Grenfell Tower Inquiry – Consultation on Terms of Reference SUBMISSION FROM TRANSPARENCY INTERNATIONAL UK
Introduction In this submission, Transparency International UK (TI-UK) provides a response to the Grenfell Tower Inquiry consultation on the terms of reference for the inquiry. Our charity, as the UK chapter of a global non-governmental anti-corruption organisation, works to reduce corruption in the UK and the UK’s contribution to corruption around the world. We are particularly concerned that the Grenfell Tower Inquiry should be so designed as to be capable of uncovering any instances of corruption that may have contributed to the causes of the tragedy.
Design Principles for the Terms of Reference of the Genfell Tower Inquiry The United Kingdom does not have a great track record in addressing corruption in its public inquiries. There is a long-standing complacency that corruption happens overseas and not here, and many of our national policy responses are built on that foundation. It has taken many years, far too many, for justice to come for the Hillsborough victims, but ultimately our democratic institutions and justice system did allow that to happen. We see this consultation as an opportunity to ensure that the right questions are asked at the start of the inquiry – mot many years after, as happened with Hillsborough. We all learned from Hillsborough that there may be vested interests who will wish it not to happen. •
What do you think the Inquiry should cover? A key question for the Grenfell Tower Inquiry is to ask whether there was corruption involved, and if so whether it made a difference. It needs to be an explicit question, properly and expertly investigated. This is perhaps best understood not so much as a question of scope, but one of the depth of the Inquiry. Systems of regulation and control are only as good as the integrity of the public officials enforcing them. Therefore shortcuts and sub-standard work can take place as a result of bribery or nepotism. They can also result from conflicts of interest among those making decisions on procurement and contracting, or involved in the oversight of those contracts, which can sometimes arise from competing sources of funding, or the operation of the ‘revolving door’ in these situations. Furthermore these functions need to be adequately resourced to work effectively, and whilst budget allocations in local government are essentially accountable political decisions, a shortage of resources can be exacerbated by instances of fraud and diversion of funds.
•
Is there any type of evidence that you think is essential for the Inquiry to obtain? The inquiry needs to get to the root-causes of the tragedy. For corruption to be exposed, it will not be enough to discover how the fire started, or even how that fire spread to the inferno that took so many lives. It will also be necessary to keep asking how those circumstances came about.
In the case of the building cladding and insulation – about which there has been much speculation - the inquiry should obtain detailed evidence relating to the process by which systems and materials used in the building were permitted, if indeed they were. The number of buildings that are reported to have since failed fire safety tests, demonstrates the wider public interest in determining the course of events by which such installations take place. So that action may be taken nationwide to prevent further development of unsafe buildings and installations. •
What should the Inquiry deal with in its interim report? What should be left for the main report, so the interim report can be published quickly? We recognise that the interim report needs to be published quickly. This is likely to require that a full analysis of the root causes must wait until the main report. There is also the issue of the impact of potential criminal investigations on the ability to conduct an inquiry into matters which will be tested in court. It is vital for public confidence in the Inquiry that it is fully transparent about which aspects are necessarily deferred, and remains committed to independently and publicly addressing them as soon as that is then possible.
•
Would you like to be kept informed of the Inquiry’s work? How would you like to be contacted? Yes. Please email information updating us on the work of the Inquiry to the contact address below.
In the shadow of such a huge tragedy and the ongoing trauma of survivors and the local community, these questions may seem like technical detailed matters that cannot do much for those who have died. However, as the case of the collapse of the Rana Plaza building in Bangladesh teaches us, sometimes many small acts of corruption can conspire to have a devastating if unintended consequence.
About Transparency International UK Transparency International (TI) is the world’s leading non-governmental anti-corruption organisation. With more than 100 chapters worldwide, TI has extensive global expertise and understanding of corruption. Transparency International UK (TI-UK) is the UK chapter of TI. We raise awareness about corruption; advocate legal and regulatory reform at national and international levels; design practical tools for institutions, individuals and companies wishing to combat corruption; and act as a leading centre of anticorruption expertise in the UK. We are independent, non-political, and base our advocacy on robust research.
Contact Duncan Hames Director of Policy duncan.hames@transparency.org.uk +44 (0)20 3096 7697 www.transparency.org.uk