London Fire Brigade Evidence - Monday 27th September 2021 (1/2)

Full transcript

00:00:26 [Music]

00:00:34 good morning everyone welcome to today's hearing

00:00:37 hearing in a moment we're going to hear further evidence from mrs rita dexter but i think first mr millet has something he needs to mention yes mr chairman good morning and good morning to members of the panel i want you both there's just

00:00:49 the panel i want you both there's just one small thing or maybe not such a small thing that are raised on friday after the examination of uh miss dexter and that was the disclosure of the document i'm going to go to her

00:01:00 go to her next in her examination which arose out of the questions i was asking her about the flow of information between the 72d people so to speak and the fire safety regulation department

00:01:14 the fire safety regulation department on the other hand now that has has given rise to some questions about the lfb's disclosure and we are investigating that with them at the moment and i don't want to say any more about it until we've

00:01:26 to say any more about it until we've fully got to the bottom of it and until the brigade has done the same so i will come back to you uh as soon as i can with it with any further information but needless to say what i'm going to be going to with her is a newly disclosed

00:01:38 going to with her is a newly disclosed document

00:01:40 document right thank you very much so um are we ready now to go on with uh yes we are thank you will you ask mr dexter to come back in please

00:02:00 uh

00:02:17 good morning mrs dexter morning ready to carry on yes good thank you very much when you're ready mr thank you mr chairman ms dexter good morning good morning uh you referred in your evidence

00:02:28 morning uh you referred in your evidence on thursday morning last week to being provided during your tenure as deputy commissioner with a set of reports presented to the directorate management board the dmb

00:02:39 board the dmb which related to the flow of information as between on the one hand the fire safety department and on the other the operational crews in fire stations and this was information and you'll

00:02:51 and this was information and you'll recall the discussion we had about um whereby members of the fire safety department would identify during fire safety visit audits what they had found in buildings

00:03:02 in buildings and

00:03:03 and relevant information which needed to be sent to the operational firefighters at the stations and vice versa now you were able i think on friday as you said you would

00:03:14 you said you would to identify a copy of one of those reports i'm glad to say that it has been provided to the inquiry i'm going to look at it in a moment i should also say it has also been disclosed to core participants

00:03:26 participants let's go to it it's at lfb double zero one two two nine six two

00:03:35 and this is

00:03:37 is a report q4 2014-15 station fire safety risk notification monitoring the date is the 12th of may 2015 and it's a meeting

00:03:48 and it's a meeting of or between the director of operations and the director of management board or dmb

00:03:54 dmb um you told us last week that the reports came to you more frequently than annually just looking at the heading of that report it's referred to q4 2014-15 is that

00:04:06 2014-15 is that likely to mean that this was a report that was provided to the dmb on a quarterly basis do you think

00:04:12 i i think that's a reasonable inference yes right now um this is one that we have at this time do you know when this looking at this document to refresh your memory this quarterly reporting started

00:04:25 memory this quarterly reporting started i don't mr millet i i didn't if if i'm honest i didn't recall the fact of this reporting at all until this year so it was mr mcgurk's expert report that prompted me to recall the fact of

00:04:39 that prompted me to recall the fact of these

00:04:40 these exchanges of information and um and as a result i said to my legal team actually i think there was something um that came to my

00:04:51 there was something um that came to my dnb can can you see what you can get my impression um uh is that the brigade hasn't

00:05:01 hasn't managed to access the papers from my directorate management board which were held by a particular officer um neil marsden i can't remember when neil retired

00:05:12 neil retired um and this one was provided to me in the middle of september and although it it's not it's not during the time that i was in the brigade having seen it i was

00:05:24 the brigade having seen it i was satisfied in the sense that it provided me the reassurance that i was looking for that a report of this nature existed which is which is what my objective was what you know was that was there such a report

00:05:36 know was that was there such a report um i think i now recall that there was and and this and this confirmed that so it's to a directorate management board but but not not the directorate management board that was mine i assume

00:05:47 management board that was mine i assume that dave brown had a directorate management board subsequently because he became a director after i left and and this was to his management board at all events is the answer to my question you don't remember

00:05:58 question you don't remember uh i don't i don't remember now um

00:06:01 now um the title of the report as you can see is station stroke fire safety risk notification monitoring and we can see that the author of the report is the director of operations

00:06:12 director of operations at the time of this report which is 12th of may 2015. i think that was david brown wasn't he ac brown yes yes uh would it be right to say that before that and until your departure

00:06:23 before that and until your departure from the lfb at the end of march 2015 so a couple of months before this document

00:06:30 document that function uh was part of your role in other words dave brown took over from you dave brown reported to me and then in numerous respects took to took over from

00:06:42 numerous respects took to took over from me after i left yes

00:06:45 do you know who was responsible for preparing

00:06:48 preparing reports such as this during your time as deputy commissioner i can't recall now the summary of the report if we go to it on the first page says this the report this report shows the number

00:06:59 the report this report shows the number of risk notifications sent between fire safety and fire stations it differentiates between the origin of the notifications and captures how many have had action taken on them this report is

00:07:10 had action taken on them this report is for the quarter ending 31st march 2015. and is it correct that risk notifications as the phrase is used there means in essence notification of

00:07:21 there means in essence notification of information that is relevant to a particular building

00:07:27 yes yes uh and in terms of its fire risks presumably which was the risks you were interested in yes yeah now it's right isn't it that tell me if you don't remember this but

00:07:38 tell me if you don't remember this but the lfb had a policy namely policy 784 uh

00:07:44 uh that govern the sharing of information like this between fire safety operational crews do you remember that uh vaguely vaguely let's be more specific can we go to it

00:07:55 let's be more specific can we go to it it's at lfb three zeros one two seven three four please

00:08:04 now you can see the title stations notification of fire safety information new policy number 784 in issue date 22 december 2011 reviewed

00:08:15 in issue date 22 december 2011 reviewed as current 16th of september 2015. that's after your departure owner head of fire safety statutory and community

00:08:25 community looking at just what i've shown you does this trigger a recollection are you familiar with this policy do you think uh i recall that there was a policy 784 and it was station's notification of fire

00:08:37 it was station's notification of fire safety information right now let's look at page two please and let's look at paragraphs 1.1 and 1.2 together under 1.1 that's the introduction and it says this in the course of their

00:08:49 and it says this in the course of their duties fire safety inspecting officers are likely to encounter matters which should be taken into consideration by operational personnel when pre-planning for operational incidents when identified matters of operational

00:09:00 identified matters of operational relevance will be communicated to the station manager via a form there will also be instances where station personnel identify fire safety issues that should be communicated to fire safety regulation

00:09:11 fire safety regulation examples include and then there are six bullet points underneath that by way of example

00:09:16 example the third of which uh is complex evacuation strategies the fourth of which is enforcement issues

00:09:24 issues and the fifth of which is poor management of fire engineered premises and then you can see at the bottom in bold no this is not an exhaustive list

00:09:35 and then at paragraph 1.2 this policy details how relevant information should be communicated to the appropriate personnel

00:09:42 personnel are you able to explain is it this procedure that is that set out in this policy i've shown you that resulted in the reports to the directorate management board the dmb

00:09:54 management board the dmb such that we've just seen i believe so yes now if we look at section two to notification to station it says this matters of operational relevance identified by fire safety inspecting officers will be recorded the

00:10:07 inspecting officers will be recorded the team leader should agree or amend the action recommended and forward the form sfs

00:10:13 sfs a 0 2 0 a 2 a note the a at the end to the relevant station manager with copies to the borough commander fsr admin and

00:10:24 to the borough commander fsr admin and the relevant areas support team

00:10:29 uh support team mailbox now that's what i would call the a form and then it goes on in the absence of the team leader etc and then if you go to section three on page two

00:10:41 page two lower down action by station it tells you what the station should do on receipt of that information and if it if if you look at 3.1 it says on receipt of the notification of fire safety

00:10:52 of the notification of fire safety information to station form and there's the a form referred to the station manager should decide on the action to be taken

00:11:00 be taken and at 3.2 if a joint visit with fire safety is required the local station should liaise with fire safety to make the necessary arrangements and then if you look at section 4 on page 3 you'll see that there's a similar

00:11:12 page 3 you'll see that there's a similar reverse arrangement to cater for the flow of information from operational crews to fire safety so that would be information going the other way

00:11:20 other way 4.1 where station personnel become aware of information which in their opinion needs to be notified to the local fire safety team they should complete a notification of fire safety information to fire safety form

00:11:32 to fire safety form and then there's the same number sfsa020a2

00:11:36 b and that's what we call the b form and then if you look at 4.2 it says the watch stroke crew manager should record the detail of the information on all risk onto the form

00:11:48 information on all risk onto the form together with the action recommended for example joint visit with local station to familiarize operational personnel with the installation or risk concerned site visit by fire safety information

00:11:59 site visit by fire safety information only

00:12:00 only and then

00:12:02 and then underneath that if you scroll down to the

00:12:05 to the bottom of page three you can see five action by fire safety it's in the middle of your screen you see that yes um 5.1 on receipt of the notification

00:12:16 notification of fire safety information to fire safety form then there's the b form identified the team leader should decide on the action to be taken

00:12:26 and

00:12:28 at 5.2 if a joint visit with the local station is required fire safety should liaise with the local station to make the necessary

00:12:36 necessary arrangements just looking at what i've shown you there miss dexter would you agree that with the exception of the non-exhausted non-exhaustive list of paragraph 1.1 i showed you uh with the six bullet points would you

00:12:48 uh with the six bullet points would you agree

00:12:49 agree that there's nothing in this policy policy 784 that directs or guides either operational crews or fire safety crews or personnel as to what type of information needed to be shared as

00:13:01 information needed to be shared as between them

00:13:06 so so

00:13:09 what type of information so you're saying leave aside the the non-exhaustive list yes

00:13:18 yes other than the non-exhaustive list am i right in thinking that there's nothing in the policy yes yes yes yes do you know following on from that

00:13:28 from that whether as a matter of practice operational crews or fire safety personnel knew what type of information to look out for that ought to be shared going one way or the other

00:13:41 well certainly the items on the list yes um other than that though beyond that could i look at the list again yes of course it's paragraph 1.1 if we can go

00:13:52 course it's paragraph 1.1 if we can go back please to page two of the document

00:14:02 uh

00:14:05 and i think you're asking me for further

00:14:11 further for examples of further types of risks not covered by this list yes um so for example the presence of cylinders um so there were

00:14:22 um so there were from memory

00:14:25 in the report that we looked at before this document

00:14:31 the categories reported against were not confined to these six items

00:14:39 no they weren't and therefore do you know as a mat whether as a matter of practice operational crews and fire safety personnel

00:14:47 personnel knew beyond the specifics in the list what other things to be looking out for you've given an example of cylinders what else would they customarily be alert

00:14:56 alert to

00:15:05 uh

00:15:08 well uh let me see management um so the fifth item here well uh

00:15:20 i'm i'm struggling to decide for myself what the

00:15:22 what the totality of the embraces of poor management of fire engineered premises but damage to firefighting equipment or firefighting lifts for example

00:15:36 cylinders i've mentioned

00:15:44 sorry uh that that's all i can readily bring to mind yes i mean to approach the point in a different way this is this is a list of examples yes did taking the station

00:15:56 did taking the station crews did the station crews just use this as a tick box list tick box list or did they do they understand that they were only examples and that they ought to be looking at everything which they thought fire

00:16:08 everything which they thought fire safety should know

00:16:12 i don't think i could speak to what what they did or didn't know so there was guidance here and there was experience um

00:16:23 and there was experience um and

00:16:24 and the combination of the guidance and the experience would inform how they responded was there training um i don't know right do you know whether joint visits were

00:16:35 do you know whether joint visits were ever carried out in practice no i don't know

00:16:39 know now we have a copy of the the bee form if i can put it that way which is the form that operational crews were directed to use when notifying fire safety regulation about relevant information can we go to

00:16:51 about relevant information can we go to that that's at lfb3091786

00:16:58 and if you go to page one of that document you can see that the form is called notification of fire safety information to fire safety to team leader in fsr admin support so

00:17:09 to team leader in fsr admin support so this is going from stations to fire safety regulation and you can see from station commander and it says underneath the thick black line the under mentioned premises have been identified as having special interest to

00:17:21 identified as having special interest to fire safety personnel brief details are given below and further information can be obtained from the officer dealing and then the watch officer dealing and the telephone number are left as blanks to be filled in and the address of the

00:17:33 to be filled in and the address of the premises and then you can see if we scroll down a bit the list

00:17:38 list detail of information or risk and um there is a set of boxes presumably to be ticked and one can go down them dangerous substances present timber frame

00:17:50 substances present timber frame construction site complex unusual evacuation strategy used poor safety fire safety management evident

00:17:57 evident prohibition notice not complied with inappropriate sleeping accommodation repeated unwanted fast signals premises information box contents missing or inadequate and then other detailed below

00:18:10 is it fair to say just looking at that that this was essentially a tick box exercise

