►
Description
Published by the Scottish Parliament Corporate Body.
www.parliament.scot // We do not facilitate discussions on our YouTube page but encourage you to share and comment on our videos on your own channels. // If you would like to join in our conversations please follow @ScotParl on Twitter or like us on Facebook at www.facebook.com/scottishparliament
A
Morning
and
welcome
to
the
29th
meeting
of
the
committee
and
2018
I'd
like
to
remind
members
and
the
public
to
turn
off
mobile
phones
and
any
members
using
electronic
devices
to
access
committee
papers
should
please
ensure
that
their
turn
to
silence
I'd
like
to
welcome
Sandra
white
MSP
to
the
committee
and
Pauline
MacNeil
MSP
to
the
meeting.
Since
this
is
your
first
meeting
with
us
Pauline.
Do
you
have
any
relevant
interest
to
declare
I
don't.
Thank
you
very
much.
A
Our
first
item
on
the
agenda
today
is
an
evidence
session
with
representatives
from
the
Glasgow
School
of
Art
and
I'd
like
to
welcome
to
the
meeting
you
do.
Glee
the
chair
of
the
Board
of
Governors
Professor
Eileen,
macadam
macmillan,
William,
a
deputy
director
for
innovation
at
the
art
school
and
les
Davidson.
The
senior
project
manager
of
the
Macintosh
building
restoration,
I'd
like
to
invite
dr.
Glee
to
make
a
short
opening
statement.
I
carry.
B
Much
convenor
and
thank
you
very
much
committee,
so
no
need
to
introduce
my
colleagues
since
you've
done
so
it's
so
eloquently
and
can
I
just
thank
you
all
at
convenient
committee
for
this
opportunity.
It's
been
incredibly
useful
because
all
the
questions
that
you've
rightfully
been
asking
actually
I've
run
completely
in
parallel
with
the
audit
that
you
would
expect
us
to
be
doing
so,
and
this
is
really
helpful.
Thank
you.
B
But
despite
that
challenge,
we
really
are
continuing
to
meet
our
responsibilities
to
our
staff
and
our
students
and
meet
their
educational
needs
and
also,
of
course,
to
Scotland
by
delivering
on
our
commitments
that
are
detailed
in
our
Scottish
funding.
Council
outcome
agree.
We
are
fully
aware
of
the
disruption
and
the
impact
on
our
local
community
and
I
particularly
want
to
express
our
deep
gratitude
to
our
neighbors,
the
residents
and
businesses
for
their
long-standing
understanding,
patience
and
continuing
dialogue,
which
is
ongoing.
B
We're
also,
of
course,
extremely
grateful
to
Scottish,
Fire
and
Rescue
Service
to
police,
Scotland,
historic
environment,
Scotland,
Glasgow,
City
Council
for
all
their
professionalism
and
support,
and
there
has
always
been
significant
public
interest
in
the
Mackintosh
buildings.
So
it's
understandable,
obviously
that
people
want
to
know
what
happened
and
importantly,
what's
gonna
happen
next
at
the
waist
thread,
rumors
and
speculation
following
the
fire
in
June
are
also
totally
understandable
following
the
2014
fire
and
I
can
assure
the
convener
and
the
committee
that
there
is
absolutely
nobody
once
answer
is
more
than
we
do.
B
What
we
do
know
is
that
the
cause
of
the
2014
fire
was
accidental,
but
we
like
absolutely
everybody
else-
do
not
know
the
cause
of
the
second
fire
and
speculation
about
this,
really
isn't
being
that
helpful
or
supportive
to
the
Scottish
Fire
and
Rescue
Services
ongoing
investigation.
However,
what
we
do
know
is
that
we
took
every
step
possible,
above
and
beyond
the
standard
in
specifying
the
contract
terms,
including
fire
precautions
for
the
McIntosh
building
restoration
project.
B
As
what
happens
next,
and
particularly
interests
of
this
committee
in
that
question,
the
board
and
the
staff
are
completely
clear
about
the
importance
of
the
Macintosh
ability
to
the
educational
experience
of
our
students
and
to
its
contribution
to
the
global
position
of
Glasgow
and
Scotland's
cultural
and
creative
identity,
which
is
so
important,
and
now
this
is
a
position
that
has
been
reinforced.
As
you
know,
by
many
of
the
contributors
to
this
committees.
B
Discussions
which
has
been
very
helpful
and
Glasgow
School
of
Art,
therefore,
is
clear
and
very
strong
in
its
resolve
to
restore
the
Mackintosh
building
to
its
rightful
place,
at
the
centre
of
our
education
and
to
the
city
as
an
open
and
accessible
working
school
of
art
and
as
custodians
of
the
Mackintosh
building
I'm
sure
you
can
see.
That's
why
we
do
not
apologize
for
telling
you
over
and
over
again
that
determination
and
that
commitment,
so
Iris
in
submission,
which
we
hope
you've
all
got.
B
A
Thank
you
very
much
dr.
gray,
and
can
I
take
this
opportunity
to
thank
you
for
coming
today
and
also
to
thank
you
for
your
extensive
written
submission,
which
has
certainly
kept
us
all
busy
over
the
last
few
days.
So
thank
you
for
that
can
I
start
by
and
in
your
submission
on
page
13.
You
see
we
have
always
taken
fire
precautions
seriously
across
our
whole
estate.
A
Now,
in
the
course
of
them,
our
evidence
gathering
our
committee
has
heard
from
Alexandra
kids,
who
is
a
independent
fire
safety
expert
who
chaired
the
UK
working
group
on
protecting
historic
buildings.
No,
he
said
that
he
visited
the
article
with
Historic
Scotland
in
1997
and
that
time
comments
were
made
and
discussions
were
had
around
the
voids,
the
ventilation
ducts
that
Mackintosh
had
designed.
And,
of
course,
we
know
that
in
2014
the
fire
report
said
that
these
ventilation,
ducts
and
other
voids
were
the
reason
why
the
I
accelerated.
A
So
they
were
identified
in
1997,
your
own
report
and
the
federal
report
which
the
Glasgow
School
of
Art
commissioned
in
2006
also
identified
these
ventilation
ducts
as
a
serious
hazard
and
not,
and
that
report
said
that
that
school
was
at
high
risk
of
fire
spreading.
Now
that
was
more
than
20
years
ago,
and
when
we
heard
from
Iraq
it
takes
two
weeks
ago,
they
told
us
that
these
dogs
still
hadn't
been
blocked
at
the
time
of
the
2018
fire.
Why
was
that
and
well.
C
His
report
talks
about
the
federal
report,
you're
quite
correct
that
the
the
ducts
that
are
the
voids,
whichever
that
he
talks
about,
were
in
the
building
from
the
start
of
it,
was
part
of
mackintoshes
system
for
bringing
air
through
the
building
and
for
taking
services
up
through
the
building.
So
it
wasn't
that
they
were
known
about
from
1993
or
97
or
or
earlier
or
later
they
were
always
there
and
always
part
of
this
building.
C
C
Actually
he
did
talk
about
the
fact
this
as
part
of
her
the
building
operate.
Some
reason
talks
about
how
you
actually
use
these
voids
in
the
building
to
take
services
and
raid
the
raises
through
it
even
today,
that
would
be
the
practice
historic
environment
Scotland
would
approve.
So
yes,
these
areas
within
the
building
which
were
not
just
razors,
were
not
just
ducks,
but
were
cavities
behind
lath
and
plaster
became
paneling
were
known
about
the
response
to
that
from
the
school
or
taking
the
advice
of
Bureau
Happold.
C
A
I'm
sorry,
because
in
that
report
it
said
that
you
know
in
the
you
meet
the
decision
not
to
fire,
stop
the
voids
and
they
see
in
the
report.
This
is
not
the
recommendations
they
see.
The
client
requirements
are
that
a
major
intervention
in
the
building
fabric
to
create
commentation
would
be
extremely
unlikely
to
be
authorized
so
for
I'm,
assuming
the
conservation
reasons
you
didn't
want
to
block
these
docks,
because
that's
that's
kind
of
what
to
put
the
architects.
The.
D
C
Stop
that
the
fed
report
wasn't
a
conservation
project
or
it
was
all
about
the
safety
of
the
bank.
There
was
no
instruction
from
Glasgow
School
of
Art
to
not
stop
voids.
In
fact,
some
of
them
were
stopped
after
that
report
and
even
before
that
report,
so
there
are
over
130
ducts.
There
are
many,
many
more
voids
in
the
building
that
we
didn't
even
know
about
until,
in
fact,
after
the
fire
into
14,
when
it
revealed
areas
of
the
building
we
didn't
know
even
had
these
voids.
C
So
there's
no
instruction
from
Glasgow
school.
That
noted
it.
In
fact,
the
instruction
was
as
part
of
a
fully
engineered
fire
system.
These
are
areas
that
would
be
stopped
or
damp
'red
or
partially
automatically
stopped
as
and
when
the
voids
are.
There
are
multi
various
kinds
of
voids,
but
the
two
main
ones
in
the
building
and
what
was
involved
into
14
or
part
of
what
was
involved
into
14
was
the
fact
we
had
timber
risers
that
took
services
up
the
building.
C
That's
totally
common
you'll
have
raises
in
this
building
any
building
those
voids
were
and
are
still
serving,
that
building
they're
taking.
But
what
we
are
installing
we
have
stopped
some.
We
have
put
damper
through
others.
We
have
automatic
closers
on
daugthers.
You
can't
stop
the
building
immediately.
You
have
to
do
it
when
you're
putting
in
the
work
itself,
so
that
was
happening
after
2:14.
Somewhat
happened
previously
2:14
as
well.
C
So
some
of
the
redundant
one's
already
been
stopped
as
I
say
others
weren't
known
about,
but
that
was
part
of
the
federal
report
was
to
actually
put
in
a
fully
engineered
system,
which
is
to
say
you
can't
close
up
every
void,
especially
once
you
don't
know
about.
So
what
you
do
is
you
put
in.
Amongst
other
things,
a
miss
suppression
system
was
what
the
school
then
embarked.
D
C
A
The
fire
suppression
system
I
came
so
we
doesn't
stop
the
voids
because
the
cause,
the
2014
fire
and
they
hadn't
been
stopped
by
2018,
but
they
going
back
to
the
federal
report.
You
you
said
that
you,
you
chose
our
fire
suppression
system
at
that
time.
Again
it's
a
long
time
ago.
Why
did
it
take
so
long?
Because
in
both
of
the
2014
and
the
2418
fire,
the
fire
suppression
system
hadn't
been
installed?
Well.
A
D
A
C
Fact
that
it's
occurred
at
the
base
of
a
void-
and
it
was
one
of
the
raises
that
hadn't
been
stopped
as
opposed
to
one
that
had
been
stopped
definite
to
the
building
vertical
up
the
building
instead
of
horizontally
at
that
point,
and
it
moved
in
a
different
way.
