Grenfell Tower Fire | 14th June 2017

finneh said:
I agree with you that the building clearly wasn't safe. However I imagine that everyone involved thought it was safe. I guarantee that if this cladding were a known ticking time bomb the contractors would not have used it. I know it's a great narrative that evil corporations put profits before safety but I really doubt that is the case after dealing with numerous contractors. It's more likely for example that the test in which the cladding passed isn't fit for purpose for this kind of building.

Whether that is abject negligence on the part of certain parties is yet to be ascertained and those parties should be punished if found culpable. If the material wasn't tested and the contactor used it anyway then they along with the fire officer should be punished. If the testing body knew about fundamental flaws in their testing likewise.

Unfortunately all Governments seem to only deal with problems like this once tragedies occur; not usually because of arrogance but more because of ignorance.

It won't satisfy people who want to see blood but there is a good chance no one is "guilty" of anything apart from ignorance. Ignorance of the testing procedure being flawed, ignorance of the product therefore being incompatible, ignorance of the significance of this and ignorant of the consequences of not acting on a report from several years ago.
Click to expand...

The two justifications for the cladding though are 'thermal insulation' & 'improved appearance'. Both of which with my non-expert instinctive hat on once again, I'm saying sound like a load of olde bollocks and should have been fecked off at source with the money being spent on something a lot more sensible.
 
finneh said:
I agree with you that the building clearly wasn't safe. However I imagine that everyone involved thought it was safe. I guarantee that if this cladding were a known ticking time bomb the contractors would not have used it. I know it's a great narrative that evil corporations put profits before safety but I really doubt that is the case after dealing with numerous contractors. It's more likely for example that the test in which the cladding passed isn't fit for purpose for this kind of building.

Whether that is abject negligence on the part of certain parties is yet to be ascertained and those parties should be punished if found culpable. If the material wasn't tested and the contactor used it anyway then they along with the fire officer should be punished. If the testing body knew about fundamental flaws in their testing likewise.

Unfortunately all Governments seem to only deal with problems like this once tragedies occur; not usually because of arrogance but more because of ignorance.

It won't satisfy people who want to see blood but there is a good chance no one is "guilty" of anything apart from ignorance. Ignorance of the testing procedure being flawed, ignorance of the product therefore being incompatible, ignorance of the significance of this and ignorant of the consequences of not acting on a report from several years ago.
Click to expand...

I'm a property insurance broker and my clients are continuously being sold cheap irresponsible insulation materials by construction companies.
 
Rams said:
I'm a property insurance broker and my clients are continuously being sold cheap irresponsible insulation materials by construction companies.
Click to expand...

All the products comply with BS EN standards which stands for British Standard European Norm, these are British standards harmonised with EU standards. The application of these products falls under Building Regulations standards. The companies making and selling these products, so long as they pass the relevant standard tests, are not at fault.
 
Classical Mechanic said:
All the products comply with BS EN standards which stands for British Standard European Norm, these are British standards harmonised with EU standards. The application of these products falls under Building Regulation standards. The companies making and selling these products, so long as they pass the relevant standards, are not at fault.
Click to expand...

If the refurbishment met British standards then why has the Government not tightened standards after the Lakanal House fire, which it promised to do? Is it not the case that polyethylene cladding is highly irresponsible & inappropriate to use in a 24 storey tower block?
 
Rams said:
If the refurbishment met British standards then why has the Government not tightened standards after the Lakanal House fire, which it promised to do? Is it not the case that polyethylene cladding is highly irresponsible & inappropriate to use in a 24 storey tower block?
Click to expand...

Yes these questions do need to be answered. I think Corbyn is right in what he is asking regarding the enquiry as that is the most important issue after the immediate aftermath. it will take years I would imagine.
 
Criminal negligence by Barwell?

That's got a reasonably strong political context too.
 
sammsky1 said:
Isn't that a contradictory statement? If you don't think May can handle this divided society we have become, how and who will control it?
Click to expand...
Controlled was probably the wrong word, but they could be managed better. Who? I don't know, but I don't think she's handled things well.
 
