The government was “well aware” of the deadly risks posed by combustible cladding and insulation a year before the Grenfell Tower fire, but “failed to act on what it knew”, a landmark report has found.
The report also said “systemic dishonesty” from cladding and insulation companies and a “toxic” relationship between the tower’s residents and the Tenant Management Organisation (TMO), which was responsible for running services, were contributing factors.
More than seven years on from the fire that claimed 72 lives, Grenfell Inquiry chair Sir Martin Moore-Bick has published his final findings into how the building in west London came to be in such a deadly state.
Image: Pic: PA
Sir Martin also concluded:
• Government officials were “complacent, defensive and dismissive” on fire safety, while cutting red tape was prioritised
• There was an “inappropriate relationship” between approved inspectors and those they were inspecting
• Grenfell residents who raised safety concerns were dismissed as “militant troublemakers”
Image: Flames engulfed the 24-storey tower block in Latimer Road, west London, on 14 June 2017
The report details what it calls a “path to disaster” and “decades of failure”.
It asked: “How was it possible in 21st century London for a reinforced concrete building, itself structurally impervious to fire, to be turned into a death trap?”
“There is no simple answer to that question.”
Sir Martin’s report runs to nearly 1,700 pages, and encompasses years of work and the testimony of hundreds of witnesses.
It contains 58 recommendations to ensure a similar disaster never happens again.
Image: Hundreds of firefighters tackled the blaze. Pic: PA
Image: Crews tackled the fire in shifts – resting at the scene. Pic: AP
Complacency in government
The first phase of the inquiry’s report found in 2019 that combustible cladding was the primary cause of the rapid spread of the fire.
The inquiry has now concluded that the tragedy was the culmination of those in charge failing for decades to properly consider the risks of combustible materials on high-rise buildings, while ignoring the mounting evidence before them.
Image: The building was covered in combustible products. Pic: Reuters
Successive governments missed opportunities to prevent the tragedy.
The deadly risks of combustible cladding panels and insulation had been identified as early as 1991, when a fire engulfed the Knowsley Heights tower block in Huyton, Merseyside.
The block had recently been covered in “rainscreen” cladding.
Six people were killed at Lakanal House in Camberwell, south London, in 2009 after a fire spread to combustible cladding.
“By 2016 the department [for communities and local government] was well aware of those risks, but failed to act on what it knew,” the report states.
It adds that by the time Grenfell Tower was being renovated in the 2010s, a “seriously defective” system was in place to regulate the construction and refurbishment of high-rise buildings.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
0:49
‘We want changes and justice’
Unsafe products kept on market and dangers ‘deliberately concealed’
The report condemns cladding and insulation firms involved in this work, saying they engaged in “deliberate and sustained strategies to manipulate the testing processes, misrepresent test data and mislead the market”.
It said that “systemic dishonesty” from the companies resulted in hazardous materials being applied to the block.
Arconic, the company that made cladding for Grenfell Tower, “deliberately concealed” the danger of the panels used on the tower, while Celotex, which supplied most of the insulation, similarly “embarked on a dishonest scheme to mislead customers”.
Kingspan knew its insulation product failed fire safety tests “disastrously” but continued to sell it to high-rise buildings, the report found.
The firms got away with this because the various bodies designed to oversee and certify their products repeatedly failed to monitor and supervise them.
Grenfell residents dismissed as ‘troublemakers’
There was also harsh criticism of the Tenant Management Organisation (TMO), which was responsible for running services at Grenfell Tower.
Residents who raised concerns about safety were dismissed as “militant troublemakers”, while there was “a toxic atmosphere” with the TMO “fuelled by mistrust of both sides”.
Spreaker
This content is provided by Spreaker, which may be using cookies and other technologies.
To show you this content, we need your permission to use cookies.
You can use the buttons below to amend your preferences to enable Spreaker cookies or to allow those cookies just once.
You can change your settings at any time via the Privacy Options.
Unfortunately we have been unable to verify if you have consented to Spreaker cookies.
To view this content you can use the button below to allow Spreaker cookies for this session only.
