Procedural hearing addressing witness protocols, venue concerns, disclosure issues, and bereaved families' participation in the inquiry. Discussion of the Hackett Review and its relationship to the inquiry's work.
00:00:01 if before we resume can I just say I'm very sorry that the fire alarm interrupted the hearing and I'm particularly sorry because I feel sure
00:00:12 particularly sorry because I feel sure that for some of those in the room to hear the fire alarm would have been distressing if not frightening and I'm sorry for that you might like to know that it was in fact a genuine caught but
00:00:25 that it was in fact a genuine caught but only in relation to a building which is adjacent to and next to this building so we weren't actually in any danger I'm very glad to say if the alarm were to
00:00:38 very glad to say if the alarm were to sound again which i think is very unlikely I will rise straight away and we will all leave so you all understand if he goes off again we'll all get out
00:00:50 if he goes off again we'll all get out and there will be people outside to guide you to the best ways of getting down to the ground floor and the outside I think all I'd like to say in addition is I hope that the unwarranted
00:01:02 is I hope that the unwarranted interruption won't unduly undermine what we've been doing this morning which I think it's been very useful now mr. Weatherbee before you continue
00:01:13 now mr. Weatherbee before you continue can I just say this in relation to discovery that I may have misled you to some extent if you thought that we were holding up documents in general in order
00:01:24 holding up documents in general in order to provide context that is not the case we have been disclosing documents as when they're ready to go what's been holding things up is partly of
00:01:35 holding things up is partly of relationships with the police under the MOU which mr. Minnick described yes and partly the redactions process which has proved to be fairly onerous because of the amount of personal information that
00:01:48 the amount of personal information that we have to take out of documents for data protection act reasons yes so I hope that to some extent that may allay some of your concerns yes well that's it's extremely helpful thank you very much may I just pick up a detail on that
00:02:01 much may I just pick up a detail on that and just may I ask the inquiry team to reflect on DPA requests as something that was mentioned earlier about the firefighter statements
00:02:13 firefighter statements we would certainly have no difficulty with personal largely irrelevant detail coming out the the difficulty we we would have is is that for example it was
00:02:25 would have is is that for example it was mentioned about the condition or the medical condition of firefighters and we would say that that would not there would be a balance there under the DPA and therefore it's something that needs to be dealt with quite carefully making
00:02:39 to be dealt with quite carefully making every effort to ensure that any information which is relevant yes yes that's very helpful thank you very much indeed I was dealing with the issue
00:02:51 indeed I was dealing with the issue positions to him so perhaps I can just pick that one use do I was indicating that we were pleased that the statements have been requested and pleased that
00:03:02 have been requested and pleased that they had been in in the main complied with and provided to the inquiry but I was going on to pose the further
00:03:13 was going on to pose the further question that what is the aim of position statements and our submission about that is that they are there primarily to cut through to the key
00:03:25 primarily to cut through to the key issues to assist the inquiry and to assist other cps in in how they participate in in the inquiry and I was making the observation that in almost
00:03:36 making the observation that in almost none of these position statements to date has any real assistance being given to the inquiry beyond the processes and the contractual arrangements as to key
00:03:47 the contractual arrangements as to key issues can why the fire spread what what caused or contributed to such terrible loss of life and it seems to us that
00:03:58 loss of life and it seems to us that with one notable exception that's absent from most of the from all of the statements that have been received so far yes indeed because on the last
00:04:15 far yes indeed because on the last occasion people said we can't be expected to lay out our position without having had all evidence and disclosure and it seemed to me that as an initial step yes it was helpful to
00:04:26 an initial step yes it was helpful to see the structure of the arrangements which could be done without any need for evidence or dispersion well a game with respect I can say can entirely follow that I don't wish to blame anybody but I
00:04:39 that I don't wish to blame anybody but I wish to take it on to the next stage and the next stage now we have this starting point on position statements we would very much add you to consider to take it
00:04:51 very much add you to consider to take it to the next level before I do that can I just point up that there do appear to be some omissions from the position statements we raised with the team the
00:05:04 statements we raised with the team the fire engineer's x over overnight I think we've been provided with a latter which has gone to x over and they have in fact been asked for it but for reasons that may not be important they haven't yet
00:05:17 may not be important they haven't yet provided that but obviously that will be an important position statement to add but there are also others the one that we know we don't appear to have a position statement from kingspan who are
00:05:30 position statement from kingspan who are a an insulation manufacturer some of whose products were present on on the tower and I'll come back to kingspan in
00:05:43 tower and I'll come back to kingspan in a moment if I if I may so what we would urge the inquiry to consider next is first of all to fill the gaps with any any any companies or authorities that
00:05:56 any any companies or authorities that haven't yet provided a current position statement but we would also urge there be a second staged at the process and we previously raised and I'll do it very briefly because I've previously raised
00:06:07 briefly because I've previously raised it though they know their processes where liability is in is to be determined notably in criminal and civil processes but others as well
00:06:20 processes but others as well defendants are required in law to assist the tribunal by narrowing the issues and is often said that such disclosure
00:06:32 is often said that such disclosure ups all sides including those who actually make the disclosure because it promotes the interests of justice by honing the real issues and we say that
00:06:43 honing the real issues and we say that that's something which is of importance here but here we're in a process which does not determine liability it seeks to establish the truth of what happened and
00:06:54 establish the truth of what happened and it seeks with some urgency to come to determinations which may prevent unnecessary future death so we say there's an even more compelling an
00:07:05 there's an even more compelling an obvious imperative for further position statements which not only set out processes and relationships and contractual arrangements and regulations but in fact what the main participants
00:07:19 but in fact what the main participants say did or did not happen and what they and others did or did not do as keep our participants people who were in the in
00:07:31 participants people who were in the in the various processes are under consideration they're in a really central position to assist the inquiry and others to speed its progress and to hone the issues and strip away probably
00:07:44 hone the issues and strip away probably some irrelevant issues along the way now if there are sensibilities about the fact that disclosure has only gone some part of the distance we understand that
00:07:56 part of the distance we understand that and in some cases there may be legitimate issues which can be raised for example the privilege against self-incrimination but let the in our
00:08:08 self-incrimination but let the in our summation let the CPS raise that because in most cases that will simply not be something that they choose to to raise so we respectfully invite you to call
00:08:24 so we respectfully invite you to call for a further stage where the corporate and public authority CPS set out their stance on from their perspective from their part of the overall picture of
00:08:37 their part of the overall picture of what went wrong and in relation to an earlier submission we we would say that leaving it for openings is a wrong move because that's too far down the track and would leave the inquiry and
00:08:48 and would leave the inquiry and everybody else in a position of not knowing until until - too far down the track can I raise by way of an example of this going back to kingspan already
00:08:59 of this going back to kingspan already mentioned them as being a manufacturer of some of the insulation used in some of the cladding and the CEO of kingspan has made a number of public comments
00:09:11 has made a number of public comments about Grenville and the fact that King's burns products were used on Grenfell and has chosen publicly to indicate as much
00:09:22 has chosen publicly to indicate as much in two significant articles that have been published and has chosen to say not only their products were used on Grenfell but their products shouldn't
00:09:33 Grenfell but their products shouldn't have been used on Granville and it seems to us that it would plainly be of substantial help if people such as the
00:09:44 substantial help if people such as the CEO of Greek Kings band were to direct some of the effort that they're putting into articles and media comment into proactively assisting the inquiry
00:09:56 proactively assisting the inquiry likewise with Celotex again the company that's been mentioned before another insulation menu manufacturer they have adverted to test results and have
00:10:10 adverted to test results and have indicated that there were problems with them although it's not entirely clear what they say about that and we would say that in a second round of position statements they should be asked to
00:10:21 statements they should be asked to clarify that and to set out for example whether their products should or shouldn't have been used on grenfell what the problem exactly with their products was and to assist the inquiry
00:10:34 products was and to assist the inquiry in that way but likewise the local authorities and the government departments involved particularly the Department of Communities and Local Government under its new name we think
00:10:46 Government under its new name we think should be asked to be part of this second round as well we're not asking anybody to predetermine or preempt that your determinations we're simply asking
00:10:58 your determinations we're simply asking for them to be asked to assist by putting their colours to the mast we're simply asking for candor this
00:11:09 we're simply asking for candor this isn't a game of cat and mouse with some of these companies and departments and if they genuinely have no responsibility
00:11:20 if they genuinely have no responsibility or accountability for what happened then it's important that we know that at this stage of also can I finally move on to disclosure and I've already spoken well
00:11:31 disclosure and I've already spoken well I've dealt with disclosure within the specifics of the expert report so I won't repeat myself on that but we say that there is still a large amount of
