Cost-cutting played key role in Grenfell tragedy, inquiry hears

By Julia Gregory, Local Democracy Reporter

Cost-cutting in refurbishment work on Grenfell Tower was a key factor in causing the tragic fire, it has been claimed by the survivors’ legal team.

The aim to cut costs on the work, which included improvements to heating and insulation, led to “unsuitable materials” being picked, The Grenfell Inquiry heard.

The inquiry heard yesterday that the tower tenant management organisation’s (TMO) desire to keep costs down was alleged to be one of the causes of the fatal fire in 2017.

Stephanie Barwise QC, who represents some of those bereaved or surviving the fire and nearby residents, said the cladding costs were cut by £243,000 by replacing zinc cladding with the aluminium composite material (ACM) cladding which proved so flammable.

“Many of these factors were rooted in the mismanagement of the tower by the TMO for many years,” she said.

Examples of “the TMO’s complacent attitude” were a failure to replace the tower’s fire strategy before the fire and to draw up personal evacuation plans for vulnerable residents, said Ms Barwise.

The budget for the Grenfell renovation was originally costed at £9.7m, with £8.5m for construction works. One would-be contractor’s bid of £12m was rejected, the inquiry heard.

Instead cost-cutting was “the most important focus of their decision making,” Ms Barside alleged.

She added that cost-cutting “led to poor quality work and the use of unacceptable materials”.

Balvinder Gill, who is also acting for bereaved and survivors, asked the inquiry: “Would the issue of cost-cutting budget constraints, lack of compliance of building regulations arise if the make-up of residents of Grenfell Tower had been different, namely that they had been wealthy and white?”

Ms Barside highlighted failings of Kensington and Chelsea council’s building control department, which “should have picked up that the ACM cladding was not suitable for the 24-storey tower.

Earlier this week people who lost family in the disaster and those who helplessly witnessed the blaze were shocked to hear the council’s building control department did not retain records about Grenfell.

The council, which owned Grenfell, is the only organisation which has so far put up its hands up to failings in this stage of the inquiry.

However Ms Barside said it was denying liability.

Lawyer Adrian Williamson said: “From the start the project was bedevilled by a culture which was cost-cutting which put cost over every other consideration.”

He added: “There was considerable anxiety about aesthetics and how the tower would appeal to well-heeled residents of the borough.”

He said the council was clear that “cost was the important factor of those decision-making processes”.

And the decision to “provide visual interest in the crown” of the building, which played a key role in the fire, “came from the very top” at the council.