We
don't
know
what
caused
the
failure.
This
time,
of
course,
because
we
haven't
had
the
report
yet
so
the
voids
may
have
had
no
role
in
this.
C
A
In
terms
of
the
fundraising
at
that
time,
you
spent
50
million
pounds
on
campus
development,
including
the
the
new
reach
building.
People
will
wonder
why
you
couldn't
afford
a
fire
suppression
system
immediately
after
this
report,
showing
that
the
building
was
high-risk
when
you
spent
50
million
pounds
building
the
new
building.
C
B
A
But
you
said
it
was
a
very
complex
system.
Actually
sprinkler
systems
mean,
according
to
Historic
Scotland
zone
when
documents
advisory
documents
on
historic
buildings.
Sprinkler
systems
are
quite
common
and
historic
buildings,
but
you
ruled
out
of
sprinkler
system
and
in
favor
of
a
miss
suppression
system.
B
Why
was
that?
Can
I
will
answer
that?
No,
let
Liz
back
me
up
on
that.
We
weren't
permitted
to
use
us
sprinkler
system
because
it
being
a
greedy
listed
building,
it
contained
mcintosh,
artifacts
and
things
that
would
have
been
destroyed
by
water.
So
that's
why
we
were
refused
permission
to
put
in
a
normal
standard
sprinkler
system.
So
the
only
other
alternative
was
a
mist
suppression
system,
which
was
a
relatively
new,
but
that
was
the
best
one
and
that
was
approved
by
historic
environment
Scotland
as
being
safe
to
use.
A
A
C
Can
I
remind
that
the
committee
of
one
thing
that
Glasgow
stove
out
the
Mac
toast
building
it
was
a
fully
compliant
building
at
the
time
of
the
first
accidental
phone
214.
If
it
hadn't
been
complained
already
with
every
fire
safety
regulation
in
the
land,
we
wouldn't
have
been
able
to
have
students
in
it.
So
there
wasn't
a
building
that
was
inherently
dangerous
in
or
too
dangerous
to
occupy.
C
It
was
already
met
every
standard
we
had
fire
alarms,
we
had
every
face,
things
had
already
met
it,
otherwise
nobody
could
have
gone
through
the
door
as
mural
says.
Actually
this
is
it
was
a
belt
and
braces
approach
and
actually
not
many
buildings
are
spring
closed.
If
you
look
at
university
campuses,
we
would
probably
both
with
the
read
the
store
when
it
comes
on
on
a
stream
and
also
the
map
when
it
would
have
come
back
and
will
come
back,
it's
probably
about
70%
of
our
estate.
I
would
challenge
you
know.
C
A
survey
of
states
around
Scotland
of
academia
of
any
ends
up
good
historic
public
building
to
see
more
than
about
five
or
ten
percent
and
say
so
GSA's
going
way
beyond.
I
understand
your
point
about
the
sprinklers,
of
course,
to
miss
suppression.
The
list
of
build
consent
is
concerned
about
aesthetics.
That
is
it's
not
to
make
it
sound.
A
frippery
BC
is
about
affecting
the
character
of
a
listed
building,
so
historic
environment
Scotland
or
our
own
Building
Control
Department.
A
C
A
C
Is
a
complaint
system,
it
is
a
kit
of
parts.
So,
as
we
know
from
very
long
discussions
with
both
makers
in
Denmark,
in
our
case
and
FM
approvals,
bs
VA
approvals,
we
had
a
complaint
system
that
would
have
been
put
in.
Otherwise
we
wouldn't
have
had
a
building
or
a
phone.
We
couldn't
have
put
in
a
system
that
didn't
meet
compliance,
but
it
has
possibly
around
24
mm
three
dozen
different
types
of
between
heads
pipes,
valves
pumps.
You
have.
B
C
Put
the
whole
system
together
and
that
becomes
the
complaint
system.
The
system
was
being
put
into.
The
Macintosh
was
an
extraordinarily
bespoke
system
because
of
the
extraordinary
bespoke
nature
of
the
building,
and
it
was
to
protect
its
aesthetics,
but
also,
very
importantly,
and
I,
think
it
is
in
a
report.
We
didn't
have
the
water
to
put
in
a
sprinkler
system.
A
sprinkler
system
uses
about
a
tank
size
that
would
have
drained
down
garnett
hill.
So
we
didn't.
C
We
were
not
allowed
from
Scottish
water
and
we
had
that
in
rating
that
we
connected
couldn't
connect
to
what
we
call
the
town
means.
If
we
done
so
well,
they
wouldn't
have
allowed
that
connection.
We
had
to
provide
the
tank
in
the
building.
The
only
way
to
have
done
that
under
a
sprinkler
system
would
have
taken
out
almost
half
the
first
floor
and
put
in
a
swimming
pool.
C
However,
what
we
had
to
do
is
make
one
work,
that,
with
the
available
water,
that
we
were
in
fact
in
this
scheme,
what
we
had
to
do
is
excavate
down
quite
deeply
into
the
phones
of
the
Macintosh
to
achieve
a
tank
that
would
make
even
a
miss
suppression
system
which
uses
much
less
water.
So
we
didn't
have
the
option
of
using
a
sprinkler
system.
It
would
mean
we
didn't
have
the
water
reserve
to
do
so.
Okay,.
B
Can
answer
that,
from
the
government's
point
of
view
we
didn't
rule
it
out,
we
had
to
examine
it
because
part
of
our
job
as
governors
is
to
be
fiscally
prudent
as
well
as
safety.
So
we
had
a
look
at
what
the
stability
would
mean
in
terms
of
compliance.
It
would
have
been
fully
compliant
again
for
fire
safety
without
a
sprinkler
system.
So
we
looked
at
that,
but
the
extra
cost
of
putting
a
sprinkler
system
I
think
came
in
up
at
1.3
million
and
that's
just
some
discussion.
A
B
D
E
Thank
you.
You
know.
We've
had
a
number
of
panels
in
front
of
us
about
classical
art
school
and
we
have
also
received
a
number
of
emails
from
interested
parties.
It's
fair
to
say,
there's
a
degree
of
conflict
and
claims
and
counterclaims
I
don't
know
it's
difficult
for
us.
Part
of
our
job
here
is
to
determine
and
try
and
make
some
judgment
on.
Some
of
the
factors
have
been
involved
in
in
the
two
fires.
Why
do
you
think
there's
this
level
of
a
conflict
in
the
committee
are
hearing
different
versions
of
what
happened.
E
Why
do
you
think
it's
an
issue
as
culture
of
the
college
and
let's
put
added
into
that
as
a
recent
resignation
of
the
director
it
would
from
the
outside
appear
that
it's
not
a
particularly
happy
Shepherd
at
the
moment.
Why?
Why
do
you
think
we're
receiving
these
kind
of?
Why
do
you
think?
But
in
this
situation,
I.
B
Can't
answer
that
I'm,
afraid
I
think
these
are
minority
views,
we've
had
the
opposite:
we've
had
many
emails
and
lasers
and
personal
messages
of
support.
We
are
collegiate
and
strong,
and
there
are
a
number
of
individuals.
I
know
that
have
voiced
their
own
opinion
in
speculation,
some
of
facts.
Otherwise
you
can
see
from
our
I
think
quite
comprehensive.
Speculoos,
submission
and
I
can't
go
into
that.
B
I
can
say,
is
it's
an
extremely
happy
place
right
now
and
I
can
assure
the
committee
that
in
fact,
is
a
great
opportunity
to
thank
the
stoning
staff
management
directorates
and
the
students
and
the
board
as
well
for
five
months
of
absolutely
amazing,
hard
work
which
they
have
done
together
with
great
courage
and
comradeship.
So
that's
not
an
impression
that
we
get
is.
E
It
possible
to
say
a
bit
more
about
the
resignation
of
Professor
Tom
ends
and,
yes,
I
think
he's
resigned
at
quite
a
critical
time,
we're
now
in
a
situation
where
we're
having
people
move
up
to
that
role
and
temporary
possessions.
So
there's
a
question
of
our
leadership:
the
college
at
a
time
where,
obviously
your
face
in
a
very
difficult
situation.
Yes,.
B
Well,
let
me
completely
reassure
the
committee:
there
isn't
a
problem
of
leadership
just
now,
because
we
have
professor
McCormick
Williams
who's,
one
deputy
director
and
professor
Ken
Neil
who's.
Our
other
deputies
director
have
stepped
up
into
that
post
and
and
are
running
the
art
school
very
beautifully,
and
this
Monday.
Of
course,
all
the
students
went
back
into
the
accommodation
that
was
pre.
E
From
the
contractors
around
this
part
of
the
evidence
said
that
the
fire
safety
plan
was
dynamic
and
required
signing
off
at
multiple
stages
and
with
a
fluid
document,
they've
seen
some
of
the
reports
and
it's
in
your
ordinary
dance
should
miss
admitted
to
us
about
visits
and
various
other
events
that
happened
and
staff
moving
in
at
the
building
and
offices.
Changing
what
would
be?
Do
you
want
to
play?
B
Board
had
a
lot
of
oversight.
This
again,
that's
before
you
can
see
the
minutes
from
the
various
committees
with
a
McIntosh
restoration
committee
and
that
reported
directly
into
the
board
and
listener
team,
we're
of
course
on
site,
and
she
can
speak
a
little
bit
more
about
that
about
the
visits,
particularly
and
but
I
can
assure
the
committee.
Absolutely
a
hundred
percent
that
visiting
nemac
sites,
which
was
a
construction
site,
was
absolutely
thoroughly
thoroughly.
E
E
And
just
finally
from
ourselves,
there's
been
discussion
around
whether
the
art
college
prior
to
2014
and
whether
its
future
might
be,
whether
that,
as
a
super
building
for
a
working,
modern
art
school,
and
if
we
look
at
the
cause
of
the
2014
fire,
well
that
it
was
appropriate
that
that
type
of
creative
activity
was
happening
in
that
type
of
building.
And
do
you
accept
those?
E
How
do
you
feel
about
that
debate?
Do
you
accept
those
concerns
and
the
future
plans
I
know
you're
committed
to
list
rebuilding
our
College?
Is
there
Canessa
is
the
way
we
end
up
going
as
a
consideration
of
what
actually
takes
place
in
that
building
in
terms
of
it
operating
as
I
worked
in
art,
school.
B
E
B
Know
it
seemed
completely
appropriate
for
it
to
happen.
What
happened
was
the
individual
involved
did
not
follow
instructions
and
had
they
followed
instructions
that
type
of
work
is
completely
appropriate,
unsafe
and
has
been
for
many
years.
