we've embedded red response red response and housing liaison into the local effort this afternoon as well as helping on the ground this will also ensure we start to get the information
02:50:27 ensure we start to get the information we need on re-housing etcetera we're also proving i think that means providing finance liaison from monday at john's request i've made sure that they know that finance is not an issue and i'm
02:50:39 that finance is not an issue and i'm confident that nick holgate understands this as well as john is it right that this intervention from dclg took place on the afternoon of the 16th of june and coincided with john baridale's appointment and the pm
02:50:51 baridale's appointment and the pm chairing the ministerial meeting so i think uh mr baradel was appointed i i think you um put to me earlier on the previous
02:51:02 um put to me earlier on the previous evening so the evening of the 15th i learned about that in the morning of the 16th
02:51:09 exactly when the red response arrived and was embedded i'm afraid i don't know you'd have to ask dclg for the the timing of that
02:51:18 that do you accept that the dclg could have implemented these actions before the 16th of june
02:51:26 well i mean that's certainly possible i think they are responding to their understanding of what was required at the time and did you or anyone else at the ccs suggest that dclg should be taking these steps before john baradel's
02:51:38 taking these steps before john baradel's appointment and before the prime minister's 1330 meeting on that day i can't recollect i'm afraid now um there's a reference to john baridil taking over the entire recovery
02:51:50 baridil taking over the entire recovery operation was your understanding that that included responsibility for residents from the wider cordon as well as those from grenfell tower itself yes yes
02:52:01 yes now um let's move forward in time to september 2017 for a moment um and go please to cab30s 14768.
02:52:14 and this is uh this is a document entitled grenfell tower tragedy lessons for the central response
02:52:22 response and i think am i right in thinking this was um authored by the ccs um
02:52:28 um yes so
02:52:30 yes so um this was pulled together by uccs with inputs from all of the departments who would have been involved yes there was a there was a cross-government feedback arrangement exactly the system right yes now if we
02:52:42 exactly the system right yes now if we go
02:52:44 go excuse me if we go to page three please paragraph 12
02:52:51 um which starts crips were issued daily um just after halfway down that paragraph it says after the bracket there was also uncertainty over the respective role of the council and
02:53:02 respective role of the council and recovery gold cobra understood that the latter john baradel had taken control of the response on the ground but it subsequently transpired that he was only responsible for the residents of the tower itself not all those affected in
02:53:13 tower itself not all those affected in the wider community or adjacent properties which remain the responsibility of rbkc are you able to help us about how and when it subsequently
02:53:24 about how and when it subsequently transpired that mr baradel was only responsible for the residence of the tower itself as opposed to the wider community or adjacent properties i'm not i'm afraid i
02:53:35 adjacent properties i'm not i'm afraid i i was
02:53:37 i was my understanding at the time was that he was responsible for both throughout in his role at recovery gold so i think this report is reflecting um different understandings of that but
02:53:49 um different understandings of that but that that was not my understanding that his role split out in that way right when did you first discover that it had been was it when we read this i'm assuming you did read this i i did read this after the fact obviously
02:54:01 i did read this after the fact obviously yes
02:54:03 yes after the fact well did you have any contribution to it did you make any did you have any input into this document um
02:54:11 i i can't specifically recollect i mean normally i would provide my views in the same way as other people in ccs
02:54:20 did you consider either at the time or later that the uncertainty that has emerged about the scope of john baradel's role contribute to the ongoing problems relating to
02:54:32 to the ongoing problems relating to evacuated residents as i say i wasn't aware of uncertainty about his role at the time let's then turn to uh the following days then starting with
02:54:43 uh the following days then starting with the saturday the 17th of june now on that day i think you'll recall that there was a further prime minister chaired meeting correct and that happened at 11 a.m
02:54:54 correct and that happened at 11 a.m yes correct and that you attended yes yes
02:54:57 yes and if we go to the minute it's at cab40s 2735
02:55:07 and you can see who was present
02:55:11 uh it included john baradel by telephone if you turn to page two
02:55:16 two please you can see i tell a teleconference you have philip hammond don baradel and mark sedwill and if you go on please to the bottom of
02:55:27 and if you go on please to the bottom of page two
02:55:28 page two scroll to the bottom paragraph five in discussion the following main points were raised and if you go over to the top of page three you can see a set of bullet points five bullet points
02:55:39 five bullet points uh at first residents were unsure how to access services and support and needed help to do so officials with high visibility jackets or similar should be deployed to the area to advise members of the community
02:55:51 area to advise members of the community how to get the support they needed it would be important to explain that it would take time to announce the final number of fatalities due to the challenges surrounding body retrieval and identification