00:18:19 i don't know it's not a form i've ever seen before um no it's not a form i've ever seen before and i don't know the answer to your question right d

00:18:29 d do you know whether the list leaving aside other perhaps was one which was approved by the fire safety department i don't know

00:18:40 safety department i don't know do you know do you remember any discussion about what should go into this document no no i didn't i didn't know it existed um it's not only that i i've never seen it i didn't know

00:18:51 i didn't know uh i don't think i ever addressed the question of what what are the mechanics of the process no all right you know can you help us who did or who would have done

00:19:01 done uh whose responsibility was this

00:19:06 i i think david brown is is the most is likely to be the most useful person to ask um although dan dan daly

00:19:18 to ask um although dan dan daly dan daly took up posting fire safety after i left um so i can't i can't speak to dan's knowledge but um

00:19:28 i think dave brown is likely to be more helpful in this um to your recollection do you remember ever an occasion on which somebody brought to your attention

00:19:39 brought to your attention the inefficiency or ineffectiveness of this form

00:19:43 this form as a as a document identifying to fire station crews defects which ought to be brought to the attention of fire safety no

00:19:54 attention of fire safety no let's go

00:19:55 let's go back to the director at management board report we were looking at before lfb double zero one two two nine six two uh and on that page three paragraph three

00:20:10 if we go to yes and you can see it paragraph three there it says this it noted that fsr fire safety regulation send more notifications to stations than

00:20:21 send more notifications to stations than stations due to fsr some possibilities for this include some stations not being fully aware of the administrative recording process alternative communication channels for recent team management changes and a difference of

00:20:33 management changes and a difference of opinion in what level of information should be referred by the other party fsr have undertaken for team leaders to scrutinize the quality of fsr notifications to ensure these are all

00:20:44 notifications to ensure these are all relevant stations and will provide additional training if required a consideration has also been given to changing the guidance on reporting lines from stations to teams for these notifications

00:20:55 notifications now

00:20:56 now were any steps taken do you know at board level in other words the board to which this report was being sent to iron out these problems so as to make the flow of information from stations to fsr better

00:21:09 information from stations to fsr better i can't remember if we go to appendix 2 of this document on page 5 we can see that this is the first page of a detailed breakdown which follows

00:21:21 of a detailed breakdown which follows over the ensuing pages of the number of the number of notifications by area and by quarter throughout 2014 and it runs uh

00:21:31 uh from it's for a railing 12 month period as you can see from april 14 to march 15 both months inclusive but if you go to page eight we can see the entry for kensington and chelsea

00:21:44 the entry for kensington and chelsea uh there it is two thirds of the way down the box uh

00:21:48 uh and if you look at that you can see that over that period there was a grand total of six notifications you see that i do yes yes and that would include am i

00:21:59 i do yes yes and that would include am i right that would include both notifications bias by station crews to fire safety and by fire safety inspecting officers

00:22:12 uh

00:22:15 i think sorry i think the report clarifies that um uh

00:22:22 uh well

00:22:24 well let me let me take it a bit more slowly because i think i may have jumped ahead a bit too fast if you go back to page if you go back to page uh to page five

00:22:35 to page five we can see fs artist this is fsr to station

00:22:39 station and page six is a continuation of fsr to station yeah and on fsr to station for kensington and chelsea it's 100 you see that uh could you go to the next page yes page six

00:22:52 it's a hundred percent fsr to station kensington or chelsea yes every starter station 100 uh uh um and there are six notifications um but if you then go to page seven

00:23:06 um this is station to fsr so information coming the other way the other way in appendix three same period uh and if you go to page eight

00:23:19 there you have kensington and chelsea uh

00:23:22 uh where the total although very small number

00:23:25 number arithmetically is 50 percent yes yes now now looking at uh on all of um

00:23:33 um all of those figures that the numbers are are low aren't they would you agree with that i would so you'd expect to see them higher uh

00:23:43 uh and looking at the 50 percent do you know what happened to the remaining 50 non-compliant notifications

00:23:53 so the remaining 50 percent was uh one notification um

00:24:00 um i don't know um right now i mean looking one can do this but one goes back to page seven and casts your eye down page seven

00:24:12 and casts your eye down page seven stationed to fsr bearing in mind that kensington and chelsea was 50 percent uh you have a number of naught percents

00:24:23 uh you have a number of naught percents uh and one or two at under fifty percent uh but fifty percent uh on that page and indeed if you go to the next page page 50 was in in the lower one of the lower

00:24:35 50 was in in the lower one of the lower bands wasn't it it wasn't the worst but it certainly wasn't one of the best uh i agree with you mr millet but

00:24:44 the use of percentages in this table is not it's not very it's not very helpful 50 obviously is one of two um but i think the numbers matter as much as the percentages well isn't that

00:24:55 much as the percentages well isn't that part of the trouble mr miller the numbers

00:24:58 numbers are so low i mean in the case of kensington chelsea it's two so if you fail to comply in relation to one you're automatically looking at 50 whereas a

00:25:09 automatically looking at 50 whereas a failure to comply in relation to one uh if if the uh overall number's much larger nearly as significant that's certainly correct statistically that must be

00:25:20 correct statistically that must be correct but somebody must have thought that a percentage uh presentation of this data was useful to somebody otherwise it wouldn't be there would that be right um

00:25:31 um well

00:25:32 well yes that would would be right but um

00:25:37 we saw another example last week where using a percentage in relation to a particular number wasn't wasn't actually uh

00:25:45 uh probably wasn't the best you know the best use of the data that could have been made and presented and i think this is an another example of that kind of approach so i'm not i'm not um

00:25:57 not um uh i'm not sorry i'm

00:26:01 sorry i'm not not trying to do too much that's inappropriate in response to your questions but these these

00:26:07 these the size of these numbers makes the use of percentages not not always very helpful i see why you say that um my the question that follows on from from that whether or not

00:26:18 follows on from from that whether or not the percentage presentation is or isn't useful to somebody in the lfb is that come what made this document would have told the board uh that there wasn't a hundred percent compliance across the board in fact a hundred

00:26:29 across the board in fact a hundred percent uh was was less rather than more likely at least you'd know that yes so for two notifications one might not have been acted upon and so the

00:26:40 not have been acted upon and so the question i have for you is what was the what was the tolerance level of failure

00:26:46 there wasn't a prescribed tolerance level um so um as a consequence of receiving a report of this nature um

00:26:56 um on dave brown as head of operations and steve turek as was as head of fire safety would have been asked to go away and have a look at

00:27:08 been asked to go away and have a look at you know

00:27:09 you know why data that was concerning um uh was in fact concerning so to to dig a bit

00:27:15 bit to dig a bit further so that would be done through cascading it through line management tiers yeah i mean standing back from

00:27:22 back from the granular data would this report not have suggested to you if you'd seen it at the time that the flow of information certainly from station to fsr was not

00:27:34 certainly from station to fsr was not functioning very well

00:27:38 um i don't think that's unreasonable um

00:27:45 i'm reluctant to commit to not functioning very well because i i don't quite know what it means in this context but uh you still i don't know what the right number nobody knows what the best number

00:27:57 number nobody knows what the best number or the right number should have been could have been well the best number would be 100 for all stations oh on the percentages yes but on but in one sense it's the numbers that are more important in here because they tell you something

00:28:08 in here because they tell you something about the level of activity and and the level activity at the levels of activity according to this report and doubtless others was was low yes so you could take two things from this document

00:28:19 could take two things from this document is this right one the numbers of levels of activity was very low and even with those numbers you weren't getting uh

00:28:27 uh very high rates of full compliance um

00:28:31 um i mean that's that's what the document is telling us would you disagree with that i personally wouldn't have set much store against the words percentage

00:28:43 much store against the words percentage compliance um all right so it's a calculation of numbers recorded as action taken by um and it's possible for example that when fire safety regulation received a

00:28:55 when fire safety regulation received a notification that they that in their view there was no further action to be taken um so

00:29:03 um so um

00:29:04 um [Music]

00:29:05 [Music] so that that's not recorded as a possibility or it or or it could have been that fire safety regulation would know that

00:29:12 know that you know they had recently taken action in respect to something that had been notified to them so the percentage compliance you know the column is actually very very unhelpful um but

00:29:23 actually very very unhelpful um but personally i would have focused on the numbers right well let's focus on a number let's look at westminster

00:29:30 i just want to see if i can get some more uh insight into this document and how it was used um total if you look at the third column from the right total recorded within railing 12 month period one

00:29:42 month period one number action number recorded as action taken by fsr naught

00:29:48 naught percentage compliance for what it's worth naught yes now that what does that tell us does that not tell us first of all that the numbers from fsr to fire safety were were

00:29:59 to fire safety were were so low as to be virtually negligible and and secondly even those when weren't comply weren't actioned doesn't that does that not tell you that there's a problem in the system

00:30:10 there's a problem in the system uh

00:30:11 uh mr you said from fsr to fire safety yes that's what this is this is a station to fire station to fire safety um uh

00:30:20 uh yes it's it's unsatisfactory um i i don't disagree with you so what did you do about it is the question uh davey brown in the case of stations to fsr

00:30:31 brown in the case of stations to fsr david brown will have taken it away and talked to the deputy assistant commissioners about what was happening individually in these boroughs and about what happened in

00:30:42 boroughs and about what happened in order to try and bring about an improvement right now he came into this onto the scene as far as this is concerned in after you had left before you left do you remember an incident or instance

00:30:53 instance where

00:30:54 where you looked at these figures thought they were unsatisfactory and went away to talk to the deputy well talk to anybody else about particularly your board about what they were showing and what you

00:31:05 what they were showing and what you could do about it um i don't remember doing it no mr millet but that doesn't mean that i didn't okay now uh

00:31:13 now uh let's turn to

00:31:15 to something different um

00:31:21 which is the audit tool

00:31:25 which we discussed i think briefly last week

00:31:31 can we look at the document itself which you exhibited your statement at lfb triple zero three two two four one

00:31:43 this is a letter dated fifth of january 2015

00:31:48 and it goes oh that doesn't say so take it from me that it goes to local authorities as a standard form letter

00:31:58 and if you go to page two we can see that you were the author of it

00:32:03 now we'll come back to this in a moment but the letter itself if you go to page one

00:32:09 one uh in the third paragraph introduces the audit tool which was enclosed with the letter yes yes yes and the audit tool itself starts it starts at page three of

00:32:20 itself starts it starts at page three of the of the same document and it has an introductory text and you can see a rather striking picture of a tower block in the shape of

00:32:31 picture of a tower block in the shape of a question mark on the left-hand side now just to be just to set this in context some people looking at this document may be reminded uh

00:32:41 uh um documents that were sent the previous july 2014 to local authority councillors there were two guides um

00:32:51 um which went out lfb quadruple zero 1294 and 1295 for those who are interested in in it but do you do you remember um do you remember that process the two guides yes yes it was

00:33:03 the two guides yes yes it was yes yes so this branding was part of the know the plan campaign thank you now um but it is at this point i think january 2015 say some six months later that this

00:33:15 2015 say some six months later that this document comes out to the to the local authorities if you go um to the introductory test it says this

00:33:23 says this london fire brigade is concerned about the arrangements in place for protecting the fire safety precautions of a building especially if it's been refurbished or if any modification or maintenance projects have been carried out in the brigades experience buildings

00:33:35 out in the brigades experience buildings can and do become compromised in fire safety

00:33:38 safety terms by works carried out these works can be high or poor quality they might be carried out for very desirable reasons but sometimes many different types of works can unintentionally

00:33:49 types of works can unintentionally damage the fire safety arrangements of a building even something as simple as repainting a surface can be significant and then at the bottom of the page if you just uh scroll down to that you can see that you

00:34:01 scroll down to that you can see that you explain that the audit tool has

00:34:03 has three parts in the first bullet point is questions short set of questions for those with government's responsibilities especially counsellors uh now um

00:34:14 uh now um just standing back it's right isn't it i think correct me if i'm wrong but the audit tool came out of the lhwg the lack of house working groups work that's correct yes um was it developed by the fire safety

00:34:26 um was it developed by the fire safety department or were other departments involved do you remember it was mostly developed by me but working with fire safety and other colleagues uh and it was designed i think to be

00:34:37 uh and it was designed i think to be used by local authorities is this right with when undertaking any kind of refurbishment or modification or retrofit yes yes and to be clear was it was it the intention that local authorities and

00:34:49 the intention that local authorities and housing organizations should complete the audit tool for their own internal risk management purposes and governance purposes yes uh and then the is it was the idea that the lfb would then

00:35:01 the lfb would then essentially check it no not it was for self-assurance it was self-assurance yes so as part of enforcement under the rra was the idea that the lfb wouldn't look and see

00:35:13 that the lfb wouldn't look and see whether or not the order tool had been had been used no right do you know why that is

00:35:19 that is uh

00:35:20 uh [Music]

