Royal Borough of Kensington & Chelsea Evidence - Tuesday 11th May 2021 (1/2)

Full transcript

00:00:14 like

00:00:18 good morning everyone welcome to today's hearing

00:00:21 hearing today we're going to hear evidence from laura johnson an employee of the royal borough of kensington and chelsea yes just a minute yes mr chairman good morning members of the panel good

00:00:32 morning members of the panel good morning

00:00:33 morning i now call miss johnson please

00:00:49 good morning ms johnson i understand that you're happy to make the affirmation yes i am could you read the words on the screen then please i do solemnly sincerely and truly declare

00:00:59 declare and affirm that the evidence i shall give shall be the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth thank you very much yes mr president yes ms johnson can i begin

00:01:09 begin by thanking you very much for coming to this public inquiry and assisting us with our investigations we're extremely grateful to you if you have any difficulty understanding any of the questions that i'm asking you

00:01:20 any of the questions that i'm asking you or you want me to put the question in a different way i'm very happy to do that we're going to take scheduled breaks during the course of the mornings and the afternoons but if you feel we need a break outside

00:01:31 but if you feel we need a break outside those scheduled times then please just say so and we can take a short break one thing i would ask you to do please is to keep your voice up so that the transcriber who sits to your right can get down what you're saying exactly

00:01:43 can get down what you're saying exactly right it also helps not to nod your head or shake your head but say yes or no as the case may be now you've made a number of statements to the inquiry but for the purposes of

00:01:54 to the inquiry but for the purposes of my questions i'm going to be asking you about four of those and i'm going to put those to you now the first is rbk triple zero three four nine four three

00:02:05 three four nine four three it's your what i'm going to call your first witness statement um is that the first page of that witness statement yes it is now if you go to page 49 you'll see that

00:02:16 now if you go to page 49 you'll see that there's a date and a signature the date is the 8th of november 2018 and there's a signature is that your signature yes it is the second witness statement i'd like to put to you is that rbk

00:02:28 to you is that rbk triple zero five four four two zero

00:02:33 is that the first page of your further witness statement yes it is and if we go please to page eight

00:02:41 eight we can see a date and a signature the date is the 27th of september 2019 and there's a signature there is that your signature yes it is i'll call that your second statement then we have rbk triple zero five seven

00:02:54 then we have rbk triple zero five seven five zero six please

00:03:02 is that your third uh witness statement or further witness statement yes it is uh and if we go please to page three of that statement we'll see a signature and a date the date the date is the 31st of january

00:03:14 the date the date is the 31st of january 2020

00:03:15 2020 and is that your signature there yes it is and finally rbk3063638

00:03:27 that's the first page of a further statement or supplementary statement that you did i think this year is that the first page of that statement yes it is

00:03:35 yes it is and can we please go to page three of that statement again there's a signature and a date the date is the 13th of april 2021. is that your signature yes it is have you read each of these witness statements that i've just shown

00:03:47 witness statements that i've just shown you

00:03:47 you recently yes i have and can you confirm that the contents are true i can thank you have you discussed your statements or your evidence with anybody before coming here today no i haven't i'm going to start

00:04:00 no i haven't i'm going to start with some questions about your background and your training if i may if we can go please to your first witness statement at page two paragraph six you set out there under the heading

00:04:13 you set out there under the heading background and role your experience in housing and at paragraph seven you say that you joined rbkc in 2009 initially as a second d from the london borough of islington

00:04:24 borough of islington is that right yes and you you were i think made a permanent employee in 2010. why were you initially seconded

00:04:31 seconded to rbkc uh the role at um rbkc was advertised on a second basis rather than on a permanent basis so that's how i undertook their role it

00:04:44 so that's how i undertook their role it was based on an 18-month contract so i was employed on that basis i see what was the nature of your previous roles uh

00:04:51 roles uh at greenwich and then at islington um at the london borough of greenwich i worked on housing strategy housing policy

00:05:00 policy supporting people and estate regeneration and at the london borough of islington i worked on policy and on strategy and as head of the

00:05:11 head of the development team and then for a period of time i was the director of housing at islington

00:05:16 islington um and then then i came to rbkc and did your previous roles such as you've just described them involved dealing

00:05:26 dealing with tenant management organizations uh there were tenant management organizations in the london borough of islington but i did not have any direct experience of dealing with them what about

00:05:37 of dealing with them what about greenwich they may well have been at greenwich but i i didn't deal with them did any of your previous roles involve management of construction projects not direct

00:05:49 construction projects not direct management of construction projects more commissioning of housing associations to undertake construction of affordable housing and did those involve refurbishment of existing buildings at the london borough of islington

00:06:02 the london borough of islington there were a number of

00:06:05 uh projects that were undertaken on estate regeneration um and uh i wasn't directly in charge of them but i was indirectly on some occasions involved in some of those projects were any of those high-rise

00:06:16 high-rise blocks of flats no they were not do you have any

00:06:19 have any professional uh or industry qualifications in housing management or local government no i do not uh now before your recruitment at rbkc what training if any had you received in

00:06:31 what training if any had you received in relation to fire safety none did rbkc provide you with any fire safety training when you were recruited no they did not what about thereafter no they did not

00:06:42 they did not did rbkc provide any continuing fire safety training for employees generally in the housing department no they did not

00:06:50 not were you ever provided with any training in relation to the obligations of responsible persons under the regulatory reform fire safety order 2005 or rro as we call it no i was not

00:07:04 or rro as we call it no i was not i'm now going to ask you some questions about your role in relation to the grenfell tower project refurbishment specifically and your initial role in the decision which i think you cover at paragraph 44

00:07:16 which i think you cover at paragraph 44 of your first statement if we can just look at that at page 10 please

00:07:23 and that's where you cover it initially here under the heading modifications of the tower 2012 to 2016 decision to refurbish grenfell tower

00:07:34 and you say in paragraph 44 that you are the senior responsible officer or sro for the calc project is that right that's correct and why were you

00:07:44 were you in particular as director of housing appointed to the role of sro on the cult project can you tell us um i was appointed as i say in my statement by derek myers

00:07:55 statement by derek myers who was looking for an officer within the local authority who had experience of working in development i believe right but calc was a school and a

00:08:06 right but calc was a school and a leisure center not a housing project that's correct do you know can you give us any insights into why mr myers thought you were the appropriate person to take on the sro role i can't i'm afraid you'd have to ask mr

00:08:17 i can't i'm afraid you'd have to ask mr myers well did you ever ask him yourself uh i don't remember to be honest with you it's some time ago now did it ever occur to you that it might be you might be a rather odd choice given

00:08:28 odd choice given the nature of the development as against the nature of your own experience um i did not think it was an odd choice i thought it was an opportunity given to me by

00:08:37 me by uh the chief executive in order to be able to take responsibility for a significant project that the council was undertaking and i was interested to do so now did you often

00:08:48 you often at that stage take on the role of sro on projects where rbkc was the client um no i think i was i may i may have been an sro on other projects but i

00:08:59 been an sro on other projects but i can't recall them at this moment but this was the most significant project that i was sro on right now we know that the what what what were if you can just give an outline what

00:09:10 if you can just give an outline what were your responsibilities as a as sro in respect of the cult project um so sro i believe is taken from the prince to project management methodology um and within that as an sro you have

00:09:22 um and within that as an sro you have overall responsibility for the project so bringing together the disparate teams in order to make them uh work as one in order to deliver the project objectives

00:09:34 order to deliver the project objectives now we know the decision to refurbish grenfell tower came after the decision to undertake the calc project put very generally is it right that as a delegated project run by the tmo

00:09:46 run by the tmo there was no sro for the grenfell tower refurbishment that's correct yes and as such do you agree that you in in any capacity had no decision-making power in respect

00:09:57 had no decision-making power in respect of the grenfell tower project that's correct how would you describe rbkc's role in respect of the grenfell tower project um rbkc

00:10:07 um rbkc were the holders of the housing revenue account the hra and our search we were the funders of the project and we regularly liaised with

00:10:17 with the tmo on a number of matters across housing management housing maintenance housing repairs so we had

00:10:24 we had oversight in terms of how the grenfell tower

00:10:28 tower project was being undertaken oversight i see we will come back to look at that in a bit more detail but would you agree that you did have a decision-making role at the very least in respect of the budget for the

00:10:40 in respect of the budget for the grenfell tower refurbishment project um the the uh members had decision making over the budget for the grenfell tower decision making project but i would be responsible for putting forward uh papers to cabinet in order

00:10:53 forward uh papers to cabinet in order for them to be able to make a decision about the budget so i think the answer to my question is you personally in your capacity uh as director of housing

00:11:04 housing didn't have a decision making didn't have decision making powers yourself in respect of the budget but simply facilitative facilitative that's correct right

00:11:17 within the scope of that facilitation was your role limited to the budget for the project or did it go beyond that i'm sorry i don't understand your question well so far as you had any

00:11:28 question well so far as you had any decision-making power at all yes uh it even though limited in the way you've just described did that power or facilitative opportunity if you like go beyond the budget

00:11:39 budget did it go into matters of detail relating to the construction project for example no it did not now let's look further down page 10 of your statement paragraph 45-46 and i summarize here

00:11:52 paragraph 45-46 and i summarize here you say that the possibility of refurbishing grenfell tower arose as a result of consultation with the residents during the calc project and i've summarized that is that correct yes and you say that the residents of

00:12:05 yes and you say that the residents of grenfell tower would on occasion raise the condition of the tower during resident consultation events for calc and they would include things like the lifts the heating water

00:12:16 like the lifts the heating water pressure

00:12:16 pressure poor sound and thermal insulation yes that's correct yes uh thermal insulation specifically because of the windows because the windows were very old and there was a lot of drafts coming through

00:12:28 there was a lot of drafts coming through so they raised the fact that there was very poor sound insulation and very poor thermal insulation due to the drafts right did the residents complain specifically about the poor thermal performance more generally

00:12:42 performance more generally other than the effect of the old windows not to my knowledge no i mean for example did they complain generally that their flats were too hot in summer and too cold in winter yes they did they did but because of the

00:12:54 yes they did they did but because of the windows

00:12:55 windows also because of the way the heating worked it was a district boiler system whereby we had one boiler that heated the whole of grenfell tower and so the heating was turned on in the

00:13:06 and so the heating was turned on in the for the winter period and i believe it was turned off at around the first of april first of may got remembered the exact date so there was no heating in the building central heating in the building during that time

00:13:16 that time but the way the heating pipes ran through the building and the hot water pipes ran through the building meant that some people's flats were very very warm also in the summer because the hot water pipes ran through their their flat heating their flats up

00:13:29 their their flat heating their flats up so it was it was the worst of both worlds really for tenants there they could either have very warm flats or very cold flats but with no control over how their heating worked in their particular flat

00:13:41 now you you say in paragraph 46 if we can just turn the page to page 11 please just say that you have it in front of you that you um you visited grenfell tower a number of

00:13:53 you visited grenfell tower a number of times

00:13:54 times do you remember when you did so um i can't remember the specific times that i went but i went to grenfell tower more than any other block in the borough over my duration of time

00:14:05 time as director of housing right

00:14:09 and and can you give us an idea of the number just in rough terms oh i probably went well i did all of the consultation meetings and they weren't

00:14:20 consultation meetings and they weren't in the tower but they were to the side of the tower i visited the boxing club i visited the nursery the playground so i probably went to the tower anywhere between 10 to 20 times

00:14:32 between 10 to 20 times now i'm going to move to the first specific event which is the strategic development committee meeting of the 1st of december 2010 and looking a little bit lower down

00:14:43 2010 and looking a little bit lower down page 11 you say paragraph 47 that the possibility of investment at grenfell tower stroke lancaster west estate

00:14:51 estate was mentioned at an rbkc strategic development committee on first december 2010 and you produce as your exhibit lj1 which are minutes of the rbkc strategic development committee of that

00:15:02 strategic development committee of that date

00:15:03 date um and that's pleased at rbk50576 just have that up there's the there's

00:15:14 just have that up there's the there's the minute of the group meeting committee room f uh and if you uh well let me just ask you some general questions what was the purpose of the strategic development committee

00:15:27 development committee um i can't remember to be honest with you uh in any detail who would normally attend

00:15:31 attend um group meetings like that there would be offices from across the council who would attend who had some involvement both from housing planning building control uh traffic management

00:15:43 building control uh traffic management who had involvement in uh looking at strategic developments that were being undertaken in the borough if we go to page six please in this document

00:15:58 uh we can see

00:16:01 uh the attendances now it doesn't appear that

00:16:05 that you are actually at this meeting because if you look under the declined list which is quite long you are the third from bottom so you weren't

00:16:13 weren't there but let's just look at page two

00:16:20 if we go to page two and look under point four you can see calc and if we go to page three the first mention of grenfell we see

00:16:31 the first mention of grenfell we see here

00:16:33 here is on that page under existing uses if you see at the top of the screen it says existing uses open space acknowledge strong residence views on play and open space grenfell has no open space or balconies

00:16:45 grenfell has no open space or balconies keep as much open space as possible and now i know that you weren't there as i've shown you but would you agree that this response related to mitigating the impact of the calc works on the play area and open space

00:16:57 on the play area and open space available to grenfell tower residents yes i would so that was the concern or a concern at that stage yes i would and do you agree that that doesn't relate specifically to the possibility of refurbishing grenfell

00:17:08 possibility of refurbishing grenfell tower

00:17:08 tower that's correct and staying on that page if we can looking further down the page halfway

00:17:13 halfway there's a subheading in bold movement new north south route full vehicular or restricted and then there's a heading over the page on page four

00:17:21 four if we just go to that movement east west

00:17:26 just towards the top of your screen there it says improve routes around base of grenfell to aid the north-south route linked to the walkway along the railway viaduct in fact

00:17:36 fact invest in the whole of the grenfell lanc west join

00:17:39 west join and make it less grotty and a better area

00:17:42 area would you agree that this response related to the routes around the base of grenfell tower rather than the refurbishment of the tower itself yes i would was it your view that the area around grenfell and the lancaster

00:17:53 area around grenfell and the lancaster west estate was grotty yes um what was meant by a better area do you think

00:18:00 you think i know you weren't there but but what was the sense that you weren't as you understood it at the time about how to make it a

00:18:05 make it a better area the area around grenfell tower was certainly if you went at night

00:18:13 at night was very dark the routes through the area in and around grenfell and lancaster west were very poorly defined and if you were walking onto the estate it was quite difficult for you to work

00:18:24 it was quite difficult for you to work out your orientation or your direction both to find the entrance to grenfell how to find the entrance to the leisure center which was existing at the time how to navigate your way around the

00:18:35 how to navigate your way around the football pitches and how to find the community room there and then how to ultimately walk through uh to the tube station and it was dark and it was foreboding

00:18:46 and it was foreboding um and it felt somewhat cut off from the surrounding streets right yes is it fair to say on the basis of

00:18:59 yes is it fair to say on the basis of what you've just said that the driver at this time for the refurbishment of grenfell was in order

00:19:07 order to perhaps put into better value the calc and leisure center project so the people trying to find those buildings

00:19:14 buildings would not have to suffer the grotty area around the base of the tower no i don't think so to be honest with you the area around the base of the tower

00:19:25 the area around the base of the tower was uh wasn't a route through towards the leisure center and or the school which faced out onto the road so you wouldn't have come from that direction but i think there was a general feeling

00:19:37 but i think there was a general feeling of trying to create a better environment it is a very very tight area around the base of the tower where the school and the leisure center were placed and so i think there was a general feeling that there should be

00:19:49 general feeling that there should be a better public realm in that area and better route throughs that had better legibility but um no i don't think it was uh a reflection on grenfell particularly better legibility

00:20:00 better legibility can you explain that um so a better understanding if you were driving or if you were walking or coming from the tube or getting on the bus how you would get yourself orientated to be able to

00:20:11 be able to find where you were going right now no mention

00:20:15 mention is made of grenfell tower other than those that i've shown you in this document

00:20:21 document uh so when you if you go back to your witness statement please your first statement of paragraph 47 just a little bit lower down where we were

00:20:31 were where you where you say at 47 i've shown you

00:20:34 you the possibility of investment was mentioned

00:20:37 mentioned at this meeting um are you referring simply to the references to those parts of this minute that i've shown you yes i'm not referring to the tower itself just to the area surrounding it

00:20:49 itself just to the area surrounding it that's clearer now can we then look at one of your day books from the following year 2011 please

00:21:00 rbk3059572

00:21:04 uh i'd like to well first of all could you just uh identify that that is or confirmed that that is the first page of one of your notebooks yes it is and can you just help us how

00:21:15 yes it is and can you just help us how you would keep these books um so these books were as you would say they were day books and i used them to jot down notes for meetings i was attending and for aid memoirs for actions that i

00:21:27 and for aid memoirs for actions that i would need to undertake as a result of those meetings and or points of note that were happening in order to be able to refer back to right and if we go to page four please

00:21:42 you can see uh that here is a note dated the 11 the 13th of june 2011.

