Afternoon evidence session examining RBKC councillor responsibilities regarding fire safety oversight, scrutiny committee functions, enforcement of non-compliant leaseholder doors, and the Grenfell Tower refurbishment petition.
00:00:19 yes would you ask mr marshall to come back in please
00:00:36 right mr marshall ready to carry on absolutely good thank you very much thank you sir mr marshall before the break we were looking at minutes of a meeting in january 2011 which were
00:00:47 of a meeting in january 2011 which were rbk
00:00:49 rbk trouble zero two nine double eight one and if we could go back to those minutes
00:00:55 and page three
00:01:09 and paragraph 4.4 it says this night quote
00:01:13 quote however there have also been a number of potentially more costly items in particular the following recommendations were made in relation to flat entrance doors of all of the enclosed blocks first bullet point
00:01:24 bullet point confirmed that each dwelling door is to fr30
00:01:27 fr30 standard and is provided with a self-closing device consider where not fitted the installation of intumescent strips and cold smoke seals to each flat access door now would you agree that the
00:01:39 access door now would you agree that the particular issue that was flagged up there was the issue of flat entrance doors yes and that the issue is then addressed by
00:01:47 by tmo and rbkc by program to replace flat entrance doors would you agree with that yes and the issue with leaseholders that you refer to
00:01:58 you refer to in your witness statement and your evidence earlier on today was whether rbkc could force leaseholders um to change their doors if that were necessary is that a fair summary
00:02:09 necessary is that a fair summary that's what emerged later in during that process
00:02:13 process it wasn't the issue the issue immediately well if we can just deal with that in more detail if i could ask you to turn to your second witness statement to the inquiry which is rbk trouble zero
00:02:25 which is rbk trouble zero five double four three one forward slash three and paragraph seven and there we go in the beginning of the third sentence which started with the
00:02:37 third sentence which started with the word the committee's function you say this committee's function was to scrutinize the actions of the executive the committee had to start from an assumption that the tmo monitored by council officers and the
00:02:49 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 tmo performance review shared with the committee annually this was a key mechanism for us to gain
00:03:00 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 leaseholder doors we followed this up repeatedly with questions until we were satisfied with the outcome between 2012 and may 2016 when i left
00:03:13 between 2012 and may 2016 when i left the hpsc
00:03:14 the hpsc as far as i can recall the issue of leaseholder doors was raised at least nine
00:03:18 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 publicizing the matters
00:03:30 and publicizing the matters before it now could we look at an example of how rbkc handled the leaseholder door issue and if we could turn first of all to laura johnson's report to your committee
00:03:41 laura johnson's report to your committee on the 16th of july 2013 which can be found at rbk trouble zero three two double four nine forward slash eleven
00:03:54 and there we go paragraph eight point two which says the responsibility for enforcement of non-compliant leaseholder flat entrance doors remained unresolved following discussions with london fire brigade lfb
00:04:06 london fire brigade lfb senior managers and so rbkc were guarded were guided by council's opinion to seek a definitive response from the department for communities and local government dclg to date an initial response has
00:04:18 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 so the issue that laura johnson addressed in her report was who should have
00:04:31 in her report was who should have who should enforce non-compliant flat entrance stores would you agree with that
00:04:36 that yes that's what she was addressing in the report and the choice was whether it would be
00:04:40 would be the lfb or rbkc is that right yes that's correct and if it were to be rbkc
00:04:46 rbkc uh the correct route would be by exercise of powers under the housing act 2004 is that correct
00:04:55 i think that's what she's writing here yes based on what she'd been told by council and were you aware of the fact that rbkc did not exercise its powers under the housing act
00:05:06 act in relation to this issue yes um no
00:05:12 what would be your response to the suggestion that a failure to exercise powers under the housing act 2004 was effectively an abdication of responsibility by the council
00:05:26 our key concern was that these doors were replaced and we were less concerned about the mechanism through which that happened than that it happened
00:05:38 happened than that it happened and so when we were receiving these reports talking about uh whether it was the council's responsibility whether it was the fire brigade's responsibility which particular piece of legislation
00:05:49 which particular piece of legislation should be used our response was this is beyond our competence to know which but we just want
00:05:56 want something to be done because this is so important
00:05:59 important thank you now in scrutinizing the actions of the tmo executive did you ever have calls to refer to our bkc's own health and safety policy no i don't believe i did now if we look
00:06:12 no i don't believe i did now if we look at rbkc's policy we can look at a 2014 version which is rbk quadruple zero one six double five excuse me
00:06:28 can you remember seeing that document no can you remember seeing any uh health and safety document uh health and safety policy published by the uh
00:06:38 the uh royal borough of kensington chelsea no i can't relax seeing that do you remember ever being prompted or receiving reminders that the policy had been published or to refer to the policy
00:06:50 been published or to refer to the policy in any way
00:06:53 no i can't remember that okay now if we can turn to page three of this document
00:07:00 and if we see their introduction and the first paragraph under that heading says this and i quote this policy sets out the the strategic fire safety vision and objectives of
00:07:11 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 based upon british standard publication past seven fire risk management system
00:07:22 past seven fire risk management system specification now underneath that diagram there are four
00:07:26 four points emboldened which say as follows plan
00:07:30 plan plan the direction for fire safety management do profile the fire risks organize and implement controls check check that fire safety management is working act act on improving fire safety
00:07:42 act act on improving fire safety management now would you agree that as the scrutiny committee chair you had an important role to check that fire safety management was effective and sufficient would you agree with that
00:07:54 i think my role was the same as every other committee member in that regard and is that a yes or a no to the question
00:08:04 question yes and would that involve ensuring that leasehold the doors and any other fire safety related issues had been managed effectively and adequately yes when an issue arose in relation to
00:08:16 yes when an issue arose in relation to fire safety we took it incredibly seriously
00:08:19 seriously could i ask you to turn to page four of this document and the definition of its scope
00:08:23 scope under paragraph 2.2 which says this and i quote this policy will apply to all premises where the council has a duty as the employer and or as the responsible person as defined in the order
00:08:35 defined in the order this policy will also apply to any premises whereby virtue of a contract or tenancy agreement other parties have duties of the responsible person but where the council retains landlord responsibilities a local fire policy for residential
00:08:47 a local fire policy for residential housing based on the housing stock risk profile
00:08:50 profile will be put in place by the housing and regeneration department now that definition of scope suggests that the policy would apply to the stock managed by the tmo whether as
00:09:02 the stock managed by the tmo whether as a responsible person or as a landlord would you agree with that yes i would the reference to a local fire policy can you help us what what was that referring to there
00:09:14 referring to there it's in the third sub-paragraph under
00:09:20 2.2 i'm not aware of which policy i understand what it's referring to but i can't think of the policy itself you can't remember it being the subject of any consideration by your committee at any stage
00:09:32 by your committee at any stage no it was never raised could i ask you to turn to page five and the fourth paragraph on that page
00:09:39 which starts with the words the council has appointed and the paragraph says this and i quote council has appointed a corp has appointed corporate health and safety team to provide competent advice
00:09:50 team to provide competent advice and to assist in the implementation of an appropriate management system the team profiles the organizational fire safety risks risks which inform the strategic direction business planning process and audit
00:10:01 business planning process and audit program a risk register is maintained and reviewed on a routine basis the corporate health and safety team will ensure that there are appropriate processes in place to ensure our partner organizations
00:10:12 organizations have suitable and sufficient fire safety management systems in place as part of the due diligence procedures and will develop suitable protocols with partners
00:10:19 partners so to ensure fire safety compliance is assured
00:10:23 assured now that paragraph is clear that the council has its own health and safety team
00:10:27 team which can provide competent advice and assistance would you agree yes and would you agree that that advice was available to partner bodies such as the tmo
