Shouts for justice at Grenfell anniversary march before tower demolition begins
The Government announced earlier this year that the remains of the building will be brought down.
It is thought the earliest that demolition will start is September and the process is expected to take around two years.
Hundreds walked in silence through west London on Saturday evening before hearing the names of the 72 dead and speeches by campaigners, as the tower overlooked them.
Vice chairman of Grenfell United, Karim Mussilhy, who lost his uncle in the blaze, 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.'
The crowd shouted 'shame' and Mr Mussilhy continued: 'Not because justice has been delivered, but despite the fact it hasn't – before a single person has been held accountable, to make what happened disappear.
'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.'
The crowd faced the tower and chanted: 'Justice, justice.'
At the close of the speeches people filed in through the gates, which are rarely opened, and paid their respects at the base of the tower.
Attendees held each other and children wrote tributes on electric candles that were left on a podium between the flowers.
What remains of the tower has stood in place in the years since the disaster, with a covering on the building featuring a large green heart accompanied by the words 'forever in our hearts'.
The final Grenfell Tower Inquiry report, published in September, concluded victims, bereaved and survivors were 'badly failed' through incompetence, dishonesty and greed.
The tower block was covered in combustible products because of the 'systematic dishonesty' of firms who made and sold the cladding and insulation, inquiry chairman Sir Martin Moore-Bick said.
News of the Government's demolition decision earlier this year was met with criticism from some bereaved and survivors of the 2017 fire who expressed their 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 in an interview that she knew the meeting with 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, with words including 'hope', 'integrity', 'enough is enough' and 'justice' written across.
Around a dozen fire fighters stood to attention on each side of the road outside Ladbroke Grove station, facing the passing crowd with their helmets at their feet.
Some members of the Grenfell community walked up to hug them and shake hands.
After an hour of walking in silence the crowd gathered for the speeches outside Notting Hill Methodist Church.
The Government confirmed in February that engineering advice is that the tower 'is significantly damaged' and will get worse with time.
Separately, the Grenfell Tower Memorial Commission has been consulting on plans for a permanent memorial in the area 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 a memorial could be submitted in late 2026.
According to the Government's latest figures, published last month, there were 5,052 residential buildings in England which are 11 metres or taller identified as having unsafe cladding as of the end of April.
Fewer than half – 2,477 buildings or 49% – had either started or completed remediation works, with just a third – 1,652 buildings or 33% – having had remediation works finished.
Labour unveiled its remediation acceleration plan last year, pledging that, by the end of 2029, all buildings more than 59ft (18 metres) tall with unsafe cladding that are on a Government scheme will have been remediated.

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


South Wales Guardian
15 minutes ago
- South Wales Guardian
Environment Secretary urged to apologise for ‘misleading' Scottish water claims
Mr Reed came under fire after claiming that under publicly-owned Scottish Water 'pollution levels in Scotland are worse than they are in England'. The UK Government minister made the remarks to Channel 4 News as he dismissed calls for water services south of the border to be nationalised. Gillian Martin, the Scottish Government Secretary for Climate Action and Energy, said she was 'extremely disappointed' that Mr Reed had made the 'inaccurate and misleading comments regarding performance in Scotland' as he sought to 'dismiss out of hand the value of public ownership of a key asset like water'. She wrote to Mr Reed noting that Monday's report from the Independent Water Commission, led by Sir Jon Cunliffe, had found 66% of Scotland's water bodies to be of good ecological status, compared with 16.1% in England and 29.9% in Wales. And while she accepted the figures for the different countries were 'not calculated on the same basis', Ms Martin stated: 'It is clear that Scotland has a higher performance.' She insisted that 'much of the improvement' seen in water in Scotland was 'due to significant investment in the water industry to reduce pollution', which she said was driven by both Scottish Water and the Scottish Environment Protection Agency (Sepa). My letter to UK Gov Minister Steve Reed asking him to retract his false statements about the condition of water in Scotland. IWC was able to report we're in a much better position than rUk with 87% 'high' or 'good' status. Public ownership works. — Gillian Martin (@GillianMSP) July 22, 2025 Ms Martin told the UK Environment Secretary: 'Your comments sought also to undermine the idea of public ownership in the minds of voters, yet this is clearly what the people of Scotland continue to want. 'Indeed, it is the very fact of that public ownership and control which has allowed us to keep water bills lower for people, compared to what people with privatised water supplies in England have to pay.' Noting that Sepa had found 87% of the Scottish water environment to be of 'high' of 'good' quality – up from 82% in 2014 – she insisted this was 'in part, due to water being a publicly-owned asset, allowing for investment without shareholder returns or the pressure to make profits'. The Scottish Government minister went on to tell Mr Reed: 'I am therefore asking that you acknowledge that your comments were inaccurate, that you apologise publicly for making them, and seek to correct them.' Sir Jon's review of water services south of the border did not explore renationalising water companies – with the Government at Westminster opposed to this despite demands from campaigners for a return to public ownership in England. Mr Reed however warned that nationalisation would cost £100 billion and would slow down efforts to cut pollution. The UK Government has been contacted for comment.


North Wales Chronicle
15 minutes ago
- North Wales Chronicle
Environment Secretary urged to apologise for ‘misleading' Scottish water claims
Mr Reed came under fire after claiming that under publicly-owned Scottish Water 'pollution levels in Scotland are worse than they are in England'. The UK Government minister made the remarks to Channel 4 News as he dismissed calls for water services south of the border to be nationalised. Gillian Martin, the Scottish Government Secretary for Climate Action and Energy, said she was 'extremely disappointed' that Mr Reed had made the 'inaccurate and misleading comments regarding performance in Scotland' as he sought to 'dismiss out of hand the value of public ownership of a key asset like water'. She wrote to Mr Reed noting that Monday's report from the Independent Water Commission, led by Sir Jon Cunliffe, had found 66% of Scotland's water bodies to be of good ecological status, compared with 16.1% in England and 29.9% in Wales. And while she accepted the figures for the different countries were 'not calculated on the same basis', Ms Martin stated: 'It is clear that Scotland has a higher performance.' She insisted that 'much of the improvement' seen in water in Scotland was 'due to significant investment in the water industry to reduce pollution', which she said was driven by both Scottish Water and the Scottish Environment Protection Agency (Sepa). My letter to UK Gov Minister Steve Reed asking him to retract his false statements about the condition of water in Scotland. IWC was able to report we're in a much better position than rUk with 87% 'high' or 'good' status. Public ownership works. — Gillian Martin (@GillianMSP) July 22, 2025 Ms Martin told the UK Environment Secretary: 'Your comments sought also to undermine the idea of public ownership in the minds of voters, yet this is clearly what the people of Scotland continue to want. 'Indeed, it is the very fact of that public ownership and control which has allowed us to keep water bills lower for people, compared to what people with privatised water supplies in England have to pay.' Noting that Sepa had found 87% of the Scottish water environment to be of 'high' of 'good' quality – up from 82% in 2014 – she insisted this was 'in part, due to water being a publicly-owned asset, allowing for investment without shareholder returns or the pressure to make profits'. The Scottish Government minister went on to tell Mr Reed: 'I am therefore asking that you acknowledge that your comments were inaccurate, that you apologise publicly for making them, and seek to correct them.' Sir Jon's review of water services south of the border did not explore renationalising water companies – with the Government at Westminster opposed to this despite demands from campaigners for a return to public ownership in England. Mr Reed however warned that nationalisation would cost £100 billion and would slow down efforts to cut pollution. The UK Government has been contacted for comment.

Rhyl Journal
15 minutes ago
- Rhyl Journal
Environment Secretary urged to apologise for ‘misleading' Scottish water claims
Mr Reed came under fire after claiming that under publicly-owned Scottish Water 'pollution levels in Scotland are worse than they are in England'. The UK Government minister made the remarks to Channel 4 News as he dismissed calls for water services south of the border to be nationalised. Gillian Martin, the Scottish Government Secretary for Climate Action and Energy, said she was 'extremely disappointed' that Mr Reed had made the 'inaccurate and misleading comments regarding performance in Scotland' as he sought to 'dismiss out of hand the value of public ownership of a key asset like water'. She wrote to Mr Reed noting that Monday's report from the Independent Water Commission, led by Sir Jon Cunliffe, had found 66% of Scotland's water bodies to be of good ecological status, compared with 16.1% in England and 29.9% in Wales. And while she accepted the figures for the different countries were 'not calculated on the same basis', Ms Martin stated: 'It is clear that Scotland has a higher performance.' She insisted that 'much of the improvement' seen in water in Scotland was 'due to significant investment in the water industry to reduce pollution', which she said was driven by both Scottish Water and the Scottish Environment Protection Agency (Sepa). My letter to UK Gov Minister Steve Reed asking him to retract his false statements about the condition of water in Scotland. IWC was able to report we're in a much better position than rUk with 87% 'high' or 'good' status. Public ownership works. — Gillian Martin (@GillianMSP) July 22, 2025 Ms Martin told the UK Environment Secretary: 'Your comments sought also to undermine the idea of public ownership in the minds of voters, yet this is clearly what the people of Scotland continue to want. 'Indeed, it is the very fact of that public ownership and control which has allowed us to keep water bills lower for people, compared to what people with privatised water supplies in England have to pay.' Noting that Sepa had found 87% of the Scottish water environment to be of 'high' of 'good' quality – up from 82% in 2014 – she insisted this was 'in part, due to water being a publicly-owned asset, allowing for investment without shareholder returns or the pressure to make profits'. The Scottish Government minister went on to tell Mr Reed: 'I am therefore asking that you acknowledge that your comments were inaccurate, that you apologise publicly for making them, and seek to correct them.' Sir Jon's review of water services south of the border did not explore renationalising water companies – with the Government at Westminster opposed to this despite demands from campaigners for a return to public ownership in England. Mr Reed however warned that nationalisation would cost £100 billion and would slow down efforts to cut pollution. The UK Government has been contacted for comment.