Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Rees Mogg uses common sense to flee burning building.

396 replies

longwayoff · 05/11/2019 10:55

Or, he would, if he were to find himself in that situation. Having previously insulted the medical knowledge and expertise of a leading neurologist, he now advises ignoring fire service advice, saying those who died in Grenfell lacked common sense and should have left the building. AIBU to say this man's ignorance is an embarrassment and he is unfit for public service?

OP posts:
merrymouse · 06/11/2019 15:27

The point he's tried to make, and I think he'll not forgiven for doing so clumsily, is that the advice would have felt counterintuitive to most people

No, that is the point he tried to make when he. back tracked.

The original point he made was that he (and for some reason the radio presenter) would have ignored advice from emergency services and left the building.

merrymouse · 06/11/2019 15:44

If any one sector had acted differently then it might have been averted.

High rise blocks with only one stairwell assume compliance with building standards that state that individual flats should be able to contain a fire for a minimum of one hour. Many don't have building fire alarms because the policy is to discourage evacuation. The stair well is to be used for access, not escape.

How do you evacuate a 24 story building in 20 minutes, if, in the event of a fire, the building is designed with the assumption that people won't leave?

By using words like 'common sense' JRM implies that there is an easy solution. The reality is that improving conditions costs money, and many people are living in conditions that we now know to be unsafe, while the building owners argue about money. By suggesting that there was a 'common sense' way to escape Grenfell, JRM absolves the government of responsibility for funding necessary changes.

StoneofDestiny · 06/11/2019 15:51

Rees Mogg has shown crass insensitivity in making any comment about the residents actions or what he would have done.
Like his pal Boris Johnson, he has no control over his mouth. Both show limited understanding of how their words impact on others.
Over and over Tory politicians seem unable to show empathy, sensitivity or compassion for the most needy in our society.

PortiaCastis · 06/11/2019 16:09

Through helping a charity for Grenfell I've met some residents and some firefighters, they are all still suffering and the firefighter I met recently still has PTSD and has been forced to resign through ill health, so very sad
They do not need moggs insensitivity, they need hope and understanding. Can you imagine being faced with a tower block on fire and doing your best but to no avail as the equipment necessary was miles away and you followed orders but still couldn't save people. Mogg can rabble as much as he likes but we do not see him volunteering to help those affected.
Grrr makes my blood boil, as always everyone knows so much about something did nothing but presume they know better than those that tried.
The person to blame is the person who signed of that cladding knowing they were cost-cutting and it was sub standard.

HelenaDove · 06/11/2019 16:12

Portia Its wonderful what the charity is doing Thanks

Looks like Arron Banks has stuck his oar in now too.

ThatsMeInTheSpotlight · 06/11/2019 16:13

merry I'm not sure why you quoted me and then listed points that weren't relevant to what I had said.

The architect, the builders, building control - should all have identified that the cladding was inappropriate. The fire safety checks and evacuation procedures should have been updated regularly but that policy has been changed in different LAs leaving the checks outdated and inadequate. And different fire officers apply and evaluate policies differently.

Much though I hate the Tories, there were failings under Labour too - successive governments and councils created a culture that cut corners, that prioritised making LA housing 'look pretty' rather than ensuring it was safe, that encouraged staff to view safety checks and risk assessments as box ticking exercises rather than essential, not to mention the completely arbitrary approach to planning processes and regulations that can vary council to council.

I was reading a council impact assessment earlier this week (in a different field). It would never have been approved in any organisation I've worked with. It had no recent research, was full of unsubstantiated references and much of it had been cut and pasted.

I'm angry about Grenfell and I'm angry about the push for easy scapegoats. There are lots of organisations that should be taking a long hard look at their processes.

PortiaCastis · 06/11/2019 16:14

Thanks Helena
Wtf has Aaron Banks got to do with anything, he's a maggot

HelenaDove · 06/11/2019 16:31

Spotlight i agree The Salford Star has extensively covered what the tenants of Salix Homes were put through.

merrymouse · 06/11/2019 17:17

merry I'm not sure why you quoted me and then listed points that weren't relevant to what I had said.

