Grenfell Tower fire - has it gone political?

Sam Russell · 16-06-2017 12:01pm #1

Has this fire gone political - or was it political from the start? The richest area of London doing things on the cheap for the poorest people.

1. When the fire started no-one appeared to know how many floors were in the building.

2. No-one appeared to know how many apartments were in the building.

3. Three days later no-one appears to know how many people actually lived in the building.

4. Official figures on day three give the number of dead at 17 with no figures for the possible number of victims - but unofficial figures given off the record by police and fire officers say about 150.

5. No-one appears to be responsible for anything - no-one from the council except Councilor Blakeman, who has been a champion for the residents for a long time.

6. No spokesman for anyone appearing on the media.

7. Minister responsible for Police and Fire spent yesterday at a commons committee on other business - saying he was only a wet day in office.

8. PM May snuck into the area and disappeared as quickly as possible and only spoke to the police. Jezza and Kahn spoke to the residents and took some abuse from the locals, but were strong on sympathy and resolve to see results of any enquiry.

9. Now the police are saying they will not be able to identify all the victims. They could start be listing the missing, suspected as being victims.

The cladding of that building cost £10 million, but no sprinkler system, and no proper fire inspection.

Ronan Point, a high rise block of flats, collapsed in 1968 as the result of a gas explosion in one flat on the 24th floor which brought down the whole corner of the block. As a result, gas was turned off in all such blocks. The block was strengthened but eventually was demolished in 1986. It was not collapsed with explosives but was forensically dismantled and examined. It was found that significant failures of construction existed in the building even after strengthening and could have collapsed in the storm of 1987.

Calculations on that building did not take account of wind loadings, nor the effect of open windows on that loading. It was a disaster waiting to happen.

Cladding these buildings with flammable material is a new disaster - but unfortunately it has already happened - despite warnings from the residents going back years. Let us hope action is taken immediately - new instruction to residents to get out fast, block wide fire alarms, and installation of sprinklers.

16-06-2017 12:10pm

Sam Russell wrote: »

Has this fire gone political - or was it political from the start? The richest area of London doing things on the cheap for the poorest people.

1. When the fire started no-one appeared to know how many floors were in the building.

2. No-one appeared to know how many apartments were in the building.

Thought that was cleared up fairly quickly since there was a recent renovation.

3. Three days later no-one appears to know how many people actually lived in the building.

I'm sure there's an official record but it's not like they're going to inspect all the time and the number is likely to be higher. If they did it would be "harrassment".

4. Official figures on day three give the number of dead at 17 with no figures for the possible number of victims - but unofficial figures given off the record by police and fire officers say about 150.

The attempt to manage and massage information could well backfire on the government.

5. No-one appears to be responsible for anything - no-one from the council except Councilor Blakeman, who has been a champion for the residents for a long time.

Contracting, outsourcing, subcontracting, all add to diffusing responsibility.

6. No spokesman for anyone appearing on the media.

Like who?

7. Minister responsible for Police and Fire spent yesterday at a commons committee on other business - saying he was only a wet day in office.[/quote
Not great.

8. PM May snuck into the area and disappeared as quickly as possible and only spoke to the police. Jezza and Kahn spoke to the residents and took some abuse from the locals, but were strong on sympathy and resolve to see results of any enquiry.

Sounds about right.

9. Now the police are saying they will not be able to identify all the victims. They could start be listing the missing, suspected as being victims.

Aye, the lack of information is shocking. Even with the London Bridge attack it was very, very poorly handled.

The cladding of that building cost ?10 million, but no sprinkler system, and no proper fire inspection.

Ronan Point, a high rise block of flats, collapsed in 1968 as the result of a gas explosion in one flat on the 24th floor which brought down the whole corner of the block. As a result, gas was turned off in all such blocks. The block was strengthened but eventually was demolished in 1986. It was not collapsed with explosives but was forensically dismantled and examined. It was found that significant failures of construction existed in the building even after strengthening and could have collapsed in the storm of 1987.

Calculations on that building did not take account of wind loadings, nor the effect of open windows on that loading. It was a disaster waiting to happen.

Cladding these buildings with flammable material is a new disaster - but unfortunately it has already happened - despite warnings from the residents going back years. Let us hope action is taken immediately - new instruction to residents to get out fast, block wide fire alarms, and installation of sprinklers.

