What about the fire in Fife Scotland in 2000? That that Red Tory Johnny Prescott as Deputy PM had cabinet responsibility for?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/201...-high-rise-building-cladding-ignored-decades/
Politicians should stop trying to throw shit at each other and get on with sorting out the multitude of cock-ups over decades layered one on top of another that resulted in this disaster.
You'd like to think so wouldn't you.I have no confidence things will change.
The phrase ´´Lessons will be learnt´´ will make its umpteenth appearance.
Unfortunately its usually a case of ´´Lessons have been forgotten´´or as you say political blame allocation.
Surely accountability comes with responsibility or perhaps things are different in the civil service ?
Which council or construction firm would not use the cheapest legal material they could to complete any building, tunnel (etc, etc)? Expensive items are only used when demanded by the customer - e.g. a marble floor, seriously large windows, use of rare expensive hard woods (etc, etc).
The fact that the cladding material was deemed legal when it wasn't is the major issue here.
There are a stack of other issues, mind, including: "Are fire safety standards up to scratch?" This includes The number of stairwells in a building, fire door provision, fire curtains to stop the spread of smoke, whether we can we continue to rely on "passive fire" protection in multi-occupany housing developments or are sprinkler systems required, electrical system provision (lots of power surges in the weeks preceding the fire), failure to correctly protect recently installed gas pipes and the management of reported safety issues in high rise buildings.
If the first hadn't happened the fire would not have spread at the speed it did. The second lot may have started the fire or turned a rapidly spreading fire into a disaster.
Which council or construction firm thinks it's acceptable to clad high rise tower blocks in flammable materials just to save a few quid? There are lots of valid points being raised about tower block design, safety doors etc but seriously what is the rationale behind wrapping these blocks in combustible material other than 'its cheap'?
Have they established that the Council knew, or should have known, that they were cladding the tower blocks in combustible materials?
What about the fire in Fife Scotland in 2000? That that Red Tory Johnny Prescott as Deputy PM had cabinet responsibility for?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/201...-high-rise-building-cladding-ignored-decades/
Politicians should stop trying to throw shit at each other and get on with sorting out the multitude of cock-ups over decades layered one on top of another that resulted in this disaster.
now isnt that the big question?
If they did know, then they are culpable
If they didnt know buthadnt specified non flamabke material, they are culpable
If they didnt know because they specified an nonflamable material but the contractor used a flamable one then they are not culpable but the building inspector might be and the contractor is.
Corbyn, rightly or wrongly, generalised that council cuts mean fewer inspections. May then specifically blames Blair for cladding - it's absolutely disgusting as successive governments have not heeded warnings. You've gone back to 2001. The Knowsley Heights fire in 1991 featured cladding. Complacency has been the consistent feature. Here's a quote from a BRE report for the government in 2002: “very few people are killed or injured from fire who are elsewhere than on the fire floor” and “most deaths or injuries on floors other than the fire floor are as a result of smoke”. “The evidence acquired for this project leads to the conclusion that the measures currently called upon through Approved Document B are still commensurate with the risk." May was not just politicising but personalising it in an utterly dishonest way.
And getting rid of flammable cladding will not be enough as simply it does not need cladding for fire to travel up the outside of buildings (or across or down).
His deputy will take his placeKensington and Chelsea Council leader Nick Paget-Brown has reportedly just quit.
Nope he's gone as wellHis deputy will take his place
A man called Rock Hugo Basil Feilding-Mellen
That's the thing though, prior to 2006 you either used consituant materials that all passed the limited combustability tests or you built a section of wall and brunt it to prove the combined material construction also passed the tests. After 2006 a 'desk-top survey' was introduced that was supposed to provide a risk assesment from work done elsewhere but in reality it allowed real proof of limited combustability to be sidestepped.Which council or construction firm thinks it's acceptable to clad high rise tower blocks in flammable materials just to save a few quid? There are lots of valid points being raised about tower block design, safety doors etc but seriously what is the rationale behind wrapping these blocks in combustible material other than 'its cheap'?
That's the thing though, prior to 2006 you either used consituant materials that all passed the limited combustability tests or you built a section of wall and brunt it to prove the combined material construction also passed the tests. After 2006 a 'desk-top survey' was introduced that was supposed to provide a risk assesment from work done elsewhere but in reality it allowed real proof of limited combustability to be sidestepped.
That's the thing though, prior to 2006 you either used consituant materials that all passed the limited combustability tests or you built a section of wall and brunt it to prove the combined material construction also passed the tests. After 2006 a 'desk-top survey' was introduced that was supposed to provide a risk assesment from work done elsewhere but in reality it allowed real proof of limited combustability to be sidestepped.
That's the thing though, prior to 2006 you either used consituant materials that all passed the limited combustability tests or you built a section of wall and brunt it to prove the combined material construction also passed the tests. After 2006 a 'desk-top survey' was introduced that was supposed to provide a risk assesment from work done elsewhere but in reality it allowed real proof of limited combustability to be sidestepped.
His deputy will take his place
A man called Rock Hugo Basil Feilding-Mellen
Interesting points. Is it a case of manufacturers of cladding etc 'paying' for 'independant testing' and these results being relied on to OK the use of materials that turned out not to be suitable after all. Bit like oil companies commissioning climate change studies from 'independant scientists' who miraculously find no link between climate change and the burning of fossil fuels.
His expenses claims are scandalousHis deputy will take his place
A man called Rock Hugo Basil Feilding-Mellen