Testimony from Rock Fielding-Mellen, former Deputy Leader and Cabinet Member for Housing at Kensington & Chelsea, about cladding decisions, fire safety oversight failures, and lack of scrutiny of the TMO.
00:00:19 Good morning everybody. Welcome to today's hearing. Today we're going to begin by hearing further evidence from Mr. Fielding Melon. So would you ask Mr. Fielding Melon to come in please?
00:00:33 [Applause]
00:00:41 Good morning, Mr. Fielding Melon. Good morning. All ready to keep going? I I am. I'll just Good. Yes. Yes. Take a moment to pour yourself some water.
00:00:54 Good. Right. Thank you. Yes, Mr. Millet, when you're ready. Yes, Mr. Chairman. Good morning. Good morning, members of the panel. Good morning, Mr. Fielding Melon. Um, we were talking last night about the champagne color and a question of taste and I'd
00:01:06 color and a question of taste and I'd like to continue please to look at the email string uh that passed between you and lately Mr. Madison in the second half of July 2014. Can we go please to
00:01:17 half of July 2014. Can we go please to RBK43508
00:01:22 which is a long string of emails some of which we've already seen in a different reference yesterday afternoon but it's more convenient to pick it up in this string because there's more at the top.
00:01:34 string because there's more at the top. Can we start at page five please?
00:01:40 Uh a and at the bottom we start with your email uh to Bruce Zones copy to Peter Madison and you thank him for sending through the photos which are the photos from the
00:01:52 the photos which are the photos from the Picaza
00:01:54 Picaza uh album he'd sent you and we we looked at this yesterday and I'm just going back into it by way of repetition and in the third paragraph you tell him that you're still not 100% sure that you
00:02:05 you're still not 100% sure that you prefer the brushed aluminium to the battleship gray painted option but that It's very subjective and I'm quite relaxed about the choice in the end. And you'll recall yesterday we we discussed that together. I do.
00:02:16 I do. Now, we then have above that on the page an email from Peter Madison to you on the 18th of July uh which we also looked at uh where he says he describes the
00:02:27 at uh where he says he describes the feedback he's got from the planners um who weren't sure about the brushed aluminium indicated a preference for the champagne finish and preferred the cassette fixed over the face fixing. And then he tells you about the budget. And
00:02:39 then he tells you about the budget. And then if we go to page four, the foot of the page, you see that you respond to Peter Madison 18th July, and you say, "So does that mean we can afford to do cassette fixings for the whole building?
00:02:50 cassette fixings for the whole building? Is that within existing budget without having to dip into contingency? If so, we should proceed with that as it will look better, I think we should stick with brushed aluminium or battleship grain, not champagne, but offer the
00:03:01 grain, not champagne, but offer the planners cassette fixings." What do you think? So just pausing there, you were um it looks from this that you were offering uh a negotiated settlement if I
00:03:13 offering uh a negotiated settlement if I can put it that way to the to the planners or rather suggesting one that he should offer. Yes, I was suggesting well I was asking whether he thought it would make sense
00:03:25 whether he thought it would make sense given that the planners had expressed a view that the cassette fixing will look better and given that it was already he had confirmed it was budgeted. I was suggesting exactly that.
00:03:37 suggesting exactly that. Yes. Yes. Then if we look above that uh he comes back to you on the 21st of July and he says yes we have budgeted for the cassette fixing without having to use
00:03:48 cassette fixing without having to use the contingency and then he says this. We were hoping to achieve savings by negotiating with the planners over the cladding material aluminium instead of zinc and fixing method face fixing
00:03:59 zinc and fixing method face fixing instead of cassette. To help achieve this we were offering planners color options to negotiate our position on the other two items. However, I'm happy to go back to planners and push our preference for the brushed aluminium
00:04:10 preference for the brushed aluminium straight gray color scheme. I'll keep you posted. Now, just just pausing there. Was this the first time that you discovered uh that zinc had originally been an option?
00:04:23 been an option? Um, as I said in my witness statement, I actually didn't recall that particular mention of aluminium or zinc until after
00:04:34 mention of aluminium or zinc until after the fire. It wasn't something that I remember particularly noting at the time. Um, when I read that now and when I've read this since, um,
00:04:48 I've read this since, um, to be honest, my interpretation of that sentence would actually suggest that they had been and we were hoping to achieve savings by negotiating over the cladding aluminium. To me that would
00:05:00 cladding aluminium. To me that would imply that they hadn't that
00:05:06 that sorry um so I I I don't remember at the time
00:05:11 time noting this potential difference between aluminium or zinc and actually having when I read that now we were hoping to achieve savings by negotiating to me my
00:05:22 achieve savings by negotiating to me my interpretation of that sentence would be that's something which we had been hoping but we're not necessarily doing? What were you hoping? It's not Well, that's what he says.
00:05:33 It's not Well, that's what he says. So, I I don't understand your answer. Let me let me try again. Um, he says here uh that he's negotiating with the planners over the cladding material, aluminium instead of zinc.
00:05:44 aluminium instead of zinc. Well, what he says, well, hold on. I've got a question that's going to come. My question is, when he said aluminium instead of zinc, to the best of your recollection, was that the first
00:05:55 recollection, was that the first occasion on which you had been told that zinc had been uh a choice?
00:06:06 I don't remember whether I had previously been told that zinc or aluminium were a choice. Right. Thank you.
00:06:17 Right. Thank you. Did you ask anybody on the project at any time uh what were the advantages or whether there were any advantages of aluminium as against zinc?
00:06:30 aluminium as against zinc? I don't remember asking that because it was it was just not an area of uh it was not something which I knew
00:06:41 of uh it was not something which I knew much about. Aluminium and zinc as far as I know are two different metals. I didn't know about the different potential properties of those two metals and it wasn't a question um that would
00:06:52 and it wasn't a question um that would have sprung to mind. And we know that you didn't ask Mr. Madison or Mr. S which of those two choices would be safer. Is that because as you've just said, you didn't know about the difference of the potential
00:07:03 about the difference of the potential properties of those two metals? As I think we got into yesterday, the the the reason we were having this conversation was all to do with a uh
00:07:15 conversation was all to do with a uh ongoing dispute with planners. Planners were concerned with the appearance and use of buildings. Um I was aware that building control was a different
00:07:26 building control was a different function, a different group of officers which were more concerned with technical uh health and safety issues to do with the building. Um and so this particular
00:07:38 the building. Um and so this particular conversation was talking about matters relating to appearance which the planners were dealing with. So I think the answer to my question is no.
00:07:49 no. Is that right? No, I did not ask in this conversation about whether aluminium or zinc would be safer. Did did you inquire
00:08:00 would be safer. Did did you inquire whether the choice between zinc and aluminium had ever been put to the residents as part of a consultation exercise?
00:08:10 exercise? As I think I've said, I did not at the time
00:08:16 time note this choice between aluminium and zinc. And I did not, as far as I recall, ask any questions about it. Can we then look up in the email chain
00:08:28 Can we then look up in the email chain uh to Peter Madison's response to you? And he says this, this is bottom of page three
00:08:36 three and he says, "Dear councelor Fielding Melon,
00:08:40 Melon, we've received some feedback from planners via our planning consultants. The key points are first bullet no exposed fixings. Second bullet champagne color, third bullet, not convinced by
00:08:52 color, third bullet, not convinced by brushed aluminium. a point I will be discussing further. We are asking for clarify, he says, on how receptive they are to consider the alternative color schemes that we have stated as our
00:09:03 schemes that we have stated as our preference. And he says, I'm on leave until Monday. And he puts you in touch with David Gibson. You see that? Yes.
00:09:11 Yes. you respond uh the the next day, the 25th of July to Peter Madison, copy to Peter Gibson, and you say this. I don't actually even remember the champagne
00:09:22 actually even remember the champagne color exactly. It certainly wasn't uh one that any of us seem to like much, but how bad is it? And is that really the planner's decision? What does Bruce think? If they really don't want the
00:09:34 think? If they really don't want the brushed aluminium, would he prefer the champagne or battleship gray? What do they think about exposed fixing above above fourth floor RFM? And I I'll just go through the rest of this quickly with
00:09:45 go through the rest of this quickly with you. Um Mr. Madison comes back to you on page two at the foot of that page and he says, "Dear Councelor Fielding Melon, it's not strictly the planner's decision. However, we do have to get their permission to proceed. Failure to
00:09:57 their permission to proceed. Failure to do so could result in delay and additional cost. So we work with the planners to try and reach a consensus. Bruce has developed a palette of color options, all of which he thinks would be appropriate for the design. planners have asked him to produce a worked up
00:10:10 have asked him to produce a worked up drawing of the detail of the champagne option. I'll ask him to send you a copy and we would welcome your views. Planner preference is for cassette fixing throughout. We will continue to push to see if they will move on this above the fourth floor and then over the page. You
00:10:22 fourth floor and then over the page. You don't need to see it. It says regards Peter. Well, there you have it. Top of page three. So, that's his response to to uh uh to you. Sorry, your response.
00:10:34 to uh uh to you. Sorry, your response. uh his response to you uh and then you respond to uh
00:10:43 uh if you go to page two, David Gibson writes to you on the 29th of July and and says this. Further to Peter's email, please find attached a series of images from Studio E for the champagne option.
00:10:55 from Studio E for the champagne option. It would be useful to have your views on this. The feedback we're currently getting from planners indicates they will not accept the face fixing options on the higher floors. I've attached an email from our planning consultant on this issue for your information. And you
00:11:07 this issue for your information. And you then respond to that foot of page one over to page two
00:11:13 uh on the 29th of July to David Gibson to Peter Madison and you say this. Thanks. I understand that we do have the budget to do cassette fixings all the way up. Therefore, I actually agree that we may as well do it all the way uh as
00:11:25 we may as well do it all the way uh as it will look better in the long run. And then over the top of page two, you say this. I'm less convinced by the champagne color. I know it's hard to tell in a drawing like that, but none of us chose that option as the best when on
00:11:36 us chose that option as the best when on site. Also, I really don't like the lime green and champagne combination at the ground floor. The lime green should be less neon and more a pastel shade of green stroke turquoise or a deeper
00:11:49 green stroke turquoise or a deeper stroke darker British racing green. And I'd personally prefer the battleship gray. But what does everybody else everyone else think? Could we get an architect to do same drawings showing that option so we can compare? Uh just
00:12:03 that option so we can compare? Uh just just pausing there. Um would you accept just from that that you are delving into some pretty specific details on pretty aesthetic matters?
00:12:14 aesthetic matters? Yes.
00:12:15 Yes. Yes.
00:12:16 Yes. Now, how did you think that that expression of private opinion would would assist arriving at a negotiated settlement with the planners in order to
00:12:27 settlement with the planners in order to speed the project up?
00:12:34 As I said yesterday, we had got into a discussion about color schemes, which was one of the issues that the planners
00:12:46 was one of the issues that the planners were um using to hold up the scheme. Because we had got into that discussion, I was thinking about colors and I
00:12:58 I was thinking about colors and I decided obviously to uh give my personal subjective opinion. As I said yesterday, thinking that my personal subjective opinion was as valid as anyone else's.
00:13:11 opinion was as valid as anyone else's. Um, again, as I said yesterday, I personally didn't like the principle that a single junior planning officer could,
00:13:22 could, you know, determine uh the color based on her preference um by threatening to hold up the whole scheme.
00:13:33 threatening to hold up the whole scheme. And I I was involved for that reason. And I'm sorry. I'm so sorry. I I almost cut across you. No, go on. Yes. Why was your expression of your own
00:13:46 Yes. Why was your expression of your own personal interests lime green, turquoise, British racing green any more likely uh to um exert authority which would unblock to block?
00:13:57 which would unblock to block? Can I can you go up a page please? Can I see what time and date this was and then go up it see the rest of the chain above it?
00:14:04 it? Oh, we will. We're going to look at that. I'm just Can I Can I Can I look at that now before I answer? No, of course you can. Um, at the moment, just to be uh clear, we're at the foot of page one and we're on your
00:14:15 the foot of page one and we're on your email of the 29th of July, 2014, 1307. Okay.
00:14:18 Okay. And the response to that. Do you want to see that? We can. We're going to look at that, but we can do that. Can can we just go up again, please? So, up to the the So, I can see the date
00:14:31 So, up to the the So, I can see the date and time above where I say most important thing is to get cracking. Yeah, we'll come to that. So is at 1:40 and when did I send the email below
00:14:43 and when did I send the email below which you're focusing on at 107. So within 33 minutes I
00:14:50 I had the same thought that you are having now which is my personal preferences about British racing green or this green are not what matters. What matters is to
00:15:01 are not what matters. What matters is to get cracking. Yes. Well, we we let's let's fine. We we'll come to that perhaps perhaps a little bit more gradually if we can.
00:15:11 we can. Okay.
00:15:12 Okay. Uh let's look at the next email intervening. There's an email from David Gibson to you at 1326.
00:15:22 Thanks for the quick response. I've already asked Bruce from Studio E to forward some graphics indicating the brushed aluminium stroke gray combination and we'll forward to you on receipt. I will feedback your comments
00:15:34 receipt. I will feedback your comments on the color combinations and ask Bruce if he can do some variations on this. There are mixed views on the colors, but the champagne seems to be viewed as a safer straight stroke less bold option. However, the planners appear not to like
00:15:45 However, the planners appear not to like the aluminium gray combination. And then you respond as you've rightly pointed out uh four minutes 14 minutes later 13:40. Okay. In that case I'll be
00:15:58 later 13:40. Okay. In that case I'll be flexible about the champagne. Another example of designing by committee. Most important thing is to get cracking. Um when you said another example of designing by committee in response to Mr. Gibson's email that I've just shown
00:16:11 Mr. Gibson's email that I've just shown you. What did you mean? I I think I was referring to the fact that as I've said before, my understanding was that when the architect, the TMO and I met on site, uh
00:16:24 architect, the TMO and I met on site, uh champagne was not the color which any of the people leading the project uh preferred. Um, but designing by
00:16:35 preferred. Um, but designing by committee is a is a I think a fairly well-known phrase to express a view that um it's a bit like saying too many chefs in the kitchen. Right. Uh, and were you one of them?
00:16:49 Right. Uh, and were you one of them? I was trying not to be. I was trying to say fine, I'll be flexible. Let's just get cracking. Yes.
00:16:57 Yes. I do do you accept from this email ch that I've email run that I've now shown you in its entirety I hope in its entirety
00:17:04 entirety uh that you became closely involved in matters of personal subjective opinion about the color
00:17:13 I I think I've said um in my statement as I got involved and expressed my personal subject of view about the colors I've also tried making clear that the reason that I was having this
00:17:26 the reason that I was having this conversation was to try and help resolve the blockage in the planning system. And at no time during this discussion,
00:17:37 And at no time during this discussion, just to be just to be clear about the facts, did it occur to you to raise any questions about fire safety, particularly the fire safety of these panels, the color of which you're
00:17:48 panels, the color of which you're discussing. It it did not for the reason which I have given before which was this was a planning related matter which was dealing with the appearance and
00:17:59 dealing with the appearance and aesthetic question. Yes. Now let's go then uh to something else that's happening at the same time. Um can we please go to your first
00:18:11 Um can we please go to your first witness statement at page 22?
00:18:19 Uh and uh at paragraph 76 on that page you can see you say this. Uh then on 17th July 2014 I was forwarded an email from Laura Johnson
00:18:30 forwarded an email from Laura Johnson along with councelor Marshall and then you you exhibit it. It was reassurance from Laura Johnson that the council and the TMO were aware of the advice coming from the LFB following the Lacel House fire and we were reassured the TMO were
00:18:42 fire and we were reassured the TMO were on top of it. In her email, Laura Johnson explained that she was forwarding documents that the fire brigade had produced along with the accompanying email. Laura Johnson says, "I hope we have provided scrutiny
00:18:53 "I hope we have provided scrutiny committee with sufficient information on fire safety and the measures that the council and TMO are taking to ensure the health and safety of the council tenants and lease holders. But if as a result of reading the information attached you
00:19:05 reading the information attached you would like any further update, please let me know and we can provide a further update." And then you say, I do not recall having any further questions at that time. Uh now, um the email itself,
00:19:16 that time. Uh now, um the email itself, let's just have it up. It's at RBK 403314.
00:19:23 It's your RFM44.
00:19:28 Uh and you can see that it is indeed from Laura Johnson on the 17th of July, 2014 to you and councelor Marshall. and its subject matter is two new guides for counselors about fire safety and know
00:19:39 counselors about fire safety and know the plan. Uh and Laura Johnson uh says what you have uh accurately uh transliterated into your statement.