00:21:52 at the very top left hand corner can we take it that you made notes from every meeting that you attended

00:22:01 here in your day book no i didn't make notes at every meeting i attended i was fairly scrupulous about making notes at calc meetings because they were they were fairly detailed and there was always a number

00:22:12 detailed and there was always a number of actions for a number of people there and because i was sro i wanted to keep track on what was happening yes i see now looking a little bit further down page four we can see as i've shown you the date and next to it

00:22:23 i've shown you the date and next to it uh what looks like calc if you if you look at the note you can see that there's a list of names down the left hand side uh and various things matters it looks

00:22:35 uh and various things matters it looks like

00:22:36 like more minutes agree matters arising uh and various things if you just look at it can you tell us in in in outline at least what this was about this meeting um so this would have been

00:22:49 this meeting um so this would have been a calc project meeting with various members of the project team attending so the people who were there were a mix of people from property services education

00:23:03 communications housing and leisure and it was to go through various actions that were being undertaken in order to be able to progress the calc project right

00:23:12 right now what you just told me is that something you have an independent recollection of or you can remember that because i've shown you this document i can remember that because you show me the document right now if we look a little bit further down the page

00:23:23 little bit further down the page to page five or down the document to page five please um we can see the bottom of the page there where you've put external landscaping

00:23:34 landscaping you see that the line underneath it and if you look at the bottom bullet it says and help me if i'm if i'm wrong about this ms johnson it says basement of grenfell tower conversion to resident or light business

00:23:46 conversion to resident or light business used to be considered jt to take forward with carl ainslie or councillor ainsley i think that is uh is that correct have i read that correctly yes it is it's carl ainslie it is right

00:23:58 yes it is it's carl ainslie it is right first time um at this initial stage was it intended only that the basement of grenfell tower would be refurbished um i don't remember this meeting but based on the note that's been presented in front of me

00:24:10 in front of me i would say that we were looking at whether there was an opportunity for residential use in the unused spaces that were at the base of grenfell tower right now the note appears under the headings i've shown you external

00:24:21 headings i've shown you external landscaping does that tell us that the discussion about grenfell tower at least at this stage concerned landscaping around the calp project

00:24:32 landscaping around the calp project in in the context of this project yes so at this stage your concern was still about the aesthetics of the calc project that's correct yeah

00:24:46 that's correct yeah now still in 2011 uh can i show you tmo

00:24:54 845421

00:24:58 this is an email of the 30th of september

00:25:01 september if we go please to page two

00:25:05 from eddie defaun

00:25:10 to a miss dairo at kctm

00:25:16 and he says dearly thank you for taking the time to listen to some of my concerns yesterday as requested please attached find attached the list of lo people local stakeholders wish to meet as a subgroup

00:25:28 stakeholders wish to meet as a subgroup to address issues raised by the proposed imposition on our estate of the kensington academy and housing issues in general the formation of this subgroup was agreed by the council at the residence forum on wednesday 29th

00:25:40 the residence forum on wednesday 29th september

00:25:42 september and then there's a list of participants below that which includes the grenfell action

00:25:46 action group as you can see now you then forward that email if we look up the chain to page bottom of page two sorry top of page two bottom of page one

00:25:58 page two bottom of page one we can do that there's the end of your email but let's go to the bottom of page one

00:26:03 one you send this on to robert black fifth of october 2011. robert for discussion tomorrow

00:26:10 tomorrow and then if you look a little higher up pitch page one he then emails a number of people at the tmo and he says dear team uh laura raised this at my meeting

00:26:21 uh laura raised this at my meeting yesterday now this email is the 7th of october as you can see and he goes on the email below is from an edward defan who is angry about two things the new academy and services on his estate laura wanted a number of things first

00:26:34 laura wanted a number of things first bullet point could we do just a bit of checking on his tenancy background he inherited tennessee she thinks but unclear of circumstances and then second bullet point issue of

00:26:45 and then second bullet point issue of lack of investment in grenfell tower and lanc west in general mark sasha did you ask robert black to make inquiries into mr defan's

00:26:56 to make inquiries into mr defan's tenancy background yes he did why did you do that um because

00:27:00 because there was a number of people who attended uh their meeting and i just wanted to understand whether they were leaseholders or tenants and it also provided an opportunity um

00:27:11 and it also provided an opportunity um because we had another member who attended very regularly a gentleman called peter martindale who turns out was illegally subletting so um it gave an opportunity just to check you know sort of who was coming

00:27:22 check you know sort of who was coming along and what their status was right why did it make a difference to you at this stage given mr defan's concerns whether he was a leaseholder or a tenant um i can't remember to be honest with

00:27:33 um i can't remember to be honest with you but i just made that inquiry had you heard of mr defan before this time october 2011 i don't remember if i had heard from him prior to october 2011 but he was a

00:27:45 prior to october 2011 but he was a he came to my attention as part of the calc project i see and we may come back to that uh shortly

00:27:52 shortly uh can we then look please at the following month in 2011 if we go back to page 48 of your first statement there you describe the sale of elm park gardens

00:28:05 describe the sale of elm park gardens uh the projected receipts from which were anticipated at that stage to be about six million pounds and then paragraph 49 and i'm summarizing you refer to an email of the second

00:28:15 second of november 2011 from jane trathue who was rbkc's housing strategy and regeneration manager and you exhibit that as lj3 can we look at that um we'll have it up on the

00:28:27 at that um we'll have it up on the screen

00:28:27 screen rbk seven zeros five

00:28:34 now before i show you the detail in this email can i just ask you one or two general questions at the time this email was sent so early november 2011 do you agree that the calc project was

00:28:46 do you agree that the calc project was already progressing yes and is it right that studio e had already been appointed on calc and had in fact started work i can't remember the exact timeline but

00:28:57 i can't remember the exact timeline but it they may well have been appointed by that time right as architects to the calc project that's correct yes and do you remember having discussions with anybody at studio e about the refurbishment of grenfell

00:29:08 about the refurbishment of grenfell tower before november 2011 no i don't

00:29:16 did anyone at the tmo approach you before november 2011 with a proposal to refurbish grenfell tower i don't remember

00:29:31 now i think on the calp project you you agreed that studio e had in fact been retained by rbkc and not tmo that's correct yeah and in fact studio we had been appointed for the cult project through a

00:29:42 for the cult project through a competitive ojeu procurement process yes yes were you involved in that procurement process do you remember um i don't think i was i may well have seen some of the tender returns but i

00:29:54 seen some of the tender returns but i don't remember being on the panel that appointed the architects can you well do you have any recollection about how rigorous that process was um it would have been extremely rigorous in terms of the council's approach to

00:30:06 in terms of the council's approach to procurement for that particular project it was a very high profile project and it would have followed the eu the odu procurement processes do you say that simply because of your um familiarity generally or because you

00:30:18 um familiarity generally or because you know something about precisely how that project was procured because of my familiarity with the way that rb casey worked

00:30:24 worked right and is it correct that that studio e had been selected in part because of their particular experience and

00:30:35 of their particular experience and expertise

00:30:35 expertise in designing and completing academies and leisure centers that's correct yes well actually their particular experience in academies because there was a different architect who was actually the architect for the

00:30:46 who was actually the architect for the leisure center very good yes and would you agree that the design work on the

00:30:55 on the on any refurbishment of grenfell tower did not form part of the assessment of studio e for the purposes of the calc project

00:31:04 project yes yes now then let's some uh look at

00:31:12 this email uh this is an email uh of um the 2nd of november 2011

00:31:24 the 2nd of november 2011 uh in which drain jane trethuy jane trethewey is that how you pronounce her name yes it is um updates you uh and peter wright about a meeting that she'd

00:31:37 peter wright about a meeting that she'd had with mark anderson and alastair manson

00:31:39 manson in relation to the impact of the celt proposals on grenfell tower and the lancaster west estate in general and how they could be mitigated

00:31:48 this is an email you've exhibited have i summarized the import of that email accurately yes you have now let's just look down

00:31:58 look down it says in the second paragraph laura peter had previously informed me of the plans impacting upon the lank west emv's play area and associated landscaping where it's intended to create a community access

00:32:10 intended to create a community access for a new academy for residents to be able to access it outside school hours we'd agree that this would require extensive consultation with residents and other users such as the ground floor nursery to

00:32:21 such as the ground floor nursery to ensure that they had the opportunity to influence the design and feel that they could benefit from the changes rather than having something imposed on them that was beyond their control [Applause] would it be fair to say that rbkc's

00:32:34 would it be fair to say that rbkc's primary concern in november 2011 was the impact

00:32:37 impact of the calc project on grenfell towers available outdoor space

00:32:44 yes i would but also um how grenfell people in grenfell tower used that outdoor space because the current outdoor space that they had at that time was um

00:32:55 was um you know a a an unloved green area with some trees on uh which was a sort of hump uh which wasn't useful for people to sit on and or uh was regularly used by dog

00:33:07 and or uh was regularly used by dog walkers so we were keen that the people in the tower also had somewhere to go to and sit in right in the third paragraph of the email

00:33:18 email mr thuy says uh

00:33:25 uh if you go down to uh

00:33:31 um a little bit lower down the page is the next paragraph this conversation then linked through to the ambitions that the housing department has to see the lower floors of grenfell tower developed out into homes do you remember when the

00:33:44 into homes do you remember when the housing department decided that it wanted to see the lower floors developed into homes um no i don't remember the specific date for that but we had an ongoing programme perhaps badged as a

00:33:56 ongoing programme perhaps badged as a hidden homes project where we were always looking to see if we could create more affordable housing out of spaces that were unused or available on our estates yes and was that part of the hidden homes

00:34:08 and was that part of the hidden homes project

00:34:09 project uh yes it would have been and could you just tell us very briefly if you can what the hidden homes project was uh so in common with lots of housing organizations

00:34:20 organizations with estates built at various different times

00:34:23 times they are a different of our complete difference of architectural styles and sometimes have unused or unloved garage areas or have basement areas which were

00:34:34 or have basement areas which were formerly laundry rooms that can be converted to residential or drying areas or you know sort of perhaps the back of an estate which previously people may not have considered for residential use

00:34:46 have considered for residential use but now we may consider putting in a small number of uh of affordable housing units affordable housing was um in desperate need in rbkc

00:34:57 was um in desperate need in rbkc and we were always looking for opportunities to create more units to your knowledge had rbkc communicated to tmo

00:35:04 to tmo its ambitions regarding at the very least the lower floors of grenfell tower for the

00:35:08 for the purposes you've just described um i can't remember whether we communicated it

00:35:13 it in november 2011 but we certainly had ongoing conversations with them over a number of years about it could we then look please at the next paragraph or rather lower down within the next

00:35:24 or rather lower down within the next paragraph

00:35:24 paragraph it goes on to say although that there is funding potentially available for this both from some section 106 funding that we currently have banked and from capital receipts

00:35:35 have banked and from capital receipts from el park gardens which currently have not been allocated to any particular scheme though we had discussed them going either into new build or else into a significant capital investment program and grenfell tower could fulfill both of these um just

00:35:48 could fulfill both of these um just pausing there was this the first time that it had been suggested that the proceeds of sale of elm park gardens could be used in the refurbishment of grenfell tower

00:35:59 refurbishment of grenfell tower um i don't remember whether this was specifically the first time but if this is the first documented evidence of it being mentioned then it may well be yes right i see now we can see that mr theory then goes on to say in the last sentence of this

00:36:10 to say in the last sentence of this paragraph peter advised that the calc architects are very aware of the poor quality of the ground floor frontage that grenfell tower creates for their scheme and have been keen to make proposals as to how to improve it

00:36:22 proposals as to how to improve it had you heard the architects mention the poor quality of the ground floor frontage that grenfell tower created for the calc scheme i don't remember specific incidents of them mentioning it to me

00:36:34 them mentioning it to me but i'm sure i would have been aware of it right

00:36:39 it right and were there concerns about the tower purely aesthetic um uh aesthetically uh but also how it how it related to the school and the uh

00:36:50 how it related to the school and the uh and the leisure center and not wanting for it to feel um that that it wasn't included in that whole development so you know sort of not wanting it to sit apart from it poor cousin yes you could call it a poor

00:37:02 poor cousin yes you could call it a poor cousin a poor relation to two brand new buildings that were going up yeah

00:37:10 did you share the architect's concern if that's the right word that grenfell tower provided a poor quality frontage for calc

00:37:18 for calc yes it did

00:37:21 and looking down the same email we can see a number of bullet points that uh jane trethuy sets out and if we look at the third bullet point down she says this the tmo

00:37:33 down she says this the tmo is also keen to investigate the opportunity to clad grenfell tower and replace its windows and will seek to cost this out with a view to investing epg funds here this will have the advantage of

00:37:45 this will have the advantage of addressing the investment needs of one of its worst property assets and prevent it looking like a poor cousin to the brand new facility being developed next door there may be an option to have a

00:37:56 there may be an option to have a cladding design that links to the design of the academy so that the visual appearance of the area is significantly improved was this the first time that you had become aware of a proposal

00:38:07 you had become aware of a proposal to clad grenfell tower yes i should imagine it was had you discussed cladding grenfell tower with the architects before this time i don't believe i had what was your

00:38:19 i don't believe i had what was your initial reaction to the proposal to clad grenfell tower um cladding uh tower blocks um and refurbishing them was fairly

00:38:31 um and refurbishing them was fairly had been become fairly standard practice across

00:38:34 across london in my experience as part of refurbishment programs both aesthetically to make them look much nicer because the architecture of the 1970s perhaps hasn't stood the test of time

00:38:45 perhaps hasn't stood the test of time but also i understood that cladding improved the thermal efficiency of the building

00:38:49 building in order to make them much warmer for tenants so that they had lower fuel bills

00:38:55 bills apart from some residents complaining about the thermal efficiency of the windows that we've discussed together and also the problem about the single

00:39:03 single boiler which you've identified this morning

00:39:06 morning what was the evidence before you at that stage

00:39:10 stage that grenfell tower as a building was thermally inefficient that it needed over cladding i did not have any evidence that it was thermally inefficient so did we take it there was no no survey

00:39:21 so did we take it there was no no survey or study done on the tower to investigate its thermal efficiency i'm not aware of one and therefore neighborly did a cost-benefit analysis on the proposal to cloud the building so working out how much heating costs

00:39:32 so working out how much heating costs would be saved by doing an overcloud there may well have been a study but i'm i'm not aware of it was it the view of the housing department uh the lrbkc that grenfell tower was one of

00:39:43 the lrbkc that grenfell tower was one of the tma's worst property assets yes why is that um we had uh asked the tmo to undertake a study based on their keystone asset

00:39:55 a study based on their keystone asset management database to have a look at the performance of various buildings across the borough and the grenfell tower along with another

00:40:04 another and a number of other properties in the borough including trellic tower

00:40:11 world's end had very poor performance when you talk about performance in that answer what do you mean so i mean in terms of uh net present value so in terms of the

