Most sensible Housing Associations have been assuming that they will have to pay for sprinklers themselves.
Par for the course under the Austerity government.
Par for the course under the Austerity government.
Grenfell Tower Fire | 14th June 2017
- Thread starter Cheesy
- Start date
I wish she'd feck off.
Don't forget the £1bn which went to the DUP. "Austerity" should probably be replaced with "being tight-arsed bastards until spending money benefits us."
All the Tory fundamentalists who were squealing like pigs at the "politicising" of the matter seem quite quiet on the topic of Teresa May's opportunistic politicising now that the news cycle has moved on and her lies have been revealed.
Seemingly showing concern about people burning to death is vile politicising but telling lies about preventing people burning to death in the future (while trying to cling on your job) is just strong and stable leadership.
Seemingly showing concern about people burning to death is vile politicising but telling lies about preventing people burning to death in the future (while trying to cling on your job) is just strong and stable leadership.
That ship has long since sailed.
Didn't Silva post an article where it said that upgrades of sprinklers would cost only £100,000s? Why are these proposals from the local authorities costing tens of millions?
Are those residents from high-rises in Camden still out of their homes by the way?
Are those residents from high-rises in Camden still out of their homes by the way?
Last edited:
That sounds pretty cheap tbh but im no expert.
fwiw, I'd expect to see prices in the range of GBP 140-200/square meter for a sprinkler retrofit in an existing high rise.
So i checked back and it was from a Newsnight ep that he had been watching, presumably for a Grenfell comparable building. The expense was supposedly estimated at £200k. In a later post someone alludes to a reduction in the cost of such refurbishments.
Reading the Metro article the proposals seem to average out at £400,000+ per site. Not quite as bad as i thought when first seeing the headline figure, however with councils there's bound to be a little skimming off the top somewhere.
One of the plans referenced was seeking to install sprinklers in every space, communal and residential. They could always remove the latter component and reapply possibly.
IIRC, we also had an absence of the requisite fire doors in many of these buildigns.
Reading the Metro article the proposals seem to average out at £400,000+ per site. Not quite as bad as i thought when first seeing the headline figure, however with councils there's bound to be a little skimming off the top somewhere.
One of the plans referenced was seeking to install sprinklers in every space, communal and residential. They could always remove the latter component and reapply possibly.
IIRC, we also had an absence of the requisite fire doors in many of these buildigns.
"We know the truth": Six months on, Grenfell Tower fire survivors are left demanding answers
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news...isaster-six-months-on-survivors-winter-london
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news...isaster-six-months-on-survivors-winter-london
I would not hold my breath(pardon the pun) waiting for the money from this shambles of a government. The Mayor of Manchester had to basically go to the press and complain to get them to pay the money they needed to to cover the cost of the Manchester Bomb attack.
Bear in my mind we are not talking about generous compensation package or contentious issues - this is the normal recovery of costs when resources are pulled in from across the region to sort out an emergency situation such as mass flooding events or terrorist events. It covers the extra fuel costs and additional hours and ensures that emergency services can concentrate on saving lives and worry about who pays the bills for services coming from multiple agencies or regions.
This is the sort of meat and drink task that should just happen in the background. Increasingly it seems that the most effective civil servants have toddled off to avoid getting dragged into the Brexit Quagmire. I honestly fear that we will see another tower fire go out of control before the Grenfell inquiry is completed - Hopefully with less casualties but i would prefer not to rely on hope.
May rejects request by Grenfell survivors for decision-making panel
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news...-grenfell-survivors-for-decision-making-panel
fecking cnuts
Will swing to labour I reckon.
The reaction under this article for Sky News was very much a "and rightly so" rhetoric.
Why the controversy? Have such panels been the norm during other successful inquiries ?
They see the fire as a failure of local and national government so why should they trust the latter to set up a fair panel?
They've also seen the numerous coverups of criminal behaviour by the establishment, and have good reason to think that everything will be swept under the carpet.
This is going to be another one of those 'things' where we'll continue seeing bumps in 2-3 years due to lack of action.
71 still seems ridiculously low to me
Is there enough general public interest in seeing justice served?
At first I thought this would lead to far reaching consequences in all levels of government - due to the mismanagement of the local authority, and the effect of cuts to services and Legal Aid, but I fear that in post-referendum Britain that the empathy levels are dropping off the charts and so far the Tories have kept a lid on the enquiry to stop it expanding out into something proper.
Any of our resident Tories want to explain why Maggie May still hasn't delivered on her funding promises to prevent a re-occurrence?
Those billboards really wound me up the wrong way for some reason, these things can happen without anyone committing a crime. It’d be much more useful to advertise what still needs to be done to improve safety in remaining tower blocks like this because work in building areas can be notoriously slow even without the government being involved.
They can happen without a crime.
But in the case of Grenfell, sub standard materials were deliberately used just to save money.
Those materials caused the deaths of 71 people.
Someone is responsible for that.
Of course but that still doesn’t mean a crime has been committed, if the materials still met regs then who can you arrest? We know multiple government have been warned about this over the years, labour included, so we’d be better off pushing to changes in buildings standards to make sure this doesn’t happen again.
Nope. Someone made a conscious decision to use sub standard materials that were a fire hazard. Authorities were also warned this may happen. Someone needs to swing for it.
If it’s found through the investigation that someone’s broken the law then absolutely send them down and hit them with the book, no problems with that at all. But in the meantime I just feel it’s a better use of advertising to focus protests like this on ensuring safety on existing properties where people are still living.
I'm game for a good old fashioned mob going after the ministers who turned a blind eye to it.
That’s a long long line of Tory and Labour ministers so I’d imagine we’d have a job of it.
Although that does sound good, take them all down and start fresh.
A less accusatory message would be also be less effective at drawing attention back to the tragedy though. Plus it wouldn't really fit the motif they've lifted from the three billboards film either.
I like the idea. It's irrefutable that this disaster has fallen away from public consciousness. It's been demonstrated time and time again that keeping something within the public eye can lead to results. Good on them.
This is my view as well @Snowjoe, I appreciate the sentiment of spending money more constructively but history has shown that all gets forgotten when things fall out of the public eye and people who should have been held accountable are allowed to slip off quietly.
As much as anything, this isn't just about justice. The Government promised money to ensure this wouldn't happen again and as yet this is yet to transpire. It's not a case of "I told you so" if a similar indecent happened, it would be a case of more lives tragically lost and families destroyed so it's important that it's kept in the public consciousness and difficult questions continue to be asked.
Flammable exterior materials need to be banned on apartments. Simple.
Looks like they banned you instead.
I agree @Snowjoe that sort of nonsense on billboards I find very childish, better to work on ways to ensure it does not happen again.
Worst thing is know people living in high rises up that way that haven't been sorted out yet, imagine... fecking shambles.
And the people who's homes got destroyed are still having to live out of a suitcase and in hotels/accommodation.
It's a disgrace that should get daily condemnation.
It's a disgrace that should get daily condemnation.