Sprinklers are an absolute no-brainer. Getting out fast may not be. Though having a building that height with one staircase seems absolutely mental to me. Remember, the Tories are all about removing "red-tape" and elf and safety culture.

Sam Russell · 16-06-2017 12:20pm

This building is owned by Kensington and Chelsea Council. Where are those responsible for the building?

Number living in the building? Do they not pay rent?

There are 120 apartments, with 200 bedrooms - even I can do the sums. Locals say 600 lived there - but with two per room would put 400 in the building, but add children into the numbers and I can see why it could be 600.

I would believe 150 deaths would be a low guess as fire destroyed everything above the eighth floor. Anyone who stayed put as advised is likely dead.

16-06-2017 12:33pm

Sam Russell wrote: »

This building is owned by Kensington and Chelsea Council. Where are those responsible for the building?

There's a management company as well no? And there have been statements out.

Number living in the building? Do they not pay rent?

There are 120 apartments, with 200 bedrooms - even I can do the sums. Locals say 600 lived there - but with two per room would put 400 in the building, but add children into the numbers and I can see why it could be 600.

Is this wilful ignorance? There would likely be more than declared in many apartments. So 3 per room you're going with? Some apartments will have a fair bit more, some will be single people.
While they should be releasing more information than they are it's likely the final death toll won't be known for certain.

I would believe 150 deaths would be a low guess as fire destroyed everything above the eighth floor. Anyone who stayed put as advised is likely dead.

People escaped from higher than that. 100-150 would be my guess but I wouldn't be surprised if the confirmed number has a margin of error of around 10-20.

seamus · 16-06-2017 12:46pm

Sam Russell wrote: »

This building is owned by Kensington and Chelsea Council. Where are those responsible for the building?

Realistically you're probably talking about an office with 3 or 4 civil servants who manage this stuff. Unless someone directly goes and asks them for this information during public sector working hours (10am to 4pm, lunch 12-2), then you're not going to get any comments on it.

I'm sure they're talking about it themselves, coming up with all sorts of plans. But they're not going to voluntarily go to the media to discuss this. Who wants that hassle?

Also, there's very little any of the building managers could say that would be helpful. The fire has to be investigated, so discussing the ins and outs of the state of the building isn't really useful at this stage.

For example, we don't even know if standard fire suppression systems could have effectively contained this fire.

Number living in the building? Do they not pay rent?

There are 120 apartments, with 200 bedrooms - even I can do the sums. Locals say 600 lived there - but with two per room would put 400 in the building, but add children into the numbers and I can see why it could be 600.

Still hard to pin down numbers. Like I say, the manifest of renters is probably something that only a couple of civil servants have access to. And even then, all you have is the renters. They won't know who is living with them and it's likely that a lot of information will be out of date - children "inheriting" a home from a deceased parent but continuing to pay the rent in their name. Unless the council go knocking door to door every couple of months, the information they have will go stale.

You can make a best guess by shooting for five people (2 parents + 3 children) per apartment, but all it takes is a handful of apartments with ten people squished into them to massively inflate the numbers.

I would believe 150 deaths would be a low guess as fire destroyed everything above the eighth floor. Anyone who stayed put as advised is likely dead.

There is a big effort here to avoid throwing out numbers, but it seems pretty clear from the huge numbers of missing that the final toll is going to be enormous.

The police chief has stated that he "hopes" the number won't reach 3 figures. In reality what he's doing is putting that possibility out there so it's not quite as horrifying when it's confirmed.

vicwatson · 16-06-2017 12:47pm

Police confirm 30 deaths at present

Gatling · 16-06-2017 12:51pm

Has anyone other than Lilly Allen claimed 150+ deaths ,
I saw one lady claiming she saw 25 + people die in front of her eyes yet then made a claim of something else ,(somebody told her ),
To me it seems a lot of people are been given airtime with various media outlets and making pretty broad claims ,but very few people speaking seem to know anything definite about what and where and who's to blame ,

cml387 · 16-06-2017 12:51pm

Nobody is obliged to talk to the media, in fact in most operations it is forbidden to speak to the media and all media relations goes through a particular channel.

So it doesn't surprise me that no member of K and C is willing to be torn limb from limb by the Daily Mail.

ancapailldorcha · 16-06-2017 12:53pm

I was just debating whether or not to start a thread here.