00:10:39 partner bodies such as the tmo i would presume so i don't believe i ever interacted with this team did you ever have a reason to ask whether the tmo had received or sought advice from the council's in-house
00:10:51 advice from the council's in-house health and safety team no now if we can turn over the page to page six and paragraph 2.5 under the has under the heading of responsibilities of elected members
00:11:02 responsibilities of elected members it says this and i quote a cabinet member for each borough will be nominated to lead on health and safety matters
00:11:08 matters elected members will ensure that health and safety is adequately considered when making decisions at a strategic level this will be through an annual report on the health and safety profile of the organization provided for public scrutiny at the
00:11:21 provided for public scrutiny at the appropriate scrutiny committee for each sovereign borough now looking at that last
00:11:26 last sentence in particular would you agree that this policy envisages a substantive role
00:11:31 role for scrutiny committees in considering health and safety policy and its implementation yes it clearly says that the report should go to an appropriate scrutiny committee
00:11:41 committee and that would include ensuring that rbkc and tmo had adhered to their relevant fire safety policies
00:11:54 i'm not sure i'm following how that leads on from the paragraph sorry well that's what i'm asking you whether you agree with that or not it sounds to me that you don't is that yours no no i i would presume an annual
00:12:05 yours no no i i would presume an annual report would indeed include comprehensive information on health and safety can we turn to page 13 and paragraph
00:12:11 paragraph 4.4 sorry 4.1
00:12:16 and if you look at the third paragraph under 4.1 which starts with the words all instance and i quote all instances should be reported using the online system incidents should be investigated by the manager considerations should be given
00:12:27 manager considerations should be given to any system solutions to avoid future recurrence corporate health and safety will investigate serious incidents when enforcing bodies such as el fipa are or may be involved were you aware of that particular provision
00:12:39 aware of that particular provision no
00:12:42 [Applause]
00:12:46 would it have been open to you to have asked the council to provide an update on what if any regulatory notices the council or the tmo had received from elfipa
00:12:58 elfipa it would have been open to us to ask can you remember in relation to fire safety ever
00:13:02 ever asking for such a list no did you ever have calls to ask uh officers for any information in relation to any regulatory action
00:13:13 in relation to any regulatory action taken that fell within the purview of the housing and property solution committee
00:13:18 committee so we did uh in relation to the fire in uh october november 2015. um i'm i'm recalling that's that's the
00:13:29 um i'm i'm recalling that's that's the dare tower is indeed um and there was regulatory action
00:13:34 action after that which was reported to us in january i think 2016. we'll come on to that in due course but you can't remember in relation to any other aspect of your your committee's functions ever asking
00:13:45 your committee's functions ever asking for details of regulatory action taken by regulatory authorities no my recollection is that there was never anything highlighted to us that there had been regulatory action taken now in 2014
00:13:57 regulatory action taken now in 2014 you were sent links to two further guidance documents and the links were sent by laura johnson on the 17th of july 2014. now
00:14:08 2014. now we can go to that email just so you know what i'm talking to and that can be talking about and that's rbk quadruple zero double three one four
00:14:24 and there you go addressed to you and she annexes the two documents now at paragraph nine of your state second statement we don't need to go to it unless you want to you say you don't recall the email or
00:14:35 you say you don't recall the email or your reaction to it could i take you to these two guidance documents and then see whether and if so to what extent you remember their contents the
00:14:46 their contents the two guidance documents we're going to be looking at first of all the counselor guide on fire safety for use during state
00:14:51 state visits and counsellor guide on fire safety for use during council meetings can you remember the title of either those guidance documents no the only familiarity i have with
00:15:02 no the only familiarity i have with these documents is having seen them subsequent to the fire in preparation for for today now could we look at the estate visits guidance first of all which is
00:15:11 which is lfb quadruple zero one two nine four
00:15:20 now a number of witnesses have been taken to this document has the distinctive question mark photograph on the right hand side
00:15:28 hand side and you'll see that the guide prompts certain questions and they can be seen in the bottom left hand corner set out under two bullet
00:15:39 hand corner set out under two bullet points and those questions are where is the risk assessment for this building how often is it reviewed who carries out these risk assessments and what are their qualifications and if we could look at the right hand
00:15:50 and if we could look at the right hand side under the title confirming the emergency evacuation plan is in place we see what is set out there rather than me read it out could i ask you just to
00:16:02 read it out could i ask you just to refresh your memory and skim read those words and when you've reached the word maintained in the bottom right hand corner
00:16:09 corner ask the docket manager to turn the page
00:16:34 uh
00:16:44 if you go to the the final bullet point is emergency lighting and signage in place along the escape route
00:16:52 now did you appreciate at any time during
00:16:56 during your tenure on the hpsc that there should be an emergency plan in place rebuilding whether or not stay put applied sorry is your question about the emergency plan or the state put
00:17:08 emergency plan or the state put emergency plan the question was this and i repeat did you appreciate that there should be
00:17:12 should be an emergency plan in place irrespective of whether stay put um not explicitly i would have thought implicitly why do you think implicitly what was the
00:17:23 why do you think implicitly what was the basis for that belief it would be common sense that there should be an evacuation plan for a building
00:17:29 building bearing in mind it was common sense could i ask you to turn to the first page of this guide on the questions in the bottom left-hand corner
00:17:38 did you ask any or all of those questions in relation to any building in the housing stock of the tmo no
00:17:50 can we look at the council meetings guidance which is lfb quadruple zero one two nine five and if i could ask you to turn to the
00:18:01 and if i could ask you to turn to the second page of the document and you'll see at the top of the page in the gray box of the question what can counsellors do and then it gives advice and it says this
00:18:11 this and i quote do not make assumptions that fire safety is being actively or effectively managed and purpose-built blocks of flats and maize nets in your borough
00:18:19 borough councillors can make their boroughs safer by scrutinizing how responsibilities for fire safety are met and ensuring that the fire safety in your borough has continuously been monitored and improved
00:18:30 monitored and improved now what did you do whether in your capacity as an elected member or a member of the scrutiny housing scrutiny committee what did you do to test what assumptions were being made in
00:18:41 what assumptions were being made in respect of the active or effective management of fire safety by the tmo directly of the tmo i don't think
00:18:49 think other than through questioning them at committee
00:18:52 committee in relation to all matters including fire safety can you remember any specific questions or issues on which you tested the assumptions of the tmo via questioning
00:19:06 not off the top of my head and now if we de-amplify that page and look further down at this page
00:19:20 and it sets out sorry if we can see the entire uh page
00:19:29 you'll see in the bottom third there are questions that are asked where are the risk assessments our counselors told us the local authority is subject enforcement thirdly what contractual relationships are in place etc
00:19:42 now just looking at those questions set out there
00:19:46 out there mr marshall did you ever ask any or all of those questions in relation to the tmo housing stock
00:19:59 no i don't believe any of us did at any time
00:20:03 time not directly we relied very heavily on on the papers we received and the assurance when you looked at the health and safety aspect of them that everything that was being that is
00:20:14 that everything that was being that is required to be done had been done was this guidance can you remember did you once you'd received it from laura
00:20:25 you once you'd received it from laura johnson
00:20:26 johnson did you circulate it further to all members of your committee no i don't i don't recollect receiving this email
00:20:36 is that a no answer to the question therefore
00:20:40 therefore yes well can you remember you don't remember receiving the email no and therefore i suppose you can't remember what you did
00:20:51 remember what you did in response to it assuming you didn't receive it indeed um that's probably as far as you can go is it it is i i have no recollection of receiving
00:21:02 i i have no recollection of receiving the email
00:21:03 the email um i've of course racked my brains in before coming here today to try and remember it but i i genuinely can't no no let's understand but differently did you ever have calls
00:21:15 but differently did you ever have calls to refer to these two guidance documents in
00:21:18 in your later deliberations on the scrutiny committee i.e after 2014 no no could we go back to your first witness statement to paragraph 44 where you refer to a paper that was prepared for an hpsc meeting on the 13th
