
Move faster on firms' public contracts ban, Grenfell survivor urges Government
Bereaved and survivors of the blaze will gather on Saturday in west London for the annual commemoration of the disaster which claimed 72 lives.
It is likely to be the final anniversary which takes place with the tower still standing in its current form, as demolition work could begin in September.
Former tower resident Edward Daffarn, who had previously raised safety concerns and predicted a 'catastrophic event' at the tower seven months before the fire, said this year's memorial will be 'all the more poignant' for that reason.
But Mr Daffarn is hopeful a new documentary about the blaze, due to air on Netflix next week, will spur Government efforts to take action against companies linked to fire.
He told the PA news agency: 'One thing that this documentary needs to do is it needs to put pressure on the Government to ensure that the companies involved are not able to access public funding, and I'm hoping that this documentary will accelerate that process.'
The Cabinet office confirmed in February that seven companies were facing possible bans – cladding firm Arconic, insulation firm Kingspan, former Celotex owners Saint-Gobain, fire inspectors Exova, design and build contractor Rydon, architect Studio E and subcontractor Harley Facades.
It is understood investigations were launched into all of them in March, looking into whether any engaged in professional misconduct for the purposes of the Procurement Act 2023, potentially leading them to be debarred from public contracts.
No timeline has been given for how long it might be before outcomes are known.
The final Grenfell Tower Inquiry report, published in September, concluded victims, bereaved and survivors were 'badly failed' through incompetence, dishonesty and greed.
The west London tower block was covered in combustible products because of the 'systematic dishonesty' of firms who made and sold the cladding and insulation, inquiry chairman Sir Martin Moore-Bick said.
He called out 'deliberate and sustained' manipulation of fire-safety testing, misrepresentation of test data and misleading of the market.
Mr Daffarn said the documentary will be the first 'that truly exposes and brings into people's living rooms' the 'cowardice of the corporates and how profit was put before people'.
He said; 'I hope that people who watch the documentary come to understand that although Grenfell happened eight years ago, there's a lot that still hasn't been resolved and, as a consequence, the companies involved with Grenfell just seem to want to brush everything under the carpet and carry on making money.
'And I think the documentary clearly exposes how little these companies and individuals have been held to account for their roles in Grenfell.'
On Government efforts, which Sir Keir Starmer first announced last September, to debar companies, Mr Daffarn said the process is 'too slow' and bereaved and survivors are 'still waiting' for companies to face consequences.
He said anyone left angered by the documentary could avoid buying products from companies criticised in the report to 'make sure that those companies understand that there is a consequence of their actions'.
Bereaved and survivors have long campaigned for criminal charges to be brought over the disaster.
Police and prosecutors have previously said investigators would need until the end of 2025 to complete their inquiry, with final decisions on potential criminal charges by the end of 2026.
The near 10-year wait for justice has been described by families as 'unbearable'.
The decision to bring the tower block down was confirmed earlier this year and prompted mixed reaction, with some people feeling their views had not been properly taken into consideration.
Sharing his own opinion, and acknowledging the difficulty others feel in seeing the tower regularly, Mr Daffarn said: 'I think the anniversary is made all the more poignant by the fact that this is the last time that we will meet with the tower in situ.
'We haven't got justice yet. It feels wrong to be pulling the tower down while so much remains unresolved.'
The Government said while some had hoped the building could remain in place as a reminder of what happened, others had reported this would be 'too painful'.
The demolition process is expected to take around two years.
A Government spokesperson said: 'As we approach the eighth anniversary of the Grenfell Tower tragedy, our thoughts remain with the bereaved families, survivors and the immediate community.
'This government remains committed to ensuring that what happened at Grenfell is never forgotten, and to delivering the change needed so it can never happen again.'
