London's Grenfell Tower, A Very Political Tragedy (1 Viewer)

[Infinite Chaos]

~ How can you be so certain? Not even May has been that unequivocal.

Firstly you seem to have a definition of austerity that applies only to Conservative councils when they underspend. Labour councils that do that and also have tower blocks without sprinklers seem to have their own definition for deliberate underspending.

Secondly, fitting banned items is not a consequence of austerity whatever your definition of the word unless you are blinkered about Conservative councils across the UK while turning a blind eye to Labour councils that also deliberately underspend. Fitting banned items sounds like a criminal offence to me.

Keep asking, I’ll keep answering. Hope you remember that when it’s my turn.

~ Not a straw man at all.

Of course that was a strawman. You specifically asked (and made sure to limit my ground to respond) about Labour councils giving tax rebates to richer residents. Even the most basic look at simplistic political allegiances suggests Labour are for the poor and the “ebil” Conservatives are only for the rich.You accuse me of conflating, reconflating and then tu quoque. Meanwhile the simple truth is that Kensignton council made some horrible decisions and a criminal investigation will hopefully sort out who selected those panels. Criminal – not political.
Seems to me the political investigation is being carried out here and anyone called conservative is the simplistic ebil enemy and when they do the same thing as other political parties, their political shenanigans don’t count.

~ No, you were deflecting the criticism that many have had for the council stockpiling £270 million by using a tu quoque fallacy of Labour councils in Greater Manchester stockpiling £40 million i.e. £1700+ per resident versus £16 per resident. That's deflection to make it look as if KCBC's action is defensible. That reads like a defence to me.

Are you kidding me? Am I speaking a foreign language when I say other councils were doing the same thing? (deliberately underspending) It makes no difference that one council deliberately underspends and builds up £1000’s per resident or £1 per residence. The point as Sir Eric Pickles stated was that these councils (both Labour and Conservatives) were sacking and laying people off when they didn’t need to. I have accepted the problem of underspend and criticize Kensignton for an incompetent response to the fire. What I am not doing but I accuse you of is looking through political coloured glasses and see fault where criminal responsibility probably lies elsewhere.

The day I see that Kensington council selected banned panels deliberately, I will happily blame that council alone for their acts. However I will not apply a blanket criticism of all other Conservative councils for the mistake on one council.

 

[Manc Skipper]

Or that ideologues would use climate advocacy to deflect criticism.

Update (EW): Dr Jim Glockling, Technical Director of the Fire Protection Association, said the following in an interview about Grenfell;

…
“There has been an emerging body of evidence surrounding some of the materials being used and now we have an appalling demonstration of what can happen,” he said.
Alongside the cosmetic appeal of cladding, it is used as an insulation to make buildings more sustainable to meet green energy requirements.
​

“It could be that this is the quest for sustainability trumping other concerns,” Dr Glockling warned.

Dr Glockling is an arse.

 

[Jack Hays]

Dr Glockling is an arse.

Well I guess that settles it.:roll:

 

[Andalublue]

Firstly you seem to have a definition of austerity that applies only to Conservative councils when they underspend. Labour councils that do that and also have tower blocks without sprinklers seem to have their own definition for deliberate underspending.

Secondly, fitting banned items is not a consequence of austerity whatever your definition of the word unless you are blinkered about Conservative councils across the UK while turning a blind eye to Labour councils that also deliberately underspend. Fitting banned items sounds like a criminal offence to me.

Keep asking, I’ll keep answering. Hope you remember that when it’s my turn.

Are you just going to continue ignoring the points I make? You stated that austerity IS NOT the cause of Grenfell House. No one yet knows what the cause of the disaster. NO ONE. We don't yet know whether it was the panels; the lack of a sprinkler system; the lack of a building-wide alarm system; faulty emergency advice guidelines; or A.N.Other cause yet you seem to be very clear on it.

