Evidence from Laura Johnson, former RBKC Housing Officer, regarding her oversight of the TMO's fire safety performance and response to Lakanal House fire recommendations. Reveals significant failures to implement coroner's recommendations and monitor fire safety compliance.
00:00:14 foreign
00:00:19 good morning everyone welcome to today's hearing
00:00:22 hearing today we're going to hear further evidence from miss laura johnson formerly of the housing department of the rbkc yes mr
00:00:33 housing department of the rbkc yes mr millet
00:00:33 millet can we ask mr johnson to come in please
00:00:45 can we ask mr johnson to come in please thanks
00:00:57 good morning miss johnson good morning take a moment to get yourself organized and then we'll get started
00:01:14 yes it's two minutes when you're ready mr chairman good morning members of the panel good morning ms johnson good morning
00:01:19 morning i'd now like to ask you some questions about lachenal house and the shepherd court fires uh first of all lachenal house um the fire as i said yesterday took
00:01:30 um the fire as i said yesterday took place on the third of july 2009. we saw judith blakeman's email to you on the 4th of july 2009 and just recapping from yesterday i
00:01:41 and just recapping from yesterday i think you agree that you became aware of that fire at the latest the next day yes
00:01:46 yes yes can we now look please at rbk304558
00:01:57 this is a letter from the lfb ron dobson to derek myers on the 9th of july 2009
00:02:07 july 2009 and derrick myers was at that time the town clerk and chief executive of rbkc wasn't he yes
00:02:15 just have a moment to look at it it's entitled social housing fire safety risk assessment and maintenance of means of escape provisions do you recognize this letter um i don't
00:02:26 do you recognize this letter um i don't remember this letter specifically but i would have seen it you would have seen it yes
00:02:31 it yes do you remember what steps you took in relation to fire risk assessments as a result
00:02:37 result i'm afraid i don't if you look at the second or third paragraph uh well second paragraph to start with he says following the tragic fire in camberwell on third july 2009 i consider
00:02:48 camberwell on third july 2009 i consider it appropriate to personally write to you to remind you of certain matters for which you are either responsible under the regulatory reform fire safety order 2005 the order
00:02:57 the order or which you have a role in enforcing and was it your understanding at the time
00:03:02 time that rbkc was either the responsible was either responsible under that enactment or had a role in enforcing it um i don't remember what i thought um in
00:03:13 um i don't remember what i thought um in july 2009 if i'm honest right so when we look at the next paragraph
00:03:18 paragraph which is a reminder of the requirement of the order for suitable and sufficient fire safety risk assessments can we just take that passage or paragraph as read
00:03:30 yes and can we take it as read that it wasn't telling you anything you didn't already know no i would have known that yes uh now moving to march 2010 can we go to rbk three zeros three
00:03:44 can we go to rbk three zeros three zero zero six zero please rbk three zeros three zero zero six zero
00:03:56 this is a joint report which you produced together with robert black
00:04:04 black and gene dantith we can see that from lower down in the document in fact let's go to that it's at page four just to show you the bottom of the document
00:04:14 document there's robert black's name your name and ms daintit's name can we go back to page one please it's entitled
00:04:24 lga report quotes extinguishing the risk a counsellor's guide to fire safety again did you draft this document yourself or was this drafted
00:04:35 yourself or was this drafted for you and you read it through and approved it um i would not have drafted it myself someone else would have drafted it in the department and i would have read it through and approved it uh now looking at the date it's for the
00:04:46 uh now looking at the date it's for the scrutiny committee 15th of march 2010 as you can see from the second heading there who is it in your department do you recall who would have done the primary drafting of this document
00:04:57 drafting of this document um could we scroll down to the end of the document please yes page four
00:05:03 um it looks as though uh because the contact officer is janice ray that actually it would have been janice ray the tmo who authored this um and then and then it would have come
00:05:14 um and then and then it would have come across to
00:05:15 across to um rbkc who would it have come to within rbkc do you remember um i don't remember it would have been in all likelihood that it would have come through pam cedric as the housing
00:05:26 through pam cedric as the housing commissioning manager at the time or it may have come to me direct i don't remember
00:05:31 remember if it had come to you direct who within tmo would you have gone to in order to correct anything or would you just have relied on what ms ray was was was writing um if i if there was
00:05:42 was was writing um if i if there was anything in there that i personally didn't agree with i may have gone back to janice ray and robert black jointly
00:05:49 jointly now let's look at page two please and look at paragraph 3.1 under the heading approach to fire risk assessments in our bkc housing stock
00:06:00 assessments in our bkc housing stock and i'll just read you for 3.1 it says initially fire risk assessments were carried out by kctmo staff however the fire brigade's requirements became increasingly stringent particularly in the immediate aftermath
00:06:11 particularly in the immediate aftermath of the serious fire at lachnal house in southwark
00:06:13 southwark where six people died therefore kctmo and rbkc negotiated with the london fire brigade to agree our new approach program and time scales for carrying out these fire risk assessments and any necessary works that they
00:06:25 and any necessary works that they identify across the council's housing stock
00:06:28 stock and then in 3.2 the london fire brigade advised in july 2009 that they considered a three-year time scale july 2012 for completion of all fire risk assessments
00:06:39 completion of all fire risk assessments and a five-year time scale july 2014 for completion of all necessary works to be reasonable uh now just looking at that
00:06:50 uh now just looking at that do you know how our bkc changed its approach to fire risk assessments following the latino house fire um rbkc didn't change its approach to fire risk assessments because they were
00:07:02 fire risk assessments because they were undertaken by kc tmo so it would have been kc tmo that then changed its approach to fire risk assessments so although we had joint responsibility they were the organization that undertook the fire
00:07:14 organization that undertook the fire risk assessments commissioned the commissioned the fire risk assessments monitored the fire risk assessments and then undertook the actions that came out of the fire risk assessments yes it's really that latter part in in
00:07:26 yes it's really that latter part in in relation to rbkc's role in respect of fire risk assessments did it did rbkc change its approach following
00:07:33 following the latino house fire and the fire brigades approach as a result of it um not specifically no rbkc didn't unless
00:07:40 unless uh kct emoted so looking at paragraph 3.2 as i've shown you we can see that july 2014 was the deadline for completion of all works identified in any fra action plan
00:07:52 identified in any fra action plan was that deadline ever extended to your knowledge um i don't remember looking look at 3.3 please and the bullet point at the foot of page two uh
00:08:04 two uh the paragraph starts specifically rbkc and kctma then proposed and the london fire brigade agreed the following and you can see that there's a list of things that were agreed the the bullet point at the foot of page
00:08:17 the the bullet point at the foot of page 2 says
00:08:18 2 says that each risk assessment would have an action plan setting out recommendations and these would clearly state which actions are required to comply with legislation which are necessary to comply with british standards and which would be
00:08:29 british standards and which would be considered to be good practice and these recommendations will be progressed in this priority order was the goal that the priority would be set independently by the
00:08:41 independently by the fire risk assessor and then observed by the tmo and rbkc uh yes that would be the methodology so it wasn't negotiable the priority wasn't negotiable
00:08:53 wasn't negotiable it may well have been because when the fire risk assessor delivered their fire risk assessment report to kctmo it would be my expectation that the
00:09:04 it would be my expectation that the person responsible at kctmo would discuss
00:09:07 discuss the grading of the actions that they had undertaken um and there may have been some opportunities to move them or they may not i wasn't in those meetings so i'm
00:09:15 i'm uh right so even though is this right even though your understanding from your the this document you helped but you approved and then presented
00:09:27 but you approved and then presented said uh that the fire risk assessment would have an action plan which would set out what was required to comply with standards of legislation and these
00:09:38 standards of legislation and these recommendations will be progressed in this priority order you still saw there you still saw scope did you for negotiation between the fire risk assessor
00:09:47 assessor and the tmo in relation to any particular action um what i'm saying to you is that that's based on my experience of being involved in fire risk assessments um i don't know whether that actually
00:09:59 um i don't know whether that actually took place in this instance
00:10:03 well that's what i was asking you um was the goal
00:10:07 the goal that the priority would be set independently by the fra and observed right so the goal was that it wouldn't be negotiable um yes the goal was that it would not be
00:10:18 um yes the goal was that it would not be negotiable the person undertaking the fire risk assessments would present those to casey tmo and then they would form an action plan in uh in merit order right so so if there was negotiation between the
00:10:30 so if there was negotiation between the tmo
00:10:31 tmo and the fire risk assessor that would not be compliant with what you had contemplated in this draft joint in this joint uh report
00:10:42 joint uh report um to be honest with you i wouldn't know that level of detail at the time in 2010 so i would not have referred back if kctmo
00:10:50 kctmo had undertaken any kind of negotiation with
00:10:53 with the fire risk assessment i wouldn't have known about it i just wouldn't have known that level of detail no it's not about a level of detail forgive me and what i'm asking you is what you contemplated and i think you just to be clear is it right that
00:11:06 you just to be clear is it right that when you presented this document with your name at the bottom you did not contemplate that there would be any room for
00:11:11 for maneuver discussion negotiations between the tmo
00:11:15 the tmo and the risk assessor on the priority of fra actions at the time of presenting this report and as written i would say no but i wouldn't have known about it in that detail in 2010 very
00:11:28 about it in that detail in 2010 very well
00:11:28 well now let's go over the page please to page three
00:11:38 on page three progress is the title with fire risk assessments in rbkc housing stock
00:11:44 stock and if we look at 4.3 halfway down the page it says this the fire risk assessment action plans are raising a number of issues which need to be progressed in many cases these actions relate to
00:11:56 in many cases these actions relate to simple and cheap responsive items which can be progressed swiftly however there are a number of potentially more costly items such as an inspection program to ensure that all flat entrance doors in enclosed blocks are sufficiently fire
00:12:08 in enclosed blocks are sufficiently fire resisting
00:12:09 resisting self-closing and smoke sealed and where this is not the case upgrading or replacing these capital funding has been earmarked to progress these items and rbkc and the kctmo
00:12:19 kctmo are working closely to ensure that all significant risks are addressed with the urgency they require was that true i can only presume that the as a result
00:12:31 i can only presume that the as a result of this particular piece of work from there the door inspection program and replacement program came
00:12:43 i'm sorry i don't know the detail that relates to this 4.3 because i don't remember
00:12:50 remember well um let's just break it down um the last sentence in that paragraph i'll read it again says the capital funding has been earmarked to progress these items
00:13:02 earmarked to progress these items and rbkc and the kctmo are working closely
00:13:05 closely to ensure all significant risks are addressed with the urgency they require now first of all was it true that capital funding had been earmarked to progress those items um i don't know unless i was able to see
00:13:17 um i don't know unless i was able to see the
00:13:18 the budget reports from 2010 as i don't remember in that level of detail
00:13:26 well when you signed this report off did you satisfy yourself that that statement of fact was true i would have done yes and we would have well i would have been uh would have
00:13:38 well i would have been uh would have signed this report off and then there would have been a report that accompanied it which set out the programme of funding for the year um and we would have been working with the tmo
00:13:49 tmo to uh to set aside funding in order to be able to meet those requirements how much was earmarked i don't know at the time did you know how much had been earmarked
00:14:00 how much had been earmarked um i may have known at the time but it's 2010. it's 11 years ago now and i can't remember
00:14:07 remember do you remember the fact that you did know
00:14:10 know that there was a figure even if you can't remember the number no i don't remember that i'm afraid looking at the second statement of fact the kctmo are working closely to ensure all significant risks are addressed with the urgency they require
00:14:23 the urgency they require was that statement of fact true um i don't remember i don't remember
00:14:34 um i don't remember i don't remember whether it was true or not um i can only presume it was true because i've signed my name to it and this was a report joint jointly authored by myself and kctmo and we weren't in the habit of putting items in
00:14:45 weren't in the habit of putting items in reports that weren't true well that i follow which leads to me to the next question if you weren't in the habit of of making full statements what did you do yourself to satisfy
00:14:56 to satisfy yourself that that statement was true um i don't remember do i don't remember did you just take it on trust from janice ray i may well have taken it on trust
00:15:05 trust why did you do that because she's an experienced health and safety officer working in kctmo and is has a high level of responsibility for undertaking these actions
00:15:15 actions um and i would have seen evidence in the regular monitoring reports uh that were presented to scrutiny committee setting out the actions that they were taking on health and safety do you know what it was that rbkc
00:15:27 do you know what it was that rbkc and tmo were doing by way of this close working as stated here um i don't know but it would have been undertaken by pam sedgwick's team at that time
00:15:35 that time do you know what arrangements have been made or contemplated by our bkc to monitor the progress
00:15:41 into the future of this flat front door project
00:15:45 project um at this precise time i don't know but i know because of the uh reports that came to casey came to scrutiny committee setting out the progress against that flat entrance
00:15:57 the progress against that flat entrance door program and i do know that a member of pam cedric's team uh was closely involved in monitoring the implementation of that flat entrance door program and i was kept up to date on it
00:16:08 kept up to date on it um would you agree that according to what i've shown you in this document all flat front doors in the tmo stock should have been inspected and made fire safe by july 2014.
00:16:22 safe by july 2014. i think that's what the document is alluding to broadly why do you say broadly um
00:16:36 why do you say broadly um yes in the sentence in 4.3 um i would say that
00:16:41 say that that there was an expectation set out in this report that all that there was an inspection program of all flat entrance doors and that was undertaken because there was then a programme of replacement
00:16:52 was then a programme of replacement doors
00:16:53 doors undertaken for tenanted doors there was around 1200 tenant indoors replaced and there was a program of inspecting leaseholder doors as well i'm just trying to get you to accept that this doc on this document the
00:17:05 this doc on this document the expectation and the planning was that all flat front doors in the tmo stock would have been inspected and made fire safe by july 2014. uh they were inspected and as far and
00:17:18 uh they were inspected and as far and there was a as a result of that there was a fire door replacement program um yes you're not quite answering my question forgive me let me try it once more the document contemplates
00:17:29 contemplates that all flat front doors in the tmo stock would have been inspected and made far safe
00:17:34 far safe by july 2014. it does state that yes yes thank you
00:17:38 thank you now um can we go to your witness statement your first witness statement please
00:17:42 please page 28.
