Grenfell United accuses Government of ‘shameless betrayal' over bans probe pause
Grenfell United, which represents some bereaved and survivors, called the decision a 'U-turn (and) yet another glaring example of a Government that abandons its duty and shamelessly betrays those it vowed to protect'.
Following an announcement in parliament in February, investigations were believed to have been launched in March into 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.
All faced criticism in the final report of the inquiry into the June 2017 west London tower block fire, which claimed the lives of 72 people.
The Government said it was 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.
But the Metropolitan Police said neither the force nor the Crown Prosecution Service were consulted over the decision, and the Met said it learned of the investigations through media reporting in February.
The Met and CPS contacted the Government shortly afterwards and wrote formally in May 'to invite them to consider pausing their debarment investigations until any criminal proceedings have concluded'.
The force said: 'It is really important that nothing takes place that may risk prejudicing the police investigation or any future criminal proceedings.'
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 previously been described by families as 'unbearable'.
Grenfell United described the pause on debarment as 'a disgrace and an insult' to bereaved and survivors.
The group said: 'Whilst we will always put the criminal investigation first, it is abhorrent to hear, yet again, that the Government failed to do its basic due diligence.
'Whether through incompetence or outright indifference, this latest U-turn is yet another glaring example of a government that abandons its duty and shamelessly betrays those it vowed to protect'.
Announcing the pause on Thursday, the Government said: 'The Metropolitan Police and Crown Prosecution Service informed the Cabinet Office that continuing the debarment investigations could unintentionally prejudice the criminal investigation and any future criminal proceedings.
'To ensure the Metropolitan Police's criminal investigation and any future proceedings remain the priority, the Cabinet Office has paused its separate, non-criminal debarment investigations at the request of the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) and the Metropolitan Police.
'This decision has been made to safeguard the integrity of the Metropolitan Police's criminal investigation. '
The CPS said it had noted the Government's decision, adding: 'We remain resolute in ensuring the integrity of any possible future prosecutions and continue to liaise closely with the Metropolitan Police Service as their investigation works towards an evidential file being passed to us.'
Demolition work on the tower could begin in September. The decision to remove the building was criticised by some of the bereaved and survivors, who felt their views had not been considered.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
10 minutes ago
- The Independent
Retired Met officer to receive damages from Sky over false misconduct claims
A retired Metropolitan Police officer is set to receive 'substantial damages' from Sky to settle a High Court claim after it falsely said he used taxpayer money to facilitate sexual encounters with female colleagues. Barristers for former chief superintendent Simon Crick told a hearing on Wednesday that he felt forced to retire earlier than planned in November last year because of the claims, which were published in April 2024 by Sky Limited and Sky UK Limited. Reading an agreed statement, Nikila Kaushik, for Mr Crick, said the two entities are within the Sky Group and publish Sky News and its website. She said they were responsible for an online article published on April 3 last year, headlined: 'Police chief accused of using taxpayer money to book hotels for sex with female colleagues'. The article claimed that Mr Crick had committed professional misconduct and had been removed from active duty while misconduct proceedings were ongoing. Ms Kaushik said Sky had accepted 'that the allegations were false' and had agreed to pay Mr Crick damages and his legal costs. She said: 'The claimant was concerned that Sky News were given this false story in order that he would be harmed by this 'fake news'. 'Unfortunately, although the article was withdrawn shortly after publication, the allegations in it circulated widely and for some months. 'The claimant was deeply hurt by these allegations, which cast a shadow over his career. 'He felt that he had no option other than to retire earlier than planned. 'I am pleased to say that the defendants accept that the allegations were false.' Matthew McKenzie, for Sky, said that the organisation 'should never have made these allegations' and 'apologises for the harm caused'. He said: 'The defendants through me acknowledge that the allegations were false and apologise to the claimant for the damage to his reputation, and his distress. 'Sky acknowledges that it should never have made these allegations, which it now withdraws and apologises for the harm caused. 'Sky is happy to set the record straight and undertakes to this court never to repeat them.' At the end of the short hearing in London, Mr Justice Linden said he was 'pleased to see this matter has been resolved'. Addressing Mr Crick, who attended court, the judge said: 'We are grateful for the service you have given to the public.'