The
accident,
as
outlined
in
the
SRS
report,
shows
it
was
a
perfect
storm
of
somebody
not
doing
what
they
were
inducted
to
and
told
to
several
times
not
to
the
work
had
nothing
to
do
with
it.
That
kind
of
work
has
been
going
on
for
years
in
the
art
school.
B
To
answer
your
second
point-
and
there
is
no
question
at
all-
that
this
building
is
a
working
part
of
the
article
and
in
fact,
if
you
talk
about
our
remit,
which
is
to
deliver
creative
education,
the
Macintosh
building
itself
is
more
than
a
building.
It's
actually
a
tool
of
learning
for
the
students
who
who
come
to
our
School
of
Arts.
You
cannot
separate
it,
but.
E
There
is
an
argument
for
word
or
there's
been
discussion
around
us.
We
have
the
rule
of
Historic.
Scotland
is
more
than
an
arts
school,
it's
a
buildin
of
significance
to
the
whole
of
Scotland.
So
there
are
questions
about
whether
there
school
as
the
two
parts,
whether
it's
the
right
body
to
go
forward
with
the
project
and
also
whether
it's
the
right
activity
to
take
place
in
that
building
and
but
except
that,
it's
not
a
view
that
you
sheerly.
B
Know,
I
absolutely
disagree
with
the
second
view.
Of
course
it
is,
it
has
to
be
working
art
school,
whether
the
art
school
are
the
right
people
to
be
the
custodians
of
it.
Yes,
absolutely
we've
been
very
useful
custodians
and
you
cannot
separate
the
two.
It
will
always
be
part
of
our
academic
plan.
It
will
always
be
part
of
the
DNA
of
the
art
school
if
I'd
probably
like
to
bring
professor
McKay
will
win
here
by
this,
and
it's
a
major
part
of
us
connecting
with
the
city
and
it's
not
a
museum.
B
It's
a
beautiful,
important
iconic
building,
but
one
of
the
reasons
is
so
important.
It
is
because
it
has
been
a
working
art
school
for
this
time,
and
I
can
testify
to
that,
because
I
was
lucky
enough
to
study
in
it
and,
of
course,
a
new
rebuild
will
not
have
the
patent
that
people
like
myself
have
built
up
over
the
last
hundred
years.
B
But
I
tell
you
something
when
all
of
us
in
this
room
are
long
gone
in
another
hundred
years,
it
will
have
its
own
one
and
it
will
be
the
same
building
and
it
will
have
the
same
effect
and
the
most
wonderful,
creative,
inspirational
ideas
are
the
people
who
are
lucky
enough
to
study
in
it.
I.
Don't
if
you
like
to
say
something,
professor,
if
I
may
add.
F
B
F
The
2014
fire
we
endeavoured
to
bring
back
the
Macintosh
in
a
way
that
would
serve
the
educational
needs
of
our
students
and
our
future
students,
and
our
intention
was
to
house
in
that
building
all
first
years.
So
anybody
coming
to
Glasgow,
the
Glasgow
School
of
Art,
to
study
from
Glasgow
from
Scotland
or
internationally
would
be
welcomed
into
the
art
school
in
the
Mackintosh
building
and
would
become
extremely
proficient
in
the
in
that
particular
legacy
and
would
be
able
to
take
that
with
them.
F
As
a
cultural
ambassador
for
Glasgow
School
of
Art
in
Glasgow,
when
they
finished
their
studies,
they
would
be
immersed,
as
we
all
know,
in
a
building
of
extreme
significant
beauty
and
function
and
from
the
papers
that
have
been
supplied.
It
was
noted
that,
in
the
review
of
our
estate,
it
was
still
the
most
functional
building,
not
only
the
most
aesthetically
beautiful
talking
to
our
creative
industries
and
contributing
to
the
creative
economy.
F
It
was
the
most
relevant
building
and
will
remain
so
and
therefore
why
would
we
deny
current
and
future
generations
of
students
the
ability
to
have
the
experience
that
is
so
deeply
lodged
in
people's
minds
and
is
reflected
in
some
of
the
statements
that
have
been
submitted
to
the
committee?
We
ready.
We
are
educators
and
we
want
high
quality
education
and
that's
that's
what
we're
about.
That's.
Why
we
want
to
bring
back
the
Macintosh
to
that
very
specific
function
that
charles
rennie
mackintosh,
designed
it
for.
A
G
You
computer
I'd,
like
to
return
to
the
communities.
Questions
are
in
the
fire.
Suppression
system
and
I
understand
completely
how
immensely
complex
it
is
to
install
a
fire
suppression
system
in
a
building
of
that
kind.
I'm
a
bit
concerned
her
and
the
financial
decisions
that
were
taken
saw
the
need
to
fundraise
for
and
wonder
if
you'd
be
able
to
explain
why,
for
example,
the
the
SFC
museums
grant,
which
at
that
point
in
time
was
around
200
grand
a
year,
couldn't
be
put
towards
a
there,
was
lottery
grant
for
conservation
and
in
2008.
G
Why
were
other
funds
that
were
already
being
received
by
the
school
of
art,
nor
into
funding
a
fire
suppression
system?
As
a
matter
of
priorities?
It
seems
the
delay
required
to
raise
additional
funds
created
the
way
that
has
unfortunately
led
to
this,
because
the
suppression
system
wasn't
ready
and.
B
G
To
be
clear
at
the
point
you
decided
that
there
needed
to
be
this
fire
suppression
system.
You
then
had
to
embark
upon
a
fundraising
campaign
for
it.
If
you
had
instead
allocated
funds,
you
were
already
receiving,
you
would
not
have
had
to
spend
a
couple
years
fundraising.
You
could
have
immediately
begun
installing
that
system.
You
would
have
discovered
the
asbestos
what
two
years
before
you
actually
did.
The
fire
suppression
system
would
have
been
in
place.
Two
years
before
this
fire
took
place,
I'm
in
the
fire
took
place.
G
B
I'm
afraid
I'm
not
able
to
ask
that
because
I
wasn't
in
office
at
that
time,
but
from
everything
we've
read
through
the
minute,
so
everything
there
seemed
to
be
a
very
cohesive
and
sensible
approach
to
that.
That's
all
I
can
say
it
was
economics
and
it
was,
as
lasers
pointed
out,
the
building
was
completely
safe
and
this
was
a
belt
and
braces
approach
that
that
was
being
put
in
by
the
previous
administration
to
further
ensure
absolute
top-notch
five-star
gold
star
standard
fire
protection,
but
it
was
already
safe.
C
You're
quite
correct
those
applications
to
funders
which
involved
historic
environment,
Scotland
or
Historic
Scotland.
At
the
time
HLF
and
other
funders
ERDF
had
been
made.
It
was
for
a
conservation
and
access
project,
I'm
sure
most
members
will
know
when
you
apply
to
anybody
a
public
sector
in
particular.
You
can't
then
say
thanks
for
the
money,
we're
going
to
spend
it
on
something
else.
Even
if
you
feel
that
that
may
be
more
important
that
what
you've
asked
for
the
money
for
it
would
have
been
historic,
environment
Scotland
were
approached,
they
were
asked.
C
They
don't
put
into
the
repair
and
conservation
of
buildings
and
move
it
into
miss
suppression
systems
by
by
dint
of
their
remit,
they
repair,
but
they
don't
add
to
a
building
so
and
I
think
it
probably
I'm,
not
speaking
just
for
heat,
yes,
but
for
others
would
open
the
floodgates,
particularly
now
to
a
lot
of
applications
for
money
from
the
public
purse
to
put
miss
suppression
through
thousands
and
thousands,
your
own
properties
and
care.
You
know
all
of
these
all
of
these
buildings,
so
we
couldn't
switch
the
money
once
having
made
those
signed.
B
C
G
G
C
Casting
that
back
into
my
board
minutes-
and
there
was
a
point
at
which
this
whole
process
has
been
incredibly
closely
followed-
to
say
the
least
by
our
insurance-
obviously
particularly
since
214,
but
the
school
had
more
than
one
insurer.
The
main
insurer
of
that
time
was
royal
Sun
Alliance,
who
behaved
wonderfully
after
the
first
fire.
But
we
also
had
another
insurer,
which
is
AXA
insurance,
and
that
was
for
contents
and
that
mainly,
we
maintain
still
the
archive
of
cosmic
School
of
Art
within
the
McIntosh
building,
and
that
required
a
different
kind
of
system.
C
So
miss
suppression
would
still
have
involved
water.
A
lot
of
museums,
I,
think
the
National
Library
here,
etc
will
still
have
where
you
have
areas
where
water
is
deemed
to
be
a
bigger
risk
than
fire
ie
with
paper,
mainly
you'd,
normally
use
a
hypoxic
system,
which
is
to
take
the
oxygen
out
of
that
area.
C
So
there
was
a
discussion
between
both
areas
of
the
insurers
of
that
claim
and
their
specialist
advices
about
whether
we
went
for
an
entirely
wet
system
and
a
mist
or
one
that
zoned
out
the
building
and
in
the
end
we
did
decide
in
fact
to
go
with
the
entire
mist
suppression
system
with
it
with
a
low-pressure
mist
system.
But
it
was
yeah,
it
was.
It
was
worth
taking
their
advice
and
hearing
it
and
then
back
to
her
own
learning
and
teaching
people
as
well
and
finding
out
what
would
be
the
best
system.
So.
G
H
G
B
C
B
A
Papers
from
October
2017,
the
committee
noted
the
latest
risk
register.
It
would
notice
that
the
risk
of
program
fully
resulting
from
uncertainty
in
confirmation
of
the
fire
suppression
system
had
no
receipted,
given
the
progress
made
and
discussions
with
the
contractor
and
then
shooter
I
think
a
lot
of
people
be
quite
surprised
that
you
were
still.
You
had
only
just
settled
this,
this
disagreement
within
shooter
in
October
2017,
which
I
think
it
was
well
over
a
year
after
key.
B
H
H
B
H
A
B
H
C
In
a
very
interesting
way
and
I
think
this
will
have
repercussions
beyond
the
Macintosh
beyond
Scotland,
actually
about
in
construction
sites.
Generally,
the
issue
of
I
think
one
of
the
submissions
again.
Mr.
kids,
submission
in
particular
I
think
talks
about
this
in
detail
about
temporary,
temporary
or
early
commissioning
of
a
fire
suppression
system
in
a
building
we
had
experts
on
our
panel
italia,
10
were
our
fire
engineers.
The
commissioning
of
that
miss
suppression
would
have
been
the
very
first.
It
would
have
come
on
as
soon
it
was
as
it
was
there.
C
But
I
really
accept
the
question,
because
the
one
thing
I
have
been
asked
so
many
times
since
is
exactly
that
and
what
I
am
a
pain
to
say
to
everybody?