Of course that was a strawman. You specifically asked (and made sure to limit my ground to respond) about Labour councils giving tax rebates to richer residents. Even the most basic look at simplistic political allegiances suggests Labour are for the poor and the “ebil” Conservatives are only for the rich.You accuse me of conflating, reconflating and then tu quoque. Meanwhile the simple truth is that Kensignton council made some horrible decisions and a criminal investigation will hopefully sort out who selected those panels. Criminal – not political.
Seems to me the political investigation is being carried out here and anyone called conservative is the simplistic ebil enemy and when they do the same thing as other political parties, their political shenanigans don’t count.

It's a straw man because that was never an argument I made. I never said Labour councils didn't stockpile funds, you did. >I said that Kensington and Chelsea did, and your response was: "But, but Labour councils do it too!" That's a straw man and a tu quoque.

The point as Sir Eric Pickles stated was that these councils (both Labour and Conservatives) were sacking and laying people off when they didn’t need to. I have accepted the problem of underspend and criticize Kensignton for an incompetent response to the fire. What I am not doing but I accuse you of is looking through political coloured glasses and see fault where criminal responsibility probably lies elsewhere.

Well, for one, Eric Pickles would say that, wouldn't he? He makes your partisanship pale into virtually even-handedness. Secondly, "criminal responsibility probably lies elsewhere." On what evidence are you basing this assertion? Do you know something that literally no one else in the country knows yet? I've never said austerity caused the Grenfell disaster, although I've said it could be a factor. You have said that it categorically WAS NOT the cause. Twice. Quoted.

The day I see that Kensington council selected banned panels deliberately, I will happily blame that council alone for their acts. However I will not apply a blanket criticism of all other Conservative councils for the mistake on one council.

Nor will I, or have I.

 

[polgara]

Firstly you seem to have a definition of austerity that applies only to Conservative councils when they underspend. Labour councils that do that and also have tower blocks without sprinklers seem to have their own definition for deliberate underspending.

Secondly, fitting banned items is not a consequence of austerity whatever your definition of the word unless you are blinkered about Conservative councils across the UK while turning a blind eye to Labour councils that also deliberately underspend. Fitting banned items sounds like a criminal offence to me.

Keep asking, I’ll keep answering. Hope you remember that when it’s my turn.





Of course that was a strawman. You specifically asked (and made sure to limit my ground to respond) about Labour councils giving tax rebates to richer residents. Even the most basic look at simplistic political allegiances suggests Labour are for the poor and the “ebil” Conservatives are only for the rich.You accuse me of conflating, reconflating and then tu quoque. Meanwhile the simple truth is that Kensignton council made some horrible decisions and a criminal investigation will hopefully sort out who selected those panels. Criminal – not political.
Seems to me the political investigation is being carried out here and anyone called conservative is the simplistic ebil enemy and when they do the same thing as other political parties, their political shenanigans don’t count.



Are you kidding me? Am I speaking a foreign language when I say other councils were doing the same thing? (deliberately underspending) It makes no difference that one council deliberately underspends and builds up £1000’s per resident or £1 per residence. The point as Sir Eric Pickles stated was that these councils (both Labour and Conservatives) were sacking and laying people off when they didn’t need to. I have accepted the problem of underspend and criticize Kensignton for an incompetent response to the fire. What I am not doing but I accuse you of is looking through political coloured glasses and see fault where criminal responsibility probably lies elsewhere.

The day I see that Kensington council selected banned panels deliberately, I will happily blame that council alone for their acts. However I will not apply a blanket criticism of all other Conservative councils for the mistake on one council.

Greetings, Infinite Chaos. :2wave:

C'est la guerre? IMO, this war is against the people who ending up paying the bills, some with their lives, it appears, all because of the advocacy of certain humans who evidently believe they can control climate by doing things their way? :thumbdown:

 

[Infinite Chaos]

Are you just going to continue ignoring the points I make? You stated that austerity IS NOT the cause of Grenfell House. No one yet knows what the cause of the disaster. NO ONE. We don't yet know whether it was the panels; the lack of a sprinkler system; the lack of a building-wide alarm system; faulty emergency advice guidelines; or A.N.Other cause yet you seem to be very clear on it.

