Peter Madison, TMO's Director of Assets and Regeneration, gives evidence about his oversight of the Grenfell Tower refurbishment project, his qualifications, fire safety training, reliance on professional consultants, and the late disclosure of notebooks that had been in his possession.
00:00:13 good afternoon everyone welcome to today's hearing we're going to begin the afternoon by hearing further evidence from one of the former employees of the tenant management organization
00:00:24 organization yes mr chairman thank you very much i now call mr peter madison please
00:00:41 can you please
00:00:46 sincerely and truly declare and affirm that the evidence i shall give shall be the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth thank you very much mr madison do sit down make yourself comfortable
00:00:59 down make yourself comfortable all right yes mr millet mr chairman thank you mr madison good afternoon can i start by thanking you very much for coming to the inquiry and assisting us with our investigations we are very grateful to you if you have
00:01:11 we are very grateful to you if you have any difficulty understanding my questions or you want me to ask the question again i'll put the point in a different way to you i'm happy to do that if you're feeling you need a break at any time please indicate and we can take
00:01:23 any time please indicate and we can take a break we will take scheduled breaks halfway through the afternoon and halfway through the mornings
00:01:28 mornings that you're going to be giving evidence the other thing i would just ask you to do please is to keep your voice up if you can say that the person who sits to your right can get down everything you're
00:01:40 right can get down everything you're saying onto the transcript um if you nod or shake your head instead of a yes or a no that doesn't go onto the transcript so if you would say yes or no as the case may be
00:01:49 may be that would be very helpful now you've made three witness statements to the inquiry can i please take you to them they are in a folder on your desk but they will also appear on the screen in front of you as
00:02:01 appear on the screen in front of you as will all the documents to which we will be going together during the course of your examination um the first of your witness statements is tmo
00:02:10 is tmo 50892
00:02:13 50892 that's dated the 8th of february 2019 and if you go please to page 52 you can see that there's a signature there is that your signature it is i'm going
00:02:24 is that your signature it is i'm going to call that your first witness statement
00:02:26 statement your second witness statement is at
00:02:31 tm00847337
00:02:34 and that the that is dated the 13th of november
00:02:38 november 2019 and if you go to page 21 please you'll see a signature there is that your signature it is and your third statement is tmo double zero eight seven three eight and
00:02:50 double zero eight seven three eight and that's dated the 17th of june 2020. is there a signature on page two if we go to that is that your signature it is and i'll call that your third witness statement
00:03:01 call that your third witness statement have you read each of these witness statements recently and can you confirm that the contents are true
00:03:09 are true i can yes have you discussed these statements or the evidence that you're going to give with anybody before coming here today no no mr madison i just want to say something
00:03:18 something so that you and others listening to this these proceedings can understand at 16 40 on friday afternoon last kennedy's who are the tmo solicitors
00:03:30 kennedy's who are the tmo solicitors told us
00:03:31 told us that only that morning you had told them that you had hard copy notebooks in your possession at your home
00:03:37 home those notebooks were immediately made available to the inquiry and disclosure to core participants has now taken place i am going to be asking you some questions about how it came about
00:03:49 questions about how it came about that kennedys did not have those notebooks until last friday but i want to make it very clear to you right at the start of your examination and also to those who are watching this examination
00:04:01 examination that i'm going to leave that topic until the very end of your examination on the substantive issues the reason for that is that as we've been told you've been
00:04:12 that as we've been told you've been advised by kennedy's that you should have separate legal representation in respect of the matter of the notebooks and diaries and that you've taken that advice and that your your solicitor who will
00:04:23 that your your solicitor who will obviously be new to the inquiry will need a little bit of time to be properly briefed on the question of the notebooks and in any case your new solicitor won't be familiar with
00:04:34 familiar with the underlying material and would any in any event
00:04:38 any event not be able to represent you in place of kennedy's on the substance that we're going to be discussing within the module 1 timetable so in order to preserve the timetable and to get your evidence we will take it
00:04:50 and to get your evidence we will take it and then come to the question of the non-disclosure of the notebooks at the end when your solicitor and new council will be here and able to represent you personally on that issue now to be clear with you in the course
00:05:02 now to be clear with you in the course of your examination we will be going to parts of the notebooks and diaries where we need to just so that you understand now i have a question subject to the notebooks and diaries issue
00:05:14 notebooks and diaries issue to which we will as i say return later can you confirm that your statements your three statements are in substance a full frank and candid account of your evidence on the matters
00:05:26 account of your evidence on the matters relevant to the inquiry i can thank you then i'm going to turn to the first of the substantive matters which is your background qualifications and experience
00:05:37 and experience and can i start with your background is it right that you were the tmos director of assets and regeneration from the 21st of january 2013.
00:05:48 from the 21st of january 2013. yes was that role your first role as a director of assets and regeneration within
00:05:53 within a tmo or an almo i'd previously been an assistant director at a previous [Music]
00:06:01 [Music] at the haringey armor at haringey almo or almo and you started just to give the context or background to where what was happening on grenfell
00:06:13 to where what was happening on grenfell when you came in the grenfell tower project
00:06:16 project has started it was a separate project from the kensington academy leisure center by then yes that's correct uh and ledbitter
00:06:27 ledbitter was the main contractor on the kensington academy leisure center or calc project that's right and studio e was the architect at that stage retained by the tmo
00:06:37 tmo in relation to the grenfell tower project correct as well as uh the calc project yes yes and they had produced a stage
00:06:48 and they had produced a stage d report is that right yes yes now in your first witness statement and we don't need to go to it but it's a paragraph eleven you you say that you had always worked
00:07:00 you you say that you had always worked in public sector housing that's right is it yes right you also say that you have no housing qualification or any technical qualification is that right that's right when you say
00:07:12 is that right that's right when you say housing qualification what do you mean by by that any professional qualification related to housing like the chartered institute of housing i see and when you say technical
00:07:23 i see and when you say technical qualification can you give us an idea about what it is i'm not an architect or a building surveyor so i have no technical skills my my role has always been client-side
00:07:35 so you're not a construction professional no um in your second witness statement it's paragraph three but again there's no need to go to it you say i had more than 20 years experience of
00:07:47 i had more than 20 years experience of leading teams responsible for the refurbishment of residential accommodation prior to joining the tmo would it be fair to say that the roles you performed were focusing on managing housing
00:07:58 were focusing on managing housing housing
00:07:59 housing and other property assets yes yes what's formal housing um was a formal housing qualification necessary for you to perform your role at the tmo
00:08:10 at the tmo um i don't believe so right so you were qualified really is this right to the role you came into uh by your experience yes and by nothing else
00:08:21 else that's right yes
00:08:24 was mark anderson your predecessor in your post he was and we have the date of your starting as the 21st of january 2013. at that stage did you report to sasha
00:08:35 at that stage did you report to sasha jevons yes she i think was then the director of operations at the tma that's right and she in turn is this right reported to robert black who was the chief executive of the tma that's right
00:08:47 executive of the tma that's right and when he arrived on the 25th of february 2013 did david gibson report to you and his job title i think was cap
00:08:56 was cap head of capital investment is that right that's right now we're going to come on in due course to the detail of of the scope
00:09:03 scope of your role but just for the moment in broad terms as director of assets and regeneration is it correct that you had oversight of the grenfell tower refurbishment project
00:09:15 refurbishment project yes that was part of the main capital program that david gibson's team managed
00:09:20 right did you receive any kind of handover
00:09:24 handover from mark anderson yes i met mark anderson before i joined the tmo and took some took hand over with him you say you took handover with him
00:09:37 you say you took handover with him was there a handover meeting there were a couple of meetings i met with mark when i in the month or so before i joined in the january
00:09:48 the january to go through key issues and to understand what was happening right and did you receive a a briefing paper or
00:09:56 paper or handover pack of some kind you could take away and study nothing i recall now
00:10:02 right and can you remember and i know it's a long
00:10:09 long long time ago but can you remember any key points that stood out from the handover meetings that you've described um well mark described the sort of the position that the team was in at that time and he'd been an interim for
00:10:21 an interim for there for a little while and he was putting in place a new structure which which the recruitment of my role was part of so he described the rationale behind the structure and where he
00:10:33 structure and where he saw the priorities going forward really right
00:10:36 right so that's the struct that's the team structure rather than team structure but also the responsibilities that sit below those teams so there had been a rearrangement of the structure there now i know that your portfolio that you were
00:10:47 i know that your portfolio that you were assuming from mark anderson encompassed a number of properties projects and developments within the borough
00:10:55 borough did you have any discussion about the grenfell tower refurbishment in particular during those meetings um we did i don't remember the level of detail that was in um i think that he described the the
00:11:06 um i think that he described the the situation in in broad terms but that was it was quite a complicated situation at that time but amongst that there were an awful lot of other things that were also happening in terms of the restructure of the team
00:11:17 in terms of the restructure of the team uh but also in terms of putting in place programs and delivering that year's capital program which was in january was a priority to deliver that by the end of the day
00:11:28 that by the end of the day let's see did anything stick out in your mind
00:11:32 mind about what he said about the grenfell tower refurbishment project in particular um it's hard to remember at this this time i remember him showing me some drawings that which were on the wall
00:11:43 drawings that which were on the wall near his office and um and i knew that the project had stalled
00:11:48 stalled um for a variety of reasons at that time and so there were there were clearly issues to be addressed right during those handover meetings did the subject of overcladding come up um
00:12:01 of overcladding come up um i don't remember specifically talking about it but it was clearly illustrated on the drawings that were outside his office was it okay
00:12:13 now if you go please to your first statement and look at page one i'd like to go to paragraph three with you please and you say that you were not a member
00:12:27 and you say that you were not a member of the tmo board nor a member of the tmo executive
00:12:30 executive team what function did the tmo executive team play um well they were the the the executive
00:12:41 well they were the the the executive directors on the board of directors and the board was made up of a number of uh resident members and independents and they reported to uh so the the executive team were on
00:12:53 to uh so the the executive team were on were on the board right i see so the executive team sat within the board as the executive members of the board that's correct and the other members of the board were non-executive is that is that the distinction between them yes
00:13:04 is that the distinction between them yes i follow now is it right to say that from time to time you would attend tmo board meetings yes would you attend tmo executive meetings
00:13:13 meetings yes yes so both some not not always sometimes usually just for a specific item i wouldn't be at the whole meeting okay can you give us some kind of idea about what sort of
00:13:25 about what sort of things you would attend tmo board meetings for um i would generally take any board any papers that i was reporting to board or to operations committee to the executive
00:13:37 operations committee to the executive team um
00:13:38 team um so i would i would go regularly to the operations committee um but i would go to board less frequently um although quite regularly right
00:13:49 um although quite regularly right can we go to your first witness statement uh at page two then please said flipping the page and look at paragraph seven and in the second line there you say the
00:14:00 and in the second line there you say the day-to-day project management of the refurbishment on behalf of tmo is managed and monitored by project manager claire williams
00:14:06 williams who succeeded paul dunkerton in that role in october 2013 reporting to the head of capital investment david gibson until he retired in 2016. now we'll talk about the title
00:14:18 in 2016. now we'll talk about the title of project manager in a moment but just for the moment i just want to understand the hierarchy from your perspective at the time how much of paul duncan's and then claire williams's time was
00:14:29 and then claire williams's time was spent on the grenfell tower refurbishment specifically um start with paul duncan i mean i was aware that paul i mean i didn't manage clara paul's workload very closely and i
00:14:41 workload very closely and i i struggled to remember exactly how much of their time but they did run other projects as well yes it wasn't a full time
00:14:47 time no um not full time with paul duncanton how much would you say looking back on it uh how much of his time did the grenfell tower project occupy as opposed to other
00:14:59 tower project occupy as opposed to other projects i mean i i can't remember really but it was probably more than about half of its time i would imagine right and from september 2013 and until the summer of 2016 what about
00:15:11 until the summer of 2016 what about claire williams how much time of hers did grenfell occupy i think it varied depending on the level of activity that was going on at any particular time so when things when the project got onto site it was much more intense and
00:15:22 site it was much more intense and claire's role was probably much more and david gibson was he 100 of the time on grenfell or did he have other projects in his portfolio too no he had a lot of other projects on his