00:40:25 uh net present value so in terms of the rent that you could receive for the property uh compared to the investment needs required for that building over the next 30 years

00:40:36 i see and that calculation that was done was it for our bkc um so we had a study done

00:40:47 for our bkc um so we had a study done um and i can't remember exactly what time it was done by saviles they did a study for us looking at the performance of our buildings in order to be able to better help perform inform uh the business plan and i think you

00:40:59 uh the business plan and i think you agree that grenfell tower would look like a poor cousin to calc unless it was redeveloped yes it would i mean being blunt was the primary reason for

00:41:10 blunt was the primary reason for exploring the refurbishment of grenfell tower at this stage at least to improve the aesthetics of the area around the calp project i wouldn't say at this time it was about it was a motivating factor

00:41:21 it was a motivating factor to clad the building in order to make it fit better with the school and the new leisure centre i would say we were exploring opportunities to have a look at

00:41:30 a look at how refurbishment project for grenfell tower would positively impact for the residents there and also help it work better with the area but cladding it because of the building of

00:41:41 cladding it because of the building of the school and the leisure centre was not a primary motivation for it now

00:41:47 would you say not a primary motivation i'm suggesting to you that this document shows that the primary or dominant motivation for cladding was aesthetics in this document yes but as we progressed no right at this stage it's right i

00:42:00 no right at this stage it's right i think that there was no evidential basis on which you could conclude that grenfell tower was thermally inefficient such as to justify the investment in cladding

00:42:09 cladding other than the aesthetic in other words how it looks that's correct that's correct

00:42:13 correct now we don't have a response uh to this email from you can we take it that you approved of the way forward suggested by mr thuy yes can we next go uh a little bit

00:42:24 yes can we next go uh a little bit further in the month and you as you can probably tell we're running chronologically to lj4 which is at rbk402315

00:42:35 to lj4 which is at rbk402315 this is an email dated the 23rd of november

00:42:38 november 2011 from a gentleman called tunde awaderu

00:42:43 awaderu representing the grenfell tower leaseholders association now it's sent by somebody called keith mott

00:42:49 mott to eddie the farm and copied to a number of people as you can see but you are an additional direct recipient can you see that

00:43:00 recipient can you see that yes now you uh addressed this document at paragraph 50 of your first statement on page 12. and let's just look and see what you say

00:43:11 and let's just look and see what you say there um you you say

00:43:15 uh that the email demonstrates in the last sentence that there was not only a desire to refurbish grenfell tower from the council and the tma but also from the residents

00:43:27 and the tma but also from the residents now can we just go back to the email

00:43:36 in the uh uh third paragraph down you can see he says this the council and their appointed managing agents

00:43:48 their appointed managing agents knc tmo and others have ethical moral and legal obligations according to the tenant and leaseheld agreement and listen to the residents decade-old serious concerns and issues sorry issues and concerns the council

00:43:59 sorry issues and concerns the council are so keen to start building their so-called 21st century academy in front of an ugly looking 70s concrete building when surrounding boroughs have refurbished all their high-rise building to a 21st century standard

00:44:10 to a 21st century standard this is a clear indication of how the council and the knc tmo and sub-agents have intentionally neglected the grenfell tower just pausing there did you take

00:44:21 tower just pausing there did you take from his email that his concerns related primarily to the building's aesthetic its appearance no what did you take from what he was

00:44:32 what did you take from what he was saying there although he mentions the ugly looking 1970s concrete building i took from his statement about intentional neglect the wider issues with the uh with the tower right

00:44:46 uh with the tower right wider issues being what poor heating poor windows poor entrance uh way um and uh a general feeling that the building required significant investment

00:44:58 building required significant investment right

00:44:59 right and if we go on a paragraph about the fifth paragraph down he says we are fed up with the so-called tenant-led organization and the unregulated managing agents k and c tmo and others for their substandard services they must put things right

00:45:11 services they must put things right and must be more accountable we want to make recommendation to set up an organization to regulate their day-to-day activities we demand and expect the council and their managing agents to leave aside their corporate greed and invested

00:45:22 their corporate greed and invested interest

00:45:22 interest to find the money and resources to refurbish grenfell tower without having to charge the residents of grenfell tower through rent increments or service charges um did what did you think of that um i thought

00:45:35 what did you think of that um i thought mr mott would like the uh the tower refurbished um and uh didn't want any charges to be levied against leaseholders did you consider this email to be an expression

00:45:46 consider this email to be an expression of the resident's frustration the general body of residents frustration uh with both the council and tmo um i consider it to be mr mott's opinion

00:45:57 um i consider it to be mr mott's opinion of the council of the tmo but not the general body of residents why is that because that's who it was sent from it was um but if you look uh please uh at uh the bottom of this email at page two

00:46:11 uh the bottom of this email at page two you can see that it's sent from mr awa dairy vice chairman grenfell tower leaseholders association and if you uh go

00:46:24 to the second paragraph i showed you he also refers to the grenfell leaseholders association and others organizing themselves and did you not take from that

00:46:35 take from that that although the email had come from mr mott it was at least to some extent intended to be representative of the resident's views yes i'd like to correct my previous statement having read that again

00:46:46 again that um on reading that it does look like it is particularly from uh the body of residents who are members of the grenfell tower action group and leaseholders association yes now looking at the top of page two

00:47:00 yes now looking at the top of page two uh if we go to page two and look at the top there he says he says we hope to reach a negotiated agreement in this matter so we do not have to sequel we do not have to seek to alternative methods

00:47:11 have to seek to alternative methods and so that we do not need to justify our decade-old issues and concerns raised by the residents of grenfell tower again the arrogant behavior of the council appointed managing agents has destroyed the trust and confidence of

00:47:22 destroyed the trust and confidence of the residents of grenfell tower and the wider estate and this need to address as a matter of urgency was this the first time you had seen this kind of

00:47:33 strong feeling about rbkc and the tmo expressed by somebody who lived in grenfell tower um this may have been the first time that i had seen it in writing

00:47:44 that i had seen it in writing but if the meetings had commenced and i'm not sure of the timeline that i was attending the resident consultation meetings about calc then i would have heard that expressed in those meetings

00:47:56 i i see but can we say that it was around this time or perhaps yes it probably would have been it would have been around this time now you can see as i've shown you that this is from the grenfell tower leaseholders association

00:48:07 association did you and i showed you an earlier document referring to grenfell action group did you have any understanding about those groups whether they were separate or related at this time no i don't think i did did

00:48:19 at this time no i don't think i did did you ask anybody um no i don't believe i did right and having seen the uh terms in which mr ardero has expressed himself in a number of places in this email

00:48:30 of places in this email um did you do anything about about it when i when i say do anything about it did you act on his feelings of discontent and seek

00:48:41 his feelings of discontent and seek to look for ways in which to address them

00:48:44 them um i don't remember whether i specifically reacted to this particular email

00:48:49 email but it was definitely following on from jane trethewey's email as well looking at ways of uh of putting investment into the tower and the surrounding area i see now we'll come back to this topic

00:49:03 i see now we'll come back to this topic in due course probably a number of times but let's just look next at how the pre-construction professional team came to be appointed on the grenfell tower project um following can i just interrupt for a

00:49:14 um following can i just interrupt for a moment yes i mean in the light of what you've told us about both about this email and uh consultation meetings were you aware where you under the

00:49:26 were you aware where you under the impression that there was a grand swell of unhappiness and anger about the relationship between tenants and the tmo

00:49:39 relationship between tenants and the tmo no i wasn't no the representation made at the calc residence meetings which were attended in the main by mr daphne and or other residents locally

00:49:50 locally would express their general crossness about the condition of the tower but i don't remember there being a general expression about you know sort of being cross about the tmo right and in those meetings did people

00:50:03 right and in those meetings did people express themselves in quite the tone that this

00:50:07 that this email is expressed or more strongly or less strongly do you remember um perhaps not so eloquently but people did put across uh that they felt that there had been a lack of

00:50:19 felt that there had been a lack of investment in their area for a number of years

00:50:22 years and you know i had a considerable sympathy for that to be honest with you because there had been a considerable lack of investment in the council's housing stock really as a result of the way that

00:50:33 really as a result of the way that council housing was funded over a number of years

00:50:35 of years which resulted across the country not in an rbkc

00:50:39 an rbkc in being unable to invest significant amounts in capital program works so um you know and in talking to the residents of grenfell tower and the wider group of

00:50:50 grenfell tower and the wider group of people who came to those consultation meetings

00:50:53 meetings um you know there was a you know in trying to explain the way different budgets worked in that uh you know this was general fund money or regeneration fund money for the

00:51:04 or regeneration fund money for the um for the school and for the leisure centre

00:51:07 centre but grenfell tower is funded from the hra which is a ring-fenced budget you know that's i think that's quite difficult to um it's not difficult to understand but it's quite difficult to stomach when

00:51:19 but it's quite difficult to stomach when you're a resident sitting in a block that feels like it hasn't had a lot of investment for very many years and you're watching the council building something

00:51:27 something next door for quite a considerable amount of money you know a lot of sympathy with that view well they may have felt that if the council could spend a lot of money on the

00:51:36 the leisure center in the school why couldn't it spend some money on them and that's exactly what they're expressing is that why rush ahead with renewing the leisure centre and building a new school when there is this problem with the grenfell

00:51:48 there is this problem with the grenfell tower estate lancaster west estate or more broadly with you know kind of quite obvious uh investment needs of the council stock yes thank you yes

00:52:02 yes thank you

00:52:09 uh yes i might come back to that that answer later on but but just for the

00:52:16 the present can i just show you your first witness statement of paragraph 51

00:52:26 you say there the formal process of identifying where major investment was needed was set down in december 2011 when the tma was asked to carry out an exercise to identify where major

00:52:38 exercise to identify where major investment was needed to improve the stock they used the keystone asset management database that contained component data on the council's housing assets grenfell tower came out as a priority

00:52:49 tower came out as a priority as a building that had significant investment needs the tma was then asked to provide indicative costings for the works

00:52:56 the works to be carried out to grenfell tower did you yourself have any discussions with studio e about the grenfell tower refurbishment between

00:53:06 between the time when you received ms trethuey's email on the 2nd of november 2011 and hearing the outcome of the tmos review

00:53:14 review in december 2011. i don't remember to be honest with you right uh let's then look at

00:53:24 sea403556 please this is an email from andre kushel of studio e to peter wright at rbkc

00:53:35 studio e to peter wright at rbkc subject grenfell meeting agenda is copy to the calc team as you can see and it has an attachment which is the calc meeting to review potential works to grenfell tower to be held

00:53:47 to grenfell tower to be held at the town hall on the 9th of december and he

00:53:51 and he says further to our discussion yesterday i've pulled together a meeting agenda which sets out what i think we will need to cover tomorrow uh and attached to that email is an is the document

00:54:02 the document at sea403557 we can look at that please there it is and it's it's entitled calc meeting to review potential works to grenfell tower

00:54:13 review potential works to grenfell tower to be held at rbk rbkc town hall on friday 9th december at 10 am and then if you um look down that you can see the topics uh item two review of workscope and item

00:54:25 uh item two review of workscope and item three tenant consultation first do you remember attending that meeting or did was it just mr wright who went

00:54:33 went um i don't remember attending that meeting but i was probably there right and why do you say you were probably there because mr wright worked for the property services team and had no role

00:54:45 property services team and had no role in the housing department and or in for the tmo right does this document look familiar to you i don't remember but yeah um i don't remember to be honest what was the purpose of this meeting from rbkc's perspective and specifically

00:54:57 from rbkc's perspective and specifically your perspective i'm really sorry i don't remember because i don't remember the meeting right

00:55:05 so you won't be able to help us um know whether there was anyone from the tmo there

00:55:11 tmo there no i'm afraid not right do you remember in general terms whether anyone from the tmo is involved at this stage in these discussions no i don't right do you know whether this meeting took

00:55:23 do you know whether this meeting took place before or after the tmo's review of its major investment needs

00:55:30 no i don't looking at item two on the agenda

00:55:34 agenda uh you can see under the heading review of scope of work there are a number of items including windows and cladding second item down do you know how cladding got to be on

00:55:46 do you know how cladding got to be on the agenda no you would agree i think and correct me if i'm wrong that at any rate this document shows that at this stage

00:55:55 stage rbkc wanted cladding included in the scope of works for grenfell tower um i believe this document was drafted by

00:56:05 by andre from studio e so he included that in the list so yes i would say that rbkc we're considering uh whether cladding should be added to this particular scope of works

00:56:17 this particular scope of works right um can i just ask you then to look please at what mr koschel told the inquiry when he was asked about this in evidence

00:56:24 evidence uh in uh march 2020 can we go please to the transcript for day six

00:56:32 day six on the second of march 2020

00:56:36 uh and look please at page 44 it says day six page 44 and can we look at line uh 15 please

00:56:50 and can we look at line uh 15 please uh and and you'll see just above that that um

00:56:53 that um he has been asked about this documented item too

00:56:57 item too question at line 16 was it you who put those on the agenda for discussion with mr right

00:57:03 mr right answer i doubt whether i would have said that unless there was an indication from somebody at the council that that's what they wanted to do question where do you remember getting that indication from do you think

00:57:15 that indication from do you think answer i attended meetings sro meetings which was basically a senior executive meeting which overviewed the project and i'm fairly confident that there would have been a mention of the tower as an issue that needed to be addressed

00:57:27 as an issue that needed to be addressed at some point question do you remember who first suggested cladding to you such that it turned up on this agenda answer it could have been peter it could have been laura i can't think of anybody else at that

00:57:38 i can't think of anybody else at that time i would have been speaking to who would have had not any knowledge of this

00:57:43 of this question so peter wright or laura johnson answer yes yes both rbkc yes answer yes

00:57:53 and then he goes then the question goes on right so would it be right to say that from an early stage late in the year 2011 you knew that cladding over cladding of grenfell tower was likely to form part of any project in respect of that

00:58:04 of any project in respect of that building

00:58:05 building yes that was the indication that was being given by kensington now i've shown you that because that's mr cassell's recollection do you yourself recall whether it was you or peter wright who first mentioned

00:58:16 you or peter wright who first mentioned cladding for studio e um it would have been unlikely to have been peter wright it was far more likely to be me

00:58:22 to be me thank you and do you know can i just ask you this

00:58:25 you this um i note that the email that started this chain of questions was sent by mr cusale

00:58:31 cusale to mr wright and nobody else can you just explain what mr wright's role in all this was he wasn't concerned with the kelp project uh mr mr wright was the

00:58:42 kelp project uh mr mr wright was the project manager for the calc project at that time yes that's my mistake thank you very much yes i'm sorry do you remember whether cladding was first

00:58:54 you remember whether cladding was first mentioned

00:58:55 mentioned at an sro meeting as mr cassell recalls it

00:58:59 it no we don't would you accept nonetheless that at this time or by this time in late 2011 it was already clear that overclouding grenfell tower was going to form part of the refurbishment project

00:59:10 form part of the refurbishment project yes i would can we then go to rbk402335

00:59:21 this is an email from mark anderson of the 12th of december 2011 with the subject line grenfell tower and it's sent to you copy to jane trethewey

00:59:33 it's sent to you copy to jane trethewey and peter wright and in this email mr anderson uh provides

00:59:37 provides some indicative costings and as he describes them below are indicative costings for the overcladding and thermal upgrade of the exterior

00:59:45 exterior facades and provision of flats to the roof area

00:59:50 roof area is it a fair assumption that these costings came from hunters yes and he says in fact in the second paragraph

00:59:58 paragraph that it's based on their work did you ask mark anderson to approach hunters for those costings um i we would have asked mark anderson for indicative costings and then it

01:00:09 for indicative costings and then it would have been up to mark anderson which organization he approached so i wouldn't have asked him specifically to go to hunters but it would have been up to him who he approached i see were you involved in formulating any of

01:00:21 were you involved in formulating any of the underlying assumptions in those costings no now you can see if you look a little bit lower down the email that there's a heading external facades