Relations “were increasingly characterised by distrust, dislike, personal antagonism and anger” and “some, perhaps many, occupants of the tower regarded the TMO as an uncaring and bullying overlord that belittled and marginalised them”.
The TMO and the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea were jointly responsible for managing fire safety at Grenfell Tower – but the years between 2009 and 2017 were marked by a “persistent indifference to fire safety”, the report said.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:30
‘I realised the burning building was my own home’
Next steps
The Counsel for the inquiry has accused parties involved in the disaster of a “merry-go-round of buck-passing” – largely blaming each other for the disaster.
The inquiry can’t make findings of civil and criminal liability.
Now its work is complete, the police investigation into the disaster will continue.
The UK Tonight With Sarah-Jane Mee will have a special programme on the Grenfell Tower report at 8pm on Sky News
Bird flu has been detected in a sheep in England for the first time, the government has said.
The single case was identified in Yorkshire during a routine check of livestock on a farm where the H5N1 virus, also called avian influenza, had previously been confirmed in captive birds.
No further infection of the virus was detected in the remaining flock, the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) said.
“While this is the first time this virus has been reported in a sheep, it is not the first time influenza of avian origin has been detected in livestock in other countries,” it added.
“There is no evidence to suggest an increased risk to the nation’s livestock population.”
DEFRA said it has been introducing livestock surveillance on infected premises following the outbreak of avian influenza in dairy cows in the US.
The infected sheep has been humanely culled to enable extensive testing, it said.
Livestock farmers are being urged to remain vigilant to any signs of bird flu following recent outbreaks.
The UK’s chief veterinary officer, Christine Middlemiss, said: “We have confirmed the detection of influenza of avian origin in a single sheep on a farm in Yorkshire.
“Strict biosecurity measures have been implemented to prevent the further spread of disease.
“While the risk to livestock remains low, I urge all animal owners to ensure scrupulous cleanliness is in place and to report any signs of infection to the Animal Plant Health Agency immediately.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:18
December 2024: ‘Bird flu could be spreading undetected’
Dr Meera Chand, of the UK Health Security Agency, said: “Globally, we continue to see that mammals can be infected with avian influenza.
“However, current evidence suggests that the avian influenza viruses we’re seeing circulating around the world do not spread easily to people – and the risk of avian flu to the general public remains very low.”
The Food Standards Agency has said properly cooked poultry and associated products, including eggs, remain safe to eat.
Bird flu poses a very low food safety risk to UK consumers since the virus is not normally transmitted through food, it added.
Chancellor Rachel Reeves is poised to deliver an update on the health of the British economy on Wednesday.
The spring statement is not a formal budget – as Labour pledged to only deliver one per year – but rather an update on the economy and any progress since her fiscal statement last October.
While it’s not billed as a major economic event, Rachel Reeves has a big gap to plug in the public finances and speculation has grown she may have to break her self-imposed borrowing rules.
Here, Sky News explains everything you need to know.
What is the spring statement?
The spring statement is an annual speech made by the chancellor in the House of Commons, in which they provide MPs with an update on the overall health of the economy and Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) forecasts.
It is one of two major financial statements in the financial year – which runs from 1 April to 31 March.
The other is the autumn budget, a more substantial financial event in which the chancellor sets out a raft of economic policy for the year ahead.
Typically, the spring statement – which was first delivered by ex-chancellor Phillip Hammond in 2018 – gives an update on the state of the economy, and details any progress that has been made since the autumn budget.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:55
Sam Coates previews the chancellor’s announcements
When will Rachel Reeves deliver it?
The OBR, which monitors the government’s spending plans, will publish its forecast on the UK economy on 26 March.
It is required to produce two economic forecasts a year, but the chancellor said she would only give one budget a year to provide stability and certainty on upcoming tax changes.
The OBR will also provide an estimate on the cost of living for British households, and detail whether it believes the Labour government will adhere to its own rules on borrowing and spending.
The chancellor will then present the OBR’s findings to the House of Commons, and make her first spring statement.
This will be responded to by either Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch or shadow chancellor Mel Stride.
Image: Rachel Reeves is looking to plug gaps in the UK’s finances. Pic: PA
Why does it matter?