00:19:50 uh transliterated into your statement. Uh now um there are uh attachments to this email. Um and indeed as Laura Johnson says she says the fire brigade have produced these two documents. Can I
00:20:02 have produced these two documents. Can I just put them up for you? We'll first of all have LFP 401294.
00:20:13 Uh and this is a document produced by the LFB entitled councelor guide on fire safety for use during estate visits. Uh and uh the second one and I'll just
00:20:26 Uh and uh the second one and I'll just show you this perhaps we can have it side by side is LFB 401295.
00:20:35 One is blue, one is red. Uh this one is entitled councelor guide on fire safety for use during council meetings. They both have the distinct uh
00:20:46 meetings. They both have the distinct uh tower block in the shape of a question mark as you can see there. Um when you received this email from Laura Johnson on the 17th of July 2014, did you open the attachments?
00:20:59 the attachments? I cannot remember specifically. Um, when I did, I do remember having seen these and skimming them,
00:21:12 having seen these and skimming them, but I can't remember exactly when I would have opened them and looked at them.
00:21:16 them. Can you think of any reason why when you received that email from Laura Johnson, you wouldn't have opened the attachments and and read them? No.
00:21:24 No. No. Uh,
00:21:33 Did you forward these on to any other counselors do you think? Uh I don't remember doing so.
00:21:43 [Applause] Now at this time you were still in communication as we've seen with Peter Madison. I say still you were in the middle of the communication about colors
00:21:54 middle of the communication about colors of cladding and the aesthetics uh and with the planning department. Um, did did the receipt of these guides lead you to consider the safety of the cladding
00:22:06 to consider the safety of the cladding that was then under discussion for Granfell Tower? It it did. It did not. And why is that? Um, I cannot remember
00:22:19 Um, I cannot remember why that would have been. Um again from looking at these documents for example risk assessments I was aware from
00:22:32 from the regular um annual reviews and the updates that I received that the TMO did have a process in place for fire risk
00:22:43 have a process in place for fire risk assessments for following up the actions and doing it in best practice with the LFB. I I as I as I've said in my witness statement, I over the years got what I
00:22:55 statement, I over the years got what I believed to be was sufficient reassurance from the TMO and from housing officers that the the risks as highlighted in these documents were
00:23:07 highlighted in these documents were being managed by the TMO. Um Norah Johnson thought it appropriate to send these to you on that day, 17th July 2014. Um,
00:23:19 July 2014. Um, do you understand or have you any understanding of why she might have sent them to you particularly? Well, I I think because she sent them to councelor Marshall and to myself, I would imagine that's because he was
00:23:31 I would imagine that's because he was chairman of the housing and property scrutiny committee and now I was cabinet member for housing. And as she says in her email, she she makes the point that she hopes that
00:23:41 that uh the housing department have already provided scrutiny committee with reassurance that things are being done well, which I believe at the time to have been the
00:23:53 I believe at the time to have been the case. So she we can take it can we that as far as you were concerned she was expecting you to open the attachments and familiarize yourself with the contents.
00:24:03 contents. I think from from my interpretation of her email she was saying here is information which you might well find useful that has been prepared by the LFB for counselors in positions such as the
00:24:15 for counselors in positions such as the ones you hold. Um and she goes on to say it is her opinion that you know she believes that the council/counselors
00:24:26 council/counselors have been given reassurance that that is all in hand. Yes. I mean these are new documents. These aren't repeats of documents you'd seen before. Not that I remember. No. Uh and did were you aware of at the time
00:24:39 Uh and did were you aware of at the time of a fire in South London which had happened in July 2009 at Lacel House in Suk? I yes I think I had heard of it. Yes. And had you read the coroner's recommendations do you think at any
00:24:50 recommendations do you think at any stage before July 27h 2014? Not that I remember. Do do you remember anybody talking in at the meetings you went to about housing
00:25:01 the meetings you went to about housing about the lacel house coroner's recommendations?
00:25:07 I seem to remember getting I think there was an email again which Laura Johnson forwarded to which she forwarded to me which maybe she had received from Janice
00:25:18 which maybe she had received from Janice Ray talking about the findings. I I I I think
00:25:25 I I think so uh that would have been I think in June 2013. Does that date ring a bell with you for I'm afraid I I just can't remember the very well. Now you you uh uh you you
00:25:38 very well. Now you you uh uh you you didn't make the connection I think between the contents of this document and the discussion that you were having with Jonathan Bore and Peter Madison and David Gibson about the panels.
00:25:49 David Gibson about the panels. That's that's right. That's fair. Uh, and the reason you give, and correct me if I'm wrong, I'm summarizing the evidence you gave a moment ago, is because um, you'd never have had any
00:26:00 because um, you'd never have had any reason to think that there was anything wrong with either the fire risk assessments being done by the fire risk assessor or the actions being taken by the TMO to close those out. That that's correct.
00:26:11 That that's correct. Right. But of course, this is not about historic fire risk assessments or the actions by the TMO to close those out. This is about the refurbishment. I say this, I mean your study of the panels
00:26:22 this, I mean your study of the panels was about the refurbishment. Did you not look to see whether there was anything in these documents which covered what you should do as a counselor in respect of fire safety
00:26:33 counselor in respect of fire safety where one of the buildings uh uh in your stock or your TMO stock was being refurbished? No, I I I failed to do that. Um and
00:26:46 No, I I I failed to do that. Um and based on what I you know know has happened I I regret having failed to do that. Um I at the time was conscious
00:26:57 that. Um I at the time was conscious that there were many layers of people with what I thought was the relevant expertise and indeed the role to check the health and
00:27:11 indeed the role to check the health and safety generally including fire safety aspects of a refurbishment project like this. Let's then look into uh LFB 401
00:27:22 this. Let's then look into uh LFB 401 1924 the blue one. If we could just have that up on the screen. 1924 blue. Uh we can see that
00:27:35 Uh we can see that uh it's entitled councelor guide for on fire safety for use during estate visits.
00:27:42 visits. uh and
00:27:44 uh and it you can see if we turn the page uh that it acts as a prompt for various questions.
00:27:54 Uh as you can see and on the top left hand corner you can see um five lines down it says you can ask and this is during estate visits uh what emergency
00:28:05 during estate visits uh what emergency evacuation plan is in place for this building? How have residents been informed about it? Are fire escapes in other parts of the escape route such as corridors and stairwells checked regularly for obstructions? Is emergency
00:28:16 regularly for obstructions? Is emergency lighting and signage in place along the escape route? Um did you notice uh when you got this document that those were questions that you should ask or counselors should ask
00:28:27 you should ask or counselors should ask when ex when visiting u uh properties in TMO stock? Um I I can't remember at the time. I see
00:28:38 Um I I can't remember at the time. I see now it says you can ask all these questions. Some of these questions as I say I knew were issues and questions that we were regularly updated on. Um for example uh
00:28:51 regularly updated on. Um for example uh we were also told that the um TMO were arranging uh home safety visits I think they were called with the LFB in high-rise blocks. I remember there were
00:29:03 high-rise blocks. I remember there were um issues around um people storing mobility scooters at certain times. So these I I was aware that there these were the sorts of questions which were
00:29:14 were the sorts of questions which were being reported either to me or to scrutiny committee and we were being reassured that these sorts of issues and questions were being looked into and
00:29:26 questions were being looked into and handled. M um I I I cannot say that I did go and ask every single one of these questions every time I went to one of the housing
00:29:38 every time I went to one of the housing estates which um I visited during my time as cabinet member for housing. Uh looking at page one
00:29:52 uh it says on the on the right hand side under the heading confirming the emergency evacuation is in plan is in place. It says purpose-built blocks of flats or masons are designed and built as self-contained residential units
00:30:04 as self-contained residential units usually sharing common corridors, staircases and an entrance. They can be of any height not just high-rise. In purpose-built blocks of flats and masons the stay put principle applies. This means that if a fire starts in the
00:30:15 means that if a fire starts in the common parts or in another flat, all residents not directly affected by the fire would be expected to stay put and remain in their flat unless directed to leave by the fire and rescue service.
00:30:26 leave by the fire and rescue service. And then it says this, there should also be an emergency evacuation plan in bold in place for each building. This details the action that residents and others need to take if there is a fire. This plan must make sure residents and others
00:30:37 plan must make sure residents and others are safe, that a fire can be detected, and that residents are warned of this event. Residents should be able to to safely escape from a fire using roots within the building designed and
00:30:48 within the building designed and maintained if we go over the page to be safe to use during an emergency. Uh and then it goes on there should be appropriate signposting and lighting in place on these routes. There is a
00:30:59 place on these routes. There is a responsibility to inform tenants about the evacuation measures and safe behaviors for properties. And then there are the questions I've just asked you. Um,
00:31:10 did you take any steps at any stage to satisfy yourself uh as councelor having been guided to do so by the LFB
00:31:21 so by the LFB that there was an emergency evacuation plan in place for all the buildings in the TMA stock? I do not remember doing so. And um as I
00:31:35 I do not remember doing so. And um as I as I've just said based on what I know now, I very much wish that I had done. I think at the time I
00:31:46 think at the time I took the view that given this was a document prepared by the LFB and given that I was frequently told that the TMO had bimonthly meetings with the LFB and
00:31:58 had bimonthly meetings with the LFB and that the LFB were visiting its high-rise blocks and specifically working with the TMO on the Grenful Tower refurbishment.
00:32:10 TMO on the Grenful Tower refurbishment. I I made the assumption that if the LFB were telling councilors that we can ask this that they would be doing that themselves at these bimonthly meetings,
00:32:21 themselves at these bimonthly meetings, but that was an assumption I probably should not have made. Yes. Yes. I I understand. Um you were deputy leader at this stage, weren't you?
00:32:31 you? Yes.
00:32:31 Yes. This was July 2014. Did you or do you remember did anybody within RBKC as counselors
00:32:43 as counselors think to themselves that there ought to be an effort just to doublech check that the guidance being given here by the LFB to councilors was carried through so
00:32:56 to councilors was carried through so that the TMO was reminded of what it was they had to do.
00:33:05 I I I sorry your question was did did I as deputy leader do that? Did you as deputy leader or anybody else in RBKC ever think that there should be
00:33:16 in RBKC ever think that there should be an effort just to double check that the TMO was doing what it was supposed to do visv ensuring that there was an emergency evacuation plan as described in this document. I I didn't, as I've
00:33:28 in this document. I I didn't, as I've said, I wish I had. I took comfort from the email that I got from Laura Johnson, who forwarded me this guide, which said she hoped that we could get reassurance
00:33:40 she hoped that we could get reassurance that these things were being done. And I got reassurance from the many reports that I've already referred to, but um I or another counselor could have asked
00:33:51 or another counselor could have asked these questions ourselves. H a and indeed
00:33:59 the the time and opportunity to ask these questions would or could have been during your dialogue with Peter Madison over the color of the cladding panels.
00:34:11 cladding panels. It would or could have been at any number of occasions when I visited council estates. C can we look at the the red document LFB 401295 please at page uh one to start with um
00:34:24 please at page uh one to start with um there it is again and it sets out uh the uh provisions of the RRO under the heading local authorities as the responsible person uh
00:34:36 authorities as the responsible person uh and in the right hand column second paragraph refers to the state principle uh which we've already covered but if we go please to the next page page.
00:34:47 go please to the next page page. We can see under the in the heading, what can counselors do? Do not make assumptions. It says, do not make assumptions that fire safety is being actively or effectively managed in purpose-built blocks of flats and masons
00:34:59 purpose-built blocks of flats and masons in your burough. Councilors can make their bur safer by scrutinizing how responsibilities for fire safety are met and ensuring that the fire safety in your burough is continuously being monitored and
00:35:10 continuously being monitored and improved. Just just pausing there on what you've told us this morning, Mr. Fielding Melon, you were making exactly the assumption that this document advised you should not make. Um,
00:35:22 Um, that appears to be the case. Yes. And then it goes on in the next box, strategic and policy questions for counselors to ask. There are questions you should ask about the fire safety of purpose-built blocks of flats and masons
00:35:34 purpose-built blocks of flats and masons in your burough, particularly in relation to the residential estates and properties run by the local authority, Almo, all local housing associations. They can be asked generally or in the context of specific programs and
00:35:45 context of specific programs and projects. And then underneath that you'll see if we just scroll up a little bit please um a a number seven I think in all of questions
00:35:56 in all of questions uh that councilors should be asking particularly in the context uh of uh specific programs and projects.
00:36:07 specific programs and projects. Uh and and if you just cast your eye down those um you can see uh for example uh the third uh the fourth bullet point
00:36:19 uh the third uh the fourth bullet point the third is about contractual relationships. The fourth is about is there a clear process in place for residents to report and escalate concerns about fire safety etc. Uh and then the last bullet point specifically
00:36:32 then the last bullet point specifically I'll show you. It says this. Does the burough have clear policies stating that uh first sub bullet before any modifications or maintenance works are carried out in purpose-built blocks of flats or masons there must be a proper
00:36:44 flats or masons there must be a proper assessment of the impact on fire safety. Second sub bullet all modifications or maintenance works will result in buildings which are equally or more fire safety compliant than they were before
00:36:55 safety compliant than they were before the works. Third sub bullet, once modifications or maintenance works are complete, councilors will receive confirmation that the building will meet all necessary fire safety requirements.
00:37:07 all necessary fire safety requirements. Uh f first my first question to you on this page is did you ever ask any of these questions identified here? Um well I think counselors I was present when
00:37:20 I think counselors I was present when these sorts of questions were indeed discussed by counselors such as um the the fire risk assessments um such as uh enforcement action taken
00:37:32 um such as uh enforcement action taken by the London Fire Brigade which we were told about um at a Tower um such as uh the issues around front doors and lease holder responsibility
00:37:44 holder responsibility um a clear process in place for residents
00:37:48 residents complaints and the complaints process and the fact that they could write to us or come and present to the housing property scrutiny committee or write petitions. Um the the the fifth point I don't remember
00:38:02 the the the fifth point I don't remember being asked about. Um what's in place to make sure residents know what they need to do? I I was told that there were, as I say, these home safety visits by the LFB. Um, and
00:38:17 LFB. Um, and we as counselors, um, I do remember being told that there was, I think that there was fire risk assessment done as part of the refurbishment. Um, and we were aware that there was
00:38:29 Um, and we were aware that there was building control who had the job of checking these sorts of projects. Looking at the last bullet point, does the burough have clear policies stating
00:38:40 the burough have clear policies stating that? And I've read you the three bullet points. Did you ask that question at any stage?
00:38:46 stage? I do not remember specifically asking that question. No.
00:38:51 No. Let's continue then on the topic of fire safety. Um when you were first appointed as cabinet member with responsibility for housing, property and regeneration in May 2013,
00:39:02 in May 2013, um what efforts did you yourself make to acquaint yourself with the program of fire risk assessments which had been carried out by the TMO to date?
00:39:14 What what what do you mean exactly? Did you that I was going to go and have a look at the entire list of fire risk assessments across the H and look at the outstanding actions. I did not do that.
00:39:26 outstanding actions. I did not do that. Well, what did you do? My question was what efforts did you make? I I received updates and was generally satisfied by
00:39:38 updates and was generally satisfied by the reassurance given in those. You received updates. In what form did you receive those updates?
00:39:48 primarily in those annual and mid-year reviews that went to myself and to scrutiny committee and I think there were also interim emails and updates that were given to me either at policy
00:40:01 that were given to me either at policy boards or emails forwarded to me by housing officers. Did you ever um ever ask any question of uh the TMO or the um
00:40:12 ask any question of uh the TMO or the um housing department, principally Laura Johnson, about the progress being made in relation to fire risk assessments and and closing out uh closing outstanding items?
00:40:24 uh closing outstanding items? No, it was not an area that I had any particular knowledge of and I took what I was told on trust. So you received information in the form of the annual
00:40:36 information in the form of the annual and media reviews and in certain emails. Uh but you never you never is this right? You never well the information that I remember receiving about fire risk assessments
00:40:47 receiving about fire risk assessments was on the whole reassuring to me. I did not reme I do not remember receiving information that gave me at that time cause for concern. And as we discussed yesterday, the fact
00:41:01 And as we discussed yesterday, the fact that it was all coming through reports that had been prepared by the housing department, I took extra comfort from that fact that professional housing managers were comfortable to report
00:41:13 managers were comfortable to report those reassurances to counselors. Were you aware of a backlog of repairs by the TMO? Repairs generally?
