Key.Aero Network
Register Free

Page 1 of 5 12345 LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 137

Thread: Grenfell Tower fire

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    6,069

    Grenfell Tower fire

    *Edit by Bruce - I've moved the Grenfell Tower fire into its own thread, so some of the below posts are slightly out of kilter, and refer in part to the GE2017 thread*

    No, but JC is very capable of makimg mischief at the slightest excuse. ClassicFM to-day had a short interview with the Bearded Wonder (unelected) on the subject of the tower block fire in London.

    Jc said, words akin, that we should take a look at local authority funding, lack of, as a possible source of the conflagration. Well, that's a novel but entirely predictable slant on matters.
    Last edited by Bruce; 16th June 2017 at 13:44.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Cambridge, Duxfordshire
    Posts
    3,082
    No he didn't, John.

    Blessed are the Cheesemakers?

    He was asked whether he thought it should be looked in to, bearing in mind Gavin Barwell had not acted on the recommendations of a previous tower block fire safety review, which recommended sprinklers (nothing to do with the cause, JG).

    Despite the deliberate attempt to make him seem crass by giving him an open goal, he answered in the affirmative, saying "Obviously ministers that served and received those reports must be questioned" but went on to say "“I am not making that statement yet. Today is the day to support the emergency services and the residents and thank all of those that have also given other help: food, water, clothing and shelter.

    Tomorrow is the time to ask all of those questions but today let’s concentrate on dealing with the consequences of this fire"
    Last edited by Beermat; 14th June 2017 at 16:08.
    www.whirlwindfighterproject.org
    It's all good. Probably.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Posts
    609
    That block of flats has been there a lot longer than the current Conservative party.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    6,069
    That is not at all my recollection. He most assuredly referred to 'local authority spending'.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Cambridge, Duxfordshire
    Posts
    3,082
    Ryan, the 'current' Conservative party came into being with the drafting of the Tamworth Manifesto in 1834, so I doubt it.

    I'm sure you have a graph to prove me wrong, though.

    JG, maybe he did as well, I have only read a partial transcript. What did he say? Ah, wait, do you mean the bit that went "I believe we need to ask questions about what facilities and resources have been given to local authorities that have tower blocs (sic) in the area"? I am quoting from the Independent.

    I agree it's an odd one to ask Corbyn in the first place - and going back further it's a curious thing to reach Whitehall - in that I would have thought fire safety measures taken by local authorities were not a ministerial issue or funded centrally - but I imagine it will all come out. I suppose that's why these things are 'questions that need to be asked' and not statements of blame.
    Last edited by Beermat; 14th June 2017 at 16:29.
    www.whirlwindfighterproject.org
    It's all good. Probably.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Cambridge, Duxfordshire
    Posts
    3,082
    There may be some picture emerging here - sorry about the source, John - hope your wife doesn't mind.. https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/...idents-in-2012 It's the fire regs that had needed revision via central gov acting on a report that they sat on instead - while the private contractors didn't appear to do anything illegal they knowingly cladded the block in flammable material - also the residents committee and the local council knew this was happening.
    Last edited by Beermat; 14th June 2017 at 17:01.
    www.whirlwindfighterproject.org
    It's all good. Probably.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    6,069
    His comment had all the elements of typical Labour mischief making. Rather than sympathetic comments appropriate to the gravity of the situation, he strove to make a political point !

    Uncalled for.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    793
    I saw the opposite to you, he was clearly distressed, and gave a deeply sympathetic response.
    It is your own prejudice that provided the political point.
    Uncalled for.

    Oh, and because I am sure you will try and make it personal, no, for the umpteenth time I am not a Corbyn supporter
    Last edited by trekbuster; 14th June 2017 at 18:39.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Henlow, England
    Posts
    636
    I think we all know that whatever he said, JG, it wouldn't have met your approval because he's Labour. Previous history does show some quite extraordinary double standards here.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    6,069
    Trekkie

    Of course you did ! Distressed ? I didn't see that.

    AK

    No. As usual you are quite wrong. If he'd confined himself to some kind of humanitarian comment, his politics would have been irrelevant but no, he had to make a political point. No matter how you dress it up, that is what he did.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Posts
    609
    There may be some picture emerging here - sorry about the source, John - hope your wife doesn't mind.. https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/...idents-in-2012 It's the fire regs that had needed revision via central gov acting on a report that they sat on instead - while the private contractors didn't appear to do anything illegal they knowingly cladded the block in flammable material - also the residents committee and the local council knew this was happening.
    That's what happens when you put energy efficiency over fire safety.

