The
government has caused outrage after announcing that it would not implement
measures – recommended by the Grenfell Tower Inquiry – that would have ensured
disabled people could safely evacuate high-rise blocks of flats in emergencies.
The inquiry had
recommended that owners and managers of high-rise residential buildings should
be legally required to prepare a personal emergency evacuation plan (PEEP) for
all residents who may find it difficult to “self-evacuate”.
But the Home
Office said yesterday (Wednesday) that it had concluded that such laws would
cost too much, and would not be safe or practical, even though some disabled
people have already drawn up their own PEEPs.
One of its
excuses is that attempting to evacuate disabled residents before firefighters
arrive could “slow the evacuation of other residents”.
The prime
minister, Boris Johnson, previously
promised to implement all the recommendations of the first phase of the
inquiry.
The Home Office
announcement came nearly five years after the Grenfell Tower disaster, in which
72 people lost their lives, including 15 of its 37 disabled residents.
Appalled
activists have now called for disabled-led organisations and allies to organise
an urgent campaign of opposition to the government’s decision.
Sarah Rennie,
co-founder of the disabled-led leaseholder action group Claddag, said: “We are outraged by the
government’s U-turn on evacuation plans for disabled people.
“The government
is wholly out of step with public opinion on this – even the professional
sector seem shocked.
“This policy
position is unethical and our community will not accept it.”
Jumoke Abdullahi,
communications and media officer for Inclusion London, said: “It is
truly deplorable that, coming up to the five-year anniversary of the Grenfell
Tower fire, the government has decided not to require high-rise buildings to
prepare evacuation arrangements for disabled residents to escape.
“Deciding that
PEEPs would not be ‘practical’ and that they would cost too much speaks volumes
to the government’s attitudes towards disabled people in the UK.
“The government
must do better. Disabled people’s lives and safety cannot be seen as a fair
trade-off in order to save money.”
The Home Office
has also published its response to a consultation on the PEEP proposal, which
ended last July.
The
document shows that more than 83 per cent of those who responded supported
the PEEP plan, even though many of those taking part in the consultation were
building owners, property companies, construction companies and trade bodies.
Instead of
implementing the PEEP proposal, the Home Office has decided instead to consult
on its own “alternative package” of measures, which it calls Emergency
Evacuation Information Sharing (EEIS).
But this will
only apply to the minority of buildings that have been assessed as being “at
higher risk”, while residents of other flats, including disabled residents,
will have to continue with the current “stay put” policy, which means being
told to “stay in their flats as long as the heat or smoke from the fire is not
affecting them”.
EEIS will involve
carrying out a fire risk assessment for disabled people who would need support
to evacuate from their flat.
The Home Office
has concluded that any fire safety measures suggested for inside a disabled
person’s flat after this assessment “should remain largely for the resident to
implement and finance”, while it will “also almost always be reasonable for the
resident to pay for adjustments to common areas”.
These measures,
it says, could include additional handrails, flame retardant bedding and fire
safe ashtrays.
Although a PEEP
could still be agreed if it was “practical, proportionate and safe”, the Home
Office said it believed “these cases would be relatively rare”.
Details of any
residents who still had “issues preventing them from self-evacuating in the
event of a fire” would then be shared with the fire and rescue service, who
would be able to access this information if an evacuation was needed.
It is now consulting
on its EEIS plans, and is asking for evidence of any existing PEEPs that
“support the full evacuation of mobility-impaired residents, and that satisfy
the principles of practicality, proportionality and safety”.
Peter Apps,
deputy editor of Inside Housing, which has led coverage of the inquiry, was
highly critical of the Home Office’s decision, and analysed its many flaws in a long series of
posts on Twitter, describing the announcement as “miserable, miserable
news”.
Dennis Queen, a
spokesperson for Greater Manchester Coalition of
Disabled People, said: “GMCDP is really disappointed and angry at the
government’s rejection of the recommendations of the Grenfell investigation and
those of Claddag.
“Requiring
personal emergency evacuation plans (PEEPs) for people living in high rise is
really quite a minimal ask of landlords, and GMCDP has joined in with
campaigning for PEEPs.
“This decision
means landlords will continue to ignore best practice methods, lawfully.
“The government’s
alternative suggestions do not go far enough. We will continue to support
Claddag with their campaign.”
Disabled
artist-activist Jess Thom
called yesterday for disabled-led organisations and allies across the country
to act “urgently” and make it clear that “this decision is unacceptable and
will be challenged”.
She has been
particularly involved in the issues around evacuation of high-rise blocks and
fire safety since
witnessing the 2009 Lakanal House fire, in Camberwell, south London.
Thom knew two of
the children who died in the fire, and their mother, because they had attended
a local children’s play project she ran.
Just as with
residents of Grenfell, eight years later, they died after being told by the
emergency services to stay in their flat and wait to be rescued.
Thom wrote to
home secretary Priti Patel earlier this year, telling her about her connection
to the Lakanal House fire, and the “indescribable” horror she felt in 2017 when
she saw reports of the Grenfell fire and realised that “the warnings from
Lakanal had not been heeded”.
She raised
concerns in the letter about the Home Office’s decision to
award a crucial fire safety contract to consultants who had repeatedly
argued against introducing PEEPs for disabled residents of tower blocks.
She said this
week that the Home Office’s decision on PEEPs “makes it brutally clear that the
government views disabled lives as less valuable”.
Thom said the
government’s decision to ignore the “clear” recommendation from the Grenfell
inquiry on PEEPs, “the campaigning of Grenfell families and the powerful
testimony of disabled residents trapped in buildings wrapped in dangerous
cladding” was “outrageous”.
She added: “It
should not be acceptable to ask disabled people to stay in burning buildings
and to prioritise commercial interests over life safety.
“While this
decision makes it brutally clear that the government views disabled lives as
less valuable, we need individuals and organisations to urgently act in
solidarity and allyship, and make it equally clear that this decision is
unacceptable and will be challenged.”
Thom said: “It
feels to me like they are making policy decisions based on industry’s
assumptions about disability and not utilising any specialist and deeply held
knowledge within disabled communities.”
She said it was
“deeply troubling” that disabled people appeared to be getting “less protection
and less progressive fire policies post-Grenfell than before”.
She added:
“Ultimately you couldn’t get a clearer example of everything about us without
us.
“Disabled lives
and those of our families are on the line. Are disabled parents expected to sit
with their children in burning buildings?”