00:15:34 no he had a lot of other projects on his portfolio so he was managing the capital program
00:15:36 program um as well as grenfell so
00:15:41 so grenfell is probably in financial terms probably about a third of the overall program right going back to the distinction between the board and the executive team for a moment
00:15:53 moment can you clarify what decisions were to be made by the board as opposed to the executive team that sat within it um there were
00:16:05 certain levels of contracts and values of contract that could be left by the executive by operations committee and by the board i can't remember
00:16:16 can't remember exactly what they were but larger scale programs would always be taken to the board for approval right so monetary decisions or decisions that were governed by a monetary cap
00:16:27 were governed by a monetary cap well certainly yes from from the perspective of contracts yes um but also there are also issues of policy and were taken to board and to operations committee too and what were the limits
00:16:39 committee too and what were the limits of your authority to make decisions without
00:16:42 without needing to seek the sanction of the tmo executive
00:16:46 executive board or the or the main board um to be honest that wasn't very clear to me so i made sure that i always got executive sign off or board signing off is appropriate right you say it was
00:16:57 is appropriate right you say it was never very clear to you does that mean that no one ever spelt out precisely what you could and couldn't do without authority um i think there were levels of authority but it was
00:17:09 but it was i always felt it was better and clearer to make sure that there was a um sign up from the executive right when you came into the into the job ins in january 2013 did
00:17:20 into the job ins in january 2013 did anybody give you a job description yes i had a job you did did that not set out precisely what the parameters of your authority no were it didn't did you ever have calls to discuss with anybody at the tma
00:17:32 calls to discuss with anybody at the tma what the parameters of your authority were yes i did discuss that um and it was the there were there were written descriptions of what the authority were but i didn't think it was as comprehensive as i would have liked
00:17:44 as comprehensive as i would have liked so i always made sure that i was careful in delegating um right that responsibility give us an idea if you could what sort of areas you thought it wasn't sufficiently comprehensive
00:17:55 sufficiently comprehensive um just the sp the specific so in terms of letting contracts et cetera i would always make sure that i got an authority from the executive in general but you mentioned a moment ago that
00:18:06 but you mentioned a moment ago that you um thought that the written descriptions of your authority weren't sufficiently comprehensive um so wha what sort of areas did you think
00:18:17 think the written authority was insufficient in that respect um well
00:18:23 um well i think that within a program or a contract i think i would always look to get an approval for that contract but within that contract some for example it would be clear you know it'd be clear
00:18:34 it would be clear you know it'd be clear i'd be able to award works within that contract um so i'd always make sure that there was a clear order trail as far as possible between uh the decision making and the executive
00:18:47 uh the decision making and the executive and the board right can you give us some sort of monetary level or limit where you were completely clear you wouldn't need to seek anybody else's sanction we're making a decision is there a figure you haven't
00:18:58 a decision is there a figure you haven't you had in mind
00:19:03 and what sort of decisions would david gibson be able to take without asking for your authority um i mean that is the same in a way all the
00:19:12 the um we always ensured that we got financial approvals through our boards and
00:19:17 and through the um the executive team so we took reports up to uh to be signed off there and within individual contracts that were left david would be able to award works within those values within
00:19:28 within those values within the approvals that were approved at the board did
00:19:31 board did david gibson have a lesser level of authority than yours in monetary terms um well i think he that would make sense but as i say i don't think it was
00:19:42 don't think it was as clear as it could have been right and does the same apply to paul duncan williams yes i think the we all worked to the authorities that we got for the approvals of the contracts
00:19:53 got for the approvals of the contracts you can't help us on what the levels of authority for paul duncan or claire williams where no nor i think david gibson no now um let's go to mr duncan's first witness
00:20:04 um let's go to mr duncan's first witness statement that's tm060885 please and i'd like to go with you to page 3
00:20:12 page 3 and paragraph 17
00:20:18 and in paragraph 17 you see he says peter madison was then appointed as director of asset in investment and engineering and he had a very clear view of how he wanted to manage the project
00:20:29 wanted to manage the project peter almost immediately took over any involvement i had in it do you agree with that no which well do you agree with none of it or is there anything you do agree with
00:20:41 or is there anything you do agree with um i'd like to think had a clear view of how i wanted to manage the project but i didn't take over responsibility from
00:20:50 from paul when i when i joined the tmo i previously appointed david gibson before i before i arrived we'd
00:20:59 we'd interviewed and offered the role to david so david came along shortly after me and david took on responsibility for managing paul and the grenfell tower
00:21:11 managing paul and the grenfell tower project
00:21:12 project so it's inaccurate to say that i was taking on management of the project my role was much broader and i wasn't taking on day-to-day responsibility for this project yes i see thank you now you i think do
00:21:25 yes i see thank you now you i think do agree that you had a very clear view of how you wanted to manage the project is that at least correct yes yes um
00:21:35 when you arrived at the tmo in the january of 2013 did you sit down and read the key documents relevant to the grenfell tower project no i didn't did you read studio e's
00:21:47 no i didn't did you read studio e's stage d report from december 2012 i don't recall i certainly would have been in meetings where it was discussed i don't recall whether i've read it in detail
00:21:56 detail right when i joined the project i took briefings from each of the parties and so met with studio e and discussed the project with them and met with artelia in particular who
00:22:07 and met with artelia in particular who gave a very sort of comprehensive induction into their view of where the project was and what the issues were i see so you met studio e you met
00:22:18 i see so you met studio e you met artelia
00:22:19 artelia did you meet anybody else i'll have met others at
00:22:23 others at project team meetings um but really studioe and natalia were the key parties that i discussed right can you recall who the others were that you met at project team
00:22:34 were that you met at project team meetings um i remember missing someone from max fordham yes um and um
00:22:45 and um i'm struggling to remember who else to be honest well we'll come back to those early days later um just staying with the question of paul duncan um we know
00:22:56 paul duncan um we know from your first witness statement that claire williams succeeded paul duncan in september 2013. in fact is it right paul duncan actually left earlier than september 2013. i think you did and
00:23:08 than september 2013. i think you did and i think there was an interim um who helped out in between i seem to remember
00:23:13 remember yes and uh is it right that during the interim period which i think was three months
00:23:18 months that role was covered by sasha coolidge that's correct right so you heard is this right so that i'm clear you had paul um duncan between
00:23:32 um duncan between before january 2013 yeah up to june 2013 i think he then left there was then a three-month period until september
00:23:41 september which um where the role was occupied by sasha coolidge and then claire williams took over as a permanent member of staff have i got that right yes i think that's right thank you
00:23:49 thank you now um paul duncan was actually only ever a temporary employee wasn't he he was
00:23:54 was yes so you had no permanent member of staff
00:23:57 staff working primarily on the grenfell tower project
00:24:02 project between the time you arrived in january 2013
00:24:05 2013 and september 2013 when claire williams arrived right
00:24:12 can we go to your second witness statement please at page 19. and i want to go to paragraph 86 and there you say in the second line
00:24:24 and there you say in the second line uh i recall attending claire's interview that's claire williams interview however i cannot recall the substance of what was said my understanding is that there was a documented selection process led by
00:24:35 documented selection process led by david gibson and supported by the human resources team claire will have completed an application explaining how her skills and experience met the requirements of the job description and person specification her skills and
00:24:47 and person specification her skills and experience were tested through an interview process now apart from attending her interview what role did you have in the recruitment of claire williams that was the only role i played right
00:24:59 that was the only role i played right were you aware that she and david gibson had worked together previously at circle 33 yes you were you were were you aware of that at the time she came to be interviewed yes yes
00:25:13 now you say in paragraph 86 that the documented selection process was led by david gibson um did david gibson recommend claire williams for
00:25:24 williams for interview um i don't know the recommenders the right i think he may have contacted her and asked her if she was interested in applying right at the time it was very difficult to recruit
00:25:35 to recruit um project managers and so we'd had um we tried on a number of occasions too because we were a number of project managers within the team right so yeah dura do you know what the
00:25:46 right so yeah dura do you know what the process was by which the applicants were selected for interview i don't recall um did david gibson have a role
00:25:56 a role in making that selection i don't recall it would have been managed by the human resources team and so david would have been working with the
00:26:04 the the hr team to um to run that process i can't remember how it was run we did sometimes use external consultants to help us
00:26:13 help us find con find project managers because it was very difficult marketing well i was going to ask you did you use external consultants or an agency uh in general in this recruitment process i don't remember
00:26:24 process i don't remember this particular recruitment process but it was a common thing that we did because it was a difficult market right did david gibson say anything about claire williams before the interview to you
00:26:34 you i don't recall now okay going back to uh or sticking with paragraph 86 you say in the second and third lines that you don't recall the substance
00:26:46 that you don't recall the substance of what was said at the interview um can you tell us whether she was would have been asked about her experience in major works involving construction projects
00:26:58 involving construction projects yes yeah can you remember whether she was asked about her experience acting as the client or employer in such projects yeah i think she would have done
00:27:09 think she would have done [Applause] do you know whether she was asked about her experience managing a project over cladding a high-rise residential building
00:27:18 building i don't recall that i'm not sure whether this role was specific to the well it wasn't specific to grenfell tower it was a generic project management role um
00:27:29 generic project management role um and i don't recall whether it was just the one post that we were recruiting to it was more than one post i understand that but i don't recall there being specific questions around over cladding the tower block right at
00:27:40 over cladding the tower block right at the time you were interviewing claire williams do you remember whether you had an eye on her specifically for grenfell or whether you were just interviewing her for the for a general role uh within uh the tmo i think we would
00:27:52 uh within uh the tmo i think we would have made the judgment based on who we recruited
00:27:55 recruited as to how we would allocate the various roles within the capital programme team i see um so it we were going to look at the strengths and the various candidates right so just to
00:28:07 the various candidates right so just to be very clear when when she was spotted as it were and interviewed and at the time she was given the job am i right in thinking that she wasn't interviewed and given the job
00:28:19 interviewed and given the job specifically in relation to the grenfell tower project i think i think that's correct so the allocation of that project to her came at a later stage yes although david and i would have probably discussed it shortly after
00:28:30 probably discussed it shortly after deciding who was the successful candidate from the interview process i see
00:28:36 when that allocation decision was made
00:28:41 obviously you say you were involved in that decision who else was involved in the decision to appoint claire williams to the role of project manager in respect of the grenfell tower project
00:28:52 in respect of the grenfell tower project i think that would have been a discussion between myself and david what factors did you take into account in making that decision and we wanted somebody who had a strong track record of having delivered
00:29:04 track record of having delivered programs and projects from a client perspective but we also wanted somebody who was really strong on managing resident consultation process and very keen on engaging residents and making
00:29:15 keen on engaging residents and making sure they were involved in the process would you agree that the grenfell tower refurbishment project was a complex one yes it was i mean it was lengthy it was major and it had a number
00:29:26 major and it had a number of different facets and it also involved residents remaining in occupation throughout didn't it did
00:29:34 did you consider the relevance of the fact
00:29:37 fact that grenfell tower as part of the refurbishment was going to be overclad when considering claire williams for the role of project manager not specifically he didn't no did you
00:29:50 not specifically he didn't no did you not ask her whether she had any specific experience in overcladding i don't think we did i don't as i say i don't i think the role was a more generic role than specifically looking for someone with a
00:30:02 specifically looking for someone with a experience of a cladding yes now going back to your professional expertise and experience you told us that you don't have any any technical qualifications if we go to your first witness statement please we
00:30:14 your first witness statement please we can look at paragraph 23
00:30:17 uh it's page four paragraph 23 you say that although i had previously had
00:30:24 had some limited involvement with asset management projects that had involved cladding
00:30:28 cladding i had and still have no technical ability or knowledge of either the materials used in cladding nor how they are required to be fitted and if you go to your second witness statement um
00:30:40 statement um page 11 we go to paragraph 51 you say there while employed at lewisham
00:30:49 council i was involved in several clouding projects including hawk tower on milton court estate and some limited involvement on the overcladding of two tower blocks on peeps estate in those in these projects lewisham was
00:31:01 in those in these projects lewisham was the client under a standard jct contract during my employment at haringey council i was involved in the cladding of trulock court this work was carried out under a design and build
