Grenfell Tower fire in North Kensington - news and discussion

[Spymaster]

I don't know if this is relevant, but I saw on tv the other night a report saying that the original testing process involved putting cladding on a test structure and setting fire to it to see how it performed. This was later stopped and manufacturers merely required to provide proof they had followed procedures. [or some such - I'll try to find the report and link to it]

It also seems that all of these buildings that are currently failing fire tests on their cladding are failing completely different tests to those in place at the time of construction.

If a contractor is mandated to make cost savings on a previous quote and can reduce the bill by 200k by changing the panelling, of course they'll do that. The only foul is if they knowingly overlook safety requirements to do it, which doesn't seem to be the case here.

 

[not-bono-ever]

But if both types of panel had the same fire rating, that's not where the blame lies.

At the moment the fault seems to be with the testing and safety standards.

Indeed- lots of bluster and finger pointing going on by everyone to distract the blame - if the contractors who installed the cladding were directed to use xxx rather than yyy- both of which having the same certification levels and they installed it correctly on site according to whatever conventions they were supposed to follow, then this isn't their problem.They can fuck up the install but thats about it

 

[Casual Observer]

Plenty of coverage in the last couple of weeks on the aluminium cladding and insulation, failed safety tests etc. but bizarrely no mention at all thus far of the fire breaks/barriers. These items, a crucial third piece in the jigsaw, are supposed to be attached to the original exterior of the building, bisecting the insulation material at periodic intervals. The barriers expand when heat is applied and... er .. prevent the spread of fire. Looks like they weren't fitted at all, weren't fitted properly or cheap inadequate ones were used.

 

[19force8]

I don't know if this is relevant, but I saw on tv the other night a report saying that the original testing process involved putting cladding on a test structure and setting fire to it to see how it performed. This was later stopped and manufacturers merely required to provide proof they had followed procedures. [or some such - I'll try to find the report and link to it]

I think the original report was last week on Channel 4 News, but their website is painfully slow and I don't have the time to search just now.

From the BBC today Grenfell Tower: Panels not tested 'properly' - BBC News

The39thStep I don't necessarily disagree, but I do think the changes in testing procedures would have been lobbied for by the industry with a view to cutting costs. So although an individual manufacturer might have adhered to the new regulations that doesn't mean they aren't responsible.

 

[Cid]

Plenty of coverage in the last couple of weeks on the aluminium cladding and insulation, failed safety tests etc. but bizarrely no mention at all thus far of the fire breaks/barriers. These items, a crucial third piece in the jigsaw, are supposed to be attached to the original exterior of the building, bisecting the insulation material at periodic intervals. The barriers expand when heat is applied and... er .. prevent the spread of fire. Looks like they weren't fitted at all, weren't fitted properly or cheap inadequate ones were used.

They were discussed immediately afterwards... Though I'll grant there hasn't been much on them since. I suppose the problem is that it will be difficult to get further information until there has been a proper on-site investigation. Which doesn't make for good headlines.

 

[Treacle Toes]

Always nice to have it confirmed; what you already know about how smug middle and upper class cunts think...

Councillor admits he 'phrased comments badly' on Grenfell victims

Labour’s Jordan Blyth said Grenfell victims were “not respectable sorts of citizens” during a special session of Middlesbrough Council held on Wednesday.

 

[19force8]

I think the original report was last week on Channel 4 News, but their website is painfully slow and I don't have the time to search just now.

From the BBC today Grenfell Tower: Panels not tested 'properly' - BBC News

This is it: Why do England's high-rises keep failing fire tests? - BBC News

It refers to using desktop studies rather than full fire tests and also describes how failure to update regulations and outsourcing of compliance inspections and application of regulations to industry bodies has undermined safety.

 

[Sue]

Always nice to have it confirmed; what you already know about how smug middle and upper class cunts think...

Councillor admits he 'phrased comments badly' on Grenfell victims

'Phrased badly' FFS.