00:35:21 [Music] it's a very good idea nobody ever proposed it right it didn't occur to me so the document would go to the local authorities and they would then decide for themselves what to do with it so you have no idea whether it was a

00:35:33 so you have no idea whether it was a whether it was even being read no

00:35:37 no uh i like sorry the borough commanders were

00:35:41 were uh were involved in um the borough commanders were aware that we were going to as it were launch it and

00:35:50 and um

00:35:51 um i can't remember whether i asked them to follow it up or liked to imagine that they would but there was the potential for that to happen yes yes now when developing the audit tool and counsellor guides

00:36:02 counsellor guides do you remember what you and your safety colleagues understood to be the lack of house working group's primary concerns that you were seeking to address by this document

00:36:13 to address by this document um

00:36:17 i think members particularly valerie shaw cross uh

00:36:24 uh were

00:36:25 were keen to

00:36:27 keen to encourage

00:36:29 encourage more political ownership of some of these issues at a local level and wanted local authority members councillors to have resources available to them to

00:36:40 to have resources available to them to help with that so the guides in the july were as it were the first examples of that so there was a guide to ask

00:36:51 so there was a guide to ask questions in council meetings and there was a guide to ask on for example questions to ask any state visits you say political ownership

00:37:04 what do you mean by that expression do you mean do you mean councillors elected councillors taking more direct responsibility for the fire safety in refurbished buildings

00:37:17 appropriate to their responsibilities as councillors yes so i think one of the questions on the next page

00:37:24 page says something like you know have you told your officers that

00:37:30 that you know your buildings ought to be at least fire safety compliant after the works as they were before yeah so that would be an example i think

00:37:39 i think uh of where a local authority could adopt a policy he could say you know we want

00:37:45 want as a matter of policy we don't want any of our buildings to be to use the term i used last week sabotaged as a result of well-intended programmes so we want some assurance that

00:37:56 assurance that um at the end of maintenance works or refurbishment works or whatever the building will be at least as far as safety compliant as it was before and did those concerns arise out of something that the working group

00:38:09 out of something that the working group had found specifically at lachnal house

00:38:13 [Music]

00:38:17 no i think uh not directly lacking or housing uh i think it would be more accurate to say it was the the consequential work so the feedback from the high-rise forum

00:38:30 from the high-rise forum the things we were told when we went to the meeting of the london district surveyors association um

00:38:37 um i think i went to i have a recollection of going to a seminar

00:38:44 a seminar a private sector-led thing where there were a number of speakers and

00:38:50 and they

00:38:51 they offered some insights into what they believed was happening particularly with building control and so we had we had a number of uh

00:39:03 we had the benefit of feedback as it were from a number of different

00:39:09 different sources about what might be happening with building control and we sought to bring all of that together and try and understand what it meant for something that we could do

00:39:19 now let's look at lfb302779

00:39:28 this is an email from uh sandra ogiest who i think was your pa

00:39:35 to you actually good morning boss please see the above which was sent out and what's more important i think is the second email down which she sent out on the 12th of january 2015

00:39:47 january 2015 to

00:39:49 to some

00:39:51 some individuals some of whom are

00:39:54 are familiar

00:39:55 familiar steve leader is familiar richard welch patrick goulbourne david lindbridge etcetera this is an internal document isn't it an internal email yes it it looks like borrow comments

00:40:06 it it looks like borrow comments yes and uh it would it would appear is this right that it was simply being sent to those borough commanders on a foreign for information basis

00:40:16 uh sandra didn't say other than that but it but it wasn't their first introduction to it um so there had been prior exchanges with the borough commanders about about the fact that it was coming

00:40:27 about about the fact that it was coming right now we've seen in this email at least no

00:40:30 least no instruction to borrow commanders on how they should individually be using the tool in their dealings with councils or housing providers is there no there isn't so

00:40:40 so would it be right that the audit tools success was going to depend entirely on the proactive and voluntary uptake by councils and housing providers

00:40:51 uptake by councils and housing providers largely so yes and uh in the absence of any feedback or or monitoring or auditing by the borough commanders the lfb wouldn't know whether it was it

00:41:02 the lfb wouldn't know whether it was it was successful or had any impact at all whether it had just disappeared into the ether well we i don't think we ever um precluded the possibility of doing that

00:41:14 precluded the possibility of doing that um so we may not have set that out um

00:41:17 um at the beginning of the process but there was no prohibition on us going back three months later and saying and you know and what happened next now this is january 2015 of course you

00:41:28 now this is january 2015 of course you left at the end of march not long later but was there any consideration of going back in those few months and and finding out what impact the audit tool that was being sent out had i can't say i've considered it no

00:41:41 had i can't say i've considered it no right

00:41:41 right it was only consideration during your time ever given to how the audit tool would feed into the 72d process no why is that um

00:41:53 um there was

00:41:54 there was uh well certainly the section on governance in the audit tool i'm finding it difficult to imagine there was

00:42:09 there was any um

00:42:14 any synergy between the things we were asking members about uh in governance terms um

00:42:23 um and seven two ds um

00:42:27 um i feel rather stupid that i can't remember what the titles of the other two sections were in the audit tool but but but i can't well that's okay let's go back to the audit tool then uh at the last document

00:42:39 last document if you can just look at those look at that

00:42:42 that um lfb303

00:42:47 page four i think is where we want to go with the first of the auditor pages okay

00:42:53 okay oh yeah so cross-disciplinary yes cross uh

00:42:58 uh i think the same about cross-disciplinary working um and internal processes um

00:43:06 um today

00:43:07 today i'm finding it difficult to i'm finding it difficult to imagine any synergy there

00:43:12 there with 72d visits um

00:43:15 um [Music]

00:43:16 [Music] the third section could we go to the third section well that's what i was going to show you yes that's got potential but that's um i think

00:43:25 think um but i'm acting on memory now um well we can we can i think help you better page five at the bottom is section three and if you scroll to page six you'll see that continues yes

00:43:38 six you'll see that continues yes uh and they're fairly broad questions yes but um for example and of course offices are uh

00:43:46 uh housing officers uh not um

00:43:50 um lfp officers just to be clear about that but not just housing officers mr millett no indeed counsellors no uh they could be uh when i was in barnett uh i was the

00:44:01 when i was in barnett uh i was the project director for um a new build project in uh in finchley which was a new art center for example it was actually it was an art it was a

00:44:13 was an art it was a multi-purpose building an art center with some retail and with uh private private sector housing above it um so

00:44:22 um so i wasn't a housing officer um

00:44:27 and in fact that experience had

00:44:32 had was useful to me in this context so but so it wasn't just housing it could be it could be another project so i think in the

00:44:41 in the in the pilot for it um i i think camden maybe looked at a library project uh maybe it was a new build library i don't think it's the british library but um it wasn't just housing you mentioned

00:44:52 it wasn't just housing you mentioned project directors i think

00:44:55 i think drawing on your own experience a long time ago would

00:45:01 would was it the intention of the lfb that this audit tool should be given to

00:45:07 to uh local authority or alma or tmo officers

00:45:13 officers overseeing refurbishment projects um yes yes now going back to my question on the 72d we look together page six look

00:45:24 the 72d we look together page six look at paragraph 3.4 there's the question how did officers guard

00:45:30 guard generally against improvements which could compromise the fire safety features of the building and there are other examples as well 3.5 3.6

00:45:39 3.6 3.7 use of incorrect materials just taking those questions which opposed to

00:45:46 to the groups of people that you've identified was there any information given to station officers that on 72d visits after january

00:45:58 that on 72d visits after january 2015 nfb officers ought to be asking the same questions

00:46:06 no why is that um

00:46:14 it it wasn't

00:46:17 it wasn't it wasn't ever suggested it wasn't a proposition that occurred to me

00:46:24 me um

00:46:26 and and now i'm moving on to thinking about how appropriate would it have been which is not what you're asking me to do so i'll try and stop no i'm just trying to yes i mean

00:46:36 i i just just tried to get a feel for the thinking at the time where you've already got a system of flow of information between 72d people and fire safety people are safe to develop the audit tool it

00:46:47 are safe to develop the audit tool it goes to the local authority and the group of people you expected it to go to i'm just trying to work out why nobody as it appears at the time thought well this is something that station officers also ought to have in their

00:46:59 officers also ought to have in their hands said that seven 2d visits are effective

00:47:03 no so um we didn't and um it you know uh i wish you'd been there to make the suggestion at the time but it wasn't suggested at the time and

00:47:15 suggested at the time and you know both fire safety and

00:47:18 and um

00:47:20 um and uh colleagues from operational response were involved in the development of this but i think the way that

00:47:29 that oddly my

00:47:30 oddly my experience with the art center in finchley did weigh on how i thought about this and one of the things that i realized is that

00:47:40 is that if i'd been in that role still in that role in barnet and a member of the council

00:47:46 council a councillor from barnet had said to me mrs dexter how did you guard against improvements or actions in this development which would

00:47:58 actions in this development which would compromise fire safety i really

00:48:01 i really i was

00:48:02 i was my thought process was actually that's a question that would make me quite fearful to be asked as an officer because it was a a genuinely probing question and so it was that i well you may not think so

00:48:14 it was that i well you may not think so i'm sorry um uh it was a broad question but it was in considerable considerable more detail than uh then happens uh

00:48:26 uh then happens uh that then happens generally you know uh in the context of that project i was i was certainly never asked any of those questions and based upon what we were hearing from people at the high rise forum and the

00:48:38 people at the high rise forum and the district surveyors association and other places

00:48:43 places these questions these types of questions simply weren't being asked which is why one saw some of the outcomes that we saw yes

00:48:52 yes uh

00:48:53 uh i'm just

00:48:55 i'm just saying whether you would agree with me in

00:48:58 in characterizing that

00:49:00 that gap if you like as as evidencing a a a lack of joined up thinking within the lfb as between fire safety on the one hand and station managers conducting

00:49:12 hand and station managers conducting information gathering under 72d on the other

00:49:20 uh no i i don't accept that it characterizes that i i genuinely would have to think harder about the join with 72d i

00:49:28 72d i i think the risk is that your

00:49:33 your the risk is that you're imbuing seven two ds with more capacity than they could ever reasonably have had

00:49:45 than they could ever reasonably have had you know maybe with a different workforce with more training in that respect we could have had bigger aspirations for 72d

00:49:55 72d but you know from the evidence that's already before you that

00:49:59 that um

00:50:00 um [Music]

00:50:01 [Music] trying to achieve enough and sufficiently and and of sufficient quality 72d visits was was already an up uphill battle and i'm just not sure how much more

00:50:12 just not sure how much more weight we could have put on seven two ds um at that time but um but i'm also admitting

00:50:20 admitting um that it wasn't something i thought about

00:50:22 about you know i'm sorry to interrupt you mr just help me with this if you could um i'm beginning to get the impression that 72d was seen to extend only

00:50:33 72d was seen to extend only to visits by station crews to particular buildings

00:50:37 buildings to see what they could discover is that how it was understood

00:50:46 uh

00:50:50 yes i'm not sure what follows from that so

00:50:55 so dave brown will be able to much more in much more detail talk about the approach to 72d visits but often certainly after lucknow house and the review of policy note 800

00:51:08 and the review of policy note 800 there was there was a desire to a increase the number of seven two ds b improve their content and see make them better targets my point is a slightly different one okay uh

00:51:19 different one okay uh i'm getting the impression that the lfb considered that 72d was entirely uh fulfilled

00:51:30 was entirely uh fulfilled by sending station crews to visit buildings

00:51:34 buildings and you keep using the word visits okay um but it but it it wasn't the visit wasn't an end in itself the the point about the visit was to enable pre-planning and to

00:51:46 to enable pre-planning and to improve the information in the operational database and which then was available to crews on the mdt on their way to incidents i understand that that my reading of 72d suggests that it's completely open-ended

00:51:58 it's completely open-ended it provides it imposes an obligation on the

00:52:02 the fire and rescue service to obtain information doesn't say how you obtain it no so

00:52:08 so sending crews to take to visit places is one way of obtaining information but not the only possible way is that right um yes um

00:52:18 yes um uh

00:52:20 uh and you you've prompted a recollection but it's at no more than the level of recollection that at some point we gave consideration to asking responsible people to provide

00:52:32 asking responsible people to provide information i'm sure that is in you know either in my witness statement or and uh

00:52:39 or and uh the documents attached or certainly elsewhere um so yes we we did give consideration to that although i i wouldn't be telling

00:52:50 that although i i wouldn't be telling the truth if i said it was methodical or well followed through as a proposition um

00:52:55 um um but but consideration certainly you know at some point there was some discussion about using that as an opportunity and was it actually

00:53:07 and was it actually taken that opportunity uh i i don't recall i'm afraid sir um uh

00:53:15 i don't recall um i'm if if it was it's it's not it's not in my consciousness so a colleague might might be better informed but

00:53:26 better informed but i

00:53:27 i i think it's less likely you see one might have thought that if you identify the information that you would find helpful