01:00:33 heading external facades and then assumptions there

01:00:37 and you can see uh recladding is approximately 45 glass double glazed aluminium 55 rain screen

01:00:44 screen rain screen will incorporate an insulated panel etc and then you can see the figure for the new rain screen uh as just over a million pounds you see

01:00:55 uh as just over a million pounds you see that

01:00:56 that uh with a grand total of 5.5 million pounds

01:01:02 pounds now now looking at those uh costing breakdowns does that tell us that by this stage rbkc was clear that it wanted rain screen cladding particularly to form part of the refurbishment

01:01:15 to form part of the refurbishment um i have no idea what the difference between rain screen cladding is or any other type of cladding it was a not a request from rbkc that it was specifically rain screen cladding

01:01:26 was specifically rain screen cladding it was a a submission put down by mr anderson

01:01:30 anderson in order to set out the type of cluttering i see so you you thought cladding rain screen clouding made no difference it did not make any uh it did not uh i did not differentiate between the two

01:01:41 i did not differentiate between the two very good now could we then look at one of your notebooks for this time uh indeed for this day rbk3059572 please page 34

01:01:59 and you'll see here is an extract from your day book 12th of december 2011. so the same day as the email i've just shown you calc presentation introduction you see that yes and

01:02:13 introduction you see that yes and over the page at the bottom of page 35 you can see a note uh and it says um at the very foot of the page grenfell tower now is that heating looks like yes it is

01:02:26 now is that heating looks like yes it is um

01:02:27 um go back to residence after working with tmo

01:02:31 tmo uh on figures for heating windows and cladding have i read that correctly yes yes would you have written that note after receiving the costings

01:02:42 receiving the costings from mark anderson that we've seen in the email do you think um i don't know what the date of this note is to be honest uh i've just shown you the 12th of december 2011. so the same day as the email that i showed you um i can't say very

01:02:54 that i showed you um i can't say very definitely whether i had read the email from mark anderson at the time i wrote this note but i may well have done

01:03:00 done and what do you mean by working with the tma1 figures well it says here working with tma1 figures

01:03:06 figures what what did you contemplate by that exercise

01:03:09 exercise um so so receiving figures from them about

01:03:13 about how much it was going to cost in order to do the refurbishment of grenfell tower right so is it fair to say that at this stage you were

01:03:20 you were concerned with if not worried by costs of the exercise no i wasn't concerned i was just trying to find out what the cost of it actually was right because i did not have um a view

01:03:32 right because i did not have um a view as to how much it was going to cost to undertake the refurbishment of the tower so it wasn't a concern for me it was just a you know kind of an understanding of what the cost was yes when i say concerned with i don't mean worried by

01:03:43 concerned with i don't mean worried by involved with yes yes um now if we go um to page 33 of this notebook

01:03:55 or day book there is a heading at the very top um december 2011. and just help me in the left-hand side in yellow with a

01:04:07 in the left-hand side in yellow with a highlight yellow there's a date 19th december 11 chp and then there is a list of names peter wright penelope

01:04:18 wright penelope t that's i think penelope tollett isn't it that's correct and others um at the bottom i think is it is that you laura j yeah i see uh and you could see planning

01:04:30 yeah i see uh and you could see planning housing and corporate property um do you know what this note was about this is a was this a meeting it must have been a meeting that we had

01:04:41 it must have been a meeting that we had i don't remember it to be honest with you right

01:04:43 you right what does chp stand for and i don't remember what that stands for i'm sorry uh right did this note relate to the proposed refurbishment of grenfell tower

01:04:54 proposed refurbishment of grenfell tower at all do you think

01:04:58 and have a look at it i'd read it all out to you

01:05:03 it does appear to be a note to talk about the

01:05:07 about the options or possibility of undertaking a refurbishment of grenfell tower linked to the calc project i'm just looking at the the first bullet point next to the vertical line

01:05:18 vertical line what is the credibility of chp in is it calc linking in with residential yes

01:05:25 yes so what does that help you identify what chp

01:05:28 chp stands for um i believe i'm referring to some kind of community heating project so

01:05:35 so it's about how the school and the leisure center were heated and then if that could be linked to the refurbishment of grenfell tower and there could be a link between the

01:05:46 and there could be a link between the different facilities in terms of taking advantage

01:05:48 advantage of a district heating system i see okay and then if we look a little bit further down

01:05:59 if we look a little bit further down we can see a third arrow e and tmo working together to agree a is that design yes it is design of what

01:06:11 is that design yes it is design of what um i presume uh a design for the refurbishment of the exterior refurbishment of the tower but i haven't been explicit there so i cannot be sure and then

01:06:22 cannot be sure and then uh two arrows down from that double glazing and cladding what impact on carbon emissions do you remember a discussion about carbon emissions now becoming relevant

01:06:33 carbon emissions now becoming relevant to the question of overcladding um i don't remember it specifically to be honest with you because it is some time ago but i do remember that the borough had a carbon reduction target in line with its

01:06:45 carbon reduction target in line with its climate change initiative so we were looking at opportunities in order to reduce heat loss from buildings and take advantage of community heating systems where possible right now if you go to the second arrow

01:06:58 right now if you go to the second arrow this may make more sense it says i think carbon reduction how we measure it what are we measuring policy includes residential uh both finger blocks

01:07:11 uh both finger blocks and grenfell tower do you see that yes um does that tell us together with the other parts i've read to you that at this stage you knew that studio e and

01:07:22 this stage you knew that studio e and the tma

01:07:22 the tma were working together to agree a design for grenfell that went beyond simply heating but it included the over-cladding as well um i don't know from this note as to whether they

01:07:33 know from this note as to whether they had started to work together or whether i've written a note just to kind of say that this may be a possibility

01:07:40 we saw discussion about aesthetics earlier

01:07:44 earlier um does this help us identify the time when carbon reduction and the relevance of overclouding the building to thermal performance came to be

01:07:55 thermal performance came to be relevant it may well do yes yes

01:08:00 can we then look at rbk3019012 please

01:08:09 this is an email of the 10th of january 2012

01:08:13 2012 from penelope tollett who was head of policy and design and planning at rbkc i believe to jonathan bohr and others in planning at rbkc

01:08:24 rbkc and you're not copied in just to be clear

01:08:28 clear but i just want to ask you about something in it if you look in the email the general subject is housing projects and four entries down it says grenfell the tmo are looking

01:08:39 the tmo are looking at how to engage studio e to do the work they're looking to do on the tower which is double glazing cladding and new heating as well as new housing units in the vacant lower floors and possibly a new floor on the top they understand the tie-up with calc

01:08:52 understand the tie-up with calc now at this point is this right that penny tolle penelope tollett who was head of rbkc planning i think and other planners at rbkc were aware of what

01:09:01 what she called the tie up with calc um penelope tollett was not the head of uh of planning rbkc that was jonathan ball at the time he was the director of planning

01:09:13 he was the director of planning i'm not sure what penelope tollett's exact title was but she may have been head of strategic she was head of definite part of the strategic side of the planning service i see i

01:09:21 see i i i i have her down as head of policy and design that's correct yeah she may have sat within the planning department she did yes i see um

01:09:33 do you know um well let me ask it this way when did you become aware first aware of the tmo's decision to appoint studio e as architects for the grenfell tower

01:09:45 as architects for the grenfell tower project

01:09:46 project i don't know to be honest with you i don't have a specific data right i mean does this email help you um so i would have spoken to the tmo

01:09:57 um so i would have spoken to the tmo about uh studio e being the uh architects for the calc project and in terms of looking at kind of how we could link those two projects together whether there was an

01:10:08 together whether there was an opportunity to use studio e on both projects so there would have been

01:10:14 been around that time conversations that uh the tmo may well have picked up in order to see whether there was an opportunity to work with them on the uh on the refurbishment of grenfell tower i see

01:10:26 tower i see so you your evidence i think just to be clear is that you to the best of your recollection spoke to the tmo about studio e being the architects for the celt project and how that

01:10:38 for the celt project and how that project and grenfell could be linked yeah that's correct did you ever yourself express a view or a wish that the tmo should use the same pre-construction professional

01:10:49 the same pre-construction professional team for grenfell tower as used on calc um i i am sure that in the most general of terms i would have spoken to the tmo to say that there may well be an opportunity there to have

01:11:02 opportunity there to have the same team on both projects and if there was

01:11:05 there was if that led to better design the opportunities for economies of scale but it ultimately would have been up to the tmo about who they appointed right

01:11:19 now mark anderson was asked about the appointment of studio e in his evidence in module 1 on the 13th of october last year

01:11:29 year day 52 can i please show you the transcript for his evidence on that first occasion day 52 page 59 please

01:11:44 um at line 20 on page 59 he's asked the question why did tmo want studio e in particular to do the works described

01:11:55 works described answer there was very much a drive from rbkc that we should optimize the use of the calc team which comprised studio e

01:12:04 can you help us how did that decision to engage

01:12:07 engage studio e tie in with the procurement process

01:12:11 process process generally and then he says the beginning of a longish answer so our bkc had expressed a strong desire that we make use of the pre-construction professional team

01:12:22 professional team which comprised studio e apple yards curtins max fordham and a number of others and the challenge then was to look at how could we engage them could we legally engage them and what those options

01:12:34 engage them and what those options were and then he goes on to recall conversations with peter wright at the sro meetings did you yourself express a strong desire

01:12:45 did you yourself express a strong desire that tmo make use of the pre-construction professional team on calc

01:12:50 calc i think strong desire is probably too strong a word for it but i would have expressed

01:12:54 expressed that there were definite benefits in such uh

01:12:58 such uh where the projects that were linked so closely together both geographically and in terms of benefits that there was an opportunity to use the pre-construction team were you aware of others at rbkc

01:13:10 were you aware of others at rbkc expressing a strong desire or a desire even if not a strong desire for tmo to use the same pre-construction professional team i would have been aware of that yes and who were they um so as mr anderson

01:13:22 and who were they um so as mr anderson says peter wright who was the project manager for the celt project

01:13:26 project and is that for the reasons that you gave earlier about synergies and and yes economies of scale etc yeah and about

01:13:34 about uh that there were two uh very large construction well there was a very large construction project taking place in an area which i believe was around 0.2 hectares

01:13:45 around 0.2 hectares of land the grenfell tower sits very cheek by gel with the school and the um and the leisure center and so if you have got these two very

01:13:56 and so if you have got these two very large construction projects taking place it makes sense that the team uh if you can that you would try and get both the same team working on both projects

01:14:06 projects and on that point was the dominant reason for having the same pre-construction team on both projects so so that the aesthetics would blend

01:14:18 so so that the aesthetics would blend um aesthetics and also about the coordination of the project so that you didn't get a clash with different teams because if you had one team working on it then they would have the ability to program

01:14:29 program both of all of the projects and have an understanding of how the whole project worked across the piece right could that not have been achieved by having the same team but a different

01:14:40 by having the same team but a different architect or designer for the grenfell yes we could

01:14:45 and what about cost savings was one of the reasons for desiring the same pre-construction team be used one of cost savings um i think it may well have been a consideration but it wasn't an

01:14:56 been a consideration but it wasn't an overwhelming it wasn't an overwhelming driving factor in this to be honest with you it was more about the coordination of the projects in a very small area and how both of those projects came together to work in synergy yes thank you um mr chairman this is uh

01:15:10 yes thank you um mr chairman this is uh an appropriate moment for a break i'm still in the middle of the topic but there's no there's no reachable better point coming along

01:15:17 along this is a good point yes thank you very much

01:15:21 much well uh ms johnson as you were warned earlier we have a break during the morning and the afternoon so we're going to take a break now we'll come back please at 25 to 12 and

01:15:32 come back please at 25 to 12 and i have to ask you as i've asked everybody else not to talk about your evidence to anyone while you're out of the room all right thank you very much would you like to give the usher please

01:15:52 give the usher please thank you 25 to 12.

01:34:57 would you ask ms johnson to come back in please

01:35:14 all right mr johnson ready to carry on yes thank you yes mr billy thank you mr chairman uh miss johnson we were uh talking about um rbkc's desire

01:35:25 talking about um rbkc's desire to use the same pre-construction team before we broke can i take you back to mr anderson's evidence about this at day 52

01:35:34 and i'd ask you to look please at page

01:35:40 60. and if we go to the foot of page 60

01:35:52 at line 17 he's asked the question now you say that there was a drive from rbkc to optimize use of the calc team from whom did this drive emanate answer

01:36:03 from whom did this drive emanate answer my recollection is that this was a my recollection is that that was across the board it ranged from the portfolio holder through to all of the officers that i had dealings with question was the drive expressed in the

01:36:15 question was the drive expressed in the imperative i.e they were directing you to do it

01:36:18 to do it or did you have any say choice or discretion in the matter and if you turn the page a line one answer rbk say never specifically said you must my interpretation of the direction that i

01:36:30 interpretation of the direction that i was receiving was that we kctmo that is would have been challenged had we not done it do you agree with mr anderson's characterization there

01:36:41 anderson's characterization there of the drive from rbkc to retain the calc team

01:36:44 calc team as widespread across the board yes and was the intention as mark anderson perceived it that the tmo should understand that they had no real choice in the matter no i would not say that at all um i

01:36:57 no i would not say that at all um i would say that we saw the benefits of using the calc team across the piece but if kc tmo had come back specifically and said

01:37:04 and said that they absolutely did not wish to use them and given us um a a reason for that then we definitely would have listened to it would you have challenged the tmo had they decided not to use the calc

01:37:16 they decided not to use the calc pre-construction team as mr anderson said um

01:37:21 said um challenged yes we would have had a discussion about way that why they didn't think it was appropriate right

01:37:29 so they would have had to have persuaded you

01:37:32 you they would have to have given us a reason yes why they did not think that was a good way to go forward yes i see

01:37:39 see did you or anybody else at rbkc tell the tmo that it should make its own independent decision about which pre-construction professionals to use for the grenfell tower project i did not specifically say those words

01:37:51 i did not specifically say those words no

01:37:53 no did you or anybody else at wkc tell the tmo

01:37:57 tmo um at this stage at least in early 2012 that a separate procurement of the grenfell tower project was even a serious option um i don't remember discussing that to be honest with you

01:38:14 could we look please at lj7 which is your exhibit at rbk50862 please

01:38:24 this takes us into february 2012 ms johnson and it is a report drafted by you

01:38:29 you dated the 9th of february of that year and it's entitled basements elm park gardens sw10 capital receipt expenditure and you can see in the full decision box

01:38:40 and you can see in the full decision box it says this report prepares the arguments by which to seek cabinet approval to the use of a proportion of the capital receipts from the elm park gardens basement disposals for investment in new homes and major improvements to existing homes

01:38:54 and major improvements to existing homes is it right just in general terms that this report was for cabinet for the cabinet member for housing with a view to your proposal going to cabinet

01:39:05 yes and if we go please to page six in this document let's look together at paragraph 7.4 and 7.5 where the priorities are set out the

01:39:18 where the priorities are set out the priorities identified and there's a list there and you've mentioned some of those earlier in your evidence today the last one there is lancaster west estate

01:39:28 estate where and you say this estate has significant investment needs particularly around the heating system and windows and you go on to say in the middle

01:39:39 and you go on to say in the middle in parallel the proposed construction of the new kensington academy and leisure center

01:39:43 center is likely to have an impact on the north end of this estate which has caused real concern to grenfell tower residents who immediately overlook the site furthermore grenfell grenfell tower lower floors currently have an area of

01:39:55 lower floors currently have an area of disused office space which has the potential for conversion into new homes this demonstrates that an investment here has the potential to deliver a range of benefits

01:40:05 benefits and then if you look at paragraph 7.5

01:40:10 the first bullet point underneath that as part of the list of benefits is replacement of single glazed fenestration which is currently beyond repair with double glazed fenestration throughout improving thermal efficiency and fuel