00:31:11 and build project none of these projects used rain screen acm ie aluminium composite material what was the cladding used do you remember at hawk tower
00:31:23 remember at hawk tower it was brick and render and what about true lot court it was render right and what about uh the peeps estate and i think the pizza state was a sheet aluminium i
00:31:34 pizza state was a sheet aluminium i believe
00:31:35 believe sheet aluminium yeah so not not atm do you remember what the insulation used in
00:31:43 in the uh uh peeps estate system was i'm assuming that it was a range green system as opposed to a render to be honest i i don't know and my involvement there was
00:31:54 don't know and my involvement there was very limited uh it was literally i gave a small amount of cover for a period when the development manager for that role was vacant so i covered the hawked out project and the people project for a
00:32:05 out project and the people project for a short period of time by that time all of the material i mean most of the build was um was was complete really so i didn't really get involved in the material detail at that time
00:32:16 detail at that time rightfully now obviously your career before you joined the tma spanned some 20 years
00:32:22 20 years the list of projects that you've got here involving cladding at paragraph 51 is is i think only identifies some three uh projects or so is that a the total list the complete list of
00:32:34 list the complete list of uh projects would you recall involving cladding during that period yes
00:32:40 right now you say that um the organization you worked for was always client in the projects would you say that
00:32:51 you say that what was expected of you as client in the grenfell tower project was similar to the projects you'd worked on before yes
00:32:58 yes yes
00:33:02 [Applause] and you say you didn't have any professional expertise with regard to building design do i take it from that you didn't actually need or think you needed any building design expertise
00:33:14 building design expertise in order to carry out your role either before joining the tmo or while at the tmo nomura was always the commissioning role so putting in place a professional team to deliver projects
00:33:25 to deliver projects so yeah so i would work as the client and with the client to develop the brief for the project and we'd put in place professional teams to deliver them
00:33:38 professional teams to deliver them now just turning to the tmo's role as clients specifically i just want to explore
00:33:45 explore that issue a little bit more closely can we go back to your first witness statement please uh to page eight and go to paragraph 43 and there you say as client tmo's role
00:33:57 and there you say as client tmo's role was to monitor and manage progress of the refurbishment work against budget to ensure delivery of the program on behalf of our bkc residents and leaseholders alongside contractors its role was to liaise with
00:34:08 contractors its role was to liaise with residents to facilitate works within residential areas tma's role was also to report progress and budget to the tmo executive tmo board and to rbkc is that a description of your role or
00:34:20 is that a description of your role or does it apply to everyone involved in the project um
00:34:30 i think it's everyone in the project so the client the client role here was about internal dealing with internal stakeholders our board the governance and um and within specifically with
00:34:42 and um and within specifically with residents
00:34:42 residents yes we would always put in place a professional team who took on the the professional management of those contracts
00:34:51 contracts right and the the client team would be monitoring those uh contracts and reporting now you say that tma's role was to monitor and manage
00:35:02 monitor and manage progress of the refurbishment work against budget to ensure delivery of the program
00:35:08 program yes but do you accept that there were people within the tmo who were required to make decisions about design options um
00:35:21 there was a there was a discussion so yes i mean ultimately there are decisions that the client will make but will be made based on recommendations from the professional team
00:35:32 team yeah and do you accept that people at the tma played and will come to it but in general do you accept that people in the tma played a an active role in the design decisions
00:35:45 a an active role in the design decisions which had an impact on the budget yes as part of
00:35:48 part of the client but taking recommendations and working with the professional team yes and therefore the tmo's role in monitoring and
00:35:59 the tmo's role in monitoring and managing progress against budget involved at least some decision making about what designs to have and what materials and products to have
00:36:11 to have i think that's
00:36:16 we would take we would be looking for the professional teams to make recommendations and if there are choices and options then we would consider those obviously we'd be assuming that everything that is proposed is
00:36:27 everything that is proposed is it complies with regulation and that the professional team has taken due diligence and making sure that
00:36:37 the designs are appropriate yes i understand your position on that mr madison i i'm just seeking really to understand with greater precision what you would accept about the breadth
00:36:49 what you would accept about the breadth of the role of monitoring and managing progress
00:36:51 progress of the refurbishment work against budget do you accept that the role as described there extends to making decisions about design and materials
00:37:01 materials um yes the decisions based on recommendations from a professional team and we would consider that in the context of the budget available
00:37:11 yes
00:37:19 now you've made it very clear in your evidence just now and indeed in other parts of your statement that you relied on the professionals involved at various stages of the works
00:37:30 involved at various stages of the works yes let's just focus on that a little bit more closely can we look at your second witness statement
00:37:38 statement and go first in that there are two passages i want to show you on this point
00:37:42 point first in that at page five and look please at paragraph 21 there you say under the heading pre-contract stage summary you say in summary in relation to the
00:37:53 you say in summary in relation to the pre-contract stage of the project i had no reason to doubt the professionalism or ability of any of the pre-contract professional team
00:38:02 team and then sticking with this statement and going please to page nine if you just go there look at paragraph 41 with me under post tender summary you say it was
00:38:13 under post tender summary you say it was not brought to my attention at any stage by any of the above named professionals that any aspect of the design planning or material selection was non-compliant with the current legislation or
00:38:24 with the current legislation or regulations would you agree that the position you're describing here and indeed in this in the first passage i read to you from your statement describes um you requiring professionals
00:38:37 describes um you requiring professionals proactively bringing faults or concerns to your attention
00:38:44 um
00:38:48 sorry because you repeat the question yes uh
00:38:51 yes uh are you in this passage and let's just keep it simple and stick to paragraph 41 are you saying that you relied on your professional team to bring to your attention
00:39:01 attention uh any aspects of the design or planning or material selection uh that you say was non-compliant but but
00:39:08 but presented a difficulty yeah right and does that tell us that if they didn't bring anything like that to your attention you assumed that everything was all right well there were checks in place at various times so
00:39:20 were checks in place at various times so in terms of the structure of the t the professional team here
00:39:25 here the at various stages there were different leads so for example in the pre in the pre um contract stage studio we were the lead consultants and they coordinated
00:39:36 consultants and they coordinated the project but in the post um tender process the um the contractor took on responsibility and we would be relying in that stage on the employer's agents to
00:39:48 employer's agents to flag up any issues with [Music]
00:39:52 [Music] managing our response um did you by you i mean both you and the tmo as an organization actively monitor the
00:40:05 actively monitor the professionals work for example to check from time to time that the design professionals were performing their role properly
00:40:14 properly there was a structure of review and coordination of meetings so there was a structured meetings where the professional team would meet and they would discuss progress and discuss specific issues
00:40:25 progress and discuss specific issues they were led by artelia as the employer's agent and within that certain aspects that were challenging or needed to be explored would be interrogated by the professional team so it wasn't
00:40:37 by the professional team so it wasn't necessarily just the client doing that it was us relying on the professional team to work collaboratively at looking at what was needed to make sure that we complied
00:40:49 yeah i think the broad thrust of what you're telling us is that you would you would rely on your professional team completely uh to make sure that there was compliance by you the client you wouldn't
00:41:00 by you the client you wouldn't monitor them actively to make sure that they were doing their work properly well we would monitor them in the sense that they would produce reports and they would produce summaries of actions and financial reports so there would be a whole series of
00:41:12 would be a whole series of documentation that would sit behind the project team and that would be interrogated by the team and discussed and my so my team would be part of that process
00:41:23 process now i'd like to examine with you the tma's relationship with rbkc if i can and i want to start with the modular management agreement or the mma and that is an rbk three zeros one nine
00:41:35 and that is an rbk three zeros one nine double zero six
00:41:41 uh there it is uh and this is its um first page volume one the agreement and if you go to the second page at the top of page two you can see the date
00:41:53 top of page two you can see the date 12th of june 2006 between rbkc and the royal borough of kensington chelsea tenant management organization limited call the bwtmo do you know why it was called the bwtmo
00:42:04 do you know why it was called the bwtmo no i've never seen that before never seen it before have you ever seen this document before i've seen extracts of it i suspect that would it was a it was a document that developed and evolved over time and
00:42:15 developed and evolved over time and certain aspects would be developed but i've never seen bt bwtmo right i mean did you know that in fact there was another mma entered on the 26th of
00:42:26 was another mma entered on the 26th of november 2015. did you know that i may have done that it didn't we don't need to go to it um for reference purposes it's rbk3018796 but there's no need to go to
00:42:38 rbk3018796 but there's no need to go to it
00:42:39 it looking at what's on the screen in front of you do you remember that this was the document which governed the relationship between rbkc on the one hand and the tml on the other yes can we go to page 12 please
00:42:51 yes can we go to page 12 please this is in volume one within chapter one clause 4.2 and it's under the broad-heading statement of exercise of management functions under the right
00:43:02 of management functions under the right to manage
00:43:03 to manage and under 4.2 the agreement says nothing in this agreement gives the bwtmo any ownership or other legal rights or imposes any obligations in respect of
00:43:15 imposes any obligations in respect of the property other than the right to manage and maintain the property nothing in this agreement affects the council's legal relationship with its tenants or leaseholders and the council retains its statutory contractual and common law obligations
00:43:27 contractual and common law obligations to them
00:43:28 to them and all other clauses in this agreement are subject to this clause was it your unders well first of all did you ever look at that part of the mma uh i don't think i did no in general
00:43:39 uh i don't think i did no in general terms was it your understanding that the council retained its legal obligations to the tenants and leaseholders of the buildings of which it was freeholder as provided for in this agreement yes
00:43:51 as provided for in this agreement yes yes now let's look at page 35. in page 35 which is in volume 1 chapter 2
00:44:00 2 we see clause 6 and this is entitled major works and at 6.1 it says the bwtmo agrees to enter into contracts for agreed major works and supervise
00:44:11 for agreed major works and supervise such works if the council has included a sufficient amount within the allowances for the bwtmo to carry out such works
00:44:21 now do you know are you familiar with this provision um
00:44:29 i don't really recall to be honest no um are you familiar with the principle that the tmo enters into contracts for agreed major works and should supervise the works if the
00:44:42 and should supervise the works if the council has included a sufficient amount within the allowances yes yes
00:44:48 what did at the time did you understand the obligation to supervise such works involved um i think the tmo took on all responsibilities to supervise
00:45:00 responsibilities to supervise the role as the client on behalf of the council
00:45:03 council would that include making sure that designers had the relevant experience yes and were properly appointed yes and that they weren't putting in
00:45:14 and that they weren't putting in artificially low figures that could never be achieved yes did you understand that the obligation to supervise such works was a proactive role in other words actively
00:45:26 proactive role in other words actively to supervise yes this wasn't just assuming responsibility away from rbkc it involved proactive work you understood that yes yeah and presumably is this right
00:45:39 yeah and presumably is this right to the best of your understanding rbkc expected the tmo to take an active role in supervising the construction professionals in the delivery of their work yes yeah can we please have
00:45:51 their work yes yeah can we please have um pages 81 and 82 of the mma up together
00:45:56 at the top of page 81 we can see chapter seven
00:45:59 seven and the title is staffing and management of the relationship between the bw tmo and the council and at the bottom of page 82
00:46:10 and at the bottom of page 82 we can see clause 4 which is entitled employment of contractors
00:46:18 and that clause 4.2 if we just see that it says the bwtmo will only appoint contractors who if we go over the page to little a
00:46:34 have the capacity to do work required by the bwtmo
00:46:38 the bwtmo to an acceptable standard of quality did the tmo have a system for assuring itself or satisfying itself um that that um that complied with that
00:46:49 um that that um that complied with that contractual uh obligation uh well there was due diligence carried out on the appointment of each contractor before the appointment and that would cover
00:47:00 the appointment and that would cover issues such as these
00:47:03 so you say there was due diligence carried out on the appointment of each contractor before appointment are you satisfied that due diligence was
00:47:14 are you satisfied that due diligence was carried out on each of the contractors that the tmo was engaging for the grenfell tower project before they were engaged on the grenfell tower project we need to say contractors do you mean
00:47:26 we need to say contractors do you mean contractors and consultants you're quite right
00:47:28 right um i was only involved in the due diligence on the selection of the main contractor so i don't didn't have sight of what due diligence was carried out with the consultants when you came into