00:53:36 helpful the next step would be to decide how to obtain it oh yes which might involve a visit but might not might involve a letter

00:53:43 letter it might

00:53:44 it might it might involve knowing who the responsible person was that you had to write to and i you know i already touched last week on the difficulty of reliably knowing who those people were

00:53:57 reliably knowing who those people were or even the addresses of the buildings where

00:54:01 where there should be a responsible person so it was not without its difficulties no i'm sure that's right but i i think from what you've told us that i'd be right in thinking that although the

00:54:13 thinking that although the concept of obtaining

00:54:16 obtaining information by means other than visits to building was there in a general way in people's minds not very much was done to pursue it

00:54:27 to pursue it visits dominated our thinking about 72d visits that's very helpful thank you very much yes yes thank you um now can i show you please next lfb3073159

00:54:44 this is an email chain um among i think helped me the fire engineering group in june 2015 after your time um

00:54:54 um uh

00:54:56 uh now the subject matter as you can see from the top is is lacking refurbishment audit tool action for af sms and it's from lindsay seal to chris callow gareth steele and christopher

00:55:07 callow gareth steele and christopher lloyd williams 30th of june 2015. uh and lindsay steele says this hi chris as per my previous email attached i don't see this as a building control tool and therefore would not recommend any

00:55:19 therefore would not recommend any reference within fsign

00:55:22 fsign 501

00:55:25 501 i'm just pausing supposing there could what is

00:55:28 what is fsign 501 am i right in thinking that it's the fire safety information and guidance note number 501 i believe so right and it um is that the fire safety department's

00:55:39 um is that the fire safety department's version

00:55:40 version of policy 501 which is i think entitled and help me consultation with local authority building control officers and approved inspectors i don't know right

00:55:52 inspectors i don't know right uh all right um well picking up where we left off if we read on he goes on to say i'm also not clear on what the intended purpose of this is and how he can effectively monitor its use and any

00:56:03 effectively monitor its use and any compliance i of course appreciate the issue and the need to address the lack of potential consideration of fire safety precautions when undertaking refurbishment projects but not sure this is the most effective way of educating

00:56:15 is the most effective way of educating strokes supporting local authorities etc as mentioned before feg

00:56:21 feg i think that's the fire engineering group isn't it yes yes feg weren't part of the original consultation on the creation of this document so are a little unclear on the intent and expectations on fire safety

00:56:34 intent and expectations on fire safety staff in terms of engagement is it right as a fact that fire engineering were not consulted on the development of the audit too uh i'm sure i didn't i didn't personally

00:56:45 uh i'm sure i didn't i didn't personally involve the fire engineering personally involved the fire engineering group but the then manager um for fire safety regulation was involved in the development work and

00:56:57 was involved in the development work and i would have expected him to take that back within the department who was that mark andrews and

00:57:05 and um

00:57:06 um i have a vision of consulting um nick coombe for um

00:57:12 um uh so i

00:57:15 uh so i i i can't speak to what happened within the fire safety regulation but it's not the case that five segregat fire safety regulation were left out of the development so this is the fire engineering group

00:57:27 is the fire engineering group accepted i think mark was the manager for the department including the fire engineering group at that time right i mean do you know why as lindsay seale is saying the fire engineering group

00:57:38 is saying the fire engineering group were not consulted on the development of the audit tool uh no

00:57:44 uh no no

00:57:45 no you don't know i mean you accept that it would have been extremely helpful to have had their input

00:57:53 not inevitably so um i remember nick coombs response um so clearly because nick's response to me in response to one of the drafts was why don't you just ask them if they've

00:58:04 don't you just ask them if they've complied with ab approved document b you know

00:58:09 you know nick's position actually i had the greatest time and still do for nick uh

00:58:16 uh a very impressive officer um but nick said you know just ask them about compliance with approved document b but that's not what members wanted members wanted something which would

00:58:28 wanted something which would seek to take it a bit further to ask that question about well you know

00:58:34 you know somebody a member of barnett might have said to me are you sure that art center in finchley uh complies with a approved document b and i could easily have said yes and and and it lay there

00:58:45 have said yes and and and it lay there but members wanted um

00:58:49 um some questions which would facilitate further probing yeah and was any consideration given to the relationship between the audit tool and the other work of the fire safety department either before or during the

00:59:00 department either before or during the audit tools development

00:59:12 because in one sense it was it was facing the other way so although i you know lindsey seal is also a first class officer when when she says she's not sure it's the most effective

00:59:24 she's not sure it's the most effective way of educating or supporting local authorities i'm not sure lindsay's ever worked in a local authority and i have and

00:59:30 and i you know i know i i was clear about how

00:59:35 how people like me in a local authority would feel if a member said you know just tell me a bit more about that um you know you've answered the question does it comply yes

00:59:46 does it comply yes but but but you know a few more probing questions are always good for local authority officers in my view and that's what we were trying to give to members now let's go to an earlier email chain

00:59:57 now let's go to an earlier email chain at lfb

00:59:58 at lfb double zero one one six one eight zero please

01:00:03 please and let's go straight in that run to page three

01:00:10 and here is if you go to page three an email of the 6th of september 2013

01:00:17 2013 from you to a number of borough commanders

01:00:22 and i think also to the operations and mobilizing email group is that right it says that that for the life of me i can't remember who they were but yes i'm sorry i can't remember i can't

01:00:34 sorry i can't remember i can't sorry it's strange to me that they're on that list but there they are right

01:00:39 right uh morning all in the context of of members consideration of the lessons to be learned from lacking some members have asked us to consider whether there is a piece of work to be done which quotes audits unquote uh whether

01:00:51 quotes audits unquote uh whether significant refurbishment projects in high-rise residential premises have been sensitive to considerations of fire safety integrity we're not sure if this is a good idea in

01:01:02 we're not sure if this is a good idea in principle whether anyone would cooperate with us or whether we have the skill and tools to undertake it but we have to look into the idea and report back when we go on to discuss a meeting and go on in fact in the second paragraph

01:01:16 go on in fact in the second paragraph in summary to request from borough commanders any anecdotal evidence of significant refurbishment projects first do you recall sending this email um

01:01:29 i've i've seen it as part of the preparation for today um right and if we look at the um if we go back to page one scroll up to page one and look at the penultimate email on that page

01:01:42 you can see that there's an email from nicholas strong on

01:01:49 on the the 15th of november 2013 to mark andrews

01:01:54 andrews forwarding the chain up the chain mark is the message from the dc at the start of this string something that we ought to be discussing at our meeting on wednesday and now if you look up the page he goes

01:02:05 and now if you look up the page he goes back to nicolas strong and brings in nicholas coombe and steve turek thanks nick most definitely steve why is this request for info not gone to our tls i think tl's are team leaders aren't

01:02:16 i think tl's are team leaders aren't they

01:02:20 um excuse me

01:02:22 excuse me and then

01:02:23 and then um if you go up the page you can see at the top of the page steve turek responds to mark andrews same day confidential um thanks for this mark but we are clearly not the only

01:02:34 mark but we are clearly not the only people she omitted to include in her request i will raise this with her next week but suggest that this is another example of her freelancing and information gathering to write yet another report herself as with the fire

01:02:46 another report herself as with the fire safety legislation report now

01:02:51 now obviously you didn't see that email at the time

01:02:54 the time would it be fair to say that your desire to raise awareness of fire safety matters

01:02:59 matters turned into freelancing as is described there at the expense of involving other members of the lfb

01:03:05 the lfb uh no um you're right i didn't see this at the time i've seen it more recently um

01:03:12 one of the things that i regret is that i didn't um send that first email to the team leaders i think i've learned i've learned as a result of this inquiry

01:03:25 that i i could and should have paid more attention to the work of local fire safety teams um but mark andrews could easily have said in response to this email actually

01:03:36 said in response to this email actually i've been fully involved in this project because he had been so

01:03:42 so at the end of the audit tool there's a risk matrix um and that came not from me that came i'm you know i'm not a designer of matrix um

01:03:51 matrix um uh it's just not something that i would do um mark andrews very specifically proposed that addition to the audit tool mark was very fully involved um and

01:04:03 mark was very fully involved um and he he could have he could have passed that one

01:04:05 that one did steve church raise the issue that he's referring to in his email to mark andrews at any time with you um [Music]

01:04:14 [Music] i i can't remember um i i don't recall him doing so no right i i'm right

01:04:25 uh let's look then at something slightly different uh which is the consideration of modern methods of construction and highly insulated buildings uh in the context of fire spread

01:04:37 context of fire spread um can i ask you to start please with nfb3084762

01:04:46 this is an email between you and dac graham ellis in march 2014 and it's entitled potential rekindling water street and you're given an incident number and

01:04:58 and you're given an incident number and if we go to the bottom of page two of this email run and over onto page three we can see that it starts with an uh email from graeme ellis to you on the 11th of march 2014. and he says this not wishing to insult

01:05:11 and he says this not wishing to insult your intelligence if you already know this but kingspan referred to in this report is the proprietary name for foil backed insulation board used in modern construction to improve insulation and meet building

01:05:22 improve insulation and meet building rags

01:05:23 rags and kingspan is in quotes there it's the same as celetex stroke ek thermostroke extra therm and a range of other major proprietary insulation slabs it generally looks like this

01:05:35 it generally looks like this and is used behind plasterboard below floorboards floor sheets and in roof lining the thickness can vary from 25 millimeters to 150 millimeters and then if you go over the page you can see that there's a picture of kingspan insulation

01:05:47 there's a picture of kingspan insulation and three paragraphs down you can see that dac ellis goes on to say this perhaps we need to empower our commanders with the knowledge that if they can reasonably justify any cutting away we will support them in any claim

01:05:58 away we will support them in any claim for damages done it all comes back to training and ensuring that cbts and guidance docs are reinforced by regular practical demonstration using modern building materials that does not happen

01:06:09 building materials that does not happen as far as i am aware the day when a significant minority of our operational workforce were skilled persons with working knowledge of building construction have long gone

01:06:22 building construction have long gone now um

01:06:24 now um why was it that dac ellis from the operations resilience and training directorate was raising these issues with you at this time do you remember [Music]

01:06:45 just the so way

01:06:50 um because he was flagging something which

01:06:55 which well sorry he asked me a direct no he didn't ask me a direct question um because he wanted to provide me with some

01:07:04 some knowledge that he was he thought it was important for me to acquire um

01:07:10 um i met graham ellis when he was station manager at soho in my very early days in the brigade and for the rest of my time in the brigade

01:07:21 for the rest of my time in the brigade graham ellis was always a very important source of

01:07:24 source of information and advice so it wouldn't be very unusual for graham to

01:07:30 graham to seek to teach me something that he might thought he might have thought i didn't know

01:07:35 know um he had a specific question there and because um from time to time graham raised things

01:07:46 from time to time graham raised things while he was in this role so i think he was dac operational assurance at this time

01:07:50 time um

01:07:51 um because of my role as chair of odcb so we

01:07:57 we i mentioned last week the idea of pushing an open door or pushing at a closed door graham's view was that generally he was pushing an open door if he raised things with me right

01:08:09 with me right yes he had a specific question there let's see your response it's at page two if we go to the top of that page uh where you go back to him on the same day

01:08:19 day um about half an hour later and uh you say it doesn't insult my intelligence at all and in the third paragraph you say i agree with your wider point it cannot be rocket science to make that happen and

01:08:31 rocket science to make that happen and we will just have to find a way to make it work in the context of an outsourced service it needs some thought and will now

01:08:39 now just pausing there you're referring there i think to the delivery of practical training on modern building materials in the context of the training having been outsourced to babcock have i got that right

01:08:57 i'm sorry would you answer again please mr let me try it a different way um what is what is what you were saying here

01:09:03 here um that you agreed that there should be practical training delivered

01:09:09 delivered to uh officers on the subject of modern building materials but in the context of the training having been outsourced to babcock

01:09:21 um

01:09:25 i'm not sure what the effect of adding those words in the context of outsourcing to babcock to be um

01:09:30 um if i leave those if i may leave those to one side i i'm not sure that my response was

01:09:36 was was was that uh was that fine um so i think i i was i was agreeing with him that that it presented a training need but um

01:09:47 um it it wasn't a more refined response than that at this stage when you said we will just have to find a way to make it work in the context of an outsourced service

01:09:55 service what did you mean

01:10:00 yeah is a very particular thing to have said no sorry uh now i understand your question um

01:10:10 better

01:10:14 i can't recall what prompted me to make that point in particular it seems an odd point to have made looking at it here now but um why would i have done that may maybe you go back down to graham's email please

01:10:26 go back down to graham's email please yes of course page two the foot of the page

01:10:36 and then over to page three is where he return he yes refers to the subject of training

01:10:52 i can't explain it mr miller if you know graham doesn't provoke the outsource question and so i'm i'm at a loss to uh recall why i mentioned it i'm sorry

01:11:02 i'm sorry i mean let me suggest something and see what you think about it but it might it suggest that at the time uh