I would definitely say that it's developed into a political issue. There is controversy with the way the building was constructed, the actions of Boris Johnson as London's mayor cutting back on the fire department and now Theresa May hasn't met any of the victims whereas both the Queen and Jeremy Corbyn have.

16-06-2017 12:53pm

Gatling wrote: »

Has anyone other than Lilly Allen claimed 150+ deaths ,
I saw one lady claiming she saw 25 + people die in front of her eyes yet then made a claim of something else ,(somebody told her ),
To me it seems a lot of people are been given airtime with various media outlets and making pretty broad claims ,but very few people speaking seem to know anything definite about what and where and who's to blame ,

They're doing their best to deflect and downplay in hope that anger dissipates IMO. It looks like the anger may just be simmering instead.

Sam Russell · 16-06-2017 12:56pm

Deleted User wrote: »

They're doing their best to deflect and downplay in hope that anger dissipates IMO. It looks like the anger may just be simmering instead.

I would say the anger is growing and is near exploding.

16-06-2017 12:56pm

Sam Russell wrote: »

I would say the anger is growing and is near exploding.

Yup, and hopefully it's well-directed this time unlike 2011.

Tabnabs · 16-06-2017 12:58pm

From a political perspective it has done a lot of harm to the Tories and to May in particular. Yesterdays quick stop off was shades of George Bush Jr overflying the Hurricane Katherine devastation in New Orleans in Air Force 1.

Labour feel they have the Tories on the back foot and there is a groundswell of support for them amongst the working classes (or more so opposition to the Tory outlook). Sadiq Kahn has taken quite a bit of abuse, but at least he's stood there and taken it. They'll use every opportunity to beat the Tories with this issue.

The best that can be expected to come out of this tragedy is that emergency services do not receive any further funding cuts and fire safety standards in building materials are both raised and vigorously enforced.

Apparently the building was used to home a lot of refugees and asylum seekers, so the numbers of people staying in the flats at any one time could be quite fluid. The likely reason we'll never know the full extent of the casualties.

judeboy101 · 16-06-2017 1:00pm

May's handlers controlled her meet and greet with emergency workers, big mistake. They should have exposed her to the venom of the residents and made her act calm and reassuring, taking all their anger but giving back comfort and strong action.

Corbyns people sent him to the people affected but wisely had it indoors where less aggro would happen and he did looked very good.

Khans people tried to do a corbyn but out in open and went bad enough.

Sam Russell · 16-06-2017 1:03pm

Tabnabs wrote: »

From a political perspective it has done a lot of harm to the Tories and to May in particular. Yesterdays quick stop off was shades of George Bush Jr overflying the Hurricane Katherine devastation in New Orleans in Air Force 1.

Labour feel they have the Tories on the back foot and there is a groundswell of support for them amongst the working classes (or more so opposition to the Tory outlook). Sadiq Kahn has taken quite a bit of abuse, but at least he's stood there and taken it. They'll use every opportunity to beat the Tories with this issue.

The best that can be expected to come out of this tragedy is that emergency services do not receive any further funding cuts and fire safety standards in building materials are both raised and vigorously enforced.

Apeparently the building was used to home a lot of refugees and asylum seekers, so the numbers of people staying in the flats at any one time could be quite fluid. The likely reason we'll never know the full extent of the casualties.

However there is an amazing sense of community and 'friendship' among residents, so the missing will be listed as such.

Mr.Micro · 16-06-2017 1:17pm

The response of May to this tragedy has been very poor. If anything it only highlights further her detachment and how inadequate she is as PM? Too late now, the Tories have been re-elected.

Why use cladding that was not fire proof, effectively creating a tree? It does not take much common sense to see how dangerous it is, to wrap a building with combustible material. If a fire started anywhere then it would spread like a forest fire along the cladding. The Borough Council are supposed to know this, they have experts or consultants. Incompetence and negligence?

A Little Pony · 16-06-2017 1:17pm

The human equivalent of caged hens. Of course it was a matter of time. sh*t living conditions, overcrowded, sh*t safety regulations. It's political because the poor got shafted in the name of saving money.

Graham · 16-06-2017 1:28pm

Sam Russell wrote: »

This building is owned by Kensington and Chelsea Council. Where are those responsible for the building?

It looks like responsibility for the building was taken from the council when the tenants invoked their rights to manage their own homes.

