Cladding Grenfell Tower in fire-resistant cladding would have cost RBKC (Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea) council just £5,000 extra. That sum was not spent – with tragic, needless consequence in lost lives.
This evening at 6.30pm, as a document prepared by Grenfell Tower campaigners and the council’s own documents make clear, RBKC council will meet to review its spending so far of around two point five million pounds on legal costs relating to the fire – and to award itself another three million pounds or so in additional funding.
Euphemistically, council documents say that these huge sums are being spent on external legal services “to support the criminal investigation and the public inquiry“.
RBKC and individuals within it are under police investigation for manslaughter.
The campaigner’s statement – which is available for download at the end of this article along with the council’s paperwork for tonight’s meeting – challenges this plan in the strongest terms:
The document also outlines the spending decisions and cuts to services the council has already made in what campaigners allege amounts to secrecy, before concluding:
Councillors who fear facing criminal charges or legal responsibility for their decisions or actions before Grenfell are desperate to get this all agreed at the 22nd March Leadership Team meeting as they know this is their best chance of avoiding ANY blame or responsibility – and using OUR tax money to do this.
We want EVERYONE, not just RBKC, to be open and honest with ALL investigations into this disaster; not just for our own sakes and our own peace of mind, but also to ensure that no one else has to suffer what we have endured since 14th June 2017 and will affect for the rest of our lives.
They seem to have already forgiven themselves for the Grenfell disaster and want to spend £6 million to ensure they face no punishment.
This is NOT justice and it is NOT want residents want. We need to remind them of their promises to be more open and honest.
THE LEADERSHIP TEAM MEETING AT 6:30PM AT THE TOWN HALL ON THURSDAY 22ND MARCH COULD BE OUR LAST CHANCE TO DO THIS – WE MUST ENSURE IT IS NOT WASTED.
The meeting will take place at 6.30pm today at the town hall.
RBKC has been contacted for comment.
The full campaigner document and RBKC paperwork can be downloaded below.
A6 – Legal fees for Public Enquiry and Operation Northleigh Investigation
The SKWAWKBOX needs your support. This blog is provided free of charge but depends on the generosity of its readers to be viable. If you can afford to, please click here to arrange a one-off or modest monthly donation via PayPal. Thanks for your solidarity so this blog can keep bringing you information the Establishment would prefer you not to know about.
If you wish to reblog this post for non-commercial use, you are welcome to do so – see here for more.
Maybe the chancellor and vice chancellor should be subject to voluntary redundancy whether they agree or not ?
Doesn’t everyone feel confident that Mr. Javid will step in and ensure this nonsense is stopped.
Elected officials voting to allocate public money to defending themselves or Council employees against legal action resulting from criminal investigation or public inquiry certainly seems to go against the principles of natural justice.
Presumably Council leaders have taken advice on the legality of such a vote but have the Grenfell campaigners done so? Has DSD or any other concerned authority on legal matters commented on this?
Selection of that specific cladding material and fitting method for the renovation being the root cause of the disaster I would expect the criminal responsibility to be limited to those knowing it to be a fire risk and causing or allowing it to be specified despite that knowledge.
The manufacturer would have known.
The supplier should have known.
The Fire Service should have known.
The Council may have known or it may have been misled – but spending six million on lawyers makes them look guilty whether they are or not – so they’re idiots if nothing worse.
The number of other towers undergoing or awaiting removal of that same cladding suggests a number of possibilities but does suggest blame – for that aspect at least – may not lie with individual Councils.
The choice not to fit sprinkler systems was reckless, cost lives and should be illegal but inadequate standards are the fault of governments.
David McNiven is correct when he apportions recklessness and inadequate government regulations . I would add to that the Mayor of London who refused sprinklers against the advice
of fire officials. He too should take responsibility for the preventable tragedy.
Which MoL was this?
I agree with David McNiven that the government should accept responsibility for inadequate regulations but should not the Mayor of London, Boris Johnson, also accept resposibility for refusing sprinklers against the advice of the fire service?
6 million, it beggars belief, beyond any reasonable doubt, it stinks to high heaven!
I live up North and I can smell it from up here!
Whitewash in the offering, “me thinks”!
They’re so bent, they can’t lay straight in bed, allegedly!
While London burns, councillors fiddle!
The same rat-bastards at RBKC spent around £200k on resolving a neighbourhood dispute about piano-playing ffs. Regardless, I hope they all bloody well hang.
Those at the top won’t, though. It’ll be someone at the bottom of the sh*theap (i.e. non-politcian, probably someone in the fire service) gets thrown to the wolves. I’m just waiting for further insult to happen. You should all be, too, because they haven’t finished kicking people in the nuts yet, Far from it.
And when (NOT ‘if’) it happens, those wasserwerfers that boris bought will soon be granted permission to be turned on the masses.