The announcement of the demolition of Grenfell Tower has sparked a spectrum of responses from campaigners, survivors, and bereaved families in London. The Deputy Prime Minister Angela Rayner took the decision on Wednesday night in a meeting, that has been described as a “deeply sensitive” one by some, while others have criticized the process as lacking transparency and failing to honor victims’ voices.
Grenfell Next of Kin, representing some bereaved families, acknowledged the weight of the decision, said, “The lack of closure, the continuous discussions and consultations, the retraumatisation of a divisive and painful debate brings nothing to the table except pain and further division. We want a discussion about what will go in the Tower’s place so it can be seen and remembered forever. We need to re-imagine a future and rebuild our broken shattered lives and our families.”
Meanwhile, Grenfell United, another campaign group, expressed disappointment, claiming that Rayner did not justify her decision during the meeting and had not clarified the extent of consultations with victims’ families. “Judging from the room alone – the vast majority of whom were bereaved – no one supported her decision. But she claims her decision is based on our views. Ignoring the voices of bereaved on the future of our loved ones’ gravesite is disgraceful and unforgivable,” the group said in a statement.
The government has previously assured that no alterations to the site will be made before the eighth anniversary of the disaster on June 14, 2025. Engineering experts have advised that while the tower remains stable for now, its condition will deteriorate over time, making its long-term retention unfeasible. The latest government-commissioned guidance from September recommended the removal of the structure, or at least the heavily damaged sections.
Local Labour MP Joe Powell defended Rayner’s stance, emphasizing that the decision followed extensive engagement with the community. “Following intensive engagement with our community… the decision to start planning for the Tower to come down has not been taken lightly,” he wrote on X.
Since the tragic fire in 2017, which claimed 72 lives, the remains of the tower have stood covered with a large green heart and the words “forever in our hearts.” While some bereaved families argue that the site should remain untouched until criminal prosecutions take place, others stress the need for a permanent memorial and healing.
The Grenfell Tower Inquiry, in its final report published in September, held both the government and the construction industry accountable for “decades of failure” in addressing the dangers of flammable materials in high-rise buildings. Inquiry chairman Sir Martin Moore-Bick condemned the use of combustible cladding, attributing it to “systematic dishonesty” by companies that manufactured and sold the materials. He further stated: “The simple truth is that all the deaths were avoidable and that those who lived in the tower were badly failed by authorities in most cases through incompetence but, in some cases, through dishonesty and greed.”
The road to justice remains long. The Metropolitan Police have indicated that decisions on potential criminal charges are not expected until late 2026, meaning that families could face nearly a decade-long wait for accountability. Many have called this prolonged timeline “unbearable.”
As discussions continue over the future of the site, the Grenfell Tower Memorial Commission is consulting on proposals for a permanent memorial. A shortlist of five design teams has been announced, with a final selection anticipated this summer and a planning application set for late 2026.
About Author
Leave a Reply