A 2019 memorial for the 72 who died in the Grenfell fire. Photo Londisland/shutterstock.com.
Part One of our investigation into the far-reaching consequences of the Grenfell Tower disaster. Nearly eight years after the fire, residents across Britain are still suffering in unsafe buildings and the survivors wait for justice…
The charred Grenfell Tower, with its iconic white shroud and green heart symbol, is set to be dismantled by 2027. By then it will have stood testament for ten years to life-threatening capitalism, and the reluctance of finance capital to make reparations.
A National Audit Office (NAO) report in November last year said the impacts of the fire “have extended far beyond the immediate victims...with many people suffering significant financial and emotional distress”. Recent figures show that nearly 5,000 high rise buildings (18 metres high and over) have been identified as being unsafe. But under half of them have had work done to remove flammable cladding and insulation.
The number of buildings considered unsafe is expected to soar as mid-rise blocks (over 11 metres high) are taken into account. Between 9,000 and 12,000 buildings, in both the public and the private sector, inside and outside London, are said to be in need of cladding removal or other forms of remediation. Over 600,000 people are estimated to live in buildings with such fire hazards.
The NAO warned that the work could take more than a decade, while some structures may never be identified.
Excuses
Excuses abound for the slow pace and failure to meet the material needs of traumatised residents.
By definition, the government stance that social housing remediation requires a “long term strategy” implies a protracted process that may never be completed. Councils are at breaking point, over-burdened with many other housing problems – as well as crippling debt in several cases.
With residents still living in fear and demanding timescales for work to be done, the NAO urged government to set a target date for cladding safety work. In response, housing minister Angela Rayner came up with an “acceleration plan” promising to make safe all high rise blocks, both private and social, by the end of 2029.
An array of overlapping remediation funding schemes has developed. Together they fall well short of the NAO’s estimate that the cost would be over £22 billion. The NAO blames Treasury restrictions as a major cause of dispute and delay.
The main source of funding is the Building Safety Fund for buildings over 18 metres high. Research by the National Housing Federation reveals that money is being diverted away from new and existing social homes into the Building Safety Fund. It estimates that one in ten planned homes to buy or rent cannot now be built.
In his final report released last September, the Grenfell Inquiry chairman Sir Martin Moore-Bick criticised the “complex and fragmented” regulatory system, with multiple government departments, local authorities, Trading Standards and commercial organisations all responsible for different aspects of the refurbishment, creating “inefficiency and an obstacle to effective regulation”.
The government promised to consider the inquiry recommendations, “to ensure that such a tragedy can never occur again.” Things aren’t turning out quite like that.
Rayner’s promises to get landlords and builders to meet her targets seem delusional, given known problems with regulation. A Local Government Association spokesperson said that for local government to carry out enforcement as quickly as possible they would need guarantees of multi-year funding. The “new money” offered as an inducement by Rayner is simply an exercise in juggling sundry inadequate pots of funding.
Insurance
Leaseholders are in a particularly precarious situation. Although exempt from paying for cladding remediation they are responsible for most other remediation costs, passed on to them through their service charge. They cannot get affordable insurance or mortgages to move on with their lives or start a family.
While freeholders and developers haggle over liability, these buildings remain a fire hazard. Residents must pay additional monthly charges for night patrols, the so-called “waking watches”. The Leasehold Advisory Service puts this at £331 for each dwelling, £499 in London.
‘The government promised to consider the inquiry recommendations. Things aren’t turning out quite like that…’
After a 4-year delay the government has set up a Building Safety Levy, aiming to ensure that developers pay to fix safety problems caused, for example, by use of combustible cladding. This will not operate until autumn 2025 – few have faith in its effectiveness. Crucially the levy depends on proving a developer’s culpability – never an easy task.
While remediation of existing dangerous buildings is delayed, so too is justice for Grenfell survivors. No date has yet been set for a court hearing into the conduct of the cladding and insulation companies working on the Grenfell refurbishment. The Crown Prosecution Service blames “the sheer volume of evidence and complexity of the investigation...”.
The conclusions of the Inquiry couldn’t be clearer, yet 180 police officers have been deployed to conduct a “line by line” inquiry of their own into the Inquiry before they will bring charges. The Met points to an “increasingly complex web” of over 60 suspect organisations, multinational companies, and individuals.
The NAO inquiry interrogated, among many others: the main contractor Rydon; the architects Studio E; the cladding subcontractor Harley Facades; cladding manufacturer Arconic; insulation manufacturers Celotex and Kingspan; the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea, and their building control department. All are engaged in what one lawyer called a “merry-go-round of buck-passing”.
Possible charges are corporate manslaughter, gross negligence manslaughter, fraud, and misconduct in public office. But securing convictions,will be subject to all the drawn-out procedures of lawyers acting for big business.
• Part 2 of this article, covering the impact of Grenfell on building regulation and what still needs to be done, will appear in the May/June issue of Workers.