Will Grenfell Inquiry report provide justice?
Final report blames central and local government for 'decades of failure' as well as 'dishonest' manufacturers for the spread of the combustible cladding

More than seven years after one of Britain's most catastrophic fires killed 72 people in the Grenfell Tower in North Kensington, the final report of a long-running inquiry has outlined the causes of the fire and the severe failings that led to it.
It pointed to central and local government for "decades of failure" and to "dishonest" manufacturers for the spread of the combustible cladding that lined the high-rise building. It said they created a "path to disaster" which, combined with the "shortcomings" of the fire brigade, led to the tragedy.
Despite the criticisms, there are concerns that the report will do little to bring justice for those who died in the fire. The government is not legally required to follow the recommendations set out by the inquiry and any police prosecutions are unlikely to emerge for two to three years.
Subscribe to The Week
Escape your echo chamber. Get the facts behind the news, plus analysis from multiple perspectives.

Sign up for The Week's Free Newsletters
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
What did the commentators say?
A "web of blame" has emerged from the report with findings of "incompetence, dishonesty, malpractice and indifference", said Robert Booth in The Guardian, but there is "no Poirot moment" where a "single guilty party is exposed".
Instead, it "found fault with virtually everyone involved" in Grenfell's refurbishment in 2015 for turning the building into what the report labelled a "death trap", said Mark Landler in The New York Times.
The tragedy has "haunted Britain" ever since, added Landler, and it has become a "politically charged symbol of the costs of deregulation and of the persistent social inequality in Britain’s capital".
Yet there is unlikely to be a swift and simple road to justice. The victims' relatives "expressed satisfaction" that a "chain of culpability" had been established by the report, but remained "frustrated" that "people had not yet been brought to justice".
A free daily email with the biggest news stories of the day – and the best features from TheWeek.com
Despite the inquiry's findings, nothing has been "concluded in a real way", Yvette Williams from campaign group Justice4Grenfell said in The Mirror. Although recommendations have been made, for the families of victims and those who lost their homes it is "just another step" and "not a day of justice” until "real" punishment is dispensed.
Many of those affected had "lost faith in the process" before the delayed report was even published given the "agonising", said Ayshea Buksh at the BBC, and remain "sceptical" that it will serve any justice. They wanted "a police inquiry first before this enormous and expensive public inquiry", but will now face a further wait for any police action.
What next?
"Attention will next turn to Scotland Yard", wrote Booth in The Guardian, which said it would investigate "58 individuals and 19 organisations for possible crimes" including corporate and individual manslaughter.
The police said that it was necessary to wait for the conclusion of the inquiry before launching its criminal investigation and, given the complexity of the case, any charges are "unlikely to come before late 2026", said The Independent.
Prime Minister Keir Starmer said the government would "carefully consider the report and its recommendations" to ensure a similar disaster "cannot occur again". However, he said a "further and more in-depth debate" on the findings would be "held at a later date".
Richard Windsor is a freelance writer for The Week Digital. He began his journalism career writing about politics and sport while studying at the University of Southampton. He then worked across various football publications before specialising in cycling for almost nine years, covering major races including the Tour de France and interviewing some of the sport’s top riders. He led Cycling Weekly’s digital platforms as editor for seven of those years, helping to transform the publication into the UK’s largest cycling website. He now works as a freelance writer, editor and consultant.
-
The app tackling porn addiction
Under the Radar Blending behavioural science with cutting-edge technology, Quittr is part of a growing abstinence movement among men focused on self-improvement
-
Magazine solutions - August 29, 2025
Puzzles and Quizzes Issue - August 29, 2025
-
Magazine printables - August 29, 2025
Puzzles and Quizzes Issue - August 29, 2025
-
Inflation derailed Biden. Is Trump next?
Today's Big Question 'Financial anxiety' rises among voters
-
Why has the State Department scaled down its stance on human rights?
Today's Big Question The Trump administration has curtailed previous criticisms of human rights violations
-
Why do Dana White and Donald Trump keep pushing for a White House UFC match?
TODAY'S BIG QUESTION The president and the sports mogul each have their own reasons for wanting a White House spectacle
-
Why is Trump attacking Intel's CEO?
Today's Big Question Concerns about Lip-Bu Tan's Chinese connections
-
Will Trump privatize Social Security?
Today's Big Question Bessent calls savings program a 'back door' to privatization
-
How does the EPA plan to invalidate a core scientific finding?
TODAY'S BIG QUESTION Administrator Lee Zeldin says he's 'driving a dagger into the heart of the climate change religion.' But is his plan to undermine a key Obama-era greenhouse gas emissions policy scientifically sound — or politically feasible?
-
China is building the world's biggest hydropower dam. Is it a 'water bomb' aimed at India?
Today's Big Question River is a 'lifeline for millions' across Asia
-
Is Stephen Colbert's 'Late Show' cancellation an omen of something worse?
TODAY'S BIG QUESTION CBS said its decision to end the talk show was strictly business. But the timing and nature of the announcement has some observers wondering if there's more at play behind the scenes.