00:17:46 page 28. um i i'd like to look with you please at paragraph 110 under the heading latino house fire and you say that on the 17th of april 2013 cynthia vaquino i hope i pronounced
00:17:57 2013 cynthia vaquino i hope i pronounced that
00:17:57 that correctly confirmed to me the completion of the latino house inquest she provided a summary of the coroner's recommendations and actions arising from the inquest and attached various letters and the
00:18:08 and attached various letters and the narrative verdicts and you exhibit those as lj33
00:18:12 as lj33 and can we just look at that rbk four zero is one five five three
00:18:23 uh that is the formal uh set of recommendations and actions the rule 43 report did you read this document
00:18:35 did you read this document um i would have yes i would have read through it yes if we go to page eight please can we go to that
00:18:45 on page eight uh towards the top of the page
00:18:48 page there's a heading fire safety firefighting and search and rescue you see that and you can see what is written below that can we take it that you would have read that or did read that when
00:19:00 that or did read that when you received this yes i would so you were familiar with the statement principle
00:19:04 principle yes i was uh and the explanation of it set out in this document uh yes and the recommendation that's made in the last paragraph
00:19:13 paragraph in the second and third paragraphs there
00:19:18 yes yes yes
00:19:22 did you take any action to ensure that the appropriate guidance was given to residents
00:19:27 residents relating to the state but principle uh i personally didn't but i was aware of the fact
00:19:34 the fact that i also received information regarding lack of house through london councils as part of a remit that we had around fire safety uh as the as their housing group
00:19:47 uh as the as their housing group and i passed on information to the tmo from that group one of which is uh i think there was a leaflet around the staple policy and i i understand the tmo did some work around making
00:19:58 around making residents aware through their link magazine around stay put did you ever have any discussions with the tmo
00:20:05 the tmo about generic risk assessment 3.2 high-rise firefighting particularly about evacuation arrangements no i don't believe i did um can we go to page nine in this
00:20:16 um can we go to page nine in this document which is entitled retrofit of sprinklers in high-rise residential buildings um did you know those recommendations um i would have read them
00:20:27 i would have read them yes did you ever actually or did anybody at rbkc ever actually consider the retrofitting of sprinklers in high-rise residential buildings in the tma stock no i don't believe we did
00:20:41 and why why was that in brief
00:20:47 um to be honest with you i don't remember right
00:20:59 can we go to page 13 please
00:21:10 on page 13 you'll see that there's a heading training of staff engaged in maintenance and refurbishment work on existing building and then it goes on to say this it is
00:21:21 and then it goes on to say this it is recommended that your authority consider the training needs of personnel who will be involved in procuring or supervising work to existing high-rise residential buildings whether maintenance refurbishment or rebuilding of parts of buildings
00:21:32 rebuilding of parts of buildings to ensure that materials and products used in such work have appropriate fire protection qualities staff should for example be trained to understand the significance of the compartmentation principle
00:21:44 compartmentation principle and to appreciate when building control should be notified about work to be undertaken do you remember reading this particular recommendation of the coroner no but can we assume that you did yes
00:21:55 no but can we assume that you did yes yes
00:21:56 yes having read it do you remember whether you considered the training needs of personnel either in rbkc or more pertinently perhaps within the tmo who were involved in procuring or
00:22:07 who were involved in procuring or supervising work to existing high-rise residential buildings no i do not
00:22:13 not why is that um if i i personally wouldn't have overseen the training needs of personnel involved in high-rise buildings i would have assumed that the tmo would
00:22:25 i would have assumed that the tmo would have taken action in those instances you would have assumed that the recommendation is directed to your authority
00:22:34 and given the relationship with the tmo did you not think it appropriate to at least raise with the tmo
00:22:43 tmo they're considering their own training needs of their people involved in procuring or supervising work on high-rise residential buildings um i did not do that at the time no i mean
00:22:53 mean can you account for that no
00:22:58 i mean you should have done um i should have raised with them i perfectly happy to concede that i should have had a conversation with the tmo about training of their personnel and people who work for them
00:23:09 people who work for them about how they managed uh the evacuation or refurbishment of high-rise buildings and how it complied with or took the recommendations from the lacanal house fire
00:23:19 fire and similarly same questions in relation to training the understanding of the significance of the compartmentation principle i did discuss compartmentation with the tmo because i was particularly
00:23:32 the tmo because i was particularly concerned as a result of the lack of house fire because the recommendations were so
00:23:38 were so so clear we had a presentation undertaken by the building research establishment which i arranged following a presentation they did at the housing group at london councils uh where they talked
00:23:50 at london councils uh where they talked about the causes of the lack of house fire how it had spread how residents responded to it attendees at that meeting were from tmo planning department or bkc and following that i was particularly
00:24:02 and following that i was particularly aware that one of the significant issues of like from lacanal was about how the fire spread due to lack of compartmentation and it was a subject i raised particularly with peter madison when we were undertaking
00:24:13 were undertaking when the refurbishment of grenfell tower was undertaken yes well we'll cut we'll come to the presentation shortly um so we'll look at that before we do uh it's right isn't it i think that in
00:24:24 it's right isn't it i think that in april or by april 2013 you were well aware of the nature of the refurbishment of grenfell tower yes yeah did you yourself take any steps in accordance with um this these recommendations to ensure
00:24:36 um this these recommendations to ensure that those involved directly in the project
00:24:38 project had the training identified here no i did not
00:24:42 did not was that i suppose on reading this again now um i did not take from it at the time that it was my responsibility to then arrange the training needs of personnel
00:24:53 arrange the training needs of personnel on these matters i mean really there should have been a holistic reaction to this whether between you and the tma or individually to say to yourselves and together look we need to make sure
00:25:05 we need to make sure that anybody engaged in a project retrofitting or refurbishing an existing high-rise block has the relevant training as per this recommendation do you accept that um yes i accept that
00:25:16 do you accept that um yes i accept that but there's also an element of this part of this
00:25:18 of this recommendation which is about being picked up by building control rather than just
00:25:23 than just the housing department particularly when it comes to compensation indeed and that would require some close liaison wouldn't it between building control and those responsible for the project um yes it would yeah
00:25:39 did the coroner's recommendations give you particular cause for concern relate when it came to the grenfell tower project or i say calls for concern calls to think
00:25:50 i say calls for concern calls to think um about the recommendations when it came to the grenfell tower project particularly because it involves an overcladding um it it didn't necessarily give me con uh lachenal house didn't necessarily
00:26:01 uh lachenal house didn't necessarily give me concern about overcladding it was about maintaining what i took from it and what i remembered following reading this and from the presentation was about the need to ensure that there
00:26:13 was about the need to ensure that there weren't penetrations um in the unnecessary penetrations in the
00:26:19 the concrete frame of the building which could cause fire to spread and that's what i took from it and remembered from it and spoke particularly to the tmo about and about ensuring that you know kind of we were very clear that this was one of the findings that
00:26:31 that this was one of the findings that was uh contributed uh to the spread of lack of house fire although it's a different blackened house is very different um different in design and different in the way it was constructed it was a scissor block
00:26:42 block uh which was part of the reasons and whereas um grenfell tower was a concrete frame do you remember whether these recommendations and the package of materials that came with it
00:26:52 with it with them was ever sent to the tmo i don't remember were they ever discussed with the tmo uh yes we definitely discussed uh as i said i discussed with peter
00:27:03 uh as i said i discussed with peter madison around compartmentation and members of the tmo attended a presentation by the bre which i arranged at the council offices now can we look at tmo one
00:27:16 can we look at tmo one zero zero zero three zero five four this takes us into july 2013 uh and i'd like to go to page three in
00:27:27 uh and i'd like to go to page three in this email run please it's an uh an email from uh miss sarah freighter as you can see from the top of the page to you 10th july 2013
00:27:39 to you 10th july 2013 uh and she although it takes some digging
00:27:43 digging it was um from the longlands court residents association and it forwards an email that had been sent to cancer the fielding mellon if we just go
00:27:54 if we just go [Music]
00:27:56 [Music] to what she says
00:28:01 and if you um you then look up you say you see that you ask robert black about an extensive response and if we go to page two
00:28:10 um you say in the second email there robert
00:28:13 robert we did quite an extensive response to something very similar on this issue from sarah frater a few months ago i can't find my copy do you have what we wrote
00:28:21 wrote and he comes back to you on the 12th of july just a little bit above that and he says this laura i have now had a chance to read this and i feel again she's making unfounded accusations which i would like my team to comment on for your reply
00:28:33 my team to comment on for your reply if she didn't go to so many people which this is an example then she might get a response
00:28:38 response peter and janice i and that's um i'm assuming uh peter madison in the uh who also received this uh i would like us to review this
00:28:49 like us to review this and address the accusations she is making enough bile for this week and then a little bit above that you go back to him and you say
00:29:00 go back to him and you say uh robert i've done a very quick response to cancer fielding melon directing him to michael clarke to discuss the good fairy development and gave him a couple of sentences regard
00:29:09 regard confirming that peter had spoken to sarah et cetera and then you say it may be worth the monthly
00:29:16 monthly me tmo digest doing an update on fire safety generally for cancer fm then you can include grenfell trellic tower block safety and leaseholder doors
00:29:27 tower block safety and leaseholder doors you could reference in there sarah's comments about longland's court it may be timely in the light of the fire this weekend in bow which looked nasty but was dealt with really efficiently by the fire service and all the press about lacking and how
00:29:39 and all the press about lacking and how the tmos reacted counselor coleridge knew all about it but counselor fielding melon fm doesn't so worth an update and then if we look at the final email in the chain please on page one
00:29:52 in the chain please on page one i'm sorry to take so much time up looking at all this but it's important you see the constantly context at the very top of the page um we can see that janice ray sends to robert black
00:30:04 robert black but not to you a briefing note by way of an attachment uh on safe and it's called fire safety and tmo blocks briefing note for councillors digest july 2013
00:30:18 councillors digest july 2013 and she says to him i appreciate we don't you'd have a date for this but as i'm going on annual leave after tomorrow i
00:30:23 i i have uh put together a draft for comment in case you need it whilst i'm away i'm enclosing a draft briefing note on fire safety and a briefing note on lacknell house and specifically the coroner's
00:30:34 and specifically the coroner's recommendations and our response to them uh now this comp this email conversation if i can put it that way took place some four months after you received the coroner's recommendations in the latino
00:30:45 coroner's recommendations in the latino housing quest had you provided any sort of briefing to councillors about those recommendations before that i don't remember um when we when we looked at your email what did you mean about press about lack
00:30:57 what did you mean about press about lack of house and how the tmos reacted
00:31:01 um i really don't remember to be honest can we look at the one of the attachments to janice ray's final email on page one the briefing note on the fire at latin house that's at tm01
00:31:13 house that's at tm01 zero zero zero three zero five six
00:31:23 um and that there is the briefing note done by janice ray and we know that because of page three if we just scroll quickly down to that we can see her name and the date
00:31:34 that we can see her name and the date june
00:31:34 june 2013
00:31:38 did you uh look at this document well have you seen this document um i don't remember seeing this document but it formed part of a briefing note to councillor fielding melon then i would have seen it right would you have read
00:31:49 have seen it right would you have read it and digested it do you think yes
00:31:54 do you remember discussing its contents at all with janice ray or another officer of the tma particularly i don't particularly remember discussing this no
00:32:05 um you just you mentioned a presentation by the bre a moment ago and i said i'd come back to that can we go to your third witness statement please
00:32:15 rbk3057506 and i want to look at pages one and two paragraphs three to five there um if you look at page one question one you're asked the
00:32:27 one question one you're asked the question
00:32:27 question what do you say i've been asked whether i'm aware of a presentation that david crowder gave to the tmo and around rbk staff regarding the natal house fire and whether i attended i recall attending a presentation by david crowder i believe it was
00:32:39 david crowder i believe it was held at obc town hall i do not recall the time or date this presentation took place
00:32:45 place can we go please to tm01.0040126
00:32:54 and within that email run please can we go to page two it's an email chain from mid-november 2013 and this particular email towards the bottom of page two is an email from brian castle
00:33:05 email from brian castle of richmond uh to a number of people uh in different authorities as it appears
00:33:12 appears um you've got croydon enfield etc copy to you
00:33:17 to you uh and the subject is forward high-rise forum
00:33:22 forum and he refers in the first paragraph to the first high-rise forum and if we go to page two please or page three please in this email run um you can see the paragraph starts um
00:33:34 um you can see the paragraph starts um yesterday
00:33:36 yesterday i went to a presentation hosted by l b wansworth by david crowder from the building research establishment all about the technical failings of lachnal predominantly from adaptations to the original design that it was excellent he
00:33:48 original design that it was excellent he spent
00:33:48 spent at least 50 percent of the last four years working on the latino fire if you haven't seen it and would like to he's available
00:33:54 available to do more presentations
00:33:57 and then if we go up the chain please um you we can see that you send this email on
00:34:04 email on go to page two to to robert black and janice ray at the tmo and you say interested in your thoughts as to
00:34:11 as to whether you would be interested in a presentation from david crowder i know we don't have any block exactly like lacking but it may be worthwhile nevertheless now this initial email was sent as we can see in november 2013
00:34:22 can see in november 2013 15th of november 2013. does that assist you
00:34:26 you about when you attended the presentation by david crowder that you agreed you did in your
00:34:31 in your third witness statement as a paragraph no not particularly would have taken place
00:34:35 place i presume uh in december or the following year of 2014. i was going to ask you was it on the 10th of january 2014 and that's a bit of a specific date but we have a reason for asking it
00:34:46 we have a reason for asking it i don't remember why did you suggest that uh
00:34:49 that uh that janice ray and robert black attend the david crowder presentation uh because i thought they would find it really interesting and informative having been to uh uh having had a
00:35:02 having been to uh uh having had a presentation um or uh having uh a discussed fire safety in lucknow house at the london council housing director's group
00:35:10 group i thought it was worthwhile for people to know what he had to say about it when you said we don't you don't have a block exactly like lacking what did you what did you mean um i wasn't aware of us having a block that was of the same construction type
00:35:22 that was of the same construction type as lachenal house right and what construction type was that oh i don't remember now uh but it was a scissor block as i seem to remember rather than a straightforward tower block and from the presentation i remember
00:35:33 and from the presentation i remember that the way the fire penetrated was because in terms of a scissor block the staircases crossed like that which meant that when works had been undertaken to that particular block it had uh the compartmental
00:35:46 it had uh the compartmental compartmentalization had been compromised allowing the fire to get to penetrate between the staircases which meant it could travel between different flats more easily why did you personally attend this rep
00:35:57 why did you personally attend this rep uh this presentation uh because i was interested and i wanted to know what he had to say and it's it's far better to be informed than not informed about these things i understand interested personally rather
00:36:08 understand interested personally rather than
00:36:08 than interested because of your role no interested professionally and personally can we go to your third witness statement again please and look at page two paragraph seven you say
00:36:19 seven you say there uh
00:36:22 i've been asked whether rbkc made any changes to how it managed fire safety across the housing stock as a result of this presentation i do not recall if there was any policy or procedural reviews with regard to how fire safety
00:36:34 reviews with regard to how fire safety was managed and therefore any changes made as a result of the presentation either in our bkc housing department or at the tmo
00:36:46 is is that in other words you don't remember whether or not they were is there is it because there weren't in fact any policy or procedural reviews no it's because i
00:36:57 or procedural reviews no it's because i don't remember i see it do you recall if you personally took any action as a result of having attended the presentation i don't remember taking any action
00:37:09 remember taking any action as a result of the presentation as you say on page two if we scroll up a little bit
00:37:20 on page two if we scroll up a little bit further please to paragraph four covered a number of topics and you've set them out in
00:37:27 out in in six sub-paragraphs one of those uh was um the spread of fire 4.3 how the fire spread did that give you any cause for concern
00:37:40 did that give you any cause for concern or
00:37:41 or did it spark your interest or curiosity uh in relation to the external cladding which was
00:37:47 which was being applied at grenfell or at least being discussed at grenfell at this point
00:37:52 point uh no uh because they they're lacking i don't i don't remember it causing me any particularly concerned with regard to cladding because lack of house was uh quite an old building as i understand built in
00:38:04 old building as i understand built in the
00:38:04 the late 60s or 70s um and the cladding there there's the paneling type uh was
00:38:12 uh was uh of that era very much so um so it would have been very different to anything that was suggested at grenfell tower
00:38:18 tower so in general terms you although these uh sub-topics were covered by david crowder in his presentation you didn't make a link between these topics and the works then
00:38:31 between these topics and the works then going on
00:38:32 going on or projected to go on at grenfell tower um
00:38:35 um yes i did as i've uh already explained i made a link uh not in terms of cladding types because the cladding was very different at lacking
00:38:42 lacking to whatever was proposed at grenfell tower but
00:38:46 tower but i did make a link in terms of compartmentalization and i was particularly interested from that presentation in the way that i believe there had been a number of different works undertaken
00:38:58 a number of different works undertaken at lacanal were a number of layers of paint number of ways that the uh the roof spaces had no longer had fire stopping in them and uh what i took from it was very much about the
00:39:09 about the compartmentalization being compromised and that needed to be uh you know kind of a very much top priority when looking at any phobia so just to be clear what you just
00:39:20 phobia so just to be clear what you just said is that a reference perhaps a longer hand reference to paragraph 4.6 on page two the structure of latin house and how works that have taken place yes it contributed to a reduction in compartmentation
00:39:32 compartmentation did you did you make any link well let me ask you this what lesson from 4.6
00:39:40 from 4.6 did you take which should be applied to grenfell
00:39:43 grenfell uh that we needed to be particularly mindful that any works that were undertaken uh didn't uh uh didn't uh didn't compromise the compartmentation of the building
00:39:54 compartmentation of the building did you pass that learning back to the tmo
00:39:57 tmo um i definitely spoke to peter madison about it in terms of the outcomes from the lack of house fire it was probably a i remember a conversation about it and but it was probably unminuted
00:40:10 and but it was probably unminuted i mean dude can you give us a feel for what you told peter madison on the subject of your learning about compartmentation from dave crowder's presentation um i believe peter madison was at that presentation
00:40:22 peter madison was at that presentation um right so he would have heard the same information that i had and it would have been the subject of a a conversation or a as a discussion right rather than me providing peter madison
00:40:33 rather than me providing peter madison with instruction because i wouldn't presume to do so because he was head of assets not myself no i'm not suggesting that you would have instructed him at all but but
00:40:44 have instructed him at all but but i i i would rather taken from your answer that you learned something about compartmentation as you've identified the paragraph 4.6 and then shared it perhaps it's a better word with peter madison really what i'm after is what
00:40:55 really what i'm after is what specifically do you remember sharing with peter madison about compartmentation risks or the risks to compartmentation at grenfell as a result of the presentation
00:41:06 grenfell as a result of the presentation i don't remember what i specifically said but i remember a general conversation about the cause of the fire at la canal and about how compartmentation had been compromised uh can we go to bre
00:41:17 compromised uh can we go to bre fives bre four zeros five eight seven one please
00:41:28 this is an email from a dager salad yes is uh he or she your um assistant she was my pa at the tv uh
00:41:42 assistant she was my pa at the tv uh and it's dated the fifth of december to dave crowder and she says dear david can i request 10th of january anytime in the afternoon uh
00:41:54 and she goes on the meeting request is about the high-rise forum etc um and it says hammersmith fulham council westminster council royal borough would
00:42:05 westminster council royal borough would like to invite you to discuss the presentation hosted by lb wandsworth by you all about the technical failings of latino predominantly from adaptations to the original design did you dictate that i don't remember
00:42:18 did you dictate that i don't remember but i would have asked sega to arrange a meeting and given her some form of words in order to um set out in the invitation so it is likely that i gave her that wording i see were you aware in
00:42:30 i see were you aware in december 2013 that the la the fire at latino house arose predominantly from adaptations to the original design
00:42:38 uh yes yes i probably was if i if i asked diego to write that then uh i would have picked that up as part of the
00:42:45 of the information that i had about the causes of the fire at lachen house right and did that lead you to have specific uh concerns or perhaps interest is a better word about the proposed
00:42:56 is a better word about the proposed refurbishment at grenfell tower uh yes i was you know kind of aware that uh that one of the reasons for the fire spread at laconia had been because they'd had a number of programmes of work as there
00:43:08 a number of programmes of work as there would be to any block of the age at lacanal
00:43:11 lacanal window replacement programs door replacement programs uh you know tv lighting you know all of those things had gone in at different times
00:43:19 times and that there was a risk in doing any of those kind of refurbishment projects that compromised fire safety um you you you said in your evidence just a little bit uh just a few minutes
00:43:31 just a little bit uh just a few minutes ago that peter madison was at the presentation i believe he was i believe he was you recall that do you well it's a long time ago now so um uh and and
00:43:40 and and memories are not always accurate but um uh based on what i remember from eight years ago i thought peter madison was at that presentation so he could he would be able to confirm that not i don't think he was and
00:43:51 that not i don't think he was and his name wasn't on the invite list so i'm just really exploring with you how clear your memory of that was um i thought he was there he um he may not have but you would have
00:44:02 he um he may not have but you would have to confirm that with peter um can we then move on to look at your communications with uh rockfielding melon uh in july 2014.