00:47:39 with the consultants when you came into the project did you either as part of the handover sessions that you've described or privately on your own did you investigate what due diligence had been done
00:47:51 what due diligence had been done studio e's fitness for appointment as architects on the grenfell tower project i didn't at that stage because when i arrived in the project it
00:48:02 because when i arrived in the project it was already at stage d and um and the so at that stage we were trying to the project had stalled and we were trying to
00:48:12 to move it on so really the only work that was carried out by the professional team at that stage was to take the project from stage d to stage it was quite a limited amount of
00:48:23 stage it was quite a limited amount of work
00:48:24 work so i didn't i didn't have any cause i took a face value that the the due diligence had been carried out
00:48:31 out before i arrived now before we look at grenfell tower specifically i want to ask you some questions about your fire safety knowledge and training there's a different topic
00:48:43 different topic um in your second witness statement i think you answered some of the questions posed by the inquiry about what fire safety training you'd received can we go to that second statement
00:48:55 can we go to that second statement and look at page 16
00:49:01 and i'd like to go to paragraph 72 towards the top of the page you say the tmo is a housing management organization during my employment there i received general health and safety training
00:49:12 general health and safety training we were given updates on this training in the health and safety committee meetings which barbara matthews led and which i attended in these meetings we also discussed fire safety matters such as amendments to our policies and updates on the progress of the fire
00:49:24 and updates on the progress of the fire risk assessment program however wherever i have worked it is not the role of the housing management organization to be the technical expert now did general health and safety training that
00:49:35 general health and safety training that you're referring to there include training on fire safety matters in you know of a few yes in overview can you explain what you mean by an overview it was it was a general health and safety training session that which
00:49:47 and safety training session that which took up a day and looked at all aspects of health and safety in relation to health and safety at work cdm and fire safety and various other aspects as i remember right was the fire
00:50:00 aspects as i remember right was the fire safety training that you described directed
00:50:02 directed to how the tmo should deal with fire safety in its building stock it was more general than that it was more general than that was it what about its obligations under the fire safety order of 2005
00:50:14 order of 2005 otherwise known as the regulatory reform order i'm sure that would have been mentioned that john i don't recall the content of the the training in great detail right was there anything uh
00:50:25 great detail right was there anything uh ever
00:50:26 ever given to you by way of training on managing fire safety in a residential high-rise building not specifically now right
00:50:37 does that tell us that when you took over oversight of the grenfell tower project with your clear view of it you had had no training on uh managing
00:50:48 training on uh managing fire safety in a high-rise residential building that's right now you will i think say that you had updates on training at health and safety committee meetings
00:51:00 at health and safety committee meetings does that tell us that there was no formal updating or professional development course available on fire safety um
00:51:12 no not that i recall so there was there was no
00:51:15 was no formal updating or keeping you current about fire safety matters there were briefings that we received through the um through the health and safety committee
00:51:26 committee and what on that committee would i be right in thinking that that committee meet
00:51:30 meet that committee and through those meetings you would focus on specific concerns or events relevant to particular buildings within the tma stock um yes but also there was a health and
00:51:41 um yes but also there was a health and safety team who would give specialists support and and advice and we would bring in specialist advice as necessary if throughout particular projects
00:51:51 projects yes you say if necessary throughout particular projects did you ever engage the specialist support and advice of tma's health and safety team
00:52:02 safety team on grenfell at various points in the project
00:52:05 project yes um we've already discussed there were certainly discussions with the health and safety team yes various points yes can you can you tell us specifically
00:52:18 tell us specifically struggling to remember specifics um certainly we took advice from the well we we carried out a fire risk assessment before it's completely yes starting the work
00:52:30 it's completely yes starting the work and took advice from from that we also engaged the fire risk assessor that we to consider certain aspects of the work at
00:52:41 consider certain aspects of the work at various stages when there were issues raised from residents for example but i'm taking from your answers that you didn't think it appropriate or necessary
00:52:51 necessary to embed a member of the tmos health and safety team within the tmos grenfell tower refurbishment project team so that they were there as a permanent
00:53:02 so that they were there as a permanent resource i mean the health and safety team was only very it was a very small team i think a team of two in the tmo um and the
00:53:14 never really come across a situation where you would have a specialist fire safety person within a capital program delivery team um and that's yeah it hasn't been my
00:53:25 um and that's yeah it hasn't been my experience yes i mean i think is the position it sounds as if it is that that the health and safety team would be consulted by the project team on an as and when basis if they perceived that expertise was
00:53:37 if they perceived that expertise was needed but but there was no holistic overview
00:53:40 overview by the tma specialist health and safety team of the project as it developed that's right and we would also take advice from the professional team of any specialist advice they would need around fire safety or other
00:53:52 around fire safety or other health and safety issues and obviously we had the cdnc role as well where they would have um a role in ensuring that we had the right advice
00:54:03 in ensuring that we had the right advice and the right health and safety approach in place
00:54:06 in place leaving aside the health and safety team were you aware if anybody at the tmo involved in the grenfell tower project had
00:54:12 had specific training in fire safety risks which would be which were posed by the refurbishment works
00:54:19 um not specific but we there was a regular engagement with the head of health and safety and various other bodies such as the fire risk assessor and the fire brigade
00:54:30 risk assessor and the fire brigade throughout the development and delivery of the project you say regular engagement uh
00:54:43 you say regular engagement uh is that right what was their regular were their regular updating meetings with the health and safety team at each stage of the project so that the health and safety team could have an overview or a holistic view of the grenfell tower project
00:54:55 the grenfell tower project well i think it was mainly on site aspect so i think that claire williams met with janice ray quite frequently on site and often brought along other specialists so carl stokes the fire risk assessor and
00:55:08 carl stokes the fire risk assessor and the fire brigades had regular uh familiarization visits yes i see but i think you were saying before that the consultations of the health and safety team would be essentially limited to things that
00:55:21 essentially limited to things that claire williams want to have their input on um yes well and a more broad
00:55:27 broad um broad overview of the attending side and
00:55:30 and ensuring things seemed right and but yeah they weren't involved the health and safety team weren't involved in the day-to-day project management of the of the project
00:55:41 project management of the of the project i'm going to ask a different topic now i'm going to ask you some questions about
00:55:45 about fires in residential blocks in the uk and what you knew of them before the grenfell tower project started um can we go to page 11 of your second statement
00:55:58 this is uh statement number two page 11. and this is paragraph 52 and in the second sentence you say i
00:56:09 and in the second sentence you say i recall that the findings of the latino house inquiry were referred to and considered by the tmo as were the findings made in relation to the fire at shepherd's court in relation to the shepherds caught fire i recall being forwarded by janice ray
00:56:22 i recall being forwarded by janice ray a copy of a letter from the lfb entitled tall building's external fire spread in april 2017. i recall discussing the contents of this letter with janice ray however my recollection is that the
00:56:33 however my recollection is that the letter was referring to the risk associated with non-compliant cladding and i understood the cladding of grenfell tower to be fully compliant with building regulations as building control issued a certificate of completion
00:56:45 of completion now there's a lot in there but i just want to focus on the findings of the latin house inquiry as you put it in fact it was an inquest or series of inquests that's right isn't it technically i
00:56:57 that's right isn't it technically i don't know how you don't know all right accept your point um now just to give you a bit of clarification so that we can put this in context the fire at lacanal
00:57:06 lacanal occurred on the 3rd of july 2009 in what was a 14 14-storey tower block called lack of house as a result of which there were six deaths do you remember that
00:57:18 deaths do you remember that i do and the inquest into those deaths ended
00:57:23 ended in the january the hearings ended in the january of 2013 and the coroner's rule 43 recommendations were made on the 28th of jan
00:57:32 jan of march 2013.
00:57:37 that's the background and if we now go to
00:57:40 to a document tmo one triple zero three one zero two please we come to a set of draft minutes
00:57:52 we come to a set of draft minutes they appear to be a draft because it says draft watermark through it uh of the operations committee of the tmo on the second of may 2013 and on the first page we can see who was
00:58:05 and on the first page we can see who was president
00:58:06 president and i just want to show you the list of presentees the third one down being a gentleman called peter molino council appointed board member and he's given the initials pm
00:58:18 given the initials pm and then in attendance we can see sasha jevons director of operations and then just a little bit below halfway down that list you peter madison director of assets and
00:58:29 you peter madison director of assets and regeneration and you're given the initials pm and then a small a you see yes so it's to distinguish you from p
00:58:36 p peter molyneux um now
00:58:41 janice ray was also there as well
00:58:46 if we go to page four in this please i want to show you the bottom half of the page item 10 health and safety report
00:58:57 and it says jw introduced the report informing the committee of the tmo's current position in relation to fire risk assessments the report provided information on the following
00:59:09 following and then there's a list of six bullet points and the last two say tmo's fire safety policy and strategy
00:59:16 strategy and then the last one says the recommendations made by the coroners following inquests on fires at lachen house and in southampton and response from communities and local government to date
00:59:28 government to date and then it says
00:59:31 pm asked whether there is a risk to the tmo as a corporate body jw confirmed that enforcement lies with statutory body not us and enforcement is still to be
00:59:42 us and enforcement is still to be decided between the council and the fire brigade
00:59:44 brigade but it is deemed that we are carrying out the due diligence now just looking at that block of text then
00:59:53 then first the reference to southampton were you familiar with what that was uh yes what was that there was a fire where two firefighters died yes that's shirley towers i think does that name ring a bell
01:00:04 ring a bell um it doesn't but um all right um and uh you can see that it's jw introducing the report that's janice wray i think it isn't it yes do you recall this meeting specifically not specifically now right
01:00:18 and there's a question asked at the end by pm
01:00:21 by pm that must be peter molyneux not you is that right i think so we can see the response
01:00:27 response jw confirmed that enforcement lies with statutory body not us and enforcement is still to be decided between council of the fire brigade but it is deemed that we are carrying out the due diligence am i right to think that this question
01:00:38 am i right to think that this question was about corporate exposure in other words focusing on the tma protecting itself from legal liability of some kind um i'm assuming that this was more about
01:00:49 um i'm assuming that this was more about the fi the leasehold of flat entrance doors which had been
01:00:55 an issue which was causing some issues because of the i understand the tmo and the council didn't have right to enforce
01:01:06 right to enforce and so that was causing some difficulties so i suspect that minute is probably related to that specific point i see so and the question of flat front doors is the fourth bullet point down if
01:01:17 doors is the fourth bullet point down if you look at it to be fair to you the current position on enforcement on potentially long compliant leasehold of flat entrance doors within enclosed blocks and the due diligence approach the tmo has adopted whilst responsibility for
01:01:28 has adopted whilst responsibility for enforcement is clarified so you think the peter molina's question related to that
01:01:32 that i assume so i i don't i don't recall the meeting specifically right
01:01:40 i see um
01:01:44 was there any discussion about whether the tmo should follow the coroner's recommendations regardless of whether there was any legislation that was to follow
01:01:55 legislation that was to follow there was a discussion that um the health safety committee regarding issues there was a report reported there yes well let's let's come on to that then um can we go to your third witness
01:02:07 then um can we go to your third witness statement
01:02:08 statement please and go to page one and then over to
01:02:12 to the top of page two
01:02:18 uh you say in paragraph five at the bottom of page one i'm aware that janice ray the tmo's health and safety and facilities manager produced a briefing note on the fire at latin house prior to these presentations
01:02:31 latin house prior to these presentations and the presentations i should just say you're referring to are those at the end of 2013. and you say over the top taking place this presentation was considered at a health
01:02:42 presentation was considered at a health and safety committee meeting that i attended
01:02:44 attended i also recall reading a report produced by the london fire brigade following the shepherds called fire
01:02:52 if we go now to tma100-39094 please
01:03:01 this is a briefing note on far at national house sudden is this the briefing note that you're referring to a paragraph five of your third witness statement that we've just seen i think so yes
01:03:13 seen i think so yes uh and if we go to page four it's a four-page document we can see that janice ray has signed it and dated it the
01:03:22 it the um june 2013. does this ring a bell with you mr madison um i i haven't seen this for a while but i i certainly recognize the first bit but it looks like a document you're
01:03:33 but it looks like a document you're referring to in your in your statement yeah do you think it was yeah i think it probably right and on page four as you can see shirley court
01:03:43 court just towards the top of the page shirley caught southampton far on 6th april 2010.