Is
it
can't
be
commissioned
until
it's
there?
So
the
very
first
thing
was
to
agree
a
design
going
forward.
He
had
a
different
building
altogether
after
the
two
14
fire.
We
didn't
have
a
say,
rooves
in
some
areas,
and
we
were
able
to
see
where
voids
existed.
C
Where
we
didn't
know
they
had
existed
because
of
the
fire,
but
the
the
putting
in
place
of
that
suppression
system
was
the
first
thing
that
would
have
been
put
on
in
terms
of
the
building
management.
So
the
joint
chiropractor
is
much
referred
to
about
prevention
of
fires
on
construction
sites
is
all
about
commissioning
as
soon
as
possible.
It's
absolutely
right!
C
C
C
H
C
It
was
genuinely
being
built
as
it
went
along,
so
those
guys
were
working
quite
often
after
the
main
trades
that
finish,
they
couldn't
work
on
the
same
platforms
as
painters
or
plasterers,
but
as
soon
as
the
room
was
finished,
the
Miss
Depression
was
following
in
behind
it.
We'd
come
in
on
a
Monday
morning,
and
that
would
have
happened
quite
often
because
they
would
come
in
on
weekends
when
the
other
wet
trades
or
the
dust
trades
or
whatever
had
finished.
So
they
were
moving
very
closely
and
I.
C
Think
here
were
managing
that
very
tightly,
so
we
had
a
big
team.
They
were
just
moving
as
quickly
as
they
could
to
move
through
the
building.
As
soon
as
the
room
was
finished,
what
a
flaw
was
finished
or
the
compound
meditation
was
in
place.
The
mist
suppression
would
come
in
behind
it,
but
it's
a
very
large
site.
It's
not
like
you
can
put
in
something
into
it
and
do
a
room
would
be
fine,
but
this
this
was
seven
half
thousand
feet
of
space
that
we
had
to
fit
out
with
a
mr.
prescience
as
much.
H
Very
complex
and
that
case
had
really
don't
understand
what
the
problem
was
with
money,
because
it
Ross
whose
questions
were
about
why
there
was
a
delay
in
putting
the
system
in
and
his
line
of
questioning
was.
You
could
have
spent
money
earlier.
That's
not
bother
about
where
all
the
money
comes
from,
but
you
could
have
spent
money
earlier.
You're
arguing
that
actually
the
system
went
in
from
day
one
as
the
building
was
reconstructed,
yeah.
C
The
difference
is
that
the
personal
money
I
may
have
misinterpreted
sort
of
so
is
that
pre,
the
214
when
we
had
what
looked
on
paper
like
four
years
between
somebody
recommending
a
mr.
suppression
system
and
the
federal
report
to
installing
it
or
not
quite
finishing
the
installation,
two
footing
was
we
genuine
had
to
fundraise
a
reserve
two
to
14.
We
were
working
on
the
process
of
the
insurance,
which
was
coming
through
and
additional
fundraising
that
we
see
from
Scottish
government
and
UK
government
as
well.
C
H
J
To
the
collection
and
Roger
a
bell
coffin,
Stewart
Robson,
director
of
the
McIntosh
society,
had
Evan
said
that
GSC
feel
to
be
open
about
the
losses
from
the
2014
fire
and
said
that
you're,
a
media
release
and
blog
focused
on
what
I've
been
saved
in
some
losses,
rather
than
full
extent
of
the
losses.
So
it's
just
to
see
where
there's
a
comprehensive
public
accessible
West
available
there.
B
J
J
B
They
are
completely
replaceable.
There
are
two
separate
insurance
schemes
that
point
one,
of
course
was
for
the
building
and
one
was
for
the
contents
and
so
at
the
time
because,
as
you
say,
they're
irreplaceable
and
priceless
and
because
we're
also
part
of
a
working
museum
and
we
routine
really
important
objects.
We
also
acquire.
B
So
we
have
to
have
our
fund
for
acquisition
as
well
as
protection
and
conservation,
so
that
money
was
ring-fenced
for
that,
and
we've
had
to
really
carefully
examine
that
we're
by
no
means
at
the
end
of
that
process,
because,
of
course
the
Mackintosh
rebuild
has
been
interrupted.
But
there
is
nothing
to
hide
all
of
that
is
in
the
public
domain
and
in
fact
the
budget
for
that
was
also
in
the
public
to
mean,
if
you're,
not
clear,
with
that,
this
is
again.
I
can
easily
provide
you
to
thought.
Well.
J
F
That
that
index
was
published
and
according
to
the
details
that
I
have
here,
that
that
went
online
in
2014
but
certainly
was
safe,
published
to
the
media
in
2015,
because
we
had
to
detail
the
impact
of
the
file
across
our
archives
and
collections.
And
following
that,
we
provided
the
museums
galleries
Scotland.
With
details
of
the
collection
losses
and.
E
F
Coming
back
to
your
question
so
that
they
could
review
if
the
macintosh
collection
should
retain
its
recognized
status
and
they
confirmed
it
still
had
that
recognized
status
and
that
has
that
has
all
gone
online.
All
of
the
items
are
on
the
website,
so
we
did
publish
that
in
food
and
it
was
reported
in
the
media.
Okay,.
J
B
On
our
list
to
do
but
you'll
understand
we're
enough
state
of
flux.
Just
know,
we've
got
other
priorities,
but
yes,
we'll
publish
that
as
soon
as
we
know,
there's
I
mean
can
I
just
point:
it
there's
nothing
that
is
private
or
being
kept
from
you
at
all.
Everything
that
we
know
we
make
available.
In
fact,
that's
a
remit
to
do
so
and
as
I
see,
if
there's
anything
missing
really
happy
to
provide
the
paper
to
back
now.
B
F
I
may
we
also
continue
to
acquire
for
our
collection,
of
course,
and
we
are
particularly
keen
on
acquiring
the
brilliant
work
of
our
own
graduating
students,
who
show
the
contemporary
work
that
that
they're
doing
and,
for
example,
I,
have
acquired
one
or
two
pieces
from
a
recent
graduate
on
the
15th
of
June,
as
it
happens,
was
our
graduation
ceremony,
and
that
was
the
Newbury
Prize
winner
Erin
McCrory,
whose
brilliant
work
will
be
part
of
our
archives
collections.
So
that's
the
kind
of
thing
that
we
will
people
and
keep
on
doing.
Okay,.
K
Ewing
you
computer
good
morning
to
the
reps
from
tasks
with
a
parent
thank
you
for
coming
in
and
yes,
so
you
talked
earlier
about
reconstruction.
I
know
that
other
members
will
want
to
focus
on
on
the
future,
but
in
terms
of
reconstruction
we
presumably
that's
dependent
upon
the
existing
buildings
insurance
policy
paying
out.
So
in
that
regard,
will
you
make
a
copy
of
that
insurance
policy
available
to
the
committee?
I
said
note,
you
want
it
to
be
open
and
yes.
K
K
We
suggested
that
to
us
before
we
had
a
meeting
with
q
that
you
know
you
would
expect
after
a
catastrophic
fire,
that
what
you
would
be
having
in
terms
of
our
renewed
insurance
policy
would
be
not
simply
a
policy
reflecting
conditions
of
our
sort
of
statutory
minimum
compliance.
If
you
like,
but
sort
of
add
on
conditions,
can
you
clarify
whether
your
current
building
insurance
policy
adopts
that
approach
of
add
on
conditions
so
going
beyond
simply
what
minimum
statutory
requirements
might
have
been
in
place
and
give.
K
But
one
would
have
thought
that,
after
a
catastrophic
fire
that
there
may
well
have
been
a
consideration
as
to
port
supplementary
add-on
requirements
might
have
been
part
of
the
package
such
that
you
would
be
showing
that
you
would
be
using
all
your
good
offices
to
ensure
you
know
that
things
were
progressing
in
a
reasonable
fashion.
Mm-Hmm
yeah.
B
I
think
that's
that's
very
much
the
case.
I
wouldn't
really
describe
his
add-ons,
but
the
insurance
policy
with
Putin
police
was
so
robust
at
this
time
and
in
fact,
I
think
Liz
negotiated
with
Kier
as
well,
but
the
the
compliance
when
we
handed
that
contract
over
so
that
would
includes
what
was
within
the
insurance
document,
I'm
very
happy
to
provide
that
with
him.
Seeing
me
and.
K
For
receiving
that,
I
mean
in
terms
of
of
what
may
or
may
not
be
part
of
the
requirements
of
insurance
policy.
I
note
from
various
documents
that,
in
fact,
after
the
first
catastrophic
found
before
the
second
catastrophic
fire,
there
were
various
visits
that
you
seemed
to
arrange.
There
was
a
whole
host
of
people
potentially
milling
about
the
site
events
organized
individual
visits.
Can
you
clarify
yeah.
I
B
K
I
spoke
to
ask
here
specifically
about
the
the
position
of
who
was
on
site,
so
you
know
there
was
obviously
Kier
and
its
and
its
workforce.
Then
there
were
the
specialists,
conservators
and
craftsmen
and
so
forth,
but
Kier
was
at
pains
to
stress
that
there
was
only
very
few
of
those
and
that
they
were
in
fact
subject
to
very
stringent
risk
assessments
and
appropriate
procedures,
and
in
fact
he
had
to
authorize
those
people
being
cited.
So
what
about
all
these
other
visitors
that
were
kind
of
you
know
the
act
who
was
in
charge
of
them?
B
I
can
tell
you
that,
because
I
was
at
one
of
them
as
a
member
of
the
Classical
School
of
Art
Choir,
when
we
sang
to
raise
money
in
the
library
and
it's
the
first
time,
I've
ever
had
to
sing
soprano
in
full
hardhat
high
vision
boots,
which
is
my
excuse
for
being
off-key.
But
there
was
nobody
allowed
on
sight
at
all
that
did
not
go
through
thorough
vetting
procedure
and
induction.
B
B
B
B
Well,
it
was
the
day
of
the
graduation,
so
it
would
have
to
ask
here
that
I
mean
we
were
all
a
beaut.
All
there
was
no
visits
organized
by
the
GSA
on
that
day
at
all.
No
so
I'm
sure
you
could
cure
and
be
able
to
answer
you
as
to
whether
the
really
technical
visits
that
day,
but
as
far
as
the
GSA
is
concerned,
yeah.
C
It
was
a
Friday,
so
actually
technically,
a
lot
of
the
contractors
do
stop
work
early
on
a
Friday
and
I
think
we
had.
The
contractor
itself
would
have
finished,
probably
about
2
or
3
o'clock.
That
day
there
were
no
visits.