01:40:22 improving thermal efficiency and fuel economy installing thermally insulating cladding to the external elevations of granfell tower where the construction provides a level of thermal comfort below the current standards improving thermal efficiency

01:40:33 standards improving thermal efficiency fuel economy and external appearance and if we go to page eight please we can also see paragraph 14.3 on that page

01:40:45 where you say proposal for expenditure of this capital receipt should go to cabinet with a recommendation to delegate the authority for approval of any minor changes to the investment needs at grenfell tower to the cabinet member for housing and

01:40:56 to the cabinet member for housing and property

01:40:58 property so it's clear at that stage that bet that

01:41:01 that cladding is now linked at least to thermal efficiency as well as aesthetics is that fair yes that is can we then go to rbk

01:41:10 to rbk 3033739

01:41:17 this is as we can see from the second page page two please um the minutes of the housing digest meeting

01:41:25 meeting of thursday february the 9th of february 2012

01:41:28 2012 and your present so is mark anderson and others including penelope tollett and peter wright what was the housing digest um

01:41:39 what was the housing digest um it was a weekly meeting that uh the cabinet member for housing and property held with myself the director of housing and or the director of property at the time so

01:41:50 the director of property at the time so to go through pertinent issues of the day

01:41:53 day right now if we look at paragraph three lower down the screen please it's entitled elm park gardens capital receipt

01:42:02 receipt and at the very bottom of the page it says

01:42:05 says there was a detailed discussion on the proposed works to renovate and convert grenfell tower on the lancaster west estate

01:42:11 estate the following main points were noted and then the first bullet point says that the new windows and cladding should reflect or complement calc do you know who it was at the meeting who said that the new windows and cladding should

01:42:22 and cladding should reflect or compliment calc no i do not was it was it you do you think it may well have been myself but i can't remember why were you so concerned that the cladding should complement calc or if it was you um

01:42:35 calc or if it was you um i don't know if it was me but um it would certainly in terms of the uh the look of the area help if the if grenfell tower didn't look completely different to the rest of the

01:42:46 different to the rest of the redevelopment that was taking place at the same time right does this tell us that

01:42:49 that even at this stage your primary or rbkc's primary concern was the aesthetics of the kelp project and the integration in the area of the aesthetic look um i

01:43:00 in the area of the aesthetic look um i don't

01:43:00 don't necessarily think it was uh the aesthetic look that was driving the kelp project

01:43:05 project um to link with grenfell tower but it was definitely a factor right now looking at the fifth bullet point on this list we need to go to page three for that uh you can see it says in respect to the

01:43:17 uh you can see it says in respect to the estimated costs of the project of 5.5 million pounds officers are planning to appoint studio e to draw up a detailed design plan this will provide economies of scale benefit and also ensure the works

01:43:28 benefit and also ensure the works complement and reflect calc that's the second reference here to the

01:43:32 the to the grenfell project complementing calc

01:43:36 calc what did complementing calc mean

01:43:40 um i suppose in in this context that there was

01:43:44 there was a major development project taking place at the base of grenfell tower and if undertaking a refurbishment project of a building that sat you know sort of some meters away that

01:43:56 you know sort of some meters away that they there were similarities in the look of the two development projects

01:44:02 and it says as i've shown you officers are planning to appoint studio e to draw up a detailed design plan and just to be clear whose officers were planning that

01:44:13 planning that i don't know in terms of this context it may well have been tmo officers or it could have been rbkc but i suspect it was tmo right now you agreed earlier in your

01:44:26 right now you agreed earlier in your evidence

01:44:27 evidence that studio e had been appointed to the cult project through a rigorously conducted ojeu procurement process that's correct um i just want to put three questions or three propositions to

01:44:38 three questions or three propositions to you just to see whether you agree with them

01:44:40 them first would you agree that the purpose of undertaking a competitive procurement process is securing best value for money yes secondly would you agree that the purpose

01:44:49 purpose of conducting a competitive procurement process would be to appoint an architect with the level of skills knowledge and experience appropriate to the work involved yes and thirdly would you agree that the

01:45:01 yes and thirdly would you agree that the further purpose of conducting a competitive procurement process would be to ensure that the procuring public authority complies with its obligations under the procurement rules

01:45:12 procurement rules yes now you said earlier on that studio e uh was appointed to calc because of its experience in designing schools that's correct even if not leisure centers

01:45:24 leisure centers at this stage did you know yourself whether studio he had any experience in high-rise buildings i did not know whether studioe had any experience in high-rise buildings but i would have expected bearing in

01:45:37 but i would have expected bearing in mind that they had taken an approach on the calc project where they had

01:45:43 they had an architect working on the leisure center who did have the appropriate experience if they didn't have the skills that they could bring them in and who was the architect working on the leisure center whom studio e had brought

01:45:54 leisure center whom studio e had brought in

01:45:55 in do you remember it was a partnership between studio e with the overarching architect

01:45:59 architect the lead architect for that project and they bid for the project with an architect's project practice who specialised in leisure centers and i'm afraid i can't remember their name off the top of my head now at this stage did you did you ask

01:46:12 now at this stage did you did you ask whether studio e had any experience or expertise

01:46:16 expertise in refurbishing high-rise residential buildings

01:46:20 buildings i don't remember asking them why is that um

01:46:24 um well i don't know to be honest with you um whether i asked them whether they had expertise maybe i made an assumption that they did have that expertise

01:46:35 that they did have that expertise why would you have assumed that uh i think i would probably have assumed that because they were an architect's practice of a sufficient scale and size

01:46:47 practice of a sufficient scale and size and had considerable experience uh i understood worldwide in doing design projects

01:46:52 projects and i also know from working in development for a number of years that innovative architects practice doesn't have that experience in a particular type of building that they would bring somebody in who

01:47:03 that they would bring somebody in who did have that experience to undertake that work

01:47:05 that work right with the same apply in relation to studio e's experience in over-cladding high-rise buildings yes

01:47:14 and similarly studio is experience in refurbishing a residential block with residents

01:47:20 residents in situ that's correct i mean given that studio he had appointed or had co-partnered if you like uh with a specialist architect firm for the cult project

01:47:31 the cult project for the purposes of the design of the leisure center why didn't you or anybody else at rbkc ask the same question about overclouding grenfell tower in retrospect we

01:47:44 grenfell tower in retrospect we definitely should have asked that question

01:47:46 question i don't remember asking that question but i also don't remember studio e ever saying to us that they didn't have the requisite experience to do this particular work but didn't did it not occur to you at the time just to check

01:47:57 the time just to check to make sure that the assumptions that you were proceeding upon were well founded

01:48:02 founded um at the time it did not no and i just wanted to really understand why that was why there was a bl it appears to be a blind spot um i cannot account for it now to be honest

01:48:13 cannot account for it now to be honest with you

01:48:14 with you because it seems to be something that would be completely obvious to ask studioe to present their credentials for undertaking refurbishment of residential projects

01:48:25 refurbishment of residential projects but at the time i did not make that uh i did not take that step and let me suggest this that that you didn't ask the what you've described as the completely

01:48:37 what you've described as the completely obvious question because um grenfell tower was essentially being um put into the as part of or adjunct to the celt project

01:48:48 the celt project as something of an afterthought would that be fair um i think afterthought is um a strong phrase to be honest with you because it definitely wasn't something that was the poor relation to the calc project

01:49:00 the poor relation to the calc project but it was something that was brought into the calc sphere of influence at a later date right

01:49:08 and in fact do you agree that rb casey's a desire to appoint studio we really had everything to do with cost savings or as you might put it economies of scale and aesthetic

01:49:19 economies of scale and aesthetic integration with calc but nothing to do with studio ezone experience it did not have anything to do with studio's track record of undertaking refurbishment projects

01:49:30 refurbishment projects on residential properties it had to do with economies of scale it had to do with linking it to the kelp project and it was also about doing two very large projects in a very

01:49:43 doing two very large projects in a very small area and getting the benefits of having the same design team doing the both

01:49:51 so just to put it really bluntly you didn't ask the obvious question because you were more concerned with money and the look of it no i don't think that's fair at all i think i didn't ask the obvious question

01:50:02 think i didn't ask the obvious question because i would have made the assumption that studio e could have brought in the requisite expertise from another architect's practice or subject in order to be able to have the skills and experience required

01:50:13 skills and experience required to do this particular project now let's go to

01:50:16 go to page five in this document you can see the paragraph six point well six any other business

01:50:26 uh i'm sorry can i ask you to go to a different document i'm actually uh no sorry i'm so sorry go back to that please i just wanted to pick something up on any other business in that place

01:50:38 any other business in that place page five

01:50:49 thank you uh any other business grenfell tower the boiler was down um it seems to be an

01:51:00 um it seems to be an uh a particular event why was the housing digest at rbkc discussing a particular event about the boiler at grenfell tower i don't remember how was that normally

01:51:11 i don't remember how was that normally part of your domain um yes if there was a particular incident

01:51:17 incident on the the council's housing estate as managed by kctmo then i would discuss it with the cabinet member for housing and property because it may well be that he or other

01:51:29 because it may well be that he or other councillors would have received inquiries from tenants about when these matters were going to be fixed so if i thought there was going to be something that would be brought to his attention

01:51:38 attention or complaints would be made or he would receive emails or his colleagues would then uh we would have a general discussion about what was taking place can we now go back to your report please that's at rbk50862

01:51:52 that's at rbk50862 which we looked at a moment ago uh and look please at page five

01:52:00 and on that page you can see paragraph 6.3

01:52:03 6.3 the total capital receipt generated through sales could therefore be in the region of 13 odd million pounds when when set against the total affordable housing development costs of 4.9 odd million pounds

01:52:14 costs of 4.9 odd million pounds the potential surplus in capital receipts is now estimated at eight odd million pounds uh now at paragraph seven section seven you

01:52:25 now at paragraph seven section seven you then set out the priorities for expenditure of elm park gardens capital receipts

01:52:30 receipts and you've listed on page six various properties if you go over to page six uh i've shown you this before do you remember whether

01:52:42 remember whether any um of these other properties trellic worlds and etc seriously considered for investment from the epg proceeds um yes we went through them in a in a

01:52:55 um yes we went through them in a in a methodical fashion to have a look at what was the uh the estate that would most benefit or could provide wider benefits as a result of the elm park gardens

01:53:06 park gardens elm park gardens funding and trellic in particular which had significant investment needs which were dealt with which we had numerous reports about by kc tmo and we

01:53:17 numerous reports about by kc tmo and we talked about on a number of occasions um at the council was a subject of particular concern about what was required there and again i i remember distinctly having

01:53:29 and again i i remember distinctly having a very long conversation about the heating at cremona state and the need for its replacement um less so about bathroom burley but definitely there was quite a wide ranging discussion about the benefits

01:53:40 ranging discussion about the benefits that could be obtained by investment in any one of those estates do you know why it was proposed at this stage

01:53:47 stage that only 5.5 million would be used for the investment in the works at grenfell tower instead of the full eight-odd million pound net surplus

01:53:55 surplus anticipated to be derived from the sale of elm park gardens um i can't remember specifically why there was only that amount but i presume it was because the indicative figure for the refurbishment

01:54:07 the refurbishment at grenfell tower had been come back at around that figure by mr anderson so that's

01:54:11 that's those are the hunters figures we looked at earlier in november yes the previous year i see so that's where their number comes from yes um can we then go to your notebook again please

01:54:24 rbk3059572 at page 87. we now move to march 2012 and we can see here on that page that there is a meeting on the 26th of march

01:54:36 there is a meeting on the 26th of march 2012

01:54:37 2012 with the heading grenfell tower you can see that with yellow highlight at the top

01:54:42 top and you can see that there's a list of attendees

01:54:45 attendees underneath the date in vertical and just help me is it it looks like bruce andre peter w that's peter wright um now

01:54:56 peter w that's peter wright um now that then a scribble which looks like your

01:54:59 your that's correct yes and then is it james m

01:55:02 m yes who's that um i can't be sure but i believe it would have been james masini who is from the planning department right

01:55:10 right i'm just looking at that and refreshing your memory quickly from that uh you've got some arrows timing interface with calc programming of works on grenfell do you remember what the purpose of the meeting

01:55:21 remember what the purpose of the meeting was

01:55:22 was no now it looks as if it helped me nobody from the tmo was there is that right yes

01:55:29 right yes do you know why you were meeting studio e on grenfell tower matters without tmo being there um i can't say specifically but it may well have been that i was already meeting with this

01:55:40 that i was already meeting with this team to talk about calc so then there was a follow-on to talk about grenfell tower uh now there is uh as i've just shown you

01:55:49 you uh a second arrow down i've read it as interface with calc um but in fact it could be interfere with calc what does it say do you know

01:56:01 calc what does it say do you know uh

01:56:05 interface right you're the best judge of that

01:56:08 that i suppose do you know what the subject of discussion was um i can't remember specifically from uh from may 2012. and then if we look

01:56:19 uh from may 2012. and then if we look uh up to the top right hand corner you can see a little line and then it says and again help me if this is wrong it says bruce to meet with um now it looks like monk but i

01:56:31 um now it looks like monk but i i'm not sure mark i think that is and jane t

01:56:36 jane t jane trethuy i i'm guessing to scope out brief for grenfell tower times two meetings

01:56:44 meetings 28th march 2012.

01:56:49 is does that tell us that there was an arrangement made at this meeting whereby bruce says would meet with mark anderson of the tmo

01:57:00 with mark anderson of the tmo and jane trothui to scope out the brief i don't know whether there was an arrangement made at this meeting or whether they were telling me that there was already a meeting that had been set up in order to do that

01:57:12 that had been set up in order to do that i see

01:57:15 and then if you go about halfway down the screen you can see a reference to apple yards do you see that yes and it says apple yards tmo to a point

01:57:26 a point to work on scope timing and costs was it your idea for the or the or rbkc's idea for tmo to appoint apple yards

01:57:37 tmo to appoint apple yards i don't remember you do you remember who suggested that the tmo should appoint apple yards to work on scope timing and costs no did the tmo have a choice

01:57:49 no did the tmo have a choice in who they or whom they could appoint as employers agent they would have had a choice yes and under the heading risks risks of doing it does this say at the same time

01:58:02 risks capacity of agencies risks on delay to calc uh working on restrictions sorry my fault um

01:58:09 fault um above that um above apple yards it says risks

01:58:14 risks risks of doing it at the same time right what was that about do you remember um i don't remember specifically but it would have been that as i've gone on to say underneath it was about the capacity of the site

01:58:26 it was about the capacity of the site really because it was a very very tight working area in order to be able to do the building of two very significant buildings in terms of the leisure center and at school and then the uh the space required in

01:58:40 and then the uh the space required in order to be able to to redo the refurbishment of the tower at the same time i see and then lower down under risks as you've rightly picked up it says capacity of agencies risks on delay to calc

01:58:49 calc working on restricted sites

01:58:54 why was there a risk in the capacity of agencies what was that risk

01:59:01 that risk um i don't remember specifically but it may will have been uh their ability to have the resources to to do both projects and then if you look a little lower down to the bottom of the screen and we'll have to scroll up a bit

01:59:12 screen and we'll have to scroll up a bit more

01:59:13 more you can see in the left-hand column you've written contractor underlined working on site individual contractor and then package one school novate to academy

01:59:24 school novate to academy package two leisure center and landscaping package iii grenfell tower and then underneath that is a separate contract but procured

01:59:35 but procured with rbkc for design same terms and conditions could you just explain what that is about what that means

01:59:46 about what that means um i don't remember specifically but we may have had a discussion at that particular meeting about um whether it was possible to do a procurement exercise working with rbkc

01:59:58 procurement exercise working with rbkc for those particular agencies to work on different packages but i can't remember in in

02:00:02 in in to be honest with you now right so can you help me with what separate contract but procured with rbkc means or indicates um rbkc had gone through the procurement

02:00:13 um rbkc had gone through the procurement for the calc project and whether there was an opportunity to use that existing procurement to help procure the grenfell tower project whether there was any latitude under the using the og or the iec framework i