In the early 1990s, the tenants and leaseholders of the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea decided to pursue their legal right to manage their own homes. Following two separate ballots in 1994 and 1995, the Kensington and Chelsea Tenant Management Organisation (KCTMO) was established on 1 April 1996 and the responsibility for managing 9,760 properties passed from The Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea to the Tenant Management Organisation.

Source: http://www.kctmo.org.uk/main/8/about-us

storker · 16-06-2017 1:29pm

This is starting to sound a bit like the Cork Airport crash. Too many entities involved in providing a service, with unclear lines of responsibility and vital tasks going undone as a result.

Graham · 16-06-2017 1:35pm

storker wrote: »

This is starting to sound a bit like the Cork Airport crash. Too many entities involved in providing a service, with unclear lines of responsibility and vital tasks going undone as a result.

I'm not sure there is any uncertainty.

As far as I can see the responsibility starts and ends with KCTMO.

ancapailldorcha · 16-06-2017 2:23pm

Looks like they cheaped out on the cladding. From The Guardian:

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/jun/16/manufacturer-of-cladding-on-grenfell-tower-identified-as-omnis-exteriors

The Guardian wrote:

Material used in the cladding that covered the Grenfell Tower was the cheaper, more flammable version of the two available options, an investigation of the supply chain has confirmed.

Omnis Exteriors manufactured the aluminium composite material (ACM) used in the cladding, a company director, John Cowley, confirmed to the Guardian.

He also said Omnis had been asked to supply Reynobond PE cladding, which is £2 cheaper per square metre than the alternative Reynobond FR, which stands for “fire resistant” to the companies that worked on refurbishing Grenfell Tower.

Looks like they only saved £5,000.

pilly · 16-06-2017 2:29pm

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Looks like they cheaped out on the cladding. From The Guardian:

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/jun/16/manufacturer-of-cladding-on-grenfell-tower-identified-as-omnis-exteriors

Looks like they only saved £5,000.

Jesus H.

ancapailldorcha · 16-06-2017 2:30pm

I think at least one head will roll over this.

murphaph · 16-06-2017 2:41pm

To be honest I suspect this could just as easily happen to a clad luxury block in London or anywhere else. The cladding of older blocks is a relatively new phenomenon. There's an international pattern of cladding fires emerging now which should worry anyone involved and which needs urgent attention to come up with mitigation techniques for already clad tall buildings.

Note Germany is the only EU country which currently requires tall (over 22m) to be clad only in non-combustible materials. The EU need to act here and compel all member states to follow suit.

A Little Pony · 16-06-2017 2:58pm

It's so transparent how they don't want to just tell the truth that over 100+ people have died and are releasing it slowly over a number of days so to avoid a possible riot and violence outbreak.

Graham · 16-06-2017 3:15pm

A Little Pony wrote: »

It's so transparent how they don't want to just tell the truth that over 100+ people have died and are releasing it slowly over a number of days so to avoid a possible riot and violence outbreak.

It's probably better that they don't start guessing at numbers.

It's fairly standard practice across the globe that you don't start releasing official figures until you have official figures.

Sam Russell · 16-06-2017 3:31pm

murphaph wrote: »

To be honest I suspect this could just as easily happen to a clad luxury block in London or anywhere else. The cladding of older blocks is a relatively new phenomenon. There's an international pattern of cladding fires emerging now which should worry anyone involved and which needs urgent attention to come up with mitigation techniques for already clad tall buildings.

Note Germany is the only EU country which currently requires tall (over 22m) to be clad only in non-combustible materials. The EU need to act here and compel all member states to follow suit.

Graham wrote: »

It's probably better that they don't start guessing at numbers.

It's fairly standard practice across the globe that you don't start releasing official figures until you have official figures.

It is obvious they will not release 'official' figures ever, because they 'will not be able to identify everyone that died - or even know'. That appears to be the strategy they are currently going for.

Fire safety will move up the political agenda.

Graham · 16-06-2017 3:39pm

Sam Russell wrote: »

It is obvious they will not release 'official' figures ever, because they 'will not be able to identify everyone that died - or even know'. That appears to be the strategy they are currently going for.

If they don't know then it's not a strategy, it's a fact.

