The decision to demolish Grenfell Tower has been met with strong criticism from victims' families and campaigners, who describe it as a "deeply sensitive" issue. The government has previously assured that no changes would be made to the site before the eighth anniversary of the fire, which tragically claimed 72 lives on 14 June 2017.
Deputy Prime Minister Angela Rayner confirmed the decision during a meeting with survivors and bereaved families on Wednesday night.
Campaigners React to "Painful" Decision
Grenfell Next of Kin, a group representing bereaved families, acknowledged that the decision followed a "thorough engagement process" but lamented the ongoing trauma it has caused. In a statement posted on X, the group said: "The lack of closure, continuous discussions, and retraumatisation of a divisive and painful debate bring nothing but further division. We need to discuss what will take the Tower’s place so it can be seen and remembered forever."
Despite the confirmation of demolition, the government has stated that further details will be shared by ministers before the end of the week.
Structural Concerns and Government Justification
Engineering experts have indicated that while the tower remains stable and does not pose an immediate risk to nearby residents, its condition is expected to deteriorate over time. The most recent government-commissioned advice from September recommended the removal of the structure or its severely damaged parts.
Conflicting Views Among Campaign Groups
The decision has sparked contrasting opinions among campaigners. Grenfell United, another prominent advocacy group, criticised Angela Rayner for failing to provide clear reasoning behind the decision and not specifying how many victims' families and survivors were consulted. "Judging from the room alone—where the vast majority were bereaved—no one supported her decision. Yet she claims it is based on our views," the group said in a statement. "Ignoring the voices of the bereaved on the future of our loved ones' gravesite is disgraceful and unforgivable."
Conversely, Grenfell Next of Kin recognised the difficulty of the decision, noting that previous Secretaries of State had avoided making a ruling despite the emotional toll on the community.
Local Labour MP Joe Powell defended Ms Rayner, stating on X that the decision followed "intensive engagement with our community" and was not taken lightly.
What Happens Next?
The future of the site remains a deeply contested issue. While some families and survivors believe the tower should remain standing until criminal prosecutions take place, others emphasise the need for a permanent memorial.
The final report of the Grenfell Tower Inquiry, published in September, concluded that the fire resulted from "decades of failure" by both government and the construction industry in addressing the risks of flammable materials on high-rise buildings. Inquiry chairman Sir Martin Moore-Bick stated that all the deaths were avoidable and that residents were "badly failed"—in some cases due to incompetence, but also because of "dishonesty and greed."
The Metropolitan Police have indicated that decisions regarding criminal charges related to the disaster will not be made until at least the end of 2026. If charges are ultimately brought forward, it would mark nearly a decade since the tragedy—an agonising wait for justice described by families as "unbearable."
Meanwhile, the Grenfell Tower Memorial Commission has been consulting on plans for a permanent memorial at the site. A shortlist of five design teams was recently announced, with a winner expected to be selected this summer. A planning application is anticipated by late 2026.
A government spokesperson stated: "The priority for the deputy prime minister is to meet with and write to the bereaved, survivors, and the immediate community to inform them of her decision on Grenfell Tower’s future. This is a deeply personal matter, and their voices remain at the heart of this process."