Daily Mirror
an hour ago
- Daily Mirror
DWP update on new bank monitoring powers to tackle benefit fraud
The DWP will soon be able to force banks to hand over private financial details in what ministers have called the "biggest fraud crackdown in a generation" Millions of benefit claimants could have their bank accounts scrutinised by the Government under contentious new "snooping" powers being introduced by Labour. The Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) will soon have the authority to demand banks disclose private financial details as part of what ministers are dubbing the "biggest fraud crackdown in a generation". The plans are in the spotlight as a minister gave an update on the looming powers. The extensive measures are included in the Fraud, Error and Debt Bill, which is currently progressing through Parliament. Ministers maintain that these changes will assist in identifying those falsely claiming benefits, such as people with savings exceeding £16,000 who are not eligible for Universal Credit. However, critics argue that the Government is establishing a "system of mass financial surveillance" that could inadvertently ensnare innocent people. Baroness Maeve Sherlock, a DWP minister in the House of Lords, disclosed new aspects of the policy this week – including the crucial provision known as the Eligibility Verification Measure, which will compel banks to comply with official data requests. This will enable DWP agents to request personal details from financial institutions, including a claimant's name, date of birth, sort code, account number – and importantly, whether the account appears to violate benefit eligibility rules. Baroness Sherlock said: 'The information that can be requested under an Eligibility Verification Notice will include basic information about the account holder, such as name and date of birth, and the sort code and account number. Agents may also request information about whether the account meets eligibility requirements.' The powers are set to be rolled out in stages over the next 12 months, starting with a small group of banks. Officials say the crackdown is designed to recover an estimated £1.5 billion over five years by tackling fraud and correcting errors early – before they spiral into large amounts of unmanageable debt. A DWP spokesperson said: 'Our Fraud, Error and Recovery Bill includes an Eligibility Verification Measure which will require banks to share limited data on claimants who may wrongly be receiving benefits – such as those on Universal Credit with savings over £16,000. 'As well as tackling fraud, the new powers will also help us find genuine claim errors sooner, stopping people building up unmanageable debt. This measure does not give DWP access to any benefit claimants' bank accounts.' However, the proposals have already triggered fierce opposition from privacy advocates, who argue the fresh powers extend well beyond what is required. Civil liberties organisation Big Brother Watch told The Independent: "It threatens to usher in an unprecedented system of mass financial surveillance." Baroness Sherlock also confirmed that the DWP will also gain powers to directly seize money from individuals using Direct Deduction Orders – similar to those used by HMRC and the Child Maintenance Service. She stated that the department anticipates making between 5,000 and 20,000 deduction orders annually. The DWP argues that these measures are an essential tool for swiftly recovering money where overpayments have occurred. However, critics worry they could result in hardship for families already grappling with the cost-of-living crisis. Work and Pensions Secretary Liz Kendall has maintained that the powers are necessary to "restore trust in the welfare system" – but opposition voices are expected to intensify as the bill approaches the statute books.
Sky News
2 hours ago
- Sky News
Sky News apology
On April 3, 2024, the article headlined 'Police chief accused of using taxpayer money to book hotels for sex with female colleagues' was published on the Sky News website and via the mobile app. Sky News reported that Simon Crick, a Chief Superintendent in the Metropolitan Police, had committed professional misconduct by using taxpayer money to facilitate sexual encounters with a number of female colleagues and had been removed from active duty while misconduct proceedings were taking place. These allegations were untrue. Mr Crick had not used taxpayer money to facilitate sexual encounters with female colleagues nor faced misconduct allegations accusing him of doing so. We also acknowledge that the allegation made in the article suggesting Mr Crick authorised expenses for female colleagues without authority is also untrue. We also acknowledge Chief Superintendent Crick was not removed from active duty in relation to these matters and neither was he the subject of misconduct proceedings in relation to such allegations. We recognise the significant impact, both personally and professionally, that the publication of this inaccurate story had on Mr Crick, and also the significant impact on his children and close family.