In
fact,
there
were
no
visits
that
week
at
all,
and
he
was
one
of
the
very
rare
occasions.
So
we
do
remember
it
that
we
had
said
to
a
group.
C
They
couldn't
go
around
the
building
and
that
was
on
the
Tuesday
and
it
happened
to
be
the
charles
rennie
mackintosh
society
who
did
think
they
were
going
in
up
until
the
point
they
arrived
in
the
reed
building,
where
we
assembled
people
and
at
that
point,
we'd
spoken
with
the
contractor
that
date
he'd
said
no
there's
too
much
going
on.
They
wanted
to
get
into
the
library
and
we
couldn't
let
them
into
that
part.
C
The
building
there
was
too
much
physically
going
on,
so
we
instead
Sarah
McKenna
and
my
colleague
actually
did
a
virtual
tour
of
it.
So,
at
four
o'clock
that
day
she
went
round
and
videoed
the
entire
building
and
to
get
back
we
did
a
demonstration
of
what
was
going
on
on
site
in
the
Reid
building
in
electro
theatre.
That
was
on
the
trees.
That
was
the
last
public
visit,
but
I
would
average
you're
quite
correct.
We
probably
had
we
certainly
had
over
100
individual
visits,
probably
far
more.
Some
of
those
were
institutions.
C
K
Okay,
well,
that's
Jilly
noted
in
terms
of
the
going
back
to
the
position
of
just
finishing
camino
of
the
insurance
policy,
and
presumably
you
know
there
was
no.
You
know
in
terms
of
the
actual
conditions
of
insurance
policy.
All
these
events
and
visits,
and
so
forth
were
totally
in
compliance
with
the
conditions
and
that
they
didn't
vitiated
in
any
way.
The
conditions
of
the
incidents
bob
solutely
and
last
question
would
be.
K
I
had
understood
that
after
the
catastrophic
fire
number
one,
that
the
GIC
had
only
a
very
limited
base
on
on-site
and,
in
fact
moved
out
at
some
point
in
2018,
but
I
also
understand
that
in
fact,
the
gsa
occupied
many
parts
of
the
building,
including
the
janitor's
house,
the
storage
rooms,
mcintosh
rooms
and
associated
circulation
spaces
toilets.
Another
accommodation,
GSA
also
used
kettles
and
cooking
facilities
on
the
site.
The
television
and
evie
equipment
were
used.
Is
that
accurate.
C
K
K
C
No,
the
toilets
were
part
of
it,
not
to
be
flippant
patron,
of
course,
and
within
the
site,
as
you
came
in
the
door
to
the
accessible
entrance,
there
was
the
key
si
office,
which
was
the
old
shop
of
the
GSA
enterprises.
Beyond
that,
what
was
the
offender
gallery,
which
was
the
meeting
room
and,
to
the
left
hand,
side?
There
was
a
janitor's
flat
and
there
was
toilets
which
were
within
the
care
office.
There
was
a
small
kitchen,
every
appliance
within
that
path
test.
C
It
obviously
no
toasters
anything
that
would
create,
but
there
was
a
kettle
for
sure,
but
as
part
of
their
risk
assessment
of
the
site
as
part
of
GSA's
own
risk
assessment,
every
electrical
appliance
is
Pat
tested,
portable
appliances
tested
so
that
there
are
no,
and
that
was
done
on
a
monthly
basis.
So
the
kettle
itself,
it's
not
a
problem.
Having
also.
K
L
Thank
choc
about
your
door,
bust
fire
alarm
system
that
you
talked
about.
The
fire
service
tell
us
that
there
were
dozens
of
false
alarms
that
took
place
in
the
run-up
to
the
blaze
in
June.
There
was
an
average
of
three
a
week
in
February,
March,
April
and
May,
but
there
was
none
in
the
three
weeks
prior
to
the
fire
in
June
on
the
night
of
the
fire.
There
was
no
indication
from
neighbors
that
they
had
any
fire
alarms
within
the
facility
or
within
the
area.
B
It
would
be
turned
off
for
hot
works
and
that
would
be
logged
and
if
you're
working
in
a
compartmentalized
construction
site,
that's
standard
practice,
but
that
has
to
be
again
you're
the
expert
on
this,
but
that
would
be
entirely
logged.
So
as
for
the
fire
alarm
not
going
off
that
day,
we
have
no
knowledge.
Nobody
does
until
is
Farris
and.
L
C
We
were,
as,
as
you
said,
occupying
the
building
up
until
January
of
to
18,
and
there
was
a
regular
site
test
of
that.
There
was
weekly
test
of
that
farm,
not
an
evacuation.
When
there
were
irregular
ones,
we
had
to
evacuate
the
whole
building
and
there
was
certainly
accidental
tripping
off
that
alarm
by
things
like
the
plasters
were
gone
engineer
and
not
informed
to
say
agent
on
one
occasion
and
duska
into
and
detectives
that
they
hadn't
capped
or
switched
off.
C
So
it
is
common
practice
when
you
have
not
all
construction
sites
would
even
have
a
hardwired
detection
system
anyway,
but
where
they
do,
it
is
then
implicit
that
you
have
to
cover
that
alarm
and
not
cause
false
activations,
obviously
to
the
phone
rescue,
because
that
is
troublesome,
so
that
was
always
engineered
always
found
out
in
advance
if
possible.
If
those
works
were
gonna
head
once
or
twice,
I
know
that
didn't
happen,
because
I
myself
was
evacuated
from
the
building.
Okay,.
L
And
can
I
maybe
go
on
to
talking
about
investigations
after
the
fire?
It's
been
reported
on
the
5th
of
November
that
the
fire
investigators
were
given
access
to
the
McIntosh
building
four
months
after
the
fire
struck
in
June.
Your
submission
talks
about
that.
There
have
been
a
number
of
site
controllers
in
the
intervening
period,
so
who
was
responsible
for
ultimately
authorizing
fire
investigators
to
access
the
building.
C
K
C
Cordon
for
the
whole
area,
we've
had
meetings
with
them
at
first
it
was
weekly
and
then
off-site
and
latterly
monthly,
but
we've
been
in
almost
weekly
contact
with
them.
They
take
decision
as
to
when
it's
it's
safe
for
them
to
go
on
to
that
site.
So
our
role
as
owner
of
the
building
was
to
bring
in
a
contractor
rygart
in
this
case,
who
have
been
steadily
putting
that
building
while
making
it
safer,
Scot
friend,
Rescue
visited
on
a
few
occasions.
C
I
know
before
the
date
they
took
access,
but
their
own
risk
assessment
has
to
say
when
they
feel
it's
safe
for
them
to
go
in,
so
they
decided
after
we
demonstrated
that
particular
area.
In
particular,
they
wanted
to
access.
First
was
safe.
How
contractor
was
asked
to
make
that
area
even
safer
by
clearing
away
through
up
to
a
certain
point,
and
then
they
and
police
Scotland
went
in
at
that
point,
but
only
after
their
own
health
and
safety
advices.
That
said,
it
was
okay
into
their
own
health
and
safety
register
go
through
the
building.
M
Making
be
enough
good
morning
panel,
and
certainly
everyone
knew
opening
comments.
Dr.
gray,
he
said
that
the
GSA
took
every
step
possible
for
the
protection
of
the
building
and
maintained
day
to
day
job
oversight
of
the
building.
No,
the
committee
received
evidence
that
the
insulation
that
was
used
was
actually
flammable.
Now,
why
was
combustible
insulation
chosen
or
non
combustible
their
products
in
such
a
high-risk
building.
C
The
the
big
flat
roofs
in
the
Mackintosh
building,
the
ones
that
fall
off
or
the
the
main
studios
were
were
being
insulated.
So
part
of
our
commitment
again
at
the
outset
before
Kiev
were
appointed,
was
in
the
tender
to
achieve
the
highest
level
possible
with
the
nearest
building
of
sustainability
of
energy
efficiency
acceptors
that
range
from
a
whole
range
of
things,
from
LED
lighting
to
single
glazing,
a
single
slimline,
glazing
on
the
studio
windows.
C
The
roofs
were
one
of
the
areas
where
we
did
decide
to
install,
not
alter
the
profile,
not
alter
the
appearance
of
it,
but
install
rigid
board
installation
and
it
was
a
PIR
insulation
that
was
used,
which
is
perfectly
legal,
safe
in
when
used
in
accordance
with
the
manufacturer's
instructions.
It's
still
on
sale.
It's
still
the
largest
selling
I
think
insulation
that
you
would
use
for
flat
roof
construction,
and
if
you
go
to
any
roofing
contractor
or
technical
advice
note-
and
this
would
be
historic,
environment,
Scotland
or
historic
England.
C
They
would
say
that
you
would
use
a
rigid
board
insulation
on
a
rigid
roof
different
in
other
areas,
but
where
you
have
a
flat
roof.
What
you
have
to
do
is
then,
obviously
inspect
that
rusi
have
to
have
something.
That
is
a
solid
board.
You
can't
put
in
the
kind
of
thing
you'd
use
in
lost
loft
insulation.
M
The
settlement
after
the
the
first
fire
I
made
a
lot
of
thought
that
that
any
restoration
works
should
have
sought
ways
to
ensure
right
any
of
the
materials.
Now
that
we're
going
to
be
used,
they
would
have
been
the
best
possible
and
particular
regarding
the
issue
of
the
flammability
of
that
particular
product.
The.
C
M
C
Insulation,
as
I
said,
we
were
using
a
range
of
measures
there,
so
we
did
have
mineral
wool
where
it
was
up,
stands
or
cavities
areas
that
we
could
we
could
use
within
the
flat
roof.
That
is
what
is
the
manufacturer's
fact.
There's
nothing
illegal
about
the
use
of
this
material
in
in
safe
in
following
the
manufacturer's
instructions,
which
is
basically,
you
don't
allow
oxygen
into
that
space.
So
it
has
been
encapsulated
space
and
in
our
case
we
had.
We
had
an
inverted
deck
roof.
M
Question
is
regarding
the
some
evidence
that
we
received
a
couple
of
weeks
ago
and
just
regarding
the
the
actual
building,
we
were
told
that
the
at
the
time
the
principal
contractor
retained
possession
of
the
site.
Is
that
correct?
Yes,
in
terms
of
the
rooms,
not
that
your
sales
possessed
on
site
who
detained
the
possession
of
those
rooms,
the.
C
M
C
We
were
subject
to
the
same
rules
as
anybody
else
coming
onto
the
site
and
we
didn't
have
to
sign.
In
every
day
we
had
to
have
a
CSCS
card
which
does
construction
certification,
Safety
card
for
access
to
the
site.
So
my
entire
team
have
had
that
certification,
which
Kia
had
been
very
keen
that
we
had
to
go
around.
