What are the key lessons for government in crisis response?

In 2017 the UK suffered several terrorist attacks and the fire in Grenfell Tower. Government needs to learn from these, in particular the poor response to the Grenfell fire, by making sure local systems are in place and wider society can be engaged effectively to help victims.

The quality of any emergency response reflects the amount of thinking done in advance. However, preparation and planning are often complicated by the infrequent and unpredictable nature of crises. Bruce Mann, the former head of the Cabinet Office’s Civil Contingencies Secretariat, noted that every region experiences quiet periods without any emergencies. Over time the lack of experience dealing with a crisis can cause the groups involved in emergency response to lose sight of what preparation is needed.

To combat this, central government needs to stay “restless”. This means playing an active role in the local planning groups and forums, encouraging them to stay focused on the issue, especially when there has been a lull in emergencies. The Government should back up its restless attention to local preparedness by setting standards for preparation and offering assurance and validation. These actions should provide accountability for emergency planning and offer reassurance that every local area is sufficiently active and thoughtful in its preparation.

Do more to support joined-up planning at the local level

Local Resilience Forums (LRFs) exist across the UK. These support consultation, collaboration and information sharing between different groups of responders at the local level. This includes emergency services, local and national government, and voluntary organisations. However, as Mike Adamson, the Chief Executive of the British Red Cross, noted these forums “vary hugely in their quality, momentum and ability to convene”. This is partly a result of cuts in funding to public sector organisations, particularly local government. As a result, there are fewer resources to support planning and preparedness. There is a lack of transparency about LRFs – in some areas there is information in public, but in many there is not. The government could address this by establishing a public register of LRFs.

This would highlight gaps without making central government responsible for everything in every area.

Understand that managing a crisis goes beyond the immediate emergency response

Zina Etheridge, the Chief Executive of Haringey Borough Council, noted how emergencies tend to have a long tail thatis often overlooked in planning. It is difficult to anticipate issues that are unique to the context of a particular disaster, and the chronic problems which only begin to emerge during the period of recovery.

It was striking that Kensington and Chelsea Borough Council did not ask for help for 36 hours after the Grenfell fire, and that central Government did not appear to respond decisively. For example, even seemingly simple tasks such as identifying who was affected were very challenging. The response to terrorist attacks has been well rehearsed; Grenfell was different.

There are lingering effects on the victims that need to be carefully managed. These range from treating mental health problems that follow the trauma, to helping re-establish normal living conditions – housing, schools for children, and jobs. Equally there are long-tailed effects on organisations. For those managing crisis recovery, fatigue is a real issue, and ensuring that there are sufficient resources for the long-term must be a priority when making preparations.

Helping small businesses to be resilient through crises is also a small detail that is easily overlooked; Bruce Mann cited several small traders in Borough Market who collapsed as a result of lost business following the London Bridge attack in 2017.

For Government, this means incorporating a wider range of expertise in the way it plans its response to emergencies. This could entail better frameworks for engaging with community groups, the private sector, small businesses and voluntary organisations.

“Be really clear about what you know and what you don’t know”

Managing information during a crisis response and into the recovery is crucial. Crises always draw special scrutiny; and the growth of social media and information sharing has increased the public sensitivity to the narratives that surround any emergency.

Zina Etheridge stressed the importance of never making statements until you are confident of the facts. The costs of appearing to either misunderstand the situation, or mislead the public are far too high during these periods, and there’s no reward for rushing to comment. This is especially true for atypical crises, where the media and the public lack a frame of reference to understand the nature and scale of the tragedy that is unfolding. In these cases, it is important to be extra sensitive and careful with what you say, as words can easily create precedents.

For the Government there are two main lessons about communication. First, during an emergency it must communicate its own messages in a way that builds confidence and demonstrates leadership. The second is that the Government needs to support communication by other groups; both by providing guidance as well as resources to train the emergency responders and local government officials who often get called to speak on its behalf. All crises are local and it is local people who will deal with the long-term consequences – this needs to be recognised and addressed by government.

Watch the event