Tower Block Disaster - Grenfell

[Vorpal]

I don't feel I get too much spam from them. If it's not about something I support, I just delete it.

[Vorpal]

Piece in the Times a couple of days ago. https://www.thetimes.co.uk/magazine/the ... -7gg28h3gq

The perspective is interesting. And I like the reflections about some of the victims and their families. There are some things about the piece I don't like; it's clearly meant to be a tug at the heart strings. Some of the comments are pretty awful.

[Vorpal]

The firm that managed Grenfell Tower says it will hand over responsibility for thousands of properties to the local council by the end of January.

https://www.bbc.com/news/amp/uk-4248957 ... ssion=true

[reohn2]

The firm that managed Grenfell Tower says it will hand over responsibility for thousands of properties to the local council by the end of January.

https://www.bbc.com/news/amp/uk-4248957 ... ssion=true

KCTMO wil only "temporarily" hand over and "we are clear this is only an interm agreement".
Puzzling or maybe not

[Vorpal]

The firm that managed Grenfell Tower says it will hand over responsibility for thousands of properties to the local council by the end of January.

https://www.bbc.com/news/amp/uk-4248957 ... ssion=true

KCTMO wil only "temporarily" hand over and "we are clear this is only an interm agreement".
Puzzling or maybe not

Politricks.

[Bonefishblues]

The firm that managed Grenfell Tower says it will hand over responsibility for thousands of properties to the local council by the end of January.

https://www.bbc.com/news/amp/uk-4248957 ... ssion=true

KCTMO wil only "temporarily" hand over and "we are clear this is only an interm agreement".
Puzzling or maybe not

Politricks.

What would be a better way forward? Genuine question as I can't see an obvious one.

[Vorpal]

KCTMO wil only "temporarily" hand over and "we are clear this is only an interm agreement".
Puzzling or maybe not

Politricks.

What would be a better way forward? Genuine question as I can't see an obvious one.

I see two possible alternatives. One is simply to improve the legislation covering the management of public housing, fire safety regulations for tower blocks, and other recommendations that ultimately come out of the investigation.

The other is to establish standards to which landlords can be audited, provide interpretive guidelines, then require that all building over a certain size be audited/inspected by an independent 3rd party on a periodic (5 year?) basis.

The main thing is that whatever they do, must be enforced, with fines that are substantial enough to serve as a deterrent, such as 20% of monthly rental intake for each month that they don't meet regulation, or something.

[Bonefishblues]

I was referencing the immediate issue with the management company which is being removed from responsibility from January, we might be at cross purposes I think, but yes I agree with the need for systemic change in the broader system. Perhaps such public housing should be administered by Trusts with guaranteed resident representation?

[Vorpal]

I was referencing the immediate issue with the management company which is being removed from responsibility from January, we might be at cross purposes I think, but yes I agree with the need for systemic change in the broader system. Perhaps such public housing should be administered by Trusts with guaranteed resident representation?

I'm not sure. I don't think that any kind of private or for-profit companies should be allowed to touch it. I'm also not a big fan of trusts, but I honestly think that it is more important to address it from the perspective of how people are measured than the type of organisation. Some organisations are more inducive than others to looking after people, and trust are far better than corporations.

The thing is, if people are measured on saving money, getting jobs done on time, and keeping apartments full (for the rent), that is exactly what they are going to do. And it won't make much difference whether the local council, or Megacorp are managing council properties. If they are measured instead on meeting safety regulations, improving customer satisfaction, and community involvement, the results for the residents will be completely different. The problem is, that will cost more money than signing a contract with Megacorp. Or handing out targets left and right to council employees who get promoted for penny-pinching instead of rewarded for community involvement.

[Bonefishblues]

I was referencing the immediate issue with the management company which is being removed from responsibility from January, we might be at cross purposes I think, but yes I agree with the need for systemic change in the broader system. Perhaps such public housing should be administered by Trusts with guaranteed resident representation?

