Day One of the ends in catcalls
Reporter HECKLES and jeers rang out as the first hearing of the Grenfell Tower public inquiry concluded after a prominent lawyer attempted to quiz the probe’s chairman.
In an opening statement, Sir Martin Moore-Bick told the packed Grand Connaught Rooms in Holborn, central London, that his investigation “can and will provide answers”.
The retired Court of Appeal judge said he would not “shrink” from making findings which could affect criminal prosecutions or civil actions, during a hearing lasting more than 45 minutes.
A minute’s silence was held at the start of proceedings for the estimated 80 victims of the June 14 inferno, observed by the survivors and bereaved families in attendance.
But the controversy which has dogged the probe was not far behind, as Michael Mansfield, who represents several survivors, attempted to challenge Sir Martin.
Discontent had begun brewing when the inquiry head rejected calls for residents to be included as one of his team of assessors, telling the inquiry it would “risk undermining my impartiality”.
As the meeting drew to a close, Mr Mansfield QC said: “Sir, before departing, I wonder if I may make a quick request on behalf of survivors.”
He was ignored by the judge as he exited the room to shouts of “hello?” and “rubbish” from gathered residents.
Speaking afterwards, the lawyer dismissed Sir Martin’s decision to opt for assessors and branded his departure “disrespectful”.
He said: “I was making a request on behalf of survivors for another preliminary meeting when they would be there as key participants, as they are all going to be core participants, with designated lawyers to sort out reservations and concerns that they have had from the beginning about this whole process.
“One of them can be encapsulated in the absence of any mention of the establishment of a panel or any panel to sit with him to take decisions, there are other issues, but that’s a big one.
“Assessors are quite separate.”
Asked about Sir Martin’s decision to leave the room, he said: “I feel it is disrespectful to survivors.”
Hamid, a former resident of the tower’s 16th floor, was also among those watching Sir Martin’s opening statement.
He said: “I think it is rubbish, nothing special, this is a serious matter, it is not good.
“Everything is missing, they never gave us a chance to make a point.”
Earlier, Sir Martin acknowledged the “great sense of anger and betrayal” felt by survivors of the fire and those touched by the tragedy but indicated he would endeavour to examine evidence “calmly and rationally”.
He expressed hope the inquiry would “provide a measure of solace”, adding: “The inquiry can and will provide answers to the pressing questions of how a disaster of this kind could occur in 21st century London.”
The shape of the inquiry was also set out during the hearing, focusing first on the immediate causes of the fire and how it spread so rapidly.
Sir Martin said there was an “urgent need” to identify the flaws in the building’s design to prevent a similar high-rise blaze in future.
“Steps must be taken quickly to ensure those who live in them are kept safe,” he said.
Outlining the timetable for the inquiry, Sir Martin said: “The process of gathering evidence has already begun in earnest but there is much more to do.
“It has become clear that there are many potential witnesses still to be interviewed and many thousands of documents to be reviewed.
“The scale of the task is enormous.”
In the probe’s second stage, the actions of the council will be