JACOB Rees-Mogg “profoundly” apologised yesterday for suggesting Grenfell victims should have used “common sense” and ignored fire service guidance not to leave the burning tower block.
It came after an LBC appearance on Monday, during which the Commons leader discussed the London Fire Brigade (LFB) “stay-put” policy and said: “If you just ignore what you’re told and leave you are so much safer.
“I think if either of us were in a fire, whatever the fire brigade said, we would leave the burning building.
“It just seems the common-sense thing to do, and it is such a tragedy that that didn’t happen.”
But after calls to apologise, Rees-Mogg said: “What I meant to say is that I would have also listened to the fire brigade’s advice to stay and wait at the time.
“However, with what we know now and with hindsight I wouldn’t and I don’t think anyone else would.
“I would hate to upset the people of Grenfell if I was unclear in my comments.”
The original comments were called “crass” and “insensitive” by Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn, and Grenfell United said his words were “extremely painful and insulting to bereaved families”.
The head of the fire brigade said yesterday that it would now respond differently to a Grenfell-like fire.
LFB Commissioner Dany Cotton was answering questions at the London Assembly about the inquiry report into the 2017 blaze that killed 72 people.
READ MORE: Tory MPs criticised for mocking Corbyn's Grenfell tribute tie
She told the fire, resilience and emergency planning committee: “Clearly, knowing what we know now about Grenfell Tower and similar buildings with ACM cladding, our response would be very different.”
When asked how the service had changed its approaches, she added: “Not only have we increased our attendance if we receive a call to a high-rise fire, we increase the number of fire engines we send.
“If there are multiple calls to the same building and the callers state the outside of the building is on fire we send an initial attendance of ten fire engines, plus officers, plus specialist appliances.”
Cotton also expressed concern over the number of other buildings covered in similar aluminium composite material, adding: “Our concern is that action is not being taken quickly enough to remove that cladding which is a high risk.”
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 hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel