
Grenfell Uncovered on Netflix: First-rate journalism highlights how working class victims were left waiting for answers
Grenfell Tower
tragedy in London and the
Stardust
fire in Artane,
Dublin
, in that they were preventable calamities where the families of the dead were left waiting far too long for answers. There is also the fact that, in both cases, the victims were mainly working class. That element of the story is tackled head-on in Grenfell Uncovered, Olaide Sadiq's hard-hitting documentary about the 2017 London catastrophe, which claimed 72 lives. 'We were treated as if we didn't matter. We're working class, we're poor,' says one former resident of the west London tower block in comments that carry clear echoes of the official response to the Stardust blaze.
Grenfell and its aftermath are told via eyewitness testimonies, including those of Luana Gomes, who was 12 at the time and had to be put into an induced coma after she and her family descended 21 flights of stairs in pitch-black smoke. 'We covered ourselves with the blankets my dad had put in the bathtub. I grabbed my dog. Dashed for the stairwell,' she says.
The cause of the fire was the highly flammable cladding attached to the outside of the building in a penny-pinching makeover intended to address complaints that the tower had become an eyesore in affluent Kensington. One expert likens the covering to 'sticking a petrol tanker to the outside of the building'. Safer cladding would have cost extra – but not a lot, around £40 per renovated flat.
[
Grenfell Tower, where 72 people died, 'to be demolished', families are told
Opens in new window
]
By the time of the fire, this cladding was already prohibited across much of Europe (although the situation in Ireland is not specified). But not in the UK, where Conservative Prime Minister David Cameron had led a campaign against state regulation of the private sector. 'The driving ideology was deregulation,' says one contributor. 'The state had no place telling private businesses what they should or shouldn't do.'
READ MORE
Cameron had been replaced by Theresa May by the time of Grenfell, and she was widely criticised for not visiting the tower block the morning after the fire. To her credit, she is the only prominent politician to appear in the Netflix film, and she accepts her share of culpability. 'One of the issues was the way in which authority had failed to listen to [the residents],' she says. 'I merely exacerbated that by not going to see them first off. It was important given the scale of the tragedy.'
Were it possible, some politicians come off even worse than Cameron and May. There is Eric Pickles, now 'Lord Pickles' but, at the time, secretary of state at the Department for Communities and Local Government. At the official Grenfell inquiry, he urged officials not to waste his time – before confusing the death toll from Grenfell with that of the 1989 Hillsborough disaster in Sheffield.
[
'The fire broke our family': Grenfell was, above all else, a human tragedy
Opens in new window
]
'Seventy-two residents died. 96 was the number of the victims of the Hillsborough disaster,' says housing journalist Peter Apps. 'That number should sit with everybody. If it's not important, you'll mix it up with another disaster where lots of working-class people died.'
Grenfell Uncovered is important public service journalism, and it's a shame that the film couldn't resist a cheesy stunt at the end by appearing to imply that Luana's mother had died in the fire – only for it to be revealed at the end that she survives (though her unborn son did not). That one lapse aside, however, the film is first-rate long-form reporting. It makes you wonder, if Netflix were to apply the same journalistic rigour to Ireland, what might come wriggling out from under the rocks?
Grenfell Uncovered runs on Netflix from Friday, June 20th
Hashtags

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


Irish Times
6 hours ago
- Irish Times
Loyalist activist Jamie Bryson and former Sinn Féin MLA Daithí McKay cleared in Nama misconduct trial
Three men, including loyalist activist Jamie Bryson and former Sinn Féin MLA Daithí McKay, have been cleared at Belfast Crown Court of charges relating to misconduct in public office. Mr Bryson (35), from Rosepark, Donaghadee, Co Down, and co-accused Thomas O'Hara (41), from Lisnahunshin Road, Cullybackey, Co Antrim, were found not guilty of conspiracy to commit misconduct in public office. The charges related to a Stormont finance committee hearing that examined the sale of the National Asset Management Agency's (Nama) Northern Ireland assets in 2015. Mr McKay (43), from Loughan Road, Dunnamanagh, Co Tyrone – who was chairman of the Stormont finance committee at the time – was found not guilty of misconduct in public office. Daithi McKay outside Belfast Crown Court on Thursday. Photograph: Liam McBurney/PA Wire Mr Bryson and Mr McKay said there were questions for the Public Prosecution Service (PPS) to answer over why the prosecution was brought. Trial judge Gordon Kerr KC said he believed Mr Bryson had lied while giving evidence in the case, but said he was not involved in a criminal conspiracy. The long-running trial related to Mr Bryson's 2015 appearance before the committee, chaired by Mr McKay, which was investigating the sale of Nama's Northern Ireland assets to US investment fund Cerberus for £1.2 billion. The criminal inquiry opened after the publication of leaked Twitter messages between Mr Bryson, Mr McKay and the account of Mr O'Hara, who at the time was a Sinn Féin activist in north Co Antrim. Mr McKay quit as an MLA within hours of the messages being published in August 2016. Thomas O'Hara outside Belfast Crown Court on Thursday. Photograph: Liam McBurney/PA Wire Giving evidence to the committee in 2015, Mr Bryson used Assembly privilege to name former DUP leader Peter Robinson as a beneficiary of the sale. The then-first minister strongly rejected any suggestion he benefited from the deal. All other parties involved in the transaction also denied wrongdoing. Delivering his judgment in the non-jury trial on Thursday, Judge Kerr said: 'Despite his lies in court, I am sure that Mr Bryson was at all times communicating with Mr McKay. 'I am sure that the communications were designed to give Mr Bryson the best advice and guidance to maximise his chances of giving evidence. 'My analysis of the messages do not show any occasion where Mr McKay undertook to say or do anything outside his duties as chairman to ensure Mr Bryson's evidence would be in open session.' Clearing Mr Bryson, the judge said the evidence did not establish there had been a criminal conspiracy between him and Mr McKay. 'In the absence of an agreement, the conspiracy charge must fail.' Turning to Mr McKay, the judge said there was 'no doubt he deliberately misled the committee to ease the way for Mr Bryson's presentation'. The judge pointed out the Assembly had its own code of conduct and said there was 'no precedent for a prosecution in these circumstances'. 'I do not consider it my role to expand the offence,' the judge added. He said the evidence against Mr O'Hara 'fell well short' of anything which would convince him of his guilt. Asked outside the court about Judge Kerr's view that he had lied during his evidence, Mr Bryson said: 'Absolutely not, I told the truth about all of my evidence. 'I absolutely didn't; the fact is this, no crime, I am innocent, that is the end of the matter.' He added: 'To drag us through the gutters for 10 years and to top that off with a seven-week trial raises massive questions for the Public Prosecution Service.' Mr McKay's lawyer, Michael Madden, said his client had been vindicated by the judgment. 'Daithí McKay has already paid a heavy price for the decision of the PPS to prosecute this case. He was placed in a legal pressure cooker for 10 years and has had to endure a seven-week trial.' – PA


Irish Times
8 hours ago
- Irish Times
UK PM gives full backing to Reeves after she appeared upset in parliament
Mr Starmer told Virgin Radio he had spoken to the chancellor and she was 'fine', and her tears were as a result of a 'purely personal' matter. (Reuters)


Irish Times
9 hours ago
- Irish Times
Starmer backs ‘excellent' Rachel Reeves after chancellor's tears in House of Commons
Britain's prime minister Keir Starmer said he did not appreciate how upset Rachel Reeves was in the House of Commons, because he was focused on answering prime minister's questions (PMQs). The prime minister said all people could be caught 'off guard' by their emotions, but the chancellor had to deal with it while on camera in parliament. He said she was doing an excellent job, would remain in place beyond the next general election, and that they were both absolutely committed to the chancellor's 'fiscal rules' to maintain discipline over the public finances. UK Government bonds rallied and the pound steadied on Thursday, after reassurances from the prime minister about the chancellor's future. READ MORE The sight of Ms Reeves in tears on Wednesday, and the £5 billion black hole in her public spending plans as a result of the welfare U-turn, had spooked the markets, triggering a sharp sell-off of bonds, with the yield seeing the sharpest increase since US president Donald Trump's tariff plans shook up financial markets in April. Mr Starmer told Virgin Radio he had spoken to the chancellor on Wednesday evening and she was 'fine', and her tears were as a result of a 'purely personal' matter rather than the 'ups and downs of this week'. Ms Reeves was visibly upset as she sat beside Mr Starmer in the Commons on Wednesday, but he said: 'I actually personally didn't appreciate it was happening in the chamber, because I came in, I've got questions being fired at me in PMQs, so I'm constantly up at the despatch box and down. 'I think we just need to be clear, it's a personal matter, and I'm not going to breach Rachel's privacy by going into what's a personal matter for her.' He said that 'in politics, you're on show the whole time, there's no hiding place'. Ms Reeves was a 'great colleague, she's a friend of mine and I'll be working with her for a very long time to come'. 'But like all human beings, we're also personal. 'There are moments that catch us off guard and if you're in front of a camera for large periods of your life, unfortunately, that could be caught on camera in a way, if it had been anybody else at work, it would have not really been noticed.' The sight of the Chancellor in tears on the front bench and Mr Starmer's initial lack of public support for her caused jitters about the government's borrowing plans, as Ms Reeves's commitment to her rules to control spending are a key reassuring factor for the bond markets. Mr Starmer said: 'She is an excellent chancellor, she will be chancellor for a very long time to come, into the next election and beyond it. 'She and I are absolutely committed to our fiscal rules and the economic stability that is so important to this country, and that is the rock on which we build everything else. 'On that issue, Rachel and I are in lockstep, and have been for years.' – PA