00:44:15 rockfielding melon uh in july 2014. rbk405826 please this is an email from you sorry to you from uh nicholas holgate
00:44:26 sorry to you from uh nicholas holgate on the 15th of july 2014. you see that yes and he is forwarding in turn an email that he's received which you can see
00:44:36 can see the beginning of just below it from rita dexter at
00:44:40 dexter at london fire uh el thiepa in fact of the 14th of july 2014 um which is entitled two new guides for councillors about fire safety and know the plan
00:44:54 those two guides are attached and in his email he says subject to your views
00:45:03 views may i suggest that before the end of july you forward the attached guides to all councillors in each council with a covering assessment of our approach to and quality of health and safety for council housing
00:45:16 and safety for council housing did you read did you open the attachments first of all uh yes i would have done and read them yes uh
00:45:23 yes uh can you confirm and we'll look at the attachments shortly but can you confirm that you only forwarded those briefings to council as marshall and fielding mellon
00:45:31 mellon but not all councillors um i can't confirm that without documentary evidence
00:45:36 evidence right we haven't seen any documentary evidence that you forward it to to any councillors other than marshall and fielding mellon are you able to explain why that is um in which case i only
00:45:47 that is um in which case i only forwarded them to cancer field and melanoma and counselor marshall and why would that have been uh because councilor marshall was chair of housing and property scrutiny committee and councillor field mellon was the cabinet member for housing and property
00:45:59 cabinet member for housing and property at that time so i forwarded to the two councillors with a responsibility or oversight for housing
00:46:04 housing right even though mr holgate had asked you to send them to all councillors uh yes i was clearly an error can we look please at your first witness statement to page 28
00:46:19 where you refer to an email of the 17th of july 2014 at paragraph 111 foot of the page you say on 17th july 2014 i emailed councillor fielding melania councillor marshall stating
00:46:31 melania councillor marshall stating that councillor the council and the tma were aware of the advice coming in coming from lfb following the latter house fire and that we were reassured that the tma were on top of it
00:46:43 that the tma were on top of it let's look at the email itself rbk403314
00:46:55 and you can see it goes to fielding melon and marshall and it's a direct forward on of the email that had been sent by rita dexter to nicholas holgate and you say the fire brigade have
00:47:07 and you say the fire brigade have produced these two documents with accompanying email i hope we've provided scrutiny committee with sufficient information on fire safety and the measures that the council and the tmo are taking to ensure the health and safety of the council's tenants and
00:47:18 of the council's tenants and leaseholders but if as a result of reading the information attached would like any further updates please let me know and we can provide a further update now just standing back from that from a
00:47:31 just standing back from that from a moment and looking at where we are in the grenfell tower project do you recall
00:47:36 recall that at that time councillor fielding mellon was in communication with the tmo and the rbkc planners about the color of the cladding at grenfell tower july 14.
00:47:47 14. um no i don't recall councillor fielding mullen being in communication with either of those two organizations about the colour of the cladding do you remember sending these guides as
00:47:58 do you remember sending these guides as a result of this communication um i don't remember but i must have done did either of these counsellors respond to this email do you remember um i don't remember
00:48:09 remember did either of them ask you for any further information as you'd offered them
00:48:12 them i'm afraid i don't remember
00:48:25 now let's go to one of these documents
00:48:32 lfb401295
00:48:46 that is one of the two documents that was sent to you and it's entitled counsellor guide on fire safety for use during council meetings you see that yeah there's a big tower block question mark on the right it's quite a memorable
00:48:58 on the right it's quite a memorable document do you remember it yes uh and um if you look at page two please
00:49:07 there's a question at the top what can counsellors do do not make assumptions that fire safety is being actively or effectively managed in purpose-built blocks of flats and masonettes in your borough councillors
00:49:19 masonettes in your borough councillors can make their boroughs safer by scrutinizing how responsibilities for fire safety are met and ensuring that the fire safety in your borough is continuously being monitored and improved then it goes on strategic and policy
00:49:30 then it goes on strategic and policy questions for councillors to ask these are questions you should ask about the fire safety of purpose-built blocks of flats and maisonets in your borough particularly in relation to the residential estates and properties run by the local authority elmo
00:49:42 by the local authority elmo all local housing associations they can be asked generally or in the context of specific programs and projects and then if you look below the box if you scroll down please you can see a number of
00:49:53 down please you can see a number of bullet point questions
00:49:56 and
00:50:00 in the last one and i could show you them all and spend time on them but but but looking at the last one specifically does the borough have clear policies stating that
00:50:11 stating that before any modifications or maintenance works are carried out in purpose-built blocks of flats or masonettes there must be proper
00:50:17 be proper assessment of the impact on fire safety all modifications or maintenance works will result in buildings which are equally or more fire safety compliant than they were before the works once modifications or
00:50:28 before the works once modifications or maintenance works are complete councillors will receive confirmation that the building will meet all necessary fire safety requirements
00:50:37 did you look at and note those particular questions um i would have read this document but i don't
00:50:47 don't i don't remember taking particular note of these and then doing anything as a result of them did rbkc have clear policies as recommended there um if it had policies on modification or
00:51:00 um if it had policies on modification or maintenance works then it would have been undertaken by building control or the planning department rather than housing but you aren't able sitting there to identify what those policies are no
00:51:18 can we just go then to paragraph 82 of your first witness statement at page 20.
00:51:28 you say in paragraph 82 i did not ask about the combustibility of either zinc or aluminium cladding option it wouldn't have occurred to me to ask about the flammability of the material or health and safety considerations
00:51:40 or health and safety considerations i would have assumed that quality checks had been done by qualified professionals the tmo employed or regulated through british safety standards stroke central government regulation this is not my area of expertise
00:51:52 this is not my area of expertise and you go on about the conversation you were having about cladding solution within the budget um given what you say there but looking also at the guide why was it
00:52:04 but looking also at the guide why was it that you didn't at least ask the questions about whether suitable checks had been done at each stage of the refurbishment to ensure that
00:52:17 flammability of material or health and safety considerations were being observed um i would have expected that conversation to be undertaken by uh building professionals rather than
00:52:28 by uh building professionals rather than myself
00:52:29 myself yes but the problem with that is isn't it is that that's not what's recommended by the lfb the lfb is is is giving a set of questions
00:52:37 questions for counselors to ask and make sure that clear policies exist uh yes they are so merely just relying on professionals
00:52:48 merely just relying on professionals engaged by the tma wasn't good enough was it
00:52:50 was it well relying on uh people who are professionals in the building industry um who have that expertise and also our rbkc's building control team who will be
00:53:01 rbkc's building control team who will be undertaking inspections of the building as well
00:53:04 as well um i think it's probably quite reasonable actually for me to expect uh professionals in the building industry to be undertaking those tasks but you would agree with me i think that as per the recommendations
00:53:17 as per the recommendations uh the uh councils had to have or should have clear policies in place that there would be proper assessment on impact of fire safety essentially at each stage with a final
00:53:30 essentially at each stage with a final confirmation that the building has modified or refurbished meets all necessary fire safety requirements and i would have expected that to be undertaken by building control but the point is that
00:53:41 building control but the point is that you would have had to have had a policy within rbkc for making sure that that happened was there such a policy i don't know it should have been there shouldn't there um well as i said i would have
00:53:53 there um well as i said i would have expected
00:53:54 expected uh building control to pick that up
00:54:02 using the grenfell tower refurbishment as the paradigm uh what was the system in place can you tell us whereby our bkc or its councillors had assurances that each of the three requirements
00:54:14 that each of the three requirements policy requirements set out in that document were met um i didn't uh i did not take the leaflet that had been sell by sent by lfp and then put together a plan about
00:54:26 lfp and then put together a plan about how i would use those recommendations in order to be able to respond to counsellors why is that um
00:54:34 i don't know to be honest with you i read the leaflets and i didn't take from them
00:54:38 them a series of actions that i then had to undertake
00:54:43 i received a lot of information in my job and
00:54:48 job and and if it had been a requirement or i'd received further information to ask me to do it then i would have done it but i didn't take that and then turn that into an action plan in order to be able to inform councillors as a result of that you see this is this
00:55:01 as a result of that you see this is this is actually macro information it's about governance which is why i'm asking you about it it came from rita dexter who was very senior if not the most senior in the lf epa at
00:55:14 if not the most senior in the lf epa at the time through your town clark chief executive so this is this is absolutely on your radar
00:55:22 radar it is on my radar and it's in the form of a leaflet to give to councillors uh which i thought to councillors and asked them if they wanted any further information um i i may i was obviously not asked for
00:55:33 um i i may i was obviously not asked for any more information otherwise you would have found emails about it um and i would have read the leaflet but i then didn't take from that that then i had a series of actions to undertake right
00:55:44 undertake right in general was there any reaction within our bkc
00:55:49 our bkc to this leaflet you call it a leaflet it's guidance document uh not by myself by anybody to your knowledge
00:55:55 knowledge i don't know can we go to rbk3048723 please
00:56:07 this is an email of the 3rd of february 2015 sent by john allen to you and debbie morris and it attaches a letter it's a second email down please on the screen it attaches a
00:56:19 please on the screen it attaches a letter to nick padgett brown of the 15th of january 2015 and a document prepared by
00:56:24 by the lfb entitled nfb fire safety features in refurbished buildings audit tool
00:56:32 tool uh and um
00:56:35 if you uh if if you look please at the document itself it's tmo so sorry i'm rushing ahead a little bit too fast this document comes from john
00:56:47 too fast this document comes from john allen to michael clark as you can see from this email it then gets sent to you by john allen at the top of the screen if we can scroll up to the top do you see that it goes to debbie morris
00:57:00 do you see that it goes to debbie morris and to you and it says debbie laura please see attached and email trail below
00:57:07 below and in the uh in that email you can see the attachments lb fire safety and refurbished buildings audit tool report letter to boros etc and if we go to
00:57:18 letter to boros etc and if we go to tm0100 42956 please we can see the audit tool report attachment do you remember seeing this document um i'm afraid i don't
00:57:30 i'm afraid i don't uh you don't remember seeing it can we assume that you would have been your normal habit have
00:57:38 have opened the attachment and read the document yes i would yeah and it says at the beginning london fire brigade is concerned
00:57:43 concerned about the arrangements in place for protecting the fire safety precautions of a building especially if it has been refurbished or if any modification or maintenance projects have been carried out now this is february 15 when you read
00:57:55 now this is february 15 when you read that
00:57:56 that did you think of any particular refurbishment project i don't remember reading this document i remember reading it
00:58:01 it no right i i would have done but to be honest with you i have no recollection reading this document right it's quite an impressive document in the sense that it's got this rather um fetching question mark in the
00:58:12 rather um fetching question mark in the shape of a tower block or tower block in the shape of a question marks it didn't doesn't ring a bell with you no i'm afraid it doesn't right uh look at page two please uh and i just want to show you one or
00:58:24 uh and i just want to show you one or two of the um parts of the audit tool because this is what this document is really about it's an audit tool on page two we've got section one which
00:58:36 on page two we've got section one which is focused on whether your organization has exercised any policy governance around fire safety management it's designed for local authorities but could equally be applied to other bodies councillors could ask officers to
00:58:47 bodies councillors could ask officers to prepare a report addressing these issues and look at question 2.4 please if we can go to page 3
00:58:54 which is under section 2 which is focused on multidisciplinary working
00:59:00 and that says what were the arrangements to consult london fire brigade on any works that could impact on the fire precautions of the building including those works that do not require a statutory consultation to lfb and
00:59:13 a statutory consultation to lfb and there's a question about evidence and then if we go on um to page four we can see a set of questions at 3.4 how did officers guard generally against
00:59:24 how did officers guard generally against improvements which could compromise the fire safety features of the building 3.7 incorrect materials 3.9 officers ensuring no materials might contribute to and fire we used