02:00:25 using the og or the iec framework i suspect

02:00:26 suspect right were you suggesting that the contractor for grenfell tower be procured by rbkc no i wouldn't have been

02:00:33 been uh we would have never been involved in directly procuring the contractor for grenfell tower well just that i seem to be discussing there as to whether there was um any opportunity to work uh with us

02:00:45 um any opportunity to work uh with us on that but um i would never have suggested that we would have procured it right you say we would never have been directly involved what about indirectly involved but we may have been indirectly involved yes

02:00:56 may have been indirectly involved yes how would that indirect involvement have manifested itself i don't know to be honest with you it wasn't something that actually came to pass now let's go to lbi50129

02:01:11 this is the minute of a calc residence forum in enb hall on the 28th of march 2012

02:01:22 hall on the 28th of march 2012 and you can see from this that you are in attendance as well as two councillors including councillor blakeman and halfway down the attendance list you can see also mr defan

02:01:33 can see also mr defan and then at the bottom you've got mark anderson tmo and andre caselle studio e you see that uh if we um uh and in fact you are the

02:01:44 uh if we um uh and in fact you are the minute taker i should point that out to you

02:01:46 you you see that so these are actually your minutes i think um i yes i would have taken the minutes because shelley gittins who would normally have taken the minutes was absent at that particular meeting

02:01:57 was absent at that particular meeting right

02:01:58 right do you actually remember that uh i don't remember taking these specific minutes but i'm noting from the information in front of me that shelley gittins wasn't present

02:02:10 gittins wasn't present and she supported me at those at those meetings

02:02:13 meetings and generally took the minutes i see so from from her absence you infer that these are your minutes yes i do now um if you go please to

02:02:24 uh the bottom of page two and let's look at aob

02:02:31 yeah you've got grenfell tower there and then if you go um over the page to page three mark anderson mark anderson presents

02:02:42 mark anderson mark anderson presents options for regeneration of grenfell tower initial work with studio e you see that and then the penultimate bullet point says ed questioned why studio e chosen to do

02:02:54 questioned why studio e chosen to do initial work counsellor c that's councillor coleridge very difficult to have different contractors on site when times two different projects going on

02:03:05 different projects going on synergizes across projects design need between

02:03:09 between school leisure center public realm and grenfell tower now can you confirm that e.d there is edward dufan who i've identified to you as present

02:03:20 as present i believe he was do you remember whether there was any wider discussion at this meeting about this joint procurement no i don't remember what did synergizes across projects

02:03:31 what did synergizes across projects design

02:03:32 design mean do you think um i think i need to ask councillor coleridge that question but i suspect rather like my previous answers

02:03:42 answers um he was talking about the ability to share information undertake uh you know the ability to coordinate the you know kind of the number of very large design projects

02:03:54 large design projects taking place in a in a very small area right

02:03:57 right i mean you took the minutes uh and you wrote down what he said and am i right to assume that when he said synergizes across projects design you understood what he meant uh i didn't

02:04:08 you understood what he meant uh i didn't i don't

02:04:08 i don't tend to write minutes that are verbatim accounts of what people actually say they're more of a sort of general statement of what people may have said at the meeting um and i would have understood what he meant by

02:04:19 would have understood what he meant by synergizes if indeed he said that phrase right so i think that's perhaps an elegant way of saying you wrote down what you thought he said i would have written down uh what i

02:04:30 i would have written down uh what i thought he said but yeah um yes it was probably your summary of what you said it may well have been a summary yes of what i thought we said

02:04:40 how could there be effective synergies in design if studio e had never designed an overcloud on a high-rise residential tower

02:04:48 um i don't think i'm talking about the particularly the their qualifications for designing residential towers it's more about the programming

02:04:59 programming and project management across the piece

02:05:05 well it it does say synergizes across projects design or design need so how could there be synergy

02:05:15 synergy between the two projects design if a studio had never designed an overcloud of a high-rise residential block uh maybe very generally in this statement uh council courage is

02:05:26 statement uh council courage is referring to uh the look of both of the buildings and the

02:05:30 the uh you know kind of connection the the look of the school and how ultimately grenfell tower will look and although it may have been as councillor kohler just noted as saying very very difficult to have different contractors on site

02:05:43 have different contractors on site what was the problem with having two different architects on site um you could have had two different architects on site i accept that point yes do you remember whether anybody actually told mr dufan

02:05:55 told mr dufan that studio e had been chosen because of cost savings and aesthetic integration that using them would bring no i don't remember

02:06:09 i assume that nobody actually admitted to mr de farm that studio e had no experience of having ever done a high-rise refurbishment no no one would have said that to mr

02:06:20 no no one would have said that to mr tufan and they've never claimed a building before that's correct well they had clad buildings uh sorry a high-rise a high-risk building but they had lots of schools had led bitter already been identified

02:06:32 had led bitter already been identified as the contractor to grenfell tower at this stage potential contractor for grenfell tower at this stage they may have been identified as a potential contractor because of the ability to use the same

02:06:44 because of the ability to use the same site compound

02:06:47 now can i then move further into the year 2012

02:06:50 year 2012 and look next at your report of the 2nd of may of that year tmo double zero eight four seven three three one please

02:07:07 now we know this is your uh document uh i can show you that at the end but do you accept it's your document it's a report by director of housing

02:07:18 housing yes i mean the reports from the housing department always came from the director of housing so i may not have always been the author although my name is the top right who would have been or who sorry who habitually was the author

02:07:29 who habitually was the author um different people within the department i was not habitually the author

02:07:33 author i was the person who checked over the reports that other officers in my team wrote

02:07:37 wrote okay at this stage early may 2012 do you know who the author was um it's very likely that the author of this particular report was jane trethewey if she was still working at rbkc at that time

02:07:49 still working at rbkc at that time nonetheless you say you weren't the author by which i understand you to mean you didn't put your finger on the keyboard but if you checked it and approved it and sent it out

02:07:58 out as a report by you presumably you were taking responsibility for it that's correct

02:08:03 correct yeah and if we go to page 12 we can see your name at the bottom yes that's correct so you can treat it as your report yes you can yes thank you um can we then go please in that document

02:08:15 in that document um to the first page just to look at the topic

02:08:19 topic and it says in the box in fact above the box use of capital receipts arising from the sale of basement spaces at elm park gardens in the box for decision this report seeks cabinet approval to the use of

02:08:30 seeks cabinet approval to the use of capital receipts arising from the sale of vacant basement spaces at elm park gardens

02:08:34 gardens for investment in new affordable homes and major improvements to existing affordable homes now if we look into the document please at page 10 let's look at paragraph 6.3.6 top of the

02:08:46 let's look at paragraph 6.3.6 top of the page

02:08:47 page the tmo is seeking to work in close partnership with the kensington academy and leisure center project taking place on the site immediately adjacent to grenfell tower the tmo has appointed the same design team as that for calc

02:08:58 team as that for calc to assist in the project management of detailed matters such as the coordination of design consultation public realm site access and works the tmo also anticipates employing the same

02:09:09 tmo also anticipates employing the same contractor and this is intended to ensure that the two projects are able to deliver cost savings where possible and produce schemes that are complementary in their appearance and function

02:09:19 function for this reason and subject to the cabinet's approval there is a need to ensure that the grenfell tower project is permitted to proceed without delay

02:09:29 now was this report prepared by you and presented by you for the purposes of going to cabinet with a view to budget being approved yes and as i've shown you it says that the

02:09:40 and as i've shown you it says that the schemes will be complementary in their appearance and function what do you mean by function in that context um i'm not sure function is a phrase here

02:09:52 i'm not sure function is a phrase here because clearly one is a residential block

02:09:54 block and one is a school and so there's very little crossover and function between those two

02:10:00 those two particular projects but the refurbishment of grenfell tower project did also include a nursery community rooms

02:10:09 rooms and a gym facility for a new boxing club so there were elements of the grenfell tower project which weren't just about residential components

02:10:20 residential components right is that what you meant by function i don't remember to be honest with you okay was it was it your view that using the same contractor potentially led bitter would produce

02:10:32 potentially led bitter would produce significant financial savings i didn't think it would produce significant financial savings there may be

02:10:38 be some cost savings at the margins particularly on the site setups or the use of sites and or having subcontractors on site or who had been commissioned and under to do work

02:10:50 commissioned and under to do work on the on the school in the leisure centre and there may be some crossover but

02:10:54 but i didn't think it would deliver significant cost savings there may be some cost savings but that would have to be borne out over the period of time right well if they weren't going to be significant can you explain why the report your report

02:11:05 explain why the report your report uh says that employing the same contractor was intended to ensure that the two projects are able to deliver cost savings well as i said they would deliver some cost savings but they may not deliver significant cost

02:11:16 they may not deliver significant cost savings so there may be an opportunity there

02:11:19 there uh to get that uh you know sort of by doing

02:11:23 doing the uh the leisure center the school and the

02:11:26 the refurbishment of the tower using contractors then you are using the same project team that the contractor has on site ledbetters who are then uh taken over by the same site set up

02:11:38 uh taken over by the same site set up you know sort of they're all in place already to do that project there so you would you would gain some savings from not having to set up a separate team and that presumably was um

02:11:48 um was part of the advocacy if you like in order to persuade cabinet to release the funds

02:11:54 funds um i don't think uh employing the same contractor was really it's mentioned in this report but it's not an overwhelming factor for for the release of funds the overwhelming factor for releasing the

02:12:05 overwhelming factor for releasing the funds

02:12:06 funds was actually the poor condition of grenfell tower yes but it would be easier wouldn't it let me put it to you this way was the reason that you mentioned the employment of the same contractor

02:12:18 the employment of the same contractor intending to ensure the two projects were able to deliver cost savings where possible uh as a part of the means by which to persuade cabinet to release the funds it was a factor yes

02:12:29 release the funds it was a factor yes it was a key factor i would have thought um i think the greater factor was the condition of grenfell tower if i'm honest with you um and it being unusual for us to have

02:12:41 um and it being unusual for us to have that amount of finance available for us at that time in order to be able to do a project of that significant nature um and undoubtedly having the calc project adjacent and happening at the same time

02:12:54 adjacent and happening at the same time gave us that ability to do that but the timing of this is explained by the stage at which the calc project had reached yes yeah and do you agree that rbkc

02:13:06 yes yeah and do you agree that rbkc was to some extent putting pressure on the tmo

02:13:09 the tmo to appoint ledbitter as its contractor i would say that we made that suggestion but i wouldn't say that we would if uh the tmo came back and said that they did not want to use lead betters

02:13:20 lead betters then um we would be quite happy to accept an alternative now ledbetter like studio e had been appointed for the calc project through a rigorous oj eu procurement process

02:13:31 a rigorous oj eu procurement process hasn't they yes and uh ledbetter is this right they've been selected as contractor for the celt project because of their experience in delivering schools and

02:13:42 experience in delivering schools and leisure center projects um they would have been i can't remember now but they would have been putting this together this report together for cabinet do you remember whether you made any inquiries into lead bit of suitability

02:13:53 bit of suitability for the grenfell tower project no i did not why is that i don't remember do you remember whether councillor coleridge or indeed any member of

02:14:02 member of the cabinet asked whether there should be a separate procurement process for grenfell whether for the design team or for the contractor i don't remember them asking right does that mean that um so far as you remember they did not

02:14:15 um so far as you remember they did not ask

02:14:16 ask i don't remember them asking right at rbk3045652 please let's look at that this takes us to the summer of 2012

02:14:27 summer of 2012 and this is a letter sent by mr tunde awadaru

02:14:30 awadaru whose name we've seen earlier this morning um on the 20th of the 12th of july 2012. if we go to the very foot of the page please page one and over to page two

02:14:44 uh we can see that that's there now for this i think you need to see the um lower down the email string of page six is where it starts

02:14:56 six is where it starts uh this is mr aberdeer's email to paul dunkerton who's the project manager at tmo at this stage and he uh

02:15:11 asks he asks the question in the fourth paragraph down perhaps makes the point we did not expect you to appoint an architect

02:15:22 expect you to appoint an architect without consulting us please find the forwarded emails copyright to siobhan rumble the area manager of lwe and hand delivered to her dated 7th march 2012 in relation to building a better

02:15:33 in relation to building a better relationship we find it bewildering that you're not aware of these emails as project manager when the area manager of lancaster west estate ms siobhan rumble is very much aware of what's going on and what mr robert black himself stated his intention of building

02:15:45 himself stated his intention of building a strong working relationship with the grenfell tower leaseholders association you need to set up a procedure so that we can work closely with you to get involved

02:15:53 involved for the approve of six million worth of investment for improvement not maintenance of grenfell tower so that's

02:16:00 that's that's the the original uh point that mr awaderi makes and just for your benefit page seven we can see his signature uh on behalf of gtla there

02:16:11 his signature uh on behalf of gtla there now if we then go up please to the foot of page five we can see that this email is sent by keith mott the name we've seen before

02:16:23 by keith mott the name we've seen before not mr awadura himself and it's copied to you

02:16:26 to you as the sec as the third copy party can you see that yes uh

02:16:33 yes uh and then um there's some further correspondence tracking up to page one until the final email on page one if we get up to there where at the top of this email chain jane trethewey

02:16:45 of this email chain jane trethewey writes to you on the 26th of july 2012 copy to amanda johnson and says this lj if you get a chance to raise this with robert before you go i'd like to see the

02:16:56 robert before you go i'd like to see the tmo's response to the grenfell leaseholders just to be clear what's being said not good to have radio silence in response to their formal requests for information

02:17:07 information now as to the substance of mr awaderi's complaint

02:17:12 complaint is it correct in fact that the residents of grenfell tower had not actually been consulted on the appointment of studio e that's correct

02:17:23 um why is that um because as we've discussed before we looked at appointing uh the same design team that were working on calc with grenfell tower

02:17:35 on calc with grenfell tower and we did not go through a formal process working with the tmo to get their express their views on the appointment i see so the same reasons that you didn't go through an independent oju process for

02:17:46 process for for studio e are the reasons that you didn't consult the residents um we consulted the residents on a wide range of

02:17:53 range of um but on that point we did not consult them on the appointment of studio e now did did receiving this email from jane trothue raise any doubt in your mind as to the way in which studio e

02:18:05 way in which studio e had been or would be appointed for the grenfell tower project no it did not why is that i don't remember

02:18:12 remember now we find no response from you to mr awaderi's complaint um do you know why you didn't respond to his complaint or his point could you scroll down piece

02:18:23 or his point could you scroll down piece so i can see the uh

02:18:26 yes uh we can scroll down to the original

02:18:30 original um because it i didn't reply to it because it was sent to mr black right so you're only a copy you're i say only a copy party you're a copy party so you didn't think you had to respond that's correct did you chase mr black to see what he'd said

02:18:42 see what he'd said um i would have asked him right what did he say i don't remember no um can we then turn to a different topic which is uh still in 2012 the concerns surrounding

02:18:55 still in 2012 the concerns surrounding the management by tmo do you remember whether you yourself had any concerns by which i mean worries um about the competence

02:19:07 um about the competence of managers at the tmo at this time early 2012. um no i don't believe i did did you have any concerns about the way in which the capital investment program is being delivered by

02:19:18 delivered by the tmo at this time um to be honest with you

02:19:22 with you uh in 2012 i can't remember if i had expressed concerns about the way that it was being delivered then

02:19:30 um mark anderson told us in his evidence in module 1 on the 13th of october last year that in april 2012 april 2012 regeneration had become more

02:19:42 april 2012 regeneration had become more prominent as what he put it a corporate requirement do you remember that um i don't remember that specifically but there would have been a greater push in our bkc towards undertaking uh

02:19:55 in our bkc towards undertaking uh regeneration projects right let me just show you exactly what he said day 52 please page 11.

