I don’t think that the FBU did miss the thrust of the report. I think that having scrutinised the evidence in detail and having represented and supported the vast majority of those who attended the fire, they probably have more insight than most. I thought that their mentioning of the fact that the inquiry failed to seek the advice of its own expert on firefighting matters particularly telling.I think they have missed the thrust of the report - the fact that they didn’t have a contingency plan of how to evacuate - or even consider the possibility of having to do it at any stage, either beforehand or on the night, are failings themselves.
turning round in hindsight and saying ‘ah, it wouldn't have been safe’ is irrelevant - NOT doing it was even more unsafe, and not even thinking about it was negligent.
Short of displaying 20/20 hindsight I’ve yet to hear anyone detail realistically how a full evacuation could have been achieved within the timeframe of events.
Do procedures need looking at in light of the findings? Certainly, given that we now know that decades of deregulation and vested interests have made what should have been safe structures worryingly vulnerable.