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Glasgow Times
an hour ago
- Glasgow Times
'Our homelessness services are under significant pressure'
We are aware that the number of people living in temporary homeless accommodation is at a record high, from reports provided by Glasgow's Health and Social Care Partnership. Currently, staff at the Health and Social Care Partnership are focusing on supporting people who are living in an emergency situation. At the moment, the demand for housing in Glasgow is much greater than the housing supply. There can be a delay of several years before people who are homeless can access a permanent house or flat. Homeless charities highlight that the cuts by the UK Department for Work and Pensions towards Personal Independence Payment and Universal Credit will lead to a further increase in homelessness. Decisions by the UK Government in the year ahead are likely to exacerbate our already stretched council services. The Scottish Government is mitigating the UK Government's Bedroom Tax. We know that this funding would be better spent tackling the housing crisis and the UK Government should scrap this tax. There is a Housing Transfer Incentive Scheme in Glasgow which can help release large housing association homes by encouraging people in 'under-occupied' properties with three rooms or more, to downsize. Tenants can access appropriately sized homes to meet their needs through specific housing support services. We can welcome the Scottish Parliament's Housing Inquiry by the Local Government, Housing and Planning Committee which has published a series of recommendations to support further collaboration by the Scottish Government with housing providers to deliver a national overarching Housing Emergency Action Plan by the end of this session. We need the Scottish Government to provide clarity on whether its additional funding for the Affordable Housing Supply Programme budget will ensure that it meets its target of providing 110,000 affordable homes by 2030. It is vital that housing is a priority and that the Scottish Government considers the importance of increasing the Affordable Housing Supply Programme budget. There has been significant partnership working undertaken to respond to the housing crisis. We can welcome the number of housing associations providing lets to tenants who are homeless across Glasgow. The Scottish Government can explore the opportunities available by increasing social investment in housing. The capacity of housing associations could be developed to increase the number of homes, especially for families, in our local communities. There is a need to ensure clarity for housing providers on the intended statutory requirement for homes to meet net-zero standards. Uncertainty is deterring housing development and this needs to be addressed to help tackle the housing crisis. We can support the appointment of Màiri McAllan as Cabinet Secretary for Housing to ensure that there is increased focus on tackling the housing crisis and providing energy-efficient homes for the future. It is vital that the new Cabinet Secretary can use all the powers at her disposal to address the housing crisis we face.


Scotsman
an hour ago
- Scotsman
SNP accused of 'pulling wool over public's eyes' in Spending Review row
Sign up to our Politics newsletter Sign up Thank you for signing up! Did you know with a Digital Subscription to The Scotsman, you can get unlimited access to the website including our premium content, as well as benefiting from fewer ads, loyalty rewards and much more. Learn More Sorry, there seem to be some issues. Please try again later. Submitting... The Scottish Secretary has accused SNP ministers of 'pulling the wool over the eyes of the public' by claiming Scotland will be short-changed by more than a billion pounds as a result of the spending review. Ian Murray said the Scottish Government was manipulating the figures and 'miscalculating'. He said the UK government was giving Scotland an extra £9.1 billion over the next three years. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad On Wednesday, Chancellor Rachel Reeves said her spending review would deliver an average block grant for Scotland of £50.9bn. Scottish Secretary Ian Murray | PA But Shona Robison, the SNP Finance Secretary, said the spending review treated Scotland as an 'afterthought'. Speaking earlier this week, she said: 'Had our resource funding for day-to-day priorities grown in line with the UK government's overall spending, we would have £1.1bn more to spend on our priorities over the next three years. In effect, Scotland has been short-changed by more than a billion pounds.' Mr Murray dismissed this argument. Speaking to The Scotsman from the Filmhouse in Edinburgh, which is reopening with help from a £1.5 million UK government grant, Mr Murray said: "I firstly say, with all due respect, that I might send her a calculator because that is not the case. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad "What she's doing is she's packaging up reserved department spend on things like defence and DESNZ [the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero] and including that in her calculations. "We're giving the Scottish Government £9.1bn more over this spending review, which is the biggest settlement in the history of the Scottish Parliament. And what she's doing is pulling the wool over the eyes of the public by miscalculating the spending review. "If she wants to calculate defence and reserved department spending as well in terms of the Scottish Government settlement, the MoD [Ministry of Defence] will spend a disproportionate amount of their 2.5 per cent of GDP on defence in Scotland, and that's not counted. But she's counting that in her figures to manipulate them, but she's completely and utterly wrong." Ms Robison said: 'The UK spending review document sets out in black and white that our funding for day-to-day spending is set to grow by only 0.8 per cent over the next three years, compared with 1.2 per cent average growth for UK government departments. This will short-change us by £1.1bn. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad

The National
2 hours ago
- The National
Where is scrutiny of UK's nuclear submarine plans?