00:41:24 Repairs generally? I was aware that there was a that there was I mean I think as long as I was a counselor, it was the case that the HRA did not have sufficient funds to
00:41:37 did not have sufficient funds to meet the the investment requirements across the whole HR. that was reported quite regularly in in uh HA business plans and before. Were you aware of a backlog of repairs
00:41:49 Were you aware of a backlog of repairs by the TMO responsive to FRA outstanding items?
00:41:53 items? I was not. Were you aware that RBKC had no fire safety KPIs for monitoring the TMO in that sphere? Um,
00:42:04 Um, I I have now looked and I have to say I I didn't notice that at the time and I think the reason I didn't was because it was a standing item on those
00:42:16 was a standing item on those annual reviews. There was always a health and safety and fire safety uh item,
00:42:23 uh item, but not a KPI. Not a KPI as far as I remember. No. Were you aware of how it was that the TMO collected and stored information on vulnerable residents in its stock?
00:42:37 on vulnerable residents in its stock? Not in any detail. I was aware that they did, as was reported in those reports, um make special effort with the LFB to um
00:42:49 um review the fire safety in the sheltered housing accommodation, which is where I believed most of our most vulnerable residents resided. You say not in any detail. Uh leaving
00:43:00 You say not in any detail. Uh leaving aside the sheltered housing accommodation. Uh were you aware in any detail at all or even in outline how it was that the TMO collected and stored its information on vulnerable residents?
00:43:12 its information on vulnerable residents? No.
00:43:14 No. Were you aware that the TMO had not produced personal emergency evacuation plans in respect of any resident of Granfell Tower as at the date of the fire?
00:43:23 fire? I was I was not aware. Throughout your time in your position as a deputy leader and cabinet member for housing, property and regeneration, did
00:43:35 housing, property and regeneration, did you ever make any inquiries yourself into whether actions from fire risk assessments were being completed in a timely manner?
00:43:44 Not that I recall specifically. I as I say I think I took comfort from the fairly regular updates which said that they were strengthening and improving
00:43:55 they were strengthening and improving that that process. Do you remember any occasion in respect of the matters we've just covered when you took an annual or midyear review and asked and interrogated it with Laura
00:44:06 asked and interrogated it with Laura Johnson or or anybody else within the RBKC housing department or housing commissioning. I I I do remember occasions at policy board where and again I relied more on the housing
00:44:20 again I relied more on the housing officers to do this because they were more familiar with um best practice and I do recall there being occasions um in policy board where Laura Johnson as the director of housing would pick up on
00:44:33 director of housing would pick up on areas of performance that she thought were um less than satisfactory and seek reassurances from the GMO at those meetings about what would be done.
00:44:44 meetings about what would be done. Right. So, is is this right in a nutshell? Laura Johnson would do the scrutinizing as it were as far as you were concerned and you would you would trust her and rely on what she was telling you?
00:44:55 telling you? If I I did trust and rely on the judgment of the housing department. I would also ask questions if I felt there was something that didn't make sense or
00:45:07 was something that didn't make sense or I wasn't happy with. Is there anything that comes to mind now? I know it's difficult looking back all those years ago. Is there anything that comes to mind now uh in respect of which having
00:45:18 mind now uh in respect of which having been told something by Laura Johnson, you were there was something you weren't happy with or didn't make sense? I think there are quite a lot of occasions where the first response that I get from I got
00:45:30 the first response that I get from I got from Laura Johnson I went back and challenged and asked and indeed there there are a few examples of me doing just that in my witness statement and attachments and there would have been
00:45:41 attachments and there would have been many more across my my work over the four years. I want to ask you now about a specific issue concerning non-compliant leaseholder front doors. You mentioned this in your first witness statement
00:45:53 this in your first witness statement briefly I think at paragraph 70 uh we can just have that in front of you please page 19 where um you are summarizing a report for the HPSC
00:46:04 summarizing a report for the HPSC uh on the on or dated the 10th of July 2014.
00:46:09 2014. uh and uh
00:46:12 uh and uh as you can see there you refer to the report the report itself is actually RFM40 that you exhibit paragraph 69 if you look just above that please on
00:46:23 if you look just above that please on the screen can we scroll up to paragraph 69 we can see you say this is a report on the TMO's performance review 2013 to 14 and the TMO's performance agreement 2014 to 15
00:46:35 2014 to 15 so that's what you're talking about and if we go back into paragraph 70 four lines in you say this. The report stated that the program to replace non-firer rated tenants flat entrance doors has been successfully concluded. The report
00:46:47 been successfully concluded. The report is very detailed in relation to health and safety and specifically fire safety. Further issues noted in include that the TMO has worked with the council's legal services to address the issues associated with non-compliant leaseolder
00:47:00 associated with non-compliant leaseolder leaseolder flat entrance doors and that the TMO meets with the LFB on a bimonthly basis to discuss fire safety issues and reduce the likelihood and severity of any fires that occur. Do you
00:47:11 severity of any fires that occur. Do you recall the issue of remedying non-compliant leaseolder doors? Uh I remember that issue being something which uh was discussed quite
00:47:23 which uh was discussed quite a few times at the scrutiny committee. Did you have any role in relation to dealing with the LFB? No.
00:47:29 No. Do you do you agree that the report quoted in your witness statement made clear the risk posed by non-compliant leaseolder front doors? Uh yes.
00:47:40 Uh yes. Did you take any action as a result? Well, I knew that the council and the TMO was taking action to try and make sure that the final we received regular
00:47:52 sure that the final we received regular updates not just in these but in the director of housing's live issues reports that went to scrutiny um which showed the process the progress that was being made in working with lease holders
00:48:04 being made in working with lease holders with non-compliant doors. Um and I think finally it got down to there were only two left and there was a lot of work going on in trying to persuade or indeed
00:48:16 going on in trying to persuade or indeed enforce those lease holders to do that. There was also I remember being told disagreement between the council and the LFB about who could or should take that
00:48:27 LFB about who could or should take that enforcement action against non-compliant lease holders. But um there is a report somewhere that I saw where the council says despite this disagreement, it has decided to um do this work because of
00:48:41 decided to um do this work because of the need to prioritize the health and safety of our residents. Can we look please at RBK3054431?
00:48:50 This is Quent. This is councelor Marshall's second witness statement to the inquiry uh at page three, please. And I'd like to look at paragraph seven.
00:49:01 And I'd like to look at paragraph seven. And in that in the third sentence he says this. The committee's function we can just look at the third sentence fourth line. The committee's function was to scrutinize the actions of the executive.
00:49:12 executive. The committee had to uh the committee had to start from an assumption that the TMO monitored by council officers and the LFB would always follow best practice in relation to safety. Health and safety was a specific item on the
00:49:23 and safety was a specific item on the TMA performance review shared with the committee annually. This was a key mechanism for us to gain comfort on this issue. When a specific fire safety issue was raised at the committee, namely the safety of leaseolder doors, we follow
00:49:35 safety of leaseolder doors, we follow this up repeatedly with questions until we were satisfied with the outcome. Between 2012 and May 2016, when I left the HPSC, as far as I can recall, the issue of leaseholder doors was raised at
00:49:46 issue of leaseholder doors was raised at least nine times at HPSC meetings. It is important to note the committee had no power to direct any action either to council officers or the TMO. its powers were limited to questioning and
00:49:57 were limited to questioning and publicizing the matters before it. Do you agree with councelor Marshall there that that was the approach as he said adopted by the HPSC during those dates?
00:50:09 dates? Yes.
00:50:09 Yes. Yeah. And do you recall the issue of leaseolder doors arising at least nine times?
00:50:15 times? Is that about right? Yeah. I don't remember the number of times but if he has counted I'm sure he's correct. Can can we go to RBK 3032449
00:50:23 3032449 please? This is an example of how RBKC treated the leaseholder door issue. It's Laura Johnson's report to the HPSC of the 16th of July 2013 uh on the TMA's
00:50:36 the 16th of July 2013 uh on the TMA's performance for 2012 to 13 and performance agreement for the next year. Can we go to page 11 in that please in paragraph 8.2 too.
00:50:47 paragraph 8.2 too. She says there and this is under the rubric health and safety at at the top of your screen. Um she says uh responsibility for enforcement of non-compliant leaseolder flat entrance doors remained unresolved following
00:50:58 doors remained unresolved following discussions with London Fire Brigade LFB senior managers and so RBKC were guided by council's opinion to seek a definitive response uh from the department uh of comm community for
00:51:09 department uh of comm community for communities and local government DCLG. To date, an initial response has been received from DCLG which indicates that enforcement should be via the housing act and not the regulatory reform order. Now, just pausing there. You were, I
00:51:22 Now, just pausing there. You were, I think, by this time in post as cabinet member responsible uh for uh property uh uh uh housing and regeneration.
00:51:32 Yes. Yes. A and um were were you involved at all in seeking council's opinion on this issue?
00:51:41 issue? I I I wouldn't have been the person who sought council's opinion. You wouldn't have be. What about uh in seeking the advice of DCLG? Again, that would have been officers who
00:51:52 Again, that would have been officers who did that.
00:51:52 did that. I see. So, when she says RBKC were guided by council's opinion uh to seek a definitive response, that wouldn't be you. That would be officers, would it? Yes.
00:52:03 Yes. Yes.
00:52:04 Yes. Uh
00:52:06 Uh now the the issue the debate if you like that Laura Johnson addressed in this report was who should be who should enforce non-compliant lease holder doors. Should it be the LFB uh under as
00:52:20 doors. Should it be the LFB uh under as the enforcement body under the RRO or should it be the council under the housing act? Is that how you understood the debate? Um I remember being told that there was
00:52:32 Um I remember being told that there was that yeah debate disagreement discussion and do you remember OBKC actually seeking guidance from the DCLG over that?
00:52:43 over that? I I I I remember what has been told here. I don't remember more than that. Uh
00:52:51 Uh do you remember can you help me that the response or certainly the initial response was that enforcement should be by RBKC under the housing act? Do you remember that? That's what it says.
00:53:03 That's what it says. Yes. Is it right that in fact RBKC did not enforce under the Housing Act? I I don't think that is right. From what I recall,
00:53:13 I recall, RBKC did then go about enforcing this. How did it do that? Do you remember? Uh there are lots of reports which
00:53:24 Uh there are lots of reports which provide updates about this over the next uh whatever it is two years or so. And I think they did it through a combination of uh the legal department writing
00:53:36 of uh the legal department writing letters, the TMO writing to people using I think there were talks about the TMO's fire risk assess. I can't remember exactly there, but it's it's set out in reports and I have I have seen them and
00:53:47 reports and I have I have seen them and read them. Well, the TMO wouldn't be the body to enforce under the housing act, would it? It would be the council.
00:53:56 So, I'm just wondering why. I it's it's not I'm afraid it's just not an area where I have expertise that what what the council did go about doing is reported in the many uh reports that
00:54:08 reported in the many uh reports that went to housing property excuse committee and it might have been reported in some minutes of my housing policy board as well right see you you've disagreed with the proposition I was putting to you that RBKC did not enforce under the housing
00:54:20 RBKC did not enforce under the housing act and I was just interested to I don't know what you mean I the RBKC didn't leave it to the LF FB it set about working with I think there was something like 107
00:54:33 something like 107 potentially non-compliant lease holder doors at the beginning of the process and it went about working with those lease holders and as I say what I remember is the final report said there
00:54:45 remember is the final report said there were two that they were still working with um and they were in the process of trying to resolve those final two so I don't know whether they ended up having to take enforcement action but they were
00:54:57 to take enforcement action but they were going about doing the work to ensure those non-compliant doors were made compliant. Right. So my question was about enforcement enforcement under the housing act and I I I was suggesting to you that
00:55:09 and I I I was suggesting to you that RBKC did not use their enforcement powers under the housing act. I thought you were disagreeing with me and and on that basis well I I I was I was trying to make the point and I'm sorry if I misunderstood
00:55:21 point and I'm sorry if I misunderstood your question. Um, I was trying to make the point that RBKC did not leave it to the LFB despite its view that it was
00:55:32 the LFB despite its view that it was more of an LFB's responsibility after this advice. My understanding is that RBKC set about working to ensure those lease holders uh doors were made
00:55:43 lease holders uh doors were made compliant. Well, okay. Did you understand that in fact the LFB was the enforcing authority under the RRO uh but RBKC was the enforcing authority under the housing act?
00:55:54 under the housing act? I only knew that from what was written here. I did not understand the the detailed statutory differences between that. That was we we relied on officers in both the housing and in the legal
00:56:06 in both the housing and in the legal department to make sure the correct thing was being done in those cases. I in your time uh as deputy leader uh and
00:56:17 in your time uh as deputy leader uh and cabinet member responsible for for housing property and regeneration, did you ever have occasion to consider RBKC's own fire safety policy? I don't remember doing so.
00:56:28 I don't remember doing so. Well, let's have a look at it then to see if we can um see if we can prompt your memory. Uh RBK 401655, please.
00:56:39 please. Now this policy uh is dated January 2014. Um it's quite a striking first page. Uh it's called by burough corporate health and safety and there's
00:56:50 corporate health and safety and there's a ring of words around it. Uh and then underneath it it says the same thing and you can see that it's for both Hammersmith and Fulham and RBKC. Just looking at that first page is that
00:57:01 looking at that first page is that something you think you've ever seen before?
00:57:03 before? I don't remember seeing it before. I mean you would remember it I think if you'd seen it before. Well um anyway I don't remember seeing right uh
00:57:13 right uh you don't then can you help me then whether there was a policy which preceded this one I cannot
00:57:18 I cannot no
00:57:21 uh
00:57:28 do you know whose role it was within RBKC to take responsibility for ensuring that this policy was carried into effect.
00:57:38 Ultimately, I would have thought it was the chief executive and Tam Clark's responsibility. So, during your time, Mr. Holgate. Uh, yes.
00:57:47 Uh, yes. Yes.
00:57:49 Yes. Let me just see if I can be a bit more specific because I'm conscious that I'm asking you a a specific question on a just on a on the front page of this. Can can we look at page two of this document
00:58:03 and look at um
00:58:07 uh the last paragraph on that page at the very foot of your screen and it says this policy sets out the strategy and organizational arrangements for the management of fire safety within the council. It is important that we all adhere to it and remember that the most
00:58:19 adhere to it and remember that the most powerful message we can send is through our own visible behavior as an example. Do you remember ever being told that even if you hadn't seen that part of this document
00:58:31 this document or this document at all?
00:58:35 No, I don't. Uh, can we look at page three, please? First paragraph under the introduction.
00:58:44 This policy sets out the strategic fire safety vision and objectives of elected members and the executive joint management team. It describes the way in which we effectively manage fire safety
00:58:56 which we effectively manage fire safety based upon British standard publication pass 7 fire risk management system specification. And then there's a a a diagram I suppose uh act plan do check
00:59:10 diagram I suppose uh act plan do check if that's the right order. Uh plan do check act I think is what you see underneath that. And then underneath that, it says, "This policy must be brought to the attention of all employees so that they are encouraged to cooperate and communicate any necessary
00:59:22 cooperate and communicate any necessary information on fire safety matters throughout the organization in order to discharge their duties." Uh,
00:59:29 Uh, can I assume that you have never seen this page of this document? I don't remember ever seeing this document. I think were members involved. This is the sort of thing which would
00:59:40 This is the sort of thing which would have gone to the cabinet and corporate services committee and I suspect if there was a cabinet member who signed it off, it would have been the cabinet member for civil society. Right. You see, it seems am I right in
00:59:51 Right. You see, it seems am I right in thinking that under the introduction it contemplates that that all the elected members as well as the executive joint management team would be aware of this document?
01:00:00 document? The sentence which you read which I can't see now but No, you can't. I'm so sorry. You're absolutely right. Can we go scroll up to the top of the page? Yes. I'm sorry. Yes. Introduction.
01:00:11 Yes. I'm sorry. Yes. Introduction. It does. It does give that impression. I would agree. Well, it says it doesn't just Well, it doesn't say all, but yes, elected members, right? Could Can you explain why this document never came to your attention?
01:00:24 document never came to your attention? You were deputy leader as well as cabinet member for property. I I I cannot explain. [Applause]
01:00:47 [Applause]
01:00:59 So, uh, I I I'm just looking to see whether or not It it's might worth my while asking you any questions about this document at all if you had never seen it.
01:01:06 seen it. I I won't be able to tell you very much, I'm afraid. Perhaps I'll consider that o over the impending break and come back to you about it. But let's move on then to another document. Can we please look at RBK 3029084?