00:21:32 prepared for an hpsc meeting on the 13th of may 2015 and the paper was prepared by laura johnson now that is at rbk trouble zero two nine zero eight four
00:21:47 and you see under 1.2 and the last sentence of that subparagraph as you say in your statement the number of households with non-compliant doors have dropped to two do you see that i do then if we can
00:21:58 two do you see that i do then if we can go on to 1.5 which starts at the bottom of this page it says this and i quote kc tmo's program of fire risk assessment is ongoing continues to consider the
00:22:09 is ongoing 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 at that stage when we're looking at 2015
00:22:21 at that stage when we're looking at 2015 were you concerned that it taken so much time to
00:22:25 time to reduce the numbers of non-compliant doors yes and that was the reason why we kept returning to the subject to encourage action along that journey
00:22:36 encourage action along that journey there were definite points where we were told that there were impediments to that and our questions were always well how are we going to find solutions if we can't leave it there now
00:22:47 solutions if we can't leave it there now if we can look following up that comment can we now turn to the minutes of the meeting on the 13th of may which can be found at rbk trouble zero three two triple four forward slash two
00:23:05 and if we look at the second paragraph under a5
00:23:09 under a5 which is entitled live issues report by the director of housing it says this in response to councillor bacteria
00:23:17 bacteria ms johnson advised that tmo 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
00:23:29 the exact number of non-compliant tmo tenant doors now you weren't at this meeting
00:23:32 meeting but would you have read the minutes yes i would
00:23:37 i would and it appears from this that councillor bacteria had picked up on the point about non-compliant doors do you see that i do and that laura johnson agreed to provide an update now would you would it be fair
00:23:49 an update now would you would it be fair to say that it was uh this is an another instance to which you refer of concern by the committee about the rate of progress on this issue yes we'd always been told that the
00:24:00 yes we'd always been told that the tenant stores were compliant um i recognize the question here was challenging that again rightly and so our focus historically had been on the
00:24:11 our focus historically had been on the leaseholder doors which we were told were the ones which weren't compliant now you referred earlier on in evidence the dare
00:24:18 the dare tower fire and if i could now take you to that and ask you some questions on it just to fix you in time on the 12th of october 2015 the lfb issued a deficiency notice to the tmo in
00:24:30 issued a deficiency notice to the tmo in respective adair tower and if i show it to you so you know what i'm talking about is it tm0084271
00:24:47 i'm talking about is it tm0084271 and there you go the title identification of the premises thank you and if we could zoom out and just go to page three
00:25:00 just go to page three and pastry sets out and thereafter various deficiencies which the lfb had identified mr marshall my first question is um did
00:25:11 mr marshall my first question is um did you ever see this notice no i've never shown this notice were you made aware of it and if so when i don't think we were made aware of it
00:25:22 i don't think we were made aware of it specifically but we were made aware as part of a commentary that a gnosis had been issued i believe that was i believe that was in january 2016 but it might have been in
00:25:34 january 2016 but it might have been in november 2015. i can't remember precisely
00:25:36 precisely did the commentary uh give you the substance
00:25:40 substance of the deficiencies that had been identified by the lfb or is it simply confined to the fact that a notice had been served
00:25:48 i'm afraid i can't remember um i did say that a notice has been served and i think it gave some pretty high high level introduction
00:25:59 some pretty high high level introduction otherwise it would have been a peculiar sentence just to say a notice has been served full stop with no commentary looking say for example looking at article 11 it's on on the page now
00:26:10 article 11 it's on on the page now um would you have been given that level of detail
00:26:15 of detail by looking at the middle column area of concern would you be given that level of detail in the commentary no i don't think so so would it be fair to summarize your evidence this way that um
00:26:29 you were given no particular cause for concern about the subject matter of the notice
00:26:33 notice i don't want to put words in your mouth is that a fair summary um it wouldn't be that we wouldn't have cause for concern of course any such finding is of course concern i
00:26:44 such finding is of course concern i think it was more that we thought that that it was being addressed so we were given comfort that the issues have been taken seriously and were being addressed
00:26:55 seriously and were being addressed now there was a fire at a dare tower on saturday the 31st of october so i think uh 19 days or so after the nato deficiency had been served and that fire was considered at your meet at the hpsc meeting on the 5th of
00:27:06 meet at the hpsc meeting on the 5th of november 2015. if we could go to the minutes which are rbk trouble zero four seven six double eight forward slash
00:27:18 slash six
00:27:27 i'll simply invite you to uh skim wreath a7 rather than read it out
00:27:55 there's no mention in that summary there to the notice of deficiency can you recall whether mr black raised it at all during the course of this meeting i appreciate this is now
00:28:07 meeting i appreciate this is now six years ago or so i can't reading that it would appear he didn't make explicit and i have to say even in the questions you've been asking me now i think i've i was confused in my own
00:28:18 i think i've i was confused in my own minds about the deficiency notice which you showed before and this conversation around the fire so thinking about that i'm not sure we were made aware of the deficiency notice occurring before a
00:28:31 deficiency notice occurring before a fire
00:28:32 fire so we're aware of the fire brigade making recommendations after the fire now and just following that through bearing in mind your the nature of your
00:28:43 bearing in mind your the nature of your role
00:28:43 role as the scrutiny committee would you have expected mr black to have informed you of the fact and the substance of the deficiency notice that had been served on the 12th of october at this meeting on the 5th of november
00:28:55 at this meeting on the 5th of november yes listening to it now it's material now could i um ask you to turn back to paragraph 49 of your first statement which is rbk treble zero double three
00:29:08 rbk treble zero double three seven double four forward slash 12.
00:29:19 now you mentioned here the mid-year review on the tmo performance a report prepared by laura johnson and you quote
00:29:28 you quote paragraph 8.1 of that report which touched on health and safety and fire safety in particular
00:29:35 now
00:29:38 what it might be quite useful to do is um
00:29:42 um look at that paragraph now there appears to be no mention of the dare tower file would you like to go over the page just to sort of
00:29:53 go over the page just to sort of see the complete picture
00:30:14 is it surprising that there was no mention of a dare tower given the proximity of the fire to this meeting on the 5th of november
00:30:23 november no because the papers were normally prepared
00:30:27 prepared about 10 days before and sent out to us well they would have been prepared by 10 days before and then sent out to us so i don't know whether these were prepared
00:30:38 don't know whether these were prepared before the fire but i would expect so given the the dates and where there was a relevant event in the intervening period between circulation and papers and the meeting would updates be provided in writing or
00:30:50 would updates be provided in writing or orally at the meeting
00:30:53 now laura johnson prepared a report for your committee on the 6th of january 2016. and if we go to rbk trouble
00:31:02 0-32439
00:31:08 there you go just so you can
00:31:11 see the start of that and if we go to page five
00:31:17 and look at paragraph 4.6 at the very bottom of the page
00:31:22 and it says this the tmo and i quote has been advised by the london fire brigade that the council tmo will be served with two enforcement notices as a result of the fire risk assessments that brigade undertook following the
00:31:33 that brigade undertook following the fire at dare tower one enforcement notice will cover a dare tower and one will cover hazelwood tower the two towers were built the same design having two separate staircases one for accommodation access the main staircase and one for emergency
00:31:45 staircase and one for emergency the escape staircase 4.7 the tmo has yet to receive the actual notices has been advised that the key matters of concern relate to the design of the main staircase ventilation system and the lack of self-closures
00:31:57 lack of self-closures on the individual flat front doors it should be noticed that the tmos agreed with the council to fit self-closures to all flat front doors within both the dare and hazelwood towers and the fitting program has now commenced
00:32:08 fitting program has now commenced it is expected that the notices should be received in the next week or so um having read that were you concerned about the prospect of service of enforcement notices which
00:32:19 of service of enforcement notices which could ultimately lead to prosecution if not complied with
00:32:23 clearly would be concerned about enforcement notices meaning there were deficiencies but i recall being satisfied on questioning that the gmo were then taking the necessary
00:32:35 gmo were then taking the necessary action to
00:32:36 action to comply with the notices
00:32:41 now if we go back to your first witness statement
00:32:44 statement rbk trouble zero double three seven double four forward slash 14 and paragraph 50.
