NEW DELHI: A open investigation into the 2017 Grenfell Tower blaze in London, which claimed 72 lives, has largely blamed the crisis on failings by authorities, the construction industry, and companies involved in fitting the explosive cladding.
The Grenfell Tower flames, which took place on June 14, 2017, in a 23-store social housing complex in one of London’s wealthiest neighborhoods, is the deadliest in a residential building in Britain since World War Two.
In its last 1,700-page report, the inquiry blamed the businesses that manage the maintenance and renovation of the building, as well as local and national authorities, as well as regulatory bodies, and certain businesses, for fraudulently marketing combustible cladding as safe.
According to the examination report,” the fire at Grenfell Tower was the culmination of years of failure by central authorities and other body in positions of responsibility in the building business.”
For the past several years, victims ‘ survivors and their families have pleaded for accountability and criminal prosecution. According to American police, 58 people and 19 businesses and organizations are being looked into.
What did the enquiry earlier report position?
An earlier investigation statement from the investigation in 2019 revealed that the fireplace was the result of a malfunctioning kitchen in a fourth-floor room. The lights spread wildly due to the building’s roof covering, which had been added during a 2016 renovation.
This coating contained explosive metal composite material, which further fueled the fire.
The tragic accounts of those who died while waiting for volunteers and who had followed formal instructions to remain put sparked outrage nationwide and a reflection on the standards and how are low-income communities treated.
Retired determine Martin Moore-Bick, who led the investigation, identified several failings, including the weakness of security lessons from past high-rise fires and inadequate testing systems. The most critical comments were made against those accountable for the explosive covering and building’s renovation. Studio E, the engineer, primary company Rydon, and cladding sub-contractor Harley were singled out for extensive responsibility for the crisis.
Exova, a fire safety inspector, also received criticism for leaving the building in a “dangerous problem” after the renovation was complete.
Additionally, the Kensington and Chelsea council and the Tenant Management Organisation ( TMO), which managed local authority housing, faced heavy criticism. In the times leading up to the fire, they were accused of showing disregard for fire safety laws. The TMO’s concentrate on cost-cutting and its overstretched relationship with people created a” dangerous environment”.
The government received praise for its slow and unsatisfactory reply, but local community and volunteer organizations were applauded for their assistance during the tragedy.
The businesses that produced and sold the insulation and coating faced legal action. The firms named—Celotex, Kingspan, and Arconic Architectural Products ( a French company of U. S company Arconic ) —were accused of systemic dishonesty.
According to the examination report,” they engaged in purposeful and suffered strategies to control the screening processes, portray tested data, and mislead the market.”
The issue of explosive covering has raised alarms across Europe, with similar burns occurring in flat stones in places like Valencia, Spain, in February, and in Italy in 2021.
As of July, official information for Britain showed that 3, 280 buildings taller than 11 meters also had unsafe covering, with restoration work yet to start on more than two-thirds of these structures.
