You are viewing 1 of your 1 free articles
KCTMO sold Grenfell residents’ ‘interests and safety’ to ‘lowest bidder’, says mayor of London
The organisation responsible for managing the Grenfell Tower “sold the interests and safety of the bereaved, survivors and residents to the lowest bidder” during the tower’s refurbishment, the mayor of London has said.
During a closing statement to modules one and two of phase two of the Grenfell Inquiry, a lawyer representing the mayor criticised the “disregard of human life” of those involved in the project, as well as the “institutional indifference to safety” within the companies that manufactured the cladding and insulation used on the tower.
Anne Studd QC began her statement by addressing the procurement exercise undertaken by the Kensington and Chelsea Tenant Management Organisation (KCTMO), which managed Grenfell on behalf of the council as part of the tower’s refurbishment project.
She said: “The KCTMO, who were meant to provide a bridge between the tenants and their landlords, to be the voice of the tenants and to act in their best interests, sold the interests and safety of the bereaved, survivors and residents to the lowest bidder.”
The inquiry previously heard that KCTMO said “value for money” was to be the “primary driver” for the Grenfell Tower project and that the TMO asked Rydon, the project’s lead contractor, to agree to a lower budget, despite Rydon already submitting the lowest budget of any tenderers.
During a closing statement on Monday, KCTMO said it had an “obligation to secure value for money in procurement” and that this should be kept in mind when the panel considers “tender bids, cost savings and value engineering”.
In his statement, the mayor also said there was a “primary focus on profit from the contractors and value from the client, rather than any accountability for risk or safety” during the refurbishment of Grenfell.
“The architect relied upon the fire safety engineers and the fire safety engineers relied upon the cladding contractor. The cladding contractor relied upon the manufacturer who had a commercial interest in remaining silent and they all relied upon the final arbiter of building control for compliance, without taking any responsibility for themselves and without providing information that was necessary for any accurate assessment to be made,” the statement said.
With regards to the product manufacturers, the mayor said in his statement that the “owners, directors and senior managers” of these organisations are responsible for a “culture that led to unacceptable priorities and ultimately the death of 72 Londoners”.
READ MORE
Adrian Williamson QC, a lawyer representing one group of the bereaved, survivors and residents, repeated many of the mayor’s criticisms of the refurbishment team, describing the subcontracting process as “donkeys led by donkeys”.
In its closing statement today, Rydon said the “main driver” of Grenfell was “inadequately drafted” building regulations, which it said the cladding and insulation manufacturers exploited.
Rydon also said it had “delegated” responsibility for compliance to the firms it subcontracted, such as the architect and the cladding subcontractor, adding that, by doing so, it was behaving in an “orthodox manner”.
In response to this argument from Rydon, Mr Williamson said: “If that is right, this shows very clearly how that orthodoxy and practice need to change if future disasters are to be avoided.”
Sam Stein QC, who represented the same group of the bereaved, survivors and residents for module two, said: “Evidence from all three companies showed no regard was given to the danger that their products posed to the public. Nothing was allowed to stand in the way of market share. If there was a bad test, it was ignored, and the next one rigged until the desired result was achieved.”
Yesterday, lawyers representing Kingspan, Celotex and Arconic denied various accusations that they had manipulated fire test data and argued that they were not responsible for the way their products had been used on Grenfell Tower.
The Grenfell Tower Inquiry will now turn to the London Fire Brigade and its preparation, planning and training in the years leading up to the blaze. Opening statements for that module will commence on Monday.
The inquiry also heard a closing statement from Local Authority Building Control (LABC), which issued a certificate that incorrectly stated Kingspan’s K15 insulation was of limited combustibility and that Celotex’s RS5000 product could be used on buildings higher than 18m.
LABC admitted to “historical errors” in relation to these products, but said it was not responsible for Kingspan and Celotex’s “abuse of the LABC scheme, nor their abuse of the testing regime”.
On behalf of the bereaved and survivors, Mr Williamson said the closing statements of the core participants of modules one and two, which have been read over the last week, have been an “unedifying spectacle” and said many of the core participants have attempted to “evade responsibility”.
The inquiry continues next week with opening statements from module five.
Sign up for our weekly Grenfell Inquiry newsletter
Each week we send out a newsletter rounding up the key news from the Grenfell Inquiry, along with the headlines from the week
Already have an account? Click here to manage your newsletters