02:56:02 and identification and some members of the public may be reluctant to come forward as they may not have been legally registered at grenfell tower the government should ensure that these individuals are reassured that no action will be taken against them and a meeting planned with
02:56:14 against them and a meeting planned with members of the local community later that day
02:56:18 that day it was important that the government and recovery goal were represented to hear directly from those affected and answer questions on the response
02:56:28 now one of is it right one of the continuing issues through the week was the lack of clear information and signposting of support for survivors residents and bereaved is that right
02:56:39 is that right um
02:56:40 um i think as recorded here it's completely correct the lack of clarity on how exactly to access support was a was a continued issue yes and if we scroll down please to the foot of the page
02:56:52 down please to the foot of the page under item two update on key actions a coordination of government support for those affected eight says this recovery gold provided an update on the coordination of local
02:57:03 an update on the coordination of local recovery and then if you look at little one it says of the 845 individuals had been evacuated some had now returned many were unable to return and some had chosen not to return
02:57:16 re-housing efforts had been prioritized according to two categories residents of grenfell tower category a and residents displaced from the wider community category b work was underway to re-house those
02:57:27 work was underway to re-house those displaced to properties appropriate to family size and need offers would be made to families on monday now you can see the prioritization that's identified to the meeting there
02:57:38 that's identified to the meeting there and that was what john baradel was telling you do you know who had decided on that priority i i don't i'm afraid did was your understanding that those categories were to be treated equally a
02:57:50 categories were to be treated equally a and b or was to it was a to be given priority over b i think my understanding was that the categorization reflected that they were likely have to have different
02:58:01 likely have to have different needs and requirements and therefore um they had been grouped in that way
02:58:09 right so they were categorized by reference to difference in need not by reference to difference in prioritization is that your under your understanding i i think so but to be honest my my recollection is not very
02:58:21 honest my my recollection is not very clear
02:58:23 and then uh if we go to
02:58:27 to cab402980
02:58:32 now this takes us um
02:58:35 um late into the day on the 17th of june there's an email if you go to the foot of page one and over to page two from mark sedwill uh to
02:58:47 uh to the office of melanie dawes but if you go over to the top of page two you can see you are copied in on it uh and it's timed at 23 47 on the 17th
02:58:58 uh and it's timed at 23 47 on the 17th of june i'm afraid i we i didn't show you that at the foot of page one but take that from me and he says this um hi melanie thanks i was on the phone at today's cobra a few points struck me
02:59:12 at today's cobra a few points struck me and just just pausing there
02:59:14 there uh again now we see mark sedwill himself uh referring to this meeting as a cable meeting was this another error or was this evidence of some some kind of confusion no i don't think it's
02:59:26 of confusion no i don't think it's confusion it's just a shorthand for a meeting of this type right in the same way that melanie dawes used it
02:59:36 right
02:59:42 and he says a few points struck me and then the second one down john b's sense of grip was palpable so i hope the situation on the ground will now gain and demonstrate some momentum but dot dot dot third bullet point do we
02:59:55 but dot dot dot third bullet point do we need a gold for whitehall on all the wider issues or maybe a gold plus gold minister e.g joe ferrar plus greg hans i think it's a reference to dr joe farrar
03:00:06 think it's a reference to dr joe farrar they would have to drop everything else i fear this will become our new orleans otherwise
03:00:13 first what did you understand mr sedwill to mean by i fear this will become our new orleans otherwise
03:00:21 i think i understood him to mean that um that the response would not be adequate to meet needs at the time and was this a reference to the criticisms of
03:00:33 the criticisms of the white house that had arisen as a result of
03:00:36 result of the united states central government's handling of hurricane katrina i assume so but you would need to confirm that with mark but i'm just asking about your understanding as one of the people who received this email at the
03:00:47 people who received this email at the time that that was my interpretation yes right
03:00:50 right thank you that's secondly um the concept of gold for whitehall or gold plus gold minister was that a concept
03:01:01 was that a concept was that new or was that written into the
03:01:04 the existing
03:01:05 existing contingency frameworks no so i i don't think that is the standard um sort of uh concept that exists in the doctrine gold is normally used um particularly by
03:01:16 gold is normally used um particularly by the police but other first responders to um to refer to the person in strategic command of a particular operation
03:01:26 operation i think mark is drawing on his understanding of that framework and using that term to describe the sort of role that he thinks is needed i see thank you and we will come to the
03:01:37 i see thank you and we will come to the 18th of june at
03:01:40 at after the lunch break which i'm now going to ask the chairman mr chairman is that a convenient moment yes it is mr millet well we'll come to it i think at two o'clock please we'll break there as i say resume at two o'clock and again
03:01:52 i say resume at two o'clock and again please don't talk to anyone about your evidence over the break all right thank you very much
03:02:03 thank you mr will it's two o'clock please
03:03:41 you