I suspect it was a combination of those things but primarily the panels used. The reason for their installation is not austerity measures though.

1. ~ can you name me one of those councils that gave those stockpiled funds away in cuts in council taxes to their wealthy residents?

It's a straw man because that was never an argument I made. I never said Labour councils didn't stockpile funds, you did. >I said that Kensington and Chelsea did, and your response was: "But, but Labour councils do it too!" That's a straw man and a tu quoque.

Quoted for you.

Well, for one, Eric Pickles would say that, wouldn't he?

He's damned if he calls on councils to stop underspending and sacking workers unnecessarily and he's damned if he doesn't, simply because he's an evil Conservative.

He makes your partisanship pale into virtually even-handedness.

Unworthy of comment.

Secondly, "criminal responsibility probably lies elsewhere." On what evidence are you basing this assertion? Do you know something that literally no one else in the country knows yet? I've never said austerity caused the Grenfell disaster, although I've said it could be a factor. You have said that it categorically WAS NOT the cause. Twice. Quoted.

And I will say it again, there was cash in the till at a vast range of councils across the political spectrum. Sprinklers cost 200,000 out of just under £10,000,000 spent. More fire resistant cladding would have cost another £5,000. The panels and windows in total cost around £2,600,000 leaving another £6,000,000 to spend on upgrading the tower block.

As for my statements, I watched a fire chief on Panorama last night state that the cladding turned a fire resistant building into a firework so it continues to be reasonable to speculate whoever specified those panels is criminally responsible for the extent of the fire.

The people who specified the specific upgrades used are the ones responsible, not kensington council, not Theresa May or the Conservative govt beforehand.

 

[Infinite Chaos]

Greetings, Infinite Chaos. :2wave:

C'est la guerre? IMO, this war is against the people who ending up paying the bills, some with their lives, it appears, all because of the advocacy of certain humans who evidently believe they can control climate by doing things their way? :thumbdown:

Hello Polgara, I'm not addressing climate here I'm afraid. I'm trying to confront ideological belief with basic facts. I like Andy but I keep seeing (just 5 minutes ago on BBC TV and in some of my friends feeds on Facebook) the problems of the world lumped on Conservatives and austerity. I even read (on Facebook) during the last general election that the Conservatives had somehow orchestrated the London terror attacks so as to manipulate feelings before the election.
All really nice people but with some horrible politics.

The borough council in Kensington has made serious mistakes in the aftermath of the fire and were very slow to react and help their own citizens (maybe even unwilling) and deserve criticism for that however I refuse to lump all the problems on the world on them where they are not responsible.

 

[Andalublue]

And I will say it again, there was cash in the till at a vast range of councils across the political spectrum. Sprinklers cost 200,000 out of just under £10,000,000 spent. More fire resistant cladding would have cost another £5,000. The panels and windows in total cost around £2,600,000 leaving another £6,000,000 to spend on upgrading the tower block.

I've heard those figures, and I've heard interviews with technical people in the building industry calling into question those figures. Apparently, and I'm no expert, merely reporting interviews I've heard, retro-fitting sprinkler systems is far, far more expensive to implement than 200k, that's just the cost of the equipment. Installation is what costs the big costs.

The people who specified the specific upgrades used are the ones responsible, not kensington council,

The people doing the renovation were working to contracts negotiated by the council and TMO. Let's wait and see who the decision-makers were and why they made the decisions they did, under what pressures and financial parameters.

 

[Andalublue]

Hello Polgara, I'm not addressing climate here I'm afraid. I'm trying to confront ideological belief with basic facts. I like Andy but I keep seeing (just 5 minutes ago on BBC TV and in some of my friends feeds on Facebook) the problems of the world lumped on Conservatives and austerity.

