Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

To think Labour should save their political point scoring re Granffell tower for later on

314 replies

angelcakerocks · 14/06/2017 20:28

I'm actually quite disgusted that Labour are yet again using a tragedy to score political points (as they did with the terrorist incident) so soon after the event.
Yes questions need to be asked, but it seems inappropriate to be doing that right now, when we should all be pulling together and focusing on the victims of this awful accident. There is no need for the political point scoring today.

OP posts:
sleeponeday · 15/06/2017 21:51

Interestingly, Wales have mandated sprinklers in all new dwellings. Nobody has ever died of fire-related causes in a property fitted with them, apparently. So it can be done! BBC article on it here.

Petition is here. It's change.org, though - I hope someone starts one on the government petition site again, because I suspect at the moment with this much public attention it would end up with a Parliamentary debate, and with luck, consequent law. The petition asks for it to be mandatory only in high rises, but that seems an excellent place to start.

DixieNormas · 15/06/2017 21:56

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

FinallyThroughTheRoof · 15/06/2017 21:57

Hear hear

7461Mary18 · 15/06/2017 21:59

The Conservative government wants people to be safe as much as the Labour party and indeed the British people chose not to elect the Labour party as they know they are safer in Mrs May's hands.

sleeponeday · 15/06/2017 22:01

Dixie that was perfectly stated. Thank you.

It could be any of us. Absolutely any of us. And it was avoidable. In fact attempts to prevent it were actively blocked, in several areas and on several occasions. That's a not hyperbole; it's a matter of public record. Much of it on Hansard.

FinallyThroughTheRoof · 15/06/2017 22:03

Yes these people were really safe Mary.

sleeponeday · 15/06/2017 22:03

The Conservative government wants people to be safe as much as the Labour party and indeed the British people chose not to elect the Labour party as they know they are safer in Mrs May's hands.

Corbyn proposed an amendment to a housing bill in January 2016 which would have prevented this from happening. May voted against it. So did her nominated junior minister with responsibility for fire safety, who is himself a landlord and would have incurred costs in making his own properties safer.

More simply: you could not be more wrong.

YokoReturns · 15/06/2017 22:09

72 landlords - sorry - MPs voted against the fire safety part of the bill mentioned by PP.

This is not point scoring, it is the poor getting screwed in a criminal way by the rich yet again. The search for answers should absolutely start now, and start with the government.

ComputerUserNotTrained · 15/06/2017 22:11

Seaman and Schmeichel are names that suggest safe hands to me.

Cameron, May? Nope.

sleeponeday · 15/06/2017 22:11

Incidentally, this was published ten days ago. I quote:

Since 2010, over 10,000 firefighters have been axed; dozens of fire stations have closed; fire engines have been scrapped; and emergency rescue equipment has been slashed. Fire service budgets have been reduced by 30 per cent across the UK, with a further 20 per cent of cuts expected by 2020.

In England, the average response to primary fires – the most serious that the fire service attends – has increased by 31 seconds since 2010/2011. Response times to dwelling fires which involve somebody who needs rescuing increased by 26 seconds since 2010/2011. Those are not the only increases: every type of incident that the fire service responds to now takes longer compared to 2010.

Firefighters are increasingly finding themselves over stretched and under resourced. I cannot emphasise enough how seconds count when firefighting. A few seconds can be the difference between saving a life or not.

The Government’s own statistics show that 303 people died in fires during 2015/2016. This is an unacceptable rise of 15 per cent on the previous year.

Safer? A year after a Manchester policeman warned May that the police cuts would result in terrorism, and were a threat to national security, only for her to sneer that he was crying wolf and fear-mongering? We are not safer. We are anything but.

You can't take large amounts of funding away and expect the same quality. It beggars belief that people can argue to the contrary.

FinallyThroughTheRoof · 15/06/2017 22:13

Hopefully this DUP deal will fall through and Labour will win a new general election. The pills indicate they will, Mary Grin

FinallyThroughTheRoof · 15/06/2017 22:13

Or even the polls

DixieNormas · 15/06/2017 22:16

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

DixieNormas · 15/06/2017 22:19

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

FinallyThroughTheRoof · 15/06/2017 22:20

You speak much sense though Grin

DeleteOrDecay · 15/06/2017 22:42

YABU. It was made political when conservative mp's decided to vote against an amendment to the housing bill which would have prevented this from happening.

Some people want to bury their head in the sand over this but they can't, it is what it is. JC is doing what he's paid to do.

Fab39ish · 15/06/2017 22:49

They certainly want their money and the money of their cronies to be safe.
Safe housing for tenants not do much.

LastGirlOnTheLeft · 15/06/2017 22:54

I really hope JC pushed this! This is horrendous and I hope FOR ONCE those responsible answer!!!

BabychamSocialist · 15/06/2017 23:19

Here's a nice fact for you all.

Germany and AMERICA(!) banned the panels used on the building because they were unsafe.

The panels cost £22, whereas fire resistant ones cost £24. It would've cost just £5k more to do the building in the fire resistant panels.

That's the country we're living in right now.

makeourfuture · 16/06/2017 06:36

The panels cost £22, whereas fire resistant ones cost £24. It would've cost just £5k more to do the building in the fire resistant panels.

Good lord.

BossaDad · 16/06/2017 06:50

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

IfYouGoDownToTheWoodsToday · 16/06/2017 06:53

Not before time Bossa.

Over the last 2 days I keep wondering how many people will be destroying losing files/emails and paperwork. Angry

IfYouGoDownToTheWoodsToday · 16/06/2017 06:54

Baby that info is just absolutely shocking.

Clalpolly · 16/06/2017 07:25

I have completely changed my mind on this. I dislike Corbyn. However, if people want to express justifiable anger through him then that is completely ok.
It would be hard for TM to face the families- security etc - but the families had no security. She should have met them.

everthibkyouvebeenconned · 16/06/2017 07:31

I'm glad it's a criminal enquiry too. Have been concerned evidence has been shredded hard drives destroyed etc