    The problem had existed since before the last Labour government who were in for 13 years, so there's no party politics that can be played here. Southwark Council is Labour and there is no regulation that forced them to wrap the flats in flammable materials rather than more modern fire-resistant cladding.

    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/...k-tower-blocks
    Last edited by Ryan; 15th June 2017 at 08:59.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Cambridge, Duxfordshire
    Posts
    3,082

    Grenfell Tower fire

    Not playing politics, but on a point of fact.. Grenfell Tower was owned by RBKC, not Southwark.
    Last edited by Beermat; 15th June 2017 at 17:37.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Posts
    609
    It's managed by a private organisation though and there are dozens of tower blocks with the same cladding in Labour and Conservative councils.

    http://metro.co.uk/2017/06/15/how-ma...tower-6711394/

    Apparently this isn't the first incident with this cladding.

    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/...grenfell-tower

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Cambridge, Duxfordshire
    Posts
    3,082
    That's true and it's a disgrace. It is managed by a private company - what Local Authorities call an 'arm's length' body - that enables the owners (regardless of political colour) to shrug off responsibility.

    I hope that the first thing the public enquiry does is make available the currently un-released existing report and recommendations on tower block fire safety, and call those responsible for sitting on it to account. Again, not a party political point.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Posts
    9,879
    Reports today that using the fireproof version of the same cladding would have added £5000 to the total cost of the refurbishment. Beggars belief if true.

    I cant believe that it is permissible to fit such a product, or indeed that it is even available in this day and age.

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    9,396
    The political feeding-frenzy continues with Jeremy Corbyn now calling for houses in Kensington to be 'requisitioned' so that displaced families from Grenfell Tower can be housed locally; not sure how many empty houses there are in Kensington but I suppose it is alright if some of the bourgeoisie are turfed-out onto the street!

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-40285994

    I must say I'm getting pretty tired of this but the media (and politicians) can smell blood-in-the-water and they're not going to let-up until somebody is made to 'pay' and they don't really care who it is, even if it is the wrong person.

    A couple of nights ago BBC Newsnight had the usual 'talking-heads' on demanding that lives must absolutely be guaranteed and money was no object when it came to fire safety. Last night BBC Newsnight has some poor council leader in for an interview and practically charged him with corporate-manslaughter on the spot and sneeringly mocked him because he hadn't visited every floor in Glenfell Tower and personally inspected the fire-safety arrangements.

    I'm sorry people, this is not the way the world works. Just because a tragedy is 'preventable' in hindsight it does not follow that something should have been done about it; it is far, far, too easy to be wise after the event and criticise those you feel are 'responsible'. The truth is far more prosaic, the existing arrangements 'protect' almost everybody, almost all the time, but every once in a while, a tragedy occurs; it is usually a million-to-one event and not really 'an accident waiting to happen'.

    I'm not saying there shouldn't be regulation regarding fire-safety nor that lives are 'worthless' but anybody who doesn't think that there is a monetary aspect to all safety-critical situations is not a realistic person; of course to say that in the light of the recent tragedy is heresy!
    WA$.

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    6,069
    "fireproof" is a misnomer. Fire retardant is more accurate. The use and application of fire retardant inhibits the start of a fire. If eventually, the fire gets a hold, it progresses much more slowly.

    One wonders whether samples had been submitted for testing by Health & Safety.

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    9,396
    Reports today that using the fireproof version of the same cladding would have added £5000 to the total cost of the refurbishment. Beggars belief if true.
    Sorry, I don't believe that figure, nor do I believe the £200,000 figure I've heard to fit a sprinkler system to Grenfell Tower; I think these figures are just being plucked out of the air (or at least out of context) to fuel the general level of media, political and public (in that order) 'outrage'!

    Somebody ought to start a new thread for this topic.
    Last edited by Creaking Door; 16th June 2017 at 08:53.
    WA$.

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    8,135
    London fire: Corbyn calls for empty homes to be requisitioned
    Which in London will tend to be those well off.... but for once I agree wih him, in this state of emergency perhaps MP's should give up their UK taxpayer funded second homes to those in need and commute.... Ohhh wait... what is that, they don't agree?.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-40285994London fire:

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Posts
    609
    That's true and it's a disgrace. It is managed by a private company - what Local Authorities call an 'arm's length' body - that enables the owners (regardless of political colour) to shrug off responsibility.