Because the contradictory construction of the building - internal building standards drawn up with the assumption that the fire could be contained for an hour within a flat, cladding applied that rendered the building a death trap in 20 minutes of catching fire - meant that there was no good way to deal with this fire.

Your comment implied that something could have been done to avert the tragedy, but a 24 storey building that has one stairwell that has to be used for access and evacuation, no building fire alarms, no suitable evacuation policy and a 20 minute evacuation window is just not safe.

PortiaCastis · 06/11/2019 17:27

The building was a death trap and how were that number of panicking people seriously expected to use one stairwell.
The aftermath will always haunt them and the firemen because of cost cutting incompetence but scapegoats will no doubt be found.
Hindsight is a wonderful thing especially from those who were not involved !

PigletJohn · 06/11/2019 17:29

"something could have been done to avert the tragedy"

Something could.

The Housing Ministers in England responsible for Building Regulations could have issued revised guidance so that homes would no longer be wrapped in flammable material.

FOUR of them failed to do so. When requested by the all-party MPs committe, one replied "I am not willing to disrupt the work of this department by asking that these matters are brought forward."

HelenaDove · 06/11/2019 17:31

Salford Mayor, Paul Dennett immediately met with residents of the affected blocks to reassure us that this cladding would be removed and replaced as soon as possible. He promised an expert survey would be carried out to evaluate the state of the problems with each of the blocks and that the resulting report would be shared with residents as soon as it was completed. This report became unofficially known as the 'Trident Report', after the name of the company undertaking the survey.

Today, two years later, City Mayor, Paul Dennett has not been back to speak with the residents about his failure to remove and replace all the cladding. City leaders are adamant that there is no Trident Report for residents to see. Only the first three floors of all nine blocks have had their cladding removed, but replaced with temporary cement boards, to mitigate the risk from low level vehicle fires. The blocks look like the kid who forgot his trainers for P.E., and had to wear a really naff pair from the lost property box!

Only one of the smaller, medium-rise blocks has had all its cladding removed. This was done in the period leading up to Christmas and it not only left the block without the vital insulation it needed to keep the homes warm and for the heating system to operate effectively, but it also left all the window framework jutting out from the wall. Removing the cladding caused water to seep into flats over winter when it rained. This revealed that the windows had not originally been made independently watertight. Residents were offered some financial recompense for their inconvenience - provided they applied for it!

The residents of the remaining 8 blocks are still in a state of limbo and at risk. Several safety measures have been put in place to bridge this vacuous state, with the employment of Fire Marshals, who patrol the blocks and grounds continuously 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, 365 days of the year. The weekly cost for this service? Approximately £25,000! The Fire Marshals are armed with air horns or Klaxons to sound as an instruction to evacuate the building in the event of a fire.

Fire Alarms have now been fitted on every floor, as previously we were instructed to stay put in the event of a fire and the fire alarm was silent. However, the Fire Marshals are needed because most residents cannot hear the new Fire Alarms! This is because the alarms were fitted in the stairwells on every landing. We are told they are as loud as regulations allow them to be. However, this is not the issue. They are in the wrong place! The sound has to pass through at least TWO fire doors to get to residents in their flats. Duh! Pendleton Together have been told of this multiple times and by numerous residents. Yet, there have been no changes!

As you will appreciate, I personally – and many of my neighbours feel very far from safe at the moment and with little belief in either Salford City Council, who owns the properties, or Together Housing Group, who manages them under the Pendleton Together P.F.I. Contract. We have had so many broken promises;

"Some persons make promises for the pleasure of breaking them." - William Hazlitt.

Alongside all this stands a long list of failures to address repairs and the replacement of gates, doors and windows, outstanding from the poor standard of refurbishment work carried out by Keepmoat under the P.F.I. deal that are still to be corrected. We understand litigation is taking place over who should pay for these corrections, but residents should not be inconvenienced because of it. Repairs and restorative work should be undertaken and the argument over who pays determined in due course. We have been put out enough!