01:03:48 2010. so it looks like the shirley towers fire was the southampton fire referred to in the previous minute of the meeting in may
01:04:00 do you remember when the health and safety committee meeting took place that considered this document sorry i don't right well we may be able to track it down because you didn't give the date in your statement
01:04:11 the date in your statement uh can we go to tm00841428 please
01:04:20 this is a a um
01:04:25 a committee meeting of the health and tmo health and safety committee and we can see that janice ray is present you look at the second attendee down see that
01:04:37 attendee down see that yes uh uh now i'm not sure that you were present
01:04:47 uh because you're not listed as present and it doesn't look as if you apologize for the for your absence either was it a meeting that you would normally expect to attend um
01:04:59 expect to attend um not at this stage when um when these meetings were were run by anthony parks my team would be represented there so alex bosman and john bora
01:05:10 john bora were from my team so they attended to consider certain issues that changed as the health and safety committee meetings evolved right now we know well
01:05:21 right now we know well we know that a paper was presented at this meeting because there was a the paper we've just been looking at was attached to the agenda and let's just trace it through the agenda is it tmo
01:05:33 agenda is it tmo one double zero three nine zero nine one
01:05:39 and you could see item six briefing note on latino house fire circulated with agenda you see that yes and then the paper that's attached to the agenda is it tmo tmo10039094
01:05:52 to the agenda is it tmo tmo10039094 if we can just flash that up it you'll see that that's the paper that we saw before dated june 2013 by janice ray now if we go to the meeting note itself it's tmo double zero
01:06:03 it's tmo double zero one
01:06:08 go back to that and that's the first page we were looking at a moment ago if we jump to page four in that document we look at item six latino house a briefing note was
01:06:20 latino house a briefing note was circulated showing a timeline for the escalation of the fatal fire at this block and there was a discussion about the factors that contributed to the speed of fire spread further the briefing note outlined the
01:06:31 further the briefing note outlined the recommendations made by the coroner following the inquest the likely impact of these and what action the tmo should take and then there are some specifics underneath that which
01:06:42 some specifics underneath that which which you can see there um now as i think of established you weren't at the meeting am i right in thinking you didn't see the agenda either
01:06:53 the agenda either i don't think i would have done can you tell us what were the circumstances in which you saw the paper that was attached to the agenda
01:07:03 agenda i think that was presented to a future health and safety committee from memory right we certainly know that
01:07:14 from memory right we certainly know that it was presented much later
01:07:18 in 2017. does that ring a bell with you i've no
01:07:23 i've no i really have no recollection right i'm afraid
01:07:26 afraid to give you the picture there was a prosecution of southwark council in 2017 uh and if we go to the minutes of the health and safety meeting of the 16th of march 2017 this is at
01:07:40 tm010016739
01:07:48 this time we can see that you were present you're the fourth person down immediately under janice ray you see that yes and it's dated the 16th of march 2017 at 10 30 a.m and if we look at page five under
01:08:01 30 a.m and if we look at page five under paragraph
01:08:02 paragraph 5.0 and 5.1 we can see lachen house lfb prosecution of london borough of southwark the paper was discussed and it was noted we were compliant with the offences with
01:08:15 we were compliant with the offences with for which southwark had been prosecuted you see that yes now the agenda if we just go to that is that tmo10016 two three eight
01:08:31 and uh again at item six uh against the perhaps optimistic time of 11 15 paper and appendix latino house lfb
01:08:43 paper and appendix latino house lfb prosecution of london borough of southwark see that yeah so do you think that was the time at which you got the paper i really can't it's the june 2013 paper no recollection of this i'm afraid
01:08:55 recollection of this i'm afraid right let's look at the email sending the agenda it's tmo1001616229
01:09:04 tmo10016229 the email from janice ray 13th of march 2017
01:09:10 2017 and it comes to you as the third recipient in the list and you can see the list of attachments and
01:09:17 and one of the attachments four lines done in the list if you can just cast your eye down there mr madison lacknow house briefing note for h s comm june 2013. you see that yes
01:09:31 comm june 2013. you see that yes so can we take it that janice ray's june 2013 lachenal note was sent to you on the 13th of march 2017
01:09:43 2017 as part of the agenda item for the meeting
01:09:46 meeting the minutes of which we've just seen that looks to be the case yes
01:09:58 having shown you those documents when did you think or do you think you first became aware of janice ray's lack of house briefing note of june 2013
01:10:11 note of june 2013 i'm afraid i really can't remember i mean i remember there being discussions within the tmo about the lack of house fire and i i can't tell when that paper specifically
01:10:23 tell when that paper specifically came to me i don't know right were you ever to the best of your recollection actually involved in the discussions about what to do about the lachenal coroner's
01:10:35 about the lachenal coroner's recommendations i do remember a conversation at the
01:10:41 health and safety committee but as that may have been the later one i don't remember
01:10:47 remember right you know you when you say the later one you won march 2017. right can we then get back to the briefing note and in the light of what you
01:10:58 note and in the light of what you told us in your recollection of it let's see how far we get with it
01:11:04 tmo10039094
01:11:09 you could see the first page there could i see the second page system indeed and if we go to the second page let me just draw a ten let me just draw well you've got it there now i'm just gonna draw some things to your attention on the first page we can but we can go
01:11:20 on the first page we can but we can go back to that that is the second page
01:11:25 is there anything you would want to point out could i see the third page certainly page three please
01:11:34 yeah okay thank you now going or rather sticking with page three
01:11:42 three we can see at the top of the page first paragraph last two sentences um it says at the conclusion of the inquest
01:11:50 inquest into this file the coroner made a number of rule 43 recommendations to the department for communities and local government dclg these recommendations cover the following areas further i have also outlined the tma's
01:12:02 further i have also outlined the tma's current position stroke approach and if we go towards the bottom of the page to item four it says consider retrofitting of sprinklers in high-rise blocks
01:12:14 sprinklers in high-rise blocks tmo currently so this is the current position
01:12:17 position recently asked the lfb to confirm where they require sprinklers to be fitted and as yet no requirement to retrofit in high-rise blocks a number of other landlords most notably
01:12:28 a number of other landlords most notably southwark have commissioned feasibility studies
01:12:30 studies however they have confirmed that there is currently no resources to fund this did you know at any time between june 2017 and june 23
01:12:42 2017 and june 23 june 2013 and june 2017 that retro fitting sprinklers was one of the recommendations made by the coroner at lachnal i was aware of that and when did you become aware of that i
01:12:54 and when did you become aware of that i don't know specifically the latest it would have been i would suggest when you received the briefing notes we know you definitely did in mid-march 2017. yes and i certainly remember having a conversation with
01:13:06 remember having a conversation with janice ray uh following the southampton fight inquest
01:13:10 inquest firing quest uh in relation to sprinklers right and we took advice from the fire brigade at that time i see so you did give consideration to retrofitting sprinklers into your
01:13:21 retrofitting sprinklers into your housing stock um
01:13:28 i think i think
01:13:38 there was a consideration given to it and um
01:13:42 and um we had a conversation with the fire brigade who gave certain um recommendations in terms of this they um there was a report back from the
01:13:54 they um there was a report back from the fire brigade saying that the janice ray had had with in relation to sprinklers and it wasn't it was it was a very complicated issue that hadn't been given full
01:14:05 issue that hadn't been given full consideration
01:14:09 that hadn't been given full consideration in practice in the practical sense in terms of you know the how that would be could be designed and how that could be delivered and how it could be afforded so
01:14:20 and how it could be afforded so and the the note from the fire brigade was quite
01:14:23 was quite um wasn't saying that they specifically that we needed to install them at this stage but it was a recommendation from
01:14:34 stage but it was a recommendation from the inquiry that needed some consideration yes was the question of money uh a stumbling block in the retro in the decision not to retrofit sprinklers once you'd seen the rule 43
01:14:45 once you'd seen the rule 43 recommendations from the coroner at lachnal i don't think we ever got as far as getting getting a full cost of what it would be and i think some of the other issues were the practical issues of
01:14:57 were the practical issues of how to do it and um and yeah so
01:15:04 there wasn't a there wasn't a full considered um approach to our strategy in relation to their sprinklers right you see in the note that we can see
01:15:15 see southwark are said to have no resources to fund
01:15:19 to fund the retrofitting of sprinklers was that the case also with rbkc or the tmo so far as it had a need within its own housing stock i
01:15:30 a need within its own housing stock i think this was an issue of strategy so in a way part of the work that
01:15:36 that i was doing when um when i first arrived the team
01:15:39 the team was to put in places an asset management strategy would set the parameters within which we would be investing in the stock and um and with with that we would
01:15:50 and um and with with that we would were in dialogue with the council about the level of investment needed and what the priorities were at that time i think um we were looking at ensuring that the passive elements of fire safety were
01:16:03 the passive elements of fire safety were um were in operation and particularly on grenfell the the aov there was beyond economic repair and so the priority was really to make sure that what was there
01:16:14 that what was there was put back in working order um and there wasn't a break great consideration as i could remember when i was on the project in relation to fitting sprinkler
01:16:28 mr chairman i'm not quite finished on this document but i've got a few more questions on it but it's probably time for a break central point would it yes yes um thank you i'm going to give mr madison the
01:16:40 you i'm going to give mr madison the usual
01:16:40 usual yes junction but i'll have to make an exception in relation to advice on the books won't i i think that's right mr chairman you'll need to speak to whoever's going to act
01:16:52 need to speak to whoever's going to act for him
01:16:53 for him in relation to that he will need to remain free to speak to his legal advisor his new legal advisers yes about the narrow issue of disclosure of the diaries and the notebooks but
01:17:06 of the diaries and the notebooks but not about their substance no well that's as it seemed to me but thank you for coming
01:17:11 coming subject possibly to one qualification which is which is the question of whether any of the substance is legally professionally privileged i think on that that's a different question which is a different question
01:17:21 question yes so it's a it's a narrow direction yes
01:17:25 yes well mr madison if you wonder what that was about it is because we're about to have a short break in the proceedings and whenever we do that i warn the witnesses that they're not to talk to anyone else about their evidence
01:17:36 talk to anyone else about their evidence or anything related to it and i would normally say just that to you and leave it at that but of course there is the question of the notebooks and the diaries and we know that you're going to take
01:17:48 and we know that you're going to take advice from separate lawyers in relation to those matters and so of course although you mustn't talk to
01:17:55 talk to anyone about your evidence or anything relating to it you obviously must be able to talk to your new lawyers such solicitors or counsel about
01:18:06 such solicitors or counsel about the the notebooks that we now know existed and why we they weren't brought to our attention sooner
01:18:14 sooner it's possible that there may be passages within those notebooks that you might wish to say should not be disclosed because they are what lawyers call
01:18:26 what lawyers call subject to legal professional privilege i'm not going to give you a little lecture about what that involves but that is something which you can talk to your new lawyers about if it if
01:18:37 talk to your new lawyers about if it if it seems
01:18:38 it seems appropriate and they will explain to you what that means but i think i should say to you please don't talk to your new lawyers or anyone else come to that about the substance of the contents of those notebooks do you want
01:18:50 contents of those notebooks do you want do you understand right well with all that i'm going to say we're going to have a break now we'll come back if you would please at 25 to 4 and then we'll resume
01:19:00 resume at that point thank you so would you like to give the usher please
01:19:14 good 25 to 4 please
01:36:32 [Music]
01:36:37 would you ask mr madison to come back in
01:36:50 please
01:36:54 all right mr madison are you ready to carry on yes thank you thank you very much yes mr miller yes thank you mr chairman mr madison can we go back to the document we were in which is janice ray's june 2013 lacking
01:37:07 which is janice ray's june 2013 lacking note uh tm0100 39094 please [Applause]
01:37:16 and uh paige um we could go to page three in that note
01:37:24 uh at the bottom there where we were paragraph four consider retro fitting of sprinklers in high-rise blocks you can see in the end in the first line at the end it says and as yet no requirement to retrofit
01:37:36 as yet no requirement to retrofit and my question is to the best of your recollection was there a decision made or a discussion about not retrofitting [Music]
01:37:45 [Music] sprinklers in your housing stock because there was at least as yet no legal requirement to do so i don't think there was a decision of that nature made i think it was
01:37:56 that nature made i think it was it was identified as an issue but it was a very complex issue in terms of the practicalities and i think we probably needed to do a lot of feasibility work in terms of understanding how how it could be done
01:38:10 understanding how how it could be done and how much it would cost to what extent did the fact that sprinklers were not a legally required factor for the tmo in deciding what to do better
01:38:19 better play on it in this decision-making um well i think the focus i mean can you just remind me what time what day this is june man yes this is immediately after or within a few months of
01:38:30 after or within a few months of the lachenal coroner's rule 43 recommendations june 2013. so about six months after you arrived at the tmo
01:38:40 um i mean the focus really was what was detailed in the asset management strategy that was agreed with the council around that time and that put health and safety issues as
01:38:52 and that put health and safety issues as a high priority within the strategy but the priority at that time was really about making sure that what was currently there was compliant and
01:39:02 and rather and the focus hadn't really moved on to
01:39:05 on to the opportunities of installing sprinkler systems so would it be fair to say that because you didn't have to do it you didn't do it
01:39:14 it um
01:39:19 i think there's a there's i think there's
01:39:23 there's that's a fair enough thing to say but i think it was more it was probably more complicated than that yes i understand it's difficult issues around the feasibility and the management of those systems was problematic too
01:39:34 systems was problematic too now sticking thank you sticking with this paper right at the very bottom you can see item five review approved document b of the building regulations clear reference to external fire spread