Classical Mechanic said:
Did he say it in as much words? I mean that indirect governmental failings or indeed criminal negligence shouldn't be protected.

It has to be proven as currently those are speculative accusations.
Click to expand...

For sitting on the Fire Regs report is it? Little bit awkward.
 
finneh said:
It won't satisfy people who want to see blood but there is a good chance no one is "guilty" of anything apart from ignorance. Ignorance of the testing procedure being flawed, ignorance of the product therefore being incompatible, ignorance of the significance of this and ignorant of the consequences of not acting on a report from several years ago.
Click to expand...
Funny how the people who slate others for taking political sides are the first to give the benefit of the doubt to the authorities involved. Forgive us for us our cynicism about those authorities' motives but we've had literally hundreds of years of 'glorious' British history from which to conclude that various ruling authorities don't give a f*ck about the rest of us except when it comes to factory, battlefield, times of crisis and the ballot box. It's bloody political, all right, and the spilled blood you try to shame us with is our own.
 
Classical Mechanic said:
But you have to know the full details regardless.
Click to expand...

I don't mind locking him up first, details later, tbh. Along with a few from Kensington Council & it's TMO. (I am just about joking)

LBC has uncovered a damning speech from former Housing Minister Gavin Barwell, which proves he failed to follow up promises to review fire risks in tower blocks.

Damning Speech Of Housing Minister Promising To Review Tower Block Safety

LBC's Political Editor Theo Usherwood has unearthed Mr Barwell, now Theresa May's Chief Of Staff, saying he would review the report into the Lakanal House tragedy.

But despite his promise, nothing was done - and yesterday, at least 12 people died when Grenfell Tower went up in flames in west London.
In a debate in the Houses of Parliament on 24th October last year, Mr Barwell was asked about his plans for building regulations following the Lakanal House inquiry.

His said: "We have not set out any formal plans to review the buildings regulations as a whole.
"However, we have publicly committed to review Part B following the Lakanal House fire."

Theo explains: "The key bit is Part B. They made the commitment to look at it. It never happened.
"The Tories are pointing out that Mr Barwell was only one Housing Minister. The post of Housing Minister has had a huge turnover of ministers - Mark Prisk, Stephen Williamson, Brandon Lewis and Mr Barwell.

"When you have that high turnover, no one passes on their previous brief as well as they could have done."
Government Has Failed To Act On Lakanal House Fire Report, Expert Says

A statement from the government insisted they had not "sat on" a fire safety review, saying: "Following the Lakanal House fire, the coroner recommended the guidance relating to fire safety within the Building Regulations was simplified.

"This work is ongoing – including with the publication of a survey in February this year – as our priority is to make sure we have the highest possible standards.

"The Coroner also asked Government to write to councils encouraging them to consider retro-fitting sprinklers, which we did shortly after."
Click to expand...
 
Ekkie Thump said:
It's in the second quote from the bottom.
Click to expand...
3rd you mean?

'The cladding looks lovely, it’s cheap, complies with regulations and gives the building a high environmental rating. But it’s a silent killer'

The sentence you refer to is the one that threw me, they are talking about when it was built there, as opposed to renovated. This line that I've quoted says the cladding met regulations.
 
montpelier said:
I don't mind locking him up first, details later, tbh. Along with a few from Kensington Council & it's TMO. (I am just about joking)
Click to expand...

What you have posted indicates a possible failure in procedure whilst The Tories claim to have been taking action, including a recommendation that may have or may not have been ignored. I can't really see any grounds to jail Barwell from that, which is why you need an inquiry to unpick it all.
 
afrocentricity said:
3rd you mean?

'The cladding looks lovely, it’s cheap, complies with regulations and gives the building a high environmental rating. But it’s a silent killer'

The sentence you refer to is the one that threw me, they are talking about when it was built there, as opposed to renovated. This line that I've quoted says the cladding met regulations.
Click to expand...

lol, I meant that one - my directions were terrible. I failed to notice the last line included a quote. I'm equally poor when it comes to lost drivers.
 
montpelier said:
Political in the sense of the relationship between feckwit Landlord & Tenants. Not actually about austerity to start with because of the funding for quite extensive improvements being in place. Maybe starts to be about austerity if we find out the block was also grossly overcrowded & the death toll is completely ridiculous even for a building of 150 flats where only a few escaped.