Just one of these is that many new window frames and their opening/locking mechanisms are faulty. Instead of replacing the windows that are clearly not fit for purpose, the onus is being put on residents who are being instructed by Pendleton Together not to fully open the windows, but only have them on "vent". They have been instructed not to open the Juliet balcony doors – on pain of attracting a Tenancy Warning for any infringement.

One female resident, the mother of a disabled child with breathing problems, was awarded such a written warning, but this was later rescinded following the intervention of her social worker, who had been present at the time of the incident and was a witness. What would or could have happened otherwise?

Many other residents, including myself, have experienced a similar regime of threats, intimidation and over-zealous enforcement from Pendleton Together for making legitimate complaints. Residents are not the only people to receive this level of disrespect. Our MP, Rebecca Long Bailey, who wanted to arrange meetings to investigate mounting concerns from residents was ignored and disrespected. This resulted in her request having to be escalated to Council and Mayor level to get answers from Pendleton Together.

Their continued failure to address residents' complaints and repairs just goes on and on. How can this situation be allowed to continue? Pendleton Together seem to be untouchable, they certainly think that from their actions or lack of them. They seem answerable to nobody and able to rule with a rod of iron. They operate from Brotherton House, but we now call it Big Brotherton, because they always seem to be watching us and they are the 'Thought Police'!

After Grenfell, the Fire Evacuation instructions were changed from "Stay put in your flat" to "Full evacuation - with one central assembly point near the Housing Office at one end of the estate." For many elderly or infirm residents to walk that distance, up to 0.38 of mile, would be impossible at any time let alone under evacuation conditions and potentially wearing very little!

However, a minor fire broke out recently in the Bin Room of a nearby block. Confusion reigned as some residents were evacuated, while many on the upper floors were seen standing at their windows uncertain of what was required as no klaxons had been sounded on their landing by any Fire Marshals. Certainly not a glowing endorsement of the Fire Evacuation Procedures under the circumstances and all the money being spent on the Fire Marshals themselves!

One resident who lives on the ground floor of the block in question has several disabilities, but was just ignored by those who should have known about him from the Fire Evacuation Risk document held in a metal cabinet located in the entrance to the building. When he became aware of people standing around on the grass outside he came to the front door, looked around, and then went back to bed. No Marshals tried to direct him to a place of safety. Later, when questions were asked about this, residents were told "we only evacuate the floors above and below the fire." In one of the resident Newsletters produced by Pendleton Together the evacuation was given a glowing report and it stated that everything had gone according to plan, but a few items needed further thought.

To date residents have yet to be told of this complete change to the Fire Procedures. We are supposed to go to Pendleton Gateway, a library and medical centre, opposite "Big Brotherton", as a muster point. This is not feasible for some residents, who are disabled or elderly, who could not walk that far. Even if people reach the Assembly Point, there is nowhere to sit, no toilet facilities, nowhere to get hot beverages to keep you warm or combat shock and no blankets to keep you warm either. You would just be stood there in the open air, for how long who knows? Probably until Pendleton Together staff arrived, if out of hours. We have told them this is not acceptable again and again. One of the slogans that came out of Grenfell was; "Residents die when landlords don't listen"!

All in all it has to be said that from the days leading up to the start of the P.F.I. contract when there was an award winning, high level of cooperative working between the landlord and the residents, the quality of life has fallen a long way due to Pendleton Together's overly draconian estate-management style and residents' trust in them has become seriously affected.

Communications and tenant participation are at an all-time low. What was meant to be a much improved lifestyle in an up-to-date, modern housing estate has been reduced to a life of frightening insecurity in what continues to be a series of highly volatile high-rise tinderboxes.

merrymouse · 06/11/2019 17:35

Yes PigletJohn, I agree that steps could have been taken to avert tragedy (mainly not apply flammable cladding to a building not designed for evacuation), but by the night of the fire I think it was too late.

PortiaCastis · 06/11/2019 17:40

I have looked up rees moggs contact details and e-mailed him (probably a PA) asking for a donation to the grenfell charity I'm helping.
Wonder if I'll get a reply?
Well at least I now feel like I've done something

oldwhyno · 06/11/2019 17:41

I think he should be given the opportunity to demonstrate

Likethebattle · 06/11/2019 17:44

In a tower block there should be fire proof doors, stay put as the fire brigade can’t battle 300 people going in the opposite direction. Opening fire proof doors creates a chimney effect and let’s smoke build, it also feeds oxygen to the fire. The issue here was the fucking death trap cladding.