The UK economy is thought to be underperforming – potentially due to global factors, like Donald Trump’s trade tariffs – and there are rumours that the chancellor could consider breaking her own rules on borrowing in response.
The economy contracted slightly in January, while inflation has climbed to a 10-month high of 3%. Meanwhile, the government has committed to boosting defence spending to 2.5% of GDP by 2027 – an expensive task.
Spreaker
This content is provided by Spreaker, which may be using cookies and other technologies.
To show you this content, we need your permission to use cookies.
You can use the buttons below to amend your preferences to enable Spreaker cookies or to allow those cookies just once.
You can change your settings at any time via the Privacy Options.
Unfortunately we have been unable to verify if you have consented to Spreaker cookies.
To view this content you can use the button below to allow Spreaker cookies for this session only.
Ms Reeves’s fiscal rules mean she cannot borrow for day-to-day spending – leaving cuts as one of her only options. Her other “non-negotiable” is to get debt falling as a share of national income by the end of this parliament.
It is expected that welfare cuts will be part of the spring statement package to help the chancellor come within her borrowing limit.
In short, the Treasury believes Ms Reeves must maintain £10bn in headroom after months of economic downturn and geopolitical events since last October’s budget.
It is widely expected the OBR will confirm that this financial buffer has been wiped clean.
Where can I watch the spring statement?
The spring statement will be delivered in the House of Commons on Wednesday 26 March, directly after Prime Minister’s Questions, which is usually finished by around 12.30pm.
You’ll be able to keep up to date on Sky News – and follow live updates in the Politics Hub.
The chief executive of National Grid has claimed that Heathrow Airport had enough power from other substations despite Friday’s shutdown.
Around 1,300 flights were affected after a fire knocked out an electricity substation in Hayes on Thursday evening. Operations were not able to resume until Friday evening.
John Pettigrew from National Grid said there were two other substations “always available for the distribution network companies and Heathrow to take power”.
Image: The aftermath of the substation fire. Pic: Reuters
Image: The substation fire
In his first comments since the disruption, Mr Pettigrew told the Financial Times: “There was no lack of capacity from the substations.
“Each substation individually can provide enough power to Heathrow.”
He added: “Losing a substation is a unique event – but there were two others available.
“So that is a level of resilience.”
More on Heathrow Airport
Related Topics:
In response to the comments, a Heathrow Airport spokesperson said: “As the National Grid’s chief executive, John Pettigrew, noted, he has never seen a transformer failure like this in his 30 years in the industry.
“His view confirms that this was an unprecedented incident and that it would not have been possible for Heathrow to operate uninterrupted.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:56
Heathrow reopens: Govt orders probe
Image: Flight cancellations at Heathrow left hundreds of thousands of passengers stranded around the globe
“Hundreds of critical systems across the airport were required to be safely powered down and then safely and systematically rebooted. Given Heathrow’s size and operational complexity, safely restarting operations after a disruption of this magnitude was a significant challenge.”
Heathrow chief executive Thomas Woldbye previously said a back-up transformer failed during the power outage, meaning systems had to be closed in accordance with safety procedures so power supplies could be restructured from two remaining substations.
But it has emerged that a report by consultancy firm Jacobs more than 10 years ago found a “key weakness” of Heathrow’s electricity supply was “main transmission line connections to the airport”.
The document, published in 2014, stated “outages could cause disruption to passenger, baggage and aircraft handling functions”, and “could require closure of areas of affected terminals or potentially the entire airport”.
In its appraisal of operational risk at the airport, Jacobs said provision of on-site generation and other measures to ensure resilient supply appeared “to be adequate” to enable Heathrow “to withstand and recover from interruptions to supply”.
The report added that the airport operated “within risk parameters that are not excessive or unusual for an airport of its type”.
Metropolitan Police counter-terrorism officers initially led the investigation but the force said the fire is not believed to be suspicious so the London Fire Brigade is now leading the probe which will focus on the electrical distribution equipment.
Heathrow is Europe’s largest airport, with more than 83.9 million passengers travelling through its terminals in 2024. Around 200,000 passengers were affected by Friday’s closure.