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.
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”
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.
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.
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
Many months before farmers found themselves on the front pages of newspapers, after protesting in Whitehall against the new government’s inheritance tax rules, we at Sky News embarked upon a project.
Most of our reports are relatively short affairs, recorded and edited for the evening news. We capture snapshots of life in households, businesses and communities around the country. But this year we undertook to do something different: to spend a year covering the story of a family farm.
We had no inkling, at the time, that farming would become a front-page story. But even back in January, 2024 was shaping up to be a critical year for the sector. This, after all, was the year the new post-Brexit regime for farm payments would come into full force. Having depended on subsidies each year for simply farming a given acreage of land, farmers were now being asked to commit to different schemes focused less on food than on environmental goals.
This was also the first full year of the new trade deals with New Zealand and Australia. The upshot of these deals is that UK farmers are now competing with two of the world’s major food exporters, who can export more into Britain than they do currently.
You can watch the Sky News special report, The Last Straw, on Sky News at 9pm on Friday
On top of this, the winter that just passed was a particularly tough one, especially for arable farmers. Cold, wet and unpredictable – even more so than the usual British weather. It promised to be a challenging year for growing.
More on Farming
Related Topics:
With all of this in mind, we set out to document what a year like this actually felt like for a farm – in this case Lower Drayton Farm in Staffordshire. In some respects, this mixed farm is quite typical for parts of the UK – they rear livestock and grow wheat, as well as subcontracting some of their fields to potato and carrot growers.
A look at farming reimagined
But in other respects, the two generations of the Bower family here, Ray and Richard, are doing something unusual. Seeing the precipitous falls in income from growing food in recent years, they are trying to reimagine what farming in the 21st century might look like. And in their case, that means building a play centre for children and what might be classified as “agritourism” activities alongside them.
The upshot is that while much of their day-to-day work is still traditional farming, an increasing share of their income comes from non-food activity. It underlines a broader point: across the country, farmers are being asked to do unfamiliar things to make ends meet. Some, like the Bowers, are embracing that change; others are struggling to adapt. But with more wet years expected ahead and more changes due in government support, the coming years could be a continuing roller coaster for British farming.
With that in mind, I’d encourage you to watch our film of this year through the lens of this farm. It is, we hope, a fascinating, nuanced insight of life on the land.
You can watch the Sky News special report, The Last Straw, on Sky News at 9pm on Friday
The rugged mountains, limestone caves and spectacular waterfalls of Bannau Brycheiniog – the Brecon Beacons – attract visitors from all over the world.
Tourism is a vital part of the local economy. But local attractions say the industry would be devastated by the Welsh government’s plans for a nightly visitor tax.
“In an area like this all we’ve got is tourism and farming – there is nothing else,” says Ashford Price from the National Showcaves Centre, a visitor complex of cathedral sized caverns, winding tunnels, a dry ski slope, shire horse centre, self-catering accommodation and campsite.
“If they go on like this the future for Welsh tourism is really, really bleak. It will be an absolute catastrophe.”
The proposed fee would be £1.25 for those staying at hotels, bed and breakfasts and self-catering accommodation – and 75p for campsites, caravan sites, and hostels.
Ashford is secretary of the Welsh Association of Visitor Attractions. In protest against the plans, its more than one hundred members closed their attractions for a day.
“Even Welsh people who live in Wales will be clobbered by this tourism tax,” he said.
“It’s quite high, there’s no reduction for children. For a family that will add roughly £35, £40 a week. If you’re staying two weeks, as many people do, it’s £70 on top of your bill. At a time when everybody’s earnings are really struggling, it’s utter insanity to put Wales at such a disadvantage.
“There will be no more big developments. We already cancelled a development for £1.5m and I know other attractions are doing the same. I don’t think the Welsh government really understands how demoralised people feel.”
‘It’s a disaster’
In the nearby village, Anthony Christopher, landlord of the Penycae Inn, is deeply frustrated.
“I just feel like calling this government a bunch of weasels,” he said.
“We’re a small family business and all these extra taxes are taking away the will to do anything else.
“We have national insurance already – contributions are very high. VAT is very high. Now this tax is coming – it’s a disaster. We have to put this extra charge on the customers – how much more can we put on the customers? It’s terrible.”
Anthony has just converted an old school building into a 14-bedroom hotel – due to open in January.