PigletJohn · 06/11/2019 17:51

@merrymouse

There had been two fatal cladding fires, fires, and warning letters sent to the Housing Minister by the All-Party Parliamentary Fire Safety and Rescue Group, well before Grenfell was wrapped.

If building Regulations guidance had been issued after the 1991 Knowsley cladding fire, or the 1999 fatal Irvine cladding fire, or the 2009 fatal Lakenhall House fire, Grenfell might not have been wrapped in 2014.

HelenaDove · 06/11/2019 17:52

elenaDove Wed 06-Nov-19 17:27:41
HelenaDove Fri 24-Nov-17 00:52:36
HelenaDove Thu 23-Nov-17 23:11:22
DISABLED SALFORD MAN BARRED FROM HOUSING MOBILITY SCOOTER

Star date: 6th September 2017

"MOBILITY SCOOTER RIGHTS AGAIN UNDER SCRUTINY AT SALIX HOMES

"You've got a right to freedom of movement but mine is curtailed..."

In what is now becoming a growing problem, a disabled man living in sheltered accommodation at Salix Homes' Heraldic Court says he has to charge his electric mobility scooter at his carer's as he is not allowed to charge or park it where he lives.

Three times a week he has to get a taxi to the carer's house to pick up his scooter so he can use it..."Without it I wouldn't be able to get out" he says "I struggle to walk fifty yards with my sticks."
Add message | Report | Message poster HelenaDove Thu 23-Nov-17 23:12:04
"James Hayes is chronically disabled and can hardly walk, due to a degenerative spinal injury in his lower lumbar... "I struggle to walk fifty or one hundred yards with my sticks" he explains "I have to stop and lean against a lamp post as most of the time I'm unaccompanied."

The only salvation for James is his mobility scooter, which allows him to get out and about and do his shopping in big stores while sitting down. In February it became necessary for him to move into sheltered accommodation at Salix Homes Heraldic Court, off Langley Road South, but was told that he couldn't take the scooter onto the property.

He left it in a yard for six weeks and then confronted Salix... "They said 'You can bring it on the premises but you can't charge it'" James recalls "I can charge it in my flat but that's on the second floor and I can't charge it in the communal area, so I've had to take it to my carer's house."

A Home Safety Guide, issued by Salix Homes last year, brought complaints and accusations of discrimination, with guidelines stating that "Mobility scooters must not be stored in communal areas in blocks and sheltered schemes" and "We do not currently provide charging facilities for mobility scooters..."*

Instead, James has had to charge the scooter at his carer's house, which entails getting a taxi for a double journey three times a week at £6 a time... "It's costing me loads and I haven't got a lot of money" he says "But without it I wouldn't be able to get out...You've got a right to freedom of movement but mine is curtailed without it."

Now James and his advocate, Bill Smid, are further confronting Salix with Section 149 of the Equality Act 2010 which states that public bodies have a 'general duty' to 'have due regard to' a list of considerations, such as the need to advance equality of opportunity.

Indeed, James believes that Salix Homes could help its disabled tenants by looking at practical solutions. At Heraldic Court - scene of protests when Salix increased service charges recently** - there are three former bin bunkers which could be used as a mobility scooter parking and charging point... "It wouldn't need much to adapt them, put points in them and upgrade the facilities" he explains "I've put it to them but haven't had a reply."

He does have a meeting with Salix Homes on Friday, where it is hoped that common sense prevails...

"It's disappointing because I need the mobility scooter, I'm lost without it" James explains "It's been a nightmare..

salfordstar.com/article.asp?id=5048

SALFORD RESIDENT REVEALS OVER £2MILLION SPENT ON FIRE MARSHALS AT DANGEROUSLY CLADDED BLOCKS

Star date: 7th May 2019

"REGIME OF THREATS AND INTIMIDATION" AT PENDLETON TOGETHER BLOCKS

On Sunday afternoon at the Manchester May Day Festival Justice panel, Salford resident Graeme Langton exposed a whole series of failures, faults, draconian management and non-action within the Pendleton Together blocks that still have dangerous Grenfell-style cladding on them.