01:11:10 uh it

01:11:10 it suggesting new training practical training

01:11:14 training to

01:11:16 to firefighters or station um station personnel um was not easy given that the whole

01:11:25 the whole of the training structure had been outsourced to babcock

01:11:42 i i don't think it was that it was not easy to

01:11:46 easy to propose new training um but it you know it certainly may not have been easy to secure its delivery um so

01:11:58 delivery um so the

01:11:59 the the strengths and weaknesses of the babcock arrangements were

01:12:07 were recognized within the brigade at that time

01:12:10 that time um so i i don't think it was that it i don't think it was that it was hard to ask but it was it was it was it was not certain you'd get

01:12:21 you'd get what you wanted or you'd get it quickly enough right now you say at the end of the sentence we were just looking at we just go back to page two please second paragraph of your email of the 11th of march

01:12:32 email of the 11th of march you scroll up scroll up please

01:12:37 in this in the third paragraph there at the end you say it needs some thought and will what happened uh with the suggestion to provide

01:12:49 to provide regular practical demonstrations as um d.c ellis put it on modern methods of construction and materials to frontline staff

01:13:04 i uh

01:13:08 so i saw this correspondence again um for the first time last week and i'm unimpressed by my own recollection of what happened next so graham raised a

01:13:19 what happened next so graham raised a specific point about support for officers who ordered cussing away and just reading this sorry officers who decide to cut away

01:13:30 sorry officers who decide to cut away and you know maybe damage somebody's property more than they thought it needed to be and i and i have no recollection of how i took that forward so i reproached myself for that um

01:13:42 um well let's see let's see if we can take it forward on the documents then yes um if we go to page one and mr chairman i should just say i've got about five minutes i'll say on this run of emails and that after that would be convenient

01:13:53 and that after that would be convenient for a break yes would be better to finish these wouldn't it yes thank you very much can we go to page one then please and look at mr uh d.c ellis's response

01:14:01 response uh now it's a long email and uh he covers a a number of matters but i just want to look at the third paragraph there with you um he says this by now babcock training should have a rig at

01:14:12 babcock training should have a rig at training venues where they can demonstrate how fire can spread undetected through voids or shafts and a selection of modern building materials such as kingspan which they can show to students to highlight the dangers

01:14:23 students to highlight the dangers associated with concealed fire spread it wouldn't even have to be a full-size rig even a glorified wendy house would do the trick this will become more critical if we move to reinstate recruit training

01:14:35 if we move to reinstate recruit training uh

01:14:36 uh now just pausing there we'll come back to that the rest of that in a moment but did you take any steps to further his suggestion to take it further forward no why is that um

01:14:46 um i don't know and if we look at the penultimate paragraph on that page we'll need to scroll down he says

01:14:54 he says in the paragraph that starts i'm struggling with the latin survey instrument you can see there's a paragraph break and after that he says this

01:15:01 this i do fear that the vastly experienced and savvy old-fashioned district surveyors in local authority building control teams have been replaced by highly academically qualified technicians

01:15:12 academically qualified technicians in in italics who seem to lack a basic working understanding of the building trades i think there may be exceptions where there has been a catastrophic failure in the overall design of a refurbishment but in the main many of

01:15:24 refurbishment but in the main many of the fire safety problems emanate from poor workmanship compounded by poor or absent quality control by surveyors stroke building inspectors a typical example would include incomplete or shoddy fire stopping around service

01:15:36 shoddy fire stopping around service shafts the fact is that even the more legitimate major contractors in italics invariably employ a plethora of subcontractors many of whom have little safety knowledge and even less desire to

01:15:48 safety knowledge and even less desire to do the best job now reading that email um

01:15:53 um at the time did you give any consideration to how the lfb could tackle the problem of fire safety issues arising as a result of poor workmanship

01:16:06 uh i

01:16:09 i my recollection is that um

01:16:16 uh

01:16:19 is that it was a

01:16:22 oh paul workman

01:16:28 there are reports like an old house working group which um report

01:16:34 um report to members um

01:16:38 um that

01:16:41 local authorities some local authorities some of those that we were engaged with were concerned about poor workmanship so i'm i'm certain the phrase paul workmanship appears in one of my reports and i

01:16:54 appears in one of my reports and i in that probably in that same report told members what southwark council had been exploring to try and

01:17:05 exploring to try and share with their other local authority colleagues their experience of poor workmanship but they were legal barriers to doing so and that's explained in the report

01:17:16 explained in the report but i

01:17:17 but i realized that you asking me mr millet requires me to direct my thinking to what did we do about conveying the fact of poor workmanship internally and

01:17:29 of poor workmanship internally and including two front line crews

01:17:33 crews and i'm just not familiar with whether there were any training packages that addressed that we'll come to that in just a moment but at the time when you raised this question or saw mr ellis raising this

01:17:45 question or saw mr ellis raising this question with you did did you give any consideration to whether this kind of problem was a problem with the operational crews needed to be aware of when conducting

01:17:56 needed to be aware of when conducting 72d information gathering

01:18:01 no um no is the is the answer um and

01:18:08 and that is partly because and you may reasonably say it was a fault we were

01:18:16 we were i was

01:18:20 focusing on um

01:18:23 um as it were trying to encourage more rigorous monitoring and regulation by the people who might

01:18:35 and regulation by the people who might address the problem of poor workmanship i.e the people who were commissioning projects

01:18:40 projects um

01:18:42 um through the audit tool well through the audit tool uh and you know the things the discussions with the highrise forum uh sharing davy crowder's presentation with

01:18:54 presentation with the district surveyors and and uh and others so we were

01:19:02 we were we were doing something that we probably hadn't done before which was trying to reflect back to those who were in a better position to control

01:19:11 control the likelihood of poor poor workmanship or poor refurbishments and trying to make them aware of the detail of what had happened at lucknow house to be a lesson for the future

01:19:23 future would you agree that that effort was something which

01:19:30 which should have been the subject of training to frontline station-based personnel

01:19:39 personnel so that they at least understood the risks involved in a refurbishment and in the use of modern building materials such as kingspan

01:19:50 kingspan so that they could take account of those when formulating operational tactics yes yes

01:19:56 yes now

01:19:57 now the inquiry understands that in late 2015 so after your departure in the march of that year dac ellis was involved in the production of a training package on highly insulated buildings to

01:20:08 package on highly insulated buildings to be released in conjunction with operational an operational news article um my question for you is were you ever made before your were you ever made aware before your departure of the intention to develop

01:20:19 departure of the intention to develop that package no no or the reasons for the development before i left no no no mr chairman i have some

01:20:30 mr chairman i have some maybe 20 minutes or so left with the witness maybe a little bit more than that maybe 30 but now would be a very convenient moment yes but i think we probably all have a break so we'll take a break now we'll resume please at 25 to

01:20:41 a break now we'll resume please at 25 to 12.

01:20:42 12. and as before please don't discuss your evidence with anyone while you're out of the room all right thank you very much

01:20:57 thank you 25 to 12 please

01:36:49 yes would you ask mrs dexter to come back in please thank you

01:37:10 all right it's ready to carry on mr dexter yes yes yes mister yes thank you yes ms dexter can i just ask you first to be shown amity 3077 774

01:37:23 3077 774 and i'm doing this as part of a set of general questions i'm going to ask you now about fire safety uh leading on to your november 2017 submission now what i'm showing you here

01:37:34 now what i'm showing you here is dan daly's statement that he gave to the mps and metropolitan police in november 2020 and can we go to page 12 in that please and let's just look on page 12 in the

01:37:46 and let's just look on page 12 in the first paragraph there where

01:37:49 where um

01:37:50 um he says in the third line uh

01:37:54 uh uh well second line in my experience in the lfb and the role of assistant commissioner for fire safety i think that it would be fair to say that issues raised through fire safety are not

01:38:06 raised through fire safety are not always at the top of the list do you agree with that comment uh

01:38:14 the top of which list i'm just not very helpful comment and uh it wouldn't be uh so if i'm if i was forced to have a view about a very imperfect claim in my view

01:38:26 about a very imperfect claim in my view it would be the answer would be no well you say what list and he's obviously talking generically what he means is not always a priority well the priority would you agree with that

01:38:44 well yes it's not always the priority sometimes there are other priorities yes yes the priorities you know will be time of the year and context dependent

01:38:56 why would fire safety not always be at the top

01:39:00 the top of

01:39:01 of the lfb's priority list um because nothing is always at the top of the list that's why i think it's a very imperfect statement i i think i understand the sentiment that

01:39:12 i think i understand the sentiment that dan is conveying which is

01:39:17 uh

01:39:21 fire safety didn't doesn't have uh the same profile as operational response

01:39:30 response i think everybody who goes into fire safety

01:39:34 safety comes to think you know it's potentially the most important thing that the brigade does so i think you can i think you know maybe dan feels like that certainly neil or bell who was

01:39:45 that certainly neil or bell who was became assistant commissioner while i was still there after steve turek uh i don't know that i don't know that neil thought he was going to

01:39:54 going to really enjoy the fire safety job but he did he was thrilled by it he thought it was really really interesting and important but i suspect you have to be in it to get

01:40:07 to really understand what a interesting and important um set of responsibilities it amounts to i think it was my impression i think i said last week uh

01:40:19 uh you know maybe for years it was a bit of a sideshow let's look at your own words in your submission to the inquiry that you

01:40:29 you made in november 2017. it's at lfb3040774

01:40:36 and on the first page there in the last paragraph you say this i feel strongly that the current governance arrangements for fire safety management are deficient

01:40:47 are deficient because in advance of the grenfell tower fire there was both available intelligence about refurbishment risks and advice to those in vital decision-making roles about the sort of questions they should pose about the fire safety aspects of the refurbishment

01:40:59 fire safety aspects of the refurbishment process

01:41:02 process a refurbishment but on the face of it and not only in relation to grenfell tower the availability of this material was not impactful

01:41:09 impactful to be clear it is not my suggestion you go on to say um to be

01:41:15 um to be after the next sentence to be clear it is not my suggestion that anyone willfully ignored available advice but i do believe that many public service leaders struggle with the idea that fire safety management is a topic

01:41:26 that fire safety management is a topic where they can achieve important interventions and where they can take action to reduce fires or the severity of fires if we go over the page

01:41:34 the page and where they can take action to prevent deaths and injuries many fires and fire deaths are preventable people working in the fire service understand that but many of those they work with do

01:41:45 that but many of those they work with do not despite the actions taken by individual fire brigades to disseminate information and to offer advice about preventive strategies now um

01:41:55 now um in the last few lines there are you referring there to your work that you did on the audit tool no um not

01:42:04 no um not um no

01:42:06 um no and

01:42:07 and i wrote this in 2017 before i knew i'd be a witness and before i've learned as much as i've learned in the last four years i i

01:42:18 four years i i i think when i wrote that i was thinking about

01:42:20 about political governance and management arrangements so um

01:42:25 um in in that last couple of sentences it's more likely that i had in mind that um old people were dying from smoking

01:42:36 um old people were dying from smoking related deaths in their home where they had a carer going in three or four times a day and where those elderly people were

01:42:44 were demonstrating that they were dropping cigarettes on their clothing getting cigarette burns uh disposing of cigarettes uh in waste paper bins lined with plastic

01:42:56 waste paper bins lined with plastic carrier bags um

01:42:58 um and and that this just seemed unremarkable to many people um so yeah i i think it was probably more that uh can we go back to page one and look at the third line yeah

01:43:10 the third line yeah or second line there and third line there you say in advance of the grenfell tower fire there was both available intelligence about refurbishment risks

01:43:21 intelligence about refurbishment risks and advice to those in vital decision-making roles about the sort of questions they should pose about the fire safety aspects of refurbishment projects what available intelligence

01:43:34 what available intelligence are you referring to there what was the available intelligence about refurbishment risks uh the the knowledge that every

01:43:44 every local

01:43:46 local authority leader in london could and should have had about what happened at lucknow house but also i think i published a number of reports either to the strategy committee

01:43:58 to the strategy committee but also to external bodies which included

01:44:03 included what i described as pen pictures here are ten examples of fires that the brigaders encountered in the last 10 years and they were all quite they were often quite different in nature um but were intended to um

01:44:16 nature um but were intended to um illustrate um to illustrate the main features of incidents which may not always have been apparent before so and we did a number

01:44:28 apparent before so and we did a number of other things within the brigade over time so

01:44:31 time so where there were fire deaths i think we wrote to the council leader and the chief executive saying look you know this happened in your borough um and that may be the elderly person with cigarettes but it might have been

01:44:42 cigarettes but it might have been something where um uh structural fire safety was involved

01:44:47 involved we did an accumulation of things over time to

01:44:51 time to to to try and make this these issues not invisible in the way that we felt they had been and when you refer to refurbishment risks in the third line in this document would

01:45:03 in the third line in this document would i be right to think that you were referring there to fire safety failings arising as a result of refurbishment works on high-rise buildings which may compromise that building's compartmentation well not just higher well we're