 

[DotCommunist]

'Phrased badly' FFS.

'lowest rungs of society' and 'immigrants'. Why doesn't he just say untermensch and be done with it

 

[not-bono-ever]

Always nice to have it confirmed; what you already know about how smug middle and upper class cunts think...

Councillor admits he 'phrased comments badly' on Grenfell victims

I had this on FB - decrying the invasion of the council office and the abuse of May- stating that civilised people do not do this kinda thing, its not the way we do things here- the undercurrent here isn't hard to work out. Rural tories from the same county as the bloke above. Not common sentiments but not unheard of either - thankfully in the NE, most people are sensible enough to understand the horror of this happening

 

[The39thStep]

I think the original report was last week on Channel 4 News, but their website is painfully slow and I don't have the time to search just now.

From the BBC today Grenfell Tower: Panels not tested 'properly' - BBC News

The39thStep I don't disagree, but I do think the changes in testing procedures would have been lobbied for by the industry with a view to cutting costs. So although an individual manufacturer might have adhered to the new regulations that doesn't mean they aren't responsible.

What are you not necessarily disagreeing with me on?

 

[Sue]

I had this on FB - decrying the invasion of the council office and the abuse of May- stating that civilised people do not do this kinda thing, its not the way we do things here- the undercurrent here isn't hard to work out. Rural tories from the same county as the bloke above. Not common sentiments but not unheard of either - thankfully in the NE, most people are sensible enough to understand the horror of this happening

'Civilised people' = know your place

 

[cupid_stunt]

Another voice saying testing just the cladding is wrong, the insulation needs testing. The police have said the insulation on Grenfell seemed to have been the bigger problem.

The Conservative local government chief has savaged the Government’s tower block safety checks after the Grenfell fire – warning not all of the cladding is being tested.

Ministers had blundered by testing only the core of the panels on high-rise blocks and not the insulation behind them, which may not be fire-resistant, Lord Porter said.

“The Government has not done the retest properly,” the Tory peer and chairman of the Local Government Association said.

“They are not testing the whole system. We should be testing the insulation. There is more than a good chance that the insulation is probably the main problem.”

Lord Porter said the insulation – between the wall of the tower block and the panel itself – needed to be of a certain type, in order to prevent the spread of fire.

Tory local government chief says failed tower block safety checks down to wrong type of tests

 

[David Clapson]

Has there been no criticism of the fire service since Panorama reported that when the first crew put out the fridge fire they didn't realise that the fire had got out of the flat?

Sorry about linking to the Telegraph, I couldn't find a better alternative
Grenfell Tower firefighters put out fridge blaze 'and were just leaving when flats erupted in flames'

 

[xenon]

The question for me is more how it is possible for a - presumably - somewhat carefully arrived-at specification for materials can be almost summarily changed purely to save some money and by simply making some kind of equivalence on the basis of a standard, rather than going back and looking at the previous decisions that were made in regard to the original material, and questioning where any impact of the revised choice might fall. "Regression testing", if you will...

Other questions.
Why are the regulations so week. Why can materials pass our regulations, yet apparently be banned in other countries. Why can materials the manufacturer themselves say should not be used on buildings above a certain height, be specced for a building above that height. Or who chose them?
How does a burrugh with a surpless of 200 million have a housing waiting list?

My thoughts.
Government cutbacks, contractors cost saving all down the
chain, none with the larger picture or a care much to look at it, of how these changes interplay.

Industry regulation capture, = piss poor regulations.

Class.

 

[19force8]

What are you not necessarily disagreeing with me on?

Sorry, mistook you for Spymaster

Though I'm sure I could find something I don't necessarily disagree with you about

 

[Pickman's model]

How does a burrugh with a surpless of 200 million have a housing waiting list?

of course it needn't if only they were prepared to massively increase the density of housing. there is of course only a certain amount of land in any borough and if, as seems likely, the council is as unwilling to build tower blocks as potential residents would atm be to live in them not sure how that can be resolved. not to mention a load of former council flats and houses will have passed from the council's control.