00:32:56 forward slash 14 and paragraph 50. you say there you note that robert black had addressed um the hp sc meeting and referred to the fire at ader tower now
00:33:08 ader tower now looking at what's set out there mr black made it clear that the lfb's concerns weren't limited to adair and hazelwood towers but extended across the estate would you agree with that as a summary of what's set out there
00:33:20 of what's set out there yes presumably that was a matter of concern to you and your committee absolutely as i said though in discussion with them or asking them questions they told us that
00:33:32 asking them questions they told us that this has happened and they told us that they were going to take it seriously and and address the points during the course of those discussions was any consideration given to um asking the tmo to set out in writing
00:33:46 um asking the tmo to set out in writing for you
00:33:47 for you this substance of its responses to the lfb
00:33:50 lfb no i don't think we asked for a written report
00:33:54 report or or its proposals as to compliance with the notices no we would expect that they would then continue to report to us the pattern would be more that they would tell us these things we'd ask
00:34:05 would tell us these things we'd ask about
00:34:05 about it and then we would expect to be updated periodically subsequently now one issue which arose out over dare towers the information provided to tenants
00:34:16 provided to tenants and in that regard can we look at tmo one double zero
00:34:23 excuse me
00:34:28 and if we could go to the very end of this chain
00:34:33 and it's an email from councillor mason to you councillor mason is pat is that right
00:34:39 right correct now councillor mason says this under the heading of daretower fire at the last ccsc meeting can you help us ccsc what does that stand for uh
00:34:51 stand for uh corporate and cabinet services committee thank you
00:34:54 thank you i was asked to request if you could tell us what advice the tmo gives to its tenants in the case of a fire the question came up because the borough fire commander told the committee the last time he visited that although a
00:35:05 the last time he visited that although a dare tower flats were fitted with smoke-proof doors people opened them during the fire letting in the smoke when they may have been safer staying indoors and then started walking down 13 stories of smoke-filled stairs
00:35:16 down 13 stories of smoke-filled stairs perhaps it's not possible to stop people leaving a building in panic during a fire
00:35:22 fire on receipt of that email were you concerned about the quality and substance of the advice given to tmo residents in the event of a fire
00:35:33 i can't remember exactly how what i was thinking in response to this email i do know that um we have been told about the stay put policy
00:35:45 policy and it had been explained to us and we felt or understood it to be a sensible policy was that the thrust advice you'd received yes
00:35:57 received yes i wouldn't say advice that was what we've been told yes now if we scroll further up at this email chain you copy in robert black for a response it's just the next page
00:36:10 you say it's very bottom the page you say mr black could you let us know what is normally advised especially in towers also could you give some thought to council mason's questions
00:36:19 questions um about weekends and if we go further up
00:36:31 there we go we've got mr black's response
00:36:38 now would you agree that at this stage you would have been aware of the issue regarding door closes because of what had been discussed in relation to door closer issues previously
00:36:51 uh this is yes i believe so this is january 2016. and again would it be fair to say that your evidence is this you relied upon the
00:37:03 evidence is this you relied upon the assurances given to you by officers and the tmo and were satisfied that action was being taken yes now if we can go to the rbkc cabinet corporate
00:37:13 corporate services scrutiny committee and the minutes of the 8th of february 2016 and if those minutes can be found at rbk trouble zero five eight one zero one
00:37:27 if we go to page three
00:37:30 and the second paragraph from the very top of the page which starts with the words cancel the it says this and i quote councillor campbell drew attention to the statement on page one that fire safety information is provided
00:37:41 that fire safety information is provided to residents on the tmo website she considered this inadequate as not all residents would have access to the website
00:37:48 website referring to page two she drew attention to the comment that some dwellings were provided with lfe leaflets and asked which ones were not the chairman undertook to take this up with the tmo
00:38:00 now would you agree that by this stage so february 2016 there's a pattern of concern from councillors about the provision or lack of provision of information to residents
00:38:13 yes i i think councillor campbell is certainly expressing that concern here and councillor mason had done previously yes
00:38:24 now if we go to paragraph back to your first witness statement i'm afraid mr marshall paragraph 51 which is the rbk trouble zero double three
00:38:34 three seven double four forward slash fourteen
00:38:42 and you say this and i quote i do not know which individual had specific responsibility for fire safety at the tmo
00:38:48 tmo including at grenfell tower the information i had from sitting on the hpsc
00:38:52 hpsc was from the reports listed above based on what we were told there were no quotes red flags close quotes in relation to fire safety including at grenfell tower
00:39:03 including at grenfell tower given the enforcement notices that have been served by el fipa wouldn't it be an incumbent upon you to find out who did have specific responsibility for fire safety at the
00:39:15 responsibility for fire safety at the tma
00:39:16 tma i don't think so because we would always interact with the chief officer or the chief executive in relation to the tmo so we would see they those people as being responsible
00:39:27 responsible and in turn they would follow that chain of accountability through their organizations and would it flow from the answer you gave earlier on that notwithstanding the service of the enforcement notices
00:39:40 the service of the enforcement notices you had no reason to seek the advice of rbkc's in-house health and safety advisor or their own fire risk assessors no no we wouldn't to the scrutiny committee
00:39:51 committee now in the second sentence of that paragraph you said that there were quotes no red flags closed work close quotes in relation to fire safety including at grenfell would you agree with the suggestion that
00:40:03 would you agree with the suggestion that the service of enforcement notices in relation to a dare tower and the concerns
00:40:08 concerns regarding information given to tenants in the event of a fire did constitute red flags yes i would i don't think that was a very well phrased sentence i think i was
00:40:19 very well phrased sentence i think i was referred when i wrote it i was referring to the
00:40:22 to the formal documents we received from the tmo on a twice annual basis irrespective of format of documents that were provided to you can you remember whether at the time
00:40:34 you remember whether at the time the issue of the enforcement notices and information given to tenants was treated as a red flag issued by your committee or indeed the officers who reported to your
00:40:45 the officers who reported to your committee
00:40:46 committee i can't easily speak to the latter but certainly we took any matters like this very seriously
00:40:54 now i think i'm right in saying that the hpsc meeting on the 11th of may 2016 was your last as chairman is that right yes that's correct now if we go to the minutes of that meeting which are rbk
00:41:06 minutes of that meeting which are rbk zero one double four three six
00:41:18 now you can take it from me and i'm sure if this is wrong i will be corrected but there's no mention in these minutes of the enforcement notices or
00:41:29 notices or lfb's concerns regarding self-closures across the tmo housing stock does that absence demonstrate that those issues were unimportant to the hpsc
00:41:40 issues were unimportant to the hpsc no it would have meant that they weren't raised at this meeting
00:41:46 thank you now can i turn to a separate distinct
00:41:49 distinct topic which is the grenfell tower refurbishment review and can we now look at the issue of the petition regarding the works of grenfell that was brought before your committee in late 2015 and then later into 2016.
00:42:01 in late 2015 and then later into 2016. now you deal with this petition in your first witness statement of paragraph 107 through to 120
00:42:09 and the references can be found at rbk trouble zero double three seven double four forward slash 26
00:42:19 now i'm not going to ask you to go through all of that again and i've given the reference but can you remember when you were first made aware of the fact of the petition
00:42:31 of the fact of the petition not precisely i would imagine in advance of the
00:42:34 of the council meeting i think from memory maybe a week before who made you aware of it i believe either council fielding mellon or
00:42:44 or mrs johnson but i'm not sorry now can we can we go to the petition itself which is rba rbk quintuple zero double one zero
00:42:57 quintuple zero double one zero and specifically the prayer of that petition
00:43:10 and it says basically we the undersigned residents of grenfell tower as the chairman of the housing property and security committee turned to take an urgent scrutiny of the
00:43:21 turned to take an urgent scrutiny of the tmo and ryden's management the refurbishment project it says timed again residence views have been ignored or downplayed despite interventions from our mp our
00:43:32 despite interventions from our mp our day-to-day concerns are belittled and sidelined
00:43:38 and then further substance set out and then the signatures now taking the step back uh would you agree
00:43:47 agree that the strong language of that prayer at the very least evidence the strength of residents views yes and it would appear given the
00:43:59 yes and it would appear given the number of signatories that a significant number of residents supported the petition would you agree with that yes
00:44:07 it asked that lessons be learned from the project do you agree with that yes and that grantful resident views and experience be canvassed and included in the report so that future projects could benefit do you agree with that as well
00:44:20 benefit do you agree with that as well yes did you accept that request that the time has been reasonable or not yes yes that we should uh that we should undertake scrutiny of the program yes
00:44:35 and going beyond that learning lessons yes
00:44:39 yes and that grenfell residence view should be canvassed so that future projects could be informed by the grenfell experience
00:44:46 yes but as i referred to earlier i don't think at that time we routinely as a committee engaged directly with residents so i don't think we would have expected