00:11:44 that there is still a large amount of highly relevant material that remains out outstanding and we ask for an unequivocal commitment by the inquiry to disclose the remaining relevant material
00:11:57 disclose the remaining relevant material at the earliest opportunity we note what's been said about the issues with with the mat we're slightly surprised by some of those comments because we've
00:12:09 some of those comments because we've actually had discussions with lawyers for the matter as well and we hoped that a sensible approach would be taken to
00:12:21 a sensible approach would be taken to the issues between possible future prosecutions and this enquiry I'm sure that can be done but we would say for in
00:12:34 that can be done but we would say for in the example given about firefighters but it is difficult to see how the disclosure of firefighters statements to the inquiry and onwards to CPS for the
00:12:49 the inquiry and onwards to CPS for the furtherance of the imperatives of this inquiry it's difficult to see how that could have any adverse impact on the criminal process and hardly need to go
00:13:04 criminal process and hardly need to go further than that with with respect with somebody who sat in the court of appeal and and knows the criminal process well but it's a long time there were cases where publicity of this
00:13:18 there were cases where publicity of this sort of thing stopped the prosecution and therefore we would urge particularly urged the mat now to have a rethink and to adopt a sensible approach to these
00:13:32 to adopt a sensible approach to these matters and deal with them quickly can I just give a list of some of the headlines that we're concerned about in terms of disclosure and first of all in terms of phase one footage we have had a
00:13:46 terms of phase one footage we have had a large number of still photographs but we've had little in the way of actual footage and we would seek from the
00:13:57 footage and we would seek from the inquiry an inventory of the footage that is available and we would seek disclosure disclosure of the footage itself at an early stage likewise and
00:14:12 itself at an early stage likewise and buy footage I'm including the TV footage that the inquiry may have CCTV footage the body-worn videos from various emergency services the footage is going
00:14:26 emergency services the footage is going to be key to working out exactly what happened following from that we know from other processes and proceedings that timing of footage is often a
00:14:39 that timing of footage is often a difficult issue we understand that the police have been doing their best to time-time the footage we would seek disclosure of that so that we can assist with that there are various parts of our
00:14:52 with that there are various parts of our side of this process for example mobile phone records that some of our clients hold which may allow us to do that and that's been done in other inquiries and and inquests we've dealt with or I've
00:15:05 and inquests we've dealt with or I've dealt with the documents that have gone to the inquiry instructed them experts mr. millet referred to 999 calls again
00:15:16 mr. millet referred to 999 calls again we would urge that those are dealt with with some urgency now because of Essen centrality to the witness statements and we've heard what mr. millet said about the remaining
00:15:27 the remaining release statements we're concerned about the firefighter evidence and the commander evidence and and that that is expedited but we're also concerned that
00:15:39 expedited but we're also concerned that the emergency services radio communications are disclosed because they are real-time records timed which show what was happening and
00:15:52 timed which show what was happening and the command commands that were going down the line to the firefighters in particular those would cover fire police and ambulance we have referred in our
00:16:05 and ambulance we have referred in our written documents and because of time I won't I won't go and take more time over giving a list of these but there are various of the documents largely itemized by the Fire Brigades Union of
00:16:16 itemized by the Fire Brigades Union of other firefighting documents which should be available and we would urge that those are expedited and also and finally in in this respect
00:16:27 and also and finally in in this respect for faith phase one we would urge that post-mortem reports are disclosed as soon as possible in relation to a disclosure more generally it would be
00:16:40 disclosure more generally it would be helpful and we would urge the inquiry team to provide us with the inventories of documents that have been provided to the inquiry because that would assist us
00:16:53 the inquiry because that would assist us to go through and help the inquiry team in terms of which of those areas of documentation czar and are not relevant and we can see no reason from our side
00:17:05 and we can see no reason from our side as to why the inventories of the documents that are available to the inquiry should not be able to be disclosed and hand hand-in-hand with
00:17:17 disclosed and hand hand-in-hand with that the process that we're told and understand is going on meticulous and painstaking process of the consideration
00:17:28 painstaking process of the consideration of relevance that must be producing schedules of material which is and isn't relevant and therefore like in certain other processes that many of us have
00:17:39 other processes that many of us have been involved with we would seek disclosure of the what would another proceedings be called an unused schedule again the purposes of us raising issues about that the two
00:17:55 us raising issues about that the two specifics in respect of documentation more generally is documentation and material relating to complaints made and we were told at an early stage that this
00:18:07 we were told at an early stage that this was an area that the inquiry was concentrating on and therefore it would be very useful to us to have as much of the complaints material that is currently being gathered disclosed as
00:18:19 currently being gathered disclosed as can be done now and there's the ongoing issue of the housing files I reach her reiterate before I sit down that we are all aware of how hard the inquiry team
00:18:30 all aware of how hard the inquiry team is working that we want to participate and assist in that process and the matters that I've raised are without very much in mind that's all I've got to
00:18:43 very much in mind that's all I've got to say and this is anything when I miss the Steen you're next on the sheet
00:19:01 yes if I can avoid the danger of any repetition I will we have to react sometimes to material that is disclosed and the D material that has been hopefully disclosed so taking up the
00:19:14 hopefully disclosed so taking up the thread of the point raised by mr. Weatherbee Queen's counselors just left the podium where the inquiry can provide an index or insight into the material
00:19:25 an index or insight into the material they are considering at this stage we can provide some support so as an example we will provided very recently I think overnight with a copy or a list of
00:19:36 think overnight with a copy or a list of the core participants and immediately myself working with mr. Weatherbee we've been ever able to identify that there are perhaps some gaps now it may be that they are organizations or individuals
00:19:48 they are organizations or individuals that are currently within the inquiry site but we can now discuss it with the inquiry and therefore provide that assistance where we can as you know sir
00:19:59 assistance where we can as you know sir from my remarks made on the last occasion we are committed to ensuring that our client group and indeed all survivor bereaved and resident core participants are heard and allowed access to expert documents and support
00:20:11 access to expert documents and support that need to they need to meet to fully participate within this inquiry but we also recognize that there are many others who have been affected by the
00:20:23 others who have been affected by the ground fault our disaster who are living day-to-day with the consequences of that fire who live today in tower blocks up and down this country to an extent
00:20:36 and down this country to an extent therefore the core participants the residents that bereaved and survivors that we represent they hold for those other people on part as part of our
00:20:47 other people on part as part of our responsibility in their responsibility the duty to make the points that we can on behalf of all those people that live in such conditions and we know this is relevant because as examples show us
00:20:59 relevant because as examples show us this year on the 22nd of January of this year in material published by the Ministry of housing communities and local government they revealed that three buildings had finished the
00:21:10 three buildings had finished the installation of replacement cladding but a further
00:21:13 a further had only just been begun in terms of that replacement the same report identified 299 tower blocks that had failed safety tests only a couple of
00:21:25 failed safety tests only a couple of days ago the 19th of March 3/4 of tower blocks in Greater Manchester failed to meet even the current standards the same date the 19th of March cladding on six
00:21:38 date the 19th of March cladding on six high-rise rocks of flats in Cardiff did not meet the current safety standards so we say that the people we represent are therefore not only witnesses what
00:21:49 therefore not only witnesses what happened to them and their own suffering but also for those people who live with their families in what are apparently defective blocks now the terms of
00:22:00 defective blocks now the terms of reference for this inquiry and I will refer to two please or obviously to examine the circumstances surrounding the Grenville tower fire and a the
00:22:11 the Grenville tower fire and a the immediate cause or causes of the fire and the means by which it spread to the whole of the building phase one will go into Phase two and as part and parcel of
00:22:22 into Phase two and as part and parcel of both of these phases sir you will be reviewing at sea of the terms of reference the scope and adequacy of building regulations fire regulations
00:22:33 building regulations fire regulations and other legislation guidance and industry practice relating to the design construction equipping and management of high-rise residential buildings now
00:22:44 high-rise residential buildings now there are many other terms of reference but I highlight those two for a particular good reason in order for those terms of references to be fulfilled
00:22:54 fulfilled you need Sir the voices of the bereaved survivors and residents and you need that so that they can be heard and they will be listened to in order to achieve the end product that we all want which
00:23:08 the end product that we all want which is to establish who and what was responsible for killing the residents in the ground full tower and to make sure through changes in fire regulations and
00:23:19 through changes in fire regulations and safety that this never happens again so practical steps that take us to that end result we learned it friends to Weatherby Queen's counselors addressed
00:23:32 Weatherby Queen's counselors addressed the question of disclosure I won't repeat it but it may help having listened to him and thought about the issues if you um take on board this short point effective participation
00:23:44 short point effective participation requires effective disclosure so that means witnesses in their evidence can speak to what has happened who they hold responsible what they had been told at
00:23:57 responsible what they had been told at the time of the refurbishment and the like and what they believe should be done to protect people in the future now to get the message across to this inquiry