We
were
inducted
like
anybody
else
we
had
to
sign
in
over
if
we
went
beyond
that
point
in
the
site.
C
So
as
you
come
in
the
door,
there
were
rooms
which
were
it's
like
having
a
porter
cabin
within
the
Harris
fence
of
a
larger
site,
but
we
were
subject
to
exactly
the
same
rules
as
anybody
else
other
than
that
and
our
rooms
had
to
be
tested
and
any
equipment
in
it.
Pat
tested
as
well.
So
we
were
like
any
other
anybody
else
under
the
same
control
regime
that
Kia
would
have
applied
to
anyone
else
coming
in.
D
Thank
you
could
be
no
good
good
morning
panel,
it's
very
clear,
there's
a
lot
of
passion
and
on
the
panel
for
the
School
of
Art,
and
that's
leads
me
into
looking
ahead.
I
think
we
spent
a
lot
of
time
looking
back
at
the
what-ifs
and
the
maybes
and
I
think
that's
very
relevant
and
their
due
processes,
which
will
have
to
be
followed,
but
also
things
importantly,
have
a
open,
frank
conversation
about
what
next,
both
for
Glasgow
and
the
community
I
would
like
to
kick
off
by
just
asking
what
the
panel's
views
are
on.
D
This
we've
heard
that
real
wide
range
in
a
very
broad
spectrum
of
ideas
and
opinions
on
this
everything
from
a
comment
such
as
it
should
be
left
as
a
ruin.
Architectural
ruins
are
among
the
most
emotive
objects
in
the
world.
It's
a
fair
point
from
one
witness
to
others,
saying:
there's
no
argument
for
why
you
wouldn't
rebuild
the
skill
as
it
was
and
other
views
who
think
that
you
can't
rebuild
the
Mac,
because
it
won't
bring
back
historic
building,
you're
just
beginning
something
else
they're,
given
that
there
are
such
a
wide
spectrum
of
views.
B
F
When
we
look
at
our
position
now,
we
would
have
been
doing
that
if
the
Macintosh
had
opened
in
2019
with
our
first
year
experience
as
we
had
planned
for
the
future.
We've
had
discussions
already
right
after
the
fire
I
gathered
together
a
group
of
staff
and
started
thinking
about
what
the
future
could
mean.
The
remit
actually
remains
the
same.
F
The
intent
absolutely
remains
the
same
and
where
we
would
expand
it
is
that
we
want
to
be
intensively
much
more
collaborative
with
the
local
community,
with
the
communities
of
Glasgow
and
with
all
of
the
projects
on
which
we
already
work.
So
school
of
simulation
and
visualization
is
looking
at
the
digital
tools
for
schoolchildren.
We
do
exchange
projects
and
and
work
and
fine
art
with
Cuba.
We
work
with
garnet
Hill
can
unity,
and
so
on.
The
list
is
endless.
F
We
do
a
lot
of
live
projects
because
that's
the
best
way
for
students
to
learn
about
civic
matters
or
industry
and
go
out
and
start
their
own
business,
incidentally
in
Glasgow.
So
we
want
to
set
up
with
our
partners-
and
this
is
the
discussion
about
how
we're
going
to
do
this
set
of
engagements
which,
where
we
can
shape
that
future
collectively
so
I
think
we
would
answer
that
by
saying.
We
are
not
saying
it's
going
to
be
X
or
Y
or
say
it,
but
collectively
we
can
do
the
best
for
the
art
school.
F
B
B
In
fact,
and
going
forward
is
about
the
most
exciting
thing
at
the
moment
I
can
think
of
because
we
are
in
discussions
just
now
closely
with
Glasgow
City
Council
and
the
community
about
how
we
can
have
a
front
for
the
Glasgow
School
of
Art
on
Psaki
Hall
Street,
how
we
can
spread
out
into
the
city
and
include
everybody,
because,
although
people
who
know
were
there
know,
were
there
not
everybody
who
comes
to
the
city
does.
And
so
we
have
a
big
estate
strategy
plan
which
we're
just
putting
two.
B
No,
no
we've
stabilized
at
the
school
in
terms
of
academic
teaching
for
the
next
term
and
we'll
be
sharing
that
with
everybody
and
inviting
in
everybody
for
a
consultation
over
that
there,
because
we
recognize
that
as
part
of
the
creative
industries,
which
is
so
essential
to
the
economic
health
of
Glasgow
in
Scotland,
we're
a
major
part
of
that
and
bringing
back
the
Macintosh
as
a
working
art
school
and
giving
that
gift.
Passing.
That
on
is
absolutely
essential
to
us.
C
Very
shortly,
I
suppose
in
working
on
this
building
over
the
last
four
years.
What
we
do
know
is
Mackintosh
designed
an
article.
He
didn't
design
a
museum.
He
maybe
would
have
I'm
sure
if,
given
the
money
at
the
time
like
anyone
else
struggling
architect,
you've
done
the
job
asked,
but
he
designed
an
art
school
and
it
worked
brilliantly
four
hundred
and
fifteen
years
and
we
have
it,
we
have
a
museum,
we
have
Scotland
Street.
C
What
I
do
want
to
say
is
that
my
discussions
and
I'm
not
going
to
pretend
I
have
extensive
discussions
with
every
single
person
and
that
incredible
part
of
Glasgow.
It's
no
part
of
an
amazing
regeneration
initiative
for
the
city,
we're
gonna,
be
part
of
that
and
the
people
I've
spoken
to,
because
this
is
an
area
filled
with
X
students
and
people
who
teach
or
work
or
have
lived.
There
are
people
who
want
that
building
back
as
an
as
an
art,
school
and
working
for
it,
and
the
only
thing
it
is
something
that
you
can.
C
You
can't
really
find
a
silver
lining
about.
What's
happened
here
on
this
site,
but
this
is
going
to
be
a
major
project
for
God's
going
for
the
city
and
what
we
do
know
from
2-14
is
we
have
the
skills
in
this
country?
We
had
to
go
a
bit
further
afield
or
one
or
two,
and
we
won't
not
that
to
happen
in
the
next
phase.
We
want
to
bring
it
all
back
as
tight
to
Scotland's.
We
can.
We
have
the
crafts
and
the
skills
and
the
people
who
put
their
heart
into
that
project.
C
B
I
I,
just
just
mr.
Ewing's
point-
is
that
in
this
next
rebuild
I'm
having
people
come
in
to
this
construction,
it's
going
to
be
a
major
part
of
some
of
our
research
projects
and
involving
people
from
the
city
college,
in
Glasgow,
apprenticeships,
and
so,
and
so
we're
wanting
to
use
this
construction
as
part
of
the
learning
process.
So,
yes,
I
mean
we
are
I.
K
B
Well
to
me
at
me,
I.
Thank
you
very
much
for
giving
opportunity
to
point
out
they're
two
entirely
different
incidents.
One
was
an
accident
in
a
fully
operational
building
in
plain
sight,
which
has
evacuate
evacuate
with
procedures
that
were
exemplary.
The
Scottish,
Fire
and
Rescue
report
has
documented
that
funny,
and
also
that
gives
me
opportunity,
as
welcome
here
to
point
out,
there's
nothing
redacted
from
that
report
by
the
way,
contrary
to
one
of
your
witnesses,
seeing
that
the
only
redaction
was
that
of
the
individual
involved
in
the
fire.
B
The
second
was
a
fire
at
a
construction
site
in
the
possession
of
Kier
in
a
non
operational
building.
So
the
confidence
you
can
have
is
in
that
intervening
four
years,
the
art
school
was
managed
perfectly
well
competently
and
I
would
say
rather
magnificently,
given
what
we
were
about
to
deliver
back
to
Glasgow.
That's
why
they
should
have
confidence.
K
B
K
Evidence
I,
don't
think
that
you
were
in
post
as
Guardian
and
have
been
to
Casa
traffic
fire.
So
it
begs
the
question
in
terms
of
future
structures
going
forward.
Perhaps
it
has
been
suggested
is
maybe
the
best
way
forward
is
to
have
the
the
mark
separated
out
from
the
operation
and
work
of
cosmic
School
of
Art,
and
maybe
that
has
been
suggested.
Maybe
that
is
something
to
consider,
but.
B
F
From
the
point
of
view
of
the
staff
of
the
Glasgow
School
of
Art,
because
we
have
been
through
a
period
from
the
15th
of
June
and
we're
now
at
the
15th
of
November
to
address
the
development
of
the
Glasgow
School
of
Art.
And
we
have
confidence
in
that
board.
So
I
just
like
to
have
that
on
record.
I'm.
Keen.
D
If
I
appreciate,
we've
gone
off
on
a
tangent
slightly
of
a
fourth
question
from
miss
Ewing,
but
connecting
back
to
the
future
again,
which
is
my
line
of
questioning
and
and
with
permission
of
the
the
chair,
one
of
my
line
of
questions
was
around
committee.
Engagement
I'd
be
very
happy
to
pass
on
to
Sandra
white
who's,
a
local
representative,
if
that's
okay,
but
if
I
could
just
ask
one
further
question.
I
noticed
in
your
initial
response
to
my
question
around
the
future.
D
I
think
there
is
a
lot
of
unanimity
I
conceived
around,
bringing
it
back
as
a
working
art
school,
not
just
as
a
museum.
Indeed,
there's
not
much
left
to
be
a
museum,
it
is
indeed
a
ruin
and-
and
you
talk
about
the
next
rebuild
and
I-
think
that's
the
phrase
you
used,
but
you
clearly
weren't
specific
around
the
nature
of
what
that
rebuild
may
or
may
not
be
one
of
the
witnesses.
D
We
had
said
that
this
is
probably
one
of
the
most
well-documented
architectural
buildings
in
the
world
now
as
a
result
of
the
2014
fire
and
subsequent
evidence
that
came
forward
to
help
with
the
last
rebuild.
You
know:
do
you
have
any
views
as
to
whether
you
think
we
may
see
the
building
at
least
tried
to
be
rebuilt
as
it
was
being
done
before
the
28th
fire?
B
Well,
I
can
I
can
answer
that
because,
and
obviously
after
the
2014
disaster,
we
had
massive
consultation
because
of
course
we're
a
creative
institution
and
wish
to
be
creative,
and
so
we
put
consultation
now
not
just
locally
and
not
just
but
internationally.
Even
it's
a
venison
to
the
States
to
ask
the
architectural
community
and
everybody
else
what
they
thought.
B
B
We
don't
know
credibly
in
its
infancy
that
part
of
it,
but
our
intention
is
to
bring
it
back
exactly
as
Mackintosh
designed
it
and
that
will
be
unique
as
well,
because
you
must
understand
that
over
the
years
has
been
all
kinds
of
bits
and
pieces
done
to
the
Macintosh
that
have
rendered
it
not
in
its
original
state.
