Labour’s ‘watered-down’ response to Grenfell evacuation proposal ‘was a betrayal’

The government must abandon its “watered-down” proposals for emergency evacuation of disabled people who live in high-rise residential buildings, say disabled people’s organisations.

The government quietly announced the policy in December when responding to a consultation on Conservative plans that would have weakened a key recommendation made by the Grenfell Tower Inquiry.

Last September, on the day the inquiry’s final report was published, Sir Keir Starmer promised, in memory of those who died at Grenfell, to “deliver a generational shift in the safety and quality of housing for everyone in this country” and to provide “a profound shift in culture and behaviour”.

But the 16 DPOs say that last month’s announcement “betrays” the Labour government’s commitment to learn the lessons of Grenfell.

In a joint statement, they called on the government to introduce a legal right to a personal emergency evacuation plan (PEEP) for all residents who might find it difficult to “self-evacuate” from a high-rise residential building.

Five years ago, the Grenfell inquiry called for such a duty to be imposed on all owners or managers of high-rise residential buildings.

But the last Conservative government rejected the PEEP recommendation – even though those who responded to a consultation overwhelmingly supported its introduction – and instead proposed its own weakened version of PEEPs.

A consultation on that weakened version ended in August 2022, and the Labour government published its own plans in a response to the consultation in December.

The DPOs said this week that Labour’s plans were just a watered-down version of PEEPs – to be known as “Residential PEEPs” – and showed that the new government “would follow the life-threatening proposals of the previous Conservative administration”.

The DPOs – including Disability Rights UK, Inclusion London, Greater Manchester Coalition of Disabled People, Action Disability Kensington and Chelsea, and Disabled People Against Cuts – said this week: “Disabled people’s lives must be treated as having equal value to those of non-disabled people.

“Every disabled tenant and leaseholder living in a residential block, who is unable to independently evacuate in the event of fire, must be entitled to a personal emergency evacuation plan.

“Without such plans, disabled people’s lives are not being treated equally and are actively being put at risk.

“The prime minister said that his government would learn the lessons of Grenfell Tower; the December announcement betrays this commitment.”

Svetlana Kotova (pictured), director of campaigns and justice for Inclusion London, told Disability News Service (DNS): “Personal emergency evacuation plans are essential to keep us safe in case of an emergency.

“We’re calling on government to make basic safety a right, not something we each have to fight for.”

Under Labour’s Residential PEEPs, the individual in charge of a high-rise building – known as the responsible person (RP) – would have to take “reasonable steps to identify vulnerable residents”.

After carrying out a “Person-Centred Fire Risk Assessment” on each of these residents, the RP would then have to identify “potential” measures to enable their evacuation that are “practical, proportionate and safe” and discuss these with the disabled resident.

It would be up to the RP what measures are implemented, and for some measures “within their flat” the disabled resident may have to pay to ensure they are carried out.

In the event of a fire, it will be up to the fire and rescue service to “fight the fire, and undertake the evacuation and rescue of vulnerable residents”, the Home Office has said.

The Grenfell Tower fire, which began in the early hours of 14 June 2017, led to the deaths of 72 residents, and analysis of the inquiry’s final report suggests about 20 of them were disabled people.

In response to the DPOs’ statement, a Home Office spokesperson said: “The proposals for Residential Personal Emergency Evacuation Plans will protect vulnerable and disabled residents in high-risk buildings to prevent further tragedies.

“We are ensuring residents with disabilities or impairments are entitled to a personal, bespoke fire risk assessment, and information is shared for the Fire and Rescue Services in case they need to undertake evacuation.”

The statement from the 16 DPOs came as the Home Office released responses provided by disabled people and others to a key question in the Conservative government’s consultation.

The consultation document had asked for examples of PEEPs which “fully or partially” avoid the government’s concerns over “safety, proportionality and practicality”.

Among the responses, provided to DNS in response to a freedom of information request – but with nearly all the identities of those responding redacted – was one that criticised the Home Office’s “biased” view that PEEPs were not safe, proportional and practical.

This response argued that the Home Office had provided “no objective evidence” that family, friends and neighbours would not be able to provide the support needed for PEEPs.

It also said that the Home Office suggestion that disabled people evacuating via the stairs could block the escape of other residents was “outrageous” and “has not been supported by any objective evidence”.

It said that research showed that evacuation chairs controlled by trained handlers can even “outperform typical stair descent walking speeds”.

Another response to the consultation accepted that formal PEEPs were currently rare in residential buildings, but that many disabled residents were “sufficiently concerned about their fire safety” that they have agreed informal arrangements with their building managers, which may not even be written down.

Some wheelchair-users have bought their own evacuation chair, “on the basis that a family member, carer or partner would be able to help them evacuate”, the response added.

Another response highlighted the example of a housing association that bought an assisted evacuation device, trained care workers and neighbours in its use, and practised its use regularly.

This PEEP was put into effect when a fire developed near the disabled person’s flat, and resulted in her being “evacuated away from immediate danger prior to the arrival of fire fighters”.

Another response pointed out that there were “very few examples of functioning PEEPs because the government has been so outspoken against them, leading to Disabled people who ask for PEEPs being routinely denied them”.

A similar point was made by another respondent to the consultation, who said: “The absence of lots of effective PEEPs is only evidence of the consequences of a lack of guidance and Government policy.”

And a disabled respondent told the Home Office that their evacuation chair cost less than £1,000 and their care team were “trained to use the chair and we (independently) do a monthly practice on our own of our PEEP protocols”.

One local authority told the Home Office that PEEPs “can be made to work”, although they would need investment in staff for buildings, adaptations to buildings such as second staircases and sprinkler systems, and installation of evacuation lifts.

There were also multiple responses from fire and rescue services which raised concerns that the Home Office was focusing its attention on residents with mobility impairments, which could lead to a “discriminatory” system that ignored the barriers faced by other disabled residents, such as those with learning difficulties and hearing impairments, and those who were neurodivergent.

A note from the editor:

Please consider making a voluntary financial contribution to support the work of DNS and allow it to continue producing independent, carefully-researched news stories that focus on the lives and rights of disabled people and their user-led organisations.

Please do not contribute if you cannot afford to do so, and please note that DNS is not a charity. It is run and owned by disabled journalist John Pring and has been from its launch in April 2009.

Thank you for anything you can do to support the work of DNS…