No one should have died at Grenfell Tower, the inquiry into the disaster that killed 72 people has heard as it closed after 400 days of evidence. The government said it was “truly sorry” for its own failures.
Richard Millett KC, counsel to the inquiry, used his final statement to declare: “Each and every one of the deaths that occurred in Grenfell Tower, on the 14 June 2017 was avoidable.”
He accused organisations involved in the refurbishment of spinning “a web of blame” and denying responsibility despite evidence of “incompetence”, “malpractice” and “dishonesty”.
In front of survivors and the bereaved gathered at the west London inquiry room for the final day of a four and a half year process, he admitted his initial fears the process would become a “merry-go-round of buck-passing” had been confirmed and it “turns still, the notes of its melody, clearly audible” in statements by companies this week deflecting responsibility.
Millett displayed a web diagram on screens in the inquiry room showing the dozens of occasions on which the companies, professionals and public authorities involved in wrapping the council block in materials that burned like petrol had blamed one other.
He also accused organisations of disrespecting the victims by seeking to “minimise their own exposure” ahead of legal proceedings.
There was, he added, a “failure to pay due respect to the idea of home as a physical aspect of human privacy, agency, safety 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 the evidence has been uncovered. And yet, there’s no change. No accountability. No charges”.
As Scotland Yard wait for the final report before moving towards potential criminal charges, any trials for offences ranging from corporate manslaughter to fraud may not start before 2025, more than seven years since the disaster, the Guardian understands.
“We now have to put our faith into a justice system that protects the powerful – a system that prevents justice,” the families group said. “While this system exists, we face the same unachievable battle as the many before us. From Aberfan, to Hillsborough, justice has been denied, and Grenfell is no different.”
The inquiry’s chair, Sir Martin Moore-Bick, told the bereaved: “We are very well aware we need to produce our report as soon as we can.”
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-floor flat, said: “It’s been a long road and it’s another long road coming.”
Adel Chaoui, who lost four members of his family, said: “We knew after phase one of the inquiry [which ended in 2019] why the building went up in flames … There is criminal activity that could have been prosecuted there and then.”
The Grenfell Tower inquiry has cost the taxpayer more than £150m in legal costs, but the true legal bill is far higher. The cladding manufacturer, Arconic, for example, has been spending as much as $4m (£3.4m) every three months on lawyers, according to recent corporate filings.
By contrast, the saving to the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea made by switching from zinc cladding to combustible plastic-filled aluminium panels with “significantly worse” fire performance was just £293,368.
Millett told the inquiry: “Each and every one of the risks which eventuated at Grenfell Tower on that night were well known by many and ought to have been known by all.”
But the main organisations involved in cladding the council block with combustible materials have sought to blame each other. Arconic, which made the plastic-filled panels that it knew were dangerous on high-rise buildings, blamed nine other companies and claimed to be “wholly blameless”, Millett said.
One of those companies, Celotex, which made the combustible insulation, blamed Arconic and eight other organisations, from the architect to the council. Rydon, the builder, suggested it “isn’t to blame for anything”, Millett said.
The Kensington and Chelsea Tenants’ Management Organisation, which oversaw the refurbishment, this week suggested it was unlucky, arguing a “similar fire could have occurred at any of the many high rise buildings across the UK”, which also used the same cladding.
Lawyers for central government had told the inquiry that all companies involved displayed “a fundamental failure to give any real thought to the most basic aim of the building regulations”, Millett said. But the inquiry 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 characterising the industry as “this ship of fools”.
He said the inquiry could conclude there was “a common root” in the UK building safety regime’s “shortcomings”.
On Thursday, Jason Beer KC, counsel for the department of levelling up, housing and communities, said the government was “truly sorry” for its “failure to realise that the regulatory system was broken and it might lead to a catastrophe such as this”.
Grenfell United said: “We hope Sir Martin Moore-Bick will be thorough and rigorous in his findings and that the phase two report will bring real change; a legacy for the 72 people who lost their lives that night. We thank the Inquiry team for all their work in uncovering the evidence.
“It’s now up to the Metropolitan police and the CPS to bring about the necessary criminal charges and to prove to us that there is not a two-tier justice system.
“We ask all those who have stood with us until now to keep going. This phase might be over, but the battle for justice is not, and we will continue until those culpable are prosecuted.”
