There's quite a lot to unpack with this story, but let's start with inquiry chair Sir Martin Moore-Bick's recommendations in his report in October 2019.

Having heard months of evidence about the difficulties people (including those with disabilities) had evacuating, he said... https://twitter.com/PeteApps/status/1339864481879511041

- All disabled residents of high rises should be offered a personal emergency evacuation plan (PEEP)
- All high rises should have a 'plan b' evacuation plan developed
- Blocks should be fitted with devices to enable fire service to send an evacuation signal to all or part

But when a government consultation on implementation came out in July this year, it rowed back substantially. Alarms were kicked into the long grass, the evacuation plan could be a 'stay put' strategy and PEEPs should only be provided in buildings with known dangerous cladding

This was despite saying publicly that they were implementing in full.

The family of Sakina Afrasehabi, a disabled woman who died in the fire, sought a judicial review.

This review has now concluded. The Home Office settled it out of court by agreeing to rerun a specific consultation on the provision of PEEPs. But in doing so they had to disclose documents to the family's lawyers and one was pretty important in explaining what happened.

This document was minutes and notes of a behind-closed-doors meeting of a 'special interest group' convened by the Fire Industry Association to advise the Home Office on 'practical and sensible solutions' regarding the recommendations.

This group was comprised of fire and housing sector figures (but no one from the Grenfell community, disability rights sector or any residents group full stop). They spoke forcefully against evacuation plans, particularly the recommendation for people with disabilities.

Home Office notes show they felt this was "completely impracticable and not doable" and that disabled people should continue to rely on stay put. "It is safe for them to stay in their flat," the notes say.

In the formal minutes of the meeting, they said the proposal was "completely impossible" to achieve, warned it could put firefighters at risk and again said people with disabilities should carry on relying on stay put

They also spoke against the retrofitting of alarms, noting that "it’s cost against benefit (it’s not cheap)". And on general evacuation plans, they said this should comprise little more than "a simple reiteration of the standard stay put strategy" for most buildings

Bear in mind, Sir Martin had specifically criticised such over reliance on stay put in his report - calling it an "article of faith" to the extent that any attempt to depart from the strategy was “unthinkable”

While all this had gone on behind the scenes, and amounted essentially to industry influencers undoing the central recommendation, Boris Johnson gave a speech on the third anniversary of the fire telling the community “We’re working to implement every recommendation made"

An added element is that recent industry guidance (not government) called PAS 79 has recently been published. It's the document which essentially sets the standards for fire risk assessment of residential buildings.

It contains nothing about the need for PEEPs and evacuating disabled people, and was authored by Colin Todd, a director at the FIA. As an expert witness to the inquiry, he was the only one who advised continuing with the stay put policy largely unchanged.

Sakina's family say the saga has made the inquiry feel like "a joke" and that they fear for the safety of other disabled people living in high rises.

The daughter of Sakina's sister Fatemah, who died alongside her in the tower has also expressed anger, saying "there is no price you can put on such humanity and love"

From a personal point of view, I find the saga extraordinay and infuriating. What is the point of a £50m public inquiry if its recommendations can be undone by a closed Zoom meeting of 12 special interest groups?

While the question of PEEPs is not an easy one to solve, simply putting the lives of disabled people in high rises into the 'too difficult' box cannot be right. Got to applaud the family's courage in fighting it and hope the new consultation leads to a better place (ends)