In the shadow of Grenfell Tower- thread four

[RhythmAndStealth]

Rest in Peace

Isaac Shawo, 5
Khadija Saye, 24
Mohammed Alhalaji, 23

At least thirty people confirmed to have died

Six further deceased victims provisionally identified

Many more people feared to have died. They have yet to be reunited with their names

Nineteen people still in hospital, with ten in critical care

Many people homeless and dispossessed

Many bereaved

Many traumatised

“…it is difficult to escape a very sombre national mood.” The Queen.

Three investigations launched- Fire, Police and Public Inquiry
£5m Government Emergency Fund created
£3m donated by public
Peaceful protesters demand justice and answers.

Thread three (includes links to threads one and two)

On R4 at lunchtime the local MP said that a family who were rescued from the upper floors were put on the 14th floor of a hotel and were too terrified to sleep. They were told that if they didn't like it they could go and sleep on the floor in the Westway gym. What is wrong with these council people

They also said that the North Ken legal centre has lots of clients who are afraid to claim the £5500 because of their status and fear that they'll be deported. It is logical to conclude that if 'illegal' people survived then others likely died and will not be identified as no one will come forward to do that. It's all just so awful.

Fuver muckers! Where is their compassion

On R4 at lunchtime the local MP said that a family who were rescued from the upper floors were put on the 14th floor of a hotel and were too terrified to sleep. They were told that if they didn't like it they could go and sleep on the floor in the Westway gym.

This is inexcusable. Who was the Local MP?

I am aware the fire looks to have been spread by the cladding.
I said that whether posters on here like it or not, the inquiry is bound to look at tenant behaviour, alongside everything else. I said this because every time it is mentioned, the poster is rounded on and accused of victim blaming.
No-one is blaming the victims - I certainly am not - but everything needs to be looked at, and refusing to even discuss it is unhelpful and short-sighted.

squishysquirmy Thanks, I would like to see those minimum standards raised - I believe that when it comes to HSE we all should be doing the absolute upmost to ensure that we are aiming for the highest standards, and to be that means raising the legally acceptable standards far above "the minimum".

Emma Dent Coad is the newly elected MP
Monkey

Was she on CH4?

Jesus chartreuse. The council sound like complete sociopaths.

I heard the radio 4 programme discussing this, and wondered...how if you are an illegal immigrant do you get a council flat in london ? high rise or not ..

I 100% do not think that anyone should be living in unsafe housing , and even if you are here illegally , if there is unsafe property, either privately rented or council owned it should be dealt with, however...i just wondered..are these people trafficed in ? are they sofa surfing with friends...it implied that a lot of people may have died or are too scared to come forward because they are illegal immigrants, so how come they were all living there ?

The other thing that upset me was the lawyer saying that people with dubious immigration status were sleeping rough rather than coming forward for help with accomadation...and it was disgusting in this country that that could happen....errr.....what about all the legal uk citizens who are sleeping rough all the time ?

I am horrified we cannot or have not organised a uniform consistent and quick response for these poor people, but it is actaully more disgusting we have families in b+B, and sleeping rough every day...

Monkey: Yes, me too. My point was that whether or not we raise minimum standards is actually nothing to do with the EU - we always have been able to raise standards above those the EU set anyway, so the EU regulations are rather irrelevant here. Of course, by raising EU standards we would have the opportunity to make the residents of other countries safer as well as our own, but we no longer have any influence on that.

He told the BBC that there was gas leaking into the building.

www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/grenfell-tower-fire-victim-brother-mohammed-alhajali-omar-alhajali-london-kensington-chelsea-gas-a7794031.html

squishysquirmy Ah, get you now. Sorry misunderstood.

Not excusing the council here, they are total sociopaths, but I imagine they've got very little wiggle room even if they were mindful to help to any degree. This is where the housing crisis has led us to... hospitals unable to recruit junior consultants cos they need to live 15 mins away from work & there's nothing affordable on their salaries in an appropriate radius. Yet alone people in average or low paid jobs. The waiting lists a decade or more long for social housing. The beds in sheds phenomenon. The "hotbedding" of shift workers sharing beds across their shift patterns in overcrowded makeshift dorms. The unfortunates allocated a deathtrap flat in a cosmetically gentrified brutalist tower. Generations of housing and social policy, both Conservative and Labour, local and national have contributed to this conflagration, as much as the technical specs of the fire protection that should've been in place. This is very much political catastrophe that goes deep into the rotten heart of austerity, deregulation and outsourcing.

bah..i could not have put it better

While I am sure the investigators will and should look at everything, there is

1. no reason to believe these residents behaved any differently from residents in all the other blocks of flats where fires didn't spread, and lives weren't lost
2. every reason to believe there were differences in the building and fire precautions from blocks where fires didn''t spread and lives weren't lost.

cf tower block fires in England in the past where there wasn't flammable cladding, tower block fires in other countries where there was cladding but also sprinklers, etc.

