A panel of people drawn from the local community should be appointed to advise the chair of the Grenfell Tower inquiry, according to the bishop whose diocese covers the building where the deadly inferno took place.

The bishop of Kensington said that judge Sir Martin Moore-Bick should establish a panel that would “represent the local community and win their confidence” in a submission to the inquiry.

The Rev Graham Tomlin’s remarks echoed the voice of local campaign groups such as Justice4Grenfell, which said local people “must be placed at the heart of this inquiry” and argued that the former judge’s advisory panel was “unrepresentative and non-diverse”.

The Rev Graham Tomlin: ‘Local people must be placed at the heart of this inquiry’ Photograph: Dominic Lipinski/PA

The bishop’s submission was one of 330 sent to the public inquiry before the consultation period’s 5pm deadline on Friday. They came from individuals, community groups, campaigners, professional bodies, politicians and faith leaders.

Tomlin suggested that a panel reflecting the diversity of the community could “ represent both the local community and win their confidence, and … can bring the perspectives of a wider range of our society, socially and ethnically, to the important issues the inquiry will examine”.

After considering the submissions, Moore-Bick will write to the prime minister with his own recommendations. Theresa May is expected to set the terms of reference in the middle of August, after which the inquiry will have legal status and can begin work.

Moore-Bick has been criticised by North Kensington residents and politicians, who have suggested he lacks the confidence of local people. The 70-year-old former judge is seen by some as aloof and lacking empathy and he alarmed some residents by saying soon after his appointment that the investigations would be limited to the technical causes of the fire.



Emma Dent Coad, the Labour MP for Kensington, said on Friday she still did not have “total confidence” in Moore-Bick, but “we have to work with the system we have, unfortunately”.



Speaking on BBC Radio 4’s Today programme, she suggested the experts Moore-Bick had brought in to advise him had generated greater confidence.



Justice4Grenfell said in its submission that the inquiry had not won public confidence, citing a previous judgment of Moore-Bick allowing Westminster council to rehouse a homeless family 50 miles away and the “unrepresentative and non-diverse makeup” of his advisory panel.

It said: “Victims and survivors must be placed at the heart of this inquiry so that all findings and recommendations are grounded in the experiences and accounts of those victims and survivors.

“The inquiry should not have a focus solely on the traditional legal ‘facts and judgment’ process. Instead, it should carefully consider the emotional needs of all the key stakeholders, particularly the survivors and bereaved families.”

Justice4Grenfell, along with other groups who made submissions, called on Moore-Bick to establish a panel drawn from the local community that would reflect its ethnic diversity and social background.

According to sources close to the inquiry, Moore-Bick is considering recommending an advisory panel in his letter to May, which will be sent to Downing Street next week.

Sir Martin Moore-Bick is considering recommending an advisory panel. Photograph: Philip Toscano/PA

He is also minded to recommend a two-stage inquiry: the first part dealing with the immediate causes of the fire and producing an interim report; the second looking at broader issues over a longer time-frame.



Dent Coad said a legal commitment must be given to a second stage. “We need to look at all the broader issues. One of the concerns about a two-part inquiry – like with Hillsborough – is if it’s held off for too long and then it doesn’t happen at all, so that’s a concern.”



The first stage should “look at accountability and recommendations straight away so that the things that have become most obvious throughout the inquiry are put into action straight away”, the MP said.



In a submission made public last month, David Lammy, the Labour MP for Tottenham who lost a family friend in the fire, backed a two-stage investigation into the specific causes and circumstances of the blaze and its implications for national policy.



The first stage, according to Lammy, should cover the policies and decisions of Kensington and Chelsea council and the Tenant Management Organisation (KCTMO), and the London fire brigade’s “stay put” policy, which some have suggested contributed to the high number of deaths.



The second stage should address “systemic failure at a local and national level when it comes to the provision, management and administration of social housing in this country”.

The bishop of Kensington also proposed a two-stage inquiry: first, to look at the cause of the fire and decisions taken on the night of 14 June, and second, to look at decisions and issues over a number of years that may have contributed to the disaster.

Tomlin suggested there should be a separate independent commission on housing in London to examine the regulation of a housing market “that often seems more focused on investment than actually housing people”.



So-called affordable housing was not affordable for many people and there was not enough social housing, he said in his submission. “This creates the kind of divided communities we have seen in Kensington, leading to disparity and social tension.”



Tomlin told the Guardian: “There are parts of London where the only people who can live there are either the very poor or the very wealthy, and nothing in between. That contributes to this sense – which is concentrated in Kensington – of two very different communities, one very wealthy and one very disadvantaged, right next door to each other. It exacerbates a sense of dislocation.”

Justice4Grenfell said it believed “the causes of this disaster need to be tracked to those at the highest levels of central government, and not restricted to those at local authority level, the KCTMO, the contractors and the subcontractors”. It urged a two-part inquiry, on the immediate causes of the fire and the “wider and more complex issues”.

Inquest, an organisation that campaigns for justice for people who have died in contentious circumstances, said the inquiry must “address the pain, trauma and individual and community damage caused by the tragedy, and the lack of public trust and confidence in the state institutions involved”.

It suggested three areas for the inquiry to examine: the background leading up to the fire; its cause, spread and impact and the immediate emergency response; and the aftermath of the fire – including “the role that discrimination, inequality or institutional indifference played in the systemic failures in the aftermath and the response at a local and national level”.



A submission from Hackney council in east London urged the inquiry to review the current system of housing regulations to put safety and residents first and to examine the impact of cuts to local authority budgets since 2010 on fire safety. It called for “an urgent interim report to reassure those affected by the fire and give local authorities clarity on funding and safety issues”.

After the terms of reference have been set, the inquiry will contact organisations relevant to its investigation, such as the local council, KCTMO and fire brigade. Individuals and groups will be able to apply for “core participant status”, giving them certain rights in the process.

The first hearing is likely to be in September, although it will be a preliminary “housekeeping” session. Hearings at which evidence is heard are expected to start later in the year.