Continuing Discussion
538898
Last edited by: VxFan on Wed 28 Jun 17 at 10:41
|
PM has suggested a new inquiry into the cladding.
I wonder, are we the only country to use this stuff, and to have had a problem with it? Hasn't someone else already done an inquiry which we could buy a copy of?
|
>> PM has suggested a new inquiry into the cladding.
>>
>> I wonder, are we the only country to use this stuff, and to have had
>> a problem with it? Hasn't someone else already done an inquiry which we could buy
>> a copy of?
>>
Yeah sure, if you want to blame Senior Jose Bricolage of Barcelona Bricolage Bodger's SA for the problem.
|
|
LOL - but don't they already know the answer? We knew it here on this forum within minutes didn't we? :-)
|
There's already a promised judicial inquiry into the Grenfell fire itself. Will be interesting to see where that goes. For understandable reasons victims/family and residents want to be involved in setting terms of reference and appointing chair, counsel and experts. In practice it could be problematic - see child abuse inquiry.
Now seems to be some sort of second issue, for same or another inquiry, as to how/why cladding that has 100% failure rate in tests came to be installed on hundreds of buildings. Guardian article explores some of issues:
www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/jun/27/may-orders-national-inquiry-after-100-failure-rate-in-high-rise-cladding-tests
Need to understand more about the tests and how they're applied. The cladding industry reps, while understandably coy, are saying it's no good testing components in isolation when they're intended to work together as a system.
|
|
My mate who is a sales director in the fire detection trade reckons the fire industry trade body has been warning the governments annually for a number of years about this kind of risk, in fact fairly specifically THIS risk. It's not like him to BS.
|
|
Indeed the BBC were reporting a few days back (can't find link at the moment) that he Fire Safety Council (or whatever they're called) had been warning ministers about this problem since 2010 and had been repeatedly fobbed off.
|
|
An inquiry is an inquiry. People died, how they died, why they died and how they were allowed to die should be the terms of reference, and if the evidence is followed, all that will be revealed
|
>> My mate who is a sales director in the fire detection trade reckons the fire
>> industry trade body has been warning the governments annually for a number of years about
>> this kind of risk, in fact fairly specifically THIS risk. It's not like him to
>> BS.
>>
From a guy called Smokie. Sorry. 0:-) I'll get me moped.
|
Need to understand more about the tests and how they're applied. The cladding industry reps,
>> while understandably coy, are saying it's no good testing components in isolation when they're intended
>> to work together as a system.
>>
This. It'll be interesting if the government release the methodology of the tests. Chatting to someone in this business there's not always a requirement to have cladding made from a completely inert/flameproof material, it all matters on the nature of the building, building materials, layout, additional fire safety measures. All the factors (and more) above influence the level of fire proof materials. I believe level 0 is the best but is uncommon.
|
As it happens I have pretty good (historic) knowledge of the Building Control system in this country. Until the mid 1980s in the inner London Boroughs we had the District Surveyor set-up which was actually established in 1667 - Great Fire year +1.
Run by the LCC, later GLC it employed properly qualified surveyors and engineers who examined all aspects of building construction - structural and fire. "Means of Escape" in case of fire was also a major part of the brief. Plans were inspected and frequent unannounced site visits made during construction. One case I remember was about architects proposing, the new at the time idea, resin fixings for stone building cladding. These were rejected as the resin would soften in heat and the cladding then fall off. Stainless steel only was permitted for fixings. The number of contractors who tried to con the surveyors with mild steel was surprising. A magnet soon showed them the error of their ways.
The governent of the day "reduced red-tape", disbanded the expensive District Surveyors in London and also dumped lots of regulation throughout the country. For example, one item dumped was minimum ceiling heights in homes - they claimed builders would self regulate and not build homes with lower ceilings as nobody would buy them. Well, take a look at 1990s onwards ceiling heights compared with earlier.
Simultaneaously they allowed private building control with ill qualified so called inspectors doing it all for much less money.
Kindly take a look at new builds of today and take note of all the residents' complaints of poor finishes and so on.
