Grenfell Tower fire: Mayor Philip Glanville seeks to reassure residents living in Hackney blocks

Grenfell Tower fire. Photograph: Grenfell Action Group
Following the tragic fire at Grenfell Tower near Notting Hill in which twelve people have been confirmed dead so far, the Hackney Citizen quizzed the council earlier today about its own fire safety checks on the borough’s residential tower blocks.
The Citizen asked what Mayor Philip Glanville is doing to ensure that Hackney Council fulfils its obligations under the Regulatory Reform Act 2005 on Fire Safety with particular regard to high-rise blocks.
In a joint statement, Mayor Philip Glanville and Cllr Clayeon McKenzie, the cabinet member for housing, said: “No one can fail to be moved watching the coverage today of the terrible fire in Kensington.
“Our thoughts and sympathies are with those affected by the tragedy at Grenfell Tower and we want to highlight the bravery of residents and the emergency services, often at considerable risk to themselves, who rushed to help during the early hours of the morning.
“We have also seen ordinary Londoners rally to help those families who have lost everything in this awful fire.
“While it’s too early to comment on possible causes of the fire, we understand that residents are concerned and we want to reassure residents in Hackney that fire safety is of critical importance to us, the council meets regularly with the London Fire Brigade to ensure we’re doing all we can to keep our estates and residents safe.
“We also work with the independent fire advisory services rigorously test and challenge our existing arrangements.
“All of our buildings have an up-to-date fire risk assessment. Any priority work needed following these assessments has been done and we continue to monitor fire safety through estate inspections and our estates officers.
“We have invested significantly in the last five years to upgrade lighting and fire alarms in communal areas, hard wire smoke alarms in properties and those in communal areas while upgrading all our stock to ensure that it meets fire regulations.
“Despite this we cannot afford to be complacent, and will apply any lessons learned or recommendations arising from this terrible accident.
“The London Fire Brigade’s advice currently remains unchanged – for more information visit the London Fire Brigade website. Residents can also play their part by making sure fire exits are kept clear and ensuring that fire doors are kept closed. We also encourage residents to report any faulty fire doors or fire safety equipment immediately to the contact centre on 020 8356 3330 / 4440 so the Council can take action.”
Outlining the fire safety precautions are in place on Hackney’s estates, in a statement the council said: “As a matter of routine, we meet regularly with the London Fire Brigade to discuss fire risk assessments and other matters to ensure we are doing all we can to keep our estates safe.
“We also work with the independent fire advisory services to rigorously test and challenge our existing arrangements. We continue to monitor fire safety through estate inspections and the vigilance of our estate-based staff.”
The Citizen also requested the most recent dates on which each of the council’s tower blocks of six storeys and above were fire safety assessed, and in its statement the council said: “All of our blocks are subject to individual fire risk assessments – all of which are up-to-date – which are agreed with the London Fire Brigade. The assessment schedules vary in accordance with that level of risk.
“All of our buildings have an up to date fire risk assessment. Any priority work needed following these assessments has been done and we continue to monitor fire safety through estate inspections and our estates officers. In addition, all buildings have up to date certification for dry riser testing and electronic certificates- these are assessed twice yearly with one test and one visual inspection.”
Questioned about whether aluminium cladding or panelling similar to that at Grenfell Tower had been used in any of the council’s refurbishments of residential blocks, the council said: “At the moment it is too early to say, as we don’t know the detail of the cladding used at Grenfell Tower – or if that played a part in this tragedy.
“All of the cladding used on Hackney buildings is subject to rigorous safety checks but, we are of course inspecting them to allow to give greater reassurance to residents.”
The Citizen also quizzed Town Hall chiefs as to what instructions are given to residents of tower blocks regarding what they should do in the event of fire. The council said: “At the moment the London Fire Brigade’s advice about what to do in the case of a fire in a block of flats remains unchanged. More information is available on the London Fire Brigade website.”
Back in 2009, Frampton Park Estate residents living in tower blocks at high risk from fire described dangerous conditions and their fear that officials were putting value for money before their safety.
Six years later, Hackney announced that a pioneering fire sprinkler system was set to benefit 258 social housing residents on the Frampton Park Estate, helping to save lives in the event of a fire.
At the time, Philip Glanville, the then cabinet member for housing, said: “Hackney … places the risk of fire and the safety and welfare of all residents as highest priority. Hackney is once again at the forefront of resident safety with this fire sprinkler system, providing residents with an extra layer of safety in case the worst should happen.”
Shame that Mayor Glanville selectively places our safety and welfare as highest priority. At Whatcott Mews N16. The planning officers ignored the fire officers concerns who said that he had serious concerns about the proximity and the lack of access to the proposed development. The planning officers ignored and mislaid his concerns (and their own which refused permission) and approved an either higher version that not only does not have a fire officers report but is in breach of planning. …[Deleted by moderator]
In the past 10 years Environmental Health officials have been more interested in protecting residents from false alarms in the middle of the night than fire protection.
In my day job of property management we have had environmental letters served by Westminster requesting that the alarms are isolated so other residents do not get disturbed when an alarm goes off. In 1999 the recommendations were that the alarms were linked.
I have not a clue whether that was a contributing factor but what I do remember that the first residential building I managed was a 6 storey building of Studios with an addressable alarm system. One evening a lady left her pan on the fire and yes the whole building was woken up at 3am, within seconds she was woken up she extinguished the flames with a fire blanket and all was ok.
Yes there was inconvenience but she was there to tell the tale.
Another case I was involved in Staines (Spelthorne Council) whereby the Planning Officer refused to pass the building until the alarms were separated after incurring expense.
We can all play the political blame game but unfortunately it takes a tragedy of this magnitude to change attitudes.
Despite the planning officers approving the identical project (which they had previously failed) 4 days before the objectors deadline and ignoring the chief fire officer B G Robinsons (LFCDA) advice who said (among other things) “If at any time the water main is being worked on or is not available for any other reason, fire fighting operations are put in jeopardy” The officers involved, knew that the fire officer would have the same to say about the second application – particularly as it was allowed to be in breach of planning and exceed the height that it was failed AND passed on, making fire fighting operations even more difficult. So they simply “mislaid” his first report (along with all their previous reports that detailed the damage to the environment that the project would cause) and didn’t bother getting a second one. The officers involved have given no rational for their actions and simply refuse to answer any questions relating to it.
Mr Glanville is aware of the unanswered anomalies above and the subsequent (failed) smear campaign the officers ran against me for exposing their corruption.
His response is typical of someone defending the indefensible – “I have been assured that such allegations are unfounded…” and “I do not accept that either the Council or the previous administration was ‘corrupt’”. Despite Mr Glanvilles response, he refuses to have the officers explain or answer, any questions relating to this scandal!
Mr Glanville if you truly believe your confused statement, then you will be happy to show the public the fire officers report for the second application and give a rational for why the LFCDA were ignored.
I was told at the time by councillor Sylvia Anderson (who was removed for revealing this information) that my case (the one where Hackney council deliberately destroyed my home) was “the tip of the iceberg” which I can reasonably assume, that Hackney council is ignoring it’s udp policies and the serious reports of the London Fire and civil defence authority on much larger developments. A full scale investigation needs to be carried out on this councils negligence ASAP before they “mislay” any other documents that could incriminate themselves.