But
now
we
know
exactly
how
he
designed
it.
What
a
thrill
for
the
people
involved
in
that
and
again
the
community
involved
that
to
do
that
from
scratch,
so
that's
rather
exciting.
B
I
You
and
good
morning,
and
thank
you
for
being
here
today.
Obviously
we
have
to
look
to
the
future,
but
has
just
been
you
know,
said
before:
2014
fire
absolutely
tragedy,
another
one
in
2018
absolutely
unforgivable,
and
you
made
to
the
fact
that
you'd
suffered
from
the
fires
yourselves.
The
people
who
live
in
that
community
have
suffered
terribly,
not
just
in
2014,
but
even
more
so
in
2018.
No
some
are
sitting
behind
us
in
the
audience.
I
have
made
them
grow
along
with
other
elected
representatives.
I
Exactly
when
you
talk
about
engaging
with
the
community,
that's
not
the
message.
I
certainly
got
across
what
from
the
local
community,
and
we
have
to
understand
that
people
have
been
out
of
their
houses.
They
can't
get
insurance,
businesses
have
closed
down,
they
can't
operate,
and
thankfully
Glasgow
City,
Council
or
the
Scottish
Government
have
put
forward
some
monies.
So
whether
I'm
really
really
concerned,
is
this
absolutely
attitude
when
its
next
rebuild?
I
In
fact,
it's
non-negotiable
that
this
will
be
built
this
new
building
if
it
does
get
built-
and
it
seems
to
be
that
yourselves
as
a
board
just
saying
it
won't
be
built
its
non-negotiable.
It's
gonna
cost
nearly
a
hundred
million
pounds
and
it's
going
to
take
ten
years.
The
local
community
who
are
suffering
just
know,
is
there
going
to
be
consultation
with
them.
Do
they
want
it
to
be
back
there
or
do
they
want
it?
Somebody
else
so
I
would
just
like
your
thoughts
on
the
local
community.
B
You
so
much
thank
you.
It's
nice
to
bring
up.
We
have
been
in
close
contact
with
the
community
recently
and
and
we're
a
very
useful
meeting
at
the
council.
In
fact,
something
involving
the
residence
and
the
businesses.
I
think
you're
aware
that
we
apologize
for
not
having
got
oh
quickly
enough
to
speak
to
them,
but
they
were
I.
Think
they've
accepted
the
reasons
for
that
and
we're
not
going
to
move
forward
a
single
inch
without
consulting
them.
You're.
Absolutely
right.
B
I
really
want
people
to
understand
and
what
was
what
you
saying:
there's
people,
it's
not
just
the
building's
it's
their
health,
it's
something
we've
gone
bankrupt,
you've
lost
businesses,
who've
lost
everything
and
I,
really
can't
tell
you
the
kind
of
suffering
that
some
of
the
residents
have
explained
and
we
are
massively
sympathetic
to
that.
I
mean
excurrent
Hill
resident
myself,
many
of
our
staff
and
her
students
at
Garnell
residence,
we're,
friends
and
they've
always
been
part
of
our
community.
B
We
were
horrified
by
what's
happening
to
them
and
it's
a
major
part
of
our
strategy
to
involve
them.
So
there
would
be
no
point
in
carrying
on
if
they
weren't
part
of
this
plan.
We
have
got
all
kinds
of
ideas
for
liaisons,
but
committee
is
inviting
them
in
of
using
their
skills
of
asking
their
opinion.
I
But
basically,
you've
seen
that
the
point
I'm
trying
to
make
is
perhaps
a
local
community
a
number
of
them
anyway,
one
don't
want
it
rebuilt
and
the
less
well
so
I
think
they
need
to
be
asked
and
to
really
following
up
from
something
at
Annabelle
Union.
It
said
as
well,
and
it
came
from
torments
and
professor
Tony
Jones
as
well
to
see
that
basically,
a
building
trust
should
be
there
that
should
oversee,
and
the
board
should
not
be
in
charge
of
the
hall
yeah.
B
We
were
if
there
was
yeah
we're
aware
of.
There
was
two
opinions
which
are
minority
opinions,
but
there
were
sadly
take
those
views
on
boards
because
we're,
as
I
say
in
our
infancy
in
deciding
how
we
move
forward,
and
we
will
we'll
look
at
every
option
and
our
view
currently.
Is
you
know
one
that
we're?
I
B
I
B
I
I
C
I
A
On
I'd
like
to
move
on,
no
I
would
just
like
to
ask
a
supplementary
to
that
myself
I.
Actually
you
mentioned
minority
opinion
and
professor
ends.
Obviously,
as
a
former
director
and
I
think
professor
joins
as
a
former
director
as
well
and
they've,
both
expressed
the
view
that
the
art
school
board
shouldn't
be
in
charge
of
any
D
build.
A
B
Not
at
all
I
completely
respect
and
professor
ins
personal
opinion,
which
is,
is
to
express
em
disagree.
We
do
know
that
and
when
we
appoint
a
new
director,
it
will
be
a
really
exceptional
person
who
will
be
able
to
manage.
Both
projects
will
receive
them
by
the
proper
delegation
of
being
able
to
bring
in
experts
who
are
absolutely
placed
to
be
able
to
oversee
such
an
important
as
we
did
with
the
2014
5
arey
successfully,
and
it
is
a
big
ask
and
that's
what
we're
looking
for.
F
Comment
on
this,
it's
absolutely
the
role
of
every
higher
education
institution
to
take
care
of
their
estate
matters
places
where
I
fought
before.
We
all
have
to
do
that.
Now,
it's
not
just
about
doing
the
education.
We
have
to
maintain
the
infrastructure,
of
course,
as
best
as
we
can-
and
this
is
our
response
to
that-
but
over
and
above
all
of
that,
just
like
from
2014
to
now.
The
restoration
is
a
research
project.
We
have
PhD
students
studying
that
research.
They
are
due.
They
are
doing
work
on
it.
We
have
creative
practice
based
on
it.
F
It's
not
a
project
that
can
be
hive
the
way
somewhere
else
as
if
it's
nothing
to
do
with
us
and
our
educational
function,
it
will
be
absolutely
embedded
in
our
future.
We
will
learn
from
that.
We
will
bring
the
craft
teaching
into
our
teaching
programs,
etc.
That
has
to
be
an
integrated
program,
and
it's
for
that
reason
that
it
becomes
very
interesting
for
the
Glasgow
School
of
Art
for
Glasgow
and
nationally
and
internationally
to
be
doing
this
project
at
all.
Thank
you.
A
B
A
B
N
Thank
You,
convener
and
good
morning,
M
I'm
glad
that
you
did
acknowledge
an
answer
to
Sandra.
Why
the
devastation
to
the
residents
and
the
businesses
and
my
own
viewers
there
will
be
a
long
time
before
it
will
recover.
So
the
decisions
that
you
take
I
hope
you
appreciate
will
impact
on
Glasgow
future
I
have
to
see
that
I
think
you
are
deluding
yourselves.
If
you
think
that
you
have
a
good
relationship
with
this
community
and
well,
people
are
shaking
their
heads
in
disagreement.
Excuse.
A
N
And
it's
one
of
the
things
that
the
fire
has
exposed
is
that
we
have
this
wonderful
institution
in
Ghana
hell
as
you
see,
but
it
has
exposed
your
feelings
over
the
last
number
of
years
to
involve
this
community
No.
So
it's
not
maybe
the
business
of
this
committee
as
to
for
the
future
of
their
art
skill
list,
but
it
is
the
business
of
local
politicians.
If
you're
going
to
spread
the
hd2
sake
host
to
you,
then
the
fact
that
I'm
gonna
have
to
ask
you
these
questions
at
hope.
N
You
will
take
as
an
indication
that
you're
still
not
properly
informing
the
community
of
your
plans
and
I
would
plead
with
you
on
this.
If
you
want
to
be
build
your
relationship
well,
this
community,
you
really
start
need
to
start,
tell
them
immediately.
What
your
plans
are.
I
do
have
some
questions
about
the
fire
investigation,
but
maybe
you
could
just
tell
the
committee
first
of
all
and
which
buildings
then
do
you
intend
to
spread
out
into
in
Saki
Hall
Street
to
create
this
funtage
frontage?
No.
B
Idea,
yeah
I,
like
absolutely
agree
with
you,
a
hundred
percent.
We
can't
take
that
estate
strategy
forward
at
all,
without,
as
you
see,
repairing
any
damage
that
the
some
of
the
residents
or
some
of
the
businesses
might
feel
has
been
done.
Not
all
of
them
can
I,
say
and
I'm
100%
in
agreement
to
you,
and
that
state
strategy
will
be
done
completely
completely
in
partnership
with
if
it
happens
at
all
we're
still
discussing
it
with
Glasgow
City
Council,
with
all
the
residents
with
all
the
businesses
and
all
involved
parties.
You're
right.
N
B
N
Should
I
ask
you
about
the
fire
investigation?
It
was
a
shock
to
a
lot
of
people
that
it's
only
just
started
now.
I'm
sure
you
understand
that
the
businesses
and
the
residents
are
anxious
to
find
out
the
cause
of
the
fire
because
they
will
have
questions
and
they'll
be
liabilities
issues,
and
we
don't
know
who
was
responsible.
You
said
earlier
that
it
was
accidental,
so
I
wondered
how
usually.
N
B
Massively
agree
with
you
and
that
the
Scottish
Fire
and
Rescue
Service
have
been
hampered,
obviously
by
just
State
Building
Control
regulations.
It's
about
safety
and
I
hope
I
mean
we
have
spoken
to
the
residents
and
businesses
at
some
length
to
try
and
explain
to
them
that
we
were
focused
on
trying
to
get
the
cord
and
lifted
and
shortened
to
get
them
back
into
the
homes.
Well,
while
we
were
not
communicating
with
them
and
you're
right,
we
didn't
do
that
was
a
failure
of
communication.
B
B
Just
last
week
you
were
asking
me
exactly
the
same
thing
and
I
don't
know
we
are
desperate
to
find
out
the
cause
of
this
fire
and
we
can't
interfere
with
the
SFR
s,
investigation
and
understand
police
Scotland,
as
well
still
have
I
think
about
70
interviews
still
to
do
because
they
can't
do
that
part
until
they
offenders
have
got
them.
It's
a
it's
a
huge
investigation,
but
there's
nothing.
We
can
do
to
speed
that
up
and
we
haven't
hampered
iteration.
D
C
Scotland
have
been
doing
interviews,
checking
CCTV
footage
everything
they
could
do
outside
the
site.
They
and
I.
Think
SF
RS
have
been
working
hand-in-glove
on
that.