    I hope that the first thing the public enquiry does is make available the currently un-released existing report and recommendations on tower block fire safety, and call those responsible for sitting on it to account. Again, not a party political point.
    As I said early, lots of people sat on it for a very long time (25 years) and part B of the Building Regs was last reviewed in 2006.

    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/...k-tower-blocks

    Using a management agency is very common in renting even at private level because there are a lot of laws and complexities that the average Joe does not want to get involved in, plus deposits have to be held by a regulated body and not the landlord.
    Last edited by Ryan; 16th June 2017 at 10:21.

  21. #21
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    8,135

  22. #22
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Cambridge, Duxfordshire
    Posts
    3,082
    It is nothing to do with deposits being held by a regulated body not a landlord. That's smoke. As you know the management agency is not the regulated body responsible for deposits anyway.

    You are deliberately conflating two separate concepts. In private rental the 'average Joe' landlord if he is lucky enough uses an agency to handle the 'laws and complexities'.

    This is council housing. Such laws and complexities were once handled by the body best suited to deal with 'laws and complexities' - the council. Now, like many other ex-council services, it is usually farmed out to a private concern. This change was an ideological one, and it had benefits and pitfalls.

    Part B of the building regs was last reviewed in 2006. Gavin Barwell said in parliament that he would review it last year following another tower block fire (Lakanal House), and then didn't.
    Last edited by Beermat; 16th June 2017 at 10:47.
    www.whirlwindfighterproject.org
    It's all good. Probably.

  23. #23
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    8,135
    As for the flats being housing for "poor people" that is not strictly true, some of them appear to be far from that.

    I suggest you look at

    https://www.openrent.co.uk/property-...wer-w11/219191

    https://www.openrent.co.uk/property-...wer-w11/168071

    one of them says......

    Let Agreed - This property is no longer available for rent

    This property has now been taken off the market (as of 01 June 2017).

    One can only hope they never got time to move in


    ..
    Last edited by TonyT; 16th June 2017 at 10:44.

  24. #24
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    8,135
    I cannot understand why they are hounding this guy

    http://metro.co.uk/2017/06/15/man-be...house-6712189/

    His company simply fitted the product, one would imagine that the product was specified by the building owners / re furbishers and his company simply installed it.. Bloody Press.

    And the other thing, they do not know yet if the cladding was to blame so saying spending £5000 extra would have is crass.
    Last edited by TonyT; 16th June 2017 at 10:53.

  25. #25
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Cambridge, Duxfordshire
    Posts
    3,082
    Yes. Why is anyone hounding anyone until we know exactly what happened. But least of all the person who's company did the work. Agreed, classic 'soft target' tactics.
    www.whirlwindfighterproject.org
    It's all good. Probably.

  26. #26
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    9,396
    Still doubt the £5000 'extra' figure for fire-retardant cladding; nobody spends £2,600,000 on cladding and scrimps on an extra £5000 do they.

    As usual the media, with almost no experience of anything outside the media, are grasping at any figure, quoted by anybody, if it makes their story more shocking.

    And why does he have to ge 'hiding' in his (million pound!) house? He lives there. I expect he wouldn't give an interview so, in the media's view, he's got to be guilty of something!
    Last edited by Creaking Door; 16th June 2017 at 11:13.
    WA$.

  27. #27
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    8,135
    I would be asking more questions of the fridge manufacturer if that is what is found to be at fault, because there might be several more buildings of this size with the cladding on, but their could be millions of the fridges out there, at the end of the day, the building and its cladding would be still standing if the supposed fridge hadn't burst into flames.

  28. #28
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    9,396
    Despite the reports, I doubt it was a fridge that caused the fire; the heat-generating component, the compressor, is sealed in a pressure-tight steel cylinder.
    WA$.

  29. #29
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    8,135

  30. #30
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    9,396
    I stand corrected, but that does surprise me.

    I once had a summer-job in a factory making commercial fridge-freezers and during a boring lunch-break I cut a broken compressor out of its pressure vessel. The pressure vessel was about the size of a football and made of 3mm thick steel; even with an angle-grinder it took about twenty minutes to cut it in half. The strange thing was that the burnt-out compressor was still so hot you couldn't touch it but the pressure vessel was room-temperature?
    WA$.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

- Part of the    Network -

KEY AERO AVIATION NEWS

MAGAZINES

AVIATION FORUM

SHOP

 

WEBSITES