What they will know for a fact is the number of bodies recovered and that appears to be what is being released.

tea and coffee · 16-06-2017 3:46pm

What I wonder is why can't they release figures on
1. How many rescued : done
2. How many escaped of their own accord
3. Number of confirmed deaths: done.

Particularly 2. Would be useful . We keep hearing x rescued and y in hospital. Yes. How many in total got out with or without the help of fire services

pilly · 16-06-2017 3:48pm

tea and coffee wrote: »

What I wonder is why can't they release figures on
1. How many rescued : done
2. How many escaped of their own accord
3. Number of confirmed deaths: done.

Particularly 2. Would be useful . We keep hearing x rescued and y in hospital. Yes. How many in total got out with or without the help of fire services

How could they know that though?

tea and coffee · 16-06-2017 4:02pm

pilly wrote: »

How could they know that though?

Would they not keep a tally of people who got out/ ask them to make themselves known to be counted

pilly · 16-06-2017 4:16pm

tea and coffee wrote: »

Would they not keep a tally of people who got out/ ask them to make themselves known to be counted

In the middle of fighting a fire I'd imagine it was low on their list of priorities.

Sam Russell · 16-06-2017 4:26pm

tea and coffee wrote: »

Would they not keep a tally of people who got out/ ask them to make themselves known to be counted

As everyone knows, the poor people of Kensington and Chelsea do not count.

£5,000 extra for the cladding might have averted most of this tragedy.

Tabnabs · 16-06-2017 4:32pm

I see the far left are calling for the seizure of the "empty" Kensington mansions to be used to house the homeless from this disaster. That didn't take long.

Graham · 16-06-2017 4:33pm

Sam Russell wrote: »

As everyone knows, the poor people of Kensington and Chelsea do not cont.

£5,000 extra for the cladding might have averted most of this tragedy.

Who specified the cheaper cladding in order to save the £5k?

murphaph · 16-06-2017 4:33pm

I strongly suspect if this fire had happened 2 weeks ago that PM Corbyn would be calling the shots now.

pilly · 16-06-2017 4:36pm

murphaph wrote: »

I strongly suspect if this fire had happened 2 weeks ago that PM Corbyn would be calling the shots now.

Why? I'm genuinely interested, that's not a sarcastic question.

How has this fire got to do with Theresa May in particular?

Richard Hillman · 16-06-2017 4:40pm

The whole thing is horrendous. Both politcal sides on the blocks to start the blame game. People playing the PR game. Special interest religious groups trying to claim credit for the aftermath response. The media trying to play games in creating fake and skewed news. Celebrities trying to incite riots. Ambulance chasing lawyers wanting to represent compensation claims or advertise themselves doing it for free for profile.

Everything about this is toxic.

Nobody is coming out of this well bar the firefighters.

volchitsa · 16-06-2017 4:46pm

murphaph wrote: »

To be honest I suspect this could just as easily happen to a clad luxury block in London or anywhere else. The cladding of older blocks is a relatively new phenomenon. There's an international pattern of cladding fires emerging now which should worry anyone involved and which needs urgent attention to come up with mitigation techniques for already clad tall buildings.

Note Germany is the only EU country which currently requires tall (over 22m) to be clad only in non-combustible materials. The EU need to act here and compel all member states to follow suit.

Umm... Brexit?

Plus the official UK narrative is that the EU are a bunch of meddling Eurocrats sitting around thinking up annoying Elf N Safety wheezes to stop hard working companies from making money. :rolleyes:

I agree with the basic premise of your post otherwise.

Mr.Micro · 16-06-2017 4:52pm

pilly wrote: »

Why? I'm genuinely interested, that's not a sarcastic question.

How has this fire got to do with Theresa May in particular?

I am not answering for the poster murphaph, but methinks it would have added to the cuts issue after the Police citing cuts after the Manchester attacks. Then there might have been more of a swing to Labour, especially with the last minute undecided voters.

A Little Pony · 16-06-2017 4:58pm

Richard Hillman wrote: »

The whole thing is horrendous. Both politcal sides on the blocks to start the blame game. People playing the PR game. Special interest religious groups trying to claim credit for the aftermath response. The media trying to play games in creating fake and skewed news. Celebrities trying to incite riots. Ambulance chasing lawyers wanting to represent compensation claims or advertise themselves doing it for free for profile.

Everything about this is toxic.

Nobody is coming out of this well bar the firefighters.