01:01:22 We can see a parag this is a a report produced by Laura Johnson for a meeting of the HPSC on the 13th of May 2015. As you can see it's called live issues report by the
01:01:34 it's called live issues report by the director of housing. Uh and if we go down to paragraph 1.2 this is under the heading leaseholder doors. Uh it uh says in March 2014
01:01:48 uh we reported that we've been working with householders of 37 doors that had been assessed as non-compliant. This had gone down from a high of 107 doors in December 2013. 35 of these households
01:01:59 December 2013. 35 of these households now provided evidence of their doors being compliant. This leaves two households with non-compliant doors. Um I show you that because I think you referred to that a few moments ago in your evidence about leaseolder doors. Is
01:02:10 your evidence about leaseolder doors. Is that what you were thinking of? Uh yes yes yes yes thank you. Now if we go then um to uh paragraph 1.5 at the foot of the page
01:02:21 the page uh it says under the heading ongoing work to identify and change non-compliant doors. KCTMA's program of fire risk assessments FRA is ongoing and continues to consider the compliance of flat entrance doors as they form an
01:02:33 flat entrance doors as they form an integral part of the means of escape from the block. The FRA highlights any flat doors which are which are potentially non-compliant. Were you concerned uh at Well, first of all, did you receive this report? I
01:02:45 all, did you receive this report? I should have asked you that question. Um
01:02:49 Um I I can't remember exactly whether I was at this uh housing and property scrutiny committee, but I think I would have received it in advance even if I hadn't
01:03:01 received it in advance even if I hadn't attended. Were you concerned that despite the flat door replacement program, there may still have been non-compliant doors?
01:03:11 Uh, I took that paragraph to be one of reassurance, which is that um I mean I think the point is that lease holders
01:03:22 think the point is that lease holders can and sometimes did change their front doors. Um they didn't need to ask the council to do it. they could do that to their own property. And so I took this
01:03:33 their own property. And so I took this as reassurance that it was an ongoing process of the FRA's checking and identifying doors which might have become non-compliant.
01:03:45 become non-compliant. Were you concerned that there were still non-compliant doors notwithstanding the program? The two non-compliant doors that uh were
01:03:57 The two non-compliant doors that uh were highlighted in the above paragraph. Well, I'm looking at the paragraph. I I've read it to you. Paragraph
01:04:02 Paragraph paragraph 1.5 1.5.
01:04:05 1.5. It's not just referring to the lease holders. It's referring to all doors. All
01:04:09 All doors.
01:04:11 doors. Can we go up and I'll read it again? Yes, of course. Paragraph 1.5 at the foot of page one. I'll read it to you again. KCTMA's program of fire risk assessments, FRA, is ongoing and continues to consider the
01:04:22 is ongoing and continues to consider the compliance of flat entrance doors as they form an integral part of the means of escape from the block. The FRA highlights any flat doors which are potentially non-compliant. So my reading of that now and I imagine
01:04:35 So my reading of that now and I imagine my reading of that then is not saying that there are more non-compliant doors. It's saying that the TMO has a process in place to
01:04:47 that the TMO has a process in place to continue an ongoing review to make sure that if there are doors that for some reason or other become non-compliant, they will be identified and then rectified. That's what I read that
01:04:58 rectified. That's what I read that paragraph to mean. Yeah. But it's telling you that there are non-compliant doors. My my question is it's telling you there may become non-compliant doors in the future.
01:05:10 Well, that's a what it's saying is the FRA highlights any flat doors which are potentially non-compliant. Yes. But it doesn't say. Anyway, as I've said, my reading of that paragraph is not your reading of that paragraph.
01:05:22 not your reading of that paragraph. All right. Let's then look at the minutes of the meeting. RBK 3032444.
01:05:29 We can see from the first page if we go to that that you were there.
01:05:40 See that? I see it.
01:05:42 I see it. You were in attendance as well as Laura Johnson. Uh and uh if we go please to uh page two, we can see under paragraph A5 live issues report by the director of
01:05:53 live issues report by the director of housing and we've seen the report and what she says is in the second paragraph in response to councelor Bactier, Miss Johnson advised that the TM the TMO tenant doors were checked for fire
01:06:05 tenant doors were checked for fire safety compliance as part of an annual program and replaced if non-compliant. She agreed to provide an update to the committee on the exact number of non-compliant TMO tenant doors. Now, we can see you were at this meeting and we
01:06:17 can see you were at this meeting and we can see that councelor Bactier had picked up on the point about non-compliant tenant doors and we can see as I've just shown you that Laura Johnson agreed to provide an update to the committee on the number the exact
01:06:28 the committee on the number the exact number of non-compliant doors at that stage. Would you agree from what you could see at the meeting that that the number of non-compliant
01:06:39 number of non-compliant TMO tenant doors was of concern? of concern to the committee. I think the committee was doing its job
01:06:51 I think the committee was doing its job well and asking questions which were relevant about the fire safety and seeking reassurance and again
01:07:02 again to me that that is reassuring. It is saying that the TMO does go and check on an ongoing basis and will replace them
01:07:13 an ongoing basis and will replace them if found to be non-compliant. Yes. And my my question coming back to it again is were you concerned being at the meeting and seeing the exchange that there that there were non-compliant doors?
01:07:27 The impression that I had got over the years was that this issue of doors there were there were various things that could be done to a door to make them
01:07:38 could be done to a door to make them non-compliant. sometimes by the tenant, sometimes by the lease holder. And so it was
01:07:46 was reassuring to know that rather than just doing it once, there was an ongoing mechanism in place to check this and correct it as and when a non-compliant door was identified.
01:08:00 Right. I'd like to ask you some questions now, please, about the Adair and Trellic tower fires. And Mr. Mr. Chairman, I can get some way into this topic before time an appropriate time for a break. So, I'd like to if I can.
01:08:12 for a break. So, I'd like to if I can. Yes, of course. It's a bit early to stop. Um, now you'll recall, I think, because you cover it in your first witness statement that there was a fire in Adair Tower in October 2015. Yes.
01:08:23 October 2015. Yes. Yes.
01:08:24 Yes. And you cover that just for just for our note as well as your recollection uh at paragraphs 34 to 35 uh on page 8. and you cover the Trellic Tower fire at paragraphs uh 36 to 40 on page nine of
01:08:38 paragraphs uh 36 to 40 on page nine of your statement. Um let's go to paragraph 34 of your statement on page 8 specifically. You say there is your first witness statement. You say there that on the 30th of November
01:08:52 that on the 30th of November 2015, I was copied into an email from councelor Padet Brown to himself entitled notes for party meeting 30th November 2015 and you exhibit it regarding the fire at dead air tower. It stated this could have been a very
01:09:03 stated this could have been a very serious incident but for the response of the emergency services who were able to treat neighbors suffering from smoke inhalation promptly. Many housing department and TMO staff as well as our emergency officer came in to help tenants over the weekend and acted very
01:09:14 tenants over the weekend and acted very efficiently to ensure that none of the 12 households were without accommodation that night. I've written to thank them all.
01:09:22 all. Uh now
01:09:24 Uh now the fire at Adair Tower happened on the 31st of October 2015. So this email uh was about a month later. Was this the first um time that you'd heard of the Adair Tower or had you heard the fire or
01:09:35 Adair Tower or had you heard the fire or had you heard about it earlier? I'm pretty sure I had heard about it earlier, but I think when I was writing my statement, this was the first documentary
01:09:46 documentary um proof that I could find. Yes, I see. When you found out about the fire at the end of October 2015, do you remember what action you took to obtain further details about its causes?
01:09:59 Um, I I don't remember precisely. I I I think I remember being told that they thought it was uh arson.
01:10:10 thought it was uh arson. Who did you speak to? Do you remember? It would have been Laura Johnson. Laura Johnson. Right. Um let's go to RBK43761,
01:10:18 RBK43761, please. This takes us a little bit later into 2015. And this is the minute um for the housing policy board of the 3rd of December 2015, which you produced as RFM3.
01:10:29 RFM3. And if we go, as you can see from the first page to the list, you're an attendee and the offices there are listed, but Laura Johnson uh and Barbara Matthews is also there as you can see.
01:10:41 Matthews is also there as you can see. Uh and then if you go to page, uh two please, you can see that um under any other business, Adair Tower. Uh Laura Johnson reported that the London Fire Brigade have informed the council that
01:10:52 Brigade have informed the council that they will be serving two enforcement notices on Hazelwood Tower and Adair Tower following the fire on 31st of October.
01:10:59 October. Uh, did you understand at the time what an LFB enforcement notice was? Um,
01:11:10 I didn't have a a kind of detailed understanding. I I I assumed that it meant that the LFB thought there were um
01:11:21 meant that the LFB thought there were um problems in the tower that they were putting the TMO and the council on notice needed to be rectified and if it wasn't rectified they would take
01:11:33 wasn't rectified they would take enforcement action. Were you concerned by the fact that the LFB was serving an enforcement notice uh on uh uh on the TMO? Yes, I would have been.
01:11:47 Did you ask the housing department whether all other buildings in RBKC housing stock were compliant with relevant fire safety legislation?
01:11:56 I cannot remember whether I did or not. Uh it's rather a broad question. What really lies behind it is did you explore with the housing department
01:12:07 explore with the housing department whether that this was indicative of a more general problem or whether a dare Tower was a one-off? I I'm afraid I cannot remember the detail of conversations I may have done.
01:12:19 detail of conversations I may have done. I was certainly given the impression I was under the understanding that these were particular problems to these two towers which were um you know they were
01:12:30 towers which were um you know they were what they called sister towers. They were designed to the same specification.
01:12:36 Did you ask how come an an enforcement notice had been served when you had uh a a fire risk assessor and and presumably a fire risk assessment for that building?
01:12:48 building? Um, I don't remember asking that question.
01:12:51 question. Why was that a question that or can you explain why that was a a question which didn't occur to you at the time?
01:13:00 Um, no. Uh,
01:13:05 you say in your first witness statement of paragraph 35, there's no need to go back to it, uh, at page 8 and over to page nine, that it was the responsibility of the TMO, not the council, to take action in relation to
01:13:16 council, to take action in relation to enforcement notices. Did you yourself ever follow up with the TMO to ensure that the relevant action was taken? No, I would have um expected the housing
01:13:28 No, I would have um expected the housing department to do that and update me, which I think they did. Right. Um I see. Uh now the minutes uh refer in the third paragraph to the
01:13:41 uh refer in the third paragraph to the fact that the London Fire Brigade were looking at the ventilation system in the Holivad Air Tower with the possibility that this will have to be entirely replaced. The policy board noted the potential cost. Did that prompt any
01:13:52 potential cost. Did that prompt any concern on your part about the ventilation systems in other RBKC uh housing stock and particularly highrises?
01:14:02 No. Again, I I I thought these were problems specific to the design and construction of Adair and Hazlewood Towers.
01:14:10 Towers. What What gave you that impression? Because there were enforcement notices about those two towers. No, but what gave you the impression that the problems about uh Well, I thought I I I I
01:14:24 Well, I thought I I I I assumed and I think it's probably correct that the different towers all had different designs and different types of construction and different types of ventilation systems. So the fact that there was a particular problem
01:14:35 fact that there was a particular problem in Adair and Hazelwood to my mind did not necessarily mean there would be the same problem in other differently designed and differently constructed blocks.
01:14:43 blocks. Now the minutes go on to say at the end of that section councelor Fielding Melon will go and visit air tower if possible before the end of next week or at the beginning of the new year. Did you did you visit air tower? Do you remember? I
01:14:57 you visit air tower? Do you remember? I certainly went I I I'm familiar with the Dare Tower and Hazelwood Tower. I didn't go inside the tower, but I I I have visited the outside of
01:15:10 but I I I have visited the outside of the tower. What What would What What What did you learn from that about the fire? I don't remember. Right. Why didn't you go into the tower? Uh I don't remember.
01:15:22 Uh I don't remember. Okay. Uh now if we go to TMO1015934 please and I'll just cover this document Mr. Chairman if I may before before the break. Um you can see that this is uh a
01:15:36 break. Um you can see that this is uh a a
01:15:37 a minute of the TMO executive team meeting on the 7th of July 2016. Now of course you're not present uh naturally. You can
01:15:48 you're not present uh naturally. You can see who was uh if we go to item three on page two please. Adair tower is the item and it says
01:16:01 Adair tower is the item and it says this. Barbara noted that Janice, that's Janice Ray, received a phone call from Ben, I think that's Ben Dwis of the LFB to say that we would be receiving a statutory information request asking for a list of residents and their contact
01:16:13 a list of residents and their contact details of residents that were living at a dare Tower on the third, fourth, and fifth floors on 31st October 2015. Barbara noted that we were surprised to have received this as we have fully cooperated and kept nothing hidden from
01:16:24 cooperated and kept nothing hidden from the fire brigade during their investigation. And then it says this. Robert has spoken to Laura and Rock and their view is that we need to pass this to legal. Robert asked Barbara to speak
01:16:35 to legal. Robert asked Barbara to speak to Laura and update her. Um do do you well does the rock here refer to you? I presume so. Yes. Uh do you recall having a conversation with Robert Black about uh
01:16:48 conversation with Robert Black about uh the enforcement notices in respect of Adair Tower? Um,
01:16:54 Um, I
01:16:56 I don't have a clear recollection of that, but I I that's not to say that he didn't.
01:17:07 Uh, so you just can't remember one way or the other. I I I'm afraid I can't remember what No,
01:17:15 No, this would have been I I I don't remember. No, we haven't been able to find a a minute or a written record of of of the meeting that's referred to here. Um,
01:17:26 here. Um, I know you can't recall one way or the other, but could you explain why there is no written record of it? Well, I I can't because if he it normally would have been at one of my
01:17:37 normally would have been at one of my housing policy boards that he would have come. Did you uh habitually or perhaps ever speak to Robert Black about housing matters
01:17:47 matters uh
01:17:49 uh and and not have it minuteed or recorded in some way? Certainly not habitually. Um there were a couple of occasions I can remember when we went for example I remember
01:18:01 when we went for example I remember going and having a coffee there was a new uh under the trellic tower there was a new um kind of furniture social enterprise with a cafe. So we I I there
01:18:13 enterprise with a cafe. So we I I there were maybe two or three occasions when I had an informal discussion with Robert, but I don't I don't think we would ever have discussed something
01:18:26 discussed something like this in one of those, right?
01:18:31 right? Uh well, the note certainly records this fact of a conversation. Um, assuming because you can't remember one way or the other, assuming that the the minute here is correct and accurately records
01:18:44 here is correct and accurately records the event, um, are you able to explain why you were involved in conversations with Robert Black and Laura Johnson about the notices and what to do about enforcement? I I think it would have been
01:18:57 I I think it would have been Laura and Robert Black wanting to make sure that I, as the cabinet member, am informed of as to what's what's happening. Uh it it says that it says their view which includes you is that we
01:19:10 their view which includes you is that we need to pass this to legal. I I don't I I I can't remember what was being passed to legal and why it would have been passed to legal. I I don't I don't know. Well, would it have been part of your
01:19:21 Well, would it have been part of your function at the time to have advised Robert Black together with or perhaps without Laura Johnson uh to pass this question to legal? Certainly, I wouldn't
01:19:33 question to legal? Certainly, I wouldn't have done that without Laura Johnson. If this did happen, I would have imagined it to have been, as I say, at a housing and policy board where he would have raised it. I would have been there with
01:19:44 raised it. I would have been there with Laura Johnson and um I might have shared her view based on her advice that it should be passed illegal, but I can't remember that.
01:19:56 remember that. Very well. Mr. Mr. Chairman, we we've got one uh more document on this line of examination. You want to put it now? Yes, why not? If that's if that's all right. Um can we just look at your first
01:20:07 right. Um can we just look at your first statement, please? First of all, uh I said one. I'm so sorry. I think there are probably two. Um but never mind. We can take them quickly. If you go to your first statement at page nine, paragraph
01:20:18 first statement at page nine, paragraph 36, please. You can see that you say there that Laura Johnson told you about the Trek Tower fire uh at uh on the 20th of April 2017 by email.
01:20:31 of April 2017 by email. Uh and if we look at that email, it's at RBK43412
01:20:36 at the foot of page one.
01:20:42 Uh where she says, "Dear, well, doesn't she? She doesn't say dear." She says, "Councel FM, there was a fire last night at the Trellic tower. Below is an explanation of what happened in the current situation. And you responded to
01:20:53 current situation. And you responded to her email just above that uh by saying on the 20th of April, "Thank you for letting me know. Fortunately, it sounds as though nobody was badly hurt. I guess we don't yet know the cause of the fire."
