Andrew Dismore

2017/2935 – Lessons Learnt from Grenfell Tower

Andrew Dismore AM

 

How soon can lessons be learnt from the Grenfell Tower fire?

 

Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): I will begin by just saying that I am sure all of us have in our thoughts and prayers the families and friends of the victims and everyone affected by this fire. It is imperative we get answers to all our questions about what happened to make sure justice is delivered and to make sure nothing like this ever happens again. I am taking immediate steps to make sure lessons are acted upon in those areas where I have the powers to do so. For example, I have asked the Commissioner of the London Fire Brigade to investigate what extra specialist equipment and support they might need to keep the capital safe and I have asked my team to consider what can be done through the new London Plan to improve fire safety. The police’s criminal investigation is not a matter for me, but I know the Commissioner [of Police of the Metropolis] is determined to secure justice for all those affected.

 

Most of the questions arising from the Grenfell Tower fire, however, have wide-ranging national implications. They ask us as a country to look at our approach to a range of issues such as how we respond to disasters and look after their victims, how we make sure our buildings and in particular tall buildings are safe for those who occupy them, how we ensure that public bodies listen to and respect all local residents, and how we house some of the least well-off people in our society. These questions need and deserve clear, comprehensive answers that draw on careful expert investigation of the fire, the factors that may have contributed to it and the subsequent response.

 

This is why the public inquiry into the Grenfell Tower fire is so vital. I want to make sure that survivors, the families of victims and the local community are involved from an early point in discussions about how it should progress. However, the scope of and process for the inquiry remains unclear. The exercise must be transparent and genuinely independent and it must involve those affected by the fire. I have called on the Prime Minister to ensure that this is the case. I have also been clear to the Prime Minister that we do not want to have to wait years to start learning the lessons of what happened at Grenfell Tower. This is why I have said to that the inquiry should produce an interim report in the summer to allow swift implementation of any urgent steps that need taking around fire safety.

 

Andrew Dismore AM: Thank you. I am sure we all join you in expressing our sympathies and condolences to the survivors and the bereaved and also in commending the outstanding courage and bravery of the firefighters, police and ambulance staff. For all of the lessons to come out, we are going to have to await the outcome of Sir Martin Moore-Bick’s judicial inquiry and you are right to demand the full involvement of the residents with appropriate legal aid backing and also await the interim report of Sir Ken Knight. Would you agree that one obvious lesson is the need for far better communication with and co-ordination of immediate help and support for those affected by the fire and who have lost everything?

 

Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): The communication has been awful from day one. I was there again yesterday. Yesterday was week four. I met residents and voluntary groups. The bad news is, I am afraid, the communication has not got much better.

 

Andrew Dismore AM: We have already seen that the Fire Commissioner has increased predetermined attendance for high-rise fires. As you say, you have rightly asked the Commissioner to advise on what additional resources she considers the Fire Brigade needs. Would you agree that we need to look at the requirements for and suitability of taller aerial appliances like the one we borrowed from Surrey and of drones like we borrowed from Kent? Will you look at extended-duration breathing apparatus sets and also radio communications, which was also an issue thrown up by the King’s Cross inquiry 30 years ago? What approaches have you made to the Government to make sure it contributes its fair share towards the Fire Brigade’s requirements?

 

Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): Of course there is going to be a public inquiry and of course there is going to be a criminal investigation, but that could take some time and I am not willing to wait that long. In consultation with the Chair of the London Fire and Emergency Planning Authority (LFEPA), I asked the Commissioner to meet with me and the Chair of LFEPA. I said to the Commissioner through the Chair that what I would like from the Commissioner is an urgent review, based upon her experience from Grenfell Tower, of what further equipment she thinks the fire service needs, learning the lessons of Grenfell Tower. I have received the urgent review from the Commissioner and I have written to the Home Secretary asking her for additional support financially to make sure our firefighters have the equipment they need. The patent point I make is this. The arrangement and agreement we have with the fire service is one that is quite remarkable when you think about it. Firefighters, men and women, agreed to go into a burning building running towards danger, risking their personal safety and the personal safety of their colleagues. It is not unreasonable for them to, quid pro quo, ensure they have the right equipment. The relevant LFEPA committee will meet in the next couple of weeks to discuss the issue of funding, but we need to ensure that they get the equipment as soon as possible.

