Grenfell Tower Fire | 14th June 2017

Thats a different issue, should you and i have sprinklers in our homes as well, how smoke and carbon monoxide alarms are required?
Sprinklers don't make much difference in small residential properties where evacuation times are very quick and the number of residents very small. But it's a completely different story in high-rise buildings where sprinklers help to contain fires, allowing more time to escape and protect the exit routes.

I believe it's compulsory in the UK for any new building over 30m to have sprinklers for this reason. There has been no law requiring retro-fitting of sprinklers on older buildings though.
 
I feel sorry for those in here who think anyone who didn't live in the tower or have someone they know die shouldn't be angered by this.

If you read any of the reports you'd hear the community has been angry at the tory council for a while and it should be no fecking surprise that the idea of children dying during the night because of poor maintenance on buildings under their control has people pissed off..but hey they must just be a Mob because they want their voice listened to :rolleyes:
 
Yes, properly maintained sprinklers & evacuation does look streets ahead of cladding, dopey alarms with a staying put policy.

What a total shambles of a journey to the (insane, really) 2nd destination & supposedly in the name of an improvements programme.
 
Sprinklers don't make much difference in small residential properties where evacuation times are very quick and the number of residents very small. But it's a completely different story in high-rise buildings where sprinklers help to contain fires, allowing more time to escape and protect the exit routes.

I believe it's compulsory in the UK for any new building over 30m to have sprinklers for this reason. There has been no law requiring retro-fitting of sprinklers on older buildings though.

Right but residential homes do still burn down and people do still die, would sprinklers have saved them as well?
I used to live in a 13 story block in London with no sprinklers and paid quite a bit in rent to live there. It had some sort of cladding on the outside. Seeing how the fire engulfed the building so quickly, im sure people in there would have died as well, even though it was a much small building.

And also the council are claiming the residents were offered sprinklers but refused their installation , if that is true who is to blame? Still the council, for not enforcing the installation or do residents need to shirk some responsibility
 
Right but residental homes do still burn down and people do still die, would sprinklers have saved them as well?
I used to live in a 13 story block in London with no sprinklers and paid quite a bit in rent to live there. It had some sort of cladding on the outside. Seeing how the fire engulfed the building so quickly, i sure am people in there would have died as well, even though it was a much small building.
It's usually a lack of working smoke detectors or blocked exits which cost lives in house fires.

And also the council are claiming the residents were offered sprinklers but refused their installation , if that is true who to blame? Still the council, for not enforcing the installation or do resident need to shirk some responsibility
I'd be careful with that line of reasoning. There will be attempts to shift the blame to victims, as there always is after major disasters - look at Hillsborough for the classic case.
 
Besides, were the residents sufficiently warned about safety being compromised in the absence of sprinklers? That is key.
 
Right but residential homes do still burn down and people do still die, would sprinklers have saved them as well?
I used to live in a 13 story block in London with no sprinklers and paid quite a bit in rent to live there. It had some sort of cladding on the outside. Seeing how the fire engulfed the building so quickly, im sure people in there would have died as well, even though it was a much small building.

And also the council are claiming the residents were offered sprinklers but refused their installation , if that is true who to blame? Still the council, for not enforcing the installation or do residents need to shirk some responsibility

It is a bit convenient to put the blame on the victims, many of whom are dead so won't be able to respond.

Also, worth pointing out that the Grenfell Action Group felt that proxy votes were being used: https://grenfellactiongroup.wordpress.com/2016/11/20/kctmo-playing-with-fire/

We believe that the KCTMO have ensured their ongoing survival by the use of proxy votes at their Annual General Meeting that see them returned with a mandate of 98% in favour of the continuation of their inept and highly dangerous management of our homes.
 
I'd be careful with that line of reasoning. There will be attempts to shift the blame to victims, as there always is after major disasters - look at Hillsborough for the classic case.

Which is why the question is should the council be blamed for not enforcing installation if they knew it would have improved safety
 
Which is why the question is should the council be blamed for not enforcing installation if they knew it would have improved safety

That isn't really the question.

''Wtf was your stay put policy all about?'' - is the question I'd be asking. Followed by ''are you fecking mad?''
 
May has shown herself up to me a massive bellend over the last two days.
She reminds me of the twats who claim to be amazing at presenting on The Apprentice, then stumble over their words when they get given the chance. For 6 weeks, she's been banging on about being strong and stable, but every time the opportunity arises to show it, she's conspicuous by her absence.
 