02:20:11 and at page 11 if you go to line of 12

02:20:23 is a reference to anthony parks and and then questions about mr black and mr parks and then at line um 21

02:20:33 um 21 did regeneration become more prominent as a corporate requirement in the run-up to the change of your title in april 2012

02:20:39 2012 answered line 24 yes it did my understanding is that at the time i'd been approached kctma was going through a degree of change

02:20:48 change and there was also a desire on the part of kctmo to do more for our bkc and similarly for our bkc to have kctmo do more

02:20:57 do more and as par and part of that was moving towards one a stable property services function but it was also looking at what they could do more broadly around the housing assets

02:21:07 assets and housing regeneration was part of that

02:21:10 that do you agree with mr anderson there that in early 2012 rbkc was looking for the tmo to do more and specifically in housing regeneration uh yes i would broadly agree with that

02:21:22 uh yes i would broadly agree with that statement

02:21:23 statement what was driving rbkc to expect more from the tmo do you remember so in 2012 the local authorities had moved from one

02:21:34 the local authorities had moved from one where they had a nationally agreed settlement under the

02:21:39 the previous funding formula being able to keep their own rents and be able to have their own business plan so we would have had more funding available or prospectively had more funding available

02:21:50 funding available to us and be the master more of our own destinies in terms of uh the capital programme in order to be able to undertake more of those projects

02:21:58 projects i see mr anderson then went on in his evidence

02:22:02 evidence um if if we continue on um that page um to say uh line um

02:22:13 uh line um go to page um

02:22:17 yeah line 11. my understanding when i was first approached and also subsequently approached when i first started was that the property services function

02:22:24 function hadn't been delivering or hadn't been performing to the standard that either kc tmo or rbkc wanted now it was then stopped but is that correct

02:22:36 correct um at the time in 2012 the previous incumbent i believe had left the post and mr anderson was brought in on a temporary contract on a short-term

02:22:47 on a temporary contract on a short-term basis until a permanent appointment was made so i believe there was a period in of time that kctmo was undergoing uh considerable change so yes i would agree with what mr anderson had said

02:22:58 with what mr anderson had said can we then please go to page 13.

02:23:07 uh and uh look please at

02:23:15 line uh six we could start at line six now you mentioned rbkc had these deficiencies been identified to the best of your knowledge by the tmo had they been pointed out as well by rbkc

02:23:25 rbkc answer to the best of my knowledge it was probably a combination of both uh and then do you know who within rbkc had expressed these concerns regarding skills and experience at managerial

02:23:36 skills and experience at managerial level

02:23:37 level answer on the basis of my experience of rbkc i would historically i would have thought that that would have come through laura johnson certainly laura johnson and i had conversations about that okay can you just while we're dealing

02:23:50 okay can you just while we're dealing with this topic give us an idea or gist of the criticisms that laura johnson had of the skills and training expertise and management at management level at the tmo answer i need to clarify this

02:24:01 at the tmo answer i need to clarify this isn't executive directors and it isn't assistant

02:24:04 assistant or directors this was about so within the property services function one of the things that was responsible for

02:24:12 for was delivering the capital investment program

02:24:15 program so this is money invested in the housing stock to maintain or improve it yes and my understanding was that for a number of years the program had not been delivered in its entirety

02:24:26 delivered in its entirety so there was an underperformance in that regard and certainly from when i went to kctmo and in advance of that i felt there was a lack of management or correct level of management within the

02:24:37 correct level of management within the organization one to have the focus to drive that forward and two to ensure that it was delivered now i've read that to you at length is what he says there an accurate

02:24:48 is what he says there an accurate reflection of your concerns about the tmo

02:24:51 tmo and its delivery of the capital programme in early 2012 i cannot remember in any detail to be honest with you about my concerns about the management of the capital programme

02:25:03 the management of the capital programme over the period i started at rbkc in 2009

02:25:08 2009 until 2012 but it was fair to say that there were uh problems within the kctmo

02:25:15 kctmo about the quality of the service that they had been delivering and mr black was doing a considerable effort in order to try and improve the skills and experience of the people in his organization

02:25:27 people in his organization so i would say that mr anderson's reflection on concerns that i expressed at the time were probably fair do you recall raising criticisms of

02:25:39 fair do you recall raising criticisms of the experience and skills at a managerial level within tmo i don't remember that nowadays do you share mr anderson's views that there was a lack of the correct level of management to drive the program forward um i think we would have seen

02:25:51 um i think we would have seen a lack of delivery of the capital programme or lack of transparency about the capital programme and there was a need

02:25:58 need to improve performance there so i probably would have discussed that with mr black in my monthly meetings but i cannot say for definite no did you take a more hands-on approach to the grenfell tower project

02:26:09 grenfell tower project at the outset because of concerns about the skills and experience within the tmo at a managerial level no well the absence of such skills no i do not can you look please at rbk

02:26:24 no i do not can you look please at rbk 3045698 please

02:26:29 this is an email we need to go to page three please in that this is an email from mark anderson towards the foot of the page to you dated the 22nd of october 2012

02:26:43 to you dated the 22nd of october 2012 which starts good morning did you have a good weekend there's something about umpiring and then it says um yvonne has advised that amanda celia

02:26:54 yvonne has advised that amanda celia jane and ruth is seeking a level of detail in relation to the grenfell tower and hidden homes projects that i have understood we do not need to provide my approach stems from the meeting you hosted where you advised you did not

02:27:06 hosted where you advised you did not require this level of detail have i misunderstood you the recent requests have focused on detail around resident engagement and our approach to this and then scrolling up page three you

02:27:18 and then scrolling up page three you respond the same day uh in the evening uh and you say in fact in fact you don't respond you forward this email and you say this is the email from mark it

02:27:29 say this is the email from mark it doesn't seem to be the same information we discussed with regard to the business plan which was more strategic although i appreciate we probably need some detail about grenfell and hidden homes and uh and then you say i've written to

02:27:40 and uh and then you say i've written to say i understand that you've asked for info which was as previously requested which was still relatively high level but the business plan required some detail about asset management etc and then you say at the end i'm at a

02:27:51 etc and then you say at the end i'm at a loss

02:27:52 loss what else to say is i think we've been clear enough and if we go up to page two you see that on the 23rd of october 2012 jane trathue then responds to your email

02:28:05 laura the discussion uh we had with yvonne was regarding resident that's communications she starts it and at the foot of the page he says this my reading of mark's note to you

02:28:16 reading of mark's note to you is that he doesn't like us prompting this or

02:28:19 this or specifying our requirements i think he forgets that rbkc is the client and kctmo is the contractor i hardly think our requests are excessive or unreasonable

02:28:30 excessive or unreasonable our follow-up is planned

02:28:34 on follow-up is planned to be through a further meeting in six months time to review progress so not exactly giving them a hard time and then she goes on there is a further

02:28:45 and then she goes on there is a further issue here that kctmo senior management team seems to be resisting taking direction from your senior management team

02:28:51 team but want you personally to give the nod instead there is a risk that you end up being the director for both organizations at this rate exclamation mark for avoidance of doubt it would be good if you confirmed to

02:29:02 it would be good if you confirmed to mark stroke sasha straight robert that your management team acts with your support i'm just pausing there do you remember what the information was that you

02:29:11 you requested from the tmo in relation to grenfell no i do not did you agree with mr thuy's viewers expressed here that mark anderson did not like rbkc prompting tmo for information

02:29:24 prompting tmo for information um i think he may have been robust in his response to it but [Music]

02:29:32 i don't remember to be honest with you because i don't remember this email or the context in which they were discussing the information required but james who was an excellent officer in my housing management

02:29:43 management in my housing team so um probably at the time i may have been in broad agreement with her right i was going to say did you or ask you did you agree with mr theory's assessment that mark anderson was

02:29:54 assessment that mark anderson was resisting taking direction from your senior management team um i suspect he probably was because he reported into the kc senior management team um and so would have probably preferred

02:30:06 um and so would have probably preferred to take direction from them right well following up on that were you often asked by mark anderson or other tml officers to give them the nod on things as he's put it i don't think i was particularly ever asked to give them the nod

02:30:18 asked to give them the nod but we worked very collaboratively with kctmo

02:30:23 kctmo on a number of matters not just grenfell tower but across the piece and my office has dealt with them on a daily basis on a range of matters and there may have been some things that kctmo or

02:30:35 some things that kctmo or asked to come to me to confirm whether that was the intention of rbkc now if we look up this email run please to page two you can see that amanda johnson then comes in same day

02:30:48 amanda johnson then comes in same day and responds to jane trethuy and to you and says dear both jane has summed this up perfectly is what she says ironically mark's

02:30:59 is what she says ironically mark's unresponsiveness requires us to take a more hands-on approach albeit in my view proportionate and appropriate to the contractor relationship i'm also mindful of councillor marshall's response on epg

02:31:10 marshall's response on epg that's elm park gardens and his requirement that officers are effectively monitoring the tmo's delivery of major projects did you have to take a more hands-on approach as a result of mark anderson's unresponsiveness do you think um i don't

02:31:23 unresponsiveness do you think um i don't remember to be honest with you but um i had a very good relationship with mark anderson so it may be that i found him easier to deal with than some of my colleagues right

02:31:35 you don't recall but does that mean that you wouldn't quarrel with amanda johnson's observations no i would not crawl with amanda johnson's observations both my

02:31:46 amanda johnson's observations both my both here and jane tethui were excellent officers in my team and i would have respected their opinion and concurred with them right do you recall what uh issue councilor marshall had raised in

02:31:58 issue councilor marshall had raised in relation to rbkc's monitoring of tmo's delivery of major projects um in this context i don't i'm afraid now the final email in the chain if we can go up to it

02:32:09 in the chain if we can go up to it please just a little bit up above page above this one on page two

02:32:16 we just scroll up a bit please uh it is over at the bottom of page one and then going up onto page one

02:32:27 one and then going up onto page one uh the

02:32:31 uh the uh email at the top from james to three to you

02:32:34 to you to um amanda johnson uh you're no longer copied in there and she says totally he's spot on they can't be left unsupervised just to

02:32:46 they can't be left unsupervised just to do their own thing that's how the tmo got itself into a state in the first place in my view through lacks clienting in the bad old days and just pausing there

02:32:59 the bad old days and just pausing there what's lacks clienting you know um so i joined rbkc in 2009 um and not soon after i joined

02:33:10 in 2009 um and not soon after i joined rbkc um we had to serve a notice on the uh on tmo and i was definitely my opinion although i wasn't there at the time that

02:33:22 although i wasn't there at the time that part of the problem um with how the tmo why we had to save that

02:33:27 that that notice on the tmo was also part of the council's responsibility because it hadn't necessarily been as good as it should have been at clienting the tmo and holding it to account

02:33:38 account i see so cliente means holding it to account scrutinizing scrutinizing it and receiving regular updates on its performance and i don't think that we had done that as well as we should have done in the

02:33:49 as well as we should have done in the past

02:33:50 past and thank you then she goes on to say wonder what l j and rb have been discussing about mark i'm just pausing there had you been discussing anything about mark i really don't remember it's you know

02:34:01 i really don't remember it's you know it's ten years ago and earlier she goes on i'm so unhappy at the idea that he thinks he can just uh see off even the most minor monitoring and scrutiny by council officers through a brief email to laura that just

02:34:13 through a brief email to laura that just has to be nipped in the bud otherwise he's on his way to being untouchable very disempowering for the staff here whose job is to hold the tma to account on behalf of the council and ultimately of residents a clear shot

02:34:24 and ultimately of residents a clear shot across the bowers required in my view we shall see was there a general impression in the housing department previously that um the tma was in a

02:34:35 previously that um the tma was in a state

02:34:37 state or is that a reference to what you you said before about that europe what happened when you arrived um there was a in 2009 when i joined um the tmo was um had some very very

02:34:49 um the tmo was um had some very very particular problems uh both in terms of the executive management team and the way that the board functioned and then that translated down through the organization because of the uh lack of proper

02:35:01 because of the uh lack of proper governance and or i think you know sort of poor direction from uh from the executive team at the time

02:35:08 time um and mr black started to work at the tmo

02:35:13 tmo probably about six weeks after i was appointed and then then had to go through a considerable process which takes a period of time in order to appoint a new executive team and work with the board to appoint

02:35:25 and work with the board to appoint to appoint new attendees in the board to get better governance in the tmo and that takes some time to do that to turn an organization around but in my impression when i joined the tmo was not in the greatest of places

02:35:38 tmo was not in the greatest of places was your impression at this time i mean now in

02:35:41 now in the autumn of 2012 uh that mark anderson was

02:35:45 was really repeating the old habits of the tma from the past and and essentially trying to see off scrutiny by brief emails um i don't think he was uh you know he wasn't there in the past either so he

02:35:56 wasn't there in the past either so he was a relatively recent appointee so um and i had no experience of it in 2000 uh prior to 2009 uh but i think mark was quite robust in pushing people back

02:36:08 pushing people back and my offices are quite rightly going but we'd like the information so please provide it do you know what was meant by well you didn't receive this at the time but looking at it now what amanda johnson

02:36:19 looking at it now what amanda johnson meant by a clear shot across the bows in relation to the tmo i should imagine that she meant and you can ask amanda johnson this when she appears

02:36:27 appears uh but that both here herself and jane tracy were seeking for me to talk to robert black to say that if officers at the council request information then we would like it to be provided

02:36:38 then we would like it to be provided rather than being questioned all the time

02:36:40 time can i just ask you i sense that there may have been a problem with lines of communication here that some of your officers wanted to go straight to their counterparts as they saw them at the tmo

02:36:51 counterparts as they saw them at the tmo and

02:36:52 and maybe that was all wasn't appropriate no it would have been entirely appropriate to be honest with you because we were two organizations that although there was a formal structure for monitoring the tmo uh by far the most scrutiny of the tmo

02:37:05 uh by far the most scrutiny of the tmo actually took place on an informal level between officers discussing particular projects so

02:37:09 so it really wouldn't have been unusual at all for jane or for amanda to go and talk to their equivalents at the tmo and ask them for information yes thank you did you have any doubts

02:37:20 yes thank you did you have any doubts about mr anderson's abilities i know i don't think i did was this clear shot across the bows ever delivered i don't remember

02:37:29 remember did it have anything to do or did this discussion have anything to do with the fact that mark anderson left the tmo soon afterwards in early 2013. uh mark anderson wasn't interim um and so

02:37:40 anderson wasn't interim um and so mr black would have been looking to make a permanent appointment to that particular very important position in the tmo so um i think it would have been time for for mark to move on is my impression probably my recollection from that time

02:37:53 probably my recollection from that time and i get to ask uh you some questions on a different topic which is the decision to retender

02:38:02 were you aware that towards the end of 2012

02:38:05 2012 the tmo had been in discussions with lead bitter concerning the cost of the project um i may well have been aware of it were you told around that time so we're looking at the autumn of 2012 that the

02:38:16 looking at the autumn of 2012 that the ballpark figures being banded about by led bitter for the grenfell tower refurbishment were of the order of some 12 to 13 million pounds um i don't remember that particular

02:38:27 um i don't remember that particular discussion but um it may have been brought to my attention who would have brought that to your attention um either mr anderson if he was still there did he keep you informed of the progress of discussions with ledbitter at this

02:38:38 of discussions with ledbitter at this point

02:38:39 point i don't think particularly i don't remember having detailed discussions with him about it but i didn't meet mark particularly regularly

02:38:46 regularly he may have come to the calc meetings or he may have come to meetings uh just on other topics were you do you remember even in outline being concerned about lead

02:38:57 in outline being concerned about lead bitters

02:38:57 bitters anticipated costs i remember an email that i was sent saying that the costs that led bitter were proposing for the refurbishment for grenfell tower were coming in in the region of 11 to 12

02:39:09 were coming in in the region of 11 to 12 million

02:39:10 million and you know at that time i just noted it i didn't necessarily think it gave me any particular concern did it not when compared with the available budget that you'd secured um the budget that we had secured from

02:39:23 um the budget that we had secured from the empire gardens receipt was based on estimates from that hunter study which was a really basic study about what the um about what it could uh about the cost of the refurbishment so i i never took that kind of six

