HUNDREDS of suggestions on what the Grenfell Tower fire inquiry should cover have been received as the feedback deadline looms.
Around 300 submissions on what the inquiry into the high-rise blaze should focus on are expected to have been received by the cut-off at 5pm today.
Inquiry head Sir Martin Moore-Bick promised to consider a broad range of evidence when he launched a public consultation into the terms of reference in July.
Local community members were initially given a week to give their feedback, but the deadline was extended twice.
In meetings with Martin and his advisers, residents have spoken about wanting a team that represents the diversity of the community, with many of those affected from BME (black and minority ethnic) backgrounds.
They also want wider issues and the authorities’ response in the aftermath of the disaster to be included in the probe.
Chairman of the nearby Bramley House residents association Samia Badani said: “What is crucial, having spoken to hundreds of people, they want the inquiry to deal with the relationship between the residents and the local authority and tenant management organisation.
“It’s been years of neglect — and contempt sometimes, because the behaviours of some officers was appalling. And what the community thinks is that unless this is dealt with in the inquiry, this will never change.”
“We’d be very disappointed if it was narrowed down on the causes of the fire... we want real change and unless they understand that relationship between public bodies and residents is flawed, there is no hope of this changing.”
It is understood that Moore may recommend the Government consider broader questions about social housing separately when he sends his draft terms of reference to the Prime Minister next week.
It will then be up to Theresa May to decide what the scope of the inquiry should be, which she is expected to do the following week.
An inquiry spokesman said: “Sir Martin has been clear that his priority is to learn the lessons of the fire and stop such a tragedy taking place again.
“Looking at the causes of the fire could include going back to when Grenfell Tower was first built, if that is where the evidence leads.
“He is also prepared to look at the system of fire regulations and building regulations, their drafting and enforcement.
“He has also said that if there is evidence of warnings being raised about the safety of the tower — for instance from tenants — then he will look at that too.
“He recognises there is a balance to be struck between covering a wide range of issues and keeping the inquiry to a manageable size and length, and he will be seeking to get that balance right when he makes his recommendations to the Prime Minister on the terms of reference.”
Deborah Coles, of Inquest, said it was crucial the inquiry recognised “the significant trauma and damage that’s happened as a result of the fire itself but also the way in which people were treated afterwards”.
She said there were “justifiable concerns” over the make-up of the inquiry team, adding: “We’re talking about a multi-cultural and multi-faith community, so it’s completely unacceptable if the panel does not properly reflect that community, and without that they will have no trust or confidence.”
She said the issues of institutional discrimination and inequality should also be probed.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here