That isn't really the question.

''Wtf was your stay put policy all about?'' - is the question I'd be asking. Followed by ''are you fecking mad?''

I think the stay put police comes from the firefighters. The logic behind it is that the fire should be contained within a flat and not spread.

It'll have to be reviewed now as if in the future there's another incident in a tower block, then you can bet all the residents will evacuate after what happened at Grenfell.
 
May's position is untenable but where has dodgy dave been hiding? Seven years of tory austerity - six of which came under his rule.
 
Her last minute interview on Newsnight right now won't do her any favours. Not responding to the questions and more scripted responses as if she was still campaigning.

Ffs she's literally responding the same thing to different questions.
 
And also the council are claiming the residents were offered sprinklers but refused their installation , if that is true who is to blame? Still the council, for not enforcing the installation or do residents need to shirk some responsibility

There's a bit of a circular argument going on in this thread. As others have said, the residents association previously accused the landlords of using proxy votes to vote down proposals like that.
 
Her last minute interview on Newsnight right now won't do her any favours. Not responding to the questions and more scripted responses as if she was still campaigning.
If ever a situation calls to just drop the script and talk like an actual human being with compassion, this is surely it.
 
I think the stay put police comes from the firefighters. The logic behind it is that the fire should be contained within a flat and not spread.

It'll have to be reviewed now as if there's another incident in a tower block, then all the residents will ensure they evacuate after what happened at Grenfell.

I still don't like it. Just based on common sense.

''The building is on fire''

''OK, we'll stay here''

I'd like to know the origin of the principle as to what supposedly makes it a better idea, than getting away from the danger. and the linkages to building design that I suspect are entwined somewhere.

(opportunity to fight the fire I suppose)
 
The government acted on the coroners report of 2013 by writing to local authorities to consider putting in sprinklers. That would be under Eric Pickles watch who cut local government funding by 40%. So they would consider and conclude they didn't have any cash
 
Her last minute interview on Newsnight right now won't do her any favours. Not responding to the questions and more scripted responses as if she was still campaigning.

Ffs she's literally responding the same thing to different questions.

same as usual, then?
 
I still don't like it. Just based on common sense.

''The building is on fire''

''OK, we'll stay here''

I'd like to know the origin of the principle as to what supposedly makes it a better idea, than getting away from the danger. and the linkages to building design that I suspect are entwined somewhere.

(opportunity to fight the fire I suppose)
As far as I understand it, the 'stay in your flat' policy is primarily to allow room for firefighters to get to the blaze - otherwise they would be trying to go up the stairs, while hundreds of residents come down.
 
That isn't really the question.

''Wtf was your stay put policy all about?'' - is the question I'd be asking. Followed by ''are you fecking mad?''

But it is though, because people are trying to establish why it happened and how it could have been prevented.

Fire like these are supposed to be contained. And opening doors when you dont exactly know where a fire is can cause a blowback, so i guess that where that line of thinking comes from
 
As far as I understand it, the 'stay in your flat' policy is primarily to allow room for firefighters to get to the blaze - otherwise they would be trying to go up the stairs, while hundreds of came down.

Your building hasn't got enough stairs.
 
I still don't like it. Just based on common sense.

''The building is on fire''

''OK, we'll stay here''

I'd like to know the origin of the principle as to what supposedly makes it a better idea, than getting away from the danger. and the linkages to building design that I suspect are entwined somewhere.

(opportunity to fight the fire I suppose)

The design of buildings should contain the fire in the flat in which it originates, this system obviouslydidn't work.

Can you imagine the difficulty of 600 people leaving at the same time as firefighters move in?
 
But it is though, because people are trying to establish why it happened and how it could have been prevented.

Fire like these are supposed to be contained. And opening doors when you dont exactly know where a fire is can cause a blowback, so i guess that where that line of thinking comes from

So you favour continuing with the stay put idea?
 
Her last minute interview on Newsnight right now won't do her any favours. Not responding to the questions and more scripted responses as if she was still campaigning.

Ffs she's literally responding the same thing to different questions.


2 short clip below: Ouch, taking a pasting.

I don't have sympathy for her because she wants the job as PM, but she's had a very tough month: Manchester suicide bomb, London Bridge Knife attack, taking a hammering in the election, Grenfell Tower, Queens Speach and historic BrExit negotiations to start next week ...

It's not a 'normal period' for any PM and would test even the very best. She is still just a human being like the rest of us, and it must be taking a huge toll on her emotional stability.