00:44:58 so i don't think we would have expected to have played a direct role in in that canvassing process
00:45:02 process we did as it happened mr de fung came to our committee and spoke but it wouldn't be normal for us to go and undertake a canvassing exercise ourselves
00:45:12 ourselves can we look at an email chain now that begins on the 7th of december 2015
00:45:19 2015 and it starts with an email from laura johnson to you and councillor fielding melon
00:45:24 melon and the first email in the chain is rbk quadruple 0-3567
00:45:34 it starts at the bottom of this page you see there counselor fm and councillor marshall
00:45:38 marshall then goes over the page
00:45:43 and sets out a petition being handed in second paragraph invites whether you want to discuss matters with mr black or mr madison
00:45:54 mr madison and it concludes i would like your guidance on how you wish to respond to the petition she then includes the prayer that we've just looked at and then if we could look at the response from rock fielding melon
00:46:05 response from rock fielding melon so going back to page one
00:46:11 he says this and i quote as the as the petition has addressed the chair of hpsc i must defer to councilman marshall however i would agree with you that both the housing department and the tmo must be mindful of their limited manpower and
00:46:22 be mindful of their limited manpower and resources
00:46:23 resources must make sure that they spread such limited resources as evenly and fairly across the council's entire hra state rather than focusing predominantly wherever the loudest complaints are coming from the council has acknowledged the
00:46:34 the council has acknowledged the disruption and inconvenience caused by such major refurbishment and improvement works being done to grenfell tower but i believe that it is the inevitable price that must be paid by the residents in order to have their flats brought up
00:46:45 in order to have their flats brought up to very good modern standards i trust that both the tmo and ryden will continue to work with residents of gt on a case-by-case basis helping to fix individual problems that have resulted from the refurbishment as the council committed to in the
00:46:57 as the council committed to in the amended motion last week
00:47:01 now looking at that email correspondence in the round would it be fair reasonable to say that neither laura johnson nor counsellor fielding mellon were in favor of a review
00:47:16 i think they were saying that they didn't have the resources within the department to undertake a department by a review by the officers a full complete review yes
00:47:28 and they're basically saying it was over to you
00:47:31 to you it's the thrust of cancer fielding melanchema he was saying it was for me to decide i say me the committee to decide how to respond to the petition it's been referred to us by the full council
00:47:42 referred to us by the full council and if we go to your response at the top of this page
00:47:50 you see that 8th of december 2015 at 1615 you said this and i quote my instinct was to add an oral agenda item to our next meeting rather than the report
00:47:59 report what you both think i'm sure a majority of members could be pre-briefed to understand how to play it why did you ask ms johnson the cancer fielding melon for their views
00:48:12 because i was making a suggestion and i wanted them to tell me if they agreed with it you didn't think it was matter solely for you given you the chairman i could have insisted on one thing or
00:48:24 i could have insisted on one thing or another but it's not unreasonable to ask their views now looking at your statement and i quote i'm sure a majority of members could be pre-briefed to understand how to play it close quotes are you suggesting there
00:48:36 close quotes are you suggesting there that you pre-briefed the members of the committee
00:48:40 committee i yes in relation to whether there should be a oral report or a written
00:48:46 report was that a majority of committee members or the members of the committee who were from the majority party no i think just a majority of members
00:48:58 no i think just a majority of members what do you mean by the phrase quotes understand how to play it close quotes well that we wouldn't have a written report that we would deal with this orally
00:49:10 was your ins was your intention to instruct the majority of how to play it no i can't couldn't my colleagues would not take my instruction even if i sought
00:49:22 not take my instruction even if i sought to give it it wasn't that wasn't the nature of our relationship they were an entirely independent group of 10 other councillors so you made no effort to predetermine the decision
00:49:34 the decision no i could bring my own views but i could tell them why i thought that it was reasonable particularly over christmas
00:49:40 christmas and given that what i've been told by both the senior officer and the cabinet member
00:49:45 member that if we'd asked for a report it would be
00:49:48 be difficult for them can you remember now the gist of the words or just the discussions you had when briefing the majority of the members to be honest i don't actually recall
00:49:59 to be honest i don't actually recall doing so
00:50:10 when you were discussing how best to quotes play it close quotes um did you have regard to the four principles of scrutiny that we considered at the start of your examination or at least
00:50:21 examination or at least the uh the substance of them yes i considered that an oral report would allow us to to conduct proper scrutiny i wouldn't have agreed to do something which would have
00:50:32 agreed to do something which would have uh led to an improper level of scrutiny it was just whether that that would require a full written report at this stage this email exchange wasn't set out in your witness statement can you help us
00:50:43 your witness statement can you help us to why it wasn't mentioned in your statement
00:50:45 statement or any of your statements i should say i don't think it was material could we turn to another email chain from the 19th of december 2015 which can be found at rbk treble
00:50:57 2015 which can be found at rbk treble zero
00:50:57 zero three zero seven four one
00:51:10 now if we can expand the top email which is one to cancel the blakeman you say this i would be willing to hear from the residents although to be clear they will not be permitted to question officers that's
00:51:23 permitted to question officers that's quite a clear steer from you to another councillor isn't it of how you wanted to play the meeting yes one of the few distinguishing features of my role versus other
00:51:35 features of my role versus other counselors was maintaining order at a meeting so on that sense i absolutely that was my role
00:51:42 looking back now prompted by this email chain
00:51:46 chain do you think it's likely that you would have briefed the majority of members of your committee by this stage so the 19th of december no i don't think i had i did
00:51:57 no i don't think i had i did brief the majority of the members of the committee as a guest and it is a guess i might have spoken to my vice chairman you can ask him later i know he's he's coming but i can't remember doing so
00:52:08 can't remember doing so to be honest i don't think i i felt i probably needed to was it his view it's makov's view that a speech in their questions would not be allowed as i've said i i
00:52:19 would not be allowed as i've said i i can't remember speaking to him i'm just surmising what if i were to have spoken to someone the most likely person that i would have spoken to would have been him could we now go to another email chain which is rbk
00:52:30 which is rbk trouble zero four six three zero one and it's the first email in that chain which starts at the bottom of the first page
00:52:41 now peter madison on 24th of december 2015 circulated a briefing note on the refurbishment of the tower
00:52:54 do you recall receiving and reading that note
00:53:00 note i'm not certain uh i i've definitely read it
00:53:04 read it but i can't recall precisely when i've read it but i would presume i would have read it
00:53:08 read it between christmas and the meeting can we move up this chain to an email from robert black on the 4th of january 2016. there we go um it says this and i correct i've just
00:53:19 um it says this and i correct i've just picked up this briefing was sent to you before christmas my apologies but it should have been marked confidential as is going to my board tonight as a confidential paper i wonder if you could treat this as confidential until after
00:53:30 treat this as confidential until after my board meeting if it help spelling's correct it can be tabled at the scrutiny committee close quotes
00:53:39 was it of any undue concern that mr black wanted to keep the paper confidential
00:53:48 i don't recall i can't remember whether i thought it was of concern or not in general our view throughout this process was that the tmo was keeping
00:54:00 process was that the tmo was keeping things confidential which we couldn't see why they needed to be they would assert that these documents were confidential to them and it wasn't for us we didn't have the
00:54:09 the right to disclose things how did you uh press them uh on whether the plea of confidentiality was well made in our committee meetings and how how
00:54:21 in our committee meetings and how how did they respond to that pressure from you
00:54:25 you they asserted that they were confidential to them did they give you any uh greater detail as to why they were confidential for example did they say it included commercially sensitive material or anything of that nature
00:54:38 material or anything of that nature i can't remember the exact arguments used i think in the sixth of january meeting potentially and i think also maybe in the may 2016 meeting we had council legal officers sitting
00:54:49 we had council legal officers sitting with us
00:54:51 with us and i can't remember again if they spoke directly to this but certainly their presence and their lack of challenge to it if that's what happened and i can't remember precisely we would have taken as a sign of that
00:55:03 we would have taken as a sign of that our law our own lawyers were implicitly validating this approach
00:55:08 approach so because of that you were content not to press the matter further is that a fair summary no not content not to no
00:55:15 not to no we we thought that certainly the board report which came to us in may 2016
00:55:22 2016 should be matter should be made public so
00:55:25 so going to our your earlier questions in terms of our powers this is quite a good example in sense of we couldn't compel them to do anything all we could keep saying is why this you know we'll keep asking that
00:55:37 why this you know we'll keep asking that question
00:55:39 question now can we just interrupt for a moment i mean
00:55:42 mean the impression i get from this email is that
00:55:46 that at that stage the paper in question hadn't gone to the tmo board and um what mr black is saying is that you should treat it as confidential
00:55:58 that you should treat it as confidential until after the board meeting it can be tabled at the scrutiny committee does that did that give you to understand what's going on yeah no thank you no i think that's correct so if i've read it properly he's saying