The government of the day thought they could save the state money and perhaps they did - but at what cost to quality and lives. Will 'lessons be learned' ? I doubt it very much.
|
Hmmmmmm let's see now, What regime was Ronan Point built under,. oh yes the old good one.
I don't see too many complaints of people banging their heads on ceilings, Oh yes post GFoL Elizabethan ones
|
>> Hmmmmmm let's see now, What regime was Ronan Point built under,. oh yes the old
>> good one.
>>
>> I don't see too many complaints of people banging their heads on ceilings, Oh yes
>> post GFoL Elizabethan ones
>>
I don't post often on this site anymore. I used to get a lot of good useful information from here and so have tried to give something back when I can.
Many of the old contributors have gone and the level of back-biting and sniping from the well known few has increased - coincidence ?
Well Zero, you're a bully and crave attention - good or bad. Call me naiave or thin skinned, but I've had enough of it.
|
mega snip quote!
>> Well Zero, you're a bully and crave attention - good or bad. Call me naiave
>> or thin skinned, but I've had enough of it.
There was no back biting in the post, there was no sniping in thyis post, it was merely a FACTUAL counter point. Presenting facts is not bullying, nor attention seeking. You are not a cravne coward, merely upset because your argument had holes in it and you hate being wrong.
Last edited by: VxFan on Wed 5 Jul 17 at 12:59
|
www.politicshome.com/news/uk/political-parties/labour-party/news/87042/labour-mp-david-lammy-suggests-true-grenfell-tower
Politicians !!!!!
Plus comments in the clip. .
The reasons why the death toll is not known should be spelled out and posted around the area.
The reasons why identification in the UK has to be correct not guessed at.
IIRC one third of 9/11 victims were never identified.
|
Number known locally as missing is said to be a lot more than official figure.
www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/jun/28/grenfell-residents-groups-compile-lists-of-victims-and-survivors
The process for identifying needs, as you say, to be spelled out and the response on the ground of government, both central and local needs to be greatly improved.
Lammy has a personal link to the issue. The artist Khadiya Saye, one of the first to be named as dead in the fire, was being mentored by his wife Nicola Green, an artist herself, and was a friend of the Lammy family.
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Wed 28 Jun 17 at 07:51
|
>> Number known locally as missing is said to be a lot more
No, the word is not " Known" the word is " Claimed"
Due to illegal immigrants, illegal multiple occupation, illegal sub letting and transients,no one knows, not even the locals. Will there be fruadulent claims for some form of gain? Yes.
|
www.bbc.co.uk/news/video_and_audio/headlines/40498186/china-s-forest-city
But I would bet that the facades would burn even more vigorously than aluminium and plastic!
|
Interesting Opinion piece by Joshua Rozenberg in the Law Society Gazette:
www.lawgazette.co.uk/comment-and-opinion/trained-to-get-at-the-truth/5062053.article
As well as commenting on how inquiry chair Sir Martin Moore-Bick has been treated he raises possibility that prosecutions may not be in the public interest. Better to let people give evidence unhindered by possibility of self incrimination so as to get facts and follow up actions sorted quickly.
|
>>... raises possibility that prosecutions may not be in the public interest.
>>Better to let people give evidence unhindered by possibility of self incrimination so as to get to the facts and follow up actions sorted quickly.
>>
Learning from the aviation industry. A nice change from the blame industry.
|
Learning from the aviation industry instead of the blame industry?
Are you for real?.What has happened and the neglect on so many fronts beggars belief.
|
>> Are you for real?.What has happened and the neglect on so many fronts beggars belief.
>>
Dutchie, we only know what has been reported in the papers.
There is a serious decision to be made
Do we want to know all that went wrong and the mistakes that were made and the deliberate choices that were made, all of which led to the horrible fire, learn what we can and make sure that this sort of thing is never allowed to happen again?
OR
Do we want to see somebody punished for the people who died and were made homeless by their actions and decisions?
You can only really have one of these as the levels of detail and openness will be very different in a criminal case than they will in an inquiry.
Hard as it is to think that people might "escape punishment", I personally believe that an open "no prosecutions" enquiry approach could be a better outcome in the long term if lessons really are learned from it.
|
>> Learning from the aviation industry instead of the blame industry?