00:59:35 contribute to and fire we used and then over the page please to 3.10 did officers consider whether the project also provided an opportunity to examine fire stopping and compartmentation in the building and then a sign off at 3 14 as you can
00:59:48 and then a sign off at 3 14 as you can see
00:59:51 now what steps if any do you remember taking to ensure that these basic questions posed by the audit tool were asked and answered i'm really sorry i don't uh remember
01:00:02 i'm really sorry i don't uh remember seeing this document or seeing this audit tool so i can't uh answer that question right so is this the first time you've ever been shown this document to my knowledge despite having been sent it at the time
01:00:13 despite having been sent it at the time uh i don't remember being sent at the time i clearly was um and i would have opened it and had a look at it but i'm really sorry i just um
01:00:21 um i just don't remember it at all no um i i i
01:00:25 i i people might find it surprising that you don't remember it given that it's quite an attractive document it compels the attention and it's about fire safety um i i can't i can't account for it because i remember
01:00:36 because i remember a lot of what i did in the eight and a half years i was at kctmo but with regard to this document i just don't it doesn't ring any bells whatsoever and i don't remember reading it
01:00:46 it oh we haven't seen any documents which would show that rbkc took this document examined the audit tool and discussed the audit tool with with the tma or internally
01:00:59 the tma or internally to check yeah um and i can't account for that because quite honestly this is the first time i remember seeing it right excuse me shepard court
01:01:11 excuse me shepard court can i ask you to please to look at rbk402385
01:01:18 now this is an email chain that you've exhibited as lj43 so you have seen this this document and can we go to page two please
01:01:29 can we go to page two please where the email chain starts with an email to you from hannah
01:01:36 lauer or lofa i there are varieties of different pronunciations i imagine um and i think you'll be able to help me with that dear ms johnson for your information please find attached
01:01:48 information please find attached a letter regarding our advice relating to the issue of external fire spread a hard copy of this letter will follow in the post and the letter itself is at rbk302688
01:02:04 please
01:02:10 um there it is it's addressed to you it's dated the 6th of april 2017 and it's entitled tall buildings external fires spread just pausing there can we take it that you opened and read
01:02:21 you opened and read that letter yes it is uh did you do that straight away or did you do that at some point during the two weeks before you sent it on to robert black i was on holiday for those two weeks
01:02:31 two weeks which is why it didn't get sent on immediately and on return from holiday i would have been going through possibly hundreds of emails that i had received at that time and then i would have been i would have
01:02:44 and then i would have been i would have sent it on understand but did you read it yes did you read it well on holiday or did you read it when you got back and went through your emails um i would have read it when i got back
01:02:56 um i would have read it when i got back from holiday um and um you know as is customer practice uh for me not for everyone um i would have been going through my emails and seeing what i needed to
01:03:07 emails and seeing what i needed to what hadn't hadn't been actioned in my absence um would have seen it and thought right i just need to send that on to mr black you know sort of fairly quickly
01:03:15 quickly yes can we look at uh the first paragraph just to pick up the point about shepard's court 19th of august 2016 last sentence
01:03:27 19th of august 2016 last sentence he says uh i'm also drawing this fire to your attention to highlight the external spread
01:03:34 spread of the fire that occurred and then there's a reference to the steve turek letter in march 2009 and then in the third paragraph uh he
01:03:45 and then in the third paragraph uh he says
01:03:46 says we have seen a number of cases where it appears on the basis of the information available to us that the level of fire protection to the external face of the building did not comply with the requirements of part b of the building regulations insofar as
01:03:58 of the building regulations insofar as they seek to limit the speed at which a fire can travel and spread over the external face of a building or may contribute to a fire testing of panels has found that the combustibility of the composition of the
01:04:09 combustibility of the composition of the panels at shepherd's court did not meet the levels expected for conformity with the building regulations on testing it was found that the panels made a formal delaminate exposing any combustible core or or
01:04:21 exposing any combustible core or or constituent material resulting in the panel becoming involved in the fire and involved in allowing the fire to spread
01:04:27 to spread to flats other than the flat of origin of the fire and then if we turn the page please to the final paragraph
01:04:38 he says this i would therefore strongly urge
01:04:42 urge that you consider this issue as part of the risk assessment process for premises under your control i suggest that you make sure all relevant information about any replacement window and facade schemes is fully available to
01:04:54 and facade schemes is fully available to fire risk assessors where no reliable information is available for a given property it is our general expectation that a strategy
01:05:02 strategy to assess the risk and when necessary implement short medium or long-term actions to address the risk
01:05:08 the risk this assessment will need to take account of other fire safety measures already in place in the building as well as potential mitigation measures to ensure that any potential fire spread does not pose a risk
01:05:19 does not pose a risk to health and safety now do you agree that that letter provides advice on the potential hazards from refurbished external walls in high-rise
01:05:30 refurbished external walls in high-rise buildings
01:05:30 buildings yes yes and requires an assessment of such walls using reliable construction information yes and it flags up potential mitigation measures
01:05:41 measures yes yes did any of this raise any concern in your mind at that time about the refurbishment of grenfell tower uh
01:05:50 tower uh yes and robert black replied to me to let me know that um they had sought advice from their fire risk assessor
01:06:00 assessor about the cladding at grenfell tower and received communication uh to the effect that um it wasn't the same uh cladding that was on the fire at shepherd's court um and uh it was okay so i had uh
01:06:15 um and uh it was okay so i had uh so i took that to be um so thank you very much yes i said the information right let's let's look at that a bit more closely can we go to the email chain we were looking at a moment ago
01:06:30 rbk402385
01:06:34 we can see that uh at page one there is a longer email chain but below this but i don't think we need it
01:06:43 it we can see at the foot of page one uh robert black comes back to you in response to you're sending the letter to him and
01:06:49 him and says 20th of april 2017. hi laura i will review with janice and come back to you so we can clarify the position and then
01:07:00 the position and then the next email up 27th of april 2017 janice ray to robert black barbara matthews
01:07:07 matthews hi robert apologies for the delay but i wanted to check with our fire risk assessor before i responded to you i can confirm that it is our understanding that we do not have any blocks with cladding of the nature described in the lfb's letter
01:07:19 described in the lfb's letter which was present at the shepherd's court shepherd's bush tower block grenfell tower did have external cladding panels fitted as part of the recent refurbishment work however our assessor investigated
01:07:30 however our assessor investigated thoroughly the details of the installation with the contractor rydens when the works were on site and he is able to confirm that this complies with the requirements of the current building regulations
01:07:42 of the current building regulations i hope this is helpful regards janice and that email is then sent to you at the top of the chain laura for information not sure we have to do anything but may be useful to update your scrutiny committee
01:07:56 to update your scrutiny committee um do you remember whether you you ever followed up with janice ray or anybody followed up with janice ray to see if she consulted mr stokes about
01:08:08 consulted mr stokes about lfb's letter in general terms um i didn't follow up with janice ray but i don't know whether robert did did you take any steps to satisfy yourself that the tmo had carried out an
01:08:20 yourself that the tmo had carried out an adequate survey to investigate whether any tmo property was similarly clad to shepard's court um i did i didn't um
01:08:31 um i did i didn't um what did i do um i knew uh with the council's housing blocks were i think there's 13 um high-rise blocks that were across rbkc
01:08:43 rbkc and they were in the main brick or concrete construction and so i was under the impression that there was no others that had cladding in the same way that grandfathered
01:09:01 were you did you ask janice ray whether she got a formal and written
01:09:13 she got a formal and written confirmation from carl stokes that the new cladding at grenfell tower complied with the building regulations no i did not
01:09:23 did do you remember yourself at this stage having any concerns about mr stokes's work no did you ever have any such concerns
01:09:34 no did you ever have any such concerns no did you know or were ever given to understand that the tmo has concerns uh no
01:09:46 did you never wonder why the lfb had served efficiency and enforcement notices
01:09:51 notices on the tmo at the very least when you had an apparently competent fire risk assessor providing fras and an apparently functional system for closing out
01:10:02 out fra items um even if you have a the most perfect functioning uh fire risk assessment consultant uh there is still the opportunity to
01:10:13 uh there is still the opportunity to have a deficiency notices saved on you because the lfb can visit and find matters
01:10:19 matters that uh the fire risk assessment consultant may not have seen or the lfb may require that their fire risk assessment consultant may not have been aware of so it didn't suggest to me that just because we
01:10:31 suggest to me that just because we received
01:10:31 received deficiency notices that the fire risk assessment consultant wasn't competent what about enforcement notices would that have not run an alarm bell um i don't know how many enforcement notices we had received
01:10:42 many enforcement notices we had received at that
01:10:43 at that time well you've had one for our dare tower we did have one for a dare tower but that was after the after a fire um and after the fire brigade had had the experience of seeing how the building performed
01:10:54 seeing how the building performed in a in the case of a fight yes you said it was after the fire and i think you said that yesterday as well but in fact do you recall that actually before the fire at a tower the lfb had served the deficiency notice
01:11:05 the lfb had served the deficiency notice only a few days beforehand um i don't remember that until i had seen the testimony to the public inquiry but it may well i was notified of it but to be honest with you i don't remember
01:11:26 to be honest with you i don't remember do you remember uh receiving or seeing an email from councillor blakeman in in september 2016 about fire drills at grenfell tower
01:11:38 grenfell tower um yes uh let's go then to uh iws four zeros one four eight nine
01:11:52 please
01:11:58 uh this is an email chain of that date uh it comes from the grand fell grenfell leaseholders association to councillor blakeman and it's copied to you as you can see
01:12:09 and it's copied to you as you can see from the third line there so you you get this uh and if we go to page two
01:12:17 we can see that towards the bottom of the page there's a heading fire drill at grenfell tower and you can see reference to the 2010 fire
01:12:26 fire in that paragraph there and in the last sentence the author says since then that's uh 2010
01:12:37 since then that's uh 2010 you've organized one fire drill yourself not the kc tmo we strongly believe one is due
01:12:42 is due now in caps uh and then if you go to page three you can see that there's a link to the shepherd's court fire and the guardian's article about that do you remember whether that email
01:12:54 do you remember whether that email prompted you to consider whether a fire drill was necessary at grenfell tower i don't remember whether it prompted me to consider whether a fire drill necessary
01:13:03 necessary because uh it wasn't routine for us to and
01:13:06 and it wasn't routine for kc tmo as i understood it to undertake uh fire drills uh because i understood there was a stay put policy so it wasn't um it wasn't practice for a building to
01:13:17 um it wasn't practice for a building to be evacuated but people to stay put until the fire brigade were on site and uh they were organizing uh the extinguishing of the fire and and providing advice on how residents would
01:13:29 providing advice on how residents would uh
01:13:30 uh you know would or wouldn't be evacuated um i
01:13:33 um i i'm going to turn to a different topic mr chairman um this might be a convenient moment uh for uh
01:13:40 for uh the morning break we're doing well yes very well
01:13:43 very well but i think that sounds it's a good point to have a break uh mr johnson say we'll stop now uh we'll return it to fast 11 please and as usual please don't talk to anyone about your age thank you
01:14:04 thank you for 11. please
01:32:05 yes would you ask mrs johnson to come back in please
01:32:23 right ready to carry on yes thank you yes mr millet yes can i ask you now some questions please about um communications with residents and
01:32:35 um communications with residents and i'm going to start by taking you back please
01:32:38 please to what you said yesterday about the mma and and i summarize well i'll quote from day one two nine page thirteen lines six to sixteen
01:32:49 to sixteen uh and you say that the mma was set up to be a general document that set out the relationship between the council and the tmo
01:32:56 the tmo because it's a standard document drafted by government that set out how you would work
01:33:01 work with it on a range of quite very standard
01:33:04 standard very quite standard housing management issues from rent collection to housing management to asbs as we saw yesterday but perhaps didn't have any kind of specific chapters in it relating to very detailed pieces of work around a
01:33:15 very detailed pieces of work around a building refurbishment that's what you said
01:33:18 said yesterday um can we just look at two or three provisions uh in the mma first rbk3019006
01:33:30 uh in the mma first rbk3019006 at page 165.