 

[The39thStep]

Sorry, mistook you for Spymaster

Though I'm sure I could find something I don't necessarily disagree with you about

Easily done although I am better looking, have more personality and am a lot brighter

 

[taffboy gwyrdd]

A bit tangental, but this so needs saying in defence of national heroes.

How Murdoch Uses Sex to Trash Our Democracy.....

 

[19force8]

Easily done although I am better looking, have more personality and am a lot brighter

There you go, two out of three ain't bad.

 

[yardbird]

Just heard on R5 - no written link yet - that #10 has said RBKC was wrong in not allowing public and/or press into meeting. More to follow.

 

[yardbird]

Here we go - Grenfell Tower fire: Downing Street criticises council over aborted meeting - BBC News

 

[Pickman's model]

Just heard on R5 - no written link yet - that #10 has said RBKC was wrong in not allowing public and/or press into meeting. More to follow.

Kensington council's Grenfell Tower meeting turns to chaos | Daily Mail Online

 

[Wilf]

Always nice to have it confirmed; what you already know about how smug middle and upper class cunts think...

Councillor admits he 'phrased comments badly' on Grenfell victims

A partial defence from me:
Firstly, the video in the link kept crashing, so I didn't manage to hear his full comments. Anyway, I don't know him personally but people involved in local anti-cuts stuff regard him as okay. He's not a Corbnyite certainly, but seen to be generally okay. He's certainly middle class and there's definitely the problem of language there, when somebody from one class describes another group of people - and it sounds horrendous. However, I'd be inclined to see it as a (very) badly worded attempt to say something about the way K&C council treated the residents. Having said that, his refusal to apologise is pretty crass. Even if it was 'just' badly worded he should said sorry. It's the sort of comment which, even with the best intentions, still embodies an element of class prejudice [so, actually, I'm probably not making much of a defence]

 

[Wilf]

I had this on FB - decrying the invasion of the council office and the abuse of May- stating that civilised people do not do this kinda thing, its not the way we do things here- the undercurrent here isn't hard to work out. Rural tories from the same county as the bloke above. Not common sentiments but not unheard of either - thankfully in the NE, most people are sensible enough to understand the horror of this happening

Was that Jordan Blyth also? Sorry, hard to read the Gazette story in the link, keeps crashing (wish these fuckers at work would buy me a proper computer so they could allow me to read urban when I'm sat at my desk. ).

 

[David Clapson]

In 2005 Scotland banned the most flammable cladding types, following a fire in 1999 in Irvine - the only other time in the UK that high rise cladding has enabled a fire to spread at speed. The local MP asked for a parliamentary enquiry, but a select committee said cladding was safe enough. Would somebody like to find out who was on that committee and whether they had a financial interest in preventing the Scottish ban from being adopted in the rest of the UK?

House of Commons - Environment, Transport and Regional Affairs - First Report

How 1999 Scottish tower block fire led to regulation change - BBC News

 

[Spymaster]

Easily done although I am better looking, have more personality and am a lot brighter

Yeah but I've got a bigger dick.

 

[DotCommunist]

.

 

[brogdale]

In 2005 Scotland banned the most flammable cladding types, following a fire in 1999 in Irvine - the only other time in the UK that high rise cladding has enabled a fire to spread at speed. The local MP asked for a parliamentary enquiry, but a select committee said cladding was safe enough. Would somebody like to find out who was on that committee and whether they had a financial interest in preventing the Scottish ban from being adopted in the rest of the UK?

House of Commons - Environment, Transport and Regional Affairs - First Report

How 1999 Scottish tower block fire led to regulation change - BBC News

Why not read your own link?

 

[David Clapson]

Thanks. I don't have time to look up the interests of the members, perhaps someone else would like to?