He also revealed that the fire marshals, brought in to improve safety while the cladding is still in place, have cost £25,000 per week, or over £2million so far

What was meant to be a much improved lifestyle in an up-to-date, modern housing estate has been reduced to a life of frightening insecurity in what continues to be a series of highly volatile high-rise tinderboxes..."

At the Manchester May Day Festival on Sunday, there was a panel discussion on Justice, in which Terry Renshaw spoke about the horrendous 47 year fight of the Shrewsbury Pickets to clear their 'criminal' name; Ben Clay talked on behalf of the Tenants Union and its fight to stop 'no fault evictions'; while Ruth London, from Fuel Poverty Action, argued that almost two years after Grenfell little had changed...

Her point was underlined by Graeme Langton, a resident of Malus Court in Pendleton which, along with seven other blocks managed by Pendleton Together and owned by Salford City Council, still has the cladding on, as many residents are subject to a regime of 'threats, intimidation and broken promises' by the authorities.

As Graeme listed the failures under the title of A Nightmare On Ellor Street, the audience laughed and shook their heads in equal measures, some barely believing such events could happen in the wake of Grenfell....a 'Trident' safety report that no-one can see; fire alarms fitted in the wrong place; wrong fire doors fitted; a whole list of repair failures and confusing evacuation procedures, and fire marshals being employed for the blocks at a cost of £25,000 per week, or over £2million so far.

Just as worrying was the lack of action from Salford City Council and the Salford Mayor, and the 'disrespect' shown by Pendleton Together to residents and even Salford MP Rebecca Long-Bailey.

"Today, two years later, City Mayor, Paul Dennett, has not been back to speak with the residents about his failure to remove and replace all the cladding" said Graeme...

"As you will appreciate, I personally – and many of my neighbours - feel very far from safe at the moment and with little belief in either Salford City Council, who owns the properties, or Together Housing Group, who manages them under the Pendleton Together P.F.I. contract. We have had so many broken promises

Salford Mayor, Paul Dennett immediately met with residents of the affected blocks to reassure us that this cladding would be removed and replaced as soon as possible. He promised an expert survey would be carried out to evaluate the state of the problems with each of the blocks and that the resulting report would be shared with residents as soon as it was completed. This report became unofficially known as the 'Trident Report', after the name of the company undertaking the survey.

Today, two years later, City Mayor, Paul Dennett has not been back to speak with the residents about his failure to remove and replace all the cladding. City leaders are adamant that there is no Trident Report for residents to see. Only the first three floors of all nine blocks have had their cladding removed, but replaced with temporary cement boards, to mitigate the risk from low level vehicle fires. The blocks look like the kid who forgot his trainers for P.E., and had to wear a really naff pair from the lost property box!

Only one of the smaller, medium-rise blocks has had all its cladding removed. This was done in the period leading up to Christmas and it not only left the block without the vital insulation it needed to keep the homes warm and for the heating system to operate effectively, but it also left all the window framework jutting out from the wall. Removing the cladding caused water to seep into flats over winter when it rained. This revealed that the windows had not originally been made independently watertight. Residents were offered some financial recompense for their inconvenience - provided they applied for it!

The residents of the remaining 8 blocks are still in a state of limbo and at risk. Several safety measures have been put in place to bridge this vacuous state, with the employment of Fire Marshals, who patrol the blocks and grounds continuously 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, 365 days of the year. The weekly cost for this service? Approximately £25,000! The Fire Marshals are armed with air horns or Klaxons to sound as an instruction to evacuate the building in the event of a fire.

Fire Alarms have now been fitted on every floor, as previously we were instructed to stay put in the event of a fire and the fire alarm was silent. However, the Fire Marshals are needed because most residents cannot hear the new Fire Alarms! This is because the alarms were fitted in the stairwells on every landing. We are told they are as loud as regulations allow them to be. However, this is not the issue. They are in the wrong place! The sound has to pass through at least TWO fire doors to get to residents in their flats. Duh! Pendleton Together have been told of this multiple times and by numerous residents. Yet, there have been no changes!

