Labour’s dismissive response to Grenfell shows what it really thinks of disabled people

“The fire brigade knew there were disabled people in the Grenfell Tower. They still didn’t bloody get them out.”

This was how an insider at a disability organisation responded when I told them of the Labour government’s decision to perform a volte face on the subject of the Personal Emergency Evacuation Plans, or PEEPs, recommended by the Grenfell Inquiry.

That lovely acronym describes something that one would hope would never be needed. But, as anyone who has ever bought an insurance policy knows, you want to have it there.

PEEPs were one of the key recommendations emerging from the Grenfell Inquiry, an exhaustive and commendably thorough process that produced two reports. Having urged the introduction of PEEPs in Phase 1, the chairman Sir Martin Moore-Bick, reiterated it in Phase 2 after the then government and local councils started backsliding. There was a reason for that. It matters that a named person in a high rise – such as the owner – knows not just where the disabled residents are, but also how to get them out in the event of a fire.

When the Local Government Association guide advising landlords said that it was “usually unrealistic to plan for the evacuation and assistance in the event of a fire of disabled and vulnerable residents living in general needs blocks of flats, such as Grenfell Tower”, the inquiry demurred. This was based on the evidence accrued in Phase 1 and the taking of further evidence to confirm its view in Phase 2 of the inquiry.

For a brief moment, it looked like the new Labour government might actually justify its oft-repeated promise of “change” by agreeing to the recommendation and following through on it, only to engage in the self-same backsliding the last lot were guilty of.

When you’re disabled, it doesn’t matter who the singer is. The song remains the same: disabled lives don’t matter.

What’s worse is the cynicism the Home Office is using to justify this. The previous government’s proposal in lieu of PEEPs was to provide what it called “emergency evacuation information sharing” (EEIS), which would provide the location of disabled residents of tower blocks to fire services. And, well, see the quote at the beginning of this piece.

Under the government’s latest proposals, this will be extended to cover all buildings over 18 metres, rather than just those with known fire safety issues, with EEIS being rebranded as “Residential PEEPs”. But these are not PEEPs. And, again, I refer you to the opening quote.

Reading through the government’s justification for this exercise, published on the Home Office website, I confess I started to feel queasy. The spin was as fast as anything I’ve seen from a government document. Did I say document? It’s more of a novella, running to more than 22,000 words.

If you use a wheelchair or some other mobility aid and if you work at an office job in a high-rise, you’ll have a proper PEEP. They’re mandatory for employers. But when you get home, you’re on your own. Perhaps ministers expect people to take camp beds into the workplace and stay there? I know some investment banks that would just love the idea. Twenty-four-hour working? Result!

Needless to say, Disability Rights UK described the decision as “shocking”.

“All Disabled residents in all residential blocks should be given the right to a PEEP if they need support and adjustments to leave the block in the event of a fire. This is what needs to be done if Disabled lives are to be equally valued,” the charity said.

Quite. As things stand, if there is another conflagration – sorry, if there is another residential conflagration – disabled people are going to die because the government has decided it’s too much effort to ensure their safety.

This is what it means when it uses the word “proportionate” and “practicable”. To whit: “There are no clear examples of workplace-type PEEPs within a residential setting which are practical and deliverable at scale in a proportionate and safe manner.”

Coming hot on the heels of the assisted dying bill, piloted by Labour MP Kim Leadbeater and pushed through the House of Commons by Labour votes, despite not having the support of any disabled people organisations or charities, this is deeply disturbing.

Labour loves to indulge in virtue signalling in its statements, its tweets, its flag-flying and its constant use of words such as “inclusive”. But if including disabled people, or simply ensuring their safety, involves having to do meaningful work, or to cajole others into doing meaningful work, or, yes, to spend money, it’s not interested.

Setting light to the carefully thought through evidence-lead recommendations of the Public Inquiry into a tragedy that killed 72 people, of whom 15 were disabled, in the most horrific fashion, is a case in point.

The worst may be yet to come, with next year’s review of disability “benefits” – I hate that word because it implies the inadequate support currently available magically fixes things – when there is a very real fear that the “change” government will deliver the coup de grace.

Developments like this suggest those fears are entirely justified.