01:21:04 fire." And has this incident given any cause to worry about the safety of the building or the procedures in place when a fire breaks out, or has the incident provided good reassurance that correct procedures and safety mechanisms are in place? Please keep me posted as you find out
01:21:16 Please keep me posted as you find out more. and she responds the same day attaching a response that the TMO had produced for her which is in fact at RBK50's 943
01:21:27 RBK50's 943 if we can just look at that
01:21:31 and this is a a schematic document uh which sets out a list of questions about Trellic Tower including water pressure. Uh ignore the highlights uh on
01:21:42 pressure. Uh ignore the highlights uh on page one. And if we go to page two um you can see uh that there's reference to under paragraph 16 what is the drill in an emergency is there one there's no
01:21:53 in an emergency is there one there's no drill as there's a stay put strategy if LFB assessment on arrival requires any evacuation they will instigate this there are other there are other topics in there as well did you look at this document at the time do you remember
01:22:05 document at the time do you remember um I I don't specifically remember but I you know I imagine I would have right Did you follow up with Laura Johnson about the fire prior before
01:22:16 Johnson about the fire prior before reading her report to the Housing Property Scrutiny Committee on it?
01:22:22 on it? Um,
01:22:24 Um, I cannot remember now without being able to go back and look at my documents, but I seem to remember her. I do remember there being a few back and forths and on the whole again it was reassuring
01:22:38 the whole again it was reassuring um the information that I was given.
01:22:44 Mr. Chairman, is that a convenient moment now? Yes, I think it is. Good. Thank you. We'll have a break now. Mr. Fieldsing Melon. We'll come back please at 20 to 12 and then uh and please don't talk to
01:22:55 12 and then uh and please don't talk to anyone about your evidence over the break. All right. Thank you.
01:23:07 Thank you. 20 to 12.
01:39:29 Yes. Would you ask Mr. Fielding Melon to come back in, please?
01:39:44 Right. Mr. Fielding Melon, ready to carry on?
01:39:46 carry on? I am
01:39:46 I am good. Thank you very much. Yes, Mr. Mr. Mr. Fielding Melon. I'd like to ask you now about aspects of communications with residents of Grenfell Tower, if I may. And I'm going
01:39:57 Grenfell Tower, if I may. And I'm going to start, if I can, with the petition that you may recall having been presented to the HPSC in December 2015. And you cover this in your first witness statement at paragraphs 84 to 85 of page
01:40:08 statement at paragraphs 84 to 85 of page 24. Uh and if we can go to 85 please on page 24.
01:40:23 Uh you say there once Ryden commenced work on site. This paragraph 85. Uh I became aware of various complaints about the management of the project as well as as about the behavior and attitude of
01:40:35 as about the behavior and attitude of both Ryden and the TMO. I noted that the TMO was responding to these complaints. For example, in July 2015, there was an email exchange between councelor Blakeman and Peter Madison, and you
01:40:46 Blakeman and Peter Madison, and you exhibit that in which he responded to the concerns that had been expressed. Nevertheless, the complaints continued and on 2nd December 2015, there was a motion about the Grenfell Tower debated at full council. And then a petition
01:40:59 at full council. And then a petition signed by 60 people was handed in by councelor Blakeman requesting that the housing and property scrutiny committee undertake an urgent review of the TMO and Ryden's management of the refurbishment project. That's what you
01:41:10 refurbishment project. That's what you say. Uh and uh you you say particularly that you'd noted that the TMO was responding to complaints. Were you surprised when the petition was presented?
01:41:23 Um, I wouldn't describe my reaction as surprised.
01:41:33 You weren't surprised. So, is this something that you saw coming?
01:41:39 Um, again, I surprised is too strong. I wasn't necessarily expecting it, but uh petitions were I mean this wasn't the first petition that had been handed in
01:41:50 first petition that had been handed in about Grenville project. Um I So yeah, I I I knew there were ongoing issues which is why it had been debated at full council. Um
01:42:03 at full council. Um did you realize or did you see that um the petitioners were claiming that their concerns, their day-to-day concerns had been belittled and sidelined? Did you notice that? I I I I read the prayer of the petition.
01:42:14 the petition. Read the prayer. Were you surprised? Well, let me ask you. What was your reaction to reading the prayer?
01:42:22 Um,
01:42:25 I might need to see the prayer.
01:42:31 Uh, well, all right. Uh, you can do that if you need to. You you don't have a do do I take it from that that you don't have independent recollection of it?
01:42:42 recollection of it? I don't remember the ex the exact details of what the prayer said in full. I remember the general themes and I remember it being discussed and I
01:42:54 remember it being discussed and I remember the email you so right. Well, we can look at the prayer um in a moment, but do do you remember whether you had a particular view about whether the whether it was necessary to
01:43:06 whether the whether it was necessary to have a review of the refurbishment project?
01:43:17 A review about what aspects? Well, I'm asking you, did you think a review of the project was necessary? That was the subject matter of the petition. Um my my so the petition as far as I recall was submitted to the
01:43:29 far as I recall was submitted to the scrutiny committee asking the scrutiny committee to take a look and I remember replying saying I will need to defer to the chairman of the scrutiny committee to decide how he and his committee want
01:43:41 to decide how he and his committee want to react. Um I then went away. I wasn't there at the scrutiny committee meeting. Um, but I remember being told or seeing
01:43:52 Um, but I remember being told or seeing that the upshot was that the TMO board was going to do a review and indeed I think it was agreed that the housing and property scrutiny committee would go on
01:44:04 property scrutiny committee would go on to do a review about lessons learned in the future.
01:44:14 Right. You you you thought it was agreed that the H uh PSC the the scrutiny committee would do a review
01:44:21 review at some again maybe my timing I know that at some stage it was agreed at the housing and property scrutiny committee that after their current working groups
01:44:33 that after their current working groups had done the current list of projects they were working on. They would undertake a review to try and learn lessons
01:44:43 lessons for future refurbishment projects. Right. Well, let's see how this this this panned out. Can we please go to RBK 403567?
01:45:01 This is an email uh uh it's an email chain which starts if we can go to that please on page bottom of page one and over to page two
01:45:12 bottom of page one and over to page two very bottom of page one you can see it's an email of the 7th of December from Laura Johnson to you and councelor Marshall and at the top of page two she says this a petition was handed into
01:45:24 says this a petition was handed into council on Tuesday night by councelor Blakeman although the prayer and petition organization has clearly been organized by Eddie Defan. If you would like to discuss with Robert Black or Peter Madison what they've done with
01:45:35 Peter Madison what they've done with regard to communicating with residents, councelor Blakeman, Eddie, and how they think Ryden have performed, I'm sure they would be only too happy to discuss this with you. I think it's fair to say Peter is exhausted from the amount of
01:45:46 Peter is exhausted from the amount of time stroke responses Eddie and councelor Blakeman have taken on this project. The TMO will of course be be happy to assist in whatever way they can, but I don't think either myself or Robert have the resources to undertake a
01:45:57 Robert have the resources to undertake a fullscale review with interviews of residents to meet the demands of the petitioners. I would like your guidance on how you wish to respond to the petition. And then you can see um in the
01:46:08 petition. And then you can see um in the email that she uh um copies uh the um prayer from the petition uh in the italics and she says or it says this. We
01:46:21 italics and she says or it says this. We the undersigned residents of Grenfell Tower ask the chairman of the housing and property scrutiny committee to undertake an urgent scrutiny of the TMO and Ryden's management of the refurbishment project currently underway at Grenfell Tower. Time and again,
01:46:33 at Grenfell Tower. Time and again, residents views have been ignored or downplayed. Despite interventions from our MP, Victoria Borick, and our ward counselors, our day-to-day concerns are belittled and sidelined. While we
01:46:44 belittled and sidelined. While we recognize that once completed, the tower will at long last be fit for the 21st century. During this process, we have had to endure living conditions that at times have been intolerable. We understand that the council will be
01:46:55 understand that the council will be commencing a major reprogram of regeneration throughout the burough and that this may involve refurbishment rather than demolition of some other tower blocks. In view of this, it is vital that all the lessons from the
01:47:06 vital that all the lessons from the Granfell Tower project are learned so that the terrible daily living conditions inflicted upon us for so long are not replicated elsewhere. As part of this investigation, the residents of Granfell Tower ask that their views and
01:47:19 Granfell Tower ask that their views and experiences be canvased and included in the scrutiny report. Uh
01:47:30 would you like me to Well, well, hang on. Um so my first question going back to you because you wanted to see the the prayer of the petition is what was your reaction to the claim here uh that the resident's
01:47:42 the claim here uh that the resident's day-to-day concerns had been belittled and sidelined? that was that didn't strike me as uh a fair representation of how either the TMO or the council had um
01:47:57 how either the TMO or the council had um responded to concerns from what I had seen. Um
01:48:05 seen. Um both the TMO and the council took account of and responded to and you know tried to reassure residents about
01:48:17 know tried to reassure residents about the various different concerns and issues that were raised from when I became cabinet member in May 2013 through to this. And I've given many of those examples in my written statement.
01:48:30 those examples in my written statement. As you've already um seen, I and the leader had met with residents about their concerns. Um I'd responded to emails. Laura Johnson had responded to
01:48:42 emails. Laura Johnson had responded to emails. Um the TMO had responded to emails. So I did not feel that their views were being ignored or belittled or
01:48:53 views were being ignored or belittled or sidelined. You then respond to her on page one
01:48:59 page one uh the next day 8th December. Uh and it's an email you spent send at 1610 and it says this. Dear Miss Johnson, as the
01:49:10 it says this. Dear Miss Johnson, as the petition is addressed to the chair of HPSC, I must defer to councelor Marshall.
01:49:15 Marshall. However, I would agree with you that both the housing department and the TMO must be mindful of their limited manpower and resources and must make sure that they spread such limited resources as evenly and fairly across
01:49:26 resources as evenly and fairly across the council's entire HR estate rather than focusing predominantly wherever the loudest complaints are coming from. The council has acknowledged the disruption and inconvenience caused by such major
01:49:37 and inconvenience caused by such major refurbishment and improvement works being done to Grrenville Tower, but I believe that that is the inevitable price that must be paid by the residents in order to have their flats brought up to the very good modern standards. I
01:49:48 to the very good modern standards. I trust that both the TMO and Ryden will continue to work with residents of GT on a case-byase basis, helping to fix individual problems that have resulted from the refurbishment, as the council committed to in the amended motion last
01:50:00 committed to in the amended motion last week.
01:50:01 week. Is it is it fair to say that Laura Johnson was not in favor of a review by the council? I think what she says um is that
01:50:15 I think what she says um is that she wanted members to be mindful of her and the TMO's uh limited resources which as I paraphrase in this email um need to be
01:50:30 paraphrase in this email um need to be uh used to look after all nine and a half thousand properties across the HR estate. We've gone into some detail yesterday about the um financial and statutory constraints
01:50:42 statutory constraints faced by the HR. Indeed, I saw the end of Amanda Johnson's evidence where she highlighted some of the challenges that um all councils had to deal with
01:50:54 um all councils had to deal with relating to policies um in edicts that had come down from different central governments. um and those were real difficulties and challenges and she was just wanting to
01:51:05 challenges and she was just wanting to make sure that members understood those limitations. Um, so I think she was, as she says, she it would be difficult for her to do a I can't remember how she phrased it, but a a full kind of
01:51:19 phrased it, but a a full kind of detailed questionnaire survey doorto-door um with her resources, but she's willing to to do a review as I can't remember how she phrased it, but
01:51:30 can't remember how she phrased it, but it's there. Uh, do I take it from this email back to her that you yourself were not in favor of the kind of review that the residents were seeking?
01:51:41 were seeking? I
01:51:42 I I I wouldn't say that's what I was saying. No, I I was deferring to councelor Marshall. I wanted to let him uh guide, but I was aware and I
01:51:54 uh guide, but I was aware and I understood Miss Johnson's concerns about the the limited resources and the need to make sure that they were spent fairly across all nine and a half thousand
01:52:05 across all nine and a half thousand homes. Would it be fair to characterize your response to her uh as essentially one of taking her her her side, agreeing
01:52:17 one of taking her her her side, agreeing with her um about whether or not the review that had been sought by the residents uh should be undertaken? I don't think so. I I I'm saying I
01:52:30 I don't think so. I I I'm saying I understand her concern. I also leave it specifically to the person to whom the petition is addressed to to come to his own decision about this. And I go on to
01:52:42 own decision about this. And I go on to say that, you know, I I understand the inconvenience and disruption that's been caused. The council has acknowledged that. It it was not easy for residents to have to live through that. Totally
01:52:55 to have to live through that. Totally sympathize with that. And I go on to say that I trust the TMO and Ryden will continue to work with residents to solve their problems on a case-by case basis.
01:53:06 their problems on a case-by case basis. Yes, Mr. Fielding Melon, we can read the text of both emails. I'm just seeking you seeking really to accept the fact uh that in this email, although you had deferred to councelor Marshall, you thought fit to express your own views about it and those were largely in line
01:53:18 about it and those were largely in line with what Miss Johnson had stated. Isn't that is that what was happening? I've I've told you that I I I certainly did understand and sympathize with her
01:53:29 did understand and sympathize with her concern about limited resources. Well, you're certainly not saying you think it's a jolly good idea that there should be a full learning review undertaken independently and impartially by somebody in respect of the Granfell
01:53:40 by somebody in respect of the Granfell Tower refurbishment so that full lessons can be learned for the future. Well, you're not saying that, are you? I I I don't specifically say that, but actually later on I I make a point of
01:53:52 actually later on I I make a point of saying in meetings with David Collins and afterwards about the importance of learning lessons. I I did think that was very important. I agreed with that part of the petition. I never said that was not important.
01:54:05 I never said that was not important. So let's see how this then plays out next. Uh if we look at councelor Marshall's response to you in the same email chain, uh he uh says halfway down your screen, same day, um my instinct
01:54:18 your screen, same day, um my instinct was to add an oral agenda item to our next meeting rather than a report. What do you both think? I'm sure a majority of members could be pre-briefed to understand how to play it. Now, he's
01:54:30 understand how to play it. Now, he's suggesting, as you can see there, an oral item rather than a report. Do you know why that was? I think that he considered that would give the
01:54:42 he considered that would give the residents who uh signed the petition the chance to come and have their say at the housing and property security committee, make sure that their views were not
01:54:53 make sure that their views were not ignored or belittled or sidelined. They were going to be given the chance to speak directly to the scrutiny committee, make their case. Um but he was an oral agenda item would be one
01:55:05 was an oral agenda item would be one which
01:55:06 which uh perhaps required less manpower um from housing officers. So he's it's a kind of compromise between the the the
01:55:17 kind of compromise between the the the full-on detailed review um and Miss Johnson's uh explanation that there is limited resource available. Well, no, with great respect. This is
01:55:29 Well, no, with great respect. This is about why uh the next meeting should have have this issue as an oral agenda item rather than a report. So why was that?
01:55:41 So why was that? What was so what was so intensive about in my my understanding of what he meant and you'd have to ask him but I think there was a report there was a written report at the scrutiny committing so it
01:55:53 report at the scrutiny committing so it wasn't about that it was about being able to give the petitioners the chance to have an or a a a discussion at the scrutiny committee rather than going away and commissioning again I can't
01:56:06 away and commissioning again I can't remember how it's described in the prayer but this uh you know. Oh, I see. So you you you you read this, did you? As councelor Marshall suggesting that um is this right that
01:56:19 suggesting that um is this right that the petitioners should be able to address the HPSC under an oral agenda item rather than their producing? That's that's my interpretation because that's what happened. Right. When he says I'm sure a majority
01:56:30 Right. When he says I'm sure a majority of members could be pre-briefed to understand how to play it, what did you think he meant by that? I can't be sure, but I now would think
01:56:42 I can't be sure, but I now would think that he is uh trying to reassure Laura Johnson that he would pre-brief the the scooting committee members about her concerns about um doing a the
01:56:56 concerns about um doing a the limitations and resource manpower limitations in terms of doing the full uh range of interviews etc. that was asked for in the petition.
01:57:07 asked for in the petition. Right.
01:57:09 Right. And what would what would the sort of pre-briefing to understand how to play it in involve? I I don't know. I wasn't on the committee, so it wouldn't have been No, I reading it at face value, it looks
01:57:20 No, I reading it at face value, it looks like what's being suggested by Mr. Marshall and obviously he'll have to answer for this, but I is is some sort of quiet on the side discussion to tap people up to to to influence them as to
01:57:33 people up to to to influence them as to how to decide what to do with the petition. Now, you read this email briefing. Is that how you understood it? Pre-briefing to me would be more making sure that all members of the committee or the majority members of the committee
01:57:44 or the majority members of the committee um had a had a full understanding of what has been done to date. It's a briefing rather than Well, I I not really.
01:57:55 Well, I I not really. Well, he can. It says to understand how to play it. To pre-briefed to understand how to play it. Not pre-brief so they know the facts, but pre-brief so they understand how to play it. Isn't that really an
01:58:06 how to play it. Isn't that really an indication of really sort of helping people along to make the right decision? You'll need to ask him that. What was your understanding of? I've told you. Okay.
01:58:17 Okay. Uh and then um I if uh we look at the next two emails in the chain, you say uh I won't be there. See my early email. Can you speak to majority members
01:58:28 Can you speak to majority members beforehand? Speak to them about what? But what he he's just saying I'm sure they could be pre-briefed. I'm saying I'm not going to be there. So
01:58:39 I'm saying I'm not going to be there. So if that's what you want to do, you'd best do it. Yeah. Yes. Can you speak to majority members beforehand to do what? What What did you want, Mr. What did you want? Councelor Marshall. Well, he is he is suggesting that they
01:58:50 Well, he is he is suggesting that they be pre-briefed to understand how to play it. I'm saying I won't be there. So, effectively, if that's what you want to do, you will need to do it. Uh, yes, Mr. Fielding, I'm going to ask the question. Um, you see, I've asked
01:59:02 the question. Um, you see, I've asked you already about his sentence. You then come back and say, can you speak to majority members beforehand? Is is that a a a response to his suggestion that a majority of members could be pre-briefed
01:59:14 majority of members could be pre-briefed to understand how to play it? Yes.
01:59:18 Yes. Yes.
01:59:22 And his response was yes dot dot dot. Were you suggesting that councelor Marshall speak to a majority of conservative party members? Yes. That's what I Well, again, it
01:59:33 Yes. That's what I Well, again, it wasn't me. He suggested it first. Do you know whether he actually did speak to the majority? I do not know. Uh let's then go to TMO101
01:59:47 Uh let's then go to TMO101 3234 please.
01:59:52 Now this is an email chain from the 11th of May 2016. So this is 5 months into 2016 after the scrutiny committee meeting Mr. Fielding
02:00:03 scrutiny committee meeting Mr. Fielding Melon and after the review. It's the day on which the outcome of the board review was presented to the HPSC. Uh and you can see the email uh uh from
02:00:14 Uh and you can see the email uh uh from Robert Black to uh you and councelor Marshall copy to Laura Johnson subject re-scrutiny meeting this evening. Uh and there's an attachment uh and it says dear counselors thank you
02:00:27 uh and it says dear counselors thank you for sharing this. I spoken to our company secretary and she has spoken to RBKC governance services and we are advised of the following. Uh and then um you refer in the second uh and uh third
02:00:41 you refer in the second uh and uh third paragraphs to a conflict uh around uh councelor Blakeman. You see that I didn't refer to it. The the email refers to it. Yes. Now this is an email response to an
02:00:54 Yes. Now this is an email response to an email uh which had come a little bit earlier. If you go to page two uh which comes from uh you to uh councelor Marshall and you say this. Dear Quentin, I think HPSC needs Judith to be clear
02:01:06 I think HPSC needs Judith to be clear about her role as a board member of the TMO and she needs to be guided about whether that is an interest to be declared
02:01:13 declared and what is the most appropriate forum for her to make some of these points within the TMO or at HPSC. I've also copied in officers so they can get early sight of the issues raised below so that they can respond in your mind to discuss
02:01:25 they can respond in your mind to discuss all these issues tonight. Uh and uh as I've shown you, Robert Black responds to that at page one. What was the email below? Can I see it? Yes, of course. Of course you can.
02:01:37 Yes, of course. Of course you can. Absolutely. Page three.
02:01:43 Uh we can look at page three. We can go to the bottom of the email chain. We can we can scroll slowly through it if you like. If we go to the very bottom at page five, we can see I'm say sorry page uh three, we can see a long uh email
02:01:57 uh three, we can see a long uh email which is advanced comments about the report. You see that? And we scroll slowly down through page four which is a series of comments on
02:02:07 on these are from Judith Blakeman. These are from Judith Blakeman. And I'll show you the signature. Mhm.
02:02:11 Mhm. Uh B the bottom of page. Uh
02:02:18 sorry, it's a very tricky email to understand. It appears to be um a forwarded message. Uh and it ends on page six and it starts, "Dear Quentin, to save
02:02:30 and it starts, "Dear Quentin, to save time this evening, see some advanced comments below, Judith." And then there's a lot of comments.
02:02:38 uh I'm not going to get into the detail of that and we could spend a very long time doing that. Uh and I'm not sure our next witness would appreciate it. But then if we look at page two, this is what you're
02:02:49 we look at page two, this is what you're referring to. You see? Mhm.
02:02:52 Mhm. Uh and then uh at page one, we've had the response from Robert Black. I've shown you
02:02:57 shown you the same the same day. Uh and he's he's raised, as I say, some clear concerns about Judith Blakeman's role. Now, um we can look at that. It's
02:03:08 role. Now, um we can look at that. It's a lengthy document, but he's raised questions about conflicts of interest around Councelor Blakeman. You weren't a member of the HPSC at this stage. Uh, but we've seen that you are the one who
02:03:20 but we've seen that you are the one who who raises questions about her role as a board member. Uh, which I've shown you. Why were you raising those concerns about Judith Blakeman's potential for conflict of interest?
02:03:32 conflict of interest? So, from memory, I do think that um it had been flagged to me by Laura Johnson that there were uh
02:03:44 that there were uh potential risks around councelor Blakeman
02:03:48 Blakeman being well potentially conflicted and so I I
02:03:53 I I would have asked about that. Um could you explain the nature of the potential conflict which Laura Johnson had flagged to you?
02:04:04 which Laura Johnson had flagged to you? So I do remember it was something which counselors when we were appointed to outside bodies. So um a member of another trust or this that organization
02:04:16 another trust or this that organization like the TMO we were told that one normally had you know statutory duties as a trustee or a director. um there and
02:04:27 as a trustee or a director. um there and one had to be careful and mindful about uh
02:04:33 uh when one's fulfilling that statutory responsibility and when one's acting as a counselor and I think that had been flagged to me and so I was in turn
02:04:46 flagged to me and so I was in turn flagging it on it was the let me see if I can get to the bottom of this more simply was the conflict as you understood it being flagged to you I don't think I was I don't think I say there is a conflict. I ask whether there
02:04:58 there is a conflict. I ask whether there might be. I think all right. You're quite right. It was the potential for conflict that had been flagged to you. One between uh Judith Blakeman's um role as counselor and her
02:05:12 Blakeman's um role as counselor and her role as nominated member of the TMO board. Was that the nature? My my understanding was the potential conflict between her role Yes. as a counselor and a member of the housing
02:05:23 counselor and a member of the housing property scrutiny committee and her role as a board member. I wouldn't say it mattered whether she was just because she I my understanding is that it's her statute duties as a board member not
02:05:35 statute duties as a board member not just because she was a board member nominated by RBKC. Those roles that she had adopt that she had had those three roles in fact were roles that she'd had for a very long
02:05:46 roles that she'd had for a very long time weren't they? She was certainly a counselor for a long time. I can't remember when she was first made a board member of the TMO. Can you explain why this issue was being
02:05:57 Can you explain why this issue was being raised with you and you are raising it with councelor Marshall? I think I think Hold on. Sorry. There's a there's a question coming. We don't have to finish it. Um it's the way this works. Um could
02:06:08 it. Um it's the way this works. Um could you please explain why this question was only or this potential for conflict was only being flagged now when councelor Blakeman is coming in with her comments on the board report about the Grenfell
02:06:21 on the board report about the Grenfell Tower project and not at any earlier time.
02:06:24 time. I think for the reason it the kind of answer is in your question which is it's discussing the board report. She was a member of the board. It's a report going out in the name of the TMO board of
02:06:35 out in the name of the TMO board of which she was a member. I think that's why there was a specific concern.
02:06:39 concern. Did you understand that TMO board members who sat on the housing and property scrutiny committee were not expected to participate in discussions about the TMAO? I that was not my expectation. Indeed, I
02:06:51 I that was not my expectation. Indeed, I didn't know exactly how it might have been fine that she just needed to declare the interest. Um I was I was asking questions. I didn't want it to cause problems later on when it had been
02:07:03 cause problems later on when it had been flagged to me. So I thought better to raise it as a potential concern beforehand. Was the purpose of this to identify potential conflict? So in some way either to silence or negate Judith
02:07:14 either to silence or negate Judith Blakeman's contribution to the board report?
02:07:17 report? Absolutely not. Right. Um let's go to RBK30 32130.
02:07:24 This is uh a the minutes of the HPSC meeting on the 6th of January 2016 scrolling back I to earlier in the year
02:07:35 scrolling back I to earlier in the year and you you may remember that meeting. I wasn't there but I've I've I've heard about it and read about it. Yes. Uh and you exhibit this minute at RFM51
02:07:46 RFM51 and you can see who was there and who wasn't there. You can see that uh in the list of counselors, Quentyn Marshall was there, Sam Macka was there, Judith Blakeman was there, and there's a long list of others in attendance. You are
02:07:57 list of others in attendance. You are not there. Uh if you go to page five, please, you can see the conclusion. Do I take it that from what you've just said that you would have seen the minute
02:08:08 said that you would have seen the minute soon after the meeting or soon after the minute was finalized? Uh I think I would have seen the minute when it was circulated of the papers for the next HPSC meeting.
02:08:19 HPSC meeting. Right. Uh uh and do you do you remember? Well, let's look at what I want to show you first. If you go to page five, last paragraph above A5, it says, "In conclusion, the chairman agreed that a
02:08:30 conclusion, the chairman agreed that a working group would be commissioned at some point in the future, but that this was dependent on a number of factors, including the conclusion of an of existing working groups and the review work conducted by the TMO.
02:08:43 when you saw this minute uh at the next um HPSC meeting, did you read that paragraph? Um do you remember? I don't remember, but I'm familiar with
02:08:55 I don't remember, but I'm familiar with it now. And that's what I was talking about earlier on in my evidence. Yes. Do do you remember agreeing at the time, at least in your own mind, with the conclusion reached by the committee
02:09:06 the conclusion reached by the committee as expressed by the chairman in that paragraph? that they would Yeah. Yeah. I mean, it wasn't my decision, but I thought it sounded like a sensible conclusion.
02:09:17 sounded like a sensible conclusion. Right. Do you know then, having seen the decision uh when it would be that the working group would be established, if at all?
02:09:28 Sorry. Is your question? Do I did I know then exactly how long in the future it would be before it was established or are you asking me whether I know now when it was established?
02:09:43 Uh uh no. My question was did did you know then having seen the decision at the next meeting you saw the decision and it recorded um what your understanding was about the
02:09:55 um what your understanding was about the time frame when this working group would be established my understanding was that it would be subject to uh the conclusion of the existing working groups
02:10:06 existing working groups and when would that be I wasn't sure so did you have any idea about when this working group would be set up even vaguely
02:10:17 vaguely it would have been I would have expected to be months rather than years and this was I my understanding was this is a working group looking at what
02:10:28 is a working group looking at what lessons could be learned for future refurbishment projects of a similous nature in scale um and there were not
02:10:39 nature in scale um and there were not imminent such projects in the pipeline So I was fairly uh relaxed that there was good time for that to be done. Now we do know that in due course the
02:10:51 Now we do know that in due course the TMO board did produce its own review report and you exhibit that final document as RFM52. It's at RBK 403513.
02:11:04 This is the final version
02:11:10 and it's dated the 31st of March. Did you see this document at the time do you think
02:11:18 think or do you but this is the board report or do you think you saw the report produced by Laura Johnson for uh the HPSC
02:11:26 HPSC later in the year in May? I I now I'm I can't remember exactly. I think I have seen the TMO board report itself,
02:11:37 itself, right?
02:11:37 right? But I can't remember exactly when it was sent to me. Right. Let's see if I can help you a bit better. Um, can we have both up at the same time? Please keep this document on the screen. Let's have up at the same
02:11:49 the screen. Let's have up at the same time RBK 302438.
02:12:02 Um, you can see that the uh lefth hand document is the the actual board review report itself, 31st of March 2016. And on the right of the screen is the document Laura Johnson produced for the
02:12:13 document Laura Johnson produced for the housing and property scrutiny committee dated the 11th of May uh 2016. Right. And the former purpose is to produce is to provide the board with
02:12:24 produce is to provide the board with information and recommendations. And on the right hand side, it's to provide the housing property and scrutiny committee with information and recommendations. You see, and and just of those two, do
02:12:35 You see, and and just of those two, do you remember seeing the one on the left, the March 2016 report? I'm afraid I right now I I I look so similar. I can't be sure. If I have
02:12:51 similar. I can't be sure. If I have submitted the one on the left in my evidence, then that means I would have seen it. But I I right now I'm afraid I can't be certain. Right. Uh
02:13:02 Right. Uh if we look down at uh the um
02:13:08 um one on the left, I think we'll probably look at first. If we can go to um
02:13:19 scroll down, I think is probably the best way to deal with that. Scroll down through it. You can see what what's covered. Um on on page two is the background to the report. If we go to
02:13:30 background to the report. If we go to page three, you can see um the topics. Item three, resident consultation. Item four, position of the HIU in the hallway. Item five, allegations of
02:13:41 hallway. Item five, allegations of threats, lies and intimidation. Six is response to complaints. Seven, quality of work and site management. Eight is compensation. And nine are conclusions. You see that? M
02:13:52 You see that? M um and if we go and do the same with the right hand side document uh please start on page one scroll down
02:14:03 you can see if you go to the next it's similar in fact almost identical and again you get recommendations under paragraph two and conclusions under paragraph three uh where you can see group recognized that there were
02:14:14 group recognized that there were significant challenges with the project and acknowledged that residents would have experienced inconvenience due to the nature of this type of construction work and the constraints of the particular design of Grenfield Tower, disruption included, lots of bullet
02:14:25 disruption included, lots of bullet points there. Paragraph 3.4 is a doornocking exercise, etc. Um, just looking at paragraphs um par three uh over on page three and over on page
02:14:37 over on page three and over on page four, do you remember seeing those conclusions? Are you talking about the one on the right now? Yes.
02:14:42 Yes. Uh yes.
02:14:44 Uh yes. Yes. Were you content with the outcome of the review?
02:14:52 Uh yes. Uh
02:14:55 Uh do were you concerned that the review lacked independence in light of the fact that it was conducted by the TMO board? Well, no. I thought that the so I think
02:15:07 Well, no. I thought that the so I think I touched on this yesterday, but my view was that the TMO board was an independent entity with a majority of resident and lease holders on it. Their
02:15:22 resident and lease holders on it. Their whole purpose, the reason that the TMO was set up under the right to manage was to ensure responsive management of the housing stock for and led by the
02:15:33 housing stock for and led by the residents of the council housing stock. Um, within the board, not only were there a majority of tenants and lease holders, there were also a number of independent
02:15:44 independent board members. Um and my understanding is that the chairwoman of this group was one of those independent board members. Is that Paul Fence?
02:15:55 Is that Paul Fence? Yes. And I I felt reassured that the the the board would um take these issues seriously and look
02:16:07 um take these issues seriously and look into them thoroughly and the the report that I read gave me that impression. Yes.
02:16:16 Yes. Just breaking that down a little bit, is is it the case then on that answer that you thought that the TMO board was sufficiently independent and impartial
02:16:28 sufficiently independent and impartial a a a collection of people uh that it could examine objectively, robustly and ruthlessly independently
02:16:39 independently the activities of the employees of the TMO in relation to the Grenfield Tower project.
02:16:47 project. So I believed that the TMO board was set up to be have a majority of members who are residents for the to make sure that
02:16:58 are residents for the to make sure that it was responsive and cared about how the executive functioning of the TMO uh treated residents because it was them.
02:17:11 treated residents because it was them. And I was also aware that over the last few years the TMO had done a lot of work to try and strengthen the um board both
02:17:22 to try and strengthen the um board both in terms of uh elections for the board reaching out increasing number of members, increasing how many people voted, who could stand and training for board members. And I did feel reassured
02:17:35 board members. And I did feel reassured that the board would be uh a suitable uh body to conduct such a review. Do you know what objective factors or
02:17:46 Do you know what objective factors or criteria the TMO was measuring itself and Ryden against when producing this document or either document?
02:17:57 document or either document? I'm not sure. Can you give a bit more detail about what you're asking? Let me let me let me start with the lefthand side document. In fact, don't worry about the RB about the Laura Johnson report. When the board produced its report and its conclusions and
02:18:09 report and its conclusions and recommendations about the Grenfell Tower project, do you know what objective factors or criteria the TMO board was using to measure its performance? And I
02:18:20 using to measure its performance? And I say its, I mean the TMO's performance.