It is worth bearing in mind, though, that some bits of equipment take some time to receive once we have ordered it. What I have said to the Commissioner is that my promise to her is she will get whatever she needs.

 

Andrew Dismore AM: Thanks. Would you also agree that we need to revisit the cuts of the previous Mayor, especially the reduction of fire safety inspecting officers? I am sure you will not tell me to get stuffed, like Boris Johnson [MP, former Mayor of London] did when I challenged him at the time. Do you also agree that a wider issue may be the former Mayor’s cuts to stations, pumps and fire crews, although that is another issue for the inquiry to look at?

 

Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): We are revisiting the London Safety Plan in relation to Grenfell Tower. You will remember that Anthony Mayer did a report in relation to the impact of the previous Mayor’s cuts on the London Fire Brigade. As a consequence of Grenfell Tower and the advice from the Commissioner, we will be revisiting some of the issues around the Safety Plan.

 

Andrew Dismore AM: Thanks for that. Lastly, the Brigade had done a lot of work predating the Grenfell fire on the need to improve the regulatory framework, the recall of defective whitegoods and – especially after the Lakanal House fire – the need to implement the Coroner’s recommendations on the retrofitting of sprinklers. Indeed, apart from Grenfell, only last week we saw a school burn down in Hackney because it did not have sprinklers fitted. Will you be raising these Fire Brigade recommendations again urgently with the Government as they do not need to await the findings of the inquiry?

 

Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): I have raised them regularly at the taskforce meeting that the Prime Minister chairs. It is worth remembering the timelines. The Lakanal House fire happened in 2009. The Coroner’s inquest in 2013 recommendations made, including the three

ones that are relevant for the purposes of your current question, are: (1) all buildings and tower

blocks which are at major risk should have sprinklers retrofitted; (2) the regulations around

cladding should be revisited; and (3) the advice given to tenants and residents should be looked at again, bearing in mind the issue of cladding in the Lakanal fire. They were the 2013

recommendations made and 2015, of course, was the prosecution. There had been a considerable time lapse and that still has not happened, which is the point I make about the

reason for an interim report this summer from the chair of the public inquiry.

 

Clearly, the Government has not listened to the Coroner’s report and we need action there. In

relation to whitegoods, the Member of Parliament (MP) for Hammersmith, Andy Slaughter, has

for the last year been trying to persuade the Government to take more action in relation to

concerns he has raised around safety of tumble driers and other forms of whitegoods. Again, no

action taken, but these are points that were made around the taskforce meeting that the Prime

Minister chairs. Relevant Ministers were present and I am hoping they take heed of the points

you have made, I have made, residents have made and experts have made over the last few

weeks, months and years.

 

Andrew Dismore AM: Thank you for that. The King’s Cross inquiry 30 years ago produced a

step-change in safety and personal protection for firefighters. Let us hope that the outcome of

this tragedy is another step-change in safety for residents of tower blocks.

 

Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): Agreed.

 

2017/2918 – Night time economy

Andrew Dismore AM

 

In developing the night time economy, how will you ensure that the interests of local residents in such areas are fully protected?

 

Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): Thank you, Deputy Chairman. Protecting the interests of

London’s residents, workers and visitors is vital when developing London as a 24-hour city. One

in eight jobs in the capital are at night. This is said to grow in the coming years. However, a

balance must be struck between work, play and sleep for London’s 8.8 million residents.