>>
>> Are you for real?.
Yes. The aviation industry has advanced safety in so many ways.
www.chirp.co.uk/
An example of which you are probably aware.
www.chirpmaritime.org/
After the Manchester BA disaster interior furnishings were made more fire resistance.
Cockpit CRM is another.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crew_resource_management.
This is an incredibly difficult problem and aircraft losses will still occur due to lack of CRM
Many industries are ( slowly ) learning from aviation.
>>What has happened and the neglect on so many fronts beggars belief.
>>
I agree and I am not in the least surprised but I think the public should look at themselves.
Fitting and maintaining a smoke alarm is a simple example.
I have been involved in disaster response ( manning a call centre ) and in spite of many many rehearsals and training courses when it can to a real event all did not go as well as it simply should have.
So revise things and improve it. No blaming people.
Last edited by: henry k on Wed 19 Jul 17 at 10:53
|
The fact that an airline operates a no blame culture doesn't mean to say that they won't be held liable if they kill a plane load of passengers. Airlines and aircraft manufacturers are nearly always sued for negligence in the case of a crash, in the US courts if at all possible. Damage usually run into the millions.
I expect the negligence claims resulting from this fire will run into the hundreds of millions and take many years to settle.
|
One of those Shorthand designed web pages again.
Some of the flats looked nice.
|
|
Not like the scroll down type design?
|
Watched the program last night on BBC2.
Very sad and moving,how some people got down from the 21st floor is beyond me.Can't blame the fire fighters but the advice to stay in your flat became fatal for some people.
No tall ladder to reach the heights so many questions have to be answered.
|
Worth listening to this broadcast on Radio 4's PM programme. All 71 victims' names are read out by Eddie Mair.
www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b09drjmk#play
10:17 into the programme.
|
|
Tragic and unnecessary tho the fire was, and the cause needs to be found and rectified, I really don't need to listen to the names of 71 people, with whom I have no connection, being read out,
|
I'm with this ^ geezer ^.
|
There are some really sick people out there.
Who in their right mind would create a model of the tower with brown faces at the windows and then place it on a bonfire?
Mocking cries of “help me†and “stay in your flat†are heard as the flames take hold.
Other onlookers say: “Jump out the window†and “All the little ninjas getting itâ€.
www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/grenfell-tower-model-bonfire-burned-guy-fawkes-party-a8618661.html
www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/nov/05/police-appeal-video-mock-up-grenfell-tower-burned
I do hope they get arrested and charged.
|
|
I hope they are prosecuted too. But they are pretty sick joking about this.
|
|
Some might say of course that burning an effigy of the Pope on a bonfire ever November is in itself offensive.
|
It was a joke.
A bad joke. A joke in extremely poor taste, but a joke in someone's back garden - except that some twit felt they should film it and then someone - did what? Passed it to the media? Who, instead of ignoring it, thought they could get some mileage from it.
Really, some of these things are best ignored.
|
It was a joke, a joke in bad taste, a sick joke. This country has a history of sick humour, some of it has been displayed on here from time to time.
But arrested? Jailed? no way, that in itself is sick. As CGN says you would need to arrest and imprison every NI protestant ( Which in itself wouldn't be a bad thing, would make Brexit easier)
There Mrs May, a solution for you.
|
Isn't the burning of effigies of May, BJ and Trump also then a hate crime?
Was an effigy of Corbyn burnt?
|
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-46106224
5 handed themselves in, arrested for public order offences.
|
|
Sick, nasty, unacceptable, but hardly a crime.
|
The video is here. You do not have to watch it.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=n81i6bM5dfc
|
Ridiculous.
But these sanctimonious twits taking offense really hack me off. When did not being offended become a fundamental human right protected by the law?
Last edited by: VxFan on Thu 5 Sep 19 at 10:21
|
I can see why, maybe, some families or living victims of the fire might get upset, didn't offend me particularly. There is no legal protection from being offended other than a well crafted offence under Section 4(A) Public Order Act 1986 fits the bill. There may be aggravating circumstances. Whatever the outcome of the decision making processes are about any legal action the perpetrators
don't exactly cover themselves in any sort of glory do they.