01:33:44 and under paragraph two there you can see the 2.1 there was a provision as follows the neighborhood manager and project manager will decide whether to establish a client review group or steering group for the project
01:33:55 for the project this will be chaired by a representative of the residents association and will include the neighborhood manager and project manager the role of this group will be to act as client for the project review progress in implementing the scheme
01:34:06 implementing the scheme and focus on those issues which directly concern residents where it is decided not to establish a client review group the residents association will be asked to nominate a representative to join the project team
01:34:18 team that's one then there's another on page 167
01:34:23 paragraph 5.2 under the heading appointment of consultants and it says the project manager consultancy services manager neighborhood manager and residents association representatives
01:34:34 association representatives will select suitable consultants with relevant experience the project manager will chair the panel depending on the size and complexity of the project consultants may be appointed from a number of disciplines and the first one there as you can see
01:34:45 and the first one there as you can see is architecture you see that yes and there's also there are also other specific skills and then um if you go to page 175 please let's look together at paragraph
01:34:57 please let's look together at paragraph 15.3
01:34:59 15.3 the top of the page to ensure that the tenants concerns are addressed the residents association representative can either attend the site meeting or a meeting can be held with the residents association prior to the site
01:35:10 residents association prior to the site meeting
01:35:11 meeting feedback will be provided to the residents after the site meeting where necessary
01:35:15 necessary and then finally a page 177 there's two pages on
01:35:20 pages on paragraph 22.1 we've got uh post project review all schemes will be subject to a post-project review after completion of the project or on
01:35:31 after completion of the project or on sectional completion residents will be asked for their views on the way the work was carried out and what they like or dislike about the improvements to their homes the survey will also seek to collect bme data
01:35:44 now i've shown you all of those do you know
01:35:48 know whether any monitoring of whether these provisions were complied with took place in respect of the grenfell tower project um we did not undertake monitoring specifically
01:35:59 specifically with regard to the provisions in the mma for project management against the grenfell tower project why was that um as i said i've read the mma on two or three
01:36:11 i've read the mma on two or three occasions
01:36:12 occasions i did not use it on a regular basis and therefore did not refer to it with regard to how resident engagement should be undertaken on a project of this type
01:36:23 this type can i show you uh something from one of your day books please rbk3059574 at page one two five
01:36:46 uh now if we could just blow up um this a little bit more this is the 23rd of uh july 2014 entry by you in your in your day book and it
01:36:57 by you in your in your day book and it says grenfell tower met with um can you help me with that team team at tmo to discuss managing eddie defan and resident concer
01:37:09 managing eddie defan and resident concer resident liaison that says major capital projects look at mma for level of monitoring required can you explain that entry um
01:37:21 can you explain that entry um so um i was in error it looks like i did say
01:37:25 say in uh in july 2014 to check the mma for what it said i don't remember saying that um [Music]
01:37:31 [Music] and in terms of meet the team at the tmo to discuss managing eddie define and resident liaison it would have been about um how they were undertaking uh resident consultation on the refurbishment
01:37:43 consultation on the refurbishment project
01:37:44 project with with the residents there right just just focusing on uh the mma looking at the mma for level of monitoring required do you remember looking at the mma and asking or monitoring the team the tma's
01:37:56 or monitoring the team the tma's performance of the obligations we've just looked at together um so i was asking amanda johnson and i wanted one to do that so i was asking her to go away and do that oh i see uh how do you remember that it was
01:38:08 uh how do you remember that it was amanda johnson because it says one to one aj at the top which stands for oh i see underneath the purple yes thank you right
01:38:16 you right and what did she do do you remember no i don't did you follow up you remember um uh i don't know whether they would have followed up specifically with her about the point on the uh what the mma said but i definitely
01:38:27 uh what the mma said but i definitely would have spoken to her about what was taking place in terms of resident consultation at grenfell tower by the tmo um can i ask you some questions about the gta well before you do mr millett um you
01:38:40 well before you do mr millett um you asked amanda johnson to go and look at the mma to see what it said about consultation yes it's likely is it not that she reported back to you what she'd done um yes she probably did yes i
01:38:52 she'd done um yes she probably did yes i don't remember to be honest with you because i don't remember asking her to do that until i saw this entry in my day book now
01:38:58 book now well would it be fair to infer that she did as you asked yes she would she was a very diligent officer so she would have done and and reported back what she'd she would have done yes so it follows from that does it that you
01:39:11 so it follows from that does it that you at least at that stage were made aware of what the mma said about consultation i must have been yes perhaps decided not to pursue it um or um i don't i
01:39:25 or um i don't i quite honestly i don't remember this uh particular uh one to one or the follow-up that amanda johnson gave me um or or maybe took uh i can't i can't
01:39:36 or or maybe took uh i can't i can't remember so i don't want to kind of guess
01:39:37 guess to be honest with you right thank you yes
01:39:41 yes yes um can i then turn to your communications with gtla the grenfell tower leaseholders association um can we please look at iws401335
01:39:53 um can we please look at iws401335 at page 76
01:39:59 now this is the witness statement to the inquiry
01:40:02 inquiry of shaheed ahmed who was a long time resident of grenfell tower and he says at paragraph 218 on that page
01:40:11 page laura johnson was director of housing at rbkc and gtla had a lot to do with her gtla very often copied her in on emails i met her a few times over the years and
01:40:22 i met her a few times over the years and i always got the impression she didn't take me seriously and was inclined to protect the tmo just as a matter of fact is it right that
01:40:31 that you met him a a few times over the years i don't remember i i only remember meeting mr ahmed on one occasion and that would have been
01:40:42 on one occasion and that would have been at a
01:40:43 at a calc project board and if we go to page 79
01:40:48 79 paragraph 228 he says a paragraph 130 laura johnson says the council effectively placed its trust in the tmo
01:40:58 the tmo my impression was always that laura johnson gave the tmo unconditional support
01:41:04 support and then he makes a comment uh on the mma
01:41:10 were you aware that mr ahmed was was the chair of the grenfell tower leaseholders association um i would have been at the time yes yeah and were you also aware that mr tundewa deru was a non-resident leaseholder and vice chair
01:41:21 leaseholder and vice chair of the grenfell tower leasehelders association i would have been yes yes what would be your answer to the charge that uh that there was inadequate scrutiny by rbkc of the tma
01:41:32 scrutiny by rbkc of the tma or as he puts it that you gave the tmo unconditional support um i think that's unfair um i think uh i don't think i know that although i
01:41:43 uh i don't think i know that although i was supportive of the tmo because they were an organization that were undertaking the management of the council's housing stock we did have on occasion challenging conversations with the tmo about
01:41:54 conversations with the tmo about performance in relation to repairs or rent collection or void turin around
01:41:59 around and i would certain if you said spoke to the tmo they would say that the council didn't always agree with them on every point and would be happy to come back with them if there was anything
01:42:10 with them if there was anything that we weren't particularly happy about it may not have been the impression that mr
01:42:15 mr shah got but that certainly wasn't the case can you give us a particular instance
01:42:20 instance of an occasion when you took the gtla side on anything raised by either mr ahmed or mr abu um i can't think of anything off the top of my head now now i want to turn to the topic of the
01:42:31 i want to turn to the topic of the delays to the refurbishment which you deal with in your first statement at paragraph 151 and onwards um can i show you l j50 which is
01:42:43 um can i show you l j50 which is rbk403901
01:42:44 rbk403901 your email uh well sorry an email into which you're copied from tundial dairy to paul duncan of the 28th of february 2013. um
01:42:56 of the 28th of february 2013. um do you remember and there it is on the screen do you remember what you did if anything
01:43:00 anything in response generally to emails about delays
01:43:04 delays on the project um i don't remember specifically and this email wasn't copied to me i was copied into it so if i was copied into emails that were sent to kctmo rather than myself
01:43:17 sent to kctmo rather than myself quite often i would check via john malcolm the complaint manager or directly
01:43:22 directly that they were putting together a response to reply did you raise delays with paul duncan or any other member of the tmo staff um i didn't raise delays i don't remember raising delays i don't really remember who paul duncan
01:43:33 i don't really remember who paul duncan was to be honest with you i don't remember specifically raising it with him but i would have discussed with the tmo over the course of 2012 to 2015 why the
01:43:47 over the course of 2012 to 2015 why the project
01:43:48 project wasn't completed in the original time scale proposed in 2012 do you remember whether you tried to arrange meetings to discuss
01:43:54 discuss complaints such as this or indeed this particular complaint um i don't remember whether i arranged a meeting to discuss this particular complaint
01:44:03 complaint the complaint the grenfell tower leaseholders association were regular communicators with the kctmo and rbkc um and i did discuss with robert black at
01:44:14 and i did discuss with robert black at one of our monthly model 1 meetings or on a separate occasion how we were to arrange for a coordinated response
01:44:21 response to the uh many and often communications we received and it was also difficult to um sometimes discern who the uh who the leaseholders association were looking to
01:44:33 leaseholders association were looking to receive a response from because so many people it was sent to or copied into and can we go to tma1000 2731 please
01:44:45 i'd like to go to page three it sits in an email chain in early june 2013 between you councillor blakeman
01:44:52 blakeman and peter madison if we go to page three you will see that there is an email from judith blakeman dated the fifth of june to you
01:44:59 to you a copy to others uh and uh she says dear ms johnson i'm wondering whether it's possible for the council to produce a small
01:45:06 small leaflet or formal letter for the residents of grenfell tower we believe this is necessary as a matter of some urgency because a lot of misinformation is circulating you're probably aware of its source the
01:45:17 you're probably aware of its source the residents of the tower now believe that the proposed improvements for grenfell tower have been dropped furthermore they are now also being told that the council has no plans to replace the grenfell tower children's playground
01:45:30 children's playground and there are other things in there as well your response we can see on page two if we scroll up to that please
01:45:43 and in the main paragraph you say i agree
01:45:46 agree that quotes certain members of the community quote quotes are doing their best to spread false information and we do need to counter this it is probably not quite the right time to send out definitive information on the works
01:45:56 the works as we're still working through costs timetable programming program and contract a straight client relationship and this won't be finalized for a few weeks however i take a point about letting people know what's going on and we shall
01:46:07 people know what's going on and we shall jointly have a think about how to do this and ensure that local residents know we are still committed to making the improvements um i've shown you all of that to give you the full context there but i just want to ask you about the first line
01:46:18 want to ask you about the first line there
01:46:19 there where you refer to certain members of the community what was the false information being spread by certain members of the community um i believe uh councillor blakeman uh
01:46:32 um i believe uh councillor blakeman uh was referring to the non-replacement of the of the playground and that the council had decided that they were no longer going to fund or undertake the refurbishment to grenfell tower
01:46:42 tower right why do you refer to that as false information because we were but did you mean to imply
01:46:49 imply that that it was deliberately false uh yes i see who were the certain members of the community you were referring to um uh in this case um i believe myself
01:47:00 um uh in this case um i believe myself and mr
01:47:01 and mr councillor blakeman are referring to um eddie duffin right you thought you thought he was lying to the community did he i thought he was telling people information that wasn't true so yes he
01:47:12 information that wasn't true so yes he was not telling the truth right
01:47:20 if we go to page one please of this email string we can see that peter madison uh responds to councillor blakeman furthers your
01:47:31 to councillor blakeman furthers your email to laura i'm writing to give an update on current resident engagement on the refurbishment of grenfell tower see that and if you look in the last paragraph
01:47:44 and i should have said this email goes to councillor blatant it's copied to you if you look at the last paragraph he says we are committed to delivering the best investment for grenfell and we will work to ensure that we
01:47:56 and we will work to ensure that we communicate effectively with residents throughout the process and ensure that they get accurate information and are properly consulted do you know what what was peter madison doing at that time june 13 to ensure that the
01:48:08 at that time june 13 to ensure that the residents did get accurate information and were consulted properly
01:48:12 properly um i think you probably have to ask peter madison for a definitive opinion on that but my impression would be that
01:48:19 be that my uh thoughts on that are that peter madison would be arranging meetings with a residence or sending out a newsletter or
01:48:30 or sending out a newsletter or they would be talking to residents about how they would like to be communicated with
01:48:34 with throughout the uh refurbishment project yeah i mean my question whether he did that in 2013 i i can't tell you definitively my question really was when peter
01:48:45 my question really was when peter madison says what he says there did you know what he was talking about by way of
01:48:49 by way of uh communicating effectively and ensuring that the residents get accurate information he says we will ensure that we communicate effectively so i would have i would on regeneration
01:49:01 would have i would on regeneration projects or refurbishment projects of this type would mean effectively by using a range of mechanisms in order to be able to talk to residents um
01:49:10 um and tailor that communication accordingly because different residents like to be uh
01:49:17 uh like to find out information in different ways did you have a a system or policy for monitoring or overseeing that work the communications work the work that mr madison refers to at
01:49:30 the work that mr madison refers to at the foot of this email um in 2013 that would have been undertaken by the regeneration and development team and then from 2014 uh amanda johnson's team would have followed up around the uh you know what communication was
01:49:42 uh you know what communication was taking place right and did did they report to you at least in general terms about process and progress uh they would have reported in general terms and on occasion i got sent copies of
01:49:53 on occasion i got sent copies of newsletters i didn't routinely get invited or notified of when the meetings were taking place that were held
01:50:01 were held and i did understand at a later date that there was a meeting held and then i did know that they had decided to move to more individual meetings because that was expressed as a preference by residents about how
01:50:12 as a preference by residents about how they would like to be informed about the grenfell tower update right uh can we then move to the end of 2015 you deal with a number of
01:50:23 end of 2015 you deal with a number of other complaints in your statements but i want to focus on uh the petition presented to the council on the 3rd of december 2015 next uh in which the hpsc
01:50:36 uh in which the hpsc the scrutiny committee was asked to undertake a review of the tmos and ryden's management of the refurbishment project now you refer to this and deal with it at paragraph 156 of your
01:50:46 of your first witness statement can we please uh go
01:50:50 go straight into a document rbk50109 this is an email of the 7th of december 2015 but you sent to councillor fielding mellon as you can see and councillor marshall
01:51:03 and i i'm assuming you sent it to those gentlemen
01:51:06 gentlemen because of their roles that you identified earlier chairman of the scrutiny committee and the cabinet member yes yes um you say there
01:51:18 yes yes um you say there uh in that email um the petition was handed into council on tuesday night by councillor blakeman um and and then you go on to say in the next paragraph
01:51:29 next paragraph if you'd like to discuss with robert black or peter madison what they've done with regard to communicating with residents councillor blakeman eddie and how they think ryden have performed i'm sure they would be only too happy to discuss this with you i think it's fair to say
01:51:40 you i think it's fair to say peter is exhausted from the amount of time straight responses eddie and councillor blatant have taken on this project
01:51:45 project the tmo will of course be happy to assist in whatever way they can but i don't think either myself or robert have the resources to undertake a full-scale review with interviews of residents to meet the demands of the petitioners
01:51:56 demands of the petitioners i'd like your guidance on how you wish to respond to the petition and then you what lies below that i think is that is this is a it's an outtake i think from the petition itself
01:52:07 outtake i think from the petition itself we the undersigned um it was the prayer as we decided it's the prayer yeah you say it's the following prayer but it's it's an outtake is it it's a cut and paste
01:52:16 and paste yes yes
01:52:20 now let's just look at that in the third line
01:52:23 line it says time and again residents views have been ignored or downplayed did you agree with the effective charge that the tmo had ignored or downplayed
01:52:34 that the tmo had ignored or downplayed the resident's views during the refurbishment no i did not now you say as i've as i've shown you at the top uh or what it says at the top the prayer of the petition organization has clearly been
01:52:45 petition organization has clearly been organized by eddie defan why did you think that the petition and the prayer particularly had been organized by eddie defan because he was our most regular correspondent so it was an assumption
01:52:56 correspondent so it was an assumption you made
01:52:56 you made yes it was uh why did you not have the resources to conduct a review that the petition sought uh because as we discussed earlier uh there was only amanda johnson and celie
01:53:08 there was only amanda johnson and celie chalaskan
01:53:09 chalaskan in the housing commissioning function and i couldn't identify anybody at that time
01:53:14 time who would have been available to undertake something of that level of detail within my team if i had been instructed to by the councillors then i would have found the resources but i was just saying i don't think i have anybody available
01:53:25 i don't think i have anybody available to undertake this at the present time did you ask the result the councillors can we please have the resources to undertake
01:53:30 undertake the review that sought no what i said is please uh
01:53:34 please uh uh please can i have your advice so if they had come back to me and asked me to do that
01:53:39 do that then i would have gone back and had a discussion not with the counsellors i would have had a discussion with mr holgate yes i see so when you say i would like your guidance on how you wish to respond to the petition you were
01:53:49 were essentially taking a neutral line here were you i was saying yes i was saying what do you what would you like to do about this how would you like to respond to this petition right this is my view this is
01:54:01 petition right this is my view this is the resources i have available how would you like to respond i follow uh
01:54:08 uh did this stage did you remember the um the provisions of the mma that i read to you earlier just after the break
01:54:19 the break and ask yourself i wonder how come it it it happens that the residents are are so dissatisfied
01:54:30 are so dissatisfied with the engagement in respect of the grenfell tower project given those provisions um i can categorically state i never thought to myself i wonder how this relates to the
01:54:41 this relates to the provisions in the mma and i did think about why the residents were unhappy and why we had received those signatures
01:54:52 yes um but as part of that thinking i think
01:54:55 think you've just confirmed it you never linked that to the tma's contractual obligations under the mma no i didn't i didn't have that thought process about how it related to the mma my thought process would be much more
01:55:06 my thought process would be much more about what was good practice in terms of consulting residents on a project of this type and this nature so can we take it that you you never thought a thought along the lines of something has gone badly wrong
01:55:17 lines of something has gone badly wrong with the tma's performance of those obligations no i did not think anything had gone badly wrong uh in the course of time it's right isn't it that the tmo working board did investigate complaints that were raised
01:55:29 investigate complaints that were raised during the project yes they did
01:55:36 and grenfell tower is was one of the first major projects undertaken by the tma i think yes it was um why were you not keen to see the lessons learned from the refurbishment by undertaking a full review so so that
01:55:48 by undertaking a full review so so that other projects later could be could benefit from that a full review was undertaken by their tmo board and the the results of that review were then fed back to myself and to scrutiny
01:56:00 then fed back to myself and to scrutiny committee
01:56:06 um well if you look at the last sentence of the prayer what is asked for is that's two last two sentences uh what he said it's vital that all the
01:56:17 what he said it's vital that all the lessons from the grenfell tower project are learned so that the terrible daily living conditions inflicted upon us for so long and not
01:56:23 and not replicated elsewhere as part of this investigation the residents of grenfell tower ask that their views and experiences be canvassed and included in the scrutiny report now uh your
01:56:36 now uh your what they're after you can see at the start of the prayer um is an urgent scrutiny of the tmo and ryden's management of the refurbishment project currently underway at grenfell tower
01:56:47 tower they're not asking for scrutiny of the tmo
01:56:51 tmo by the tmo are they no they're not but that the the petition was brought to scrutiny committee and the residents of grenfell
01:57:02 residents of grenfell tower uh well a small number of residents from grenfell tower came to scrutiny committee to present their uh
01:57:09 their uh present their report and were given the opportunity to speak by the chair councillor marshall at exclusionary committee about their experiences of the refurbishment project you see what to cut a long story short what the
01:57:20 to cut a long story short what the residents were after was an independent investigation and analysis of the project so that lessons could be learnt did you understand that that's what they wanted uh did i understand that they wanted somebody independent or whether
01:57:32 wanted somebody independent or whether they would like the council to do it um i don't remember having that thought process at the time right let's look at lj 61 then please which you refer to a paragraph 160 of your statement
01:57:43 your statement rbk50116 please page two email from david collins to victoria borick foot of the page
01:57:56 to victoria borick foot of the page 3rd of january 2016 so this is a a month after the presentation of the petition and three days ahead of the scheduled meeting before the scrutiny dear victoria thank you for visiting
01:58:07 dear victoria thank you for visiting grenfell tower and if you um look um at page two
01:58:19 it's quite a long uh email and but it it starts it starts on page two in in
01:58:26 two in in in substance and continues done and if you go to page three at the foot of the of the page you can see that it says in the last paragraph specifically we would like you to support in writing our call for an independent investigation one
01:58:38 for an independent investigation one carried out within a structure of change which would ensure the findings are implemented so the experiences of residents never have to be as they are again we believe this independent investigation is the only way to bring
01:58:49 investigation is the only way to bring about meaningful change within the existing and proper channels now there is much else in this email i i could read to you but my next document
01:59:00 i could read to you but my next document is at page one we can see that this comes
01:59:03 comes up to you on page one
01:59:08 from robert black can you see that yes uh on the fourth of january and then you send that on to celia chaliscan and amanda johnson more information if you scroll down to the email from david collins say
01:59:20 the email from david collins say can we take it that by this time third perhaps 4th january 2016 you understood that david collins
01:59:28 collins was after an independent investigation yes and that he had said in fact and i haven't taken you to it but 90 of the residents had signed this petition yes
01:59:40 petition yes
01:59:40 [Applause] so you knew by that point that it was it was important to the residents that the investigation that take place be in an independent one it was important to david collins that it was an independent well it was
01:59:51 it was an independent well it was important to the signatories of the petition um whether the signatories of the petition fully had the opportunity to read the prayer i can't answer that question
02:00:01 question but all i can say is that it was important that to david collins that there was an independent investigation are you suggesting that the signatures of the petition might might not have read the prayer or understood it um i i think all of the
02:00:13 understood it um i i think all of the people in grenfell tower perfectly capable of reading the petition and understanding the prayer um but i didn't know how the uh signatories of the petition were collected i didn't that's not that's not
02:00:24 not that's not the point is it i mean there is a large body of people not just david collins calling for an independent investigation there is a petition calling that with there with signatories on it from members of the grenfell tower uh
02:00:35 from members of the grenfell tower uh calling for an independent investigation into tmo that is correct was a decision not to order an independent review revisited in the light of what i've just shown you
02:00:46 shown you i don't remember the timeline to be honest with you well let's then move forward well was it was a decision not to order an independent review ever revisited
02:00:55 revisited notwithstanding the message i've shown you from david collins that made its way up to you
02:01:01 up to you um does the message i'm afraid i don't have the dates in front of me does the email from david collins come before after the scrutiny committee um the dates are the dates are the
02:01:12 um the dates are the dates are the petition is the 3rd of december david collins's email is the 3rd of january 2016 and the scrutiny committee meeting was on the 6th of january okay um so at the scrutiny committee meeting
02:01:24 um so at the scrutiny committee meeting there was a presentation from memory and a discussion held about the um about the the petition and the presentation given
02:01:35 presentation given and there was questions and answers provided
02:01:39 provided and then i don't remember exactly when the
02:01:42 the offer was made and or the decision was made to have the investigation undertaken by the tmo by a working party from the tmo
02:01:51 tmo chaired by paula franz who was an rbk rbkc
02:01:55 rbkc nominee to the tmo board um and she was an expert in uh regeneration well let's see how this unfolds can we go to tmo double zero eight five two seven zero four please
02:02:06 zero four please a tmo double zero eight five two seven zero four email chain between you and robert black which starts on the fifth of january 2016.
