Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Aibu to be so angry with the tory government regarding grenfell

574 replies

GreenTreesWithLeaves · 16/06/2017 20:47

Grenfell should not have happened. Austerity, cost cutting, ignoring the poor, helping the rich get richer, all this led to the horrific circumstances.

Tory response? Theresa May didnt even speak to the survivor residents. A tory minister cited security reasons, yet the Queen managed to come out and talk to the residents without issue.

Tories have form for voting against safety issues in housing. All to benefit the wealthy. It is utterly shameful that these are the people that run our country, who care only for the rich.

OP posts:
Thread gallery
5
muckypup73 · 16/06/2017 22:20

mothertruck3r, you what??? it was the mess left by Labour??? scuse me shes had 7 years to sort it out!!! but shed rather make her pals richer than give a fuck about poor people! probably why she diddnt fuckin visit them!

FizbotheClown · 16/06/2017 22:21

But Corbyn is king of not answering questions.

akkakk · 16/06/2017 22:25

Thank you for that London Mayors List yes I do believe this is why he is squarely blaming a Tory government. I would not at all put the blame for this at his door - in no way, however seeing as fire and safety etc does also include his remit as Mayor he should be spending his time proactively telling us what steps he is taking in his powers to prevent this again in London.

I don't think it is appropriate to blame any one person - and especially not to follow the trend here and elsewhere of blaming individuals where often the fault lies in the role (i.e. there have been tory and labour Mayors / governments)

however, I am not sure why you feel that you couldn't be putting at least some of the blame at the mayoral office door? His office has responsibility for:

  • Fire
  • Planning
  • Land & Buildings
  • Regeneration

i.e. - for every dimension of what was behind this fire, plus the opportunity to look at how to regenerate the area - i.e. prevent it

I can not see any one role which had as much opportunity to be setting policy etc. which could have prevented this...

perhaps as a country we should stop spending money on projects which might not be essential (H2 link / Stonehenge tunnel / ??? / etc.) until we have sorted out the absolute basics - shelter / nutrition (food and water) / basic wages / education - for every person in this country - until those are our fundamental core aims we don't deserve to consider ourselves a compassionate / civilised nation

so perhaps we need to be looking at the Mayor's budget and where he is spending time and money to see where his priorities lie...

Allabitmuchisntit · 16/06/2017 22:31

Corbyn isn't the fucking PM though is he. These people are looking to May to show empathy and understanding.
She made the election about her, not the party. She's failed, failed and failed again. It's her job to put herself in the line of fire when something so absolutely horrific and tragic like this happens. And yet she dodges the victims with ease. Am fucking furious for those poor, poor people and they deserve much, much more from our so called leader.

TheNaze73 · 16/06/2017 22:36

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

CrossWordSalad · 16/06/2017 22:48

There are a lot of people apportioning blame before we know what happened. I don't know if people who say "It's all the Tories" and "It's all austerity" really believe this themselves. The truth will no doubt be much more complicated.

www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/labours-new-kensington-mp-was-on-housing-scrutiny-committee-a3566661.html?amp

CrossWordSalad · 16/06/2017 22:50

This is good from Brendan O'Neill

www.spiked-online.com/newsite/article/please-stop-exploiting-the-dead-of-grenfell-tower/19962#.WURSWOxuIdc

SkafaceClaw · 16/06/2017 22:50

I see the number of Tory MPs many of which are also landlords that voted against making homes fit for human habitation and it tells me all I need to know.

Austerity wise - the cuts in legal aid meant that the action group were unable to further challenge their HA about their safety as they were constantly fobbed off.

www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/tories-vote-down-law-requiring-landlords-make-their-homes-fit-for-human-habitation-a6809691.html

LostSight · 16/06/2017 22:51

Tanyfastic has already, to an extent answered all those who suggested I was being ridiculous to suggest there were too few firefighters, but I read a quote from one of those involved.

"“Put it this way, you’re meant to work on a fire for a maximum of four hours, we’ve been here for 12. Hopefully, we’ll get home at some point before we have to come back tonight.”

From an article in the Guardian about the recent and continuing cuts to the fire service.

This is not all about the Conservatives. It obviously goes much deeper. But they do have to carry their share of the responsibility. And to suggest that people should just wait and see and not draw any conclusions is ludicrous. That there have been Titanic levels of failure, costcutting and inadequate legislation is obvious.

GreenTreesWithLeaves · 16/06/2017 22:57

I agree that there were failings with labour in the past too.

However, Corbyn did try to pass through a law last year to make hones fir for human habitation. Tories rejected it. 72 of the MPs who voted against the law, are landlords themselves. Those MPs did not vote to protect the poor, they voted to protect their income at the expense of others.

OP posts:
WizardOfToss · 16/06/2017 22:59

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

GreenTreesWithLeaves · 16/06/2017 23:00

'homes fit for'

Sorry about the typos

OP posts:
IdontTrusther · 16/06/2017 23:11

Yes as predicted socialist worker placards out there on streets tonight, down with tory filth etc.