I was expecting an understated death toll somehow - that's it's only 17 four days after this is faintly ridiculous to start with. You wonder how many nameless people might have perished with barely a trace of them ever having existed. I wouldn't expect 100's in this category though.

Is it an event with a strong political context in societal terms that can be utilised legitimately when talking about that? I dunno, I can see both sides. But there does seem to be a defiinte disconnect between the community & those in authority who should be moving swiftly to help them. And where those in authority are undoubtedly chums of the feckwit Kensington Landlords.

If this was 200 white middle class house owners that had died, I don't think Government would be dicking about wondering what to do with the survivors.
Click to expand...

it is about austerity now. the amendment to the law that would have required the landlords to retrofit more stringent fire control measures was blocked by the government last year on the grounds that it was too expensive during times of austerity
 
SteveJ said:
Funny how the people who slate others for taking political sides are the first to give the benefit of the doubt to the authorities involved. Forgive us for us our cynicism about those authorities' motives but we've had literally hundreds of years of 'glorious' British history from which to conclude that various ruling authorities don't give a f*ck about the rest of us except when it comes to factory, battlefield, times of crisis and the ballot box. It's bloody political, all right, and the spilled blood you try to shame us with is our own.
Click to expand...

No one is giving the benefit of any doubt to authorities. But waiting until we have the facts before spewing venom about people whose hands could well be as clean as our own is not only unhelpful but dangerous.

If people want to rise against a political body who have been blatantly and willfully negligent then fair enough. But let's put the pitch forks back into the shed until we have the relevant facts at our disposal.
 
manc exile said:
it is about austerity now. the amendment to the law that would have required the landlords to retrofit more stringent fire control measures was blocked by the government last year on the grounds that it was too expensive during times of austerity
Click to expand...
I love it that anytime money has to be spent we seemed to have been plunged into austerity.
 
manc exile said:
it is about austerity now. the amendment to the law that would have required the landlords to retrofit more stringent fire control measures was blocked by the government last year on the grounds that it was too expensive during times of austerity
Click to expand...

The specific funding for Grenfell's 'improvements' would have been in place for yonks - which doesn't actually invalidate your very decent point, I know.

Maybe they didn't want to make things more difficult for those people trying to organise those improvements? Not that that doesn't look like the worst excuse ever now, and given their non-existent levels of competence...
 
afrocentricity said:
Do you ever turn it off? Ever take off the Tory hat and look at things as a human being? Maybe you do and maybe you have done in this thread but in line of what has happened and the rightful feelings of anger and frustration I just find it strange that you can be in here acting as some kind of Tory defence force....
Click to expand...

It is not a party political matter to have misgivings about a comment like that. And if you haven't been following the thread properly, you might want to refrain from making similarly misguided remarks.

If you wish to discuss the role which austerity might have played, i'm open to that. Personally, i think we're going to find that individual incompetence was the main culprit, along with the failure of the ''stay put' advice in a cladding fire of this kind. Human error and systemic flaws: much like with a tragic air accident, it will now be a case of whether industry and regulators learn the right lessons (as soon as possible ).
 
Nick 0208 Ldn said:
If you wish to discuss the role which austerity might have played, i'm open to that. Personally, i think we're going to find that individual incompetence was the main culprit, along with the failure of the ''stay put' advice in a cladding fire of this kind. Human error and systemic flaws: much like with a tragic air accident, it will now be a case of whether industry and regulators learn the right lessons (as soon as possible ).
Click to expand...
Or as Chris Morris put it in On The Hour, 25 years ago:
And Weekend P.M. Special tonight comes live from the besieged home of a maintenance man who will be speculatively blamed in a few hours’ time, reduced to a gibbering wreck by six months of press harassment, and found extremely responsible for everything in about a year from now, so that everyone else can carry on as if nothing had happened.
Click to expand...
 