01:39:45 clear reference to external fire spread and over the page page 4 at the top you can see
01:39:49 can see it says whilst we cannot be sure how dclg will respond to these recommendations it is like it is considered unlikely that they will make existing legislation more onerous especially if this requires
01:40:00 more onerous especially if this requires landlords to undertake significant as yet unresourced works now as to the reference to approved document b and
01:40:08 b and clear reference to external fire spread there in this document do you recognize that or did you when you saw this document recognize that as a reference to fire spread in the cladding at lachnal house
01:40:22 cladding at lachnal house i certainly recognize that in relation to fire spread um through in through the fire compartmentalization within lucknow has not been adequate right do you recall that there were any
01:40:34 right do you recall that there were any discussions about the external wall buildup or exterior wall construction contributing to the fire yes you do now of course as we know central
01:40:46 you do now of course as we know central to the grenfell tower refurbishment project
01:40:48 project was the overcladding of a residential uh high-rise block did you consider that the lessons from the latino house fire might be relevant to the project you were overseeing
01:41:02 um
01:41:09 i don't remember there's a specific reference back to lachnal house but i was
01:41:13 was my focus was really on ensuring that the works that were carried out to grenfell tower complied with regulation but right i didn't specifically reference that back to lucknow house i
01:41:25 reference that back to lucknow house i see
01:41:26 see did you ever connect the dots and think that the lessons and experiences from latin house might be relevant learning points in relation to the safety of the cladding at grenfell
01:41:38 the safety of the cladding at grenfell well i was conscious that lucknow house and grenfell tower very different constructions and so my reference points were really more towards other similar buildings that have had similar treatments
01:41:50 when you say your reference points were towards similar buildings that had similar treatment what what what are you referring to well there are a number of other cloud buildings within london and so i'd visited some of them and i'd
01:42:01 and so i'd visited some of them and i'd seen them so i was i'd assumed um i was i was looking for those as reference points because they were
01:42:07 were a more similar construction than the uh than say lack of house was to grenfell tower which were the buildings of the overcloud buildings in london you visited
01:42:17 visited i'd visited um so i i was i've been to the charcot estate in camden i'd worked in camden
01:42:28 in camden i'd worked in camden not on that project specifically so i was aware of that and had visited that estate too right to look at the works when did you visit that estate um
01:42:41 probably late 90s
01:42:46 late 90s sorry am i thinking no sorry not late 90s sorry
01:42:53 it must have been it was at my time when i was working at height housing association i remember so at hyde you were working at hyde yes right
01:43:02 right and um went and i went and visited that
01:43:08 estate now that would have been before you went to the tma yeah did you visit that the chalkits estate while it was being reclad during the reclaiming project yes
01:43:21 reclad during the reclaiming project yes you did yes
01:43:24 certainly through the refurbishment work i think the cladding was complete when i was
01:43:27 was when i visited right what was your role at hyde housing which took you to the child cuts project at the stage of its refurbishment that
01:43:39 at the stage of its refurbishment that you visited it it had i was responsible for um stock condition um stock transfer works um so putting together programs of work
01:43:51 um so putting together programs of work with reference to potential stock transfers from local authorities to housing association so i manage programs of work there did you meet
01:44:02 you meet any of the contractors or subcontractors when you visited i don't remember who i was there with um
01:44:15 you can't remember did you have any discussions when you visited it with any contractual subcontractor about the cladding system not specifically it was more about the approach to
01:44:26 approach to complex works with residents and occupation and management of that it wasn't a it wasn't a technical review meeting
01:44:34 meeting it was a it was a reviewing approaches to complex projects right do you remember who you spoke with or dealt with um
01:44:46 dealt with um i remember the chief the country of the name of the chief executive of the um the pfi it was a pfi project so it was certainly there and i can't remember who else right are
01:44:58 and i can't remember who else right are there any other overclad residential tower blocks you visited in addition to chocolates um
01:45:10 well there are others that i've worked on that have been over clad um so um not enough that visited so there was some inclusion um which i was working on as part of that we've
01:45:21 working on as part of that we've discussed that already no this is a different these are the different ones are they yeah this is uh so when i was at hyde i am uh there are a number of tower blocks
01:45:33 uh there are a number of tower blocks at the bottom of the orchard road i think is hutch and parker state which have been
01:45:37 have been over cloud so i worked on i worked in that as part of a potential stock transfer
01:45:42 transfer but again but didn't know the nature of the material and the contractor sort of significantly at chalcott's estate was ryden yes they were there they were the principal contractor for the pfi
01:45:56 principal contractor for the pfi indeed they were we know that who were the contractors at the old kent road project do you think called hatch is it hudson parker at hatcham park i don't know the country the works
01:46:07 know the country the works were long finished when i was working and when did you visit that project that was when i was at hyde so we we
01:46:14 we we were working on a potential stock transfer from the borough to right height housing association just for convenience you say can you give us the dates you were at hyde
01:46:24 um i'd say from probably 2005 to around 2010 right in fact i think i've been reminded
01:46:37 right in fact i think i've been reminded you were at high from 2006 to 2011 that's in your first witness statement that that sounds right right okay uh and uh in what way was lacking all
01:46:48 and uh in what way was lacking all different from the grenfell construction do you know um lucknow was more of it was a lower rise block and it was more of a medium-rise construction and it wasn't
01:46:59 medium-rise construction and it wasn't it from the photographs that i've seen it wasn't completely over clad it was it was more infill panels around window frames um
01:47:08 frames um so it seemed like a different construction whereas the construction that i'd seen on the the these other blocks that i didn't work on but was familiar had visited were more akin to the the full envelope
01:47:20 were more akin to the the full envelope um over cladding that you can see on grenfell tower now can we go forward then in time to the march of 2017
01:47:30 2017 and the health and safety committee meeting we looked at earlier on uh we go i think uh to
01:47:42 tmo10016241 please
01:47:47 this is a further paper by janice ray it's called paper six
01:47:57 and it's entitled latino house fire london fire brigade prosecution of london borough of southwark for information and it looks very much as if this was one of the agenda items
01:48:08 one of the agenda items or performed part of the agenda pac which was
01:48:12 which was circulated prior to the 16th of march 27 2017 health and safety committee meeting you attended is that right um i don't know but um right uh well let's
01:48:23 i don't know but um right uh well let's um
01:48:25 um let's look we'll come back to this in a moment let's just look at uh tmo1001c
01:48:40 there there is
01:48:44 there is the paper and it's now called the top right hand corner paper six appendix a so that looks like the same paper that dated june 2013 we've just looked at and if we get back to the the second
01:48:55 and if we get back to the the second paper
01:48:57 paper tmo one double zero one six two four one about the prosecution
01:49:04 that's paper six and if you look at the bottom it
01:49:08 bottom it deals with the prosecution of london borough of southwark and there's a summary of what happened there do you remember that do you remember seeing this document i don't remember it you don't um let's look at the minutes of the
01:49:20 um let's look at the minutes of the meeting then tma10016739 and see if these uh prompt recollection you can see that here are the minutes
01:49:31 you can see that here are the minutes again we looked at them before you're there
01:49:33 there sec for fourth um at nd down and if we go to page five of the minutes and go to item 5.1 and again i've showed you this before it says the paper was discussed and it
01:49:46 it says the paper was discussed and it was noted we were compliant with the offences for which southwark had been prosecuted do you recall that discussion i don't recall that specific discussion now right do you read so you don't recall the discussion and you don't recall
01:49:57 the discussion and you don't recall seeing the paper of march 17 i've just shown you which has the summary of the prosecution in it i
01:50:05 in it i i just don't remember the meeting specifically i mean if i was there i'm sure
01:50:10 sure absolutely do you remember to to what extent the meeting reviewed the tmo's own systems uh and arrangements for complying with the relevant obligations uh under the rro the fire safety order
01:50:24 uh under the rro the fire safety order in light of the fact that southern had been prosecuted do you remember anything about that
01:50:32 do you know what the basis was for the note that quotes we were compliant with the offenses for which southwark had been prosecuted sorry i don't i mean were any
01:50:45 sorry i don't i mean were any documents prepared and then analyzed so that an informed discussion about that issue could happen do you know sorry i don't remember the specifics of this meeting at all right do you know who it was who had made the
01:50:58 do you know who it was who had made the decision or if you like observation that the tma was compliant with the offences for which southwark had been prosecuted i don't um i assume the minutes were
01:51:09 i don't um i assume the minutes were taken by
01:51:10 taken by janice ray right and so um i don't but i don't know you can't help no
01:51:17 help no and did you draw dis connection in your mind at this stage and i know this is march 17 so only a few months before the fire and more months after practical
01:51:28 and more months after practical completion in july 2016. i appreciate that but did you draw on a any connection in your mind between lack of house and prosecution and grenfell tower no
01:51:40 and grenfell tower no can we then turn to other uh fire cladding fires before grenfell
01:51:50 grenfell do you have any recollection of the question of the combustibility of the cladding being discussed with you in particular in the context of the lack of house fire
01:52:02 in the context of the lack of house fire the clubbing on grant for cladding on grenfell yes
01:52:08 um no not specifically now at the time of your appointment to the tmo in january 2013. were you aware of a history of
01:52:19 of a history of fires in cladding in the uk
01:52:23 um no well you were aware in particular of the fire at nosley heights in 1991 no or the fire at darn it caught in irving in 1999. no what about cladding fires in
01:52:34 no what about cladding fires in high-rise residential buildings in other parts of the world such as the uae i've seen some dramatic pictures on the on the news right those were in 2012 and 2013.
01:52:47 right those were in 2012 and 2013. so before and perhaps at the time you joined the tmo you remember those do you i remember i remember coverage of those fires
01:52:54 fires but didn't have any knowledge of the materials used or the regulations to which they were built too did you ever discuss those fires with anybody within the tmo not that i remember no what about with
01:53:05 not that i remember no what about with anyone in the grenfell professional team
01:53:10 no did you have any knowledge uh of the lacrosse building fire in melbourne in 2014 when it happened no
01:53:25 can we then turn to the initial procurement stages for grenfell tower and we start with your first witness statement please at page four and on page four i'd like to go to
01:53:36 and on page four i'd like to go to paragraph 25. you say um at the time of my appointment the rebuilding of the kensington academy and leisure center calc is being undertaken directly by rbkc
01:53:47 is being undertaken directly by rbkc using their contractors ledbitter later taken over by boog architect studio e
01:53:53 studio e and other contractors and consultants including artelia then known as apple yards rbkc chose to use the same contractors and consultants for the proposed grenfell tower refurbishment which they were able to do
01:54:04 refurbishment which they were able to do under the iesi framework agreement for public sector procurement to engage call-off contractors without the need to go out to tender now the employer or client for the calc
01:54:16 the employer or client for the calc project was rbkc yes and it was rbkc that had appointed studio e and artelia to the cult project yes and also x over as
01:54:28 yes and also x over as fire safety consultants to that project yes
01:54:32 yes i don't know you don't know no right um now i appreciate this all happened before you started but when you came into post in january 2013 were you told on what basis studio e and
01:54:45 were you told on what basis studio e and artelia had been appointed to the grenfell tower project um i think you can see in my statement here that i was until very recently under the
01:54:52 under the misapprehension that they were appointed under the iec framework it's become clear that that's not you say until very recently when did you discover that that was wrong as i said in the last few
01:55:03 wrong as i said in the last few weeks during the evidence yes i see can you explain how you came to be under the illusion uh that they were appointed uh under the iasi framework
01:55:14 iasi framework um it's been reported it has been mentioned
01:55:17 mentioned so i took my reference point when i arrived at the tmo from the board report that had been presented to the tmo
01:55:24 the tmo board in january 13 before i had before i came
01:55:27 i came to post and that had referenced that both contractor and consultants were procured through the iec framework and i'd also noticed in reviewing um
01:55:39 and i'd also noticed in reviewing um the status reports from artelia that they
01:55:43 they also make the same reference so i think i'd
01:55:48 my assumption was they were all through the iec framework but now i learned that that rbkc had procured them separately and it was just um led better that were procured
01:56:01 just um led better that were procured through the iec framework right when you came into post did you actually investigate i think you told us you didn't actually investigate how tetelia and
01:56:13 actually investigate how tetelia and studio e came to be on the grenfell tower project as opposed to rbkc's calc project no as i say i took my reference point from the board report which is related to their appointments right
01:56:25 is related to their appointments right and you never challenged it or investigated it no no
01:56:31 did was your understanding that the reason
01:56:34 reason why studio e and artelia were appointed to the grenfell tower project was because they had worked on the cart project yeah i understood that the um that rbkc
01:56:45 that the um that rbkc and kctmo had been talking and understood that they would well wanted to explore the possibility there being a synergy between the two projects i thought that that would give better
01:56:56 i thought that that would give better value for money through shared overhead costs etc now if if you just look in the middle of paragraph 25 of your statement you say
01:57:07 paragraph 25 of your statement you say there
01:57:08 there rbkc chose to use the same contractors and consultants for the proposed grenfell tower project when you say rbkc chose on what basis do
01:57:19 when you say rbkc chose on what basis do you say there that it was rbkc who made that choice for the grenfell tower project i think that's probably incorrect i think it's rbkc and the tmo to get agreed together
01:57:31 to get agreed together that that would be a sensible route to uh procure the work through given that the grenfell tower refurbishment was a tmo
