The houses aren't empty, they're used to house the latest weapon soon to be at the disposal of the British Army, invisible people.
Grenfell Tower Fire | 14th June 2017
- Thread starter Cheesy
- Start date
Looks like this won't beat Hillsborough for number of dead
But an awful thing to happen on these shores
But an awful thing to happen on these shores
Yup, the Commander saying that exact thing here...some movement in numbers possible (up or down) - but, not significant changes.
Jesus. I wonder what the eventual figure will be?
I know this is reductio ad absurdum but just imagine the situation where foreign and domestic investors have bought up 50% of the housing in the UK and almost no one can buy a house anymore.
Shouldn't be allowed.
Pretty sure that the last Labour government had warnings of these kind of fire hazards since 2000. Kier Starmer said on Andrew Marr that the failings were cross party.
So tired of hearing that we shouldn't 'politicize' things that are 100% political. Like after each terror attack when we're not supposed to ever talk about silly things like the policies that cause the damn things to happen in the first place. No, we should all shut up, send 'thoughts and prayers' and not ask too many awkward questions.
Because, quite simply, Corbyn's allusion to compulsory purchase orders misrepresented both their use and necessity in this situation. John McDonnell, the shadow chancellor, admitted that such a course would have required an emergency session of parliament so as to allow for the passing of new laws.
Is there any evidence to support the theory that a lack of time resulted in the failure of an inspection in this case?
Last edited:
What the apportionment is who knows, but yeah it does seem to be a cross party thing.
Boris Johnson's sister, on LBC today:
It's not 'weird', it's cnutish. That's what it is.
A very weird thing to say. Incredibly weird.
Victims of the Greenfell Fire
Those that died in the fire
Friends or relatives of those that died in the fire
Those that were in the fire, and were seriously injured, but survived
Friends or relatives of those that were hurt in the fire
Those that have been made homeless by the fire
Those that were in the fire but escaped
The Fire Fighters who went into the fire
Relatives of the Fire Fighters that went into the fire
Those that had other property that was destroyed in the fire
Those that live near Greenfell tower
...
Greenfell tower Milkman
Greenfell tower postman
...
Generic person being affected by house prices
...
Lilly Allen
Theresa May
So let me get this straight. Tower didn't look nice to the neighbors so they made it look nicer but saved money on refurbishing and cladding?
In theory, cladding is a good idea. Makes the building more energy efficient and makes it look nicer. In practice its killed 80 odd peopleSo let me get this straight. Tower didn't look nice to the neighbors so they made it look nicer but saved money on refurbishing and cladding?
Yeah but it was flammable right? And it was few pounds cheaper than inflammable ones?
As I heard.
Those firefighters.............Heros, every single last one of them.
In all these threads there's been a number of people seemingly trying to close down certain areas of discussions and its quite revealing of them i think
So let me get this straight. Tower didn't look nice to the neighbors so they made it look nicer but saved money on refurbishing and cladding?
Yeah. In theory flats should exist as compartmentalised concrete blocks essentially. If a fire breaks out, by design it should be contained into 1 flat. Putting flammable cladding on the outside stretching from flat to flat undermines this entirely. The fire spread on the outside via the cladding itself and gaps within the cladding allowed fire to follow streams of oxygen and jump multiple stories, resulting into a fat fecking inferno surrounding the place.
They surrounded a 24 story building with no sprinklers, no central alarm and only 1 stairwell; in fuel(polyethylene) which isn't recommended for buildings over 10m . As a cut price way to make the block look nicer for the people living in and people who want to live in the multimillion pound houses down the road. Thoughts on energy conservation were secondary, if any at all.
property unnoccupied for a 12 month period.
Temporary use to house the victims of Grenfell fire, until local permanent housing solution is available.
Owners to receive market rental value during use, to be paid by council.
Property returned to owners in same condition it was taken.
Not sure how legally you would achieve it, but it is worth investigating.
Even more so because she (Boris Johnson's sister) lives in RBKC. Although, like a lot of people who live in that area, she couldn't be more disconnected from the Grenfall victims if she tried.
Sounds perfectly reasonable. They could pass an emergency bill to make sure its legal if they needed.
That was a condition attached before approval.
When it was finished there was no mention of environmental/economic benefits in the public statement:
That statement included a quote from Nick Paget-Brown, the leader of the council, who remarked on how happy he was to see "first-hand how the cladding has lifted the external appearance of the tower".
That public statement after the completion made no reference to insulation, only discussing the change in the external appearance of the building.