What peed me off was the BBC news refusing to broadcast the video "because it may offend" that actually offended me more. I'm offended by a decision not to offend a minority..(I don't really care one way or another.)
Last edited by: VxFan on Thu 5 Sep 19 at 10:20
|
>> What peed me off was the BBC news refusing to broadcast the video "because it
>> may offend" that actually offended me more. I'm offended by a decision not to offend
>> a minority..(I don't really care one way or another.)
As an idea, whilst sick and distasteful, its actually quite imaginative and cleverly carried out. With a few beers inside one, at a party of blokes It was probably quite funny at the time.
In hindsight with the benefits of sobriety it was probably a bad idea. That they came forward and identified themselves to police confirms that notion
Storm in a teacup really, wont distract from finding those responsible for the real fire, those who turned a pile of fireproof safety cells into a furnace chimney.
Last edited by: VxFan on Thu 5 Sep 19 at 10:20
|
|
IMHO the more serious offence was that committed by the person who published the stuff on social media. The cretins who 'performed' were in their own garden and perhaps had some expectation of privacy.
|
Thanks Bromp:)
I've been wanting to say that since this thread started but if it had been my words, I would have been crucified on here!
Despite having loads agree with me in other places.
Pat
|
>> Thanks Bromp:)
>>
>> I've been wanting to say that since this thread started but if it had been
>> my words, I would have been crucified on here!
>>
>> Despite having loads agree with me in other places.
Was it really necessary to add all that everyone has it in for me crap? Had you just said " I think The real crime its putting it on social media" everyone, including me, would have agreed with you. Instead you turn it into something personal some kind of perceived vendetta against you. Its no wonder you get the responses you do, you actively seek it out.
Well you got what you wanted, what you worked for - a hostile response. Wouldn't want to disappoint you.
|
You should try sitting on your fingers Z, all day just as I have because I just knew what the response would have been.
You can't deny years of experience....and your response is typical.
Proves my point entirely.
But hey ho, I can live with it.
There's always a benefit to knowing your enemies and how they will react.
Pat
|
>> There's always a benefit to knowing your enemies and how they will react.
>>
Indeed I now know who the phantom red scowly face giver is.
Seriously Pat, actually read what you wrote, and my response, you will see its an entirely logical and factual conclusion. I doubt many will disagree with me. You are your own very worse enemy.
I suspect you will now take it out on the mods for failing to support you.
Last edited by: Zero on Tue 6 Nov 18 at 17:00
|
Nothing to do with the mods, and no need to read what I wrote again.
It was an honest statement said somewhat 'tongue in cheek' as depicted by the smiley face, but predictably it had a bad reaction because I said it.
For what it's worth, you had already earned the smiley face before I saw your post...etc etc...no personal insults please
Last edited by: R.P. on Tue 6 Nov 18 at 17:18
|
>> Nothing to do with the mods, and no need to read what I wrote again.
>>
>> It was an honest statement said somewhat 'tongue in cheek' as depicted by the smiley
>> face, but predictably it had a bad reaction because I said it.
You really do need to read that wot you wrote. There is no smiley after your tongue in cheek comment. It comes much earlier and way out of context with your "woe is me" statement.
So there.
|
>> you had already earned the smiley face
Er, it's not a smiley face.
|
>> You should try sitting on your fingers Z, all day just as I have because
>> I just knew what the response would have been.
Do you know what the response would have been if you had just said "I totally agree with you Bromp"
I can tell you it would have been different, but that clearly is not what you were after.
|
Zero, I shall post on here entirely what I think in a way I want to.
I shall not ask your permission on how to do it or ask for advice on which way would suit your delicate little ears best.
When I want your advice I will ask for it.
I have in the past and you have kindly given it so let's stick to that way of doing things, shall we?
Pat
|
>>I've been wanting to say that since this thread started but if it had been my words, I would have been crucified on here!
Well that's silly. You shouldn't be scared to do something just because other people might disagree with you. You should be brave and stick up for your own point of view, however limited.