All of this is very true. The whole 'Aren't Muslims brilliant for being human' as if most people don't know that if your a good person you are most likely to do good things.

murphaph · 16-06-2017 5:00pm

pilly wrote: »

Why? I'm genuinely interested, that's not a sarcastic question.

How has this fire got to do with Theresa May in particular?

I think there would be a lot of "guilty feeling would be Tory voters" who would vote Labour to ease their consciences, strange as that may sound.

The whole rich/poor divide couldn't be clearer in Kensington. I cannot see how this would not have helped Labour.

Impetus · 16-06-2017 7:17pm

I have lived in tower apartment buildings on the Continent for much of my adult life. It seems to me that English speaking countries are clueless in terms of designing, engineering, construction and management of condominium towers.

1. Each apartment should be fire resistant - designed to contain a fire lighting within an apartment for 30 to 60 minutes and stop it from spreading before the fire services deal with that apartment.

2. Every apartment entrance door (to public areas) should be lined on the inside with steel (even if it is otherwise a timber door) - about 1cm of steel - to resist fire. This is the norm in most continental countries. Similarly doors leading to fire exits on each floor should be steel lined to prevent a fire moving between floors easily.

3. Fire exit stair doors should be similarly insulated against fire to prevent its spread from floor to floor.

4. Floor and ceilings should be fire insulated.

5. Every apartment should have both temperature and smoke detectors to report a fire event. Smoke detection on its own causes many false alarms in a large building - as a result residents tend to ignore them - especially if it means the elevator system shutting down and 40 people having to climb 40+ stories of stairs to return to their apartment, after the false alarm. When a detector reports products of combustion (smoke) and high temperature, you have a fire - not a false alarm. Security staff should be trained to recognise the difference between a false alarm and a real fire at the monitoring station level.

6. It should be unlawful for fire alarms to be disabled in individual apartments or public areas.

7. Service shafts with windows into each apartment should not be allowed - as they have in some countries - a fire can spread especially with wind in seconds over 10 to 30 floors.

I live in an apartment building which is one of nine in a development. Each is about 20 stories tall + four parking levels underneath and a high ceiling drive in level for furniture and other deliveries. There is no way that a fire service in a relatively small city could deal with a major fire in this environment.

It is an issue of prevention rather than cure. an engineering issue to contain the spread until an outbreak is outed.

The best apartment regulations are in Monaco. They have had to be earthquake proof since 1955 or so, and in the newer apartments (ie newer than 25 years) typically have real time waste collection 24/24h - ie you dump your waste into a shaft, which gets vacuum transferred over to the local incinerator instantly. In return you get green electricity, hot water and chilled water. No need for air conditioning. All apartments have to be fire self contained. The fire services visit each each building every year - with a team of fire fighters - checking out hydrants, access routes (these have to be signed and kept free of parking cars etc) and the fire guys get to know each building intimately.

There is a recycling room for waste items too large to be vacuumed over to the incinerator system - and this consists of sorting bins. Above each bin is a self triggering fire extinguisher.

Leaving the car park for your apartment elevator - there are at least three thick metal doors. There are high powered fan systems and sprinklers in the car park. In a few of the newer buildings in Monaco, there is no underground parking - you bring your car up to the apartment in a car elevator and the garage space is under your control.

The best elevator system is one built outside the building so there are no elevator shafts. The elevators go up the wall outside, sideways at the top, and down on a track on the right hand side and multiple elevators operate one after the other - with no risk of a shaft carrying flames.

strandroad · 16-06-2017 7:29pm

Mr.Micro wrote: »

I am not answering for the poster murphaph, but methinks it would have added to the cuts issue after the Police citing cuts after the Manchester attacks. Then there might have been more of a swing to Labour, especially with the last minute undecided voters.

Also, "look at deregulation in practice".
Mandatory sprinklers laws were defeated as overly regulating.

pilly · 16-06-2017 7:37pm

murphaph wrote:

I think there would be a lot of "guilty feeling would be Tory voters" who would vote Labour to ease their consciences, strange as that may sound.

Yeah it makes sense. Thanks.

I'm quite interested in English politics but don't understand quite a lot of it.