00:24:07 inquiry there are various measures designed to provide support screens to make the giving of evidence less intimidating live links recorded statements there are many measures that we use as common
00:24:19 many measures that we use as common standards across the courts and of course the will be we're required the provision of interpreters counselors and intermediaries if require now effective
00:24:32 intermediaries if require now effective participation therefore means that this inquiry listens to the core participants and their representatives about the best way to put their voices across now in my written submissions I was critical of a
00:24:45 written submissions I was critical of a protocol that has been set forward the protocol referring to vulnerable witnesses now the protocol appeared to
00:24:56 witnesses now the protocol appeared to suggest if you look at it in black and white that a brief survivor or resident witness in order to achieve some type of support as an example screens or video
00:25:07 support as an example screens or video link might have to have the benefit of a report a psychological or psychiatric report I see you nod your head and I've also been a big my well I see your crotch shake your head not and I agree
00:25:19 crotch shake your head not and I agree I've discussed these matters and I know they've been discussed behind the scenes with Council and I'm sure it's been therefore discussed with justice inquiring that clearly has been and also having listened today to mr. millet
00:25:32 having listened today to mr. millet Queen's Counsel counsel to the inquiry that clearly has been some clarification provided about this now I've got no doubt at all no doubt at all that the document I refer to the
00:25:43 that the document I refer to the protocol for vulnerable witnesses was drafted and intended to provide support for vulnerable witnesses and to make sure that witnesses are protected and that children can be saved from an
00:25:55 that children can be saved from an ordeal so we understand that of course the danger though is that if we look at that I'm not going to go through it because it's been dealt with that the inquiry might have seemed as though it
00:26:07 inquiry might have seemed as though it was regarding vulnerable witnesses as almost ending up in some rule-bound rather hidebound way of being dealt with and potentially an old-fashioned way or possibly patrician approach to young
00:26:19 possibly patrician approach to young people one of the core participants we represent provides a good example of the sort of issues that a perception of a barrier can provide she has a daughter a
00:26:31 barrier can provide she has a daughter a teenager who suffered very badly in the fire but she the teenager wants to have her say the danger if we were to look at that protocol was on the face of it
00:26:42 that protocol was on the face of it means that we would have to ask you sir for permission to speak to her and take a statement now I know that we are going to discuss this with council inquiry we will work out a system but if we were to
00:26:54 will work out a system but if we were to explain to a 14-year old a teenager that we need to speak to Sir Martin more bit about the weather we can take a statement I would suggest that we might get a certain response the same response
00:27:05 get a certain response the same response that I might give if such a barrier was being posed to the giving of evidence so I bet they're all very pleased to have heard today from mr. Miller at Queen's Counsel who clearly has considered our submissions with care with his team and
00:27:17 submissions with care with his team and that what seemed to be apparent hard lines in that protocol are not going to be used as barriers for the survivors briefed and residents corps participants
00:27:28 briefed and residents corps participants also we understand and have again having had discussions with council to the inquiry that we will discuss the way forward for the dealing with witnesses that are young people so that their
00:27:40 that are young people so that their statements can properly be taken progress is being made the same spirit of collaborative working across this inquiry is also paying
00:27:51 across this inquiry is also paying dividends in the response and Council to the inquiry we heard today about access to this inquiry littoral access the discussion that we heard today about support for child care arrangements is
00:28:03 support for child care arrangements is welcome issues that relate to time off work clearly needs more work it is a difficult area to consider but it is necessary something that we will
00:28:14 it is necessary something that we will need to speak to the inquiry about so there are still some issues but they are capable of discussion and you will be pleased to hear that your words in opening this inquiry last year where you
00:28:28 opening this inquiry last year where you said I'm open to suggestions about how I can obtain evidence from those witnesses in a sensitive appropriate way are being given good effect so issues that remain
00:28:39 given good effect so issues that remain the venue we hear what was being said today that this is it seems at least at this moment in time the chosen venue
00:28:50 this moment in time the chosen venue when we look at what this room provides by way of an opportunity as a hearing room and if I think about the measures that may be required to provide support
00:29:01 that may be required to provide support for witnesses there are obvious deficiencies in this arrangement and there is no doubt about that the location is also difficult for survivors bereaved a resident core participants in terms of travel it
00:29:14 participants in terms of travel it doesn't take much thinking to work out that someone that has found their way through the plat corridors of a burning building may not enjoy the rigors of going on the tube to this particular
00:29:26 going on the tube to this particular area these are matters that are real and they affect if I have my math right 667 potential people that is a lot of people that this affects so these issues the
00:29:40 that this affects so these issues the question of loss of earnings the question of this location remains still something we would ask to be attention to and we were pleased to see that the mayor's submissions that have been put
00:29:51 mayor's submissions that have been put forward also echoed the question at the very final paragraph of whether this is indeed a suitable location we would ask though
00:29:59 though that perhaps the mayor's office maybe also well placed to provide some consideration if there are any other possible venues that they could consider
00:30:09 lastly in terms of the practical arrangements those are need to understand that when this inquiry is going on through the summer and through those weeks and months that there is a need so that our
00:30:21 months that there is a need so that our client group our core participants that we represent have the ability to speak to us in private so consultation rooms desks and the like are not just fancy places for us to do
00:30:32 are not just fancy places for us to do our work that that would be welcomed but it would in fact be that we only way forward when dealing with a large number of people that we represent and may I suggest the way forward again going back
00:30:43 suggest the way forward again going back to what I've said about collaborative working is we have a plain and simple meeting about this with counseling solicitor the inquiry to discuss the actual practical arrangements so I've been dealing and I've mention already
00:30:56 been dealing and I've mention already the need to make sure that core participants have a voice on the issues that will be addressed by this inquiry one of those issues I've mentioned is the question of consideration of current
00:31:07 the question of consideration of current fire regulations and what changes should be recommended by the inquiry in the future
00:31:14 future the Hackett review is already looking at this issue and since representation has been confirmed or this inquiry we have
00:31:25 been confirmed or this inquiry we have been seeking access to and a voice within that Review Dame Judith Hackett who conducts that reviewers chair does so under the following terms of reference that following the Grenville
00:31:38 reference that following the Grenville tower disaster the government commissioned her to provide an urgent independent review of building and fire safety regulations and their effectiveness the purpose within those
00:31:49 effectiveness the purpose within those terms of reference for the hackett review is to make recommendations that will ensure we have a sufficiently robust
00:31:59 robust regulatory system for the future and to provide further assurance to residents that the complete system is working to ensure the buildings they live in are safe and remain so now I quoted the
00:32:11 safe and remain so now I quoted the terms of reference for the Voltaire enquiry your inquiry sir a few minutes ago and at sea as I repeat only very shortly that deals with the scope and adequacy of building regulations and
00:32:23 and adequacy of building regulations and fire regulations and other legislation so we can see when considering the hackett review terms of reference and the ground fault our terms of reference that there is a lot if not entirely
00:32:35 that there is a lot if not entirely common ground between the review and this inquiry sadly the hackett review is currently proceeding without ability for the ground fault our Korb participants to
00:32:47 ground fault our Korb participants to make supported and ongoing submissions as to the detail of that review now I want to be clear about this this is not to say that Dame Judith team have not
00:32:58 to say that Dame Judith team have not spoken to Granville tower residents that would be wrong to think that they have they have had engagement as I understand it with Smith with specific resident groups and they have conducted what are
00:33:09 groups and they have conducted what are called roundtable discussions what is lacking we suggest is specific and detailed access to the Hackett review submissions and ongoing discussions to
00:33:21 submissions and ongoing discussions to be able to contribute to dangerous part to report which is said to be delivered not far away at some time early this year and let me make it clear what we are actually suggesting is required and
00:33:34 are actually suggesting is required and that is funding for core participants to have their views collated advice from experts who are funded so that they can make equal submissions in equal detail
00:33:45 make equal submissions in equal detail to the Hackett review as are being put forward by various representative bodies and companies and industry insiders who currently populate the hackett review
00:33:57 currently populate the hackett review committees that is required so that the ground fault our voice of those residents that we represent can be heard that voice which has become more
00:34:09 that voice which has become more knowledgeable and more compelling through their ordeals on the hackett review committees there is no mention of any tent Grenville tower group or representative expert who is putting
00:34:21 representative expert who is putting across the viewpoint of the survivors but there is plenty of representation from industry local authorities across all of those committees IR mentioned some names of those committees in um of those
00:34:32 those committees in um of those representatives in a moment we're not in any way suggesting that the review is being conducted in bad faith we're not suggesting that those representatives are not doing anything other than trying
00:34:44 are not doing anything other than trying to put forward what a responsible use but if there is not a voice in relation to that particular aspect of her review then there is a danger of matters being lost so I meant to this so that we have