I'm not sure. I don't think that any kind of private or for-profit companies should be allowed to touch it. I'm also not a big fan of trusts, but I honestly think that it is more important to address it from the perspective of how people are measured than the type of organisation. Some organisations are more inducive than others to looking after people, and trust are far better than corporations.

The thing is, if people are measured on saving money, getting jobs done on time, and keeping apartments full (for the rent), that is exactly what they are going to do. And it won't make much difference whether the local council, or Megacorp are managing council properties. If they are measured instead on meeting safety regulations, improving customer satisfaction, and community involvement, the results for the residents will be completely different. The problem is, that will cost more money than signing a contract with Megacorp. Or handing out targets left and right to council employees who get promoted for penny-pinching instead of rewarded for community involvement.

I agree. In my line of work there are legion examples of incentive schemes which achieve exactly what they were(n't) intended to achieve. The law of unintended consequences is a powerful one. If the profit motive is retained, then sufficient (expensive) checks and balances must be built in to protect the vulnerable.

[Bowedw]

Did the Local Authority have the skills to prepare a Tender Document on which the management companies could provide a proper tender, one that would bind them into their obligations. I would suspect not.
The willingness with which the LA is embracing, the return of these properties under their wing ,seems to reflect that. Mates for jobs rather than ability is deeply rooted in all levels of society in this country, Both private and public bodies.

[Cyril Haearn]

I was referencing the immediate issue with the management company which is being removed from responsibility from January, we might be at cross purposes I think, but yes I agree with the need for systemic change in the broader system. Perhaps such public housing should be administered by Trusts with guaranteed resident representation?

I'm not sure. I don't think that any kind of private or for-profit companies should be allowed to touch it. I'm also not a big fan of trusts, but I honestly think that it is more important to address it from the perspective of how people are measured than the type of organisation. Some organisations are more inducive than others to looking after people, and trust are far better than corporations.

The thing is, if people are measured on saving money, getting jobs done on time, and keeping apartments full (for the rent), that is exactly what they are going to do. And it won't make much difference whether the local council, or Megacorp are managing council properties. If they are measured instead on meeting safety regulations, improving customer satisfaction, and community involvement, the results for the residents will be completely different. The problem is, that will cost more money than signing a contract with Megacorp. Or handing out targets left and right to council employees who get promoted for penny-pinching instead of rewarded for community involvement.

I agree. In my line of work there are legion examples of incentive schemes which achieve exactly what they were(n't) intended to achieve. The law of unintended consequences is a powerful one. If the profit motive is retained, then sufficient (expensive) checks and balances must be built in to protect the vulnerable.

The law of unintended consequences, could you tell us more? Maybe on a new thread?
Diolch yn fawr iawn

[pwa]

Not that it really matters, but I think I had assumed that Grenfell Tower had been a block of not very nice flats, grey and unattractive to live in. But a few days ago I saw photos of the interiors of a few of the flats prior to the fire, alongside images of their residents, and some of them had been kitted out to be very modern and comfortable. For me it produced a pang of pathos, thinking how these people, some who survived and some who didn't, were making their homes places that reflected their aspirations. Places that displayed their achievements and hope.

[Vorpal]

Not that it really matters, but I think I had assumed that Grenfell Tower had been a block of not very nice flats, grey and unattractive to live in. But a few days ago I saw photos of the interiors of a few of the flats prior to the fire, alongside images of their residents, and some of them had been kitted out to be very modern and comfortable. For me it produced a pang of pathos, thinking how these people, some who survived and some who didn't, were making their homes places that reflected their aspirations. Places that displayed their achievements and hope.

Did you think that just because someone was poor they had no desire or right to live in a nice place? That council tower blocks are rquired to be nasty places, so no one aspires to live there?

I would think that what you wrote would sound very privileged to someone who lived there. Or in any council blocks. It certainly sounds so to me.

[Bonefishblues]

I didn't respond, but it read rather like that to me too, I must admit.

Apropos of similar, I saw Jaywick on the news last night - often held up as a deeply deprived and dreadful place to live, at least in programmes I have seen. I had a browse around Rightmove at the properties on sale there. I have since had a word with myself for accepting the media's portrayal without critical thought.