02:18:29 I'm I mean I I need to from again from memory when you went through the different particular
02:18:40 through the different particular complaints. Um
02:18:43 Um it it tried looking at what evidence there was to back up those complaints. I think it spoke probably to the well there at the top the group were advised different methods of quantity quality
02:18:55 different methods of quantity quality control site management by the surveyors clarks of works and site agent conclude I mean I when I read that report I got the sense they went through each of the different complaints trying to
02:19:06 different complaints trying to understand the basis for those complaints speaking to the people against whom the complaints were being made and coming to a judgment yes
02:19:15 yes which was a group of independent and board members who had a vested interest in making sure that the TMO was a responsive organization to its residents
02:19:26 responsive organization to its residents because
02:19:28 because that included them. Yes. Uh I understand what you're saying. My question was a slightly different one. Do you know what those individuals uh the independent board members who had a vested interest in making sure that
02:19:39 a vested interest in making sure that the TMO was responsive etc. what standards, what objective criteria existing in the in the world uh were were being applied by them in order to judge the
02:19:50 by them in order to judge the performance of the TMA.
02:19:54 I don't and I don't necessarily think they were judging this. The point of this was to respond to particular complaints. It wasn't a performance review of the whole TMO. point of this
02:20:06 review of the whole TMO. point of this review was to review specific allegations and complaints that had been made about the the management of the refurbishment project at Grenfell Tower.
02:20:17 refurbishment project at Grenfell Tower. Now, we've got no evidence, at least we've seen no evidence, and maybe you can correct me about this. I don't know that the residents of Granfell Tower were interviewed as part of this review
02:20:28 were interviewed as part of this review or had any say in what information the review should have in front of it. We've seen no evidence to that effect. Are you able to help us with that? Um, I
02:20:39 Um, I seem to remember being informed that the TMO did do a door knocking exercise um after the petition was lodged. I seem to
02:20:51 after the petition was lodged. I seem to remember over the kind of Christmas period if unless my memory might be failing me, but I seem to remember them knocking on something like 72 or 77 speaking to that many. um and for
02:21:03 speaking to that many. um and for example finding no evidence of any bullying and harassment. That that's that's what I remember but that's I was reading from this. So if I haven't I haven't seen the
02:21:14 this. So if I haven't I haven't seen the actual uh video footage of them doing this door knocking or any evidence like that.
02:21:19 that. So your answer to my question is you you is the door knocking exercise that you seem to recall. Did you at the at the time do you remember do do you think that the doornocking exercise conducted
02:21:30 that the doornocking exercise conducted in respect of the residents was an adequate way of of understanding residents concerns to be the as the subject of the review exercise?
02:21:43 subject of the review exercise? Wasn't that one of the requests in the petition prayer? Just answer my question please. Did you think that the doornocking exercise was the right way of going about understanding the resident's concerns
02:21:55 understanding the resident's concerns that which was part of at the time? I didn't see any reason to doubt why that would not be an effective way of doing that. Now, if we stay with the right hand
02:22:07 Now, if we stay with the right hand side, please, and go to page three, you can see that there are a number of recommendations made at paragraph two. Just scan your eye down those five bullet points there. Um, do you know if
02:22:18 bullet points there. Um, do you know if any changes were made to RBKC policy and procedure as a result? My understanding is that these recommendations were for TMO policy and procedures, weren't
02:22:30 for TMO policy and procedures, weren't they?
02:22:34 Were these recommendations carried into effect? Do you know? Um I so what I do remember is later on that year um when I agreed to have a meeting
02:22:46 year um when I agreed to have a meeting with Mr. Collins and he wrote with a list of I I can't remember exactly how many 15 or 16 suggestions. Um, I asked
02:22:59 many 15 or 16 suggestions. Um, I asked uh for the TMO's feedback and housing department's feedback on those suggestions and I do remember um getting an email from Sasha Jeans in reply and
02:23:10 an email from Sasha Jeans in reply and it seemed to me that an awful lot of those suggestions had been agreed and either had been implemented by the CMO or they had agreed to implement them.
02:23:23 or they had agreed to implement them. Yes. And let's look on a little bit before we do that. Um can we go to your se uh your first witness statement please at page 27 paragraph uh 94 you say there
02:23:35 you say there uh in the third line from the end eventually the TMO agreed that the report would be made public and on 19th May 2016 I emailed some of the residents who had made the complaints telling them
02:23:46 who had made the complaints telling them that the report would be made available for them to review and you exhibited um they weren't eventually there did you get the impression that the TMO were reluctant to publish the report.
02:23:59 were reluctant to publish the report. Yeah. Yes. So, it wasn't just an impression. They they expressed it clearly.
02:24:03 clearly. Oh, did they? Who who expressed that? I think Mr. Black did. Well, do you know why?
02:24:09 From what I remember, he said that his board had asked for it to be kept confidential. Um, and it was something which quite a few members of the housing and property scootering committee thought was uh not right. And I shared
02:24:22 thought was uh not right. And I shared that opinion. Was there any other reason you were told or detected in Mr. Black wanting to keep the
02:24:30 the I didn't know why and I didn't agree with it.
02:24:34 with it. Now let's look on in the year September 2016. I think you've referred to this a moment ago. Let's see if we can be a bit more specific. RBK 30865.
02:24:49 If we go to page two in that email run,
02:24:54 uh you can see that uh here is an email from David Collins of the 6th of September
02:25:02 September to you a copy to Judith Blakeman and he says, "Dear Rock, I hope you've had a good summer and enjoyed time with your family. It was a pleasure to meet with Laura, Judith, and yourself back in July. Thank you for taking the time to discuss the Grenell Tower improvement
02:25:14 discuss the Grenell Tower improvement works, the TMO, and the role of the checks and balances in maintaining a transparent culture, which represents both sides of the story. I'm very curious to know if anything's changed in your thinking or in the council's approach to regeneration or the
02:25:25 approach to regeneration or the operations of the TMO as a result. Uh, and then you forward this, if you look up to the next page, please page one. Um, you can see you forward this at the foot of the page, uh, to Laura
02:25:38 the foot of the page, uh, to Laura Johnson on the 7th of September, the next day. uh and you say please see below and then over over the page at the top of the screen
02:25:49 over the page at the top of the screen you say can you think of any small concession we can think of offering kind regards RFM and she replies about a month later if you go back to page one please on the 4th of October 2016 uh saying councelor
02:26:02 4th of October 2016 uh saying councelor FM I'm struggling to think of something hence the time it's taken for me to respond and because I actually think the TMA managed this pretty well in difficult circumst irstances. And then she says this, I suppose we
02:26:14 And then she says this, I suppose we could say something to the effect that on larger programs such as these will complement estate regeneration as there will be greater council officer and member involvement, more focused working on assessing the needs of individual
02:26:25 on assessing the needs of individual tenants and perhaps going into greater detail with residents about what the costs are and why the budget will only stretch so far in the context of what we can spend across the stock on capital works. Now there is a greater use of digital media. We may for some age
02:26:37 digital media. We may for some age groups focus some of our efforts at making information more accessible online whilst respecting the fact that for some they still prefer face-to-face communication. Is that enough along the right lines?
02:26:49 right lines? Regards LJ and you respond at the top of the page, yes, something along those lines would be good. And can we confirm that any of the recommendations he sent over will be implemented? Weren't quite a few of them being done or going to be
02:27:01 a few of them being done or going to be done anyway? Many thanks RFM.
02:27:06 Uh so that's that's the line of of uh emails to your knowledge. Well, let me ask you, did you get a response from Laura Johnson in in answer to your
02:27:18 Laura Johnson in in answer to your questions there? I don't remember getting one. Did you chase for any? Um I don't remember chasing Laura Johnson about it. I do remember that I
02:27:29 Johnson about it. I do remember that I think later that year or early in 2017 um when indeed when the housing and property scrutiny committee had set up a subgroup um looking at uh the lessons
02:27:43 subgroup um looking at uh the lessons learned and we're looking at the trellic tower uh works that were to be done. Um I do remember forwarding uh Mr. Collins email with his various
02:27:55 uh Mr. Collins email with his various suggestions to Peter Madison uh asking him directly whether um you know these lessons have been learned and trying to get reassurance that the TMO
02:28:06 trying to get reassurance that the TMO was implementing uh the changes that Sasha Jeans had told me would be done right. Um, I see going back to uh your
02:28:18 right. Um, I see going back to uh your question at the top of page two in this email run. You ask her, "Can you think of any small concession?" Can we just go back to page two, the top? Can you think of any small concession that we can
02:28:29 of any small concession that we can think of offering? Um, what did you mean by small concession? I think I meant that given as I say higher higher up the page my
02:28:42 as I say higher higher up the page my understanding was there was there's actually not very big gap between what Mr. Collins was suggesting, recommending, and what I was being told
02:28:54 recommending, and what I was being told the TMO were either already doing or were planning to do. There was only a small gap and therefore only potentially a small concession needed to to resolve such any remaining
02:29:07 needed to to resolve such any remaining disagreement. Right.
02:29:12 Right. Why did you want the concession to be small? I didn't say I want it to be small. I think I thought it was only necessary for there to be a small concession
02:29:24 for there to be a small concession because as I say the gap between what I've been told was happening and what he was asking was small. Doesn't really read that way, does it? I mean, it really reads along the lines of can you think of something we can fob
02:29:35 can you think of something we can fob Mr. Collins off with? I totally disagree with that, but you and I have read different things differently before. So, very well. Uh did you believe that there were no substantive learning points for
02:29:47 were no substantive learning points for RBKC from the refurbishment or from the TMO for the TMO from the refurbishment that you could tell Mr. Collins in answer to his question? I think I had told Mr. Collins at our meeting because
02:29:59 told Mr. Collins at our meeting because I'd had the email from Sasha Jevans at which there were many of those things were being done and I thought those were important lessons and that's why I
02:30:11 important lessons and that's why I forwarded them on to Peter Madison uh in late 2016 or early 2017 saying can you you know just confirm that these lessons have been learned before we embark on Trell.
02:30:22 Trell. Right. Why didn't you answer? Let's go back to Mr. So you have it in front of you Mr. Mr. Collins's question on page two. I'm very curious to know if anything has changed in your thinking or
02:30:34 anything has changed in your thinking or in the council's approach to regeneration or the operations of the TMA as a result. I mean, I'm assuming you understood his question. Yes.
02:30:41 Yes. Yes. Uh what was to stop you simply setting out uh the answers? If there were substantive answers to give him, why could you or perhaps Laura Johnson
02:30:53 why could you or perhaps Laura Johnson not simply respond to him and say, "What's changed is follow?" I I don't well I my point is I don't think a huge amount had changed since the meeting because at that meeting I had explained
02:31:05 because at that meeting I had explained the responses that I had had from both the TMO board review and from Sasha Jevans specifically and
02:31:15 and there wasn't a huge amount of change since that because there was already and I was asking Laura Johnson is there something else on top of what we've already said which Sasha Jeans has told
02:31:27 already said which Sasha Jeans has told us and hence why it only needs to be small because it seemed to me that there was an awful lot of agreement. Right. Just help me during this meeting.
02:31:38 Right. Just help me during this meeting. I mean, was this meeting minutes or noted at all that you'd had with Mr. I don't think it was. No. Um
02:31:45 No. Um what what did you It says here in the email that you'd taken the time to discuss the the works, the role of checks and balances, etc. Um, at the end of that meeting, did you have the
02:31:56 of that meeting, did you have the impression that Mr. Collins was satisfied? I think the the the outstanding issue as far as I remember was he wanted a kind of
02:32:09 was he wanted a kind of some other form of independent check on the TMO
02:32:14 the TMO some over and it wasn't very clear to either Laura Johnson or myself exactly what or who that would be. So that was I I think the the the main
02:32:29 I think the the the main from my recollection the main kind of area of of of difference still right uh and why not then simply just go back to him and say well I'm afraid Mr.
02:32:41 back to him and say well I'm afraid Mr. Collins nothing has changed our position remains as explained to you at our July meeting. Um, I I asked Laura Johnson. She replied I replied back to her and I
02:32:54 She replied I replied back to her and I didn't get a response. I think I was expecting her to draft a response. I didn't get it and I'm afraid it must have slipped my mind after that. But the issues of learning those lessons from
02:33:05 issues of learning those lessons from Grenville for future projects did not slip my mind as is demonstrated by the email I sent to Peter Madison.
02:33:23 Let's look at uh one or two more documents. Um this is uh in relation to Trellic Tower RBK 401807.
02:33:34 Trellic Tower RBK 401807. This is an email exchange between you and Peter Madison starting in December 2016.
02:33:42 uh and it concerns a request for further information in relation to Trellic Tower. And at the bottom of page one, you say this. I'm particularly keen to make sure that
02:33:53 particularly keen to make sure that we've learned all lessons from the Granville Tower project in regards to resident consultation and engagement. This means not only following best practice, but also foreseeing what those with political motivations will do and
02:34:04 with political motivations will do and stir to try and stir up problems and trying to minimize such opportunities. Therefore, can you please send us a copy of the TMO board's report and recommendations into the GT project so that we can cross-check that we are
02:34:16 that we can cross-check that we are following all recommendations here. Indeed, it might also be worth reviewing again the long list of recommendations that was prepared by David Collins and councelor Blakeman to check whether any of those issues be pertinent maybe
02:34:27 of those issues be pertinent maybe pertinent to TT. Now, you referred earlier, I think, in your evidence to discussions in early 2017 with Peter Medicine on Trellic Tower, but is this the email you were thinking of? Yes,
02:34:37 Yes, it is. Right. Um when you if we just go back a page uh could we go to uh the last paragraph the part I read
02:34:49 to uh the last paragraph the part I read which says uh thank you which says um foreseeing what those with political motivations will do to try and stir up problems.
02:34:59 problems. Uh who were you referring to there do you think? Um, I'm pretty sure I was referring to uh the local labor
02:35:11 referring to uh the local labor counselors local in Goldworn Mort where Trell is. I I see. So, what experiences were you drawing on from Grenfell Tower
02:35:23 from Grenfell Tower when you made that remark? Um well I think I was talking more generally about the lessons learned about resident consultation and engagement from Grenful Tower but with
02:35:35 engagement from Grenful Tower but with regards to Trellic Tower which was in Glorbourne Road where there was a particular group of local labor counselors I think I was flagging that up as an extra uh
02:35:49 up as an extra uh it was it was as a politician I was I was thinking about that from a political point of view. I see. Um can we then look please at RBK30's 51312
02:36:02 this is a uh a bundle of documents uh
02:36:08 uh which
02:36:10 which some 11 pages long which is um delivered to you I think uh on the 30th of 8 May 20 30th of May 2017 and it's signed as you can see by Lee Chapman and Tundi
02:36:22 you can see by Lee Chapman and Tundi Aaderu as secretary and vice chair of the Granville Tower Leaseholders Assoc Association and it says, "Dear Councelor Rockfielding Melon, further to previous correspondences, please find attached relevant materials including evidence of
02:36:33 relevant materials including evidence of 96 signatures collected by the Grenfell Tower Leaseholders Association from the residents of Grenell Tower. This excludes vacant properties and residents away on holiday. It is clear without a shadow of a doubt that the residents are
02:36:44 shadow of a doubt that the residents are calling for and demanding security and concage in Grenell Tower without further delay." Do you recall those documents being handd delivered to the town hall for your attention at the end of May
02:36:55 for your attention at the end of May 2017?
02:36:56 2017? Yes. And I remember uh one of the officers in the um who who looked after the cabinet um compiling them and asking Laura Johnson to prepare
02:37:07 them and asking Laura Johnson to prepare a response. I see. Do do you remember that the petition was presented following correspondence uh with the GTLA about number of complaints but primarily to
02:37:18 number of complaints but primarily to the sighting of the gas pipes or gas risers in the stairway. I remember that issue well and I think I go into some detail about it in my witness statement. Yes. Do you remember that this petition
02:37:30 Yes. Do you remember that this petition was presented following that? Yes.
02:37:32 Yes. Yes. Do did you read do you remember reading the documents enclosed with this bundle?
02:37:37 bundle? Um,
02:37:40 Um, I have to say I can't remember reading going through all of them at the time. I've I've I can't remember if I did or didn't.