00:56:11 so if i've read it properly he's saying it's confidential for the next 24 hours because i believe that meeting occurred on the 5th and our meeting would have occurred on the 6th if it were if he's agreeing that it would be tabled on the 6th by definition it's a public meeting and
00:56:23 it's a public meeting and would have then been made public well that's when i was wondering do you recall
00:56:26 recall whether it was tabled at the scrutiny committee
00:56:29 committee i'm afraid i don't it may appear from the minutes but i just wondered if you could recall i can't remember of course by this stage i would have read it so i'm not sure i would have remembered whether it was subsequently tabled
00:56:41 whether it was subsequently tabled thank you just flowing from that sir just so we get your evidence clear did you have further instances of frustration that the tmo said that
00:56:53 of frustration that the tmo said that papers were confidential and you were pressing for the publication no as you mentioned i i left the committee in may 2016. so the only other and i'd say the most
00:57:04 only other and i'd say the most significant uh perhaps the only occasion where i had that was was in relation to this board report which was clearly a very important document
00:57:14 now can we go to an email chain which begins on the 5th of january 2016 between robert black and laura johnson and that can be found at tm00852 704
00:57:36 and if we go to page four in this chain and it's the first email from robert black which ought to be 5th of january 2016 sent at 1523 and if we go to the
00:57:47 2016 sent at 1523 and if we go to the third paragraph down it says this in terms of outcomes the board agreed we need to finish the project character review to see what has worked and not ie lessons learned usually this would be
00:57:59 ie lessons learned usually this would be officers doing it but they want it to be involved which is fine and adds the challenge and independence paula fance wants to be involved and adds value to her regeneration work she was very supportive
00:58:10 was very supportive cush will get involved and a few others as could judith they can listen to the issues
00:58:15 issues the board feels this is a tmo matter and wants to deal with it itself i imagine they will be happy to share the outcomes with scrutiny and if we go to page three of this email chain at the very bottom of that page
00:58:28 chain at the very bottom of that page and an email sent by laura johnson at 1636
00:58:32 1636 and the second paragraph says this rec board recommendations seem very reasonable rbkc has no desire to be involved in review i shall echo this point councillor mack over so that recommendations the board
00:58:45 over so that recommendations the board has made are supported at scrutiny committee if we go further up the page to see robert black's response at the top of page three
00:58:56 he says their last push for tonight will let councillor marshall know my board decision
00:59:01 decision might be worth reminding him they have four appointees and pauline has confirmed she is happy to be on the review
00:59:06 review and if we go over the page to page two
00:59:12 laura johnson's response there 6th of january 2016 1138 she says this and i quote i've emailed counselor martial the board outcome says aware
00:59:20 aware and in that email i remind him that paula was an rbkc nominee we can make this point again tonight if a scrutiny committee member is suggested as being on the review of the grenfell tower refurbishment now if we can having set
00:59:32 refurbishment now if we can having set out that long run up can we now look at an email to councillor mac over copying you
00:59:37 you from laura johnson that can be found at rbk trouble zero three zero seven double four
00:59:52 we can see you're copied in it's dated the
00:59:56 the 5th of january sent at 446 and says there's the tiemoue board met on monday night
01:00:01 night one of the items on the agenda was grenfell tower and the impending discussion of scrutiny committee on the 6th of january the board agreed and she set out what has previously been quoted and concludes
01:00:12 has previously been quoted and concludes with this i'm sure mr black will raise this as on wednesday but if not i thought i would share it with you
01:00:18 with you as it would be useful if a suggested outcome of the discussion security committee
01:00:21 committee could support the tmo and the due process they are undertaking now looking at that email in the round why would it have been sent
01:00:32 would it have been sent to councillor mack over and not you who's still then the chair honestly i don't know um i believe he might have gone to the
01:00:44 um i believe he might have gone to the tenants consultative committee uh which i believe owned slowly from the papers i've read subsequently i think was happening the same week so potentially maybe they had had a
01:00:55 potentially maybe they had had a conversation at that or i you'd have to ask him and fred but i i agree it just seems odd at first blush i agree and i haven't seen those other
01:01:06 i agree and i haven't seen those other emails
01:01:06 emails and i think one thing we were always jealous of and i'm afraid this was the source of some friction over many very many years was our prerogatives it was for us to decide
01:01:18 our prerogatives it was for us to decide as a committee how we wish to proceed of course we took great account of our officers advice we respected them i think ms johnson was a very fine officer but it wouldn't be for her to tell us how we wish to proceed
01:01:30 how we wish to proceed that really comes to us the question i was going to ask you next whether the whether you treated the last paragraph of that email as a weighted piece of advice if not an instruction
01:01:44 i think if i thought it was an instruction if anything it would have prompted me to do the precise opposite say we were quite jealous of those progressives we had few of them but the ability to decide our own agenda
01:01:55 but the ability to decide our own agenda and how we wish to proceed with was one of the few did you consider that last paragraph to be within the bounds of propriety
01:02:05 i i i can't remember i'm reading it now i think it's very close to wherever those bounds lie
01:02:13 but you wouldn't have acquiesced in it seems to be the truth of your evidence no and and indeed if even if i had or indeed council mac overhead we were two of
01:02:22 of 11 people and the other nine people would have similarly you know they would have expressed their own views so we had no that was one of that's perhaps the reason that these
01:02:34 reason that these scrutiny was performed by a committee not by single individuals i'm sorry if i just to say it also included of course members of the minority party so it
01:02:45 members of the minority party so it wasn't just a consensus amongst one political grouping it was designed to encourage independent thought just look going back to the addressee point
01:02:57 to the addressee point it's possible that the email wasn't addressed to you directly because you already knew the substance are you able to help us whether that's a fair reasonable inference to draw and
01:03:08 fair reasonable inference to draw and the fact it was solely it was primarily addressed to cancer mac over
01:03:15 i don't know because i i i don't recall having any uh emails or conversations with mr johnson around what their board had discussed in the 24
01:03:26 what their board had discussed in the 24 hours before the committee would be very unlikely that i would
01:03:32 would mr canelo can we just be clear about that uh here's the suggestion that uh councillor marshall might already have had a conversation with miss johnson which he had uh given him the thoughts
01:03:45 which he had uh given him the thoughts in that last paragraph uh yes well i think that ought to be put a bit more clearly again i can't remember precisely so i don't want to mislead you but it's extremely unlikely
01:03:56 mislead you but it's extremely unlikely i would have had a conversation with miss johnson most of our interactions other than when we had an agenda planning meeting were through email so it would have been a matter of record
01:04:09 it would have been a matter of record yeah would you understand what mr clear is putting to you he suggested that this email didn't need because i'd already been you'd already been got out got out and i'm saying okay i think that's
01:04:20 and i'm saying okay i think that's extremely unlikely thank you thank you miss motor um
01:04:25 could we look at the minutes of the scrutiny committee meeting and there are rbk
01:04:29 rbk trouble zero three two one three zero
01:04:33 and grenfell is addresses item a4 on page two i'm not going to take you through all of it but if we could look at
01:04:44 it but if we could look at page four in the second paragraph
01:04:51 cancer counselor mac over thank residents for attending you'll see slightly further down on the fifth line its report is recorded saying council macover suggested that a working group
01:05:01 group could have a look at the lessons learned for future regeneration projects and you would be happy to chair this group
01:05:09 group next paragraph counselor beryl cox agreed that a working group would be the best mechanism to conduct a review and then
01:05:14 then look at the lessons learned he said that it was important to look at what consultation proposals were in place for any future projects then we go further down the page if we may
01:05:25 may at the bottom counselor press said that grenfell tower was the first example of regeneration of a tower in the borough and as good practice there should be a review of how the project went and she would support a recommendation for a working group
01:05:37 working group and she said the council of latin's comments
01:05:40 comments that the group need to be independent with the resource and skills necessary said the independent reviewer may be useful to give expertise now there seem to be at least a a body of opinion that a working group was a
01:05:51 of opinion that a working group was a good idea
01:05:52 good idea is that a fair summary of the reality of the meeting yes which is why that was what we agreed to do
01:06:00 to do and just following on from that we see it the the paragraph at the top of the page it starts with the chairman said that if a working group was established then it would decide on what resources
01:06:11 then it would decide on what resources it needed
01:06:11 it needed and its scope he said however that he was reluctant to establish another working group until those in existence had reported he suggested the group was not set up immediately that urgent complaint should be dealt
01:06:22 that urgent complaint should be dealt with through the tmo process and then if we go to the conclusions section which further down that page i think
01:06:30 think there we go in conclusion the chairman agreed that a working group would be commissioned at some point in the future but this was dependent on a number of factors including the conclusion of existing working groups and the review work conducted by the tmo