01:45:15 well not just higher well we're including yeah absolutely yes yes now turn the page please to page two in the third paragraph there let's look at that together you say there um

01:45:25 um overall my main points can be summarized as follows and then in the third paragraph you say first the discovery of building failure following a fire is not exceptional grenfell tower and lachlan house are not

01:45:36 grenfell tower and lachlan house are not in that respect rare examples in 2014 as deputy commissioner i reported to the elfipa lacanal house working group that between and quotes between first september and 2010 and 31st august 2013

01:45:49 september and 2010 and 31st august 2013 82 primary fires were identified as involving a structural fire safety failure these 82 incidents have been reviewed to identify the following and then you set out a long list of bullet points of statistics

01:46:03 list of bullet points of statistics which you can you can see of which at the bottom um you can see that six were in a purpose-built block of four to nine stories seven were in a purpose-built block of 10 or

01:46:15 were in a purpose-built block of 10 or more stories and at the very top of the list 50 were dwellings

01:46:21 dwellings now

01:46:23 now during that's just during that period to be clear you're referring here i think to total building failure due to structural defects uh and the substantial progression or spread of a fire are you

01:46:36 um no i don't think so um no not total failure not total failure no so the date um the data came from uh

01:46:48 the data came from uh the brigades database um so there's a structure for the submission of data to um it was then dclg

01:46:59 of data to um it was then dclg and there was provision within that scheme to notify dclg about structural fire safety failure and i think i think i might have mentioned this last week i think there was a kind of drop down menu

01:47:11 think there was a kind of drop down menu then where um

01:47:13 um either the station or fire investigation could

01:47:16 could um as it were elaborate on the detail of that right would you accept that this would show or did show that the lfb had within it the knowledge as at november 2013

01:47:29 uh the date of that report uh that building failure or structural failure was not exceptional as a result of a fire

01:47:50 if building failure might include or would include a private domestic home where somebody had had an extension um and

01:48:00 um and uh

01:48:01 uh and there was a fire in that extension and the smoke spread through uh to the first floor because of insufficient fire stopping um

01:48:12 um then i think the answer is yes so you know i think i mentioned it last week that's an incident that you know for whatever reason remains firmly in my mind

01:48:21 mind um

01:48:22 um uh

01:48:23 uh so

01:48:24 so um

01:48:26 um the words building failure

01:48:30 i'm i think uh i think they potentially convey the idea of something dramatic um encompassing the whole building and i think that's not

01:48:41 whole building and i think that's not that's not what i was intended to convey and that's not um

01:48:45 um that's not what this data measured uh

01:48:50 uh well we could see the numbers listed in the bullet points there some are hotels some are pubs some are converted converted flats some are in purpose-built blocks 13 i

01:49:01 some are in purpose-built blocks 13 i think in all so we can we can do the numbers on the kinds of buildings but let me ask the question

01:49:06 question again

01:49:07 again do you accept that as at the time of this report in november 2013 the lfb had within it the knowledge that building failure following a fire was not exceptional yes yeah and as you

01:49:19 was not exceptional yes yeah and as you put it last thursday lachnal was not a one-off

01:49:30 uh i'd have to look at i'd have to be reminded of the words before and after but yes

01:49:36 but yes well um let me put it to you again then um as of november 2013 did you think that latino wasn't a one-off or not

01:49:45 no no now in the paragraph below that i'm sorry uh

01:49:51 sorry uh uh

01:49:52 uh all had the potential not to be a one-off so i don't recall the specifics i can't name another building which had the same range of failures as

01:50:04 had the same range of failures as lacanel but it's perfectly conceivable that they exist and that you know i think a couple of times last week i said you know you you could make a list of 10 items that might

01:50:15 could make a list of 10 items that might be involved in a particular building failure and you might find seven of them were a feature of la canal and a different six were a feature of another high-rise fire but

01:50:26 another high-rise fire but the potential for multiple failures in a single building including a high rise was definitely there yes now in the paragraph below that you say the inquiry should obtain this report and request

01:50:37 should obtain this report and request the brigade to provide information about further findings since this report that quotes building failure quotes it is not a rare event has many important ramifications and i feel sure that the inquiry will want to

01:50:49 feel sure that the inquiry will want to address these is it right to say that one of those quotes important ramifications your words is that one cannot assume that a building's fire safety features will perform or remain intact during a

01:51:02 will perform or remain intact during a fire yes yes or indeed that they even exist yes yes and developing that further that theme as you do in this document let's go to page 11.

01:51:11 page 11. um

01:51:13 um third paragraph down on that page

01:51:19 and you say there um uh

01:51:23 uh uh underneath the heading the response of the fire brigade uh below the short introductory paragraph uh you say this the first is that the

01:51:34 uh you say this the first is that the brigade's operational tactics for fighting fires and for determining the application of state advice reflect many considerations and experience but they are both predicated upon an assumption

01:51:45 are both predicated upon an assumption that a building does not suffer from a lack of structural integrity and that the fire safety features will perform

01:51:53 perform both the latino and grenfell fires demonstrate that this assumption can be wrong and fatal in its outcomes now is that because a staple policy assumes

01:52:05 assumes that compartmentation will hold up and that occupants will be protected from fire yes and as you go on to say in the next paragraph the brigade cannot be expected to be certain

01:52:16 to be certain that all of the buildings where they attend fires will be constructed or maintained in accordance with the regulations and that it will perform in any specified way if a fire occurs now

01:52:27 any specified way if a fire occurs now that much was clear wasn't it following latino yes yes and that being the case um

01:52:32 um does it follow and i would suggest to you that it does that stay put cannot be expected or assumed to be an appropriate and safe evacuation policy for a high-rise building

01:52:56 i'm sorry would you ask again please mr miller does it follow from what you've just said to by way of answer to those questions that stay put can't be expected

01:53:04 expected uh or to be or be assumed safely to be an appropriate and safe evacuation policy for a high-rise building not for all high-rise buildings well for any high-rise building i would

01:53:15 well for any high-rise building i would suggest unless uh the lfb has sufficient information to be able reasonably to know

01:53:20 know that the fire safety features will hold up in the event of a fire but

01:53:28 if it was in all buildings or non-buildings um so brigade has does

01:53:37 has does successfully evacuate people from high-rise buildings and

01:53:45 i don't know the detail of the recent madrid fire where the external facade of the building burnt in a way that looked similar to grenfell but the internal compartmentation of the building

01:53:56 compartmentation of the building apparently held and everybody got out um so it's not it's not an all-or-nothing thing and there's part of the difficulty of course no that's um not i think an answer to my question

01:54:08 not i think an answer to my question does it not follow that given that the assumption that a high-rise building will not always perform so far as its safe fire safety features are concerned in the event of a fire

01:54:20 are concerned in the event of a fire if you've accepted doesn't that does it not follow from that that stay put can't be trusted

01:54:28 yes yes thank you that being said why did the london fire brigade never provide its crews with any operational materials training operational news articles or emails that sent a very

01:54:39 articles or emails that sent a very clear message to local firefighters that building failure wasn't rare and as a result they needed to be ready to consider and action either a full or significant

01:54:51 and action either a full or significant partial evacuation at any time

01:55:04 um [Music]

01:55:12 i think

01:55:16 i'm genuinely trying to answer your question

01:55:19 question um

01:55:20 um i think i've learned as a result of preparation for the inquiry that there was

01:55:25 was maybe

01:55:26 maybe uh a policy deficiency so i think i've i think andy rose's statement says sorry i'm there was a point last week where i was commenting on evidence and uh or maybe and i'm i'm anxious not to

01:55:38 uh or maybe and i'm i'm anxious not to uh be somewhere where i shouldn't be but my understanding of uh a story of material that's been disclosed to me is that he has acknowledged that although there

01:55:49 he has acknowledged that although there were in the policy in policy uh

01:55:55 one of the policy notes that although there was some brief contemplation of the possibility that evacuation might might be necessary that wasn't then developed in any way

01:56:06 that wasn't then developed in any way and certainly wasn't carried through to any training and then the second um

01:56:11 um and peter camerup and gary reason we'll know much more about that but the second reason was um i think what the chairman referred to as staple being an article of faith i think

01:56:22 staple being an article of faith i think that i think that's how the phase one report describes it and uh i think that's a that that's

01:56:30 that's a fair commentary um i know uh that many firefighters have views about the practicalities of evacuation that um it can't be done because of the nature

01:56:42 it can't be done because of the nature of the building you know narrow single staircase

01:56:45 staircase lots of kit on the staircase and the inquiry will be dealing with all of that so

01:56:50 so um

01:56:54 i hope that is an answer did you ever ask anybody whether the commissioner the operations director at dave brown the fire safety department to

01:57:06 dave brown the fire safety department to disseminate the message to front line firefighting responders that when they turn up to a fire in a high-rise building they cannot assume that the state policy in place for that

01:57:17 that the state policy in place for that building will hold up um

01:57:22 no but uh

01:57:26 uh there are

01:57:28 there are uh there are people who are far better qualified than i am to talk to you about the approach to training for firefighters and it isn't to

01:57:39 and it isn't to predict scenario well i don't know whether that's the right way of saying or not um

01:57:46 or not um the approach is about dynamic risk assessment and as part of that to

01:57:51 to not rely upon the certainty of anything and so the possibility of

01:57:59 of the unpredictable or the unpredicted

01:58:05 my understanding is that that is a core element of incident commander training and yet do you accept that senior officers in the lfb and particularly the fire safety department knew

01:58:17 knew particularly after refurbishments but knew that the stay put policy couldn't be trusted for high-rise buildings because of the risk presented by modern materials and other things and

01:58:29 modern materials and other things and yet failed to share that with frontline firefighters um

01:58:34 um no

01:58:35 no because that idea that it couldn't be trusted

01:58:39 trusted that in my experience that's not how i remember colleagues thinking about it the idea that it couldn't be trusted it's not how i thought about it until 2016

01:58:50 2016 you know

01:58:51 you know these were things i didn't think about even after i left the brigade but that idea of couldn't be trusted i don't think that was the way that colleagues thought about it now do you accept that they could they

01:59:03 do you accept that they could they should have thought about it that way and by failing to do say failed to give local crews the tools to face the fires that they were uh presented with in the modern built environment

01:59:14 environment uh not directly after la canal um but i i said last week i think that um

01:59:23 um the revelation that southwark and lewisham between them had spent 80 million pounds on fire safety improvements to their housing stock after the prosecutions was a revelation to me and did make me think

01:59:35 to me and did make me think you know well what was the quality of the their stock and how reliable would stay put be in that context there was also the scottish schools that was a thing about masonry presented itself as

01:59:46 thing about masonry presented itself as a problem about uh masonry uh all the focus was on it on the fact that the scottish schools were built through a pfi contract but i you know i remember saying to a former colleague at the time you know i bet you

01:59:58 colleague at the time you know i bet you that there are as many fire safety failures in those buildings uh uh well that there are many fire safety buildings uh fire safety failures in those buildings in addition to the masonry problems and that is what the

02:00:09 masonry problems and that is what the inquiry into the scottish schools revealed so certainly after i left the brigade

02:00:15 brigade um i saw more things that made me personally think

02:00:20 think uh you know i'm just not sure about that assumption but um but that wasn't abroad within the brigade while i was there well let's just refocus if we can please on the

02:00:31 just refocus if we can please on the last sentence of the paragraph on the screen i was asking you about i'll read it again both the lachenal and grenfell fires demonstrate that this assumption can be wrong and fatal in its outcomes now if

02:00:43 wrong and fatal in its outcomes now if you ignore the words and grenfell fires the sentence reads that

02:00:48 that the lachenal fire

02:00:51 fire demonstrates if we make the changes that this assumption can be wrong and fatal in its outcomes now

02:00:59 now do you accept that the lesson from lachenal namely that the assumption that the stapled advice

02:01:08 advice would hold was wrong was never communicated to frontline firefighters

02:01:22 um i don't know um that i can accurately pick my way through um

02:01:33 the fault line at la canal as regards stay put and the handling of fire survival guidance

02:01:43 and it wasn't just

02:01:48 i can't pick my way accurately through that um probably others can um but

02:01:56 um but but

02:01:57 but i go back to the point that the approach to training was um

02:02:02 um expect the unexpected and

02:02:06 and i simply don't know whether um

02:02:13 i don't know what references to stay put were contained in the lack of house training that was that began to be rolled out in 2004 so all

02:02:24 began to be rolled out in 2004 so all firefighters fired fire fire station based staff um

02:02:28 um uh

02:02:30 uh were required to undertake the lack and all house training package and there was a

02:02:34 a separate package for officers

02:02:37 officers and i simply can't speak to the extent to which if at all staple was part of that package

02:02:45 now on the 14th of june 2017 you had left

02:02:49 left the london fire brigade some two years and three months earlier yes yes when you first heard the news and you saw the images of the fire at grenfell tower