00:34:57 lost so I meant to this so that we have an understanding there are various working groups effectively subcommittees of the Hackett review they have different names the golden thread group which is really as I understand it designed to provide the
00:35:09 understand it designed to provide the way forward in the future that is populated we would understand of course by the National Fire Chiefs Council local authority Building Control the construction products Association is
00:35:20 construction products Association is there but little representation it seems by way of residence regulations and guidance chaired by the construction products Association and we can go
00:35:31 products Association and we can go through these Committees of which there are I think seven maybe it's six and there is not at the moment a full representation there is a residence
00:35:43 representation there is a residence voice committee that is working group five and that is chaired by mr. Hartley of the tenants and residence organizations of England so there is a particular committee that is designed to
00:35:55 particular committee that is designed to deal with residents voice that though we suspect is not going to be sufficient to understand and take onboard the voice that is required across those committees supported properly with expert advice
00:36:07 supported properly with expert advice where necessary so that a contribution can be made from those people that have gone through this and either lost loved ones or survived we know that that
00:36:19 ones or survived we know that that review will be feeding its findings into this inquiry not because it is anything other than plainly obvious but because it paid 14 of the first part of the Hackett report published in December of
00:36:31 Hackett report published in December of 2017 paragraph 1.2 the following is said as set out this is by Dame Judith as out in the reviews terms of reference
00:36:42 out in the reviews terms of reference published on 30th of August this review is running in parallel with the work of the ground fault our inquiry the review is independent and covers the system of regulation for all high-rise rents at
00:36:54 regulation for all high-rise rents at residential buildings it will however provide useful background and input into the inquiry there is an urgent need therefore for our grandfather core participants to have a real voice within
00:37:06 participants to have a real voice within the next section of the Hackett report this
00:37:09 this we suggest means much more than a relatively casual conversation no matter how well meant with some residents or residents association there is a need we
00:37:21 residents association there is a need we suggest for residents of tower blocks and in particular our core participants to let it be known what they would think of the priorities that are being set by the hackett report and whether they go
00:37:32 the hackett report and whether they go far enough in suggesting change for the future now we've opened our discussions with the hackett review team after of course we have properly been unable to
00:37:43 course we have properly been unable to buy the the grant of funding through this inquiry and the formation of our teams and we have been invited I think overnight to have a half-hour discussion with them over the next week we are going to obviously take up that
00:37:56 we are going to obviously take up that invitation and we will be discussing these matters with them again I have no doubt whatsoever that the Hackett review team is working hard to make recommendation that may change the
00:38:09 recommendation that may change the landscape of fire regulations in the future and it would be difficult if not impossible to criticize Dame Judith harshly when she has already said that the current system of fire regulations are not fit for purpose nevertheless a
00:38:23 are not fit for purpose nevertheless a mistake may be about to be made here now we saw the dangers of mistakes being made on consultations during the process for the refurbishment of the ground for tower now residents were consulted about
00:38:36 tower now residents were consulted about the potential refurbishment those consultations were to extol the thermal efficiency of putting cladding on the ground filled Tower sadly no resident was told that the
00:38:49 sadly no resident was told that the thermally efficient cladding could also be a thermally efficient fire risk on the 14th of May of 2012 at the Mermoz tower in Rue de France the fire spread
00:39:00 tower in Rue de France the fire spread through the aluminium polyethylene polyethylene composite cladding a second story far origin leading to rapid all vertical flame spreading to the top of
00:39:11 vertical flame spreading to the top of the building within minutes on the 29th of May so something like two weeks later at the Granville Tower evening meeting to discuss the refurbishment there was a
00:39:22 to discuss the refurbishment there was a discussion about cladding this was a number this is one of a number of consultations about the refurbishment and about the apparent advantages of cladding despite the fact that this was
00:39:35 cladding despite the fact that this was only shortly after a cladding fire had taken place there were no reference to safety issues concerning cladding at that time the hackett review has also
00:39:47 that time the hackett review has also attracted some criticism from the communities and local government committee where the suggestion made by that committee perhaps understand Lee was that in the future it might not be
00:40:01 was that in the future it might not be right to continue to permit the use of combustible materials on high-rise buildings a sensible suggestion from that committee and one that we obviously agree with so in the future when phase 1
00:40:14 agree with so in the future when phase 1 of this inquiry is complete and the hackett review will be complete as well that report will be fed into this inquiry we need at this stage to make
00:40:25 inquiry we need at this stage to make you aware that there is a danger in the hackett review not having the ability to receive the properly supported views of people from the tower and the outside area there is a danger that their voices
00:40:38 area there is a danger that their voices will be lost in relation to her report we will argue throughout this inquiry that residents of tower blocks can be trusted to have access to all
00:40:49 trusted to have access to all information they need so that they can make choices we will argue that the system of fire regulation in this country must be viewed from the perspective of residents and that their
00:41:01 perspective of residents and that their voices must be heard as to what level of risk if any they will be prepared to live with and to bring their children up within if we leave aside this question of access into
00:41:13 leave aside this question of access into the report being drafted by Dame Judith then there is a danger that a report will be provided to this inquiry within which they will not have had a say and I've got no doubt at all that there will
00:41:25 I've got no doubt at all that there will then be submissions being made on the basis of that report well you heard what Dame Judith have said we can hear it ourselves we can hear the reference to the page numbers as it would be delivered to you sir and it will have
00:41:37 delivered to you sir and it will have accepted or become accepted into the industry status quo the recommendation she is being made now we don't need to dwell too long but let's remind
00:41:50 dwell too long but let's remind ourselves what happened the last time little more than bear consultation was paid to rental tower residents we ended up here my brief today and targets have
00:42:03 up here my brief today and targets have been to address witness care and practical engagement with core participants this is directed at practical engagement with the inquiry issues as set out within your terms of
00:42:14 issues as set out within your terms of reference and mirrored by those within a hackett review it seems we are making progress
00:42:20 progress it's tempting in my notes in fact say don't regard us as a nuisance please use us to give this inquiry the best chance of the best possible outcome what we are certainly seeing in our engagement with
00:42:32 certainly seeing in our engagement with counsel to the inquiry and his team and solicitor the inquiry that we are making progress in that way but this is not something that we can do in one go and so when I ask you next would you please
00:42:43 so when I ask you next would you please be prepared to give Dame Judith a ring we ask it in all seriousness we invite you to discuss with Dame Judas and her team what we can do by providing
00:42:55 team what we can do by providing practical engagement within that review and we need to do so now before the opportunity is lost so those are our submissions thank you very much
00:43:12 now mr. Maxwell Scott I think you're next on the agenda
00:43:25 I'm sorry it's a bit tricky getting in and out of your seats as amended
00:43:37 yes yes mr. chairman my name is James Maxwell Scott and I represent the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea instructed by DWF there is nothing in my
00:43:48 instructed by DWF there is nothing in my written submissions which I need or wish to develop further however I hope it may assist if I comment very briefly and I do mean very briefly on some issues
00:43:59 do mean very briefly on some issues which have been canvassed this morning and I propose just a stick to three and they are disclosure the inquest function issue and the phase one phase two split
00:44:10 issue and the phase one phase two split yes taking those each in turn as to disclosure as I stated at the last hearing in December we are sympathetic
00:44:21 hearing in December we are sympathetic to submissions being made about the importance of a disclosure process being transparent and of the need for participation to be informed by
00:44:32 participation to be informed by disclosure in order for it to be meaningful I turn been to the inquest function we respectfully agree but it would be undesirable for there to be a
00:44:45 would be undesirable for there to be a need for inquest to be held after the inquiry has completed its work and reported and in particular undesirable if any such inquests required to
00:44:56 if any such inquests required to bereaved survivors or residents to give evidence again so so we leave it to you and your team to decide how best to achieve the sensible aim of minimizing
00:45:09 achieve the sensible aim of minimizing the need for inquest to be held in future yes and then thirdly on the phase one phase two split my position has in
00:45:20 one phase two split my position has in substance not changed from the last procedural hearing all court participants would benefit from as much certainty as possible about which issues
00:45:31 certainty as possible about which issues will be addressed in the phase one evidence which will be addressed in the phase one report which may in some instances be a different matter and whether the views expressed in the phase
00:45:44 whether the views expressed in the phase one report will be provisional or final however we recognize that there will inevitably be a need for flexibility and we have complete confidence but any changes in plans will
00:45:56 confidence but any changes in plans will be handled in a way that is fair to all core participants so unless I can assist on any other topics phase of my session today no I think not and thank you very
00:46:07 today no I think not and thank you very much making your position clear on this Thank You mr. garrow's
00:46:26 take your time
