2026/04/20 by Khadijah Na’eem · 1 voice
Business, Management and Accounting · Economics, Econometrics and Finance · Social Sciences · #Civil servant #Civil servants #Custodians #Government (linguistics) #Historical Economic and Social Studies #Political and Economic history of UK and US #Politics #Regulation and Compliance Studies #Tower #Work (physics)
paper · pdf · doi:10.5204/ijcjsd.4168
published in International Journal for Crime Justice and Social Democracy (Queensland University of Technology)
openalex publication_date 2026/04/20 · openalex created_date 2026/04/21 · openalex updated_date 2026/05/21
Research on the government’s role in the Grenfell Tower fire has tended to focus on the local authority that managed the building. While important, the Grenfell Tower Inquiry makes clear that the local authority was unaware of the dangers posed by combustible cladding. Meanwhile, Westminster civil servants were aware of the risks associated with combustible cladding materials but failed to protect the public from those dangers. Through a documentary analysis of individual civil servant testimonies and accounts to the Grenfell Tower Inquiry, this article sheds light on the behaviour and thinking of civil servants responsible for the government’s regulatory failures. It makes two main arguments: firstly, that civil servants had been conditioned to feel their work was not a government priority unless it served deregulatory interests. Secondly, this article argues that civil servants were not passive subjects in political processes but had characterised themselves as custodians of the free market, protecting it against what they perceived as unnecessary complaints and concerns about the risks of combustible cladding.