The government’s decision to dismantle Grenfell Tower, the site of the tragic 2017 fire that claimed the lives of 72 people, has triggered intense backlash from the bereaved families and survivors of the disaster. The decision was announced by Deputy Prime Minister Angela Rayner at a meeting on Wednesday, where she confirmed that the 24-storey tower in west London, which has since become a grim symbol of the fire’s horrific toll, would be demolished to ground level.
For the families and survivors, this announcement has not only reopened painful wounds but also led to accusations that their voices have been ignored in the process. The Grenfell United group, which represents some of the families, voiced their deep dissatisfaction with the consultation process that preceded the decision. A spokesperson for the group stated that none of the bereaved or survivors present at the meeting supported the government’s decision, claiming that people’s grief had been dismissed and ignored in the decision-making process.
The meeting also revealed the deep emotions surrounding the decision, with some attendees expressing that Grenfell Tower is more than just a building to them—it is the final resting place of their loved ones. One family member shared a heartbreaking account, saying, “No one cares about this more than me, because I had just bits of bone to bury of my mother. That is where her soul is, where her ashes are. It’s in that building.” This sentiment reflects the painful reality many feel—that the tower has become a sacred site for those who lost their loved ones.
The debate over the future of Grenfell Tower has been ongoing since the fire, with some calling for its preservation as a lasting memorial to the victims, while others have argued that it should be replaced with a new space dedicated to honoring the lives lost. Since the fire, the building has served as a grim reminder of the failures that led to the disaster, from the use of flammable cladding to the lack of adequate fire safety measures.
Despite these ongoing discussions, the government’s decision to proceed with dismantling the tower has raised significant concerns, especially regarding the consultation process. The spokesperson for Grenfell United criticized the government for conducting a brief, four-week consultation with survivors and bereaved families, saying that the views of those most affected were not adequately taken into account. Many families feel that their right to have a say in how their loved ones are memorialized has been undermined by a decision that was made without meaningful input from them.
At the meeting, Deputy Prime Minister Angela Rayner acknowledged the gravity and sensitivity of the decision and stated that it was one she took “very seriously.” She explained that the government had made the decision based on the advice of engineers, who had expressed concerns about the structural integrity of the tower due to the extensive damage it sustained during the fire. Despite this, Rayner’s assurance that the decision was made with the best of intentions did little to ease the hurt felt by many families, who see the tower as a tangible connection to their loved ones.
Kimia Zabihyan, from the organization Grenfell Next of Kin, attended the meeting and noted that while Rayner appeared to approach the decision with sincerity, the emotional reaction from the bereaved was palpable. Zabihyan expressed understanding of the government’s concerns regarding the safety of the building but also emphasized that the decision had left many families deeply unhappy. For many, the tower is not just a structure, but a symbol of their loss, and its dismantling feels like a final severing of that connection.
Following the meeting, a government spokesperson stressed that Rayner was committed to keeping the voices of bereaved families and survivors at the heart of future decisions regarding the tower’s removal. The spokesperson confirmed that Rayner would meet with the families and survivors personally and would communicate her decision in writing, underscoring the deeply personal nature of the matter. However, the government’s insistence on moving forward with the demolition has sparked further division, with some families demanding a more thoughtful and inclusive approach to the memorialization of the victims.
Not all reactions have been negative. Mushtaq Lasharie, the chairman of the Lancaster West Estate Residents Association, which represents local residents living near Grenfell Tower, voiced strong support for the government’s decision. Lasharie, speaking to BBC Radio 4, explained that the local community had been waiting for closure for over seven years and that the tower’s continued presence served as a constant reminder of the fire and its aftermath. He stated that the majority of local residents supported the demolition, citing safety concerns and the emotional toll the building had taken on the community.
“We were waiting over seven-and-a-half years for closure,” Lasharie said, “and I hope this decision will bring closure. The tower is dangerous, and it reminds us every day of that tragic event.” For some local residents, dismantling the tower represents a step toward healing and moving forward from the trauma caused by the fire. Lasharie added that when they conducted a survey a few years ago, an overwhelming majority of the community members expressed a desire for the building to be removed.
Despite this local support, many bereaved families remain deeply opposed to the tower’s demolition. Emma Dent Coad, who was the Labour MP for Kensington at the time of the fire, expressed her concerns about the impact the decision could have on the families. She noted that while some residents and families were in favor of removing the tower, many others regarded it as a “sacred site” and felt that its removal would desecrate the memory of their loved ones.
The fire, which occurred on June 14, 2017, was caused by a faulty fridge in a flat on the fourth floor of the building and quickly spread throughout the tower due to the highly flammable cladding that had been used on the building’s exterior. This combination of failures in both the construction industry and fire safety regulations contributed to the tragic loss of life. A public inquiry, which concluded in 2022, identified a series of government and industry failures, including the widespread use of flammable materials on high-rise buildings, which have since been deemed a major factor in the disaster.
Many of the bereaved families continue to call for accountability, demanding that those responsible for the disaster be held criminally liable. While police and prosecutors have stated that no decisions will be made regarding potential charges until at least 2026, the families remain committed to seeking justice. Some of them have also been pushing for a memorial that reflects the full scale of the tragedy and the pain it has caused.
In 2023, the Grenfell Tower Memorial Commission published a report outlining its vision for a “sacred space” to honor the lives lost in the fire. The commission recommended the creation of a garden, a monument, and private spaces where the families could express their grief. A shortlist of five design teams for the memorial was announced last month, with a winning design to be selected this summer.
As the government moves forward with its decision to dismantle the tower, the question remains whether this will provide the closure that some members of the community are seeking or if it will continue to fuel division and grief. For many families, this is not just about the physical structure of Grenfell Tower—it is about how their loved ones are remembered, how their pain is acknowledged, and how justice can be served.
Stay ahead with the latest news on global innovation, leadership, entrepreneurship, business, and tech. Join us on WhatsApp or Telegram for real-time updates. Have a report or article? Send it to report@theinnovationtimes.com.
Follow us on X (Twitter), Instagram, LinkedIn, YouTube, Pinterest and Facebook for more insights and trends