00:46:34 so good afternoon my name is James a gross I represent the Kensington and Chelsea tenant management organisation I'm here today with Richard Crockford from Kennedy's law and Alice Jarrett who
00:46:46 from Kennedy's law and Alice Jarrett who was here on the last occasion so we made three brief written submissions which were given to the inquiry on the 7th of
00:46:58 were given to the inquiry on the 7th of March and I know that all the core participants have had a chance to see all of those submissions and so we don't intend making any length and further or
00:47:11 intend making any length and further or all submissions today of course if there is any matter which is arisen as a result of the oral submissions or indeed the written submissions which should be made by the parties this morning and
00:47:22 made by the parties this morning and this afternoon we are more than happy to to address those and answer those as best we can so far as the scope is concerned and again very briefly and in
00:47:34 concerned and again very briefly and in relation broadly to the question raised by mr. Friedman as to whether the inquiry should should address inquest type questions as we have said previously the TMO is keen that the
00:47:48 previously the TMO is keen that the inquiry examines the causes of the fire as thoroughly as possible consistent of course with your statutory function under the Inquiry Act 2005 and contained
00:48:01 under the Inquiry Act 2005 and contained convention law so to that extent we certainly support the submissions which were made earlier today sir so far as disclosure is concerned we hear what has
00:48:13 disclosure is concerned we hear what has been said by a number of the parties this morning in relation to disclosure of course the TMO seeks to continue to assist the inquiry by providing full and frank disclosure as and when required
00:48:26 frank disclosure as and when required indeed so you know that we have provided a very large number of documents already throughout the course of this inquiry those are our submissions and si consists of a particular point I don't
00:48:40 consists of a particular point I don't think so thank you I mean I've read what you say
00:48:43 you say and missions you had a question about witness evidence and whether it would be restricted yes we I think the answer is
00:48:55 restricted yes we I think the answer is probably not but I'd like to keep things open for the time being yes we address the question of witness evidence in terms of the in terms of B SRS and the
00:49:09 terms of the in terms of B SRS and the and the firefighters and sought to we hope make some effective distinction between the type of issues which might be dealt with in phase one and those that might be dealt with in phase two we
00:49:21 that might be dealt with in phase two we appreciate that there is liable to be some crossover but so we've made the submissions and we hope that there is some effective way to ensure that the
00:49:33 some effective way to ensure that the witnesses give evidence only once but in a way which is consistent with the with the phases as you have articulated them yes we would not seek to shut out at any
00:49:46 yes we would not seek to shut out at any witnesses evidence whenever it's taken you might have to bank it for phase two so to speak if it was clearly phase 2 the phase 2 relevance yes no I don't I I
00:50:00 the phase 2 relevance yes no I don't I I don't think it does so I think a good example might for example be complaints for example that's a complaint was made is likely to arise in phase 1 to some
00:50:14 is likely to arise in phase 1 to some extent at least the the way in which the complaint was dealt with is more likely to arise in the context of phase 2 so there may be some distinction along those lines yes all right
00:50:28 those lines yes all right well otherwise they don't think there's anything I need to continue for is that I attend exciting thank you very thank you very much indeed
00:50:39 no miss studs here for the mayor is that right yes so I am aunt stud I appear on
00:50:52 right yes so I am aunt stud I appear on behalf the mayor of London yeah I'm instructed by solicitors Jonathan Lloyd and an account live from Transport for London so I don't intend to repeat obviously what's been written
00:51:04 to repeat obviously what's been written but can I say this that in order for this inquiry to confidently fulfill its terms of reference the mayor would endorse the representation that's been
00:51:17 endorse the representation that's been made by others that effective participation from the bereaved survivors and residents is essential and this should be a priority in all of the decision-making processes adopted by
00:51:29 decision-making processes adopted by your inquiry and we would urge you to proceed with as much transparency as possible in order to alais any suggestions that the process is ignoring the needs of those most affected by
00:51:41 the needs of those most affected by these events we welcome the concession in relation to the position statements because they've now been disclosed and relativity and we also welcome the very
00:51:54 relativity and we also welcome the very careful consideration that has been given in relation to pen portraits these are clearly very positive steps and from listening to the representations made
00:52:05 listening to the representations made this morning they've obviously had a profound impact on the confidence of those most directly affected can I just say one or two things about these pen
00:52:17 say one or two things about these pen portraits we would urge you sir to take account of the submission of mr. Thomas QC in relation to the pen portrait and the way that that evidence is likely to
00:52:29 the way that that evidence is likely to be given we would suggest perhaps that consideration should be given to a formal opening of some sort of the inquiry to take place in advance of
00:52:41 inquiry to take place in advance of those pen portraits in order to give appropriate formality dignity and respect
00:52:48 respect to that evidence before it is given and in relation to what mr. Steen has said this morning it may be this afternoon rather it may be that those hearings could take place in a location closer to
00:53:01 could take place in a location closer to the site of the Glen Paul tower because it's likely to be an isolated part of the evidence and it may be that in that way more of those wishing to attend and
00:53:13 way more of those wishing to attend and support those people who are going to give evidence before you could attend and provide that support moving to venue
00:53:24 and provide that support moving to venue obviously the mayor of London will assist in any way he can in relation to venues it sounded from the submission made by your council this morning that fairly extensive inquiries have already
00:53:36 fairly extensive inquiries have already been made but obviously there only needs to be contact doing our best to find
00:53:51 to be contact doing our best to find somewhere else a great deal of time if the mayor's got something to offer I'd
00:54:05 the mayor's got something to offer I'd love to be able to pull that rabbit out of the Hat but certainly we can we can have communication with your team and see whether there are any alternatives
00:54:17 see whether there are any alternatives can I say this I think the the assistance that your council gave this morning in relation to transparency on what inquiries have been made may be very very helpful to those for whom this
00:54:30 very very helpful to those for whom this has been a very significant issue and lastly the mayor would support representations from various legal teams in relation to the provision of
00:54:41 in relation to the provision of assistance certainly in your protocol you seem to identify vulnerable as being much wider than that provided for under
00:54:54 much wider than that provided for under section 16 of the youth and justice a Criminal Evidence Act which of course is restricted to criminal proceedings in any event so your discretion discretion is much wider than that and we would also support the submission
00:55:07 we would also support the submission that any anxieties felt by witnesses should be alleviated as far as reasonably practicable there is an inevitable anxiety in anybody who has to give evidence simulations these
00:55:18 give evidence simulations these proceedings thank you very much indeed
00:55:27 that's disturbing
00:55:33 sorry it's a good afternoon no milord I'm Jim Sturm and I act for CEP architectural facades I'm here with
00:55:44 architectural facades I'm here with Helen born of Clyde & Co and you've got our written submissions and everybody else has there aren't there are a few things I'd like to develop however because we are concerned about the time
00:55:55 because we are concerned about the time from the disclosure of the underlying material and the experts report we accept and acknowledge and wouldn't for one seconds seek to deviate from the position that cross-examination is for
00:56:06 position that cross-examination is for you in the first instance and your team but it is obviously very important that we are in a position that if we're going to have any input into the expert evidence that we are up to speed as soon
00:56:17 evidence that we are up to speed as soon as possible and disclosure was one of the items we had it Illustrated and I'm not going to try to I go to try not to repeat what's been said by others I'm
00:56:28 repeat what's been said by others I'm certainly not going to speak to my note but the experts for the inquiry have had five months and have been on the site when I arrived this morning I was told
00:56:39 when I arrived this morning I was told that our experts couldn't go on this site because it's currently too dangerous after the winter so I was very relieved to hear that there are in fact visits being made available and if
00:56:50 visits being made available and if that's only to the exterior and I've misunderstood what is now possible we are concerned that if our expert cannot get in to the site we're at a huge disadvantage and these proceedings of
00:57:02 disadvantage and these proceedings of course have to be fair to all so I will liaise with Metropolitan Police today before I leave the building yes you've heard already the police are willing to make the site available
00:57:15 willing to make the site available providing it's safe to do absolutely and I think it's a matter of speaking to them absolutely and we will do that and whenever we're all together or whenever
00:57:27 whenever we're all together or whenever we speak on the phone progress is made but um we are concerned about disclosure and how that affects timetabling because if we receive this material shortly
00:57:38 if we receive this material shortly before Easter and it's going to be very substantial and at some point our expert needs to go in it is highly unlikely in reality that on the 4th of June we will
00:57:49 reality that on the 4th of June we will have an informed opinion from our own expert and I was a bit concerned when I heard Mr Millett conclude this morning with a proposed timetable where the
00:58:00 with a proposed timetable where the experts would very early in the proceedings given oral and visual presentation of their conclusions so far we wish to reserve our position on that because it may be that would be unfair
00:58:11 because it may be that would be unfair in all the circumstances we wait to see what that proposal is I don't think the
00:58:23 what that proposal is I don't think the reports will obviously be if it's in
00:58:35 reports will obviously be if it's in effect no more than an opening then any unfairness can be cured by the experts being called to give their evidence later exactly and we had indicated that in our written submissions that we felt