That being so, I don't know why anyone would choose to focus on the behaviour of the residents rather than the known issues concerning the building.

www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/jun/20/jobseekers-allowance-rules-suspended-for-grenfell-tower-tenants

I have a feeling that if this say the Shard there would be zero questions regarding occupants behaviours. The only difference between the two types of human beings is that one set are poor the other rich

It's just victim blaming. Pure and simple.

Sorry, I was called away Monkey. The interview was on the World at One today, a report then interview with the MP. It was on about 1.30 if you want to listen back.

Surely when building/refurbing a building like this a risk analysis is undertaken as part of health and safety. The potential behaviour of residents would be taken into account when this is put together.

The fact that the council 'saved' 2.5m when they switched from the proposed contractor to Rydon raises many questions. I would be very surprised if a contractor could deliver the same for so much less. It makes me wonder if Leadbitter highlighted/included other work that they thought needed doing.

For me it isn't just about saying that the work was compliant with fire regulations, it's the whole building being compliant. Surely when any additional work is done the whole building is checked again?

Everthib, why do you think that? What a silly thing to say with absolutely no substance whatsoever. No-one is 'victim blaming', but is it really so unlikely that every single resident followed every single fire regulation all the time?
Why us it that everytime this is mentioned it is shouted down as if the very thought is somehow breaking some unwritten rule?
To be clear - again - I am not saying the tenants caused the fire, but I am saying that potential tenant behavior will be looked at by the enquiry team.

The fire investigation will indeed look at all aspects which could have affected the fire in any way, from behaviour to brand of appliances to building regulations and checks. That's not the same thing as saying it was the residents' fault, it's just the nature of an investigation. It would happen in any kind of building. It's actually useful to know even if tenants had done anything "wrong" because it alerts us (if we didn't already know) that fire prevention mechanisms need to account for people behaving in ways which counteract fire safety unless these behaviours can be avoided and checked for example with building regulations which need to be signed off by another person. You can't monitor or prevent things that people do privately in their own homes, whether they are aware of regulations or not.

People making snide comments about fire doors and old fridges and whether everyone should have flooded their bathroom on internet forums and news comment sections is a completely different thing to a fire investigation. Whether it's meant that way or not, it comes across as snide and superior, and yes, as though you're saying that they brought it on themselves. I really hope people making such comments never make mistakes or overlook anything.

That is exactly what I meant Bertie.

Just a random thought, but hope they won't (daily fail etc) use the EU to blame.

The EU regulations on thermal requirements.

Personally (and I don't want to offend anyone with speculation, but this is being talked about and should be talked about) - I think the building was an 'eyesore' so they wanted to find a way to make the building easy on the eye, and found the EU regulations for thermal requirements the answer.

That way they could clad the building to make it look better, and do it under the guise of EU regulations.

But do it on the cheap.

No way should a building, after 8.7 million spent, should be worse of safety wise.

This is a monstrous crime of the highest order.

The original contract was 11.6 million (I think) and they went with the 8.7 million one.

Plus the firm that supplied the cladding, had a previous company that owed 1.1 million, so they sold it for £24,000 to themselves (yes, they bought their own company) and set up a new company.

And they've been partial to a few tax avoidance schemes.

Sickening as they sit in their 2 million pound mansion.

If it turns out the residents made significant structural alterations to the building including installing a possibly unsuitable cladding that funnelled fire up 24 storeys in half an hour then you'll have a point, cathf. Until then, nope, you don't have one with your chunnering on about normal human behaviour in a communal living space being a contributory factor in this case.
You don't hear about single flat fires. There must be dozens daily. Sometimes people won't have taken the steps they need to but it does not matter

They already have gluteus. But it's a moot point, Germany is in the EU and has the same regulations but has banned this cladding totally. I live in Germany and I've been looking over the last few days and modern buildings here tend to be painted concrete or stucco type finish, with a few having large panels which look like cladding, except when you get closer they are totally solid metal or stone or tile. There's no plastic or aluminium to be seen. The painted concrete/stucco actually looks much nicer than the cladding as well IMO.