IdontTrusther · 16/06/2017 23:15

Absolve agree to mower that law on the homes fitted for the habituation needed to touch be passed, councils may have powers to step into but they don't. We know that after famous Slough sheds panorama programme years ago no landlord weren't prosecuted.

deffoncforthis · 16/06/2017 23:16

"Multiple agencies and people of all political stripes are potentially culpable. I say again that decent people are revolted by the use of this suffering for political ends. It's disgusting"

Damned well right.

Neuroticwoman · 16/06/2017 23:21

I'm ashamed to say I know little of politics and cannot therefore comment on what has or hasn't or what should or shouldn't have been done prior to this tragedy by any government. But it seems to me that TM has done broadly what I would expect of a PM, i.e. address the immediate issues; JC cannot implement policy or instigate investigation etc, and has thus done what he can and shown empathy and compassion. Her Majesty has done exactly as I would have hoped by engaging with those who are suffering as she usually does and should do.

LostSight · 16/06/2017 23:29

decent people are revolted by the use of this suffering for political ends.

Can you define what you mean by political ends exactly? I consider myself quite decent, and yet I find it hard not to associate the current situation so strongly with the years of cost cutting and the lack of legislation.

If the fire had been a simple accident, with no fault, then I would have felt terribly sad. As it is, I feel both sad and angry. Have I to pretend that it isn't obvious in this case that some blame lies with the current political situation?

Or is it just party politics and political point scoring that are offensive?

MrsLupo · 16/06/2017 23:42

If you want to look at things through a party political prism, it gets very complicated. Lakanal House, for instance, occurred under a Labour government, but by the time the findings of the enquiry were published, there was a Conservative government in power that took no notice of them. Boris Johnson presided over cuts to the fire service while he was mayor, but it was a Labour decision to divest the fire service of its assessment responsibilities (supported by Tories, it must be said). Apportioning of blame along party lines is a complex process, therefore, and not necessarily that fruitful, when culpability will likely be narrowed down eventually to more specific decisions and choices.

What is true, though, imo, is that much of the decision-making that led to this catastrophe was made in the context of a politicised business culture that has incrementally allowed, condoned, encouraged and eventually rewarded greed. Business entities obviously exist to make a profit, but now also have serious questions to answer if they don't prioritise the obscene gains their shareholders have been encouraged to expect ahead of quality, safety or ethics. The public sector also has gradually been sucked into this profit-making imperative, to the point where service, care, honesty, etc have become an old-fashioned joke compared with the all-importance of the bottom line. Nowhere is this more vividly illustrated than at the interface between the public and private sectors, where, thanks to Thatcher's toxic legacy, an emasculated public sector is at the mercy of whatever the private market imposes, while those same private companies are openly allowed to operate in a moral vacuum that permits - for example - a construction company to go bust, owing creditors millions, only for its assets to be bought for a song by a very similarly named construction company owned by the same person, which then takes over all the liquidated company's lucrative contracts. Not naming any names, of course.

To me, tackling that corrupt business culture is the key political challenge, and I don't care what colour the government is that takes that challenge on, though I strongly suspect, of course, that it won't be the Tories.

nancy75 · 16/06/2017 23:51

I'm very much in favour of the legislation to ensure rented homes are fit for habitation, however in this case it probably wouldn't have made any difference, if the cladding is found to be to blame this fire would still have happened - the cladding is legal & approved for use so it would not have been checked or removed even if the bill had been passed.

PersianCatLady · 16/06/2017 23:58

It was Tony Blair's Labour government that bought in the new regulations regarding energy efficiency in buildings like tower blocks.

The purpose of the cladding was to better insulate buildings so that they would meet the new energy efficiency regulations.

bluegreenyellow · 17/06/2017 00:34

jeremy corbyn never mention fire safety before this event jeremy corbyn hasnt done anything in his time as an mp apart from moaned and complained a lot

bluegreenyellow · 17/06/2017 00:37

oh and as i said in another thread labour mayor yes all 3 labour councillors in the ward yes labour mp yes
13 strait years of labour government yes

caroldecker · 17/06/2017 00:44

KCTMO, who run the block are owned by the residents and all board members are voted for by the residents. The residents could therefore have taken complete control of the organisation themselves, had they so wanted.
They are responsible for 9,400 properties - all tenants are members and can turn up or postal vote at the AGM.
In 2016, 59 residents attended the AGM, with 724 voting, hardly a raging mass of anger.
An independent audit of tenant view of performance was carried out in 2016:
Of 3,400 residents:
86% where in favour of KCTMO running the properties
76% where satisfied with the services provided
Every 5 years there is a vote on their continuation as managers. Last vote in 2014 had 86% vote in favour.

caroldecker · 17/06/2017 00:50

The new Labour MP for K&C, Emma Dent Coad, was on the planning committee on 28 April 2015, when the materials for the cladding were approved.
I am assuming she registered an objection on fire safety grounds.

notknownatthisaddress · 17/06/2017 00:52
Biscuit