00:58:47 in our written submissions that we felt that the experts should be called late in the day and we would respectfully submit that if we could be assured that the experts weren't going to be called until July at the earliest we would hope
00:59:00 until July at the earliest we would hope to be able to work to that and that would no doubt help the concerns that were shared at paragraph 20 of mr. Mansfield and mr. Thomas's joint submissions as well about the time to
00:59:11 submissions as well about the time to get on top of that aspects it would be very unlikely that we would be able to deal with any expert evidence ourselves in any opening that we dealt with one
00:59:23 in any opening that we dealt with one final point I was approached by one or two others including counsel for Ryder and who does not have a speaking slot and I said I'd raise this in the course in the core contractor well on this occasion it's
00:59:36 contractor well on this occasion it's the reversal of roles yes mr. Miller seem to be suggesting that one of the experts now might well be trespassing from what was going to be her report
00:59:49 from what was going to be her report that dealt miss lane phase one was a preliminary report on identification of fire protection measures but now her evidence appears to be trespassing into phase two that would come evidence as
01:00:02 phase two that would come evidence as relevant
01:00:03 relevant absolutely and and we there's no reason is there why we shouldn't use that part which is relevant to what we want to decide at phase one absolutely the point
01:00:14 decide at phase one absolutely the point I think we all need to make though is make this on behalf of riders is that that might make our experts take still further for us to make a decision as to whether we're going to be making any application or to cross-examine through
01:00:27 application or to cross-examine through mr. millet or indeed through yourself sir and so we submit if if the experts could be timetabled for July after all those directly affected by this tragedy
01:00:38 those directly affected by this tragedy had given evidence that might solve all these practical problems yeah well it's a very good point thank you nothing else to say thank you thank you very much indeed
01:00:50 mr. Walsh who's here for the NF EPA yes
01:01:06 yes good-afternoon says Stephen Walsh who as you know together with Sarah affair appears for the London Fire Brigade which is an easier way of saying the longer version of the LA PPA sir you
01:01:19 the longer version of the LA PPA sir you have written submissions they are very brief and obviously I have no intention of repeating them now suffice to say given the obvious and perfectly proper
01:01:32 given the obvious and perfectly proper concentration on disclosure issues this morning the LF EPA the LFP has been carrying out a very thorough and timely
01:01:46 disclosure exercise from the earliest point last year it continues to go on it's being done with expedition and it's thorough mostly through the MPS but also
01:01:59 thorough mostly through the MPS but also with GTI as well and obviously that is continuing will continue into the future I just want to confine my submissions to one issue really here and that concerns
01:02:11 one issue really here and that concerns the continuing concern which the fire brigade has for the welfare of its staff that is to say of course firefighters and others who may be required to give
01:02:22 and others who may be required to give evidence during the inquiry we have discussed matters with the fire brigade Union and with the association of fire officers and where appropriate we will
01:02:35 officers and where appropriate we will liaise with both of those bodies to provide the best support we can to include counseling both before during and after the inquiry in the evidential
01:02:49 and after the inquiry in the evidential section obviously that contact will be restricted only to those obviously permitted matters including familiarization and counseling and so on but we need the help and support of the
01:03:04 but we need the help and support of the inquiry itself if that support to firefighters is to be provided with the greatest effect and what I mean by that of essentially is that the lfp understands and takes it
01:03:18 is that the lfp understands and takes it to be will be been assured of this and we entirely accept it that the maximum possible prior notice of the inquiries intention to call witnesses will be
01:03:29 intention to call witnesses will be given so that a range of measures can be put in place to assist those witnesses it's quite important because there are as well as providing support and care
01:03:40 as well as providing support and care there are complex arrangements which have to be put in place with taking people off the rung we don't have to close fire stations and so on and we trust and know that we have the full
01:03:51 trust and know that we have the full cooperation of the inquiry there but just turning to something which mr. Steen touched upon about a few moments ago the lfb say that in common with the
01:04:06 ago the lfb say that in common with the essential provisions and obviously necessary provisions made for the bereaved survivors and residents who give evidence each firefighter witness
01:04:17 give evidence each firefighter witness we take it is to be afforded the range of measures provided for in the inquiries protocol for vulnerable witnesses where necessary we entirely understand the position
01:04:29 we entirely understand the position there there's very little health that I need to add to be honest save for one matter and for what it's worth the LFP also agrees that it would be undesirable
01:04:41 also agrees that it would be undesirable if it can be avoided and that's the issue we know for inquests to have to be held in addition to these proceedings if only and there are any number of reasons
01:04:52 only and there are any number of reasons because it avoids the necessity of witnesses bereaved survivors residents firefighters and others having to give traumatic evidence twice but unless
01:05:03 traumatic evidence twice but unless there's anything else I can assist you with so you just help me with this do you envisage lfb will be discussing with the firemen and liaison with us about
01:05:14 the firemen and liaison with us about who needs what the special measures yes well there are a number of difficulties about that we have been asked for example to be able to indicate which firefighters or
01:05:26 to indicate which firefighters or employees are experiencing psychological difficulties or are going through counseling now the problem with that is that counseling has been provided to
01:05:38 that counseling has been provided to firefighters and that offer has been taken up but we're not in a position to identify who has because the there is a confidentiality issue with those with
01:05:49 confidentiality issue with those with providing that care well I see that I think all I'm really seeking is some sort of confirmation but either you or
01:06:01 sort of confirmation but either you or possibly will tell us when the time comes
01:06:08 comes what sort of measures you think yes ticular firefighter will require because of course next week and in yes time well
01:06:22 of course next week and in yes time well exactly so things do change what is envisaged we hope is that sufficiently early notice of identified witnesses
01:06:33 early notice of identified witnesses will be given we will know who they are we can then speak to those witnesses we can directly ask and ascertain if they're prepared to say if they are experiencing difficulties speak to them
01:06:45 experiencing difficulties speak to them about those difficulties and then identify with them giving them the choice in the option what are the appropriate measures for them we would then come back to the inquiry to GTI and
01:06:56 then come back to the inquiry to GTI and discuss those and I would imagine it is individuals that we would take it further but it is crucial obviously that as much notice as possible is provided yes so as to be able to achieve that
01:07:07 yes so as to be able to achieve that understand that thank you very much thank you very much
01:07:14 mr. C would go next
01:07:26 laughs music
01:07:31 I represent the FPU and had the interests of the firefighter members who originated in the outcome of this enquiry I'm instructed by Gerard's to
01:07:43 enquiry I'm instructed by Gerard's to the art at Thompson solicitors I agree with the bereaved and survivor residence submissions and won't go through them
01:07:55 submissions and won't go through them individually CSI relief and please just take it that I support those they are part of this course inquiry I would just
01:08:08 part of this course inquiry I would just add this that from my own practice and I'm sure reflected in your own experience it is particularly difficult
01:08:19 experience it is particularly difficult to represent any aggrieved and hurt individual but to represent so many of them presents acute and special problems
01:08:30 them presents acute and special problems and I think we are all very fortunate with the high quality of representation that they represent that they bereaved
01:08:41 that they represent that they bereaved and so I'm a resident of God and should as mr. Steen offered take full advantage of that to make this inquiry a success
01:08:52 of that to make this inquiry a success so I'm hoping that the building of trust and confidence which is obviously under way is going to be a two-way process
01:09:06 extending that a little bit firefighters as I said on the last occasion of people to and they have also been traumatized the FPU is in discussions with the lfb
01:09:17 the FPU is in discussions with the lfb the police and foa to support firefighters through this process this is a very anxiety raising process coming
01:09:29 is a very anxiety raising process coming to give evidence that this inquiry I endorse what tests evils and said in that context about the welfare of firefighters and the FPU is trying and
01:09:40 firefighters and the FPU is trying and will continue to try to work with the other
01:09:42 other to that to that end there will of course be some firefighters who want to see either the other to be or the FPU but not both and we certainly hope to
01:09:56 not both and we certainly hope to cooperate by advising the GTI team if there are any special measures that appear to us to be required that haven't already been picked up as mr. Wolfe said
01:10:09 already been picked up as mr. Wolfe said things do change it's a dynamic process
01:10:13 lui Brennan QC who represents the fire Officers Association has been kind enough to say he agrees with a lot of my written submissions and as really it's provided something in writing but you're
01:10:25 provided something in writing but you're right he pretty much adopted what you'd said yep and I'm very grateful to that for the fur that we've also been able to discuss a few additional points that have arisen today and say that he has
01:10:37 have arisen today and say that he has been able to take instructions and all the detail he's advised me that he he supports what I'm about to say on those those matters as well because I might not say it right and it's up to him in a
01:10:49 not say it right and it's up to him in a minute whether he does and so I won't repeat our written submissions um but I take it that you've read those yes what
01:11:03 take it that you've read those yes what I'd like to do is do focus on a few points firstly firefighter witness statements then I want to move on to clarification needed on some of the
01:11:15 clarification needed on some of the disclosure then on to timetabling then on to article 2 and then toxicity and
01:11:27 on to article 2 and then toxicity and finally a few points about the evidence of the FPU intends to produce and to ask about synchronizing timings we've been given a