To support this, I am aiming to support a standalone agent-of-change policy in my new London

Plan. This policy will require borrowers to consider refusing development proposals that have

not clearly demonstrated how noise impacts will be mitigated and managed. We are also

listening to the views of local residents. TfL is working to mitigate the impact of Night Tube

services, guaranteeing a response to any complaints they may receive. Amy Lamé, my Night

Czar, is holding night surgeries in boroughs and town centres across the capital. We are working

with local authorities and local councillors, for example, on our Night Time Borough Champions

Network, which includes one councillor and one officer from every local authority, through Talk

London, which has over 40,000 users.

 

The safety of London is also a top priority. This includes ensuring that antisocial behaviour and

crime are dealt with. Neighbourhood policing is key to this. It is usually important that local

councils, the police and industry all come together to devise creative solutions that support a

safe night-time economy. I want business crime reduction partnerships to help devise local

solutions and for the police to have more consistent licence and guidance.

We have never planned for London at night in the same way we do for London in the daytime. I

want to change that. I will publish my vision for London as a 24-hour city in the coming weeks.

Amy Lamé and Philip Kolvin QC, the Chair of my Night Time Commission, are attending a

session with the Economy Committee later in July to outline the vision. By planning positively

for a 24-hour city, I believe we can make London a safer, healthier, fairer and more accessible

city for all Londoners.

Andrew Dismore AM: Thank you, Mr Mayor. Last week the Economy Committee held a

workshop with residents, night-workers and councillors. One of the issues that came out was

the need for a more diverse evening economy which worked with the wider community, the

NHS, the police, the Mayor and councillors developing best practice.

 

One concern is that the evening and night-time economies are lumped together as one when in

fact they are very different, with the evening economy worth roughly four times the night-time

economy. The evening economy is restaurants, theatres, cinemas and so forth. The night-time

economy is more about bars and clubbing.

 

Would you recognise the distinction between the evening and night economies? In speaking

about it, looking at their important contribution to the economy on the one hand and the

downside for residents on the other, will you reflect this difference?

 

Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): I am not sure if I would, actually. How you define ‘night’

can be when it is dusk or when it is evening. One of the problems in relation to night-life and

evening-life has been, for example, public transport accessibility; for example, concerns around

public safety; for example, legitimate concerns from residents about antisocial behaviour, about

difficulties people have getting to and from places of work in the evenings when public

transport is less good. What we are trying to do is understand the concerns people have in all

sorts of issues from the evening going through the night.

 

I am very excited because we will have the night Overground later on this year, which will help

the east of London. That will help porters, cleaners, doctors and nurses get to and from work.

Is that evening? Is that night-time? Some restaurants will be able to open later. Some theatres

may change the time they put on performances from early evening to later evening. I am not

sure if I necessarily agree with the distinction that you refer to.

 

Andrew Dismore AM: Night-time workers’ main concerns were over pay conditions and

inadequacy of night-time transport, particularly safety on the night buses. I have received many

complaints from residents, particularly in Camden, about antisocial behaviour and uncontrolled

drug dealing and taking with inadequate and unresponsive policing.

 

What can you do to reassure and protect residents, in particular increase the police presence, to

deal with the worst excesses of the night-time economy and to support the local authorities

who do not have the funds to manage the night-time economy with street cleaning,

environmental officers and so forth due to the cuts from central Government?

 

Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): Yes. It is a really important point you raise. The business

crime reduction partnerships and the work the Business Improvement Districts (BIDs) are doing

across London is really important here. One of the reasons why we are so keen to restore real

neighbourhood policing was the importance police officers have in their local community. By

the end of this year, every ward in London will have two dedicated police officers, plus a

community support officer, who will know their wards, know their businesses and be able to

work with them to address antisocial behaviour.

 

My job is made much harder by the fact that I have coming around the corner £400 million

worth of cuts I have to make and there could be a change in the police funding formula and we

are still getting the NICC money. I am working incredibly hard not to lose frontline police

officers. As it is, we could be losing half of the police front-office counters. We may have to

make other cuts in the police budget. We are doing our best, working with businesses, working

with residents and working with councils. Our police officers are working incredibly hard.

