Extra funding to tackle unsafe cladding is too little too late for bankrupted leaseholders

Editorial: The remains of Grenfell Tower stands as a monument to continuing official indifference to every resident of a tower block with dangerous cladding

Grenfell may be visible for miles around but it seems not to have been noticed by Westminster and Whitehall (Getty)

Four years ago this June a fire broke out in a tower block in west London. The conflagration that ensued claimed the lives of 72 people, injured a similar number, and stands as one of the worst non-terror disasters since the Second World War. Although covered up, the charred shell of the building still looms across the skyline, and the inquiry into the causes of the tragedy is still not complete.

In that sense the remains of Grenfell Tower stands as an appropriate monument to continuing official indifference, both to the residents of that corner of London and to every resident of a tower block with dangerous cladding attached to it. These people have lived with the threat of immolation and, in some cases, financial ruin for far too long. To put it bluntly they are living with the prospect of being burned to death of bankruptcy. That 24-storey hulk in west London visible for miles around seems not to have been noticed by Westminster and Whitehall.

The announcement by Robert Jenrick, the secretary for communities and local government, of partial relief for people in such desperate circumstances is just that – partial and unsatisfactory. It is limited by size of building, type of materials and extent of remedial works. It is unbelievable that unsafe cladding of any kind should still be attached to buildings where people live and work. Like Grenfell Tower itself it should long since have been removed. Too many lives will remain blighted, and for some bankrupted ex-leaseholders it has arrived too late.