01:11:39 synchronizing timings we've been given a lot of footage but we haven't got any synchronization of the frame so dealing with first of all the firefighter witnesses statements endorse what mr. wolf says we do need
01:11:51 endorse what mr. wolf says we do need the list of firefighters assuming the inquiry intends to call as soon as possible
01:11:58 possible it appears there are a hundred and eight or there abouts firefighter witnesses but I 500 I'm me also control staff and yes
01:12:07 yes Farr Safety Department officers if I call them firefighter witnesses 108 whose statements may go on the record that's obviously an awful lot to read
01:12:19 that's obviously an awful lot to read we've we also wish to read the other ones that decision has been made not to go on the record in case we want to make a submission that they ought to so we we
01:12:32 a submission that they ought to so we we ask that the FPU be shown all of the firefighter witness statements taken by the police so that we can address those points there may be some that we think ought to
01:12:44 there may be some that we think ought to be called that the GTI team haven't decides to brawl we ask for disclosure of of those witness
01:12:55 ask for disclosure of of those witness statements as soon as possible because really at this stage every day counts it's an enormous task ahead of us in April to try and read all of these on
01:13:06 April to try and read all of these on top of all of the disclosure and the experts reports and so I think you can take it that we're anxious to get them out as long as we can and there are certain practical difficulties which
01:13:18 certain practical difficulties which mister minute I understand that but it seems from what he said as though they were several tranches that that were ahead of others and and if it's possible
01:13:29 ahead of others and and if it's possible to do it in a staggered form then there's no reason to keep us waiting for it all when we could get going on some
01:13:43 yeah the FPU takes the view that we have to meet with as many of of the members of the FB you who have given statements
01:13:54 of the FB you who have given statements to the police and whom it's intended either to put their statement on the record was called them as witnesses I've set out the purpose of those meetings in paragraph 2 G of the written submissions
01:14:08 paragraph 2 G of the written submissions we will prioritize those I think read this I think you may need to think a
01:14:21 this I think you may need to think a little bit about G 3 yes indeed I mean we have spoke about G 3 earlier about the need indeed I had a very long
01:14:37 the need indeed I had a very long conversation with mr. Miller yesterday oh good it lasted about an hour and a half and he did make several references including section 35 - we have section
01:14:49 including section 35 - we have section 35 - very much in mind we also have our professional obligations to this inquiry as lawyers and to our clients we have
01:15:02 as lawyers and to our clients we have all of those obligations in mind and there is absolutely no intention on the part of the FPU to distort or alter any witness statement we can't anyway the
01:15:14 witness statement we can't anyway the witness statements have been given to the police they're not going to be released to us until they already signed off there's absolutely no question of the FBO of being involved in any such
01:15:26 the FBO of being involved in any such process all we seek to do is to have the opportunity for those of our members who were going to go through the ordeal of giving evidence in a public inquiry to
01:15:38 giving evidence in a public inquiry to have any points of clarification that arise on their witness statements put to them in meeting a private meeting so
01:15:49 them in meeting a private meeting so they can have the opportunity to clarify those
01:15:52 those without being on the witness-box well we're not going to get into debate about that in detail this afternoon but I do urge you to think very carefully about we have and what would propose and
01:16:04 we have and what would propose and Gallup that we have we have thought all proposed to do is to give safeguards we've already offered both the police and the London Fire Brigade the opportunity to sit in on those meetings
01:16:17 opportunity to sit in on those meetings for reasons which we understand the police and and the RFP are loathe to to do to go down that road that's a matter
01:16:29 do to go down that road that's a matter for them they have both signed a memorandum of understanding the fbu is not a party to that Memorandum of Understanding we have a different concern here our concern is for the welfare of the
01:16:43 our concern is for the welfare of the witnesses and and that set out in paragraph 2 G and also that it helps them to give their best evidence we want to clarify points of misunderstanding
01:16:55 to clarify points of misunderstanding not to alter evidence certainly not to distort it may I explain that anecdotally and of course all the information that comes to me comes anecdotally at the moment because we
01:17:07 anecdotally at the moment because we haven't had disclosure of any witness table but anecdotally I am informed that firefighters who have given statements to the police have been unhappy with the
01:17:18 to the police have been unhappy with the written statement that is the product of that rather lengthy video interview so what they are they undergo a video interview with the police which is a very lengthy discussion and have
01:17:29 very lengthy discussion and have recorded then somebody has to condense that into a into a witness state and in the condensing of it into a witness statement there's a lot of scope for
01:17:40 statement there's a lot of scope for misunderstanding and we've heard anecdotally that firefighters are not always happy that the person who's condensed it summarized it into a
01:17:54 condensed it summarized it into a witness statement has understood what the firefighter meant to say or did say and of course the interview so it's it's largely a question of understanding the
01:18:05 largely a question of understanding the nuances of firefighting and giving the firefighter an opportunity to deal with points of clarification without standing out on the witness box in the public glare now the safeguards that we have in
01:18:17 glare now the safeguards that we have in mind are firstly to give a firefighter a handout which and take them through it which gives us structure and everybody
01:18:29 which gives us structure and everybody can see it we could serve that on the police serve it on the GTI inquiry serve it on the London Fire Brigade it's not yet finalized it does need to be finalized it will be quickly to have to
01:18:44 finalized it will be quickly to have to only ask open questions of the of the witness with a view to clarifying any any points that we consider need clarifying we will digitally record
01:18:56 clarifying we will digitally record every such meeting and preserve the record so that anyone can interrogate what was said in the course of the meeting that of course will include the
01:19:07 meeting that of course will include the police and the guiding principle will be to clarify not to contaminate very sensitive of that issue the meeting the
01:19:20 sensitive of that issue the meeting the whole meeting will be conducted by a solicitor from thompson's and the end product of the meeting will either be nothing at all because there's nothing to add or they'll be a further witness
01:19:33 to add or they'll be a further witness statement which will be given to the police in the GTI team all there'll be questions for us to submit to the to counsel to the inquiry five working days
01:19:44 counsel to the inquiry five working days before the witness go to the witness box so those are the that if you like the substantive witness evidence end-products there will be other end
01:19:56 end-products there will be other end products as it's clear from what I've said in the inner submissions we can assess whether any of those witnesses may be ill or consider any special measures that might be needed offer them reassurance
01:20:08 might be needed offer them reassurance and advice about any claims that they may have answer any of their questions introduce the team's let them know what supports available and so on so we consider that we cannot represent
01:20:22 so we consider that we cannot represent the FPU or the interests of the firefighter members of the FPU who are involved in this inquiry process without meeting them so that's what we
01:20:34 without meeting them so that's what we intend to do but please accept from me that we are acutely sensitive of not only section 35 2 but all our other professional obligations and this will be an open process which will be subject
01:20:46 be an open process which will be subject to scrutiny that brings me back to the trust and confidence point I made earlier I do ask you to have a trust and
01:20:58 earlier I do ask you to have a trust and confidence in in us in this part of the process moving on clarification is needed on disclosure of the transcripts
01:21:12 needed on disclosure of the transcripts of 999 calls mr. millet has explained and there are two types of disclosure one is to the caller and those who were in the caller's presence and type two
01:21:25 in the caller's presence and type two appears to be broader typically all CPS have understood that correctly and it may be that disclosure to all deceit
01:21:37 may be that disclosure to all deceit these answers my my point but I just want to clarify I would hope that one of those present would be the control room
01:21:49 those present would be the control room operator who had received the call so that in in every case where transcript is provided to the person who made the call that it would also be provided to
01:22:01 call that it would also be provided to the control room operator who took the call
01:22:14 timetabling a big ask for flexibility mr. millet has explained how much work is involved after receipt of witness
01:22:26 is involved after receipt of witness statements by the GTI team it's daunting to contemplate the amount of work that's involved by us I'm sure everybody in this room on receipt of the information
01:22:38 this room on receipt of the information that's going to be coming our way at the end of March and into the earth into early April so there may well be slippage it's highly likely that there
01:22:50 slippage it's highly likely that there will be and so when the deadline is given of 18th of May for opening statements I would ask that there be flexibility on that I appreciate that the team
01:23:01 the team the GTI team have got to read and digest opening statements but I think we're going to need every single day to get through the workload that we've got well
01:23:12 through the workload that we've got well you do your best to get I think that Santa so that is entirely foreseeable that there will be such difficulty oh
01:23:23 that there will be such difficulty oh you shouldn't be too pessimistic I think a bit of a bit of realism goes a long way there's an area and I do know myself
01:23:39 okay article two broadly the FPU supports the desire to avoid duplication just one point to add mr. Miller made
01:23:51 just one point to add mr. Miller made the point that the Chief Coroner hasn't asked the you the the Chairman sir to to answer the inquest question and I have
01:24:02 answer the inquest question and I have no idea what discussions have gone on between you and the Chief Coroner but all I would say is it would be a travesty if the opportunity was missed to have those discussions while there's
01:24:14 to have those discussions while there's still time to involve the Chief Coroner if if he wants to be involved in in the grand full town enquiry and there's all sorts of possibilities which are way
