Grenfell Inquiry day 23: TV images ‘could have assisted’ firefighting and rescue effort

Television images – and lack of them – were at the heart of the latest Grenfell Tower Inquiry hearing today.

Jason Oliff, who was a station manager on development at the London Fire Brigade at the time of last summer’s tragic blaze, gave evidence to the Martin Moore-Bick chaired probe.

Mr Oliff, who was undertaking an on-the-job training period after being promoted in 2016, was nearing the end of his first ever shift as ‘officer of the day’ when the fire was reported in the early hours of 14 June 2017.

After receiving a message to his pager shortly before 1:30am, he attended the back-up control room in Stratford, east London, which was acting as the nerve centre of the frantic firefighting operation.

Mr Oliff’s colleague, Joanne Smith, last week told the inquiry that while the usual control room in Merton had a television that showed 24-hour news, a decision was taken not to turn on a TV set in Stratford as the news channel pictures could be distressing for staff communicating with people inside the burning building.

But Mr Oliff’s evidence today left the issue shrouded in mystery after he declared that he had been told the TV set was broken.

“As you walk into the Stratford control room the head desk is in front of you and the screen is behind it, and it was switched off,” he said. “I noticed the TV was off and when I said this to, I think, the officer of the watch, I was told it was broken, it wasn’t working.”

News footage could have helped control room staff make better decisions on the night, said Oliff.

“When you are monitoring calls and listening for information from the main scheme radio, you are trying to formulate a picture of what actions crews are taking and how the incident is developing. Having a screen up in the control room would give everyone in that room an overview of what the emergency services were dealing with.”

He added: “I would not have had authority to change decisions in the control room at that time but [TV screens] may have given the officer of the watch or [other key staff] an overview of the development of the incident and they may have been able to make an assessment to change the ‘stay put’ policy.

“A picture paints a thousand words.”

According to evidence from both Ms Smith and Mr Oliff, the decision to tell operators to start advising 999 callers to attempt escape from the burning building rather than awaiting rescue was taken at about 2.30am.

Mr Oliff also recounted how a news clip he’d seen on a colleague’s mobile phone of the extent of the blaze informed his thinking when he was called over to help a call operator with a very difficult situation during the night.

Mr Oliff advised the operator to tell the male caller to try to leave the building with his children without going back for his wife, who had become separated from them.

In a written statement, Mr Oliff described it as a “highly stressful situation”. But he said the news footage he’d seen “allowed me to see what we were up against and the conditions crews were dealing with”.

Meanwhile, Mr Oliff conceded that using a mobile phone to speak to the command unit set up to control operations on the ground was a departure from usual policy.

“This was not normal procedure. Normal procedure is that information is passed to the command vehicles by air waves radio. This is sufficient for a low number of fire safety guidance calls. The unprecedented nature of the incident we were dealing with meant… it was adapted.”

He added that he did not take his radio into the control room.

“I did not have access to an airwave radio… I had my own personal airwave radio which I left in my vehicle when I arrived because part of my role as officer of the day is not usually to communicate with the fire ground or incident commander directly.

“I was briefed to take over responsibility for fire safety guidance information and… it was my decision to use my mobile phone to contact the command unit.”

Mr Oliff was pressed on whether he sought information from the fire crews on the ground about specific rescue attempts. “No, I didn’t,” he said.

“This was an unprecedented incident. The amounts of information we were passing over – I would imagine the fire crews were extremely stretched and I imagined that any information they had about rescues they would pass back when they had the time.”