02:39:35 so i i never took that kind of six million figure as being you know an end figure or an actual about what the project would actually cost

02:39:42 cost i took it as a guideline clearly if the project was going to come in at twice the price of that then that would require further discussion with the cabinet member and for cabinet about what the options were for being able to

02:39:53 what the options were for being able to afford to undertake that refurbishment project

02:39:56 project did you hear of any concerns surrounding ledbetter's lack of engagement with the tmo did you hear that expressed to you um i don't remember to be honest let's see what mark anderson said about that can we please go to day 52 the

02:40:07 that can we please go to day 52 the transcript for day 52 and look at page 152 please

02:40:27 and on page 152 line 25

02:40:31 uh the question is you say you recalled concerns arising can you help us

02:40:38 help us from whom do they arise and then over the page he says well i certainly had concerns about that because it either meant that lead bitter were inaccurate with their figures apple yard's cost analysis

02:40:49 their figures apple yard's cost analysis and breakdown was inaccurate or as a combination of the two question can you remember any concerns arising from anyone at rbkc answer not in terms of the specific about that but there were conversations

02:41:00 about that but there were conversations probably from about november 2012 onwards i certainly had conversations with laura johnson about ledbetter in general terms in terms of their collaboration or lack of engagement with progression

02:41:12 of engagement with progression etc anyone else at rbkc that you can remember

02:41:15 remember now answer there were others in the room but you know it was meetings chaired by laura

02:41:22 is mark anderson's recollection correct that he shared concerns with you about lead bitter of this nature in late 2012. um it may well be but i can't say i remember

02:41:36 were you do you remember being primarily concerned about ledbetter's proposed costs

02:41:40 costs or was it something to do with their engagement do you remember which of those two you had any views about

02:41:47 about if if either i i to be honest with you i don't remember having uh uh it's a long time ago now and i don't remember in any detail having concerns about ledbetter's lack of engagement or the cost plan

02:41:59 engagement or the cost plan but um i think if someone had told me that the cost plan was coming in so significantly different then obviously i would have expressed concerns that there was such a degree of

02:42:10 concerns that there was such a degree of variance between uh you know kind of what the cost consultant were telling us and what it was actually coming out at you don't have any reason to to sitting there today disagree do you

02:42:23 to sitting there today disagree do you with mr

02:42:23 with mr anderson's recollection as he's expressed it here i don't have any reason to disagree no thank you um then let's move forward into

02:42:31 into 2013 january 2013 and look at rbkc's position on lead bitter at that point can we start with this topic by going to your first witness statement please at page 17

02:42:41 page 17 paragraph 68

02:42:46 you say there however there were issues with ledbit as budget against the specification for the cal project in january 2013 i emailed ledbitter to say that due to the fact that they could not agree

02:42:56 not agree a financial close figure in line with a stage d of the cost plan for calc rbkc would no longer be recommending the tma to proceed with ledbitter and would advise the tmo to tender the work to a list of contractors

02:43:08 work to a list of contractors not including lead bitter we managed to agree the costs and get into contract for calc

02:43:13 for calc and they continue to be considered for the refurbishment at grenfell tower

02:43:19 it's right isn't it that in the early months of 2013 rbkc were attempting to agree the price for the cal project with ledbitter uh we were attempting to get into contract with

02:43:30 attempting to get into contract with them yes

02:43:30 them yes and that's what you mean by financial closing yes were you actively involved in that process yourself uh yes i attended a number of meetings about that

02:43:41 a number of meetings about that and what issues do you remember having with ledbitter at that stage um it was extremely difficult to arrive at

02:43:48 at a an agreed specification for the school in the leisure centre against the agreed contract price

02:43:58 and it was a very i think it's fair to say

02:44:02 say that they were fairly combative discussions uh between the contractor and rbkc

02:44:07 and rbkc going through on a line-by-line basis of every

02:44:10 every uh item that was listed for uh for each of the

02:44:14 of the uh projects identifying what the costs were and at this stage was it intended by rbkc at least that led bitter would also enter into contract with the tmo on the grenfell tower project

02:44:26 grenfell tower project i think there was definitely an ambition that they that led better or weak as they became would be um would be the contractor on both projects yes and that's certainly how you had put it yes i did in the may of 2012 and that

02:44:38 yes i did in the may of 2012 and that hadn't changed that hadn't changed okay thank you but the issues you were having with leadbit are related to calc is this right not potentially to the

02:44:47 the grenfell tower that's correct yeah now can we then look please at rbk401093 uh

02:45:00 can we then look please at rbk401093 uh and um this is what you produce as lj16 this is an email of the third of january 2013 from you to cliff thomas of ledbitter in which i'm summarizing

02:45:12 of ledbitter in which i'm summarizing you tell him that rbkc will no longer be recommending that tmo proceed with ledbitter in relation to the grenfell tower project uh do you remember that yes uh

02:45:24 uh do you remember that yes uh and you you send this email as you say in the beginning following the last two sra meetings in november and december 2011 and our continuing failure

02:45:35 continuing failure to agree a financial close figure in line with stage d v e cost plan uh do you mean 2011 though or do you mean 2012. i think it's a typo for 2012. i suspect it's a

02:45:47 it's a typo for 2012. i suspect it's a typo

02:45:48 typo yeah now let's look at the third paragraph of that email a little bit closely you say that there was originally a total of around 60 million pounds available for the calc project and

02:45:59 available for the calc project and grenfell tower rbkc will now no longer be recommending the tmo proceed with you on the latter and will advise them to re-tend to the works to a list of contractors not

02:46:10 works to a list of contractors not including ledbitter at the next sra meeting on 16th january 2013 i would like an unequivocal commitment from you that we will be able to enter into contract for the calc project at a combined

02:46:21 for the calc project at a combined 50.4 million pounds by the 15th of february 2013. if you cannot make this commitment then we will withdraw the leisure center from the project and reconsider our procurement position

02:46:32 and reconsider our procurement position for the academy for the for those elements we remove and procure through alternative means we will

02:46:37 will not include lead bitter on the tender lists i'm extremely disappointed that we are being forced to take such measures particularly given that the supposed principal benefits of using the iese route

02:46:48 iese route are to ensure early contractor engagement provide early cost certainty and avoid the sorts of situations we seem to be experiencing on this scheme

02:46:57 scheme now to confirm it's right isn't it that rbkc was the client only in relation to the calc project that's correct and on the grenfell tower project

02:47:07 project tmo was or was to be the client that's correct

02:47:11 correct why were you recommending here that the tmo not proceed with leadbitter i was attempting to use my leverage with the potential for an additional project uh in order to try and get ledbetter to

02:47:24 uh in order to try and get ledbetter to agree

02:47:25 agree uh the contract close figure but surely whether ledbitter took on the grenfell tower project or not could only ever have been a decision as between ledbit and the tmo that's correct

02:47:39 so these is it your evidence that this was just a negotiating ploy yes it was right uh you say that and you were going to advise the tmo to re-tend to the works to a list of

02:47:50 re-tend to the works to a list of contractors not including lead bitter but it's right isn't it in fact yeah they didn't have to accept your advice no they did not no

02:47:58 now we do know that the tmo did retender for this project in reality is it the case that um rbkc had trouble agreeing a price on calc and that that

02:48:11 agreeing a price on calc and that that became a factor in you recommending that ledbetter not be used on the grenfell tower project

02:48:21 i don't remember quite honestly whether that was an influencing factor on the tmo deciding to retender or not but i would have spoken to uh i think peter anderson

02:48:33 uh i think peter anderson peter madison who was in place by then um to express my difficulties in trying to reach contract close figure on the celt project so although it was a

02:48:44 celt project so although it was a negotiating ploy when you were facing ledbetter in fact uh it took root in some way didn't it because it was one of the reasons why in fact the tmo never proceeded with leibiter for grenfell

02:48:55 proceeded with leibiter for grenfell it was a negotiating factor in terms of this emailed introduce to try and get some movement after seven months of intense negotiation in order to try and get a contract close but

02:49:05 but i was not the person who would have been nor is there the organization who would have appointed uh led veteran to undertake the account refurbishment project

02:49:16 refurbishment project so um to say that it took root i think is uh possibly a bit strong but i would have been able to advise them that because i met my colleagues in the tmo a number of times over that period of time

02:49:27 period of time and probably would have in conversation said how difficult the negotiations were in progressing with getting better to close on this contract so do you agree follow from that answer that you agree

02:49:38 follow from that answer that you agree that um

02:49:40 that um your stand that you were taking as per this email with leadbiter had some influence

02:49:45 influence on the tma's decision to retender for the grenfell tower project it may have had some influence but then i think definitively you would need to ask the tmo as to what why they decided to read

02:49:56 as to what why they decided to read tender but it may have had some influence now

02:50:07 we know that peter madison started his employment at the tma in this very month january 2013 2013. when he started do you remember making

02:50:18 when he started do you remember making him aware of this email to cliff thomas no i do not

02:50:24 you were aware that peter madison was going to be deeply involved in the grenfell tower project why did you not think it appropriate to at least bring him or make him aware of the discussions that you'd been having with lead bitter

02:50:35 that you'd been having with lead bitter on the count project um i didn't say i didn't i just said i don't remember whether i briefed peter madison on that um well i asked you specifically about this email but but did you did you actually brief peter

02:50:47 did you did you actually brief peter madison on the state of play as between rbkc and calc i do not remember a specific meeting where i briefed peter madison on uh on the difficulties that rbkc had

02:51:01 on uh on the difficulties that rbkc had had had in reaching a contract figure and a close with uh with ledbetters but i definitely would have spoken to peter about it right his evidence and for the record is

02:51:13 right his evidence and for the record is day 58 of pages 23 to 24 is that when he joined the tmo uh he did not become aware of this email and didn't know that rbkc had

02:51:26 and didn't know that rbkc had decided no longer to recommend that the tma proceed with ledbitter yes that's fair i probably did not share i would not have shared this email with peter madison because this was an email that i sent to

02:51:39 because this was an email that i sent to uh cliff thomas ledbetter in order to try and get them to complete uh on the calc project so your recollection is the same as peter madison yes can we then move uh

02:51:51 yes can we then move uh into january 2013 a little bit further go please to tmo double zero eight four eight

02:51:57 eight nine two five

02:52:06 this uh if you go to page 2 please is an email at the foot of page 2 bottom half of the page 22nd of january

02:52:19 from peter wright to you

02:52:23 and he says this laura i've just had a meeting with colin and that's i think colin chiles isn't it um i believe it would be because he worked for lead better at that time i just had a meeting with colin and while

02:52:34 just had a meeting with colin and while i know it's not really anything to do with me could i suggest you meet with him

02:52:38 him apple yards in the tma before the project hits the rocks there seems there seem to be quite a few issues in terms of resourcing and pricing the job which need to be brought out

02:52:47 out into the open my concern is that it may affect calc as there will inevitably be program and cost interdependencies no matter how much everyone insists that they won't

02:52:58 they won't and now if we just follow your eye up the screen please we can see that you asked sasha jevens to follow up on this issue you can see that same day you see that

02:53:09 you can see that same day you see that yes uh that's the email there uh what did you understand mr right to have meant when he said before the project hits the rocks um i presume that mr wright was alluding

02:53:20 um i presume that mr wright was alluding to the fact that there was a lack of progress being made between kctmo on ledbetter on the contract on the potential

02:53:28 potential for awarding the contract for the refurbishment works to them did you have any concerns along those lines at that time

02:53:34 time um i don't think i knew about it in enough detail to be able to express a view and what were the issues in early 2013 concerning resourcing and pricing the grenfell tower project

02:53:45 pricing the grenfell tower project as opposed to coming to financial close on the celt project do you remember it may well have been that um ledbetters at the time weren't committing enough resources in

02:53:56 weren't committing enough resources in order to be able to arrive at uh at a figure for the calc project for the uh for the for the grenfell tower refurbishment project and there was considerable delay i'm i'm i'm i'm projecting here because

02:54:08 i'm i'm i'm i'm projecting here because i don't know but there may well have been delays in them responding to the capital programme team in order for them to be able to progress the program it looks from peter wright's email i've read to you is that

02:54:19 wright's email i've read to you is that that would have a knock-on on his concern was that it would have a knock-on effect in relation to celt did you share that concern um well i thought the projects could be divorced uh any time the you know kind of the

02:54:30 uh any time the you know kind of the hope that we had in being able to do both of those projects at the same time about sharing sites and about uh you know kind of if we were to voice those projects and try and bring

02:54:41 those projects and try and bring somebody else in then that would have that would have a problem because at that time we were still kind of ambitious to be able to do the school and the leisure center

02:54:51 center and the refurbishment of grenfell all at the same time because we really wanted to minimize the disruption to residents who were going to be living on a building site for a very long time which is you know

02:55:02 for a very long time which is you know which is just awful to put up with that noise and that disruption and that dirt for that particular period of time um and if there was a divorcing of the two then it would become apparent that we weren't able to take those

02:55:13 that we weren't able to take those projects together simultaneously or was your concern that the difficulties in coming to a figure for the grenfell tower project would in turn affect

02:55:23 affect the cult project no i wasn't concerned that

02:55:26 that arriving in a figure for grenfell tower would impact on kelp because there were two

02:55:29 two very separate projects

02:55:33 you say they were two very separate projects but in fact as we've seen the primary ambition for cost reasons was to keep the contractor the same yes it was but there was there was an opportunity to divorce them and it was opportunities from sight

02:55:46 and it was opportunities from sight sharing

02:55:47 sharing from doing the building works at the same time from getting that kind of sharing of the design teams and and working there at the same time but it wasn't a a drop dead scenario that those both of those projects had to

02:55:59 that those both of those projects had to be done

02:55:59 be done it was a it was a i think uh i think a very sensible view at the time when when looking at undertaking major works to try and get that kind of that benefit of the piece of using the

02:56:10 that benefit of the piece of using the same contractor across the country across both projects and as it turned out it didn't work like that um and um which meant that the calc the calc project went ahead as planned

02:56:22 the calc project went ahead as planned um and the grenfell terrific project went again went ahead and later went ahead at a later period now a few days later on the 25th of january 2013

02:56:34 january 2013 there was a tmo joint management me team meeting with rbkc and we'll see the minutes for that

02:56:41 tmo.00848936

02:56:50 and that's the first page and we can see that you are present there from our bkc as is amanda johnson and from the tma we have robert black

02:57:01 and from the tma we have robert black sasha jevons and peter madison and if we go please to page five we can see

02:57:07 see point seven

02:57:12 grenfell tower and it says there was a forecast overspend of two million pounds at present on this project

02:57:19 project and peter madison would be meeting apple yards on 28th of january to consider how this could be resolved links to be maintained with the canned apple yards however it would be possible to use reserves to plug the gap rather than

02:57:30 reserves to plug the gap rather than going for reprocurement it was suggested that some of the extra costs may be due to the architect's studio e

02:57:37 studio e now in your just showing you that in your email of the 3rd of january you told cliff thomas of ledbitter that rbkc was going to advise the tmo to retender but here we see it recorded that links are to be maintained with

02:57:49 that links are to be maintained with calc and pressure kept up on lead bitter and apple yards does that

02:57:54 that reflect the fact that in internally you were intending to keep lead bitters on but had just used the position you were taking in the third of

02:58:02 third of uh january emailed to cliff um as a negotiating stance it was a negotiating stance right and that really demonstrates that isn't it yes it does

02:58:13 isn't it yes it does yes mr chairman i'm i'm about to go to a different document but there's continuing the story um it's probably a convenient moment i'd have thought so yes otherwise we shall be sitting here quite a bit longer

02:58:25 be sitting here quite a bit longer uh yes well that is a good moment this time we all had a break from lunch i think

02:58:31 think miss johnson so we'll uh stop there we'll resume please at two o'clock and again please don't talk to anyone about your evidence uh over the break all right thank you very much you'd like to give the usher please

02:58:54 thank you two o'clock please

02:59:20 you