Skip to main content

Labour's Approach to Disability Safety

Labour's Approach to Disability Safety: More of the Same?


As the UK geared up for the 2024 general election, many scrutinised the Labour Party's promises of "change," particularly regarding disability safety in high-rise buildings. 

Fast forward to February 2025 with a Labour government and despite their rhetoric, Labour's stance on Personal Emergency Evacuation Plans (PEEPs) seems disappointingly similar to the previous Tory government’s approach, leaving many questioning the authenticity of their commitment to improve safety for disabled individuals.


The Importance of PEEPs

The devastating Grenfell Tower fire in 2017, which claimed 72 lives, underscored the critical need for personalised evacuation strategies for disabled residents. The inquiry that followed strongly recommended the implementation of PEEPs to ensure that people with mobility issues could safely evacuate during emergencies. This wasn't just a suggestion; it was a call to action to prevent future tragedies.


Labour's Response: A Missed Opportunity?

Initially, Labour leaders, including Sir Keir Starmer, vowed to prioritise safety and heed the lessons from Grenfell. However, their recent proposals have been criticised for lacking substance. The introduction of "Residential PEEPs" — an approach that requires building managers to conduct fire risk assessments and engage with vulnerable residents — stops short of establishing a legal obligation for bespoke evacuation plans.


Outcry from Disability Rights Organisations

Disability rights advocates are understandably frustrated with Labour's handling of the issue. Many see the "Residential PEEPs" as little more than a rebranding of existing procedures, lacking the robust, individualised plans needed to ensure safety. These organisations view Labour's actions as a betrayal of their commitments, leaving disabled residents vulnerable and at risk.


Local Green Party Response 

Telford and Wrekin Green Party Disabilities Officer, Mark Webster, argues that these measures are insufficient. "By allowing building managers discretion over safety protocols, there's no guarantee that all residents, especially those with disabilities, will receive the necessary protection". He also explained that "the potential for costs to fall on disabled residents themselves further complicates matters, raising questions about equity and fairness".

"I have written to both Labour MP Shaun Davies, and Councillor Lee Carter, Labour leader of Telford and Wrekin Council, highlighting the issue, and urging them to lobby for disabled people's rights and advocate for fully implementing the Grenfell Reports findings, in order to protect Telford and Wrekin residents".

Examples from the Ground: Telford and Ketley

In places like The Haybridge Hadley (formerly Hadley Manor flats) in The Wrekin and Reynolds House in Ketley Telford, the need for effective PEEPs is pressing. Residents in these high-rise flats deserve more than just promises—they need concrete, enforceable plans that prioritise their safety. Unfortunately, Labour’s current proposals do not to provide that assurance.


A Call for True Change

Labour's handling of PEEPs raises serious concerns about their commitment to real change. By not fully implementing the Grenfell Inquiry's recommendations, they risk repeating past mistakes and failing their disabled constituents. 


It's time for Labour to step up with genuine, impactful policies that ensure the safety and rights of all residents, especially the most vulnerable. Anything less is simply not enough.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

A Wolf in Reformist Clothing

A Wolf in Reformist Clothing: Dissecting the Structural Ableism of Reform UK's SEND "Vision" As a Green Party Disability Officer with three decades of experience, and as a parent who has spent 15 years battling intransigent local authorities for my neurodivergent son, and others, I watched Richard Tice’s press statement with a familiar, corrosive fury. This is not a blueprint for reform. It is a masterclass in the very structural ableism and neoliberal betrayal that has manufactured the SEND crisis. So come with me, and let’s dissect it with the critical eye that it demands. The Insidious Linguistics of Erasure Tice with his core creed: “Nobody's disabled, people are differently abled.” This phrase is not progressive; it is erasure. It is a feel-good, ablest euphemism designed to sanitise the reality of disability in a society structured against us. Disability is not a matter of “different ability”; it is an interaction between impairment and t...
Post a Comment
Read more

LibDem Conference 2025

Following last week's observations of the Reform UK Ltd conference, I had hoped that there would be nothing to report from the Liberal Democrats conference as far as disability is concerned. How wrong was I? While at the conference their leader, Sir Ed Davey, stocked the fires of the hostile environment towards the sick and disabled, using tired old tropes and unsupported figures! See video For istance, Sir Ed, sounding very right wing himself, regurgitated the "fact" that there is widespread fraud by those claiming PIP (Personal Independence Payments) while talking with a radio broadcaster see video While fraud has seen an increase, from 0.0% to 0.4% which is approximately £1.2 billion, and is born out by the governments own 2025 figures. To put that in context, the welfare bill is £303.3 billion per year. Further comparison shows that tax fraud in the UK figures were £48.8 billion a year, and known tax evasion was £0.7 billion. So it would take a person on a...
Post a Comment
Read more

Hidden Cost of Caring

Hidden Costs Why Our Family Carers Deserve Better Imagine waking up every day knowing that your entire world revolves around caring for a loved one with disabilities. You’re doing everything you can to keep them safe, comfortable, and loved — often at great personal cost.  Now, consider this: nearly half of parent carers in the UK say their income doesn’t even cover basic needs like food and housing. That’s almost 44%. And if your fridge breaks or your bed falls apart? Over 80% of carers say they couldn’t replace essentials without going into debt or going without. It’s heartbreaking, isn’t it? And yet, these are the everyday realities for millions of families. Many are skipping meals just to make sure their children eat, with over half of parent carers doing so.  Meanwhile, a staggering 93% of families want to work paid jobs, but caring responsibilities make that practically impossible. The emotional toll is equally heavy, with 28% of parent carers likely to be clinically dep...
Post a Comment
Read more