Community calls for justice eight years on from Grenfell fire
Survivors and bereaved relatives of the Grenfell Tower blaze have demanded justice following the eighth anniversary of the 2017 tragedy. The blaze left 72 people dead, including 18 children, and is still being investigated by the Metropolitan Police.In a few months' time, work will begin to take down the 23-storey block.Hundreds walked in silence through west London on Saturday evening before hearing the names of the dead and speeches by campaigners, as the tower loomed over them.
London monuments were lit up including the BT Tower and London Eye and the Crystal Palace transmitting station. In Greater Manchester Salford Civic Centre was lit green.There are concerns no-one has yet been prosecuted. Grenfell United vice chairman, Karim Mussilhy, lost his uncle in the inferno. He told the crowd: "Eight years have passed, eight years since the fire - lit by negligence, greed and institutional failure - tore through our homes, our families and our hearts."And still no justice has come. The truth is, there's almost nothing new to say because nothing has changed."As we stand here eight years on, the only decision this government has made is to tear down the tower - our home."He branded the disaster a "forgotten scandal".
"The tower has stood not just as a reminder of what happened, but of what must change - a symbol and a truth in the face of denial, of dignity in the face of power, of our resistance, of our 72 loved ones who can't fight for their own justice."And now they want it gone, out of sight out of mind, a clear skyline and a forgotten scandal."There were cries of "shame" and "justice" from the crowd.The final Grenfell Tower Inquiry report, published in September, concluded victims, bereaved and survivors were "badly failed" through incompetence, dishonesty and greed.On Sunday Kensington and Bayswater MP, Joe Powell, told the BBC's Inspirit with Jumoké Fashola: "The one thing I think everybody would agree on is that there should be criminal accountability.
"And of course we can't pre-judge how far up the food chain it will go, in terms of companies that were found culpable in the inquiry report, but that is the expectation."Leader of Kensington and Chelsea council Labour group, Kasim Ali, said he lived 500 metres (about 1,600ft) from the tower and saw "horrifying" things. He said: "My fear is that people's lives have been taken for granted and no-one cared about, let's say, communities who lived in a council-owned property, who lived in social housing. "There is stigma around it and I think they have been ignored."He said he wanted the legacy of Grenfell to be housing fit for human habitation, adding: "What we are seeking... is justice. Who is responsible for what happened to 72 members of our community that we have lost?"
News of the government's demolition decision this year was met with criticism from some bereaved and survivors of the 2017 fire who expressed upset and shock, saying they felt they had not had their views considered before the decision was taken.Deputy Prime Minister and Housing Secretary, Angela Rayner, later said she knew meeting those most closely affected was going to be "really difficult" and that there was "not a consensus" among everyone over what should happen to the tower.On Saturday, placards read, "This much evidence still no charges" and "Tories have blood on their hands. Justice for Grenfell".Large green papier-mache hearts were held aloft, had words including "hope", "integrity", "enough is enough" and "justice" written on them.Grenfell Tower Memorial Commission has been consulting on plans for a permanent memorial of the tower, with recommendations including a "sacred space", designed to be a "peaceful place for remembering and reflecting".It is expected a planning application for it could be submitted in late 2026.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Times
27 minutes ago
- Times
No concessions on benefits reform, Starmer tells rebels
Sir Keir Starmer has warned Labour rebels there will be no concessions on cuts to disability benefits as he vows to press ahead with reforming a welfare system he says is 'not working for taxpayers'. The prime minister said he has 'got to get the reforms through' as ministers prepare to publish legislation this week that is likely to prompt Starmer's biggest backbench rebellion yet. While ministers insist they are confident of avoiding defeat, there is nervousness in government after 170 Labour MPs raised concerns about reforms which will make it harder to claim personal independent payments (PIP), the main disability benefit. But Starmer insisted that even critics agreed that 'we've got to reform the welfare system', saying: 'The principles remain the same: those who can work should work; those who need support into work should have that support into work, which I don't think they are getting at the moment; those who are never going to be able to work should be properly supported and protected, and that includes not being reassessed and reassessed.' Speaking on his way to the G7 summit in Canada, Starmer said: 'We need reform and we will be getting on with that reform when the bill comes.' About 800,000 people will lose thousands of pounds a year under the reforms and MPs are alarmed by official estimates that a quarter of a million people will be pushed into poverty as a result. • Thanks to the PIP benefit I could work. So why remove it? Last week ministers offered rebels a £500 million 'olive branch', promising that those who lost PIP would have 13 weeks before their