I heard the fire engines were there within 6 minutes so at odds with the 2 hours later. I'm sure there was a video filmed from inside a flat that was well before 4:25 as well.
Exactly right,she has no right to stir people up like this with what is essentially heresay,i doubt very much she has been in on official briefings,trouble is people like a conspiracy without engaging their brainsDoesn't give her the right to start broadcasting information which hasn't yet been officially confirmed.
Of course smoke detectors go off before sprinklers (unless you've somehow got a fire with no smoke). If a sprinkler goes off, you've got wet furniture. No sprinkler, you've got a big fire, most of your furnishings in the house will be ruined by smoke, and what isn't will be ruined by the firefighters pouring water everywhere.I'm all for sprinklers in blocks of flats and high rise blocks but I'd question the value of it in a two storey house where smoke detectors are statutory. They would likely go off before the sprinklers. Guess it might limit the damage to the property.
In reply to point 1. It's all down to accountability and numbers, the fire service just can't police all these properties we are been ravaged by cuts, it's also to put the emphasis on the owner rather than someone else, basically the blame game and sloping shoulders, everyone is accountable for their own actions, it's your responsibility to make sure you got a fire safety plan etc.The news that the number of people that died in the Grenfell Tower Fire will rise above 100 is horrific and it is quite right that a public enquiry has been called.
I am not going to play a blame game now as it will become apparent that over time Labour, Coalition and Conservative governments, local authorities, the building industry as well as the Tower block owners will share little bits of whatever "blame" has to be passed around.
Such an enquiry will be made against a UK historical policy of "Passive" fire protection in which fire in a high rise block is contained in a room, flat or floor of a high rise building without it spreading to other floors or the whole building. That said, some fundamental questions have to be asked:
1. Why were Fire Safety assessments downgraded to " Self Assesments" in 2006? Also why did this move to self assesment not result in mandatory regular phyical fire safety inspections for all modifird high rise buildings and an appropriate level of random physical fire safety inspections for other buildings? By reducing most inspection to the review of a self assesment dicument for a building without visiting the building does not cut it for me I'm afraid.
2, The coroner for the 2009 Camberwell fire indicated in 2013 that fire and building regulations had to be reassessed, but this seems to have fallen down the cracks between the government and BRAC - the Building Regulations Advisory Committee a body run jointly by the Government and Local Authorities. Why was this not chased by a multitude of different bodies who knew off the coroner's findings?
3. Who on earth in the construction industry thought Polyethylene blocks covered in metal sheets could be used to clad an existing high rise building? Even if saturated in fire resistant chemicals the Polyethylene will burn at very high temperatures, worse. It could melt leaving the gap between the old concrete and metal outer cladding to act as a chimney to ferry the fire and heat up the building with the heat starting fires on other floors.
4. Is the use of a "Passive" fire protection policy for high rise building in the UK sufficient? Do sprinklers fire curtains and othef methods of fire protection need to be employed? Do high rise buildings need additional stairwells to provide a method of escape.
5. Public complaints about the safety of Grenfell Tower were clearly ignored by the owner and Local authority. How can this be improved and building owners forced to maintain a safe building? It is reported that power surges were a regular occurrence in Grenfell Tower. This is a major cause of fire in electrical appliances and equipment, yet they were seemingly ignored.
They're not trying to minimise it, they just don't know yet and won't for some time.
Some of the victims may never be identified and anyone who's seen those photos of what's left of the interiors of the flats can see why.
We can, but those numbers are being quoted now because the community are trying to say (as highlighted in the Lily Allen interview) that the authorities are trying to minimise what's actually happened. There's a lot of people saying this now and I'd be surprised if they're wrong.
they arent tryign to minimize it at all. they wont be able to identitfy who has died in a lot of cases or how many died for some time. imagine if your one of the families whos missing someone and dont know if they are in hospital ( unable to talk) or not alive.
I said that's what people in local community are saying, not me. I dont know if the authorities are downplaying it or what their motives might be and neither do you. I don't see a problem with those numbers being mentioned as part of a wider discussion of what the people affected are trying to tell us though.
they arent tryign to minimize it at all. they wont be able to identitfy who has died and wont be able to for some time. imagine if your one of the families whos missing someone and dont know if they are in hospital ( unable to talk) or not alive.
The problem wasn't the Fire Brigade's response. The main problem was the limited access available for the fire engines which limited the number of appliances that could be used to fight the fire in the critical early phase.First fire engine was 6 mins but what about the next 10 or 15 fire engines - some of them will have had to travel a long distance. The LFB is seriously depleted -Boris closed 10 stations, got rid of 29 fire engines and made over 600 fire fighters redundant- not a good idea in hindsight.