‘Systemic failures’ by fire crews at Grenfell

● Shortcomings plagued response to disaster, says inquiry report

Fewer people might have died in the Grenfell Tower fire had residents been evacuated while it was still possible and had “serious shortcomings” not plagued the fire service’s response, an official report into the disaster said.

The public inquiry’s first report into the blaze, due to be published today, condemned “systemic” failures by the London Fire Brigade (LFB).

The report accused the brigade’s commissioner Dany Cotton of “remarkable insensitivity” after she said she would not have done anything differently on the night.

Inquiry chairman Sir Martin Moore-bick said fewer people may have died if key decisions had been made earlier. He made a number of recommendations following the two-year investigation into how the disaster at the west London tower block – in which 72 people died – unfolded in June 2017.

Sir Martin criticised the LFB for its “stay-put” strategy when residents were told to remain in their flats by firefighters and 999 operators for nearly two hours after the blaze broke out just before 1am. The strategy was rescinded at 2:47am.

The retired judge said: “That decision could and should have been made between 1:30am and 1:50am and would be likely to have resulted in fewer fatalities.

“The best part of an hour was lost before Assistant Commissioner Roe revoked the ‘stay put’ advice.”

He added: “I identify a number of serious shortcomings in the response of the LFB, both in the operation of the control room and on the incident ground.

“It is right to recognise that those shortcomings were for the most part systemic in nature.”

In his report, Sir Martin said the “principal reason” the flames shot up the building at such speed was the combustible aluminium composite material (ACM) cladding with polyethylene cores, which acted as a “source of fuel”.

The panels were added in the refurbishment of the tower before the fire.

The report found the fire started as the result of an “electrical fault in a fridgefreezer” in a fourth-floor flat. Sir Martin said that Behailu Kebede, who had lived in the flat, bore no blame for the fire.

Sir Martin said he had not intended to investigate whether the building complied with regulations at this stage, but there was already “compelling evidence” that the external walls did not.

Instead of adequately resisting the spread of fire, they had “actively promoted it”.