*** DEBUG END ***

No smokescreens

08 June 2018

PUBLIC inquiries deal with two matters: knowledge — uncovering the facts of what went wrong; and acknowledgement — affirming that what happened was significant. The Grenfell Tower inquiry began with the latter, allowing relatives and friends to commemorate the 72 people who lost their lives in the fire on 14 June 2017. This created the context for the detailed technical discussions that now follow. When fault is being measured in minutes and millimetres, it is possible to lose sight of the devastating consequences of materials that were “non-compliant”. The innocent-sounding phrase is used repeatedly by Dr Barbara Lane, a fire-safety engineer, in her report to the inquiry, published on Monday. In the refurbishment of the tower block in 2016, the rainscreen cladding, the window surrounds, the fire doors, the dry-riser water system, the smoke extractors, and the lifts were all described in this way.

Those seeking to find someone to blame have plenty to choose from, therefore: manufacturers, suppliers, installers, building managers, possibly even inspectors. Guilt stretches its fingers towards the planning committee who stipulated the use of the cladding; to the gas company whose contractors had to dig three exploratory holes in the ground before they were able to shut off the gas to the burning building; to whoever was responsible for not repairing the smoke-alarm system when a fault was reported eight days before the fire. The danger with so many targets is that each may try to hide behind the others. Among the lawyers representing companies implicated in the fire were several representing groups of survivors. Stephanie Barwise QC talked of an “inhumane” silence from contractors and sub-contractors. “The corporate silence deprives the families of the degree of resolution and understanding to which they are entitled and has only served to increase their pain and uncertainty.”

Paradoxically, this silence is eating into any sympathy that the public might have for those responsible for the fire. For it is possible to feel sorry for the men and women who know or suspect that their actions, or inaction, contributed to the vulnerability of the building and its inhabitants. The criminal investigation, conducted in parallel with the public inquiry, will not conclude before 2019 at the earliest. It is a long time to wait for exoneration. It is a long time, too, to live under a cloud, prevented from confessing a known fault by corporate lawyers, and thus deprived of the possibility of forgiveness. The same goes for the firefighters, who must live knowing that they could have saved many more people had they not contributed to the one act of compliance on the night: adhering to the “stay-put” guidance until it was too late for those on the upper floors. As Philip Weatherby QC, another representative of the survivors, said on Tuesday: “This not a moment for technicalities; it is a time for candour and frankness.”

Letters to the editor

Letters for publication should be sent to letters@churchtimes.co.uk.

Letters should be exclusive to the Church Times, and include a full postal address. Your name and address will appear alongside your letter.

Forthcoming Events

6-7 September 2022
Preaching as Pilgrimage conference
From the College of Preachers.

27-28 September 2022
humbler church Bigger God conference
The HeartEdge Conference in Manchester includes the Theology Slam Live Final.

More events

The Church Times Archive

Read reports from issues stretching back to 1863, search for your parish or see if any of the clergy you know get a mention.

FREE for Church Times subscribers.

Explore the archive

Welcome to the Church Times

​To explore the Church Times website fully, please sign in or subscribe.

Non-subscribers can read four* articles for free each month. (You will need to register.)

*Until the end of June: we’re doubling the number of free articles to eight, to celebrate the publication of our Platinum Jubilee double issue.