02:02:17 uh if we scroll down please uh to uh page
02:02:20 page uh
02:02:24 page four we can see his email to you the fifth of january uh and halfway down uh this is the day before the meeting
02:02:37 uh this is the day before the meeting and it says in terms of outcomes the board agreed we need to we needed to finish the project and carry out a review to see what has works
02:02:48 carry out a review to see what has works has worked and not i.e lessons learned usually this would be officers doing it but they wanted to be involved which is fine
02:02:54 fine and adds the challenge and independence paula fance wants to be involved and adds value to her regeneration work she was very supportive cush will get involved in a few others as could judith they can listen to the
02:03:05 as could judith they can listen to the issues
02:03:06 issues the board feels this is a tma matter and wants to deal with it itself i imagine they will be happy to share the outcomes with scrutiny not sure what tcc will be like it's a hell of a week to come back to
02:03:20 uh just just on that what was tcc uh tenants consultative committee right and uh you respond to that the next day page three robert please
02:03:31 the next day page three robert please the board went well and always a good idea to get off to a good start in what is a hideous week just pausing there what was so terrible uh the first week in january apart from
02:03:42 uh the first week in january apart from that no
02:03:43 that no the first week in january is always uh a number of
02:03:47 number of um uh evening meetings that always took place in that week that was scheduled every year scrutiny committees cabinets tcc and you came back straight after christmas and then had to do a number of uh papers on meetings right
02:03:58 a number of uh papers on meetings right so it wasn't just the looming 6th of january oh no it was uh it was that that
02:04:03 that that every year without doubt that first week was always you were you were working till 10 11 o'clock at night attending uh attending meetings and then we go on board recommendations seem very reasonable rbkc has no desire to be
02:04:14 reasonable rbkc has no desire to be involved in the review so i shall echo the point at this point councillor mackover so that the recommendations the board has made are supported at scrutiny
02:04:25 has made are supported at scrutiny committee why did our bkc have no desire to be involved in the review because at this stage we wanted the grenfell tower project to be completed
02:04:37 grenfell tower project to be completed it wasn't quite finished at that stage uh we uh as i've said previously we didn't have the resources available at that time to undertake it um and uh we were looking for the tmo to
02:04:48 um and uh we were looking for the tmo to you know sort of as any organization would that had undertaken a piece of work of this nature uh to then take responsibility uh for looking at to see if there was any lessons learned or anything
02:04:59 any lessons learned or anything that they could do in order to be able to assess the performance of the um of the project yes was it not the role of rvkc to scrutinize the tmo and particularly to oversee the performance
02:05:10 performance of the refurbishment project we were and we were doing that day to day yes in the role of scrutineer why did rbkc not not want to be involved in the review um
02:05:22 be involved in the review um well we don't want to be involved in the review at this stage we were happy to let
02:05:26 let the tmo particularly with the board involvement to um to get on with it why did rbkc not itself want to investigate the concerns raised by the residents
02:05:37 raised by the residents about the tma's management of such a significant project um because uh at the time i uh we i had understood that the uh the tmo had
02:05:49 i had understood that the uh the tmo had done a
02:05:49 done a door knocking exercise uh to establish uh what the uh following the petition the tmo had been particularly concerned about
02:05:58 about the issues that had been raised and they decided that they would go and speak to the residents directly to see if those concerns were supported and they had found a very different outcome on the doorstep to the
02:06:10 different outcome on the doorstep to the one that had been presented at the petition [Applause] uh did you speak to councillor mackover
02:06:22 uh did you speak to councillor mackover as identified here or suggested um i probably did yes do you remember what he said
02:06:28 said no did he agree to support the tmo board at the scrutiny committee um i don't know but if he did then it would be uh set out in the minutes of the scrutiny committee meeting right right what was the purpose of
02:06:39 right right what was the purpose of getting councillor mac over as it were on side so that the recommendations the board has made are supported at scrutiny committee because i thought it was a a sensible suggestion
02:06:50 suggestion that the tmo undertake a review of the refurbishment project and it be led by a board-led it was seemed like a very sensible way forward for the uh for a small working
02:07:01 forward for the uh for a small working party to be set up chaired by paula fans who was as i say um
02:07:05 um an rbkc nominee onto the board with expertise and regeneration to undertake the review it just seemed like a very sensible suggestion at that time
02:07:13 time sensible maybe but but isn't it trying to get a member of the scrutiny committee
02:07:20 to support the tmo rather than independently scrutinizing whatever it is the tmo has done um well i uh spoke to councillor mac over and explained my point of view but
02:07:31 and explained my point of view but councillor mac over is perfectly entitled to disagree with me well maybe but what i'm interested really isn't what you were you were trying to do were you trying to get councillor mac over on side as as a member of the scrutiny committee
02:07:44 as as a member of the scrutiny committee so that he would support the recommendations of the board the tmo yes because i thought it was a very sensible suggestion yes it may be sensible but how is it independent how is it
02:07:53 is it rigorous how is it ruthlessly robust uh well i'm advising councillor mac over as a role as an officer in the council of my opinion
02:08:03 and as i said he's perfectly entitled to disagree with me can we go to rbk3030744 please
02:08:16 now the email we've just been looking at is at 1636 on the 5th of january this is an email from you to councillor mac over and councillor marshall
02:08:23 marshall at 16 46 10 minutes later 4 46 p.m and you say councillor mac over the tmo board met on monday night
02:08:34 the tmo board met on monday night one of the items on the agenda was grenfell tower and the impending discussion at scrutiny committee on the 6th of january the board agreed tmo needed to finish the project tmo to carry out a review to see what
02:08:45 tmo to carry out a review to see what has worked and not ie lessons learned usually this would be officers doing it but members wanted board members wanted to be involved which adds the challenge in independence paula fance independent board member appointed
02:08:56 fance independent board member appointed by rbkc
02:08:58 by rbkc wants to be involved in adds value to her regeneration work she was very supportive cush will get involved in a few others as could judith they can listen to the issues
02:09:07 issues the the board feels this is a tma matter and wants to deal with it itself they will then share the outcomes with their report with scrutiny later in the year now just pausing there that's
02:09:16 that's not entirely a cut and paste but extremely similar to the email that we saw earlier between you and robert black of the 4th of january wasn't it yes because i'm i'm telling him what the board agreed yes no i'm not criticizing you for that
02:09:27 yes no i'm not criticizing you for that i'm just getting the facts right and then he says i'm sure mr black or sorry you say i'm sure mr black will raise this as on wednesday but if not i thought i would share it with you as it would be
02:09:38 would share it with you as it would be useful if a suggested outcome of this discussion that scrutiny committee could support the tmo and the due process that they are undertaking why did you send this email to these counselors
02:09:50 counselors um well councillor mac over is uh i believe he's now the chair of this christianity committee he may have taken over from councillor marshall at that stage
02:09:59 stage and i was as an officer advising counsellors about what i thought would be a good outcome in this in this circumstances and a good outcome would be the scrutiny
02:10:10 and a good outcome would be the scrutiny committee supporting the tmo uh supporting the tmo to undertake the review because i thought it was a good idea
02:10:21 why didn't you just leave it to the scrutiny committee to decide for themselves rather than making a suggestion about the outcome uh i could have done but um it's also my role as director of housing to provide information to the
02:10:32 housing to provide information to the scrutiny committee and advise them of conversations that i've had in order to help the functioning of the scrutiny committee
02:10:38 committee you're not just providing them with information are you you're actually making a suggestion about an approach that the scrutiny committee should take which is to support the tma and the due process that they're undertaking
02:10:49 process that they're undertaking yes i am and that's i'm perfectly entitled to do that in my role as director of housing and councillor mackover is perfectly entitled to come back to me and say laura johnson you have overstepped the mark and i do not want to take your advice
02:11:00 advice yes why were you so keen that the scrutiny committee support the tmo and the dude process which did not involve an independent investigation because i thought it was a perfectly
02:11:11 because i thought it was a perfectly sensible suggestion that a small working party from the tmo board undertook the review of the work that had taken place at grenfell tower if we uh then go back please
02:11:23 if we uh then go back please to the email we were looking at the hideous week email at tm00852704
02:11:33 and go up in that email chain above where we were
02:11:47 tmo.00852704 [Applause] yes
02:11:57 and
02:12:02 if you look please at uh page uh well that's page two in that please robert black to you sixth of
02:12:14 please robert black to you sixth of january
02:12:15 january foot of the page over to page three
02:12:19 he says well done last night close close working between both teams barbara has picked up the double act with steve
02:12:30 with steve last push for tonight will you let councillor marshall know my board decision might be worth reminding him they have four appointees and pauline has confirmed she is happy to be on the review and
02:12:41 she is happy to be on the review and then you respond above that on page two
02:12:46 1138 uh robert yes i thought it went well as can be as well as can be expected i've emailed councillor marshall the board outcomes
02:12:55 outcomes so he's aware and in that email i reminded him that paula was an rbkc nominee
02:12:59 nominee we can make this point again tonight if the scrutiny committee member is suggested as being on the review of the grenfell tower refurbishment
02:13:09 so so was your aim to make sure that there was no suggestion that a scrutiny committee member was on the review uh no if i had uh no problem whatsoever if a
02:13:21 i had uh no problem whatsoever if a scrutiny committee member wanted to be on the review um i was just making the point that paula france was an rbk some c nominee um you know sort of to remind the
02:13:34 um you know sort of to remind the scrutiny committee uh who would would what probably not remember
02:13:39 remember uh routinely who the four nominees from rbc
02:13:42 rbc were onto the tmo board it was not intended to say we would object if a scrutiny committee member was on it was just saying rbkc already has somebody on this working party
02:13:53 working party um and just to remind them that she was a nominee did you seek to persuade councillor marshall that the scrutiny committee should not be involved no no security committee wanted to be involved it was uh it was fine by me
02:14:05 involved it was uh it was fine by me let's just finish this email chain off because it fills in a chronological spot in the story um if we go up to page one foot of page one robert black comes back to you same day
02:14:16 back to you same day thanks laura just met the borough commander fb rob uh we now have the enforcement notice for adair the other to follow the key issue is door closers on both which we agreed and we'll now work out a plan and time scale
02:14:28 work out a plan and time scale uh bigger picture is rebecca fb fire safety wants us to do this to all 10 000 properties and have a plan to check including leaseholders exclamation mark but that is for the latter he writes he means later and then
02:14:40 latter he writes he means later and then you respond robert bearing in mind this is in the public domain now as it's on at the lfb website i think it may be wise to put together a joint press release setting out our position
02:14:49 position we should also mention this at scrutiny tonight tonight it helps to preempt any muckraking which may take place on social media and shows we are dealing with it and working with the lfb
02:15:00 working with the lfb uh what was what was muckraking what was that
02:15:04 that a reference to oh i don't remember exactly but i should imagine uh that um that uh there was as you know a number of uh there was a regular
02:15:14 regular blog undertaken uh criticizing uh the work of the tmo and uh the council um and uh and if there was anything that that was published that was critical
02:15:25 published that was critical um or could be construed as critical then it made it way as it does and now onto social media and what was your concern really here to
02:15:36 and what was your concern really here to stop the arrival of the enforcement notices in relation to adair the adair tower fire being grist to the mill
02:15:43 mill of those residents who were going to make a presentation to the scrutiny committee that night no not grist to the mill it was it was uh is about saying we have uh we've got a plan to deal with
02:15:54 we have uh we've got a plan to deal with this
02:15:55 this um and this is the way that uh uh the tmo plan to respond to the uh to the enforcement notices uh and they were
02:16:03 they were and so they were informed about that this matter was being dealt with can we then look at the minutes of the housing and property scrutiny committee from that night 6th january 2016. rbk3032130
02:16:18 6th january 2016. rbk3032130 and if we go to page one you can see who was there
02:16:23 uh and uh quentin marshall is now chairman with samakova as vice councillor blakeman is there and others in attendance include
02:16:34 in attendance include robert black and eu and amanda johnson and peter madison as well and barbara matthews we've got a cast list and if we go to page two
02:16:43 page two there's a verbal item uh in relation to grandfield tower uh which is quite long i won't read it all to you
02:16:51 to you um in essence it's minuted that you give an oral summary on the scope of works of grenfell tower do you know why it was you who gave that report when both robert black and peter madison were in attendance
02:17:02 madison were in attendance um i would have been asked by the chair and where did the summary come from was it provided to you by somebody no i would have wrote it you wrote it yourself yes from what information from information that i had over the
02:17:14 from information that i had over the number of years i had been working uh with uh as a director of housing at
02:17:26 rbkc did anybody from the tmo assist you with preparing this presentation i don't believe they did no um if you look at the second paragraph you can see
02:17:38 look at the second paragraph you can see that you uh explain that the boilers were originally planned for the kitchens and then you say but it had then been
02:17:50 and then you say but it had then been considered easier to place these boilers in the hallways which had been conveyed to residents that's right isn't it the decision had been made to put the boilers in people's hallways
02:18:00 hallways and then afterwards you told them about it
02:18:04 it um i didn't tell them about it in terms of the
02:18:09 of the in the terms of the timeline of communication um i understand there was a general communication sent out to residents about uh the refurbishment and what was due to take place and in that communication would have stated
02:18:21 would have stated about uh where the intention of the boilers was to go and then there may well have been follow-up discussions about um with ryden's no doubt in the tmo peter madison is better better able to
02:18:33 peter madison is better better able to answer this than i am about the engineering of where they they weren't necessarily boilers actually there were heat exchange units uh where they were going to be placed when you wrote boilers yes i did write
02:18:45 when you wrote boilers yes i did write boilers yes but then rachel you wrote this and this is your original it is yes i'm now correcting myself you're quite right about that but my point is really that can we take it that what you wrote here accurately reflects your understanding
02:18:57 accurately reflects your understanding at the time which was that the decision had been made to site uh the heat exchange units in the kitchens but then thought easier to put them in the hallways
02:19:08 to put them in the hallways and then the residents were told about it uh yes but i i couldn't you know hand on heart say uh in terms of writing this as a that i was seeking to um
02:19:19 that i was seeking to um that i couldn't handle say that i was saying
02:19:22 saying uh that i was uh conveyed the message to residents after all before because i don't think i would have known that as definitively right i wrote this as a general statement as in this wasn't a
02:19:33 statement as in this wasn't a presentation that the exclusionary committee then took from me and then copied out verbatim
02:19:38 verbatim this was a note of what i said in the meeting
02:19:44 now indeed this point about making about the council or the tma making a decision about what should happen within people's homes and then telling them about it
02:19:56 homes and then telling them about it afterwards it was a point that uh was turned into a major item in mr tufan's complaint when he got to his feet very shortly after your presentation isn't it
02:20:06 isn't it uh yes i take it yes was that factor in other words the process here that the council had made decision or to the tmo who made a decision about what should happen within people's homes
02:20:18 what should happen within people's homes and then told them about it not a serious concern for you um i didn't take it as a serious concern if i'm honest with you about uh i didn't know the timeline of events
02:20:32 uh i didn't know the timeline of events about about whether the tmo told residents
