Tower Block Disaster - Grenfell

[reohn2]

I just wonder why more checks aren't made on the inquiry panellists but the links Benita Mehra had with the cladding company should have ruled her out as a candidate right from the start.

Quite!
It's almost as if someone had intended it hoping no one would notice........

[mercalia]

seems like the companies at the centre of the matter want to get immunity from prosecution to testify

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-51296935

They should be forced to with threat of contempt or something?

[100%JR]

You are implying a conspiracy of some proportion.

If however, someone knowingly clad that building in flammable materials, or was negligent in failing to exercise their duty of care, then there's no bus big enough, or heavy enough to throw them underneath. I reckon that the public can readily understand the two different scenarios.

Well,well,well........

[Oldjohnw]

Sometimes conspiracy theories follow from conspiracies. It's looking awfully like that at Grenfell.

[pwa]

I am less interested in who is to blame, and more interested in the various decision making processes that led to a tower block being encased in a combustible material. You would have thought that the first question to be asked of any prospective cladding would be "Will it burn?", and that an answer in the affirmative would consign it to the bin. Because tower blocks around the UK have similar cladding the problem must originate high up, and possibly in Government.

[merseymouth]

Sorry PWA, I think that you have jumped to a premature or even false conclusion.
The published e:mails would appear to reveal that questions about the fire safety of the cladding were asked but the answers ignored. The manufacturers knew that it was an unsuitable product for the intended use, but continued to manufacture & market the material for an unsafe deployment!
So money didn't talk, it screamed!!! The Contractors & architects knew but money again coloured their judgement.
So to blame the Government is far too simplistic, where they demand full details for every building project, with them also being required to approve or disapprove these projects then serious delay would be inevitable! Then they would get kicked for delaying affairs!!!
The need for a moral compass occurs in most areas of activity, but that won't earn them a productivity bonus from the movers & shakers. MM

[Bonefishblues]

You are implying a conspiracy of some proportion.

If however, someone knowingly clad that building in flammable materials, or was negligent in failing to exercise their duty of care, then there's no bus big enough, or heavy enough to throw them underneath. I reckon that the public can readily understand the two different scenarios.

Well,well,well........

The latter seems to be the case, based on emails, I read.

Was there a conspiracy regarding this?

[pwa]

Sorry PWA, I think that you have jumped to a premature or even false conclusion.
The published e:mails would appear to reveal that questions about the fire safety of the cladding were asked but the answers ignored. The manufacturers knew that it was an unsuitable product for the intended use, but continued to manufacture & market the material for an unsafe deployment!
So money didn't talk, it screamed!!! The Contractors & architects knew but money again coloured their judgement.
So to blame the Government is far too simplistic, where they demand full details for every building project, with them also being required to approve or disapprove these projects then serious delay would be inevitable! Then they would get kicked for delaying affairs!!!
The need for a moral compass occurs in most areas of activity, but that won't earn them a productivity bonus from the movers & shakers. MM

I would not be surprised if it turns out that blame lies at more than one level, but for the deployment of inappropriate cladding to be so widespread suggests to me that the regulatory system was at fault. Government ought to regulate and monitor, protecting us from cowboys. It will be convenient for those in Whitehall if the buck stops somewhere else, but if dodgy practices are happening in the construction of tower blocks, who, if not government, should be protecting us?

[merseymouth]

So all blame lies at the door of Parliament, whatever the real situation? To quote Jim Royle - "My Buttock"! MM

[pwa]

So all blame lies at the door of Parliament, whatever the real situation? To quote Jim Royle - "My Buttock"! MM

No. What I said was that I would not be surprised if it turns out that blame lies at more than one level. But if Government escapes blame altogether I think that will probably not be justice being served. I cannot see how this could have happened on so many buildings if the regulatory system set up by Government had been working properly. We are talking about hundreds of large residential buildings. It looks like systemic failure. Who is responsible for the system?

[merseymouth]

Hi again, We need a "Ralph Nader" for the building and safety trades! We owe him a debt for his work in the automotive industry, now we need others to step up to the plate.
In defence of politicians they are often entangled by career civil servants. Yes Minister is far too near to the truth. MM

[al_yrpal]

If anyone is to blame the Building Research Establishment should carry the blame. Since I first heard about the Grenfell disaster I have always thought this. Like the Financial Conduct Authority these quasi government backed organisations have wriggled out of their responsibilities lead by serial failures like Howard Davis. The brass at the Fire Service failed too and caused many unecessary deaths.

If the government failed at all it was simply a failure to charge those organisations with the responsibility that was clearly theirs and that goes way back before the Tories too.

Al

[Mike Sales]

Yes Minister is far too near to the truth. MM

I preferred The Thick of It.

[merseymouth]

Hi Mike, Never seen the Thick of it? But "Thick" would appear to fit with many folk supposedly in charge of our safety!
If "Buck Passing" was an Olympic Sport there'd never be a winner? All appealing some lame excuse or other. I've given bosses a roasting for their crepe, and quit on the spot! No Blame on my watch. MM

[reohn2]

seems like the companies at the centre of the matter want to get immunity from prosecution to testify

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-51296935

Did you think they would have it other way?

They should be forced to with threat of contempt or something?

What's betting they'll walk away scot free?