WIRRAL: New Ferry explosion report

Wirral Council did not apply for emergency government funding in time, failed to declare the blast a ‘major incident’ and sent threatening letters to residents demanding money.

The report, by Wirral Council’s Business Committee, comes almost three years after the disaster.

The background

On Saturday March 25, 2017, a gas explosion injured 81 people, destroyed six businesses and made 86 people homeless.

The most seriously injured victim was left with brain damage, facial fractures and life changing disabilities.

Many others were injured in the blast and suffered trauma.

The blast site was quickly identified as a crime scene and on October 23, 2019, Pascal Blasio was unanimously convicted of causing an explosion likely to endanger life or cause serious injury to property and fraud involving an insurance claim.

He was sentenced to 20 years imprisonment.

What did the report find?

A major point in the report is the council’s failure to apply for government funding within the one month time limit, under the Bellwin Scheme.

The scheme sets out when local authorities are entitled to government money to deal with disasters.

Locals had been given many different reasons for the council not applying for this money and felt their questions had not been answered.

But the report reveals council officers discussed the scheme after the explosion, but decided Wirral would not have qualified for money under its criteria.

However, other incidents such as flooding in Yorkshire and the Skripal poisoning in Salisbury, did not meet the criteria for assistance but got government money anyway.

In any case, the eventual cost to the council from the disaster was £573,778, meaning they would have qualified for government funding had they applied earlier.

On the government’s side there is clear inconsistency, as they did not apply the same rules to each disaster.

The report argues that on the basis of the numbers available to it at the time, Wirral Council had reason to believe it may not get government money.

But the rules on the cost needed to trigger Bellwin funding were ignored by the government in the Yorkshire and Salisbury incidents.

Perhaps the most important recommendation in the report is that Wirral Council applies for Bellwin funding within the one month deadline in any future disaster response, whether it thinks it is eligible for funding or not.

Wirral Council did ask the government for £500,000 of grant assistance outside of the time limit, but this was rejected.

Other serious failings

Wirral Council did not declare a major incident after the blast.

This failure is seen to communicate a sense that the incident was not as serious as it actually was.

The reason given for not declaring a major incident was that the emergency services had already declared one, meaning the council did not need to do so.

In future, the report states, the council must make their own declaration.

This is important because declaring a major incident would have triggered a “more receptive” government response.

That statement, of course, relates to the failure to secure government funding.

A notable section of the report read: “Future incidents of a similar nature should be classed as a major incident in the first instance, as they can be stepped down if needed.

“However, it is difficult to retrospectively claim a major incident. The Panel also agreed that the same should be done when claiming government support.”

Wirral Council did invest some money in helping local cope with the disaster.

The report noted £300,000 was spent in the aftermath of the blast on remedial work to secure properties, though this did little to assist traders, some of whom had lost 95% of their profits.

In December 2018, the council agreed to release a £200,000 hardship fund to help residents and traders in New Ferry.

But campaigners felt the council acted too slowly to help the victims and did not properly communicate with them.

Putting people first

One recommendation the report makes is for the council to put people first.

That means making hardship payments to victims as soon as their needs have been identified.

If needed, this should be rushed through by officers without the approval of a full council vote.

Crucially, a committee meeting before Christmas heard that sufficient one-to-one victim support was not readily available.

This type of mental health support is crucial to victims in the aftermath of a disaster which turned lives upside down.

One witness, who spoke anonymously to the committee, said: “The disaster immediately affected our family income, it had a devastating effect on my wife’s mental health, she now has chronic bouts of depression.

“Two months after the explosion I contracted double pneumonia and was off work for six weeks.

“My wife subsequently left the family home and now we are divorced, it’s had an emotional impact on our three children, we stopped having family holidays [and] various children’s clubs and music lessons came to an end due to lack of funds.”

In the face of many situations as serious as this, the committee was keen to ensure the council had a much better plan for dealing with any future emergency.

The final part of this witnesses statement shows why money should be at the heart of any official response.

It reads: “We were under insured, so we were not covered for the explosion.

“I borrowed £50,000 on our house to buy the business, we had to sell the land to the council to cover the demolition charge.

“[We went] from having a thriving business [and] owning the building freehold to having nothing but still owing the bank.”

The council must also improve its communication, the report said.

Perhaps the most heartless thing the council did following the emergency was sending letters to residents requesting payment for work done on their homes in the aftermath of the explosion.

The report stated: “Residents mentioned the letters sent from the council for scaffolding and boarding the premises.

“The letters sent demanded money within seven days or they faced recovery action.”

There had been discussions with residents on how the scaffolding, hoarding and other things needed to preserve their homes would be paid for.

But having big bills coming through the door just after such a traumatic episode was not ideal.

Most were able to sort out bill payments through their insurance, but some were not insured. Receiving these bills would have particularly harrowing for them.

Council officers acknowledged this could have been handled better.

The other aspect of the communication issue is making sure the public know how to get hold of the relevant council department after such an incident.

Some residents and traders felt they did not know who to turn to after the blast.

The report states: “Contacts numbers for the public to use should be coordinated, up to date and available for the public to use immediately, via a centralised 0800 number.

“This should be publicised online and through the media, as well as in paper copies.”

Another gripe among campaigners has been the failure as they see it to clean up the mess and make New Ferry a functioning town again.

Having destroyed much of Bebington Road and the surrounding area, the blast left a lot of work to be done.

The council did agree to invest £1.3m to buy a number of key sites in New Ferry to regenerate the town.

But again the complaints of campaigners are clear.

The council can state a figure they have pledged, but that does not change the reality on the ground.

The campaign group Justice for New Ferry, said: “Wirral Council has failed to improve the distressing sight of the explosion site, for example through hoardings.”

Of course one aspect of this is the failure to secure national funding, which would have made the whole process a lot easier.

Labour councillor Jo Bird, one of the committee members, said the council did not follow its All Hazards Emergency Plan following the blast, a key moment right at the start of the process.

She added: “People in Wirral are very concerned about the New Ferry explosion. Almost everyone knows someone affected by it.

“This report makes strong recommendations. There are serious questions to answer for Wirral Council. Plans are made for good reasons, we don’t make things up on the spot.

“There should have been a meeting of the strategic co-ordinating group. It’s unclear if this happened. If it did it should have been clearly minuted [which it wasn’t].

“We need to put people directly affected first. This is the first time their voices have been heard officially by the council.”

A spokesperson for Justice for New Ferry, who campaign on behalf of the explosion victims, said they wanted the council to support the report’s recommendations without any amendments.

They added: “We, the Justice for New Ferry campaign, demand a full and unequivocal apology from Wirral Council for its failure to manage the explosion effectively with regard to and compassion and consideration for the victims.

A business committee meeting at Wallasey Town Hall on Thursday will discuss the findings in the report further.