02:20:35 residents after the uh heat exchange users were were proposed to be in the kitchen and then moved to the hallway or whether they told residents that they were moving the heat exchange units into the hallway and then took place
02:20:47 into the hallway and then took place afterwards um i presume that they took that decision not um and that they may have updated them before or after they may have updated them on individual bases when they went round to customers homes
02:20:58 when they went round to customers homes and
02:20:59 and uh informed them about where they were proposing to place the heat exchange units
02:21:03 units i wasn't sufficiently cognizant in detail about exactly when the tmo communicated the movement of the heat exchange units from the kitchen to the hallway right i mean the short point is the concern was
02:21:15 concern was as reflected by what you're saying as a matter of fact the residents were told about what should happen within their homes
02:21:20 homes are not asked that was that was the point
02:21:23 point um i understand what the point is and on any refurbishment project um there are always decisions that are made um as the project goes along and it always
02:21:32 always it changes you know it's just uh people you know
02:21:36 you know you're looking at a project you decide at the outcome about where you think radiators are placed or where you think you can put a boiler or where you think you can how you can fit the taps or where you think
02:21:48 you can fit the taps or where you think the extractor fan may go and then when the actual builder turns up on the day that may change it's just it's just a reality of how you manage to fit something in now can we go a little bit further down
02:22:00 now can we go a little bit further down the next paragraph um you uh refer to the heating issue heating system being a big issue then you say she said that the new cladding improved the look of the building
02:22:12 of the building uh what was your point there
02:22:17 um that it made the building look nicer yeah was the aesthetics of the building ever one of the matters of his serious historic
02:22:27 historic complaint by the residents i don't remember ever it being a matter of serious historic complaint but i do remember having discussions uh with uh particularly with mr duffan
02:22:39 with uh particularly with mr duffan actually at calc meeting about how shabby the the um the tower block looked um and especially in an area as uh as nice as notting hill is um where
02:22:50 uh as nice as notting hill is um where they live
02:22:50 they live where grenfell tower is and about you know kind of wouldn't it be nice if it didn't look you know kind of quite sedated yes you see there's no mention here of the new clouding
02:23:01 mention here of the new clouding improving the thermal efficiency of the building
02:23:04 building was that because in your mind the purpose of the cladding was to make it look nicer i was making a very general statement to scrutiny committee about the uh the uh the refurbishment of the
02:23:17 the uh the uh the refurbishment of the of the tower block and it wasn't a forensic exam it wasn't a forensic presentation about the pros and cons of why the refurbishment had taken place just a general statement that the cladding made the building look nice
02:23:28 cladding made the building look nice does it not reveal your thinking which was the new cladding improved the look of the building which was its purpose rather than actually making the building more thermally efficient no right okay um now the committee resolved
02:23:40 right okay um now the committee resolved in principle to set up a working group to examine the issues raised by the petition and i'm assuming you were supportive of that working group being set up
02:23:47 set up yes yes um
02:23:50 why were you not supportive of an independent and impartial review when you were initially sent the petition
02:23:58 uh i was i didn't have any experience of setting up independent it wasn't my customer experience that independent organizations came in
02:24:09 that independent organizations came in and undertook reviews of pieces of work that
02:24:11 that had been undertaken of this nature and i was very satisfied that the board would do a very thorough examination of the pros and cons and what had happened and satisfied that they would exercise
02:24:22 and satisfied that they would exercise due diligence can we look at page five please in the very last paragraph under section a4 just above a5 in conclusion the chairman agreed that a working group would be commissioned at
02:24:33 working group would be commissioned at some point in the future but this this was dependent on a number of factors including the conclusion of existing working groups and the review work conducted by the tmo now first what were the existing working
02:24:44 now first what were the existing working groups
02:24:45 groups um i don't remember you would have to see the minutes of the scrutiny committees but at any one time there was normally one or two working groups set up to look at in detail specific items that
02:24:58 to look at in detail specific items that have been raised at scrutiny committee and they were chaired by a member of the scrutiny committee and they focused so for example a working group could be uh
02:25:09 for example a working group could be uh to look at how the council applied garage rent inflation
02:25:15 inflation you don't know is the answer no that's correct right secondly what was the review work being conducted by the tma um so i think the uh i don't know but i presume it was
02:25:26 presume it was they're referring to the proposition of the uh
02:25:29 the uh for the board to set up a review
02:25:33 but again you don't know no i don't know exactly
02:25:37 exactly it looks just from the reader's perspective that this was kicking the resident's concern into the long grass is that right no i completely refute that you say no
02:25:50 that you say no a working group would be commissioned at some point in the future dependent on a number of factors that looks like is that not long grass no that's the chairman acknowledging the fact that there are already working
02:26:01 fact that there are already working groups are being undertaken there's only so much resources that both officers and members have in order to be able to commit towards these working groups
02:26:10 groups and that the exclusion scrutiny committee would have a look at the outcomes of the review of the tmo and if required they would commission for the working group i don't think that's i don't think
02:26:21 i don't think that's i don't think that's kicking it into the long grass i think it's just uh stating a point well well mr johnson help me then when would the working group to examine the refurbishment be set up
02:26:35 the refurbishment be set up um it says or the next week or when um it wasn't at my gift to set up the week no but when this is a note of a meeting you were at and a presentation uh that you made i'm not sure you necessarily made this but
02:26:46 not sure you necessarily made this but here's the conclusion you were there when did you think that this working group would be commissioned if there was uh if following the outcome of the working group from the board
02:26:58 of the working group from the board and the reports of that which were would come back to scrutiny committee if the chair at that time on reviewing the outcome of that working groups uh the tmo board led working group
02:27:10 uh the tmo board led working group outcome then they would take a decision at that time which time at the time that the report came back from the tmo working group did you don't know what the working group was
02:27:22 you just told us no the so the tmo had a working group to look at the uh this petition they would then report
02:27:31 report which would go to the tmo main board and then it would come to scrutiny committee at that time the scrutiny committee would have a look at that and if on review of that they would decide that there needed to be further
02:27:42 decide that there needed to be further work undertaken then the chair of the scrutiny committee would then decide if there was a need to set up a working group and if indeed there were resources to do so
02:27:52 to do so and what would that working group do well i don't know because it wasn't set up the chairman's agreeing that a working group would be commissioned at some point in the future what at that stage was it
02:28:03 the future what at that stage was it intended or contemplated that that working group would do well if they uh reviewed the report from the tmo board and they found that there were deficiencies or areas that they had concerns about it
02:28:14 areas that they had concerns about it would be my expectation that the working group would have a terms of reference which would uh which would seek to explore that in further detail the work being done uh
02:28:26 the work being done uh at this point would not be impo impartial or independent would it it was just going to be looked at by the tmo itself that's correct did you genuinely believe that the residents would be satisfied
02:28:37 that the residents would be satisfied with that response that's summarized in the chairman's conclusion i've just read to you
02:28:41 to you i don't know well you don't know do you remember
02:28:45 remember having a thought one way or the other whether the residents would be satisfied with the conclusion um it would be my expectation based on experience that the residents would
02:28:56 on experience that the residents would have had a preference to set up uh would have a preference to set up an independent uh organization i don't know who they would be um and uh that would have been their preference
02:29:07 preference so yes did you realize at the time and i have to suggest you you must have done that the residents would not have been satisfied
02:29:16 satisfied with that conclusion uh i would thought they would have preferred to have an independent organization i don't know who that would be
02:29:24 be and so you can infer that they may be dissatisfied now we know that the tmo board group uh reported its findings at the end of march 2016. let's go to that
02:29:38 end of march 2016. let's go to that rbk403513
02:29:49 and you can see it there and the purpose of this report uh is uh to provide the board with information and recommendations from the board member review of the grenfell tower
02:30:00 member review of the grenfell tower regeneration report uh and uh project and it doesn't bear a signatory at the bottom of page six um first of all did you see this
02:30:11 um first of all did you see this document at the time i would have done yes who would have provided it to you um i would have been uh provided with a copy either in the board papers um or if it went because it went to cmo
02:30:23 um or if it went because it went to cmo board
02:30:24 board or i may have been sent a copy of it separately do you know who wrote it uh no i don't remember you don't remember or did you know at one point i would have done yes right i don't
02:30:35 i would have done yes right i don't remember no okay
02:30:39 so just to see what it is it looks as if it's a report to the tmo board by a group within the tmo or seconded to that group is that is that right
02:30:59 it looks like it was written by um a member is
02:31:02 member is a member it was either written by a member of the review group or written by an officer in the tmo um who was uh you know kind of as you say seconded to work with them and then
02:31:13 seconded to work with them and then provide a written report but i don't remember you you'd have to ask the tmo to be honest right well we'll look a little bit into the detail in a moment can i can i proceed on the basis that
02:31:24 can i can i proceed on the basis that this was not intended to be an independent or impartial review uh this was intended to be a review by a working party of the tmo board it was not an independent i'm not saying impartial
02:31:35 independent i'm not saying impartial because it could well be impartial but it was not independent of the tma right it was six pages long were you surprised by the short length of that report
02:31:44 report well let me rephrase the question were you surprised that the report was only six pages
02:31:48 six pages uh no i didn't i did not have an opinion at the time about the length of the uh of the of uh can we look at paragraph 2.8 please on page
02:32:02 paragraph 2.8 please on page two i can
02:32:05 two i can probably give you a bit a bit of a run-up to that um at paragraph 2.6 you see that all members of the tma board were invited
02:32:15 invited on the 19th of january to express an interest in joining the review group and you can see who put themselves forward and you can see councillor condon simmons uh who was a councillor
02:32:26 councillor an rbkc councillor nominee presumably was on that or at least put themselves forward
02:32:33 forward then there was a scoping meeting on the 24th of january to define the scope of the review and it was agreed and you can see the bullet points there what would be covered
02:32:43 covered six matters and then there was a review day on the 12th of march commencing with a presentation covering background information to the project and detailed information on each area of the review
02:32:54 the review as set out in 2.7 above just pausing there
02:32:58 there um do you do you know who gave that presentation on the review day no do you know who provided the review group with a pack of the pack of information
02:33:10 information no you can see in the next sentence it says the group was then taken on a tour of grenfell tower to view the construction works the show flat the boxing club and the hidden homes do you remember who took the group on
02:33:21 do you remember who took the group on that uh no
02:33:25 was there any information that the review group was given that didn't come from the tmo do you know um i don't know do you know if residents were able to have any input into the scope of the review i don't
02:33:36 into the scope of the review i don't know do you know whether the residents were able to have any input into the information to be provided to the review um i don't know do you know whether any residents were interviewed as part of the process i don't know did you ask any of the
02:33:47 i don't know did you ask any of the questions i've just asked you at the time i don't believe i did now this review concludes if we see under uh the heading
02:34:03 complaints i can find that um
02:34:09 forgive me for one moment uh if you look under
02:34:12 under um yes uh under page three is one place we can find them after paragraph 3.9 under the heading resident consultation and engagement the group concluded that
02:34:23 and engagement the group concluded that resident engagement and consultation during the project had been very comprehensive and it was noted that a variety of different methods were utilized and then 310 there's some detail there the ryden consultation
02:34:38 and when you my question there is when you saw that did you have any particular thoughts about that do you think that that was a fair conclusion given what you'd known about the
02:34:50 given what you'd known about the complaints about resident engagement i thought that was a fair summary of the uh resident engagement and consultation methods
02:34:57 methods that had been undertaken at grenfell tower looking at page four section six response to complaints um 6.3 yes 6.3 the group reviewed all of the
02:35:08 6.3 the group reviewed all of the complaints and inquiries and was satisfied that kctm had responded adequately the boyd the board could find no evidence that substantiated the allegations of threats lies in intimidation by either ryden
02:35:19 intimidation by either ryden or kctmo staff did you agree with that conclusion yes were you able to agree with that conclusion by by reference to any material that you'd seen um
02:35:30 seen um my reference point was the door knocking exercise that the tmo undertook following the petition which sought to get um
02:35:37 get um which sought to get views of the residents personally about uh whether there had been uh how people were how whether people were satisfied with the consultation undertaken did you have any part in framing the questions
02:35:49 have any part in framing the questions for the door knocking exercises no do you know who did uh it was undertaken by the tma right but you were just presented with the outcome yes it was right now you then produced a report uh for
02:36:00 now you then produced a report uh for the benefit of the housing and property scrutiny committee uh on the 11th of may 2016. rbk30 is 32438 please
02:36:11 [Applause] can we look at that this is
02:36:18 your document and we can see that if we go down to the very bottom please page five laura johnson director of housing
02:36:26 housing uh the contact person there is uh celia chalisgan
02:36:29 chalisgan does that tell us that she drafted it and you reviewed it and signed it yes do you know what the basis of her drafting was
02:36:40 um could i just go back and have a look up at the report please so uh of course i'm so sorry yes page one sorry
02:36:48 uh what do you mean by basis well do you know what the material that c chalice can had in front of her when she created this document for you to sign
02:36:55 sign uh not exactly no not exactly um
02:37:02 we've seen the tmo board report of the 31st of march 2016. uh perhaps we should put but we'll put this document side by side with that for the purposes of my next question
02:37:13 for the purposes of my next question that that report as i've shown you it was at rbk four zeros three five one three we could just have
02:37:22 just have that up at the same time as this
02:37:26 i'm not sure this question will take too long to ask but just just compare the two pages
02:37:31 two pages you've got the board review report 31st of march on the right of your screen and on the left of your screen you've got your report you signed they're not entirely identical but they are very closely similar aren't they
02:37:43 are very closely similar aren't they just looking just looking at them yes they are because they're uh they're a description of the work that took place so
02:37:49 so there's no need to rewrite it because it is what it is it is what do you accept that in substance your report was the same as the contents of the review document and in places is copied verbatim yes yes
02:38:02 do i take it that you didn't actually yourself investigate to what extent the tma's review was properly sourced from information outside its own organization no i did not
02:38:12 not did you consider how the recommendations could influence rbkc's role in any future project
02:38:19 yes and you can see the recommendations on page three of this document if we just go to those
02:38:30 those were the recommendations that were the outcome um you did consider those did you yes because there was a there was a project that had already started to take place uh with uh where we're looking to spend
02:38:42 uh with uh where we're looking to spend around seven million pounds on trellic tower
02:38:45 tower um and the outcomes of these recommendations were fed into that consultation exercise
02:38:56 consultation exercise if we then move on in time 7th of september 2016 rbk3030865