As you will appreciate, I personally – and many of my neighbours feel very far from safe at the moment and with little belief in either Salford City Council, who owns the properties, or Together Housing Group, who manages them under the Pendleton Together P.F.I. Contract. We have had so many broken promises;

"Some persons make promises for the pleasure of breaking them." - William Hazlitt.

Alongside all this stands a long list of failures to address repairs and the replacement of gates, doors and windows, outstanding from the poor standard of refurbishment work carried out by Keepmoat under the P.F.I. deal that are still to be corrected. We understand litigation is taking place over who should pay for these corrections, but residents should not be inconvenienced because of it. Repairs and restorative work should be undertaken and the argument over who pays determined in due course. We have been put out enough!

Just one of these is that many new window frames and their opening/locking mechanisms are faulty. Instead of replacing the windows that are clearly not fit for purpose, the onus is being put on residents who are being instructed by Pendleton Together not to fully open the windows, but only have them on "vent". They have been instructed not to open the Juliet balcony doors – on pain of attracting a Tenancy Warning for any infringement.

One female resident, the mother of a disabled child with breathing problems, was awarded such a written warning, but this was later rescinded following the intervention of her social worker, who had been present at the time of the incident and was a witness. What would or could have happened otherwise?

Many other residents, including myself, have experienced a similar regime of threats, intimidation and over-zealous enforcement from Pendleton Together for making legitimate complaints. Residents are not the only people to receive this level of disrespect. Our MP, Rebecca Long Bailey, who wanted to arrange meetings to investigate mounting concerns from residents was ignored and disrespected. This resulted in her request having to be escalated to Council and Mayor level to get answers from Pendleton Together.

Their continued failure to address residents' complaints and repairs just goes on and on. How can this situation be allowed to continue? Pendleton Together seem to be untouchable, they certainly think that from their actions or lack of them. They seem answerable to nobody and able to rule with a rod of iron. They operate from Brotherton House, but we now call it Big Brotherton, because they always seem to be watching us and they are the 'Thought Police'!

After Grenfell, the Fire Evacuation instructions were changed from "Stay put in your flat" to "Full evacuation - with one central assembly point near the Housing Office at one end of the estate." For many elderly or infirm residents to walk that distance, up to 0.38 of mile, would be impossible at any time let alone under evacuation conditions and potentially wearing very little!

However, a minor fire broke out recently in the Bin Room of a nearby block. Confusion reigned as some residents were evacuated, while many on the upper floors were seen standing at their windows uncertain of what was required as no klaxons had been sounded on their landing by any Fire Marshals. Certainly not a glowing endorsement of the Fire Evacuation Procedures under the circumstances and all the money being spent on the Fire Marshals themselves!

One resident who lives on the ground floor of the block in question has several disabilities, but was just ignored by those who should have known about him from the Fire Evacuation Risk document held in a metal cabinet located in the entrance to the building. When he became aware of people standing around on the grass outside he came to the front door, looked around, and then went back to bed. No Marshals tried to direct him to a place of safety. Later, when questions were asked about this, residents were told "we only evacuate the floors above and below the fire." In one of the resident Newsletters produced by Pendleton Together the evacuation was given a glowing report and it stated that everything had gone according to plan, but a few items needed further thought.

To date residents have yet to be told of this complete change to the Fire Procedures. We are supposed to go to Pendleton Gateway, a library and medical centre, opposite "Big Brotherton", as a muster point. This is not feasible for some residents, who are disabled or elderly, who could not walk that far. Even if people reach the Assembly Point, there is nowhere to sit, no toilet facilities, nowhere to get hot beverages to keep you warm or combat shock and no blankets to keep you warm either. You would just be stood there in the open air, for how long who knows? Probably until Pendleton Together staff arrived, if out of hours. We have told them this is not acceptable again and again. One of the slogans that came out of Grenfell was; "Residents die when landlords don't listen"!