01:06:43 and the review work conducted by the tmo was it fair to say that the reluctance to set up a working group came from you and you alone or the others who shared your view i was certainly reluctant to set up a
01:06:55 i was certainly reluctant to set up a working group for several reasons so i can't remember if other people voice those concerns i think my concerns were perhaps unique to me because of being in
01:07:07 perhaps unique to me because of being in the position i was namely we tended to be rather better at setting up working groups than actually concluding them and my thought was we need to conclude
01:07:18 and my thought was we need to conclude things we're already doing before setting up more groups and secondly having just been informed that there was a report being produced on exactly the same subject by an integr independent group of people
01:07:31 an integr independent group of people namely the tmo board that i wasn't quite sure what we could do
01:07:36 do added to which the scope of a working group as i mentioned earlier was was that it was constituted of a small number of councillors three or five of them
01:07:44 them um interrogating officers and i presume in this case it would have also included tmo employees although i i can't remember another working group where they were involved
01:07:56 involved and essentially replicated what we were doing in full committee so in this case we'd spent quite considerable amount of time at that meeting in full committee challenging the the tmo and our officers
01:08:08 challenging the the tmo and our officers on the points raised by residents so i wasn't quite sure where a working group with exactly the same set of people would go other than reaching exactly the
01:08:19 would go other than reaching exactly the same set of conclusions that we'd already reached talking about it for i think it was an hour an hour and a half in in full committee
01:08:26 committee can you help us what was independent about the proposed tmo review so it was constituted as i understand it of members of their board all of whom were non-executives some of whom were
01:08:39 were non-executives some of whom were resident members some of whom were appointed by the borough some of whom were as i understand it had a reasonable level of expertise in that in the field of housing so all of whom
01:08:51 whom were not part of the tmo executive
01:08:56 can you remember now when councillor press uh referred to the need for the group to be independent with the
01:09:03 with the resources and skills necessary did she express any concerns that a tmo review did not satisfy that threshold of independence no i don't believe anyone expressed that view i believe and if
01:09:16 expressed that view i believe and if they had it would have certainly made it into the minutes because they would have uh disagreed with
01:09:22 with with us waiting for the tmos review to be conducted do you recall any pushback from either councillor blakeman or councillor press or councillor beryl cox
01:09:34 councillor press or councillor beryl cox or indeed councillor mack over about the independence of the tmo review no
01:09:40 no could we now look at another email chain and that's between you and victoria borac mp
01:09:45 borac mp and that was in march 2016 can be found at met triple zero seven eight
01:09:51 eight zero eight four
01:09:56 i won't take you through the entire chain we only need to look at the first of the email on this first page date of the 3rd of march 2016
01:10:07 date of the 3rd of march 2016 you sign it q did you know miss boric very well and if we look at your summary of your initial conclusions
01:10:18 your summary of your initial conclusions and you say it one
01:10:21 we're spending about 100k per flat of public money to improve the building while there's been some disruption there's a massive level of support and to some extent i think when seen in the round worth a bit of disruption
01:10:34 the round worth a bit of disruption for leaseholders in particular is essentially a hundred grand thousand pound gift from the state and therefore not massively sympathetic to general
01:10:42 general quotes it's all terrible close quotes complaints looking at two when pressed very few specific complaints have been made and evidenced where there have been complaints these
01:10:53 where there have been complaints these are being treated seriously by the tmo three there's been a very unpleasant campaign against the tmo in certain offices
01:11:00 offices this does not reflect well on those involved four having inspected the flats my judgment is some of the wilder claims are grossly exaggerated you go further down next paragraph when you met people did they actually cite
01:11:12 you met people did they actually cite specifics
01:11:13 specifics mr uh the final committee made wild unstamped unsubstantiated claims which were not credible i'm certain the works weren't absolutely perfect and there'll be things to learn and improve on hence the review but equally we need to
01:11:26 hence the review but equally we need to take some of what has been said with a large pinch of salt now at this stage is it fair to say that you've read the petition yes and presumably you'd read mr madison's briefing note that he
01:11:38 madison's briefing note that he circulated on christmas eve i would presume
01:11:41 presume and had the debate at the committee on the 6th of january and you'd agreed at least in principle to commission a working group but whose work was to start at an indeterminate time in the future yes
01:11:54 indeterminate time in the future yes when the board review had completed and you visited the tower i think on the 13th of january 2016 is that right that's correct yes
01:12:05 but is it fair to say that at this stage you hadn't investigated the substance of the resident's concerns and complaints well we had because we talked about them specifically in our meeting on 6th of
01:12:17 specifically in our meeting on 6th of january
01:12:18 january one of our challenges and this is what i refer to here is that there were very few specifics mentioned so for example it was cited that there had been a campaign of i believe harassment lies and
01:12:29 i believe harassment lies and intimidation conducted by the tmo but without any detail to substantiate that
01:12:37 that and those claims did not seem credible to me
01:12:42 to me what i wrote here was exactly what i was thinking at the time
01:12:46 would you accept though in your role as chairman of the scrutiny committee you had to keep an open mind on these matters yes which is why i think i said my initial conclusion was the emphasis on the word initial or
01:12:57 was the emphasis on the word initial or the emphasis on the word conclusion
01:13:01 i don't think you can separate the two i think this is an initial conclusion well looking at the substance of what you've set out at points one through to four
01:13:11 four you're not sympathetic to it's all terrible complaints you say there's very few specific complaints made and evidenced you say some of the wilder claims are grossly exaggerated you said mr defan made wild
01:13:23 you said mr defan made wild unsubstantiated claims which were not credible
01:13:25 credible and you recommended taking a large pinch of salt when considering those matters to the lay eye they may tend to suggest that you'd formed a view
01:13:37 that you'd formed a view a relatively firm view at this stage would you agree with that yes but if i may you admitted the sentence which says i think that the works weren't absolutely perfect and that there will be things to learn and improve on
01:13:50 learn and improve on which was i think that where we were at this stage this was uh the complaints were not about specific things which were immediate at that time they were about lessons to be learned
01:14:00 learned for future similar redevelopment could we now turn to some email correspondence you had with mr david collins just in relation to the working
01:14:11 collins just in relation to the working group just following through some of the evidence you've just given now these emails are rbk trouble zero two eight four six five and if we go to the bottom of page two
01:14:23 and if we go to the bottom of page two of this chain which hopefully is an email from mr collins to you on the 24th of april there we go at the very bottom sent at 10 17.
01:14:34 10 17. mr collins said he was writing to you on behalf of the grenfell tower residents association please could we meet with you to discuss the setting up of the rbkc working group which is going to investigate the tmo's handling and the grandfather improvement
01:14:47 handling and the grandfather improvement works
01:14:48 works and the impact that had on wellbeing of residents
01:14:52 residents we are seeking assurances that the working group will be independent of our bkc and tmo and we're also asking that residents be allowed to contribute to the questions asked by the working group now your response if we go back oh sorry
01:15:05 now your response if we go back oh sorry it's at the top of the page there sorry is sent on the 28th of april 2016. and you say this my quote at its agm in may the council will appoint a new
01:15:16 may the council will appoint a new housing and property scrutiny committee i would imagine many of the members will be the same as this year however i will be standing down and will no longer be on the committee at our main meeting which precedes the agm will receive the tmo report on grenfell
01:15:27 will receive the tmo report on grenfell tower will then be for the new committee to decide how it wishes to pursue the matter further including whether it wishes to set up a working group i would note however that while a working group would consist of councillors not officers
01:15:38 councillors not officers it would not be independent of our bkc might i therefore suggest you approach the new chairman of the committee when he her is appointed to sorry is appointed to discuss how the
01:15:49 sorry is appointed to discuss how the committee will proceed essentially you're saying it was no longer a matter for you is that a fair summary
01:15:57 summary i was saying i couldn't um take any or couldn't give him any assurances or tell him anything about a committee on which i would no longer be sitting
01:16:09 and mr sorry mr marshall no just to say i think
01:16:13 i think reading it here my answer was a rather technical answer which is to say he was asking me to to bind
01:16:21 bind my uh successors and i was saying i can't do that because i'm not going to be part of that group to take that decision now if we look at mr collins's response which is
01:16:32 which is just further up the page when deed over the page i think
01:16:38 there we go um he says in the second paragraph of his response date of the first of may this and i quote however it's not acceptable suggest the group will not be taking forward its commitment to investigate the handling of grenfell
01:16:49 to investigate the handling of grenfell tower and proven works by the tmo i was in the public gallery for the scrutiny committee on the 6th of january 2016
01:16:55 2016 when after committee discussion you committed the committee to investigate the matter during 2016.