payments stopped, and that the same three-month transition period would also apply to 150,000 people who stand to lose a carer's allowance linked to a cancelled PIP claim. Ministers say this is longer than any other transition payment and will mean that no one loses out before 2027. They say there can be no change to the main thrust of the reforms, which will make it harder to qualify for help with everyday tasks such as washing and dressing. They are alarmed by the soaring cost of sickness benefits, which have risen by £20 billion since the pandemic and which will rise by another £18 billion by the end of the parliament. This is despite reforms that will save £5 billion. Asked if there would be any softening of the bill before a vote expected at the end of the month, Starmer said: 'We've got to get the reforms through. I've been clear about that from start to finish — the system is not working. It's not working for those that need support. It's not working for taxpayers. Everybody agrees it needs reform. We've got to reform it and that's what we intend to do with the bill.' • A quarter of Britons now disabled Leading rebels have dismissed last week's attempts at reassurance, saying they want a fuller impact assessment and an immediate review of PIP criteria. A wider review promised by ministers is not expected to be completed until after tougher rules come into effect in November 2026. Neil Duncan-Jordan, a leading backbench critic of the bill, agreed with ministers last week that the extra transition periods were 'not a concession', and confirmed he would vote against it. He said MPs should recognise the cuts 'will make disabled people poorer. No amount of warm words mask the reality — cuts don't create jobs, they create austerity'. Brian Leishman, another backbench leftwinger, attacked the reforms as 'a complete insult to disabled people and against everything a Labour government should ever do to people that need help'. Ministers believe that less hardline critics will be persuaded to fall into line by evidence that the government is listening to concerns. A suggestion by Kemi Badenoch, the Tory leader, that her party would vote against the bill is also seen as helpful by party managers who say Labour MPs will not want to walk through lobbies alongside Conservative MPs. An extension of free school meals to all pupils on universal credit has also helped as ministers have pointed out that this will lift 100,000 children out of poverty, twice the number pushed into poverty by welfare cuts.
Telegraph
an hour ago
- Telegraph
We must listen to the Baltic States. The Russian hybrid threat is growing
During his visit to London last week, Nato Secretary General Mark Rutte issued this dire warning about the threat of Russian aggression: 'Russia could be ready to use military force against Nato within five years. Let's not kid ourselves, we are all on the Eastern flank now.' Rutte warned that Russia produces more ammunition in three months than Nato manufactures in a year and spotlit Chinese technology's critical role in reconstituting Russia's military arsenal. Rutte's stark warning aimed to snap European countries out of their state of complacency but received a mixed reception on the continent. As Russia helplessly watched the destruction of some of its most-prized strategic bombers and struggles to gain a decisive offensive advantage in eastern Ukraine, Rutte's framing seemed hyperbolic to many in Western Europe. For the Baltic States, however, Rutte's rhetoric was not nearly strident enough. Due to his past support for the Nord Stream-2 gas pipeline and sluggish approach to increasing defence spending as Dutch Prime Minister, Rutte was already an unpopular figure in the Baltic States. Rutte's latest comments reawakened those critiques as they depicted Russia as a long-term danger rather than an urgent threat to Nato's security. The Baltic States have compelling reasons to be frustrated with Rutte's incrementalism. By illegally transiting its shadow fleet of oil tankers through the Baltic Sea, weaponising migration across land borders and carrying out disruptive cyberattacks, Russia has demonstrated that it is on a war footing with the Baltic States. By dismissing these aggressive actions as mere hybrid threats, Nato risks trivialising an existential threat to the cogency of its alliance. The mood of frustration in the Baltic States is especially pronounced because of the long build-up to Russia's current escalations against them. When I spoke to senior Estonian officials last month, they argued that Russia never truly viewed the Baltic States as sovereign after they restored their independence in 1991. As Estonia pushed for Nato membership during the 1990s, Russian ultranationalists began issuing apocalyptic threats. After earning a plurality of votes in the 1993 legislative elections, LDPR leader and ultranationalist firebrand Vladimir Zhirinovsky warned Estonians to flee to Sweden on fishing boats and threatened to deport the Estonians who stayed home to Siberia. But instead of being recognised for presciently warning about the Russian threat, the Baltic States were all-too-often accused of crying wolf. Even after Russia displayed its true hand by illegally annexing Crimea in 2014 and launching a full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022, the Baltic States still struggled to get their message heard. In response to tightening sanctions against Belarus, President Alexander Lukashenko warned in May 2021 that he would allow drugs and migrants to flood into European Union (EU) territory. Lukashenko's