Nick 0208 Ldn said:
It is not a party political matter to have misgivings about a comment like that. And if you haven't been following the thread properly, you might want to refrain from making similarly misguided remarks.

If you wish to discuss the role which austerity might have played, i'm open to that. Personally, i think we're going to find that individual incompetence was the main culprit, along with the failure of the ''stay put' advice in a cladding fire of this kind. Human error and systemic flaws: much like with a tragic air accident, it will now be a case of whether industry and regulators learn the right lessons (as soon as possible ).
Click to expand...
It's just an observation, from your posts on this and in general. It comes across like the console wars shite... I'm not in here to engage in debates about who to blame, tbh I'm looking at general info about the fire.
 
afrocentricity said:
It's just an observation, from your posts on this and in general. It comes across like the console wars shite... I'm not in here to engage in debates about who to blame, tbh I'm looking at general info about the fire.
Click to expand...

Bit unfair when there are countless more people on the other side with their conspiracies about the poor and how it's all about evil tories and cuts etc.
 
Vidic_In_Moscow said:
Bit unfair when there are countless more people on the other side with their conspiracies about the poor and how it's all about evil tories and cuts etc.
Click to expand...
In here? Goes to both sides, does that not go without saying? :confused:
 
Any time there's some sort of horrible event, and there's an inquiry, whether it be abuse at a care home or something else, they tend to find that it isn't just on that given day everything went wrong. They usually find systematic failures in checks and balances, where people who are supposed to check that something has been done, don't do it, but tick a box to say that they have. These awful incidents occur because there's a culture of don't see it, don't say it, don't sort it. Everyone passes the buck. And you'll often find, in the final report, that red flag after red flag has been ignored, whistle-blowers have been vilified, and the people at the top, who should shoulder the blame, because they are the ones who are ultimately responsible, have enough distance between themselves and the awful incident, that they can claim that they knew nothing about it, but that "changes must be made."

And it gets forgotten about, lessons aren't learnt, then it inevitably happens again. It's absolutely sickening.
 
Badunk said:
Any time there's some sort of horrible event, and there's an inquiry, whether it be abuse at a care home or something else, they tend to find that it isn't just on that given day everything went wrong. They usually find systematic failures in checks and balances, where people who are supposed to check that something has been done, don't do it, but tick a box to say that they have. These awful incidents occur because there's a culture of don't see it, don't say it, don't sort it. Everyone passes the buck. And you'll often find, in the final report, that red flag after red flag has been ignored, whistle-blowers have been vilified, and the people at the top, who should shoulder the blame, because they are the ones who are ultimately responsible, have enough distance between themselves and the awful incident, that they can claim that they knew nothing about it, but that "changes must be made."

And it gets forgotten about, lessons aren't learnt, then it inevitably happens again. It's absolutely sickening.
Click to expand...
That's why there needs to be an inquest where the people affected have a chance to be involved and ask questions.
 
Silva said:
That's why there needs to be an inquest where the people affected have a chance to be involved and ask questions.
Click to expand...
How does an inquest happen now that the leader of the country has called for a public inquiry? What's the protocol? If enough people march to Downing Street, will she change her mind? Do we do an e-petition? I honestly don't know :/
 
Something has to give, here.

This has massively heightened division, that was of course already high, just days after a general election.

I really don't think the current mood allows time for an inquiry/inquest to be sufficient.

Someone's going to have to go and it's probably May.
 
Are the firemen able to actually get in the building now?
 
SteveJ said:
Funny how the people who slate others for taking political sides are the first to give the benefit of the doubt to the authorities involved. Forgive us for us our cynicism about those authorities' motives but we've had literally hundreds of years of 'glorious' British history from which to conclude that various ruling authorities don't give a f*ck about the rest of us except when it comes to factory, battlefield, times of crisis and the ballot box. It's bloody political, all right, and the spilled blood you try to shame us with is our own.
Click to expand...
Sorry Steve I forgot to reply back to your other post but anyway this is a great post.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.