02:03:00 of the fire at grenfell tower what was your immediate reaction

02:03:05 um

02:03:13 it was like 9 11. uh it was uh

02:03:17 it was uh something that one couldn't stop watching and um well it was just it was just a terrible thing let me just take a moment okay no don't worry

02:03:35 and strangely enough i'd been with a former fire service colleague on

02:03:40 on the night that the fire started uh

02:03:43 uh and i would have said to him did say to him you know how are you getting on with that stay put business because

02:03:51 because i personally you know had my reservations about it by that time because of the actually because of the three things that i've mentioned or the two things the prosecution

02:04:02 prosecution and the scottish schools aren't enough um it just seemed to me that you know just reading the newspapers in an ordinary way and listening to the news in an ordinary way

02:04:13 listening to the news in an ordinary way you

02:04:15 you would hear and read things that made you think

02:04:18 you think i'm just you know that causes me to think differently about something did you ask yourself in that moment what might have gone wrong oh

02:04:27 oh no

02:04:29 no no now in light of your november 2017 submission and your evidence that you've given about it this morning can we assume that you maybe this is right maybe this is wrong but help me

02:04:40 right maybe this is wrong but help me did you think to yourself that this was a a one-off fire that was completely unpredicted and for which the lfb could never reasonably be prepared in the moment

02:04:51 in the moment i didn't know enough about you know that um

02:04:57 uh the spread of the fire was so extraordinary that i i was

02:05:04 i was i knew as little about why that happened as everybody else at that time what did you think to yourself that this this was

02:05:13 this was a fire this kind of fire which was waiting to happen and for which the lfb could reasonably be prepared no i didn't think that did you look back on your own time as as dc

02:05:24 dc and ask yourself what you could have done in that position to prepare the lfb better for a response to the grenfell tower fire

02:05:47 um

02:05:53 so how quickly am i contemplating this question mr millet so i i you know i i

02:06:01 i in the in the months that followed i certainly

02:06:04 certainly you know

02:06:06 you know and still

02:06:07 and still i developed some views about things that i think could have made a beneficial impact and i hold those views

02:06:14 views now

02:06:16 now and looking back now are you able to identify anything that you think you could or should have done as dc which

02:06:23 which two and a bit years on would have been would have better equipped the incident commanders to face the fire at grenfell um

02:06:35 no but the two things oh well actually maybe one of my two things would have helped the incident commander but i'm

02:06:45 but i'm but i'm sure that my two things um i wouldn't have succeeded with them as dc what were the two things um

02:06:53 um i

02:06:54 i uh the brigade has a system of tactical advisors so interagency liaison officer bulk media advisor fire safety officer there's a long list

02:07:05 there's a long list officers who are specialist officers who are mobilized if circumstances require it personally i would now have a cadre of

02:07:16 personally i would now have a cadre of stay put advisors and if any high-rise fire progressed beyond 45 minutes i'd have that officer dispatched but i say 45 minutes because

02:07:28 say 45 minutes because the overwhelming majority of high-rise fires um

02:07:32 fires um the stop messages in within about 40 minutes um so it seems to me you know it's a very simple mechanism but what works for me um i think the

02:07:44 what works for me um i think the the demands of making an assessment about stayport it's easy to imagine that that would be overwhelming for an incident commander faced with an incident like grenfell

02:07:55 faced with an incident like grenfell so maybe one of those two things would maybe that would sorry

02:08:00 sorry of course my policy intention is that it would assist an incident commander so a stable advisor and the second thing is

02:08:15 the demands of moving information around at that incident were enormous and we know from black and hell that there were failures to move incident

02:08:26 there were failures to move incident information around

02:08:30 as well as it should have been and they were magnified enormously at grenfell film

02:08:37 i believe that they for some incidents they need people who can manage information on a command unit and i mean non-operational people who

02:08:48 and i mean non-operational people who can

02:08:51 can who can

02:08:53 who can assemble and use excel spreadsheets who can create one record of information that's available in control and in every corner of the incident ground and at the bridgehead and i think that is

02:09:04 bridgehead and i think that is achievable with skill and i don't believe that at that skill is going to come from the operational workforce i think it's a specialist skill and

02:09:15 specialist skill and the brigade or to seriously reconsider whether it's prepared to do to to make what would for it be a huge cultural change and recognize that there are

02:09:26 are information specialists and analysts who would do that job better in the way the police have as far as i can see um so they they have that in place they've overcome that cultural barrier and um

02:09:38 overcome that cultural barrier and um the brigade would do well to contemplate doing the same in my opinion but sorry but although i've said those are the two things that i think you know in my mind would have made a difference or could make a difference i don't for a

02:09:50 or could make a difference i don't for a minute think if i'd been deputy commissioner and proposed either those two things they would have progressed and because

02:09:58 uh because the cultural resistance to having people who aren't operational firefighters on the incident ground is so strong

02:10:05 so strong and um

02:10:11 i think they're just not open to the idea of a staple specialist and i think they should be you mentioned just now in your answer cultural resistance

02:10:22 cultural resistance uh and you gave us a flavor of it just now was that cultural resistance something that you came across in your own experience as your tu in your time as deputy commissioner

02:10:35 um

02:10:50 um

02:10:56 don't know what i'm struggling to answer um

02:11:02 yeah yes i suppose so i suppose so yes how did it manifest itself um

02:11:08 um i don't want to leave the impression uh other than that you know uh i loved working for landon fire brigade and it was a great job um you know cultural resistance you know initially being a woman was an enormous

02:11:20 initially being a woman was an enormous novelty um there were two of us in fact and you know people couldn't figure out why we weren't the same um uh so we you know there was a thing about being a woman there was obviously a thing about

02:11:32 woman there was obviously a thing about being a non-operational deputy commissioner um uh i

02:11:39 um uh i made the information management people important in london fire brigade and i know they're not that important anymore uh and they did you know the work they did to

02:11:50 you know the work they did to improve systems in london fire brigade and they they were systems that improved training and improved performance and improved information i you know had value when i was there

02:12:02 i you know had value when i was there and i don't i don't think it has quite it hasn't got a sponsor in the same way and it doesn't have the same value as it as it did have so the brigade is you know full of opinions and experiences um

02:12:15 opinions and experiences um uh

02:12:17 uh and they you know it's full of different kinds of people with different views about other kinds of people sorry that's not very helpful

02:12:28 of people sorry that's not very helpful well miss dexter thank you very much for that and

02:12:31 that and thank you for your evidence as a whole i've come to the end of my questions that i've prepared for you it's customary at this moment to take a break to see if there are any follow-up questions that i have or or others may

02:12:42 questions that i have or or others may have for you so i'm going to ask the chairman to take a break you wanted to say something may i it was something that i meant to do first thing but we got off to a really quick start and i missed my moment um

02:12:54 moment um on thursday morning we talked about odcb and the frequency of odcb and

02:13:01 operational news and um i'm just concerned that i may have left the inquiry with the impression that the number of odcb meetings reduced um

02:13:12 the number of odcb meetings reduced um and that the number of operational news publications also reduced because we had a discussion about six monthly which i which came out of the documents that we were looking at um just having checked

02:13:26 were looking at um just having checked and i'm conscious that i also said odcb was arguably the hardest thing i did as deputy commissioner and i don't want those two things to come together with a idea that um that important thing had

02:13:37 idea that um that important thing had reduced um so uh in 2011 through to 2014 there were never less than six meetings of odcb and one year there were nine and when we went to six monthly

02:13:49 went to six monthly ops news which in fact we only did in 2013 from looking at my records it's because it expanded in size so it went from four pages to eight pages but the following year we were back up to um

02:14:01 following year we were back up to um three three three editions anyway so i just didn't want to leave the impression that you know uh this important thing um was not happening as frequently yes thank you very much thank you mr

02:14:12 yes thank you very much thank you mr chairman is that a convenient moment yes uh thank you it is well as mr militz explained we we have a break at this point because he may have forgotten to ask a question but perhaps more importantly others who are not in the

02:14:24 importantly others who are not in the room may have questions that they think we ought to put to you so mr miller do you think 10 minutes is going to be long enough uh

02:14:33 would you like a bit no no i i in fairness given the amount of time in the box let's say 15. yes all right people have had the weekend

02:14:44 people have had the weekend to

02:14:45 to think of any further questions right well

02:14:47 well i think there's no more than that we'll um we'll break now until half past 12

02:14:53 12 um

02:14:55 um if if you need more time or more questions coming in well you must just let us know but subject to that we'll come back at half past 12 see if there any more questions for you all right thank you very much

02:15:16 right thank you mr sweden well we'll say half past 12 but if there's a problem just let us know thank you very much

02:29:59 would you ask mr dexter to come back in please

02:30:17 all right mrs dexter well we'll see were there any more questions for you yes yes mr millet mr chairman uh mr extra i'm glad to be able to tell you that there are no further questions for you there you are

02:30:29 you there you are mr chairman that then concludes miss dexter's evidence but may i just make one point because um there are still discussions going on between the inquiry team and the lfb as regards disclosure

02:30:41 team and the lfb as regards disclosure of documents there may be some further documents um in respect of which we would need ms dexter's assistance therefore i'm going to ask if i may not to release her formally

02:30:52 to release her formally now clearly it's undesirable that she should be unpardon for any longer than is absolutely necessary yes um so if i were to say until something like 4 30 tomorrow afternoon that would give us

02:31:03 tomorrow afternoon that would give us enough time uh to know whether or not we need to call her back briefly to answer further questions and you will be able to tell her one way or the other formally

02:31:13 formally whether she's required or not required because i think she'd like to know that indeed yes yes yes all right thank you very much right well mr dexter thank you very much for coming to give us your evidence it

02:31:25 for coming to give us your evidence it really has been very useful to hear from you i'm sorry it's taken a little while but there was a lot to talk to you about so

02:31:31 so inevitably i suppose it was going to take some time anyway thank you very much indeed now normally at this point i would say you're free or out so to speak but um

02:31:42 you're free or out so to speak but um as you've heard from what mr millett says it's just possible we may need your help on some other matters so i'm not going to say that do you know and what i but what i am going to say is

02:31:53 and what i but what i am going to say is that please re consider yourself as mr millet attractively put it in purder in other words please don't talk to anyone about your evidence or anything to do with it

02:32:04 anything to do with it for the next day or so and we will contact you in the course of tomorrow probably at the end of the day to let you know formally whether we need to see you again or that we don't need to see you

02:32:15 again or that we don't need to see you again and if we don't need to see you again of course you can talk to anyone about anything you like at that point all right i'm sorry to do that too because i'm sure it's inconvenient but there are reasons as you've heard

02:32:28 but there are reasons as you've heard anyway thank you once again and for the time being thank you you can go thank you very much thank you very much

02:32:46 we have another witness waiting i think have we we do um we need to have a short break just for housekeeping purposes that would be helpful yes well we'll rise in for a few

02:32:57 helpful yes well we'll rise in for a few minutes and um i suggest you send the usher to collectors as soon as you're ready yes thank you very much

02:40:57 yes mr miller yes mr german thank you i now call mr gary reason please yes thank you very much

02:41:14 good afternoon mr reason good afternoon i understand that you're going to affirm i am right well then the word should be on the screen if you'd read them out please i do solemnly sincerely and truly declare and affirm that the evidence i

02:41:25 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 now please sit down make yourself comfortable

02:41:37 all right there's water there if you like it yeah

02:41:41 thank you

02:41:51 good thank you very much yes when you're ready mr chairman thank you very much um mr reason good afternoon and thank you very much for attending the inquiry and assisting us with our investigations we're extremely grateful

02:42:03 investigations we're extremely grateful to you

02:42:04 to you my questions are intended to be short and simple sometimes they turn out not to be that way so if you would like me to rephrase the question or put it again i'm very happy to do that can i ask you also please to keep your voice up so

02:42:16 also please to keep your voice up so that the person sitting to your right can get down on the transcript what you're saying plea please also don't nod or shake your head

02:42:24 head please say yes or no as the case may be we will take scheduled breaks during the course of the afternoon and throughout your evidence but if you feel you need a break for any reason other than those scheduled breaks please just

02:42:35 than those scheduled breaks please just indicate and we can we can take a break okay thank you now

02:42:40 now you've given us i think four uh witness statements in response to rule nine requests

02:42:46 requests and can i show you the first one please it's at lfb3032747

02:42:53 dated the 12th of february 2019 and if we go to the last page of that document

02:43:00 you could see that there's a signature is that your signature under the statement of truth yes it is can we next go to the second of those statements please lfb3067846

02:43:12 that's the second statement dated 2nd of december 2019 and if we turn please to the last page of that document page 31 you'll see a signature under the

02:43:23 you'll see a signature under the statement of truth is that your signature yes it is can we then go to the third of these statements please lfb308620

02:43:34 8th of january 2020 uh and if you look at the last page on that please which is a two-page statement you'll see there's again a signature underneath the statement of truth which is at the bottom of page one

02:43:46 truth which is at the bottom of page one is that your state signature yes it is and then finally your fourth statement lfb20104348