Conservatives aren't the only ones responsible for austerity, but I see you as categorically denying that austerity played a role. We simply can't say that, and I for one don't believe it.

I even read (on Facebook) during the last general election that the Conservatives had somehow orchestrated the London terror attacks so as to manipulate feelings before the election.
All really nice people but with some horrible politics.

You're lumping me in with conspiracy theorists and nutters on Facebook? Ta for that!

The borough council in Kensington has made serious mistakes in the aftermath of the fire and were very slow to react and help their own citizens (maybe even unwilling) and deserve criticism for that however I refuse to lump all the problems on the world on them where they are not responsible.

No one's doing that but, unlike you, we're not dismissing the possibility that austerity played a part, possibly quite a significant part.

 

[Infinite Chaos]

~ Let's wait and see who the decision-makers were and why they made the decisions they did, under what pressures and financial parameters.

Exactly.

Conservatives aren't the only ones responsible for austerity, but I see you as categorically denying that austerity played a role. We simply can't say that, and I for one don't believe it.

Considering my definition of "Austerity" is based on this from the Economist, (What economists generally mean by austerity is a reduction in the "structural deficit" of the government, that is, ignoring the effects of the economic cycle. ) I'd ve very interested if you or anyone else who believes this to be possible would provide a counter case as I have provided my argument against.

You're lumping me in with conspiracy theorists and nutters on Facebook? Ta for that!

I've had my doubts. :mrgreen:

However, on Channel 4 news just now I watched a Labour MP making the exact same case (contradicted by Vince Cable and Kenneth Clarke) that Austerity is behind the fire at Grenfell Tower.

No one's doing that but, unlike you, we're not dismissing the possibility that austerity played a part, possibly quite a significant part.

Well, I'd really like to see your argument and proof for this; just as I would when Labour politicians throw that line out freely on news programmes and unfortunately are not challenged to evidence such a claim.

 

[Infinite Chaos]

The chief executive of Kensington and Chelsea council has resigned amid criticism over the borough's response to the Grenfell Tower fire.

Mr Holgate, who has been in post since 2014, said it was the "highest priority" of the council to help families affected by the fire.
He said the communities and local government secretary had on Tuesday "required the leader of the council to seek my resignation". Link.

About time too, the council's response was pathetic. I know when we were flooded my local council reacted in such a different way and people were there to sort out accommodation and coordination of support services immediately.

 

[Andalublue]

About time too, the council's response was pathetic. I know when we were flooded my local council reacted in such a different way and people were there to sort out accommodation and coordination of support services immediately.

Sounds a little like a sacrificial lamb to me. It's the political leadership of the council where the buck should stop. I'm not saying that the resignation is unjustified, but that it shouldn't be the only one.

 

[Infinite Chaos]

Eleven residential high-rise buildings in eight local authority areas have been found to be covered in combustible cladding following safety tests.
It comes as tests are being carried out on about 600 high rises across England.
Meanwhile, the BBC has learned that Premier Inn is "extremely concerned" about cladding on three of its hotels.
Link.

As I suspected, this goes beyond simply a Conservative council and to a more general problem. 11 high rise towers are potential fireballs and I bet the surveys have only just started.

Arconic, an engineering and manufacturing company, said one of its products, Reynobond PE (polyethylene) - an aluminium composite material - was "used as one component in the overall cladding system" of Grenfell Tower.
~
The BBC has established that Reynobond PE was issued a certificate in the UK in 1997 allowing it to be used on high rise buildings. Chancellor Philip Hammond has said he thought the Grenfell cladding was banned in the UK.

Safety information will have changed since Reynobond was approved in 1997 for use - Labour, Conservative, Coalition governments have been in power in this time. Kensington Council are guilty of poor reaction and response to the trajedy. Theresa May is guilty and has apologised for the general govt response to the tragedy.