threats came to pass as illegal migrants overwhelmed Latvia and Lithuania's border defences in the autumn of 2021. Despite the scale of this threat, the EU refused to finance the construction of a border wall on Lithuania's frontiers. In response to the unresponsiveness of key Nato countries to their concerns, the Baltic States have taken matters into their own hands. From announcing 5 per cent of GDP defence spending targets to Lithuania's investment of $1.2 billion in border security with Belarus and Russia, three of Nato's smallest member states are setting a positive example for the rest of the alliance. These states are also trying to steer Nato towards committing to a firmer response to security threats that fall below the threshold of conventional war. Their argument is that Russia's hybrid threats are steps on an escalation ladder that could lead to full-scale war. Lithuanian officials justified this contention by arguing that shadow-fleet ships could escalate from cutting undersea cables to destroying liquefied natural gas terminals and use disruptive GPS jamming to down civilian aeroplanes. Based on its track record, Russia would maintain a level of deniability around these aggressive actions and any Baltic retaliation could lead to an invasion. As Nato's Article 5 security guarantees do not clearly extend to hybrid threats, former Estonian president Toomas Hendrik Ilves and former Lithuanian foreign minister Gabrielius Landsbergis recently called for the creation of a new permanent discussion forum on hybrid threats and the potential construction of a Baltic regional security organisation with robust military capabilities. In the European Parliament and Nato gatherings, Baltic officials are calling for European countries to re-evaluate their risk aversion in confronting Russian aggression head-on and to more thoroughly sanction the financial infrastructure that supports the shadow fleet. The efficacy of Ukraine's cross-border operations and the limitations of Russia's retaliatory capacity has caused some Baltic officials to view an exclusive focus on deterrence as obsolete. Ahead of the Nato summit in the Hague later this month, there will be a major focus on Ukraine's future within the organisation. Time should also be devoted to addressing the concerns of the Nato alliance's three most vulnerable and committed participants.
Telegraph
an hour ago
- Telegraph
Keir Starmer: I'll face down rebels on benefit cuts
Sir Keir Starmer has faced down Labour rebels on his welfare cuts package, insisting the reforms must be pushed through. The Prime Minister said the welfare system was not 'working for taxpayers' and gave no indication he was prepared to offer new concessions to angry backbenchers. A package of £5 billion in annual savings from the disability and sickness benefits bill was unveiled earlier this year, including cuts to the personal independence payment (PIP). Legislation unveiling the specifics of the changes is expected to be published this week before a crunch vote at some point before Parliament breaks for summer recess next month. More than 150 Labour MPs have signed a private letter indicating opposition to the welfare cuts, in what has become the biggest rebellion of Sir Keir's premiership to date. Downing Street advisers have identified the vote on the measures as the most politically challenging issue facing the Government in the coming weeks. The Prime Minister was asked, during a trip to Canada for the G7 summit, whether he was confident the disability benefit cuts would pass Parliament. Sir Keir replied: 'We've got to reform the welfare system. Everybody agrees with that proposition. So we've got to do that basic reform. It doesn't work for those that need support and help into work and it doesn't work for the taxpayer. 'So it's got to be reformed. The principles remain the same, those who can work should work. Those who need support in to work should have that support in to work which I don't think they are getting at the moment. 'Those who are never going to be able to work should be properly supported and protected. And that includes not being reassessed and reassessed. So they are the principles, we need to do reform and we will be getting on with that reform when the Bill comes.' The Prime Minister also offered up little chance on late changes to the package when asked if more concessions were to be expected. Sir Keir said: 'Well we have got to get the reforms through and I have been clear about that from start to finish. The system is not working, it's not working for those that need support, it's not working for taxpayers. Everybody agrees it needs reform, we have got to reform it and that is what we intend to do.' The Treasury will be loath to lose the £5 billion savings from the package, which were announced to help Rachel Reeves, the Chancellor, restore her fiscal headroom in the spring statement in March. Critics on the Right insisted the reforms did not go far enough, given the sickness benefit bill is expected to continue ballooning by billions of pounds in the years ahead. But the reforms have ignited a fierce backlash from on the Left, with Labour backbenchers putting their names to a private letter to the Chief Whip voicing private opposition. The letter reportedly has signatures of more than 150 Labour MPs. Whether all of those potential rebels end up voting against the measures remains to be seen. The ability of Number 10 and Number 11 to hold the line has been challenged by the decision to reverse winter fuel payment cuts, an about-turn which cost £1.25 billion.
