Our system detected that your browser is blocking advertisements on our site. Please help support FoxesTalk by disabling any kind of ad blocker while browsing this site. Thank you.
Jump to content
 Share
spacemunky

Huge fire London building

By spacemunky, in General Chat

Recommended Posts

Benguin

Benguin

Posted
Posted
14 minutes ago, Buce said:

 

May met a group of victims, residents, volunteers and community leaders at a church close to the scene of the blaze on Friday, and visited survivors in hospital.

The visits, however, which took place more than 48 hours after the fire broke out, have done little to quell the growing anger over the way she has dealt with the tragedy.

As she left St Clement’s church following a visit lasting less than an hour, the PM faced cries of “coward” and “shame on you”. One woman wept, saying it was because May had declined to speak to anyone outside the meeting.

Yeah but I'm saying that she dealt with it well. What are people expecting? Money? check. An Inquiry to hold someone accountable? check. A debate in the commons to look for reform in areas of failures? Check.

 

Theresa May could have personally bought all of the survivors houses, donated a £million of her own cash and still people on the left would protest.

DJ Barry Hammond

DJ Barry Hammond

Posted
Posted
19 minutes ago, Benguin said:

 

Really, you just posted a stupid unrelated article about how Theresa May apparently misread the public mood.

 

What I would assume any rational person would want from their government is action. Theresa May set up a line of funding and promised a full inquiry hence action. For a long time now it is the crown that does the public service and the queen popped down to console the victims. The idea that Theresa has failed the people by providing everything the people would expect except a hug is frankly testament to how silly the world is at the moment.

 

Once again, I will mention, May herself said the initial response wasn't good enough. She is fully deserving of criticism there.

 

The other area where criticism could become due is if it is found political decisions prior the event may have inadvertently contributed to a situation where flammable cladding was affixed to the building. We will have to see on that one, but to deny the point above suggests a mindset of blind allegiance.

  • Like 1
Buce

Buce

Posted
Posted (edited)
3 minutes ago, Benguin said:

Yeah but I'm saying that she dealt with it well. What are people expecting? Money? check. An Inquiry to hold someone accountable? check. A debate in the commons to look for reform in areas of failures? Check.

 

Theresa May could have personally bought all of the survivors houses, donated a £million of her own cash and still people on the left would protest.

 

Yes, that is clear.

 

What is also clear is that others have a very different opinion - including May herself.

Edited by Buce
separator

separator

Posted
Posted

It's amazing how many buildings are covered in cladding these days, new builds or refurbished old ones... flats, offices, hotels. I'm sure most aren't flammable but how on earth did the ones that are get through safety checks. Shocking. Going to cost a small fortune to re-clad them all.

DJ Barry Hammond

DJ Barry Hammond

Posted
Posted (edited)
23 minutes ago, Buce said:

 

Camden flats to be evacuated over cladding:

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-40389148

 

Wow! 

 

I'm split here between wondering if it's a bit of an over-reaction, but then again it is an understandable safety concern and if I lived there I might think very differently. Maybe the sensible option is the one taken.

 

It's possibly a decision that's stemmed from the tenants pressure because, I'm pretty sure this was one mentioned as having an issue this morning and the council weren't planning on moving residents then.

 

What it does do is set a precedent which other councils in similar situations will be judged by. 

Edited by DJ Barry Hammond
DJ Barry Hammond

DJ Barry Hammond

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, separator said:

It's amazing how many buildings are covered in cladding these days, new builds or refurbished old ones... flats, offices, hotels. I'm sure most aren't flammable but how on earth did the ones that are get through safety checks. Shocking. Going to cost a small fortune to re-clad them all.

 

Well what I've been wondering in this instance... why produce/sell a flammable product in the first place if you have a comparable inflammable product with very little difference in terms of price point. 

 

 

separator

separator

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, DJ Barry Hammond said:

 

Well what I've been wondering in this instance... why produce/sell a flammable product in the first place if you have a comparable inflammable product with very little difference in terms of price point. 

 

 

Social housing refurbishing projects are going to get the absolute minimum needed spent on them. Sad but true

Buce

Buce

Posted
Posted
29 minutes ago, DJ Barry Hammond said:

 

Wow! 

 

I'm split here between wondering if it's a bit of an over-reaction, but then again it is an understandable safety concern and if I lived there I might think very differently. Maybe the sensible option is the one taken.