01:24:28 sorts of possibilities which are way outside of my responsibilities to even even even mention but for example sitting on the panel is one possibility
01:24:40 sitting on the panel is one possibility moving on to another issue toxicity I feel a little remiss because mr. Mansfield's did raise this at the last
01:24:51 Mansfield's did raise this at the last hearing and and I didn't then realize the significance of it but he it has been raised again today forcefully and of course suddenly the pennies dropped
01:25:02 of course suddenly the pennies dropped it's not only going to be relevant to the cause of death in some cases and to the effect if any on the wider environment but it's also going to be
01:25:14 environment but it's also going to be relevant to the question of the long-term health effects on those who were in Granville tower exposed to poisonous gases and they will have very
01:25:27 poisonous gases and they will have very real concerns about how it's going to affect them it's developing science this field of cancer that content and the effect of inhalation of the
01:25:38 and the effect of inhalation of the toxic gases it's very much an expert field and we strongly support the application for or at least the the submission in favor of calling a getting
01:25:51 submission in favor of calling a getting expert evidence on their an expert was asked on a related our sorry of an unrelated matter about the effect on
01:26:05 unrelated matter about the effect on firefighters of a smoke inhalation and she offered the question were the firefighters from Greenville tower our blood tested in the immediate aftermath
01:26:17 blood tested in the immediate aftermath and of course I don't think anybody was alive to the possibility of blood testing immediately afterwards but at the very least there's there's a
01:26:28 the very least there's there's a recommendation there for the future but it may yet be possible and only an expert would be able to say whether the effect the long-term effects can be gauged by reference to the work that was
01:26:41 gauged by reference to the work that was going on the use of BA sets or the non-use of be a sense and the emulation of gases moving on the FPU intends to
01:26:54 of gases moving on the FPU intends to submit witness statements to to use for phase one from the following witnesses metric general secretary of the FPU he intends to deal with recommendations but
01:27:11 intends to deal with recommendations but he's not going to deal with all of them there have as you know because we've submitted that shit'll been an enormous number of recommendations made that may have a bearing on ground for tower in the past mattracks going to concentrate
01:27:25 the past mattracks going to concentrate on those which he considers are highly likely to be relevant to phase one of earth grateful steve wright is going to give witness statement on the progress
01:27:37 give witness statement on the progress of the FPU investigation into this serious
01:27:41 serious incident and Dave civet is the fun FPU expert of fire safety and and he'll give a witness statement on those aspects
01:27:53 a witness statement on those aspects that that appears cool within the issues that you've you've identified who wants to look at so it won't be the whole of the Phase two issue it'll just be those issues that are relevant to phase line
01:28:08 and finally synchronizing timings the footage is really helpful particularly T I see camera footage and so on but it's
01:28:21 I see camera footage and so on but it's very difficult to put it into a context without a means of synchronizing the times so I understand the NFB have told me that the two of the toc cameras are
01:28:32 me that the two of the toc cameras are about an hour exactly an hour out so now we can work that out but that sort of information should be available to all core participants so that they can readily see the
01:28:45 that they can readily see the significance of any footage that they've got and time it work must be going on with that with the police work must be going on with that with the lfb and I
01:28:56 going on with that with the lfb and I would ask the if the inquiry could with each piece of footage I think mr. Weatherbee has already asked for a schedule of footage if that
01:29:09 for a schedule of footage if that schedule could include any adjustments on timing need to be made that been most helpful in that context because of the amount of work that's got to be done I
01:29:20 amount of work that's got to be done I do ask that core participants be given lists and indices in in a word or other processable format because we will also
01:29:34 processable format because we will also need to use that list to make comments and to and to make suggestions and to have it in PDF form is is a great limitation yes thank you very much all
01:29:47 limitation yes thank you very much all right thank you very much indeed no mr. Lucic mr. chairman mr. licit asked me to tell you or inform you that
01:30:00 asked me to tell you or inform you that he does not wish to say anything right he must have changed his mind since he asked to be put on the speaking I'm still alright can't complain no and therefore it
01:30:12 can't complain no and therefore it leaves me to make this special
01:30:41 leaves me to make this special application we need to come here to do it I'll vacate the podium thank you
01:31:01 so you have to come up here to make sure you're on TV yes may please you sir
01:31:15 you're on TV yes may please you sir Stephen Hoffman instructed by DLA Piper on behalf of our conic architectural products SAS may I begin by expressing our deep regret in
01:31:29 begin by expressing our deep regret in relation to the occurrence of the fire with all its consequences including especially the terrible loss of life and our deepest sympathy to the bereaved to
01:31:41 our deepest sympathy to the bereaved to the survivors and to all others affected our clients make clear in their position statement in which we were invited simply to set out the role we played
01:31:53 simply to set out the role we played that we supplied certain cladding materials to others whose role it was in turn to fabricate them for the purpose of use at rental Tower we may not have
01:32:06 of use at rental Tower we may not have been the only suppliers of such cladding material we had not intended to lengthen this hearing by making submissions to you but wanted now as you've kindly
01:32:19 you but wanted now as you've kindly assented to to address you briefly simply to make you aware that in relation to the aural submissions of Moe's bar wise not foreshadowed in
01:32:30 Moe's bar wise not foreshadowed in writing there will be a significant issue the issue will not be as to the fact that the core of the cladding supplied by us was not of limited
01:32:42 supplied by us was not of limited combust ability clearly that was apparent to those concerned the issue will be as to the requirements of the
01:32:53 will be as to the requirements of the regulatory regime and as to the accuracy of what you've been told that the regime requires the use of material which was not of limited combustibility
01:33:05 not of limited combustibility did not in itself give rise to a breach of the regime to establish such a breach would involve considering a much wider range of factors we don't intend to say
01:33:20 range of factors we don't intend to say anymore at this stage we would like the opportunity to see and consider the expert evidence and having done so we will address matters further in our opening statement do you a mere six
01:33:33 opening statement do you a mere six weeks after receipt of what we anticipate will be many hundreds of pages of technical material but in the meantime we're very grateful for the opportunity to make this brief set of comments thank you thank you very much
01:33:46 comments thank you thank you very much yes mr. minute I apologize to mr. sterlin for not introducing him as I should have done mr. chairman on the
01:33:59 should have done mr. chairman on the list is closing submissions from me having heard the oral submissions this morning I wasn't proposing to make any closing submissions to you I would only do so if there was anything to clarify
01:34:12 do so if there was anything to clarify or to correct what I would do is Curtis to clarify or correct perhaps two things both of which were said by mr. seaward first of all it is not right that we
01:34:23 first of all it is not right that we have a list of 108 firefighters ready to as it were call that process the process of identifying which firefighters we wish to call is a continuing one we
01:34:36 wish to call is a continuing one we certainly have not made any decisions certainly not final decisions as to who we wish to call and who we do not we we will only be may only be making that decision when we have a greater body of
01:34:50 decision when we have a greater body of firefighter statements reviewed by our internal team when they come in and as they come in as we go but I anticipate that that primary list will be ready in
01:35:01 that that primary list will be ready in the near future and we do take on board very much what mr. seaward said and and I did what mr. wolf said about the need to identify who those firefighters are
01:35:13 to identify who those firefighters are at the earliest opportunity if only for operational reasons but there are other reasons of course as well and the other thing I should just say having heard Mr
01:35:26 thing I should just say having heard Mr Siward is that we would strongly discourage the process that he advocated of having a meeting between the FPU and
01:35:39 of having a meeting between the FPU and an irrelevant firefighter for what he anticipated would be the purpose of that meeting any taking of evidence from any
01:35:50 meeting any taking of evidence from any firefighter must be done in public this is a public inquiry and in order to facilitate the full and effective participation of all core participants a private meeting in that way would not be
01:36:03 private meeting in that way would not be appropriate but those are that is the inquiry teams position in those circumstances we think it right mr. chairman that you should give a ruling on that matter and we would ask you to
01:36:14 on that matter and we would ask you to do that as soon as possible so that everybody is clear about it that is all I wish to say by way of closing submissions and this is anything further that I can assist you with mr. chairman
01:36:25 that I can assist you with mr. chairman no I think not thank you very much indeed well that brings the hearing to the conclusion and I'd like to thank you all once again for the submissions you've made both in writing and orally
01:36:37 you've made both in writing and orally I've been impressed by all the expressions of cooperation which I've absolutely no doubt are sincerely made and I hope that we can work with you in
01:36:50 and I hope that we can work with you in order to make the inquiry go forward in a successful way sometimes cooperation is best achieved by discussions between solicitors or Council or whoever it may
01:37:02 solicitors or Council or whoever it may be
01:37:02 be sometimes it can be engendered by a more public meeting of this kind but I'm sure that one way or another we can achieve that
01:37:10 that I'm very grateful in particular to those representing the bereaved survivors and residents for having divided up their submissions in the way that you have
01:37:21 submissions in the way that you have because there hasn't been a lot of overlap I don't use the word repetition it wouldn't be fair but it does mean to say that the meeting can
01:37:32 say that the meeting can hearing can be conducted efficiently and I don't get confused by three people making the same point in different ways anyway thank you all very much that's the hearing at the end of the
01:37:44 that's the hearing at the end of the hearing which
01:38:03 you