Hope she copes through it and is getting support because the UK desperately needs a PM who can hold their shit together right now.




 
Last edited:
short clip: Ouch, taking a pasting.

I don't have sympathy for her because she wants the job as PM, but she's had a very tough month: Manchester suicide bomb, Knife attack on London Bride, taking a hammering in the election and now Grenfell Tower, Queens Speach and historic BrExit negotiations to start next week ...

It's not a 'normal period' for any PM and would test even the very best. She is still just a human being like the rest of us, and it must be taking a huge toll on her emotional stability.

Hope she copes through it and is getting support because the UK desperately needs a PM who can hold their shit together right now.
She was he one who chose to have the election and in the same month as Brexit negotiations. Yes, I have some sympathy with her for the rest but the political instability we're in now is her own doing.
 
The design of buildings should contain the fire in the flat in which it originates, this system obviouslydidn't work.

Can you imagine the difficulty of 600 people leaving at the same time as firefighters move in?

Shitely maintained, badly constructed in the first place (historical) draughty old buildings - but stay in your flat, we have put you a new door on, after all

Evacuation never caused 200 deaths from what I'm aware - despite the possibility of rampant blow-back from a fire no one can find or folks are wafting doors about in a menacing fashion.

Half the people are out by the time Cuthbert, Dibble & Grubb finally arrive <--- unfair facetiousness in the circumstances perhaps. (not perhaps, is)
 
short clip: Ouch, taking a pasting.

I don't have sympathy for her because she wants the job as PM, but she's had a very tough month: Manchester suicide bomb, Knife attack on London Bride, taking a hammering in the election and now Grenfell Tower, Queens Speach and historic BrExit negotiations to start next week ...
No doubt a tough week, but the hammering she's taken has largely been her own doing. On the terrorist attacks, she seemed to handle that fine. The rest of it, she has contributed to it by either poor timing or sheer incompetence.
 
No doubt a tough week, but the hammering she's taken has largely been her own doing. On the terrorist attacks, she seemed to handle that fine. The rest of it, she has contributed to it by either poor timing or sheer incompetence.

No doubt about it and I'm not questioning that. Personally, I don't think she is qualified to be a British Prime Minister and so refused to vote for her.

But we are where we are and like it or not, she is our leader, so I'm just recording my concern that this is a huge amount of stress for any person to handle, and it's in our national interest that she keep her shit together (until a time she is replaced), else the ramifications will be felt for a long time.

Not just in terms of BrExit negotiations, but also managing the very divided society that the UK has become right now: Tory/Labour, Remain/Leave, Rich/Poor, young/old, Muslim/Islamophobia, north/south, British born/Foreign resident, ... there are so many fault lines running through British society right now, and any one of them could explode into something which becomes uncontrollable.
 
Last edited:
The rest of it, she has contributed to it by either poor timing or sheer incompetence.

In what manner has incompetence on her part adversely contributed to the practical experiences of residents since the fire?

We've got a leader of a council, an official with responsibility for housing or planning, the firm which undertook the renovation and the TMO, yet the discussion has turned to the pace at which she walked out of a relief centre.

If we're going to individualise the disaster, the least we could do is show some intelligence regarding those called into question.
 
Last edited:
Was watching this at the time, but it was unclear at the time who they were attacking.

Disgraceful

 
2 short clip below: Ouch, taking a pasting.

I don't have sympathy for her because she wants the job as PM, but she's had a very tough month: Manchester suicide bomb, London Bridge Knife attack, taking a hammering in the election, Grenfell Tower, Queens Speach and historic BrExit negotiations to start next week ...

It's not a 'normal period' for any PM and would test even the very best. She is still just a human being like the rest of us, and it must be taking a huge toll on her emotional stability.

Hope she copes through it and is getting support because the UK desperately needs a PM who can hold their shit together right now.






How can someone so strong and stable not cope? I actually have a bit of sympathy for her. She's in way over her head and she obviously has terrible people skills.

Even my dad who's voted Tory since the financial crash has said 'she's stupid with the way she's handled this. And obviously stupid saying she could bring down immigration when it wasn't in her power to do so'. Apparently he may have swung to Corbyn now in the last few days, although he told me a week before election he was voting Labour and then voted Tory and got annoyed at my mum for voting Labour.

Cameron went for a reason though, this is an absolute nightmare time to lead the country. You follow through with Brexit you ruin the country, you oppose it you deny the popular vote. Then again soft brexit gives the easy compromise.