A Dub in Glasgo · 17-06-2017 9:48am

This is political as the decisions which led to a supposedly G7 country having this kind of tragedy is absolutely political. Heads should roll over this but probably will not. The people in that block do not even register on the minds of the Tories

Graham · 17-06-2017 10:04am

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

This is political as the decisions which led to a supposedly G7 country having this kind of tragedy is absolutely political. Heads should roll over this but probably will not. The people in that block do not even register on the minds of the Tories

I think it's rather distasteful to see people turn this tragedy into something for political advantage.

No political parties decided to save £5k off a £10,000,000 project by specifying cheaper cladding.

ligerdub · 17-06-2017 11:52am

This absolutely has been politicised and it's pretty poor stuff.

The tragedy and suffering lies with those with family, friends living in that building, as well of course as those who lived there but survived.

Having said all that, it was interesting to see the reaction to two women who visited the scene.

1. The Queen of England, the head of state, who through no fault of her own, has lived in total luxury in massive dwellings but housing a relatively small number of people. She also has a land claim on every building in the country, or at least used to have. She was welcomed in a calm, courteous manner.
2. The current prime minister. She, as far as I know, has never laid claim to being a landlord over anybody.

I feel her serious awkwardness means she shouldn't be in the job. She's a terrible leader, but some of the stuff written about her has verged into the cruel and vicious, particularly on this issue.

Was she ever in a position to make calls on local council decisions re: fire safety? (Why has the local leader, aka the mayor, in a Labour council, walked away from this looking relatively unscathed? I wouldn't even target him for ire, but in the hierarchy of blame......)

I mean what specifically has she done on this issue to bring about the anger aimed at her this week?

Creeps like Lily Allen and Owen Jones, odious arseholes, are only too happy to use this tragedy to bash the Tory party. **** off.

Sam Russell · 17-06-2017 12:09pm

ligerdub wrote: »

This absolutely has been politicised and it's pretty poor stuff.

The tragedy and suffering lies with those with family, friends living in that building, as well of course as those who lived there but survived.

Having said all that, it was interesting to see the reaction to two women who visited the scene.

1. The Queen of England, the head of state, who through no fault of her own, has lived in total luxury in massive dwellings but housing a relatively small number of people. She also has a land claim on every building in the country, or at least used to have. She was welcomed in a calm, courteous manner.
2. The current prime minister. She, as far as I know, has never laid claim to being a landlord over anybody.

I feel her serious awkwardness means she shouldn't be in the job. She's a terrible leader, but some of the stuff written about her has verged into the cruel and vicious, particularly on this issue.

Was she ever in a position to make calls on local council decisions re: fire safety? (Why has the local leader, aka the mayor, in a Labour council, walked away from this looking relatively unscathed? I wouldn't even target him for ire, but in the hierarchy of blame......)

I mean what specifically has she done on this issue to bring about the anger aimed at her this week?

Creeps like Lily Allen and Owen Jones, odious arseholes, are only too happy to use this tragedy to bash the Tory party. **** off.

Well, the Tories have cut back funding for local councils that have caused the lack of resources that gave rise to this tragedy. Cladding the building in a flammable panelling is the responsibility of the commissioning body - the local Tory council - Kensington and Chelsea Borough Council.

T May as Home secretary cut back the number of Police by 20,000.

B Johnson as Tory Mayor of London cut back the fire service in London.

The housing in London for those needing social housing is non-existant, and it was said it will take four years to find proper housing for the victims.

The Tories have been very generous to their friends, cutting Corporation Tax and income tax for high earners. They have also been less than generous to those on 'benefits' - cutting them everywhere they can.

A Dub in Glasgo · 17-06-2017 12:09pm

ligerdub wrote: »

Why has the local leader, aka the mayor, in a Labour council, walked away from this looking relatively unscathed?

Not sure where you get your info from but...

The Tories have controlled that council for 53 years!

The Tories have 74% of the councillors

oscarBravo · 17-06-2017 12:10pm

Graham wrote: »

No political parties decided to save £5k off a £10,000,000 project by specifying cheaper cladding.

True - but that's just an exercise in framing. If you zoom out to the bigger picture, you start to see political parties who make a virtue out of eliminating regulations.

You see political parties who claim that red tape - you know, the sort of red tape that makes the cheaper cladding illegal in Germany - is invariably a bad thing, because it forces businesses to spend £5k more on a £10m project for elfnsafetygonemad, which apparently is stifling the economy.

How you frame it tends to depend on what you want to see, I guess.

Grenfell Tower fire - has it gone political?

Comments