01:57:40 tmo major works and not an rbkc project rbkc not being the client for those works
01:57:48 works was it their choice to make at all um well the rbkc were the client and the owner of the building so you know and there has been a time
01:57:59 a time previously where rbkc themselves have delivered large-scale capital work rather than the tmo so i think that there was there was scope to do either and i think that um
01:58:13 but i think that rbkc were keen to allow the tmo to manage that project you know being a very large project in
01:58:24 you know being a very large project in the scope of the level of uh capital works that the tmo had been delivering to that point you said uh uh page 72 9
01:58:35 uh uh page 72 9 22 that it was the arm it was rbkc and the tmo agreed together
01:58:42 to appoint studio e and artelia being the same contractors and consultants why did rbkc have any role at all in making that choice given that
01:58:53 making that choice given that rbkc were not going to be the client under any of the contracts and i can't really comment because i wasn't involved in any of these discussions i'm only really
01:59:03 really telling you what what my assumptions were from what i've what i've seen um i think that rbkc were the client and the owner of the building and they worked very closely with the tmo and there's albeit
01:59:15 closely with the tmo and there's albeit through the modular modular management agreement but um so and
01:59:23 um so and working together to get best economies of scale and value for money seems like a sensible approach it stands from what you're telling us that although rbkc might not
01:59:34 telling us that although rbkc might not have been the sole decision maker about the appointment of studio e and artelia as consultants to the grenfell tower project nonetheless they had a significant decision-making role to
01:59:45 a significant decision-making role to play in that choice yes and the client they were the client and so
01:59:50 and so the cmo would develop an asset management strategy for example and we would agree that with the council so it was you know we the tmo worked on behalf of the council to some extent in new york
02:00:01 to some extent in new york and there was a close and clear clienting arrangement between the two parties
02:00:07 parties you say they were the client uh the the they were not the client in relation to the grenfell tower project itself no they were the client in relation to the services provided by the tmo
02:00:19 services provided by the tmo so they were our client and then we cliented the relationships with the contractors for the programs that we delivered that i follow but the client rela the client relationship that you had
02:00:30 had with rbkc was governed entirely wasn't it by the mmo which we've looked at and was monitored on a regular basis and there were agreements made about how to progress
02:00:41 progress certain schemes such as grenfell tower there's nothing we've seen in the modular management agreement which entitled rbkc to join in the decision making
02:00:49 making by the tmo in how to run and supervise major works is there i don't know you don't know at all events as you say when you came into the
02:01:00 as you say when you came into the project they were already retained on the grenfell tower project it was it was was it your impression that rbkc had played a significant role
02:01:11 significant role in the choice of appointment of studio e and artelia to the grenfell tower project it clearly played a role in procuring that team that was then being extended
02:01:23 that team that was then being extended the scope which was then being extended onto grenfell tower are you able to cast any light yourself on the nature or extent of the scrutiny that rbkc brought to bear on the appointment of studio e as suitable
02:01:35 appointment of studio e as suitable architects for the grenfell tower project as opposed to calc i'm sorry i had no i've got no insight into exactly what was happening at that time
02:01:49 were you aware that studio e had been appointed to calc by rbkc because of their specialist experience with schools and leisure centers i didn't well you were
02:02:01 leisure centers i didn't well you were aware the studio we had had no experience of high-rise refurbishment projects like grenfell i wasn't and had never done an overplanning project well calc was an overcloud project so i
02:02:12 well calc was an overcloud project so i i
02:02:13 i my experience with studio e was that they were man they were um delivering a complex and large
02:02:21 large program next right next door to grenfell tower and it was over clad uh so i i would expect that they'd had a degree of understanding of the complexities of that sort of project
02:02:32 complexities of that sort of project but did you know that they'd had no experience of over cladding a high-rise residential block i didn't know that
02:02:40 had you named that had that been something you'd learnt on arriving at the tmo
02:02:45 the tmo would you have looked with greater scrutiny
02:02:49 scrutiny at whether they were really fit to do the job
02:02:52 the job um
02:02:55 i think that i mean as the scheme had already been it was already at stage d by the time i arrived and the only design work and development of that design that took place uh pre-contract was to take
02:03:06 took place uh pre-contract was to take that stage e there was a limited amount of interface i had with with the professional team other than mobilizing them and focusing them on doing that really the decision comes further down
02:03:17 really the decision comes further down the line in terms of at which point we which contractor we procure
02:03:22 procure to take on the design post contract and that was really where my focus was on ensuring that we did get contractors who had the right experience and
02:03:33 experience and give them proper due diligence
02:03:41 can i then turn to artelia now we start i think by looking at their contractual roles we heard from simon cash
02:03:49 cash uh in this inquiry recently that there was a contract between the tmo and artelia which was agreed in the august of 2012. when you came into the project in the
02:04:00 when you came into the project in the following january do you remember that that was a feature or a fact you became familiar with i was aware they were appointed um the terms of the appointment weren't very clear to me and were you aware of the precise roles which artelia had
02:04:13 of the precise roles which artelia had agreed to perform at that time um there was a bit of confusion around that they um sometimes there was different names different job roles were interchanged
02:04:26 different job roles were interchanged within various correspondence so sometimes
02:04:29 sometimes in my statements i've referred to them as project managers for example whereas actually um so there was a bit of ambiguity because in some of their reports they would refer to themselves as project
02:04:40 would refer to themselves as project managers
02:04:41 managers where in fact that probably just relates to the member of staff's job description rather than the role that they are performing in indeed now that sense of ambiguity you've just been telling us is that a sense that you've
02:04:52 sense that you've developed since hearing the evidence or was it something you knew at the time no i did was
02:04:56 i did was i think it's it's quite well documented that
02:05:00 that i spent some time trying to fathom out quite
02:05:03 quite what the basis of the appointments were and resolving them going forward well let's then take it in stages um can you go to your second witness statement please at paragraph
02:05:14 paragraph 10 a and 11 on page three you say on in
02:05:23 in paragraph 10a uh and we need to read the opening words to that the pre-contract professional team for the grenfell tower refurbishment project consisted of
02:05:35 refurbishment project consisted of and then you put out a list a artelia project uk limited artelia as the cdm coordinator employers agent and quantity surveyor and then the paragraph 11 you say in my
02:05:47 and then the paragraph 11 you say in my earlier statement to the inquiry i referred to artelia as the contract administrator stroke project manager however having reviewed that statement to produce this supplementary one i believe the description given above is
02:05:58 i believe the description given above is more accurate so that's a correcting statement when you started what role did you understand artelia to be fulfilling
02:06:11 um
02:06:14 because they'd refer to themselves in documents as project managers i'd assume that was
02:06:19 that was the terminology that was being used under the iec framework so i i just made an assumption that that was the role they were very i'll tell you were very active in
02:06:30 i'll tell you were very active in pulling together and coordinating the various roles across the professional team and so i'm i think that led me to my understanding that they were project managers rather than
02:06:42 managers rather than employers agents quantity surveyors and cdm coordinators i see so you thought they were project managers not because they'd signed something saying project manager because they were doing a lot they were doing project management yes right and now looking at the um three
02:06:54 and now looking at the um three categories of service that they were agreeing to provide would you describe the paragraph 10 a here was that always your uh understanding they were they were always a cdm coordinator employers agent and
02:07:07 a cdm coordinator employers agent and quantity surveyor well not necessarily i don't i don't necessarily know because um part of that would be determined by the form of procurement and the
02:07:18 the form of procurement and the publishers that we went to so um i um but this was certainly once the the procurement that was agreed to tender the works this
02:07:29 that was agreed to tender the works this was the
02:07:30 was the these were the appointments that mirrored that appointment yes well we'll come back to the question of project manager shortly um but when you came into the project in the january of 2013. did you understand
02:07:41 the january of 2013. did you understand that artelia at least occupied these three roles cdm coordinator employees agent and quantitative yeah you did um then we move on to their role in design
02:07:53 then we move on to their role in design can we look at your first witness statement please uh at page four i'd like to go to paragraph 23 at the top of the page there and you say there
02:08:06 and i'll pick it up in the third line there was no requirement for me to have that technical knowledge that's about cladding as these matters were very much the responsibility of the principal designer studio e
02:08:18 principal designer studio e and the contract administrators stroke project managers artelia who had responsibility for developing the design to tend to stage the principal contractor then took responsibility post tender into the construction phase which uh
02:08:30 into the construction phase which uh compliant materials were used in a compliant way now just focusing on your words artelia who had responsibility for developing the design just tender stage there
02:08:41 just tender stage there see that um i just want you to keep that in mind and then look at something else you say
02:08:47 you say um also in your first witness statement at this time at page 12 if we can go to page 12 and look at paragraph 66 uh you say that ryden was selected by
02:08:58 uh you say that ryden was selected by the tender submission because of their experience etc and then four lines down you say it was the responsibility of artelia to check compliance and for john roman and
02:09:09 check compliance and for john roman and partners who were engaged as clerk of works
02:09:11 works to check and inform tmo of any non-compliances in the insulation installation i'm sorry installation focusing on the words it was the responsibility of artelia to check compliance
02:09:23 compliance just picking up on those words and the words in the previous section i read to your responsibility to develop the design
02:09:30 design can you clarify what responsibility for design
02:09:34 design you thought artelia had could you just take me back to that um that reference please well you've got that one there in front of you at 66. the earlier one is it paragraph 23 on page four
02:09:45 page four if i could see that bit yes certainly and it's uh three lines up from the end of the paragraph artelia who had responsibility for developing the design to say
02:09:55 to say that's a that's an incorrect statement so um
02:09:58 so um so studio we had responsibility for developing the design to tender stage not atelier i tell you were employees agents who were working on the on the client's behalf to manage that
02:10:10 client's behalf to manage that relationship with the contractor do you accept that artelia
02:10:16 artelia had in fact excluded responsibility for the design and selection of materials um
02:10:26 it was at which stage well it's a fair fair question back to me did expressly done so in their july 2014 written contracts
02:10:40 um sorry i'm struggling to so in relation to
02:10:47 to so their appointments going forward so this is in relation to managing the relation the relationship with the main contractor that there's ten
02:10:54 ten let's try it slightly differently in fact you've accepted that the words artelia who had responsibility for developing the design to send it to tender stage is wrong yes dude you really had that
02:11:05 is wrong yes dude you really had that responsibility to explain why i'll tell you had responsibility for
02:11:12 his employer's agent for ensuring that the
02:11:15 the post works
02:11:20 that post work the main contractor took and complied with the terms of their employers requirements you mean the post-tender yes contractor yes complied with the terms of their employers
02:11:31 employers yes can you explain how you came to make the error that you now accept is there why did you think when you write wrote this statement that artelia had responsibility responsibility for developing the design
02:11:43 responsibility for developing the design to center stage
02:11:50 now i'll tell you well it's it's it's it's clear that artelia's responsibilities was in relation to employees agents and while not
02:11:58 while not having necessity to um oversee the design i would expect an employer's agent to be working with the principal designer and taking
02:12:11 but also with in in their employer's agent role but also it's their cdmc role to ensure that that qualified designers were carrying out those works and complying with the terms of their
02:12:22 and complying with the terms of their contracts
02:12:22 contracts right i follow
02:12:26 so we read your words their responsibility for developing the design not as a primary responsibility to develop the design itself but to oversee the adequate development of the design
02:12:36 design as our agent yes as your agent yes i see can we then turn to the role of artelia as lead consultant and go to your second witness statement at page eight please
02:12:51 and at paragraph 38 you say at the bottom of the page there with a direct contract then in place between ryden and studio e artelia remained in the role of employers agents to the tmo
02:13:02 employers agents to the tmo and it is my understanding that in this sense it took on a de facto role as the tmo's lead consultant in relation to the professional team that the tmo retained
02:13:14 that the tmo retained by professional team that the tmo retained your expression there what do you mean or who do you mean well the only
02:13:21 the only consultants that we retained were um
02:13:25 max fordham in relation post post contract
02:13:31 contract um so really they're they're wrong so
02:13:37 they're always our employers agents they were
02:13:40 were our agent ensuring that the main contractor complied with the terms of their appointment i see so you're talking about being leader of those uh professionals who remain direct
02:13:51 uh professionals who remain direct appointed
02:13:52 appointed appointments or appointees of the tmo yes although in reality that was primarily themselves i mean they were
02:14:02 we retained artelia as employers agent to manage the main contract with ryden to be clear you're not saying that artelia was the lead consultant for the whole project um i mean again they make reference to
02:14:15 um i mean again they make reference to themselves as lead consultant in various documents and so that was that my understanding now having looked at the appointments that studio e were the lead consultant
02:14:26 that studio e were the lead consultant in the pre well when you say uh my understanding now having looked at the appointments the studio you were the lead consultant
02:14:37 the studio you were the lead consultant is that an understanding that you've arrived at since the inquiry started no no i i think i felt that at the time it is
