Richard Millett KC, counsel for the inquest, used his closing statement to state: “Every single one of the deaths that occurred at Grenfell Tower on 14 June 2017 was preventable.”
He accused organizations involved in the renovation of spinning “a web of blame” and denying responsibility despite evidence of “incompetence”, “malpractice” and “dishonesty”. In front of the survivors and bereaved gathered in the west London inquest room for the final day of a four-and-a-half-year trial, he admitted that his initial fears that the process would become “a piece of cake” had been confirmed and “it follows, the notes of the melody of, are clearly heard” in company statements this week that deflect blame. Millett showed a web chart on screens in the inquiry room showing the dozens of cases in which companies, professionals and public authorities involved in dousing the council block with petrol-burning materials had blamed each other. He also accused the organizations of disrespecting victims by seeking to “minimize their exposure” ahead of legal proceedings. There was, he added, “a failure to give due respect to the idea of home as a natural aspect of human privacy, service, security and dignity”. After Millett spoke, Grenfell United, the families’ group, said the closure of the inquiry, which is not due to produce a report until at least October 2023, was a reminder “that we continue to live our lives knowing that the evidence have been revealed. And yet, there is no change. No accountability. No charges.” As Scotland Yard awaits the final report before proceeding with possible criminal charges, any trials for offenses ranging from corporate manslaughter to fraud may not begin until 2025, more than seven years after the disaster, the Guardian understands. “We must now believe in a justice system that protects the powerful – a system that prevents justice,” the families’ group said. “While this system exists, we face the same impossible battle as many before us. From Aberfan, to Hillsborough, justice has been denied and Grenfell is no different.” The chairman of the inquiry, Sir Martin Moore-Bick, told mourners: “We are very aware that we need to produce our report as soon as possible.” But wiping away tears after the hearing closed, Hanan Wahabi, who lived on the ninth floor and lost five members of her extended family who lived in a 21-storey flat, said: “It’s been a long road and there’s another long road ahead . “ Adel Chaoui, who lost four members of his family, said: “We knew after the first phase of the investigation [which ended in 2019] because the building went up in flames… There is criminal activity that could have been prosecuted there and then.” The Grenfell Tower inquiry cost the taxpayer more than £150 million in legal fees, but the actual legal bill is much higher. Investment maker Arconic, for example, spends up to $4 million every three months on lawyers, according to recent company filings. By contrast, the savings in the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea made by switching from zinc cladding to flammable aluminum plastic panels with “significantly worse” fire performance was just £293,368. Millett told the inquest: “Each of the dangers that arose at Grenfell Tower that night were well known to many and should have been known to all.” But the main organizations involved in lining the plot with flammable materials tried to blame each other. Arconic, which made the plastic panels it knew to be dangerous in high-rise buildings, sued nine other companies and claimed it was “absolutely blameless,” Millett said. One of those companies, Celotex, which made the flammable insulation, sued Arconic and eight other organisations, from the architect to the council. Rydon, the builder, suggested it was “nothing to blame,” Millett said. Archie Bland and Nimo Omer take you to the top stories and what they mean, free every weekday morning Privacy Notice: Newsletters may contain information about charities, online advertising and content sponsored by external parties. For more information, see our Privacy Policy. We use Google reCaptcha to protect our website and Google’s Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply. The Kensington and Chelsea Tenant Management Agency, which oversaw the refurbishment, this week suggested it was unlucky, claiming “a similar fire could have happened in any of the many high-rise buildings across the UK”, which also used the same investment. Central government lawyers told the inquiry that all the companies involved showed “a fundamental failure to give real thought to the most basic objective of the building regulations”, Millett said. But the inquest previously heard the government failed to tighten fire regulations after a previous fatal fire, despite being ordered to do so by a coroner in 2013. Millett challenged Moore-Bick to consider why the government was labeling the industry as “this ship of fools”. He said the inquiry could conclude there was a “common root” in the “weaknesses” of the UK’s building safety regime. On Thursday, Jason Beer KC, a councilor at the department for uplift, housing and communities, said the government was “really sorry” for its “failure to realize that the regulatory system was broken and could lead to a disaster like this”. . Grenfell United said: “We hope that Sir Martin Moore-Bick will be thorough and rigorous in his findings and that the phase two report will bring about real change. a legacy for the 72 people who lost their lives that night. Thanks to the research team for all their work in uncovering the evidence. “It is now up to the Metropolitan police and the CPS to bring the necessary prosecutions and prove to us that there is no two-tiered justice system. “We ask everyone who has been with us until now to continue. This phase may be over, but the fight for justice is not over and we will continue until the culprits are brought to justice.”