So
we're
not
privy
to
see
that,
but
SF
RS
itself
would
only
take
access
once
it
was
safe
to
do
so.
It
was
their
choice
that
we
don't
grant
permission.
Obviously
Building
Control
have
a
role
in
this
at
the
city,
but
I
think
it
was
their
own
health
and
safety
and
they
have
to
put
that
ahead
of
everything
else,
not
the
school.
Not
anyone
else
did.
C
N
I
C
N
N
C
You
know
to
send
in
a
bulldozer,
however
long
that
were
taken
and
our
advice
from
our
engineers
and
from
that
contractors
and
working
with
the
city's
Building
Control
was
that
an
uncontrolled
demolition
there,
because
it's
sat
on
such
a
steep
site
over
to
other
commercial
properties
and
sake
all
state
and
hence
the
cordon
being
as
large
as
it
was.
Would
it
be
in
an
uncontrolled
demolition?
C
We
don't
know
how
long
they
were
taken,
but
it
would
certainly
have
destroyed
any
evidence,
as
it
is,
they've
been
able
to
actually
piece
their
way
into
that
building
and
pick
out
friends.
So
the
forensic
teams
have
been
in
and
it's
been
absolutely
in
accordance
to
you
know
they
do
call
the
it's.
The
police,
Scotland
NS
FRS
on
that,
so
we
would
be
guided
by
them
on
how
they
wish
to
access
the
site.
Thank
you.
Okay.
A
It
was
known
that
the
the
building
had
caused
an
ax
local
authority
was
seeking
compensation
and
Gordon
Gabe
who
works
in
your
own
Department
of
Architecture,
and
has
criticized
you
for
this
and
said
that
any
due
diligence
we'd
have
uncovered
this
dispute.
It
was
widely
known
in
the
construction
community
before
you're
appointed
here.
Thank.
C
C
Negligence
and
something
as
critical
as
that,
it
would
have
come
up
in
the
pre-qualification
and
they
would
have
simply
not
been
able
deemed
to
proceed
through
the
tender
process
as
it
was
it
correct,
I
think
I,
don't
know
what
data
to
15
or
whatever
the
BBC
report
wasn't
much
as
we
all
believe
everything
in
the
press.
The
actual
report
didn't
come
out,
I
think
till
to
17,
and
that
was
John
Cowles
evidence
that
also
looked
at
the
Edinburgh
schools.
So
when
the
evidence
came
out
in
217,
we
did
speak
to
Kira
both
at
the
time.
C
They
were
very
clear
that
it
was
a
different
division
of
their
company.
That
may
just
be
names,
I,
don't
know,
but
it
was
a
different
division
of
the
country,
but
far
more
critically.
For
us
it
was
under
design
and
build
contract.
We
were
under
a
standard
JCT
contract,
which
meant
critically
that
you
actually
have
full
supervision
and
your
oversight
of
the
project
as
it
goes
along
in
a
design
and
build
the
contractor,
takes
the
risk,
but
also
the
the
profit
if
it
comes
through
of
delivering
that
project
within
a
budget
within
a
program.
C
C
Look
at
my
notes
at
all,
but
this
is
the
one
place
I
will
to
look
at
the
jonquil
report
and
what
he
he
did
say,
and
it's
just
three
sentences
is
that
the
presence
of
so
many
defects
and
evidence
of
the
fundamental
fail
were
down
to
the
fundamental
failures
of
quality
control
used
by
the
main
contractor
in
this
case
and
the
design
and
build
supply
chain
delivering
the
design,
construction,
supervision
and
inspection
of
the
building.
The
lack
of
independent
professional
scrutiny
of
an
on-site
constructor
on
construction
professionals
on
behalf
of
the
plane.
N
C
C
A
To
finish
off,
to
go
back
to
something
my
original
point
have,
since
your
federal
report
in
2006
2008
and
the
building
was
left,
it
wasn't
fire
stopped
and
we
didn't
have
suppression
system
in
and
all
that
time
it
was
being
used
for
the
education
of
young
people.
Apart
from
after
the
2014
fire,
of
course,
and
you've
said
in
a
number
of
occasions
that
you're
confident
the
building
was
safe.
You
stand
by
that.
A
Absolutely
yes,
it's
just
because
in
the
federal
report
in
front
of
me
here
and
the
assessment
is
and
there's
an
six
different
issues,
likelihood
of
a
fire
occurring
in
the
building
medium
to
high
risk
potential
for
fire
to
remain
undetected,
medium
to
high
risk
potential
for
fire
to
grow,
spread
beyond
eight
and
first
ignited
high
risk
potential
for
fire
to
grow
beyond
room
of
origin.
High
risk
hazard
posed
by
fire
high
risk
consequences
in
the
event
of
the
fire
spreading
high.
That
was
in
2006
when.
I
A
A
Kenny,
you
didn't
put
any
measures
in
place
in
response
to
that
report,
which
you
commissioned.
You
didn't
put
any.
You
didn't
put
fire
suppression
as
you
try
to,
and
we
talked
through
that,
and
you
explained
why
you
didn't
put
fire
stopping
in
place,
but
those
two
significant
preventative
measures
were
not
taken.
So
despite
the
fact
that
for
I've
just
read,
though,
in
terms
of
the
risk
and
you're
still
insisting
the
building
was
safe.
B
A
C
If
it
hadn't
been
a
safe
building,
we
would
not
have
been
allowed
by
the
laws
of
this
plant
to
have
put
500
students
in
it
and
thousands
of
people
to
run
through
it.
So,
like
any
other
historic
building,
it
had
issues
that
we
as
good
custodians
were
asking
the
questions
of
it
and
I.
Probably
one
of
the
only
institutions
that
we're
going
to
the
extent
of
doing
this
and
then
putting
in
all
the
measures
CCTV
a
fire,
a
low
pressure,
mist
system
versus.
C
Putting
it
I
think
you
know
the
Parliament
decided
to
build
another
crossing
of
Scotland
of
the
fourth
bridge.
What
in
2007,
but
if
I'd
have
rolled
up
in
2008
I
could
have
got
wet
it's
it's,
it
has
to
be
built,
it
has
to
be
designed,
it
has
to
be
fundraise,
it
has
to
be
pass
all
the
listed
building
consent.
C
It
was
an
extraordinary
bespoke
system,
it
wasn't
a
kid
of
parts,
it
was
something
that,
and
the
main
part
of
that
in
the
timeline
was
to
actually
raise
the
funds
rate,
because
there
are
no
public
funds
for
bringing
in
a
half
million
pound
or
in
the
case
of
actually
the
system
we
were
putting
in
over
a
million
pounds
worth
of
mr.
suppression
into
that
building.
C
A
A
A
time
when
you
spent
50
million
pounds
on
extending
your
campus
and
then
even
after
the
2014
fire
embarked
on
another
campus
extension
by
purchasing
and
this
store
building
and
that,
despite
all
this
money
being
spent
on
extending
the
campus,
which
and
the
purpose
of
that
is
to
increase
the
number
of
students,
of
course,
increase
your
income
that
this
building
was
left
unprotected.
But.
B
I
need
to
stop
you.
There
actually
give
you
it's
not
to
increase
our
income
because,
as
you
know,
our
income
is
pretty
much
set
by
your
Scottish
government
in
terms
of
the
police's
that
we
have
and
the
international
students
that
we
can
attract
that
that's
any
extra
income
we
purchase
still
because
of
the
D
count
of
the
fine
art
students
to
the
twenty.
B
Knowing
it
was
one
of
the
best
pieces
of
happenstance
ever
that's
the
most
beautiful
building
and
it
will
come
into
the
Glasgow
School
of
Art
estate
as
an
absolute
jewel
in
the
crown
I
think
if
anyone
expressed
surprise
that
we
were
upgrading,
enhancing
and
improving
our
estate
for
our
quarry
mate,
which
is
the
creative
education
of
students
in
Scotland
I
thought
would
make
me
raise
my
eyebrows.
Why
would
that
be
a
bad
thing?
We
were
doing
that
in
conjunction
with
preserving,
enhancing,
improving
and
making
safe.
The
McIntosh
building
I
see
no
dichotomy
there
at
all.
F
Mentioned
extending
the
estate
I
think
you're,
possibly
referring
to
the
Reid
building,
but
the
Reid
building
I
was
head
of
design
the
School
of
Design
at
that
point,
and
we
occupied
the
Newbury
tower
and
the
fireless
building
which
were
deemed
unfit
for
purpose
and
had
to
be
replaced.
It
was
an
extension
to
her
campus.
It
was
actually
on
the
same
site.
Yes,
it's
the
previous.
A
Buildings
they
were
replaced,
but
as
I've
just
read,
though,
you
don't
report
where
the
Mackintosh
was
high
risk
in
a
whole
number
of
areas
in
terms
of
fire
and
all
this
other
activity
was
going
on,
but
that
has
not
been
addressed.
That
may
be
an
intention
to
Jessa
but
you're
talking
about
a
20
year
period
in
which
it
wasn't
addressed.
Clearly.
B
It
was
addressed
because
that
became
your
a
major
part
of
the
agenda
when
the
refurbishment
was
happening
before
prior
prior
to
2014
farm.
We
we
discussed
that
great
lands
about
applying
for
and
raising
the
funds
to
do
just
that.
But,
as
professor
mikeraboy
was
pointed
out,
that
was
not
an
expansion.
We
were
merely
taking
down
buildings.
It
would
no
longer
fit
for
a
purpose
and
replacing
them
funded
by
Scottish
funding,
Castle
brilliantly,
with
an
absolute
state-of-the-art,
wonderful
building
for
the
future
education
of
Scottish
and
international
students.
Okay,.
B
We
take
full
responsibility
at
all
times
for
what
happens:
the
GSE,
a
hundred
percent
and
yes,
I've
massive
regrets
that
we've
suffered
two
major
disasters.
In
fact,
I
see
more
than
regretful.
It's
broken
my
heart
and
we
have,
as
I
said,
audited
ourselves
and
in
precisely
the
same
way
as
this
committee
rightfully
has
there's
no
question
really
that
you've
asked
that
we
haven't
asked
ourselves
a
hundred
times.
We
keep
asking
ourselves.
Could
we
have
done
this
better?
Is
there
something
we
missed?
Is
it
a
lesson
that
we've
learned
from
sight
that
we
can
take
forward?
B
F
B
Do
regret,
that
is
a
point.
I
do
regret,
actually
not
having
engaged
more
fully
and
sooner
with
the
local
community
and
I
really
do,
because
that
was
actually
a
communications
mistake
and
it
wasn't
intentional,
but
and
the
perception
that
they
had
is
valid,
because
even
if
we
didn't
intend
it,
if
that's
how
they
felt
that's
valid.
So,
yes,
that
is
the
one
thing
I
do.