02:43:56 dated the 25th of march 2020 uh and again on page two there's a statement a statement of truth and a signature under it is that your signature yes it is thank you have you

02:44:07 signature yes it is thank you have you read these statements recently i have and can you confirm for us please that the contents of each of these statements are true to the best of your knowledge and belief they are are you happy for those

02:44:18 they are are you happy for those statements to be taken as your evidence to the inquiry yes i am uh now all four statements have a number of documents exhibited to them can you confirm that you've recently reviewed those exhibits i have thank you have you

02:44:30 those exhibits i have thank you have you discussed your evidence with anybody before coming here today uh no thank you now i'm going to begin by asking you some questions about your roles and responsibilities and to start with some general questions

02:44:43 and to start with some general questions in your first statement of paragraph two uh if we can just go to that lfb three zeros three two seven four seven paragraph two under the heading career profile

02:44:53 profile you tell us that you joined the lfb as an operational firefighter is that right i did you did and you also go on in that paragraph and then in paragraph three to explain that you worked your way up through the operational ranks

02:45:05 through the operational ranks uh before being promoted to deputy assistant commissioner dac in january 2007. yes that's correct and i think it's right that you were working at the time of your promotion to dac in

02:45:16 at the time of your promotion to dac in the brigade's training and development department i was promoted into the training development yes department but i was a group manager in a different department before i was promoted and you

02:45:27 department before i was promoted and you were promoted to the head of training and development uh in february 2008. i think i was yes paragraph five of your statement on page two if we can just have it in front of us and i can summarize i think you say

02:45:39 us and i can summarize i think you say that in june 2008 you were promoted from a temporary ac to a permanent ac and moved from the training and development department to the operational resilience department

02:45:51 operational resilience department is that right uh yes yes and your role there was head of operational resilience yes it was yes could you could you give the panel a

02:46:02 could you could you give the panel a brief overview of the work or the remit of the operational resilience department yes so the uh as head of service for that

02:46:12 that department there was a number of functions that were discharged by that department health and safety services emergency planning

02:46:23 emergency planning contingency planning which included uh aspects of event planning for things like the london marathon uh and new year's eve celebration uh

02:46:34 uh i also had a team that worked as a special operations group which were the group of officers that looked at the emerging terrorist threat and developed policies procedures and equipment

02:46:45 policies procedures and equipment provision to respond to that and i think that's and yeah that's about the extent of the functions under that department right now you were one of three directors i think alongside um

02:46:56 think alongside um deputy commissioner rita dexter and director of finance and contractual services sue button that's correct yes uh and that is when you became uh uh promoted to director of operational

02:47:08 promoted to director of operational resilience and training or dirt or d-o-o-r-t yes yes that was in january 2012. uh and as a director you reported i think straight to the commissioner didn't you i did yes and that was ron

02:47:20 didn't you i did yes and that was ron dobson wasn't it until the end of 2016. uh for the full tenure of my directorship it was ron dobson was my line manager indeed and he he handed over the commissionership to

02:47:32 over the commissionership to ac cotton at the end of 2016 after you had left yes yes uh and am i right in thinking that your director was one of two operational directorates yes mine and the deputy commissioners

02:47:43 yes mine and the deputy commissioners for the two operational directorates yes and you explain it paragraph nine of this statement if we can just have it up on the screen page three that um as director of operational resilience and

02:47:55 director of operational resilience and training

02:47:56 training you were responsible for six departments and you set them that out there operational assurance operational procedures human resource and development

02:48:07 development health and safety operational resilience and emergency planning now you've told us about the work of the operation resilience department can you give us similarly a brief overview of the work of the operational assurance

02:48:19 the work of the operational assurance department and the operational procedures department uh certainly just just for clarification it says in paragraph nine that it was the department's own functions shortly

02:48:31 the department's own functions shortly after i took up the directorship a number of those functions were combined into the operational assurance so particularly the health and safety and emergency planning function came

02:48:42 and emergency planning function came under the operational assurance department so it was actually four departments that i was responsible for for the majority of my time as director so so we so just graphically we take the last two bullet

02:48:53 graphically we take the last two bullet points under paragraph nine there and we we understand them as part of operational assurance yes i see um could you just tell us then um what the work of each of those two departments operational assurance and

02:49:04 departments operational assurance and operational procedures was in brief yeah so operational assurance looked after the performance management framework for the brigade and reported to the operations directorate coordination

02:49:16 operations directorate coordination board

02:49:19 operational procedures looked after as it describes their operational policy they didn't they weren't responsible for all operational policy but the vast majority

02:49:30 operational policy but the vast majority of operation procedures uh resided under that head of service human resource and development one side of that department looked after the hr function of the brigade so the

02:49:41 the hr function of the brigade so the transactional functions the policies equality's diversity that sort of thing and the development side looked after predominantly the business processes that were in place to assist

02:49:52 processes that were in place to assist the brigade to manage the external contract which was with babcock the external training contract uh operational resilience i think i've touched on that already because i was

02:50:03 touched on that already because i was the former head of that so do you want me to repeat that that's okay thank you so just the first three um

02:50:09 um uh you've you've explained um

02:50:12 um where did training sit or is that too broad a question uh if the question is was trying invested in one head of service the answer to that is no right

02:50:23 answer to that is no right the human resource and development department was predominantly focused on say the business relationship with the babcock and also the

02:50:35 babcock and also the training assurance process in terms of what the service provider babcock in this case was delivering to the brigade other aspects of the brigade's training functions

02:50:46 functions were vested in all heads of service who identified the training need as it was for their respective departments on an annual basis and

02:50:55 and the what i call the frontline which is fire stations uh training that that training and development requirement was set out in the policy uh development of maintenance and

02:51:06 uh development of maintenance and operational professionalism is the policy that i'm referring to and that training which was the ongoing day-to-day training at fire stations predominantly and also the provision of exercises and other external training

02:51:19 exercises and other external training activities was managed through the management functions within that directorate the which department uh that was well it changed its name during my time

02:51:30 well it changed its name during my time but it's operations prevention and response managed by assistant commissioner dave brown right that's not within your directorate that is not within my directorate that was sat under the dc uh it was under the

02:51:41 was sat under the dc uh it was under the deputy commissioner at that time yes now you've already summarized um that for us uh we heard from the the deputy commissioner rita dexter

02:51:52 the the deputy commissioner rita dexter that her director director root encompassed local fire stations control room strategy and performance and the fire safety department you'd agree with that i think i do agree with that yes and you say in your

02:52:04 with that yes and you say in your statement a paragraph seven for which i think we need to go back a page to page two

02:52:09 two um did you remain director of operations resilience and training until he retired from the brigade in january 2015. yes that is correct yes uh now for completeness um i take from

02:52:22 uh now for completeness um i take from paragraphs 11 to 14 of this statement just summarizing it that you then returned to work for the lfb in june 2017 to assist with the operation of the

02:52:33 2017 to assist with the operation of the lfb's internal grenfell tower investigation and review team i did yes

02:52:39 i did yes and then is it right that you left that role and indeed the lfb again on the 31st of july 2019. that is correct right now turning then to your responsibilities and oversight of the

02:52:52 responsibilities and oversight of the lfb as dort can we look at your statement of paragraph seven and you say there in and this is on page two

02:53:02 two uh at the foot of the page um

02:53:05 um in the second line the dort role formed an integral part of the brigade's corporate management team cmt that had responsibility for the effective management and continuous improvement of the full

02:53:17 improvement of the full range of prevention protection and emergency response services provided by the brigade and in the rest of that paragraph you go on to explain that at the time

02:53:28 explain that at the time that the other members of the cmt were the then commissioner ron dobson deputy commissioner rita dexter and sue budden as director of contractual services and as of 2013 the

02:53:39 contractual services and as of 2013 the appointed third officer ac brown david brown yes that's correct yeah now we heard evidence from from rita dexter that before the grenfell tower of fire

02:53:52 that before the grenfell tower of fire this body cmt i think was known as cmb or the corporate management board is that right um i think i'm trying to describe a different group of people and i wondered

02:54:03 different group of people and i wondered apologies for the confusion if that's uh what this is called so i just used the term corporate management team to describe the top four managers in the organization because i knew that i'd probably be referring to us for

02:54:15 probably be referring to us for throughout my statements and it was a sort of a short short way of describing the four officers the corporate management board was an actual

02:54:23 actual meeting

02:54:25 meeting and the membership of that meeting was uh wider than the the cmt as i've described it so apologies if that caused any confusion um formal cnb meetings involved a number of uh advisors didn't

02:54:36 involved a number of uh advisors didn't they yes i think um and those meetings were separate from the more informal um

02:54:42 um cmt meetings yes so there was a a weekly uh commissioners group meeting which was the the one you're describing is more informal uh

02:54:53 is more informal uh and then the corporate manageable was a program of meetings that were diarised throughout the year yeah so we've got i think that's clear the cmt as you describe it is the commissioner's group yes i see and that met informally uh

02:55:07 yes i see and that met informally uh weekly they tried to we didn't always manage to meet each week but yeah it was certainly an intention to meet regularly but they were informal and unminuted i think they were unlimited

02:55:18 think they were unlimited now um

02:55:19 now um having regard to your position as director

02:55:22 director uh and your membership of those two groups

02:55:26 groups cmt or commissioners group on the one hand and cnb on the other would it be fair to say in general that you had extensive oversight and knowledge of the lfb's organizational workings and

02:55:37 lfb's organizational workings and priorities yes yes were you always happy with the lfb structure that we've so far examined um it's a big organization it's a complex

02:55:48 it's a big organization it's a complex organization um there were an awful lot of meetings to attend in our uh our level um but i wouldn't characterize it as being inefficient it was just reflection of the complexity of and the

02:56:00 reflection of the complexity of and the size of the organization did you have ever have any reason to doubt its efficacy

02:56:05 efficacy uh

02:56:06 uh no not at all um

02:56:09 um can we then turn to the oversight of an involvement in the training department's work including the role of the odcb we established i think earlier that as director of operations resilience and

02:56:20 director of operations resilience and training you were responsible for as you've shown as the human resources and development department did that i think became known later as the training and development department didn't it yeah i think after i retired

02:56:32 didn't it yeah i think after i retired uh there was a restructure of some of the functions and departments and i think it was called the training development department very well now if we go to paragraph four of your statement at page two we can see

02:56:43 your statement at page two we can see that in april 2012 so during your your time as director of operational resilience and training uh the lfb outsourced its operational training to

02:56:54 outsourced its operational training to babcock yes yeah from the first of april 2012 indeed and that was done via a 25-year contract with babcock yes it was um to what extent if any at all was it your job to oversee that

02:57:06 your job to oversee that transition uh well as much as i was managing a key function that would uh be the direct contact with the training provider

02:57:17 provider once the contract had been signed yes that became a focus of my attention particularly in the early stages of that contract uh because there were some difficulties uh in that

02:57:28 there were some difficulties uh in that initial phase right right so do i take it from that you didn't negotiate the contract but you certainly oversaw its

02:57:37 its initial implementation uh

02:57:40 uh no i didn't have any direct involvement in the future options for training project uh and i as you know from my statement i only became director in the january uh

02:57:51 january uh and the and the contract went live on the first of april so only a matter of months um but certainly once the contract was signed yes it became a key focus of my attention now the inquiry

02:58:02 focus of my attention now the inquiry has heard evidence from peter groves about the lfb's court review board am i right in thinking that you chaired the course review board yes i did yes uh he also explained that in 2012 babcock

02:58:15 also explained that in 2012 babcock undertook two or

02:58:17 or committed to undertake a review of all the lfb's training courses within the first three years of the contract and that it was the course review board that was responsible for agreeing and signing off

02:58:28 signing off babcock's proposals about that is that right can you confirm that yes the contract did include a requirement on the training provider babcock to undertake a course review across all of the course curricula that

02:58:40 across all of the course curricula that was in place when the contract was signed and as chair of the course review board is it right that you had oversight for of and responsibility for babcock's initial course review or the icr

02:58:51 initial course review or the icr as it became known yeah from recollection the course review bill wasn't part of the management structures that were first implemented when the contract went live right it became apparent to me quite

02:59:03 right it became apparent to me quite quickly that given the extent of the work that was needed to undertake the course review on the brigade side so it's obviously babcock's responsibility to bring forward

02:59:14 to bring forward evidence of their review and what their recommendations was or were

02:59:19 or were that we needed a mechanism for the brigade on the brigade side to manage understanding what the course review was presenting to us and how we would actually move forward to discharge in

02:59:31 actually move forward to discharge in any of the recommendations that we wanted to take forward because this was basically a fundamental review of all the training that we had previously been delivering ourselves when the training function was in-house

02:59:42 when the training function was in-house so i it was actually at my behest if you like to introduce another governance structure that would give all of the senior officers in in the brigade visibility of what was

02:59:53 in the brigade visibility of what was being recommended by the training provider

02:59:56 provider and so that we could work in part

03:03:06 you