>>Despite having loads agree with me in other places.
So even that substantial support from "other places" didn't make you feel confident enough to post. That's very sad and a shame. You really should have the confidence and the balls to post what you think and not be scared about what others think.
Goodness knows how you cope with rough, tough truckers with this level of temerity.
|
Pathetic and patronising but I remain flattered that you still can't manage to ignore my posts:)
That's a smiley by the way.
Pat
|
|
Wonder if they'll get a big payment from the number of hits?
|
>> Wonder if they'll get a big payment from the number of hits?
Unlikely. I average about £1 per thousand hits*, my content is fairly neutral so is suitable for any google add auctioning and gets a good revenue. Their content will be marked as "unsuitable" and will attract very little good revenue.
*my Transformer vid will hit 2 million by end of week. Its been a good payer!
|
Prosecution of the idiots is an overreaction but this hasn't stopped the State prosecuting people for what they did in private before.
You can even be prosecuted for telling the truth if that truth offends someone.
Last edited by: zippy on Tue 6 Nov 18 at 19:05
|
Distasteful - of course it was distasteful but, rather than waiting days for the police to turn up if you are burgled, you could burn a cardboard tower block in your back garden and a dozen police officers will be around in a matter of minutes.
Don’t ever tell me that plod is under-resourced.
|
>> Don’t ever tell me that plod is under-resourced.
I'm telling you plod is under resourced, worse they are also badly directed.
Last edited by: Zero on Tue 6 Nov 18 at 22:18
|
Delingpole on the subject.
Yes, it's on the site which many of you love to hate.
You have been warned :-)
www.breitbart.com/europe/2018/11/07/six-arrested-uk-bad-taste-video/
|
And of course being Rogers favourite site, its not long before a commentary that starts off reasonably descends into bitter right wing tripe and racism.
I quote
The other key point is a political one. Scarcely had the last smouldering embers of the Grenfell conflagration been extinguished when the whole tragedy was seized by the left and used as a stick with which to beat all its favourite targets: rich people, white people, Tories.
Like the death of Diana, it became a litmus test for how in tune you were with the national mood of collective hysteria: if you didn’t think it was the worse thing ever, if you weren’t out there on the streets laying flowers or raising funds or — in the case of the Duchess of Sussex, launching a cookbook — for the victims, if you didn’t hate Theresa May for showing insufficient emotion on her visit to the site, then basically you were heartless scum.
So many Corbynistas and race-baiting activists have made political mileage out of Grenfell, so many con-artists have ripped off the compensation system, so preferential has been the treatment afforded the survivors (given superior housing as a kind of emotional Danegeld to buy off all those shrill, angry leftist campaigners determined to milk every last drop out of the tragedy) that Grenfell has become a kind of emblem for almost everything at least one half of the country fears about how Britain would look if ever Jeremy Corbyn’s hard left lunatics got into power.
|
>>www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-54967895
Falsifying the fire test to sell the cladding.
Nice.
I suspect Moore-Bick's final report is going to one of the most critical inquiry outcomes for a while.
|
Celotex - otherwise known as SAINT-GOBAIN CONSTRUCTION PRODUCTS UK LIMITED have deep pockets, at the end of 2018 its net worth was over £200m.
I expect a lot of lawsuits and criminal prosecutions coming at the end of the enquiry.
|
Report in this weeks Sunday Times about a newish block of flats that burned down.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=mkcFQWvU0gM
In summary, complete absence of adherence to building regulations, because of no compliance inspection. Endemic across the country in new builds.
I expect nothing to change.
|
>> Report in this weeks Sunday Times about a newish block of flats that burned down.
>>
>> www.youtube.com/watch?v=mkcFQWvU0gM
As usual, I haven't been paying attention - or is it another joke that I have missed?
My youtube video is some bloke prancing about on a beach1
Go on then! Explain it to me - but slowly.
|
>> My youtube video is some bloke prancing about on a beach1
I think he's pasted the wrong video link. The man on the beach illustrates something NoFM related about Chilean party music.
|
New inquiry - smokie