You are right that unless there is an injection of resources from central Government it makes our life much harder. The reason why I ask for support from central Government is not simply the obvious point around safety, but one in eight jobs in London is now from the night-time

economy. It is in the economic interest of the country for London to do well. London does

well, but London does well because of the night-time economy.

 

2017/2919 – Cuts plan for North Central London NHS

Andrew Dismore AM

 

A 31 page internal NHS cuts plan to plug the £183.1m budget gap in North Central London NHS uncovered by The Guardian would mean patients in Barnet and Camden, as well as Haringey, Enfield and Islington, waiting even longer for operations, patients being denied access to an increased number of treatments, cuts to financial support for patients with serious, long term conditions including brain damage, downgrading or closure of hospital units and doctors spending less on drugs. Clinicians and NHS staff have expressed deep concern, with the Royal College of Surgeons calling the changes “devastating” to healthcare provision. Will you join me

in calling for an immediate halt to the implementation of these plans until a full consultation can take place and residents’ views can be heard and the plans can be properly scrutinised and debated in public?

 

Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): Thank you for your question. Further NHS service cuts to

North Central London are very concerning, especially the potential impact this will have on

access to global health services. I am advised by the NHS that the capped expenditure

programme process – that is what it is called – is about improving the NHS financial position this

year. The proposals do not appear to provide a comprehensive health service for the local area.

 

I know that many of the financial pressures the NHS is experiencing at present result from

political choices made by the current Government.

 

Your question asks about public consultation and service changes. The NHS has very clear

duties in this respect. Public consultation is required for any major service changes.

Furthermore, before any public consultation takes place, proposals must have full support of the clinicians who make the decisions about service provision, have clear clinical evidence that

supports them and have been the subject of robust patient and public engagement.

I propose to take this up with NHS England initially to seek assurance about this process,

especially with regard to openness and transparency and the running of the local government

health, overview and scrutiny committee to demand proper consultation on these proposals. It

is important to examine whether these planned changes provide a comprehensive health service

in North Central London as per the statutory duty. Additionally, I will be seeking assurance

about how these changes will impact health and equalities before any implementation can

proceed.

 

Andrew Dismore AM: Thank you, Mr Mayor. Would you agree that the secrecy surrounding

NHS cuts project is designed to surreptitiously sneak through improper and dangerous cuts and

that such a lack of transparency can only undermine public trust? The proposals include cuts

such as patients having to wait longer than the maximum 18 weeks for planned operations,

rationing of care through patients being denied some surgical treatments, and hospital units

being downgraded or shut as a result of ‘service consolidation’.

 

I do not know if you have seen the document yourself but, if you have, would you agree that

the Government has ordered the NHS, including the Royal Free and University College London,

to implement draconian cost-cutting measures and to ‘think the unthinkable’ in its demand for

savings? The document says:

“We recognise that these choices may be difficult for a number of reasons [because they include] … options that impact on quality of care [and] options that would be difficult to implement.”

 

Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): Local residents in that part of London have seen for

themselves the consequences of changes made over the last seven years, which are impacting

the service they receive as patients and potential patients from the NHS. To argue that because

these changes are not major service changes no consultation is required is missing the point.

Any public service that is meaningful should be consulted before changes that affect users of

that service. The NHS needs to do a far better job. As a result of your question and the points

you have raised and brought to my attention, I will certainly be making those representations to

the NHS. They need to do far better.

 

Andrew Dismore AM: The fact is, is it not, Mr Mayor, that all of this is the product of the

Conservatives starving the NHS of the money it needs to do the job properly and putting

finances ahead of the interests of patients?

 

Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): Without a doubt, these are the direct consequences of

decisions made in central Government. A top-down reorganisation was not needed. Cuts in real

terms to NHS budgets, decisions being made as consequences of those cuts and local health

providers who work incredibly hard are very conscientious, retrofitting the service they provide

as a consequence of decisions made by central Government.