I still maintain this is probably a criminal matter rather than one of Conservative ideology.

 

[Infinite Chaos]

Camden Council has ordered the removal of Reynobond panels from one of its tower blocks. They are also seeking legal advice as the same company that installed the cladding on Grenfell tower carried out similar installations on other council buildings.

Halifax council has also discovered and contacted some of its residents as investigations continue. Right now, a senior fire safety officer on BBC is telling us fire safety officers have been warning from 1980 and there seems to be (his phrase) a "firewall" between the advice Govt get and give and what the building regulations people stipulate.

Grenfell was a horrible tragedy but not Austerity and not a Conservative tragedy. The political tragedy was the poor reaction to the fire by council and Govt but not in the choice to install such cladding. Events continue to bear me out.

 

[Andalublue]

Grenfell was a horrible tragedy but not Austerity and not a Conservative tragedy. The political tragedy was the poor reaction to the fire by council and Govt but not in the choice to install such cladding. Events continue to bear me out.

Wanting something to be the case, and it being the case is not the same thing IC. It doesn't matter the hue of the council, if the cladding was to blame for the Grenfell disaster (and we still haven't had that confirmed by anyone!) and the contracting authorities opted for the cheaper, less fire resistant product because of budget pressures, then it absolutely IS about austerity.

Doing everything on the cheap has become a way of life in public services; ask any teacher, doctor, or contractor. Does that culture only apply to Conservative authorities? Of course not, since local government only receives what central government decides.

Responsibility for austerity doesn't reside with individual local councils, but with central government, and austerity began with Brown's Labour government, continued with intense vigour under Cameron's coalition, and now limps on under May, although it's clear that Hammond at least is doing his best to ditch it.

 

[Infinite Chaos]

Wanting something to be the case, and it being the case is not the same thing IC. It doesn't matter the hue of the council, if the cladding was to blame for the Grenfell disaster (and we still haven't had that confirmed by anyone!) and the contracting authorities opted for the cheaper, less fire resistant product because of budget pressures, then it absolutely IS about austerity.

Doing everything on the cheap has become a way of life in public services; ask any teacher, doctor, or contractor. Does that culture only apply to Conservative authorities? Of course not, since local government only receives what central government decides.

Responsibility for austerity doesn't reside with individual local councils, but with central government, and austerity began with Brown's Labour government, continued with intense vigour under Cameron's coalition, and now limps on under May, although it's clear that Hammond at least is doing his best to ditch it.

I'm not seeing anything from you beyond opinion and political ideology Andy, I'd like some facts beyond your opinion please. Like I said in a previous post, some substantiation of your opinion would be good otherwise it's simply my opinion vs your opinion and at least I have provided links to substantiate my opinion.

 

[Andalublue]

I'm not seeing anything from you beyond opinion and political ideology Andy

Ditto, IC. The problem seems to be that you just don't seem to understand what people, other than those that agree with you, mean when they talk about austerity.

I'd like some facts beyond your opinion please. Like I said in a previous post, some substantiation of your opinion would be good otherwise it's simply my opinion vs your opinion

Yes, it is. What specific points would you like substantiating? Ask me a question on a point of fact and I'll do my best. Ask me to substantiate an opinion and all I could do would be to do what you've done, i.e. just post links to other people who share your opinion.

at least I have provided links to substantiate my opinion.

Providing links doesn't necessarily support your opinion. This one that you provided from Post #85 supports exactly the opposite of what you appear to think it does. It lays out in quite precise detail the application of austerity-based practices in awarding council contracts. I really can't imagine what 'real truth and narrative elsewhere' you believe it tells. It's almost the perfect exemplar of austerity politics. It says:

The public inquiry into the deadly Grenfell Tower blaze will want to establish beyond any doubt that in the process of driving down costs (a demonstrably good thing) corners weren't cut.