02:37:46 didn't. Do you remember what action you took in response to? I I I asked the the officer who had collected them um to pass them on to Laura Johnson so that the housing
02:37:57 Laura Johnson so that the housing department could prepare a response. Yes. What did you make of the fact that 96 signatures or so had been collected in relation to this building uh so soon
02:38:09 in relation to this building uh so soon after there had been a a a board review of the Grenfield Tower refurbishment? Well, I think I've
02:38:22 Well, I think I've there were ongoing emails um from uh Mr. Aderu and others with various concerns mainly about as you've said the the the
02:38:33 mainly about as you've said the the the gas pipe being put in by National Grid which I was I shared their concern and uh asked for um on numerous times reassurance that all would be safe and that it should be checked properly. I
02:38:45 that it should be checked properly. I remember um uh there were issues about the staircase being left undecorated. There were issues about noises banging in the night and um I I remember
02:38:58 in the night and um I I remember following up with all of those things with Laura Johnson. Um indeed that's why she I think got the TMO to prepare a response on behalf of councelor Blakeman
02:39:09 response on behalf of councelor Blakeman which went through many of those issues and I wrote to both Laura Johnson and Robert Black saying I'm happy to meet with the residents if that's what they need and I'm slightly surprised that
02:39:21 need and I'm slightly surprised that after spending over 10 million pounds on this tower there are problems and I'd like to understand what they are. M did you get the sense that
02:39:32 did you get the sense that notwithstanding the report uh that had been done by the review group at TMO nonetheless that hadn't solved the solved the problems or the way the residents felt within the tower
02:39:46 which which I mean so for example with the staircase the TMO told them that they were going to paint the staircase it had been put into the um with the national grid there was ongoing concern
02:39:57 national grid there was ongoing concern and I thought very fairly um And I was unhappy with the responses that I received about National Grid's uh reaction. I understood it was
02:40:08 reaction. I understood it was frustrating for the TMO because this was something which the National Grid were doing. This what I was told by Laura Johnson that they had their own statutory authorities to do this and responsible for the work and yet for
02:40:19 responsible for the work and yet for residents um you know they they kind of saw the TMO and indeed the council as responsible for that. So the TMO and the council were slightly caught in a difficult position with regards to those
02:40:30 difficult position with regards to those pipes and that's why I and indeed the leader suggested that we um write to our MP about it. Mr. Chairman, I've come to the end of my
02:40:41 Mr. Chairman, I've come to the end of my prepared questions for Mr. Melon. Uh I'm in your hands as to how we should proceed. uh we'll need the usual 15 or 20 minutes or so to ensure that we've covered everything with him and to see
02:40:53 covered everything with him and to see if there are any follow-up questions which are appropriate. Yes. Well, um first of all, we have to have a break at this point. Mr. Fielding Miller, you may know this, but when
02:41:04 Miller, you may know this, but when council's reached the end of his prepared questions, he needs a chance to check that nothing's been left out. And we also need there to be an opportunity for others who are not present to
02:41:15 for others who are not present to suggest further questions. say we'll have a break now. Um, Mr. Minut will 15 minutes be long enough or um, it may be. Let's see. Well, if I say that we'll come back at
02:41:26 Well, if I say that we'll come back at 1:00.
02:41:27 1:00. It should be. Yes. If we need more time, you can
02:41:30 you can Yes.
02:41:30 Yes. Tell us how long you think you might need for whatever questions there are. Yes.
02:41:34 Yes. And if we can dispose of them fairly promptly, we can push the lunch hour back a bit. Well, that would be excellent. Thank you.
02:41:41 you. Before.
02:41:41 Before. Very good. Right. Thank you. I'm going to ask you to leave us now, please, Mr. Fieldy Melon. and not to talk about your evidence while you're out of the room. Thank you very much.
02:41:57 Right, Mr. 1:00. Yes. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
02:57:52 Yes. Would you ask Mr. Fielding Melon to come back in, please?
02:58:05 Right, Mr. Fielding, and we'll see if there are more questions for you, Mr. Millet.
02:58:09 Millet. Yes, Mr. Chairman, there are one or two. Um do I before you start do you think we could expect to finish them within a 10 or 15 minutes? Yes. Oh yes. Yes. Absolutely. Um Mr. Fielding Melon,
02:58:20 Yes. Absolutely. Um Mr. Fielding Melon, first can I ask you to look please at IWS 4
02:58:25 IWS 4 2334
02:58:28 and I'll just show you for page one of this. Uh it's Mr. David Collins's statement to the inquiry of the 21st of September 2020. And I'm what I'm going
02:58:39 September 2020. And I'm what I'm going to show you relates to the July discussions that you had with him which we saw recorded in his 6th of September 2016 email uh which we discussed earlier on the two of us today. Can we go to
02:58:52 on the two of us today. Can we go to page 29 please? And in that document on that page you can see that he he deals uh with um a meeting in July with uh you and he says
02:59:05 meeting in July with uh you and he says after a two and fro by email a meeting took place on the afternoon of 13th July 2016 at Hatton Street town hall. Apart from myself no compact members were present. Laura Johnson and councelor
02:59:16 present. Laura Johnson and councelor Judith Blake were in attendance during the meeting. But then he says uh he suggest he says a councelor Rockfielding Melon suggested he did not understand why residents were unhappy with the work
02:59:27 why residents were unhappy with the work carried out to improve Granfield Tower. He said it was a more considerable investment than any part of the burough uh etc.
02:59:36 uh etc. And if we can turn please specifically to page 31 in this list of things that he recalls. Uh at N he says I asked if he would take
02:59:49 Uh at N he says I asked if he would take forward the increasing of checks and balances on the TMO. He said he would take my thoughts into consideration. Do you remember that? Do you remember do you remember him asking you that
03:00:01 you remember him asking you that question and you responding in that way? Um, I think this is what I was referring to earlier where I said my recollection of the main uh kind of area where there
03:00:16 of the main uh kind of area where there was still disagreement between us. Um, and when I say us, I mean him on the one side and myself and Laura Johnson on the other. um was he he was asking for as I
03:00:31 other. um was he he was asking for as I recall it a not particularly clear or well- definfined process of kind of additional independent checks of the TMO
03:00:43 independent checks of the TMO um and
03:00:45 um and Laura Johnson and I agreed with her um thought that the existing levels of checks i.e to having uh a resident
03:00:58 checks i.e to having uh a resident controlled board and then having the housing and property security committee and indeed the checks of the housing department officers as I understood it
03:01:09 department officers as I understood it to be at the time was satisfactory. He then says at paragraph 136, "I bumped into counselor Fielding Melon in Bramley Road near the pedestrian crossing adjacent to Witurch Road during the
03:01:20 adjacent to Witurch Road during the month which followed. The outcome was clarity. he was not going to follow up on the matters raised through our prior conversation. Is that right? Is his recollection of
03:01:31 Is that right? Is his recollection of that correct? I think in terms of that particular point, I probably did tell him that the advice that I had been given and which I concurred with was that we thought the
03:01:45 concurred with was that we thought the the checks that were in place were satisfactory. Thank you. Um, next follow-up question. Uh you touched earlier on about the on the subject of the composition of the
03:01:56 the subject of the composition of the TMO board in 2016 or 2017 before the fire. At any rate, do you remember whether any consideration was given to whether any residents of Grenfell Tower
03:02:09 whether any residents of Grenfell Tower specifically or residents of the Lancaster West Estate more generally should be on the TMO board? Um
03:02:19 Um I don't remember. My understanding was that residents could stand for election to the TMO board by the members of the TMO which were other residents. Um so my
03:02:33 TMO which were other residents. Um so my my understanding was you couldn't really nominate um residents from a particular block over any other particular block. It was it was they had to stand and be elected by the members of the TMO. I
03:02:44 elected by the members of the TMO. I mean, as a fact, it's correct, I think, and correct me if I'm wrong about this, but that there were no residents of Granfell Tower or the Lancaster West Estate more generally on the TMO board before the fire.
03:02:56 before the fire. Um, you I I have to say I did not know the addresses of the different residents who were on the TMO board. It was not something which I thought I it was
03:03:08 something which I thought I it was private information. I didn't ask that. Do do you know whether any consideration was given to inviting any particular me resident of of the tower or the Lancaster West Estate to stand for election to the TMO board? Um my
03:03:21 election to the TMO board? Um my understanding is that the TMO had a general policy of trying to engage and encourage residents across the entire HA stock to become active members and to
03:03:34 HA stock to become active members and to stand for uh election to the board if they thought they could contribute. So I I'm I would be surprised if Lancaster West was somehow excluded from that
03:03:45 West was somehow excluded from that process.
03:03:47 process. Now we we during the course of your evidence you answered some questions about the cladding change from zinc to aluminium. That was one topic. And another topic was whether there were
03:03:58 another topic was whether there were existing objective criteria that the board should be applying board of the TMO should be applying when doing their review in the first part of 2016. Separate topics. Um
03:04:09 Separate topics. Um but both um both give rise to the a follow-up line. Um, can I ask you please uh to look at the um MMA? Were you familiar with the terms of the MMA, the
03:04:22 familiar with the terms of the MMA, the modular management agreement? I I never read the MMA. You never read the MMA. Did anybody ever provide you ever with a digest or summary of its of its terms? So, I
03:04:35 So, I signed a key decision which was agreeing to
03:04:40 to an updated version of the MMA. I think it was in 2015 and that key decision report which was prepared by Laura Johnson uh set out um the kind of the
03:04:54 Johnson uh set out um the kind of the background and the the explanation for the changes and I remember it confirming that um that MMA was considered fit for purpose and that the changes had been
03:05:05 purpose and that the changes had been checked by both legal and by finance departments. Right. Do you remember when in 2015? Was it December that year? I do not remember exactly.
03:05:17 I do not remember exactly. Well, let's just look at one or two provisions in it. Uh, and this is particularly schedule three to the MMA. Uh, can we please go to RBK 3019006?
03:05:30 Uh, and in that, please turn that. This is volume one of the the modular management agreement for the TMO, the the MMA. And if we can turn
03:05:41 TMO, the the MMA. And if we can turn please first to page 165 in that document
03:05:47 document we can see um there is something called client review group a third of the way down. Now now in the middle of your screen paragraph 2.1
03:05:58 screen paragraph 2.1 you see that it says the neighborhood manager and project manager will decide whether to establish a client review group or a steering group for the project. This will be chaired by a representative of the residents association and will include the
03:06:09 association and will include the neighborhood manager and project manager. The role of this group will be to act as client for the project, review progress in implementing the scheme and focus on those issues which directly concern residents. Where it has decided
03:06:20 concern residents. Where it has decided not to establish a client review group, the residents association will be asked to nominate a representative to join the project team. If there is no residence association, the project manager should advise the tenant participation group
03:06:32 advise the tenant participation group and agree how best to encourage resident involvement. Were you aware that that was a provision of the MMA? Uh, not specifically. No. No. Uh do you know whether that
03:06:44 No. Uh do you know whether that provision was examined uh for the purposes or by by the TMO board in carrying out its investigation uh into the TMO's conduct of the
03:06:56 uh into the TMO's conduct of the Grenfell Tower project? Uh
03:07:00 Uh I don't know exactly. I rem I I remember being told on numerous occasions, for example, in the cabinet reports that the TMO had done uh quite extensive
03:07:13 TMO had done uh quite extensive consultation, had agreed a process for ongoing engagement with the residents of the tower and it then also set up a Grenful compact group which I know it
03:07:25 Grenful compact group which I know it met with and it had the resident leers on officer and I think the board from memory reviewed the the resident engagement process. Uh yes, let's try let's try another
03:07:38 Uh yes, let's try let's try another provision of this. Uh can we skip forward two pages please to page 167 and look at paragraph 5.2. Under that it says appointment of
03:07:49 Under that it says appointment of consultants. Uh that's the heading and under 5.2 it says the project manager, consultancy services manager, neighborhood manager and residents association representatives will select suitable consultants with relevant
03:08:00 suitable consultants with relevant experience. The project manager will chair the panel. Depending on the size and complexity of the project, consultants may be appointed from a number of disciplines. And then you can see a list and at the top of the list is architecture.
03:08:12 architecture. Do you remember? Uh well, first first of all, were you familiar with that provision? No, I hadn't read any of the MMA. Do you know from your knowledge whether or not the TMO board examined this provision
03:08:24 the TMO board examined this provision and investigated whether or not it had been complied with particularly in respect of the appointment of Studioe as architects for the Granfell Tower project? I do not know whether the board
03:08:36 project? I do not know whether the board reviewed this provision in that regard and nor do I know to what extent the TMO did consult with residents in the appointment of the architect because it was before I was the cabinet member for
03:08:48 was before I was the cabinet member for housing. Uh looking at page 175, please paragraph 15.3.
03:08:58 Uh this is at the top of the page. Uh and in fact, it starts uh at the foot of page uh 174 under site meetings. It's to do with site meetings and it says this.
03:09:10 do with site meetings and it says this. To ensure that tenants concerns are addressed, the residents association representative can either attend the site meeting or a meeting can be held with the residents association prior to the site meeting. Feedback will be
03:09:21 the site meeting. Feedback will be provided to the residents after the site meeting where necessary. Again, I assume that because you hadn't read this detail of document, you weren't aware of that provision. No.
03:09:29 No. No. Uh and and again, do you know what the TMO board did in the course of its review to ensure that the TMO had complied with this provision? I do not know. No. And then uh page 177. Same questions
03:09:41 No. And then uh page 177. Same questions I'm afraid. 177 paragraph 22.1 post project review. Uh all schemes will be subject to a post project review after completion of the
03:09:52 project review after completion of the project or on sectional completion. Residents will be asked for their views on the way the work was carried out and what they like or dislike about the improvements to their homes. The survey will also seek to collect BME data. And
03:10:04 will also seek to collect BME data. And again, same questions. F first, were you aware that this was a an obligation contained in the MMA? No.
03:10:11 No. And secondly, do you know what the TMO board did in its review to ensure that this obligation was complied with? I don't know, but my understanding is the board review was completed before
03:10:22 the board review was completed before the end of March 2016. And um I'm not sure that the project had finished then. I do seem to remember uh
03:10:33 finished then. I do seem to remember uh reading reports from the TMO that they were going to do a satisfaction survey after completion. But you didn't you don't know whether one was actually ever carried out in conformity with the obligation contained here.
03:10:44 here. I cannot remember that now. No. Thank you very much. Um Mr. Fielding Melon, I've got one question for you and it's a question we don't ask every witness uh but but certainly of witnesses who who have performed
03:10:55 witnesses who who have performed particular roles in relation to the Granfell Tower project uh and other matters and it's this looking back on the evidence that you and I have covered together over what is now over a day for which I'm grateful. Is there anything
03:11:07 which I'm grateful. Is there anything you would have done differently? Um,
03:11:12 Um, that is a question which I'm sure you would have expected and is the case I've I've asked myself constantly over the last four years
03:11:23 last four years and I think I will probably be haunted by that question for the rest of my life.
03:11:29 life. um
03:11:32 based on the information that I had and given what I considered my roles to be, I really don't know what I could have done differently.
03:11:43 done differently. But I I wish from the very bottom of my heart that things had been done differently so as to have prevented that fire.
03:11:54 fire. And that includes anything that this inquiry decides that the council, the cabinet or I should have done differently.
03:12:05 differently. Um, and if I may, I'd like to say how I know that the the sorrow and the pain that I have experienced over the last
03:12:18 that I have experienced over the last four years is nothing compared to the what must be unbearable grief that those who lost their loved ones have had to suffer. And indeed, all
03:12:30 ones have had to suffer. And indeed, all those who had their lives shattered on that night. and today's people I want to say how very sorry I am.
03:12:40 Thank you very much Mr. Fielding Melon and it remains for me to thank you finally for your evidence uh to the inquiry in writing and over the last day or so. So thank you very much
03:12:51 or so. So thank you very much and Mr. Fielding Melon it's absolutely right that I should thank you as well on behalf of all three members of the panel for coming to give your evidence. It has been very helpful to us to hear what you
03:13:02 been very helpful to us to hear what you have to tell us and we really are very grateful to you for giving up the time to come and speak to us like that. So, thank you Mr. Chairman. I hope it's not remorse of me to say that I would like to thank you and your panel members and
03:13:14 to thank you and your panel members and Mr. Millet and the whole inquiry team for the work that you have done and will continue to do to try and make sure this sort of thing can't happen again. So, thank you. Thank you. Yes, if you go to the Asha, she'll look
03:13:25 Yes, if you go to the Asha, she'll look after you. Thank you.
03:13:36 Thank you, Mr. Millet. So, um, we're obviously going to break at that point. So, we have some lunch. We'll resume at 2:15 when
03:13:44 2:15 when Very good. I think there's another witness to come. There is, Mr. Nicholas Padet Brown. Good. Thank you very, please.