In particular, there has yet to be any serious scrutiny of the proposal to build 12 nuclear-propelled submarines under the Aukus agreement, the military co-operation agreement between the US, UK and Australia. This scrutiny is especially necessary given that the Pentagon this week announced a review of its commitment to the agreement, raising questions about whether the billions of pounds committed by the UK Government are destined for the drain. The Aukus agreement's main aim is the material support of the Australian Navy in the Indo-Pacific, primarily by providing it with eight nuclear-powered submarines of the kind announced in the SDR. This means several of the 12 nuclear submarines will probably end up lurking around in the South China Sea, contributing nothing to the defence of the UK and raising regional tensions. READ MORE: Jeremy Corbyn says police 'picked on him' as Gaza protest case dropped No mainstream journalist or news organisation has questioned the Government over whether this is a sensible use of public resources or even a rational 'defence' strategy in any meaningful sense of the word. There has been no coverage of the fact the Government's watchdog the Infrastructure and Projects Authority (IPA) recently declared the manufacture of nuclear reactors to power the new Dreadnought submarines 'unachievable'. It gave the nuclear reactor project its lowest rating of 'red' in January of this year, as reported by The Ferret in February. While the IPA assessment rated the delivery of the new Aukus-class submarines as 'amber' ('facing significant issues requiring management attention'), it is widely assumed that the same nuclear reactors will power both the prospective nuclear-armed Dreadnought and Aukus submarines. In short, the Government's own infrastructure office just this year assessed that an indispensable component of all these submarines is not deliverable. This was hardly given a moment's airtime during the media furore on the SDR. (Image: PA) This alone is a serious indictment of Britain's elite journalists and indicates that their role has not been to question the Government's obscene military spending plans but rather to promote them. It therefore falls to citizens and civil society to raise the questions over serious doubts about the Government's costly nuclear plans. The Pentagon's review of its commitment to Aukus to determine if it aligns with the new administration's 'America First' agenda carries a weight of irony. Less than two weeks ago, UK Defence Secretary John Healey was espousing the supposed great benefits of the 'special relationship' with the US in terms of military co-operation and trade. Wednesday's development highlights just how little the UK gains from obsequiously aligning with US geopolitical interests, such as attempting to corral China in the Indo-Pacific. The unreliability of this relationship should compel a total reassessment of the predominant ideology about UK security, which currently prioritises being an arm of the US military in far-flung corners of the world over genuine domestic security. UK CND recently published an Alternative Defence, focusing on strengthening domestic social investment and a programme for common international security. The full report is on the UK CND website. The UK Government's irrational and incoherent military spending plans come at a time when the current generation of submarines based at Faslane are in an increasingly atrocious state of disrepair. Serious radioactive risk incidents at the naval base are increasing. The Vanguard nuclear-armed submarines are going on record-long assignments while their substitutes sit rusting in the repair docks. Crew are likely enduring awful conditions during six-month stints underwater, with some reports saying they ran out of food during the last assignment. Meanwhile, the Dreadnoughts that will supposedly replace these ailing vessels are unlikely to enter service for 10 years at least – if the reactors to power them can be built at all. The UK's nuclear superpower farce is unsustainable and a disaster waiting to happen. Those of us who understand this in Scotland must support the parties which oppose nuclear weapons in the run-up to the 2026 election, and keep up the pressure on Scottish parliamentarians to support the UN Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons. Samuel Rafanell-Williams is Scottish CND's communications officer