it? as i understand that the legal challenge is on it? as i understand that the legal challenge is on the it? as i understand that the legal challenge is on the basis - it? as i understand that the legal challenge is on the basis that - it? as i understand that the legal| challenge is on the basis that yes, the inquiry recommendation has been ignored despite the fact that was very well considered, on the evidence of fire safety experts. another ground for the challenge is that the consultation was ignored last year with 83% of people supporting the implementation of personal emergency evacuation plans, and that it is unfair because of human rights, the equality act and the public sector equality duty, it is unfair to treat disabled people differently and not make these adjustments for us. differently and not make these adjustments for us. fazilet hadi, head of policy adjustments for us. fazilet hadi, head of policy at adjustments for us. fazilet hadi, head of policy at disabil
head of policy at disability rights uk, an organisation which works with the government and disability charities to improve life for disabled people in the uk. it probably goes without saying that you are disappointed the government has rejected this recommendation but why do you think it will make people more vulnerable? this why do you think it will make people more vulnerable? more vulnerable? as the grenfell tower inquiry more vulnerable? as the grenfell tower inquiry recommendation i more vulnerable? as the grenfell tower inquiry recommendation of october 2019 clearly set out, the inquiry having heard all the evidence from fire experts decided that personal emergency evacuation plans for those disabled people who will have problems in evacuating on their own would be essential for their own would be essential for their safety, and i think it s because none of us have a guaranteed no risk when there is a fire but when you are disabled, read it you are blind or have a learning
plans were disproportionate or impractical. this legal challenge is on the basis that the decision is irrational, is it? no, as i understand it the legal challenge is on the basis that yes, the inquiry recommendation has been ignored despite the fact that was very well considered, on the evidence of fire safety experts. another ground for the challenge is that the consultation was ignored last year with 83% of people supporting the implementation of personal emergency evacuation plans, and that it is unfair because of human rights, the equality act and the public sector equality duty, it is unfair to treat disabled people differently and not make these adjustments for us.