All in all it has to be said that from the days leading up to the start of the P.F.I. contract when there was an award winning, high level of cooperative working between the landlord and the residents, the quality of life has fallen a long way due to Pendleton Together's overly draconian estate-management style and residents' trust in them has become seriously affected.

Communications and tenant participation are at an all-time low. What was meant to be a much improved lifestyle in an up-to-date, modern housing estate has been reduced to a life of frightening insecurity in what continues to be a series of highly volatile high-rise tinderboxes.

HelenaDove · 06/11/2019 17:55

Sorry for long post I just wanted to point out the hypocritical tokenism of telling tenants to remove things while wrapping a building in cladding.

It seems that safety rules only matter when its the tenants perceived to be breaking them

AgeShallNotWitherHer · 07/11/2019 09:44

Aquilla Wed 06-Nov-19 12:43:29
Has anyone listened to what he actually said? No, thought not
I followed the link posted early in the thread but most people are far more concerned with showing how "right on" they themselves are by calling JRM a cunt than actually adding anything intelligent or useful to the discussion.

It is a shame becasue that's the state of politics. Unless we have a truly critical thinking population more or less anyone can do anything.

LaurieMarlow · 07/11/2019 10:03

I followed the link posted early in the thread but most people are far more concerned with showing how "right on" they themselves are by calling JRM a cunt than actually adding anything intelligent or useful to the discussion.

So what important and reasonable point do you think JRM was making when he said residents should have used ‘common sense’ like he would have? Hmm

AgeShallNotWitherHer · 07/11/2019 11:43

JRM "The tragedy came about because of the cladding leading to the fire racing up the building, and then was compounded by the stay-put policy - and it seems to me that that is the tragedy of it.
The more one’s read over the weekend about the report and about the chances of people surviving, if you just ignore what you’re told and leave you are so much safer and I think if either of us were in a fire, whatever the fire brigade said we would leave the burning building – it just seems the common sense thing to do and it is such a tragedy that that didn’t happen but I don’t think it is anything to do with race or class and indeed I think it is rather sad to raise these types of points over a great tragedy"

"Nobody was evil in relation to this great tragedy but people made mistakes; humanity makes mistakes and sometimes they have deeply tragic consequences but it wasn’t done because people had chips on their shoulder or because they were bad people they just got something terrible, terribly wrong."

So Tragedy caused by - 1 Cladding and 2 Stay put advice.

The "common sense" - intuitive - thing to do is to run from a burning building. BUT the advice was contrary to that common-sense. In this case the advice caused more death - that is the tragedy.

The advice in this case was a dreadful mistake but not motivated by evil.

By all means debate what he said - and some people have been doing so. There are a lot of interesting posts. But what did he actually say? And in what context, (The question was whether the FBrig advice should be blamed and whether race/class was a factor)

Much easier to point-score, virtue signal, shout abuse, blame (the FB are racist and JRM is a cunt) - which is why we so rarely make anything better.

There are many complex factors in this terrible tragedy and we need to be able to isolate them, see how they affect each other and address the situation in other buildings NOW.

AgeShallNotWitherHer · 07/11/2019 11:46

LaurieMarlow as you can see he did not say residents should have used common sense.

I am not a JRM fan at all but we should look at what he actually said rather than get in a rage about what he didn't

LaurieMarlow · 07/11/2019 12:38

So this is what he said. Verbatim.

And I think if either of us were in a fire, whatever the fire brigade said, we would leave the burning building. It just seems the common sense thing to do

What are we to take from that? Why would he bring himself into this discussion at all? Given that he's never been in this situation himself and he's from an immensely more privileged position in life than any of the people involved (so never would be).

The only thing I can conclude from him bringing himself into the discussion is that either ...

A) his ego is so massive, he can't help making it all about him, even in the context of a terrible tragedy

B) he's victim blaming by implying the victims lacked the 'common sense' that he has.

Seriously, what point was he hoping to make by talking about what he would have done? How is how he thinks he would have reacted to an immensely stressful and difficult situation in any way helpful or respectful to the people involved?