01:17:08 his concern there seems to be the tmo would be unable to undertake a critical examination of its own actions looking at what is set out in the third paragraph of that email would you agree with that
01:17:21 in the in the third did you say yes in the third paragraph
01:17:42 i'm not sure i'm quite getting on the third paragraph the the point about that he wasn't um satisfied with the independence of the board
01:17:50 board maybe you could well if you if you de-expand and if you go down sorry if you if you can expand this email and if you read on the absence of follow
01:18:02 and if you read on the absence of follow through here leaves me and you think that some are too scared to explore alternative narratives and we go on
01:18:13 alternative narratives and we go on dissatisfaction with the manner in which the tmo have managed and carried out the works
01:18:17 works yes sorry and then go on and then conclude oh these people's views and experiences going to be dismissed or ignored because they do not fit with the official narrative from the tmo and so taking maybe i should have put it
01:18:29 and so taking maybe i should have put it better mr marshall i apologize but looking at the email in the round would you agree that mr mr collins's underlying concern is that the tmo
01:18:40 the tmo would not be able to undertake a critical examination of its own actions yes although i think i would have thought there's a distinction between the tmo executive and the tmo board
01:18:52 the tmo executive and the tmo board if the tmo board couldn't critique and hold its own executive to account i'm not
01:18:57 not quite sure what function it played now can you remember whether you responded to this email chain because if we
01:19:04 we i don't think i did because i don't think i felt there's anything more i could say beyond what i'd already said
01:19:11 said now you did have a further exchange with councillor makover
01:19:17 and it might be best so bear in mind the time that i come to that after a brief break yes all right well that sounds sensible well mr marshall we're going to have a
01:19:28 well mr marshall we're going to have a short break now we'll resume if we may please at 25 to 4 and again i have to ask you not to talk to anyone about your evidence while you're out of the room all right thank you very much
01:19:48 25 to 40.
01:36:30 yes would you ask mr marshall to come back in please
01:36:45 right mr marshall all ready to keep going yes thank you very much yes mr kennedy thanks sir mr marshall we were just considering your email exchange with mr collins and i was about to take you to a further exchange you had with councillor mack
01:36:57 exchange you had with councillor mack over
01:36:58 over now that can be found at rbk triple zero six
01:37:01 six double zero five four
01:37:10 and the first email there third of may 2016 from sam makover and he says to my recollection if we can go further down please
01:37:21 go further down please to my recollection the position hps took having visited the site was to review the findings of the board report when it was complete this will be done 11th of may then it is up to hps members to vote on whether
01:37:32 up to hps members to vote on whether there are any further lessons learned to review
01:37:35 review now you reply further up
01:37:39 indeed and it is for the next committee to decide what it wishes to do if i were on it i'd probably conclude we'd spent enough time on the subject already
01:37:48 already i certainly wouldn't want a working group at best i would spend half an hour in full committee reviewing it bottom line we spent over a hundred thousand pounds per flat the end result looks great as far as i
01:37:59 the end result looks great as far as i can see the people we saw were happy the flats looked great and to date i've seen no specific allegations or complaints only generalizations and hyperbole now your response there indicates that
01:38:12 now your response there indicates that you were
01:38:12 you were emphatically against a working group is that a fair characterization of your view at the time i wasn't in favor of working group yes yeah and for the same reasons you gave earlier on yes
01:38:24 earlier on yes you said you'd seen no specific allegations um wasn't that why or wasn't that a good reason to set up the working group to look into allegations and
01:38:36 group to look into allegations and complaints and determine whether they were meritorious or not
01:38:41 we were constitutionally barred from looking at specific complaints meaning person a complaining about issue b but when i'm saying no specific allegations or complaints
01:38:53 allegations or complaints there weren't there were no specifics that we were given so everything was um was phrased in terms of we have been the subjects of
01:39:04 subjects of harassment we haven't been listened to but this was completely contradicted by what we were hearing from the tmo and validated by our own officers
01:39:15 wouldn't the working group though provided the mechanism to identify the specifics to drill down into the detail and you denied yourself the opportunity of so doing
01:39:27 of so doing well my presumption was that we were at this point still waiting for the board review
01:39:31 review and that the board review would have done all this so i didn't see much additional utility in in us going and asking the same questions
01:39:45 but you weren't willing here in your email to say let's wait for the tmo board review and then decide whether a working group would be a useful exercise um no i was commenting on where i saw it
01:39:57 um no i was commenting on where i saw it at the time the third of may
01:40:04 mr marshall those are all the questions i have for you now um chairman there were some problems with relativity earlier on in the day no
01:40:15 relativity earlier on in the day no right
01:40:15 right we think they have been resolved but might i
01:40:18 might i ask that you rise to allow me 20 minutes to see if there are any further matters which arise which may accommodate any further relativity problems if they haven't been resolved
01:40:28 resolved yes all right well um mr marshall when council gets the end of his questions or thinks he's got to the end of his questions we always have a break to give him a chance to review the position and also to
01:40:41 position and also to take into consideration questions that may be suggested by others who are following this but not in the room so having got you back in for five minutes i'm not going to invite you to go out again
01:40:53 you to go out again and if we've had problems with the uh with the technology i think it's sensible to have a slightly longer break than we would otherwise normally do so i'm going to say four o'clock
01:41:04 o'clock and at four o'clock we'll see if there any more questions for you all right okay thank you thank you very much so please go to the ocean thank you
01:41:19 much so please go to the ocean thank you all right mr come here four o'clock um i hope there won't be any difficulties at that point if there are you'll know that let us know we'll do thanks sir thank you very much
01:59:54 would you ask mr marshall to come back in please
02:00:06 all right mr marshall we'll see if there are any more questions we need to ask you yes mr canoe tim uh mr marshall earlier on we were discussing the email in which you characterized mr defan's complaints as
02:00:17 characterized mr defan's complaints as wild
02:00:17 wild and unsubstantiated quote why did you not ask him to provide examples or question him about those claims at the hpsc meeting on the 6th of january 2016.
02:00:30 the the end of his presentation um was
02:00:37 difficult because he wanted to continue speaking
02:00:40 speaking for significantly longer than we had allowed for him so it wasn't easy at that point i think to to start a question and answer session and to be fair to him he wasn't there to
02:00:51 there to be asked questions of us it was the other way around thank you now mr marshall before we end today um is there anything you would like to say to the panel
02:01:02 you would like to say to the panel that we haven't covered an examination but you'd wish them to have regard to i think i'd like to emphasize two points you've raised in questioning
02:01:12 one is i think it's clear we should have had fire safety as a standing item on our agenda i think we dealt with it
02:01:21 it as it arose but it's particularly saying the documents you've shown me today it's evident that should have been something that
02:01:26 that was a standing item like we reviewed the tmo like we reviewed the budget so i think that's something i regret the other thing i think which is really apparent to me especially rereading all of this
02:01:38 especially rereading all of this story from beginning to end is that whilst
02:01:41 whilst when we were looking at particular matters we were dealing with them i think appropriately within the very narrow scope of thinking of them from a council perspective
02:01:52 of them from a council perspective i don't think we saw the bigger picture and i don't think that we really address the emotional side and i think we lacked a little humanity and um you know i would like to apologize to
02:02:05 to the people involved for that i think we could have done better
02:02:10 thank you mr marshall thank you very much for attending to give evidence today
02:02:15 today mr marshall before you go let me thank you if i may on behalf of all three members of the panel for coming to give us your time and your account of what went on it is really very valuable to us to hear
02:02:27 really very valuable to us to hear directly from those who are involved at the time
02:02:30 the time and so we are very grateful to you for coming to give evidence thank you very much
02:02:33 much thank you right thank you go to the usher then
02:02:48 well that mr kinnear um do we have any more witnesses for today no more witnesses for today sir um we will start tomorrow with mr mack over
02:02:59 over with your permission and that will be 10 o'clock tomorrow at 10 o'clock tomorrow yes good right thank you well then that case will
02:03:06 case will close for today and we'll resume at 10 o'clock tomorrow and look forward to the next witness then thank you thank you very much
02:03:51 you