“If I knew this was going to happen I may not have built my hotel. It’s very worrying.”
Many areas in Wales have struggled with the impact of tourism in recent years, with complaints about overflowing car parks, traffic jams, litter and even human faeces on Mount Snowdon.
The Welsh government argues giving councils the power to charge a tourism tax would help pay for better local services.
“During a period of sustained austerity of the sort we’ve seen over the last 14 years, local authorities inevitably end up focusing their spend on those things for which they’ve got statutory obligations – social care, education and so on,” said Finance Secretary Mark Drakeford.
“That has meant there’s been a reduction in the amount of money available for local authorities to invest in infrastructure that makes them successful places for tourists to visit. This is a way of collecting a very small contribution from every one of us who makes a visit to be reinvested in the conditions that make for that visit to be a success.
“It’s money that would be reinvested in the tourism industry, for example, clean beaches and safe footpaths and car parks and public toilets.”
‘People simply absorb it’
The tourism industry accounts for 11% of all jobs in Wales. But an impact assessment commissioned by the Welsh government predicted that in a worst case scenario, 730 jobs could be lost in the sector if a visitor tax was introduced across the country, with an economic cost of £47.5 million. It also predicted 340 local authority jobs would be created.
Mr Drakeford insists the tax will boost tourism – not damage it.
“For those who have fears that the very modest visitor levy will put visitors off, the experience of around the world is that simply isn’t the case. There is a great deal now of empirical evidence for many places that have introduced visitor levies of this sort, not just abroad, but in Manchester, for example,” he said.
“The evidence is not just from big places like Venice, but from rural France, where there’s a levy of this sort. People simply absorb it as part of the costs of their holiday.”
Tourism taxes in cities across Europe range from around 50p to £5 a night, although businesses generally benefit from lower rates of VAT than the 20% paid in the UK.
The idea is becoming increasingly popular across the UK.
While some regional mayors like Andy Burnham have been calling for equivalent powers to be introduced in England, the Westminster government has no plans to do so.
But local areas can work around this through businesses coming together to set up their own schemes. Manchester’s £1 a night charge raised £2.8m in its first year and hoteliers in Liverpool are about to vote on a similar idea.
Other cities, including York and London, are also considering the option – though a plan for Bournemouth, Christchurch and Poole has been put on hold after objections from hotel owners about the ballot held there.
An Oxford University spinout which is developing a new generation of weed-resistant herbicides has begun planting a $40m (£32m) fundraising with prospective backers.
Sky News understands that Moa Technology, which was co-founded by the world-leading university’s head of plant sciences Professor Liam Dolan, is kicking off a Series C funding round.
Moa has already raised $59m (£47m) from prominent investors including Oxford Science Enterprises (OSE), BGF and Lansdowne Partners, the Mayfair-based hedge fund.
Its existing shareholders are understood to be supportive of the new fundraising plans, although potential new investors will also be approached.
Moa is developing active ingredients which can break weeds’ resistance to herbicides – a key challenge for the global agricultural sector – with the aim of securing approval from regulators.
Similar to the growth of antibiotic resistance in humans, resistant ‘superweeds’ are able to kill a farmer’s entire crop, ultimately endangering food security.
Industry data suggests that farmers spend up to $40bn (£31.2bn) annually on herbicides, and a further $25bn (£19.9bn) on weed-resistant seeds.
More on Oxfordshire
Related Topics:
However, a number of leading weedkillers, including Bayer-owned Roundup, have sparked multibillion dollar lawsuits over their alleged implications for human health.
Moa has developed more than 70 so-called ‘modes of action’, with several of the company’s products in advanced field trials in six countries, including the UK, US and France.
According to Moa, these could, assuming they gain regulatory approval, be commercially available by the end of the decade.
The OSE-backed spinout has a commercial agreement with Nufarm, an Australian agrichemicals company, to further develop one of its products.
A Moa spokesman said it intended to operate a royalties model similar to that of ARM Holdings, the chip designer, in semiconductors, meaning it will focus on research and development, and license its products to global manufacturers and distributors.
The company is run by chief executive Dr Virginia Corless, who has had extensive experience commercialising sustainable solutions in the energy, water and agriculture sectors.
An update on Moa’s fundraising progress is likely in the first half of next year.