02:14:43 is so you know um so when when we when we're looking to reinvigorate the project and uh re-mobilize it so um artelia took an active role in
02:14:57 so um artelia took an active role in coordinating the appointments green this this the
02:15:01 this the uh the services from the various members of the professional team so um and in some of that correspondence with those parties referred to themselves as the lead consultant now that may not have been reflected in the
02:15:13 that may not have been reflected in the appointments but it was certainly how they
02:15:16 they acted in the in reality now simon cash said that the lead consultant was a role leading the design team
02:15:23 team and artelia excluded that role do you remember that no i don't you don't uh well if we like if you like we can look at the contract from 2014 where that role was clearly
02:15:34 from 2014 where that role was clearly excluded did you do not recall that um i wasn't heavily involved in the drafting of that contract so i um right did you not look at it um
02:15:45 um right did you not look at it um i don't remember if i had did you not know
02:15:48 know that artelia had expressly excluded the role of lead consultant when it came to formalizing the relationship as i said i recognized they weren't the lead consultant but they took a lead on certain uh i suspect
02:16:01 they took a lead on certain uh i suspect of the world so can we take it from what you've just said is that you did know always that artelia were not the lead consultant in a formal role leading the design team yeah they were employers agents responsible for managing our contract
02:16:13 responsible for managing our contract with ryden i see and therefore because they were not the lead consultant artelia did not have responsibility to your to your way of understanding for design or checking compliance
02:16:24 or checking compliance themselves no of sure well other than their responsibilities for ensuring that rydens have taken due regard to ensure that they
02:16:34 that they because the principal um responsibility here for design post tender is with ryden's and so we are expecting our employers agents to take two steps to make sure that they are
02:16:47 two steps to make sure that they are complying with those obligations now i want to come back then next to the role as
02:16:51 as project manager that octillia did or didn't occupy um can we go to your first statement at page four please
02:17:02 and look at paragraph 23 we've looked at this before and you say there and you've already addressed this a little bit i think
02:17:15 addressed this a little bit i think that
02:17:19 or you seem to suggest that artelia were appointed as project managers of the construction that's the suggestion that you make there
02:17:27 there if we look at your second statement can we go to your second statement please paragraph eleven on page three you
02:17:39 say and again i've shown you this that
02:17:44 you believe the description is more accurate when you say that they were the employers agent qs and cdmc
02:17:54 do you i think do accept that artelia were not contracted to perform the role of project manager yes yeah no it does appear that you weren't entirely sure of that when you wrote your first statement
02:18:05 wrote your first statement when you wrote your first statement had you not read artelia's contract terms either those that applied when you
02:18:12 when you started at the tmo in 2013 or those which were agreed in the summer of 2014. at that time i didn't have access to that document but i um i took those references from various correspondents
02:18:24 references from various correspondents from artelia
02:18:34 [Applause] hopefully
02:18:39 hopefully uh let's see if we can round this topic off
02:18:43 off fairly quickly then we may be able to do that in light of what you've just told us can we look at art four zeros one two one nine please this is a document entitled
02:18:56 this is a document entitled draft revised brief at june 2013 for grenfell tower and on the first page we can see that you are identified as the project sponsor does this mean
02:19:09 as the project sponsor does this mean that this document was directed to you um i don't recall i think it was it was
02:19:20 recall i think it was it was yes well it was it was directed to to the team that i led yes yes yes did you do you remember receiving it yes did you read it yes yeah can we look at page two
02:19:31 yes yeah can we look at page two at the fourth paragraph from the top of that page
02:19:35 that page uh it says the design team who have been involved with the project to date will remain appointed and will continue through to project completion previous plans to navigate
02:19:46 completion previous plans to navigate all designers to the principal contractor are to be reviewed apple yards who had previously acted as ea stroke qs will take on a full pm stroke ea role in addition to their qs responsibilities and will fulfill the lead consultant
02:19:58 and will fulfill the lead consultant role
02:20:00 role do you recall that artelia proposed to act as full project manager and lead consultant at that time um i don't specifically recall it but i i recollect that we
02:20:12 recollect that we this was the start of a process that apple yards and stuff within my team started to work on the details of the appointments because it had been uh ambiguous in some areas and this was
02:20:24 uh ambiguous in some areas and this was a
02:20:25 a first star but starting to pull that together i see so do you agree that at this stage june 2013 there needed to be a designated project manager management um by a professional
02:20:39 not specifically now there was i think that was the this this was an initial
02:20:47 initial proposal as to how this might be done but i think that there was a bit of an iterative process that we went through in establishing what roles were required
02:20:58 roles were required there was a client-side project manager who was
02:21:02 who was within the team within my team but that wasn't taken on the professional roles and the professional roles were led going forward by um
02:21:14 going forward by um apple yards or italia as they became as an employees agent cdmc and quantity surveyor
02:21:20 surveyor can i just show you what philip booth of artelia said about this can we please go to his transcript for day 49 of page 128.
02:21:38 and he's shown this document by ms grange and at line 24
02:21:48 he says so in the early this is in the early part of me being involved still with the handover and the project was in and we can go over the page sort of a bit of the state of distress we were reforming through our status
02:22:00 we were reforming through our status report around that sort of time as well in april and june what was the project because it had a kind of hit a wall and wasn't getting anywhere
02:22:07 anywhere so there were a number of things that were being reviewed with the client tmo as to how reef how to reform the project to make sure you know we could move it forward
02:22:15 forward and we prepared a short-term action plan there were times when we were reviewing who was doing what and you've refreshed my memory there i think you know evidently at one point we were talking about being the pm
02:22:26 about being the pm or the lead consultant but we actually didn't end up doing that in terms of appointment do you agree with that yes i think that's the sort of iterative
02:22:37 yes i think that's the sort of iterative process i was talking about earlier and do you agree uh that at the time the project was in a bit of a state of distress i think it was the
02:22:48 a state of distress i think it was the project had stalled for a variety of reasons
02:22:51 reasons um and um
02:22:55 um and um so it needed it needed to be given focus as to what the principles were and the priorities were going forward at that time there had been some challenges and issues around the design and the planning permission
02:23:06 and the planning permission and the negotiations with the contractor had been difficult and i think that this was part of a refocusing uh within the professional team to push the project forward can we then go
02:23:19 push the project forward can we then go to art409106 please these are the minutes of a meeting held on the 6th of june 2013
02:23:30 meeting held on the 6th of june 2013 produced by ortelia and we can see that you and
02:23:33 you and david gibson and paul duncan are there from the tmo with simon cash and others from artelia uh if we go to the item 1.1 on the first page just a little bit
02:23:44 on the first page just a little bit lower down on the screen approval of revised project brief pb presented the draft as philip booth presented the draft revised project brief
02:23:52 brief it was agreed to insert overall project costs including fees and surveys not just construction costs subject to the proposed changes the brief was approved
02:24:03 brief was approved now that tells us that the revised project briefly just seen was formally approved is that correct um
02:24:14 is that correct um what date was this this is the 6th of june 2013
02:24:20 and it's referring to the draft revised project brief which is the document i think unless i'm wrong we've just seen
02:24:32 wrong we've just seen are you asking me in relation specifically to the professional team and the roles of the professional what i'm asking you really is is it right that's subject to the proposed changes
02:24:45 that's subject to the proposed changes about inserting overall project costs fees and surveys subject to that the draft revised project brief was formally approved i don't recall i mean i haven't read the
02:24:56 i don't recall i mean i haven't read the project brief in in detail for some time and
02:25:00 and um it doesn't i can't remember right i mean view any reason sitting here to think that that minute is wrong doesn't occur to me although you know as
02:25:11 doesn't occur to me although you know as i was
02:25:13 i was i think there was a bit of an iterative process that was not formalized until we made the formal appointments right and i think that's probably the brief
02:25:21 brief as it was written then may have evolved further
02:25:24 further and i don't think this is saying that it was written who was set in stone at this time
02:25:30 time philip booth said in his evidence that in fact this proposal wasn't taken up is that your recollection i think when we look at the uh the actual appointments i think that's that's true that wasn't the um
02:25:42 that's that's true that wasn't the um they weren't the appointments that were made they were appointed as employers agents cdmc etc do you remember whether there was any further discussion with artelia about artelia
02:25:52 artelia uh performing the role of project manager and lead consultant in or after june 2013 but before july 2014. between june 13
02:26:04 july 2014. between june 13 um
02:26:09 the lead consultant role so i mean in a way
02:26:12 way the way the project was re-mobilized was to
02:26:16 to um appoint worked with jenny jackson in my team i remember
02:26:23 remember uh to refine and define the um the roles that were required going forward to get the project to stay g at which point the project was going to go out to
02:26:34 go out to to tender so really this was about focusing
02:26:37 focusing the roles required for that project and then beyond that there are a set of appointments which are required to deliver that project so um that's my that's my recollection of
02:26:49 um that's my that's my recollection of the way the process worked i think the answer to my question is no there was no further discussion about artelia performing the role of project manager
02:26:58 or or yes i think or leave consultants yes
02:27:01 yes right
02:27:06 [Applause]
02:27:11 can we just go back then to philip booth's evidence at day 49 page 129 and just pick up where we broke off from it
02:27:23 it day 49 page 129 please and i'd like to go to line uh 16. he he says there i mean in terms of who is the right person to fulfill the role of project manager i actually
02:27:34 the role of project manager i actually think it was it rightly sat on the client side because the wider scheme of responsibility for a project manager was going to be largely around for this project
02:27:42 project the complications for this project so like the resident liaison lots of communication within all the other departments within the m within the tma so i actually think it sat
02:27:51 sat correctly in-house as a client side do you agree with that i think this is about
02:27:58 about clarity about the definition of the pro the client side project manager who has a role for um working with the employer's agent or
02:28:09 um working with the employer's agent or the
02:28:10 the the lead consultant on developing the brief and managing that project their roles are really around for the internal communications and working with the repairs teams and the
02:28:21 working with the repairs teams and the internal teams external communications with residents and and others and also monitoring um the the contract in terms of cost and program etc
02:28:33 program etc but it's the technical aspects of the team of
02:28:36 team of of this project were delivered through the professional team who were led by well it in the in the post-contract phase was led by
02:28:47 led by artillery it sounds like i'm so sorry to continue as an employer's agent it stands from your answer to my question that you agree with philby's evidence
02:28:59 philby's evidence um that i've just read to you there with one
02:29:03 one caveat being that the project management role isn't a technical it's not managing the technical aspects of the employees managing the employee delivery of the employer's requirements by the
02:29:14 of the employer's requirements by the main contractor the project management role is a client-side monitoring brief stakeholder engagement governance type role whereas the actual um
02:29:26 type role whereas the actual um managing of the project is going forward from the client side is through the employer's agent and ultimately the project manager is delivered through the main contractor so to summarize is this is this how you
02:29:38 so to summarize is this is this how you understood it at least from let's say june 2013 when the this was discussed and certainly after june to july 2014 when the contract was entered into uh
02:29:50 when the contract was entered into uh that on the client side there was a project manager namely claire williams who was there to manage the client side of things
02:29:55 of things such as residence liaison but not a technical project manager role in the sense of running or running the project and on the professional side you have artelia as
02:30:08 professional side you have artelia as employers agent and everything within the scope of their contract that's right yeah thank you
02:30:23 there are a lot of documents i could show you but when people used the term project manager or assistant project manager
02:30:35 or assistant project manager uh and we can see some of the artelia people
02:30:39 people doing that what did you understand that meant
02:30:44 um i think probably ultimately a lot of the people involved in this project were project managers in one sense or another but in terms of the contract they were
02:30:57 but in terms of the contract they were providing different roles for example a project manager who's from australia maybe the employer's agent in reality right so you're drawing did you draw your mind at the time of distinction between their
02:31:08 at the time of distinction between their job title within the organization they were
02:31:10 were employed by and the role of project manager on the project i think any confusion that i had around this was was my initial lack of clarity around the
02:31:21 my initial lack of clarity around the source of the procurement and i think going forward it became clear to me because i was looking for this to be delivered through a very clear traditional design and build process which has very clearly defined roles of employers agent
02:31:34 clearly defined roles of employers agent quantity surveyor and cdmc for example thank you mr chairman i've come to the end of this line of questioning and uh it's also just gone half past four so
02:31:45 uh it's also just gone half past four so yes
02:31:46 yes very good point at which to break for the day thank you yes well um mr madison we're going to break there for the day um i'm afraid i have to ask you to come back to answer some more questions
02:31:58 back to answer some more questions tomorrow but i think you are probably expecting that and let me just repeat what i said earlier not to talk about your evidence or anything related to it to anyone else while you're out of the room
02:32:08 room apart from the exception that i explained to you earlier on of course all right thank you very much would you like to give the usher then please
02:32:28 good ten o'clock tomorrow then please
02:33:00 you