The Grenfell Inquiry: How it connects to community safety and what can be learned
The Grenfell fire of 2017 destroyed lives and tore apart communities. Since the tragic incident, there has been significant media coverage that puts the issues in social housing into the spotlight. It is clear, as articulated by Richard Blakeway, the housing ombudsman, that “Integral to these findings are respect and trust – and the principles of transparency and accountability.” Going on to further say, “it is clear residents’ complaints were dismissed and devalued.”
A Multi-Agency Failure
The Grenfell disaster was a multi-agency failure, one that was about more ‘than cladding and insulation’,[1] it showcased how not only different organisations avoid accountability for proper practice, but also the stigma and culture that surrounds social housing. The Housing Ombudsman Service (HOS) declares that there is therefore a need for ‘human-centric provision of services by landlords’, this is because of the findings that, it was clear, that the ‘landlord’ did not fully understand ‘the needs of the residents they were serving’. This is made even clearer in the documentation that has come to light since the Grenfell inquiry.
In a document titled ‘following action the residents of Grenfell Tower demands are as follows’ there is a list of demands proposed to management from the Grenfell Action Group (GAG), a group formed in 2010 that highlighted major safety problems, and which criticised both the council and Kensington and Chelsea Tenant Management Organisation (KCTMO). A significant portion of this is related to structural and safety issues, that as we know, where not resolved accordingly. What is more pertinent, however, is the GAGs demands in relation to anti-social behaviour, and what the Grenfell managements uses as an excuse to not follow through with the safety demands of the residents.
The residents noticed and requested action on anti-social behaviour in Grenfell Tower, referring to a statement signed by the almost ’95 residents’ bearing witness to this anti-social behaviour, most notably around a stabbing incident. They as a result, demanded permanent security guards, and a request to access CCTV footage, which was declined.[2] It was clear that failures were also present in action around anti-social behaviour, and they were let down in a multitude of ways.
The Connection to Community Safety
This is compounded by the fact presented by Inside Housing reporting on the failures the of the Kensington and Chelsea Management Organisation (KCTMO). They remark on issues relating to access to lifts, and how they were inoperable. Three people unfortunately died after the lift they were travelling in stopped suddenly on the 10th floor and filled with smoke.[3] Experts analysed the key sent to the police, and it was found to be “very significantly different in its dimensions” and was “grossly ill-fitting” for the switch at Grenfell Tower.
Research from the University of Northampton shows the deformation was due to ‘excessive force’ and an ‘ill-fitting key’. The key reason for this failure, was the use of a ‘drop key’ rather than a more standard ‘triangular Euro key’. It was cited, that previous witnesses had informed the inquiry that the more standard key was not used because of the risk of use by “unauthorised persons”. It is clear, then, that certain safety decisions, that ultimately cascaded into the tragic events of the 14th of June 2017, were taken with the justification of ‘protecting’ and ‘safeguarding’ the residents from anti-social behaviour, and threats to community safety.
While these concerns are valid, and extrapolating from the resident’s demand, it was clear there were anti-social behaviour concerns present throughout the building. However, it is also clear that the fear, or the assumption of anti-social behaviour, was used as a justification for inaction on valid safety concerns voiced by residents. The HOS reiterates this viewpoint, declaring there is a ‘wider societal change that needs to take place towards those living in social housing’.[4]
This societal change, can be practically driven by firstly, reviewing complaints procedures. The HOS declares that ‘Landlords should vigorously review the complaints they receive’ going on to articulate they should ‘create a positive complaint handling culture’. This is crucial if we are to learn from the mistakes from the Grenfell inquiry; stigma and cultural assumptions about social housing tenants are direct causes of inaction, poor complaints handling and overzealous and misguided anti-social behaviour responses.
Policy and Legislation
The BBC reports, that because of the inquiry, the ‘2010 coalition government ignored risks’ largely because of a mission to cut regulations, aiming to extinguish “red tape” holding back British enterprise.[5]
As a report from Shelter states, since Parliament has enacted the Social Housing (Regulation) Act 2023, it does ‘not consider it necessary to make any additional recommendations’.[6] The Act allowed the regulator of social housing to take action against social landlords before people are at risk, holding landlords accountable with regular inspection.
There have been great strides in terms of policy making, however more needs to be done, such as providing social landlords with the necessary funding to both carry out the necessary repairs, and to respond effectively to complaints and emergencies as mentioned previously. There also needs to be a cultural change in social housing, not just for the actual physical safety of tenants, but for the protection of their safety in the community from degeneration and decay that we know, can often sustains anti-social behaviour. This cultural change can be done from the top, as it can be done from the bottom. Giving tenants a voice, like the one established by the previous Labour government in February 2010. Much like Shelter notes, ‘had a strong national voice for social tenants existed previously, social tenants may have been able to research or object to the risks of new forms of cladding’. This combined with a shift in ethos of serving tenants, rather than infantilising them, is key to combat such tragedies again.
Issues like safety in social housing are interconnected, and often community safety is interweaved throughout. More needs to be done not only to honour those lost, and the bereaved, but to also change our approach so we can best support social housing tenants.
To read the housing ombudsman’s response visit: https://www.housing-ombudsman.org.uk/2024/09/04/grenfell-tower-inquiry-phase-2-report/
Sources
1 https://www.theguardian.com/uk...
2 https://assets.grenfelltowerin...
3 https://www.insidehousing.co.u...
4 https://www.housing-ombudsman....