Isn't the cutting of corners in the interests of driving down costs is precisely what the strongest opponents of austerity are arguing is the problem here? I think it is.

 

[Infinite Chaos]

Ditto, IC. ~

Well then let's leave it at that if you cannot do as requested.

Meanwhile, I am free to post substantiation of what I feel as further investigation and the announcement of 11 possible avenues of criminal investigation are announced.

 

[Andalublue]

Well then let's leave it at that if you cannot do as requested.

Meanwhile, I am free to post substantiation of what I feel as further investigation and the announcement of 11 possible avenues of criminal investigation are announced.

Criminal activity and austerity politics are not mutually exclusive, in fact I'd argue that austerity makes criminality and corruption far more likely. You seem desperate to have an either/or situation here. "If there's criminality involved, it can't have anything to do with austerity." Couldn't be further from the truth.

 

[Infinite Chaos]

Criminal activity and austerity politics are not mutually exclusive, in fact I'd argue that austerity makes criminality and corruption far more likely. You seem desperate to have an either/or situation here. "If there's criminality involved, it can't have anything to do with austerity." Couldn't be further from the truth.

I repeat, let's leave it as you are unwilling to substantiate. I won't bother replying but will continue to substantiate the criminality investigation as it develops.

 

[Andalublue]

I repeat, let's leave it as you are unwilling to substantiate. I won't bother replying but will continue to substantiate the criminality investigation as it develops.

Except your evidence substantiated my position on the issue!

I really don't know what you want me to substantiate. Here's the best summation of the issues and potential causes of the disaster that I've seen so far. It's a complex picture that identifies deregulation, privatisation, austerity and inequality as the culprits.

I think you would find it much more comfortable if we were just dealing with a matter of simple criminality by contractors, but that's certainly not the case, as Jonathan Freedland points out. Criminality doesn't occur in a vacuum. It occurs when there's no defence put up to prevent it and I don't think it's to your credit that you seem to be in denial about the role the local political establishment might have played in creating the conditions for this disaster to occur.

 

[Snazzy]

I really hope ALL of the families of the victims sue the manufactures of those panels, and everyone else responsible for allowing them to be put on that building.

No doubt ISIS thanks the greedy businesses, and corrupt politicians that murdered so many as they couldn't of done a better job themselves. Being burned to death has got to be the worst way to die.

 

[Infinite Chaos]

Except your evidence substantiated my position on the issue!

I really don't know what you want me to substantiate. Here's the best summation of the issues and potential causes of the disaster that I've seen so far. It's a complex picture that identifies deregulation, privatisation, austerity and inequality as the culprits.

I think you would find it much more comfortable if we were just dealing with a matter of simple criminality by contractors, but that's certainly not the case, as Jonathan Freedland points out. Criminality doesn't occur in a vacuum. It occurs when there's no defence put up to prevent it and I don't think it's to your credit that you seem to be in denial about the role the local political establishment might have played in creating the conditions for this disaster to occur.

:2wave:

 

[Snazzy]

I don't think it's to your credit that you seem to be in denial about the role the local political establishment might have played in creating the conditions for this disaster to occur.

Would those conditions purely be austerity measures?

 

[Andalublue]

Would those conditions purely be austerity measures?

I refer the honourable member to my previous statement in Post #121:

Here's the best summation of the issues and potential causes of the disaster that I've seen so far. It's a complex picture that identifies deregulation, privatisation, austerity and inequality as the culprits.

I think you would find it much more comfortable if we were just dealing with a matter of simple criminality by contractors, but that's certainly not the case, as Jonathan Freedland points out. Criminality doesn't occur in a vacuum. It occurs when there's no defence put up to prevent it and I don't think it's to your credit that you seem to be in denial about the role the local political establishment might have played in creating the conditions for this disaster to occur.

So no, not entirely, but it's a factor, quite a significant factor to my mind. This little set-to with IC began because he insists that it is not a factor. He's a great guy, but utterly wrong on this.