Talking about any political considerations that led to the regulations is very different to the ranting and raving going on in parts of the press and social media.
I'm not convinced by the argument that the cladding was done primarily to make the tower look better for the rich people. It may be an added bonus for it to appear nicer on the eye, but I do believe that the primary concern is to reduce heating bills and also reduce things like damp. I say this because the 7 tower blocks in the New Lodge area of Belfast are in the process of getting the cladding (two have already been finished), but there's no rich people to appease. It's all working class people and not like K&C at all.
However, whether jazzing up shitholes is better than demolishing them and building nice new homes for people, is another matter.
However, whether jazzing up shitholes is better than demolishing them and building nice new homes for people, is another matter.
I think you are right. There are new minimum standards for private landlords to meet by April 2018. I'm not sure what this would mean for housing associations though as I'm not sure if they qualify as private landlords.
https://www.rla.org.uk/landlord/guides/minimum-energy-efficiency-standards.shtml
Indeed, I quite agree. There are even a number of studies on living in areas that *look* bad, and how that creates a horrible environment and attracts poverty.
At a cost of around £20-25k per resident, this cladding/refurbishment project isn't cheap either. It makes me question the idea of social housing in high-rise buildings.
But what needs to happen now is, as well as those that have lose their homes be given new ones, and the victims compensated, and a beautiful memorial created, what needs to happen is for this type of cladding being used elsewhere to be torn off... fire gaps in the cladding created (see the 1999 debate), and sprinklers installed.
Billions of pounds to be spent, because of lack of regulations.
I have to disagree with the last line - the Green drive behind this (and the funding provision) was massive. Not even allowed to question it.
It wasnt. For years tenants in council housing were complaining about the state of the blocks they were living in. The current drive to upgrade them is down to that as much as environmental considerations. Some were just knocked down like the godawful Heygate Estate, but most were refurbished.
I used to work with a few London area Housing Associations around financing for new blocks and so forth. The appeasing rich neighbours is nothing to do with it.
It was a Labour initiative to raise the standard of housing at the bottom that gotten entwined with Green commerce for me.
Why the maintenance admin departments of the Housing Assocs, ALMOs & TMOs are mainly staffed by incompetent lying cnuts is something they should look at too.
I think people are getting confused between servicing a car and cutting it's brakes.
There should have been nothing wrong with cladding the building.
There should have been nothing wrong with cladding the building.
My own all encompassing anti-cladding stance is based upon saying that after improved more reliable heating which tenants can learn to use more skilfully too (in my world) and with double glazing installed too, the external cladding does just become a cosmetic affectation. But you were never allowed to oppose it I would guess & I bet they pushed it everywhere too.
I'd look at the whole of this improvements programme because I reckon there is every chance it's been a massive crooked carve up between Landlords & their nameless investor friends operating in the shadows. Sums of money involved are very large in terms of easy money to be made & the adding of value on to anyone's balance sheet. Might be a relatively long game for the nameless investor, awaiting change in legislation, might be writing it off as a tax scheme - I don't really know anything about any of this, but I reckon there's deals been being cut everywhere. The admin of it all with mine was extremely fishy.
source: my own insane conspiracy theory, obviously
Last edited:
I'm in a council flat. It was clad recently. I'm grateful for the effect on my energy bills. Don't know if it's fire-resistant or not. Doesn't matter too much as my block is only two stories high and I could jump without a problem if push came to shove. I've got nothing at all of any value anyway since my previous landlord took it all.
any other work done by them, Denis?
No. They arrange with me for a council inspector to view my flat from time to time and ask if I have any problems - to which I reply "Hell No! And thanks so much for housing me after being street-homeless for 6 months!". I am genuinely hugely grateful to have somewhere to come home to. I've been in this flat for a year and a half now and still it feels so good to hear the lock engage when I come home and close the door behind me. My sanctuary. Feels so good!
aye right, I bet you do, well played,
edit - we never see ours unless there's some low-level bullying they want to dish out & they would never ever do anything as remotely courteous as the making of an arrangement to see us, I can't compute that idea at all, unless it involves them not turning up for it
Last edited:
How about if.....
Corbyn tells all those Labour MP's with Tax Payer funded flats in London to give them up until the victims can be rehoused.
Tory MPs as well, if you want.
No....Thought not.....
Do you mind me asking where you live?aye right, I bet you do, well played,
edit - we never see ours unless there's some low-level bullying they want to dish out & they would never ever do anything as remotely courteous as the making of an arrangement to see us, I can't compute that idea at all, unless it involves them not turning up for it
Clearly