02:39:09 this is an email from david collins that is that is forwarded to you which relates to a meeting that you had had with him in july 2017 after the tmo board review and
02:39:23 after the tmo board review and at the moment we're looking at uh uh a a higher up in the email string but could we please go to page two of that where we can see mr collins's message um
02:39:35 where we can see mr collins's message um it's the 6th of september 2016 and this is to rock fielding melon copy to judith blakeman it does come to you he says dear rock hope you had a good summer etc it was a pleasure to meet
02:39:46 summer etc it was a pleasure to meet with laura judith and yourself back in july
02:39:48 july just pausing there do you remember the meeting with david collins yes i do um thank you for taking the time to discuss the grenfell tower improve improvement works the tmo and the role of checks and balances in maintaining a transparent
02:40:00 balances in maintaining a transparent culture which represents both sides of the story i'm very curious to know if anything has changed in your thinking or in the council's approach to regeneration or the operations of the tmo
02:40:08 tmo as a result and then that email comes to you if we look up please to put the bottom of page one over to the top of page two the next day seventh september
02:40:20 the next day seventh september and he says see below can you think of any small concession we can think of offering and then you reply
02:40:28 reply about a month later if we go up page one on the 4th of october 2016 councillor fm i'm struggling to think of something hence the time it's taken me to respond
02:40:39 hence the time it's taken me to respond and because i actually think the tma manages pretty well in difficult circumstances and then you make a suggestion about larger programs uh in in the next paragraph had they had rbkc actually changed any of its
02:40:51 rbkc actually changed any of its policies and procedures following the tmo board review and the meeting with mr collins in july no no
02:41:00 no no where are you really of the view that the tma would handle the project well yes i thought they'd manage the project well in difficult circumstances
02:41:09 why do you think mr mr fielding mellon asked you for a small concession as opposed to one of substance you'd have to ask him that i'm asking you why you thought he did what was your understanding of what he
02:41:21 what was your understanding of what he was about um well i presume that i can only presume that cancer field in mellon also thought that the consultation was managed fairly well uh and there was no need to make uh
02:41:31 make uh you know that that it didn't lend it didn't uh suggest that there needed to be a radical overhaul of how uh resident consultation was undertaken on refurbishment projects of this type i mean you clearly understood what he
02:41:42 i mean you clearly understood what he meant because you said i'm struggling to think of something you didn't say to him what are you talking about so on the basis can we proceed on the basis that you did understand what he meant yes as i've just said
02:41:53 yes as i've just said i thought that he would mean that he also thought that the the consultation was undertaken in very difficult circumstances and that was there something we could say in response right did you understand that he was looking
02:42:04 that he was looking really just to fob mr collins off um i don't think he was looking to follow him off i think he was looking to provide him with a response that acknowledged his email but also um you know kind of said well you know thanks very much mr
02:42:16 well you know thanks very much mr collins for for taking the time to write to me
02:42:19 to me we met him um and this is what we'll seek to do on future future projects right so by small concession
02:42:29 what did you think he meant um you know do you think there's something that we could say
02:42:34 could say that you know kind of shows that on future regeneration projects we've heard what the residents have said but you just told us that rbkc didn't change his policies and procedures and you thought that the tmo had handled the project well if that was the purpose why not just
02:42:46 if that was the purpose why not just tell him that rather than offering him a small concession well i thought they had tmo had handled it well
02:42:53 it well but that doesn't mean to say that um as we saw in the previous scrutiny committee report there wasn't things that we could learn from that um and so as i said we're moving on to trellic tower at that time i remember
02:43:05 trellic tower at that time i remember speaking to my officers about that and about about you know because was there anything that we should do differently particularly did you really believe that there were no learning points at all for rbkc from
02:43:16 no learning points at all for rbkc from the refurbishment of granville tower of course not there's always learning points from every refurbishment and how it's undertaken and nothing goes perfectly
02:43:23 perfectly no what were the learning points from from rb for rbkc from the refurbishment that you drew um i can't remember no to be honest with you but not such as to prompt rbkc to change
02:43:34 but not such as to prompt rbkc to change any of its policies and procedures ah no and an independent review an impartial independent review of the refurbishment was in fact never undertaken at least not until now
02:43:47 never undertaken at least not until now that's correct
02:43:59 can i ask you to look please at
02:44:04 rbk50501
02:44:08 [Applause]
02:44:13 this is your report to the housing and property scrutiny committee uh dated the 5th of july 2017 that's the date it bears and on page three we see your name
02:44:24 three we see your name contact celia chaliscan and it concerns the tma's performance in 2016 and 17. and if we look at paragraph 3.1
02:44:35 and if we look at paragraph 3.1 conclusion for 2016-17 it says this the tmo continues to be an effective partner in delivering the council's objectives and aspirations for the housing stock and residents
02:44:47 for the housing stock and residents across a range of strategic functions as well as delivery against the agreed performance indicators the proactive asset management ensures that the borough's stock both
02:44:58 that the borough's stock both residential and commercial is being maximized in terms of use and rental income
02:45:07 compliance with audit and health and safety legislation protects both residents
02:45:11 residents and the council's standing and then in paragraph 4.2 looking ahead to the performance agreement for the following year 2018 and 19
02:45:20 and 19 the challenge remains to continue to provide high standards of housing management now we can see that the date of this document on page one is the fifth of july 2017.
02:45:34 that was the date it seems of the projected housing and property scrutiny committee
02:45:40 committee do you remember whether this report was finalized
02:45:43 finalized before the fire on the 14th of june 2017.
02:45:48 2017. um i don't remember it was customer practice to normally have a scrutiny committee or any committee report
02:45:54 report completed around two weeks before in order to meet their committee timetable now to be fair to you the metadata that we've seen on this document suggested
02:46:05 we've seen on this document suggested suggests that it was drafted on the 6th of june
02:46:08 of june 2017 and then last modified on the 12th of june
02:46:11 of june 2017 we can't find any evidence that the report was circulated itself um but given what i've just said would it be fair to
02:46:23 what i've just said would it be fair to say that
02:46:24 say that even as at the 12th of june 2017 so days before the grenfell tower fire the words in this report reflect uh the thinking
02:46:35 reflect uh the thinking within the housing and property scrutiny committee or at least your thinking your thinking uh at the time my thinking at the time to be presented to the housing and property scrutiny committee
02:46:46 housing and property scrutiny committee right
02:46:48 right [Applause] which i don't believe took place on the 5th of july and i was going to ask you did that take place i don't believe it did i don't it was a very busy time after the fire and i uh but i shouldn't imagine that it took
02:46:59 uh but i shouldn't imagine that it took place do you know whether this report was ever finalized i don't know um mr chairman i've come to the end of my prepared questions there may be one or two um others that i may need to to um
02:47:11 others that i may need to to um to ask yes uh but it's appropriate to take the break now um looking at the time might it be convenient to you and to the witness to elide the
02:47:22 to you and to the witness to elide the break
02:47:23 break for the for the extra questions with the lunch break and come back at an a come back
02:47:27 back let that 145. well i was wondering whether i'm sure that miss johnson would quite like to finish
02:47:37 finish giving evidence i'm just wondering whether we might push lunch back of it and happy to do that
02:47:43 that uh i just haven't consulted my colleagues
02:47:57 i think we would probably prefer to try and
02:48:00 and finish with the witness before we break for lunch understood um so if we if we break now and um
02:48:10 i don't know how long you think we need well can i just mention one thing i i have no doubt that there will be people watching and listening to the the evidence who would like a little bit more time to to to examine the transcript for this
02:48:22 to to to examine the transcript for this morning
02:48:23 morning so if i would ask for 20 minutes or so and i'm sure that that won't be regarded as enough but it's probably the best i can do in the circumstances would that be inconvenient um no i think
02:48:34 would that be inconvenient um no i think we can manage that can't we hopefully yes we'll do that we'll break now
02:48:38 now um you probably know the routine um when council gets to the end of his questions we have to have a break first of all to um enable him to check that he hasn't left
02:48:50 enable him to check that he hasn't left anything out and also to allow questions from others who are not in the room to be considered and perhaps put to you later on so we'll stop now we'll break till ten past one
02:49:02 stop now we'll break till ten past one i hope from at that point it'll be possible to deal with any further questions they may be fairly swiftly and that'll enable you to get away
02:49:10 away a bit earlier all right thank you i appreciate that all right thank you and um while you're out of the room no talking about your evidence please all right thank you
02:49:29 uh tempest woman please
03:10:49 yeah should you ask ms johnson to come back in please
03:11:04 all right miss johnson well we'll see whether there are any more questions for you
03:11:07 you yes mr millet yes um ms johnson uh first of all i was asking you this morning
03:11:14 morning about document rbk3030060 if we can have that up please
03:11:28 uh and if we turn in that document please to the proposal uh
03:11:42 at um page
03:11:48 uh i'm sorry sorry paige
03:11:57 um
03:12:02 well can we in let me try and try it this way do you remember that in fact the document this document um expressly says that it was all flat entrance stores in enclosed blocks that was to be the subject of the plan i
03:12:14 that was to be the subject of the plan i don't remember that specifically right because i i think i put the questions to you on the basis that all flat front doors in the tmo stock would be inspected and made safe by 2014
03:12:24 by 2014 but in fact it was in relation to enclosed blocks or flat entrance doors using in enclosed blocks with that correction um have you any further evidence to give
03:12:35 further evidence to give no uh the next question by way of correction
03:12:56 is i'm sorry to keep you in suspense
03:13:10 yes the coroners rule 43 letters and i i think i
03:13:15 think i put it to you that the recommendation was directed to your authority uh in fact none of the coroner's rule 43 letters were addressed to rbkc and what i was doing is reading from a
03:13:26 and what i was doing is reading from a letter to address to the london borough of southwark um so i'm not sure that it's right that was addressed directly to rbkc again does that make a difference no i understood what you were yes
03:13:39 no i understood what you were yes now i apologize for trying to dodge between my emails and the document but that's what i've been doing can i just go then back to an exchange that we had this morning about uh the email um
03:13:52 about uh the email um where you said that he was mr defan was spreading false information and i'd like to like to show you the transcript it's the raw transcript from this morning page 59
03:14:08 and i quoted at line five i agree that certain members of the community are doing their best to spread false information and we do need to something about how to do this and ensure the local residents know we are still committed
03:14:21 know we are still committed and my question uh
03:14:26 19 why do you refer to that as false information because we were did you mean to imply that it was deliberately false yes and then i asked you who it was that you were referring to and if we turn the page please uh we go
03:14:40 and if we turn the page please uh we go to uh your identification of mr defan and my question you thought he was lying to the community did you i thought he was telling people information that i wasn't that wasn't true so yes he was not
03:14:52 that wasn't true so yes he was not telling the truth just first of all to be clear when you say i thought he was telling people information that wasn't true so yes he was not telling the truth were you intending to
03:15:03 you intending to convey the idea that not only was he telling people information that wasn't true
03:15:07 true but that he knew he was telling people information that he knew wasn't true i wouldn't know that
03:15:13 that so you will not accuse are you accusing him of lying or are you accusing him of saying things which true or aren't true i would say i was saying that he was telling
03:15:22 telling people information that wasn't true so are you accusing him of lying or are you just accusing him of spreading information that happens not to be true not knowing whether he knew it to be true or not uh i didn't know whether he knew it to be
03:15:34 i didn't know whether he knew it to be true or not but he was spreading information that it wasn't taking place right i see uh now you say it wasn't it wasn't true let me just show you one
03:15:47 it wasn't true let me just show you one document please iws402148
03:15:54 now the email i've shown you was fifth of june 2013.
03:16:00 uh here is a blog of may the 14th 2013 and it gives a chronology of the delays in the planning application uh and and then if you go to page two
03:16:18 uh it it's it it goes on and it says
03:16:23 uh something is wrong here and there's a bad stink about it uh in fact the blog express is concerned
03:16:34 uh in fact the blog express is concerned that the project may not go ahead and there have been inadequate communications i mean first of all do you remember seeing this blog at all um i i saw the blog on occasion but i didn't regularly look at it right did you know that this blog was
03:16:45 right did you know that this blog was actually making the point uh that uh that there were delays in the project uh and that in fact now works on site couldn't commence
03:16:56 fact now works on site couldn't commence until sometime in 2014. i don't remember reading this particularly particular entry in the blog but i can see that that statement is being made in this blog yes and that was true in fact wasn't it it's a true statement yes true that
03:17:08 it's a true statement yes true that there were delays to the grenfell tower refurbishment project that's absolutely true
03:17:11 true yeah and therefore it was reasonable for a resident to espouse the belief and indeed articulate the belief that the project may not go ahead
03:17:19 ahead or may be delayed um it's reasonable to say that the project was delayed but it wasn't reasonable to suggest that the project may not go ahead
03:17:30 yes there's a statement of fact that the project was delayed
03:17:36 yes yes thank you very much having clarified that that's very helpful uh would you just give me a moment
03:17:52 please
03:17:56 yes thank you very much um ms johnson i have one more question for you i must ask you given your position we've now been looking at the past over the last two and a half days we've gone through a lot of material
03:18:07 gone through a lot of material and i've asked you a lot of questions looking back on all of that and looking back on
03:18:11 back on the entirety of your time at rbkc and in particular your role or otherwise in the grenfell tower refurbishment is there anything that you'd like to tell us that you would have done differently
03:18:24 gosh of course you know sort of uh you look back on your time there and you think
03:18:32 you think if only we had uh had more due diligence in relation to um uh sort of the uh the cladding that was placed on the
03:18:43 uh the cladding that was placed on the tower
03:18:43 tower if only we had um understood better what was happening internationally around uh cladding if only we had um you know sort of uh had the ability
03:18:54 um you know sort of uh had the ability to
03:18:55 to uh you know sort of to really understand better
03:18:58 better uh you know kind of all the ins and outs of the of a refurbishment project of this of this nature then uh i i it the list is is actually rather endless in terms of you know kind
03:19:10 rather endless in terms of you know kind of
03:19:10 of because you would never want anything of this type of incident to happen ever it's just awful so of course i look back and think
03:19:22 so of course i look back and think what could i have done differently to make sure that this didn't happen
03:19:28 thank you very much it only remains for me too thank you very much for coming to the inquiry ms johnson and giving us your assistance and your evidence thank you thank you
03:19:38 thank you miss johnson i should thank you very much on behalf of all three of us on the panel for the time you've given to share your evidence with us it's been quite a long
03:19:49 quite a long ordeal i know that and not an easy one so we're very grateful to you for the time you've given us and and and for uh telling us all about your involvement in this matter so thank you very much indeed and you
03:20:00 so thank you very much indeed and you are now free to go thank you very much chair thank you
03:20:06 you have to say 2 15. honey right thank you well we'll uh break at
03:20:17 right thank you well we'll uh break at that point um although it won't give us quite a full hour for lunch i think we ought to start again at 2 15. very well mr chairman can i say thank you for allowing us to
03:20:28 you for allowing us to use up some of the precious lunch break for that even if it only announced five minutes in the end and the next witness will be amanda johnson at 2 15. yes good thank you very much 215 then please
03:21:11 you