 

It's possibly a decision that's stemmed from the tenants pressure because, I'm pretty sure this was one mentioned as having an issue this morning and the council weren't planning on moving residents then.

 

What it does do is set a precedent which other councils in similar situations will be judged by. 

 

Five tower blocks now to be evacuated:

 

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/jun/23/camden-to-evacuate-taplow-tower-over-fire-safety-fears-after-grenfell-disaster

yorkie1999

yorkie1999

Posted
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, separator said:

It's amazing how many buildings are covered in cladding these days, new builds or refurbished old ones... flats, offices, hotels. I'm sure most aren't flammable but how on earth did the ones that are get through safety checks. Shocking. Going to cost a small fortune to re-clad them all.

Probably employ the same companies that stuck the dodgy stuff up in the first place as wall. This isn't done for safety reasons, this is being done to appease people.

Edited by yorkie1999
SouthStandUpperTier

SouthStandUpperTier

Posted
Posted
 
For 3-4 weeks as well! 
 
And chances are, they'll be put up in tower block hotels with cladding on them [emoji185]

They're being put up in the local leisure centre. Imagine being told to evacuate your home then finding out you were going to be looked after by Gordon Brittas.
  • Like 2
stripeyfox

stripeyfox

Posted
Posted

They (the government, local authority, whoever) cannot under any circumstances, no matter how small the likelihood allow another tower block fire like Grenfell to occur. That is the bottom line. The Grenfell fire might have been 10,000-1 or more to happen - the exploding fridge, the warm night with all the windows open, the cladding, the cavity, the chimney effect... but they can't afford to take that risk. Even if it cost millions to move and rehome people, it is better than another disaster.

 

DJ Barry Hammond

DJ Barry Hammond

Posted
Posted
10 minutes ago, SouthStandUpperTier said:


They're being put up in the local leisure centre. Imagine being told to evacuate your home then finding out you were going to be looked after by Gordon Brittas.

 

 

DJ Barry Hammond

DJ Barry Hammond

Posted
Posted (edited)
24 minutes ago, stripeyfox said:

They (the government, local authority, whoever) cannot under any circumstances, no matter how small the likelihood allow another tower block fire like Grenfell to occur. That is the bottom line. The Grenfell fire might have been 10,000-1 or more to happen - the exploding fridge, the warm night with all the windows open, the cladding, the cavity, the chimney effect... but they can't afford to take that risk. Even if it cost millions to move and rehome people, it is better than another disaster.

 

 

Well... I wonder if the fact this is a Labour council has an impact in the decision.

 

In n uncalculating world, what you state is correct, but we both know that isn't always the case. They may have felt the risk could be 'managed' in other ways and the Twitter link below suggests that this morning Camden council held a different position.

 

My guess is people higher up in the Labour Party have had a word with the council here... yes with your sentiments primarily in my mind, but there is also a political considerations that probably play a part.

 

 

Edited by DJ Barry Hammond
foxy boxing

foxy boxing

Posted
Posted
14 hours ago, Buce said:

 

Camden flats to be evacuated over cladding:

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-40389148

everything that needs to be done to make these buildings safe should be done but this is a massive upheavel for the families to endure and who knows how long it will take to get back into their homes! lessons need to be learned from this and it must not be allowed to happen again 

Tuna

Tuna

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, Buce said:

 

60 towers now found to be unsafe:

 

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/jun/25/revealed-60-towers-across-england-found-to-have-unsafe-cladding

 

This is a scandal on a national scale.

How on earth did this cladding get through quality control? You'd think fire testing would be one of the first things they did. It couldn't possibly have passed.

 

Amazed that this stuff is used on housing or any building whatsoever.

Jattdogg

Jattdogg

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Tuna said:

How on earth did this cladding get through quality control? You'd think fire testing would be one of the first things they did. It couldn't possibly have passed.

 

Amazed that this stuff is used on housing or any building whatsoever.

£ mate. It makes anything happen.

Guest Col city fan

Guest Col city fan

Posted
Posted
12 hours ago, Tuna said:

How on earth did this cladding get through quality control? You'd think fire testing would be one of the first things they did. It couldn't possibly have passed.

 

Amazed that this stuff is used on housing or any building whatsoever.

To think that this could happen in the U.K. In 2017 is an absolute, fookin disgrace.

It is a scandal on a national scale

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...