The Grenfell Tower tragedy has stunned us all. It may not have happened in West Sussex, but many of the issues and concerns are equally valid across the UK.
Those of us
who are, or were, firefighters can only admire the London firefighters who took
such risks and punishment to try and rescue people. I am sure we can also relate to
the extreme frustration and despair that they must have felt when they
were unable to help more people. Especially when they could see and hear victims,
but could not reach them.
It is quite right that there will be a public inquiry and it
must cover everything, from when the building was planned, right through to all
aspects of the response. Every organisation, body and individual who may have
taken, or failed to take, action that contributed to the tragic outcome and post
incident inadequacies must be investigated. They must examine what influenced
decisions and then assess each one to see if it was right or wrong to take that
decision at the time it was taken.
I know many people want an organisation or individual to
blame, but I doubt there will be a clear cut ‘x’ knew doing ‘y’ was extremely
dangerous, but did it anyway. Disasters usually result from a series of
failures and, had any one of them not happened, then disaster would have been
avoided. If there is a significant individual failing, that must be dealt with,
but that must not allow other contributing failings to be swept under the
carpet. If failings justify prosecution then so be it, but the most
important thing is to act to prevent all the failings, large and small, from
being repeated. There is already strong evidence that lessons learnt previously
were not acted upon, and that must not happen again.
We will have to wait for the full facts to emerge, but I
would not be surprised if several of the following issues did not play a part:
This is what can happen when politicians:
- dismiss the professional concerns
of firefighters as scaremongering
- reject genuine public concern as
politically motivated
- remove the inspectorate that
monitored fire & rescue services
- replaced regular fire safety
inspections by experienced and trained firefighters with tick box inspections
by people with limited training and little or no experience
- handed fire risk assessments over
to the private sector, without any monitoring of their standards, abilities and
effectiveness
- falsely claim that fewer
emergency calls justifies fewer fire crews
- use the fire & rescue service
as a political football
- legislate, but don’t provide
funding and fail to monitor those given duties by that legislation
- fail to understand that Police
& Crime Commissioner control of the fire & rescue service will devalue
and degrade the service
- cut local authority funding and deprive them of the money to improve fire safety in their own properties, and to provide an effective planning and building control service to monitor
safety in other buildings
This is what can happen when Architects/Developers/Local
Authorities:
- design buildings that can make
escape impossible when just two doors fail to close
- fail to ensure access for fire
appliances
- put lower costs before public
safety
- only install one staircase in
buildings that are higher than firefighters’ ladders
- ignore fire service
recommendations and advice
- don’t have safety at the top of
their priorities
This is what can happen when Chief Fire Officers:
- pander to politicians, instead of
protecting the public and defending their service
- support politically motivated lies
that cuts will not have serious consequences
- become complacent about
inadequate fire safety standards
- fail to ensure the service has a
strong voice speaking out on safety
- put more emphasis on likelihood
than on risk to life when assessing risk
- gamble with lives by reducing the resources available
- increase the risk to firefighters
by cutting crewing levels
- fail to learn the lessons from
incidents occurring elsewhere in the World
I also wanted to mention the response. The emergency
services seemed to have acquitted themselves superbly, but the local authority
and government have not. Having spent some of my fire service career, and all
of my local government career planning for emergencies, I am well aware of what
should have happened.
Having worked with the current and previous emergency
planning leads at Kensington & Chelsea Council, I am puzzled as to why
things were not more effective. Now it might be that the media have not covered
it, but I would have expected to see their Chief Executive at press conferences
alongside the emergency services from at least the afternoon of the day it
happened. I would also have expected lots of information on their website and
paper copies handed out to survivors.
It may well be that cuts have undermined their planning and
training to deal with emergencies. I know that when budgets are under pressure,
day to day mandatory duties tend to take priority. They do also have a legal
duty in relation to emergencies, but the Government have done nothing to ensure
local authorities are meeting those obligations.
It may also be that the Chief Executive and department heads are
part of the problem. I have experienced Chief Executives and department heads
who refuse to participate in training for major incidents, whilst others have
understood that they must be prepared and have contributed effectively. When
major emergencies occur, I have known Chief Executives and department heads who
have been quite useless in a crisis, whilst there have been others who have
stepped up, taken charge and shown the necessary leadership.
I also have concerns about the casualty bureau process which, although a police responsibility, should also have input from the local
authority. One of its fundamental tasks is to provide accurate information to
relatives and friends, but four days on and some were still saying they have
been told nothing. That is unacceptable. I know they cannot confirm all the
deaths, but they should have been able to confirm survivors and to confirm, to
family at least, if relatives are listed as missing.
I have met survivors and bereaved relatives from previous
tragedies who have worked tirelessly to ensure that others don’t suffer from
failures in future incidents. I have worked with people at national and local
level trying to improve procedures for survivors and bereaved relatives. I can
only imagine their frustration as they see lessons learnt, once again, apparently
being forgotten.
One final point, if this had happened in any other European
capital city, the emergency services would have quickly received substantial
support from trained volunteers in their civil defence organisation. This
country foolishly abandoned our very effective civil defence organisations back
in 1968. As we saw at Grenfell Tower, willing but untrained volunteers were
left to do the best they could. Their efforts should be applauded, but in a
country rated by some as the fifth richest in the World, that should not have
been necessary.
