Grenfell Tower fire in North Kensington - news and discussion

[teuchter]

I haven't seen a lot of discussion so far about the report's recommendations. The media of course is more interested in stories with a retribution angle so is focused on prosecutions.

Of the report's 1700 pages, about 18 of them are recommendations and of those about 10 related to the construction industry and how it's regulated.

It's rather dry stuff but it's the stuff that actually has a chance of improving things.

 

[savoloysam]

Somebody on the television yesterday saying the owner of the fridge is to blame.

This is why society is fucked up.

 

[rasputin]

Lord Pickles statement

Lest we forget

"96 people killed in the Grenfell fire"

The stupid fat fucker doesn't know, or more likely doesn't care, about the difference between Grenfell and Hillsborough.

 

[taperoo2k]

I haven't seen a lot of discussion so far about the report's recommendations. The media of course is more interested in stories with a retribution angle so is focused on prosecutions.

Of the report's 1700 pages, about 18 of them are recommendations and of those about 10 related to the construction industry and how it's regulated.

It's rather dry stuff but it's the stuff that actually has a chance of improving things.

This is a fairly good discussion about the inquiry's recommendations. Channel 4 News asking questions the BBC and Sky News won't.

Somebody on the television yesterday saying the owner of the fridge is to blame.

You'll always get people who repeat the lies printed by tabloid rags like the Daily Mail.
If they took the time to read the Phase I and Phase II reports they'd realise how stupid they are for
saying it.

This is why society is fucked up.

Tabloid rags and Politicians in fear of Tabloid rags is part of why society is screwed up.
Thatcher's survival of the fittest nonsense is another part of it.

 

[Lurdan]

Peter Apps addresses Tony Blairs "Tragedies like Grenfell cannot be completely avoided" aka "shit happens" comments by illustrating how his government was fully complicit in the creation of the dysfunctional regulatory and oversight framework within which the fire occured.

Xtwitter thread archived here as a webpage.

Begins:

Sighs
Opens mental draw marked 'New Labour's responsibility for Grenfell'
Begins thread...

Concludes:

I mean, it is true that in good systems people make mistakes, Tony. But it's also irrelevant. Because we did not have a good system, we had a dysfunctional one - and it was one you helped to build. If you're going to say anything, maybe start with sorry.

 

[taperoo2k]

You can set a clock by how long it takes Tony Blair to appear and
attempt to deflect from his own failures.

 

[Lurdan]

You can set a clock by how long it takes Tony Blair to appear and
attempt to deflect from his own failures.

But probably not one you want to tell the time by.

 

[taperoo2k]

Eric Pickles is a piece of work.

Eric Pickles urged to quit as Tory peer over Grenfell inquiry criticism

Emma Dent Coad, who was Kensington MP at time of fire, says former housing secretary should ‘have grace to resign’

www.theguardian.com

 

[Lurdan]

I haven't seen a lot of discussion so far about the report's recommendations. The media of course is more interested in stories with a retribution angle so is focused on prosecutions.

Of the report's 1700 pages, about 18 of them are recommendations and of those about 10 related to the construction industry and how it's regulated.

It's rather dry stuff but it's the stuff that actually has a chance of improving things.

Indeed. I've been looking for a comprehensive account of the recommendations but so far I haven't found one. Obviously there are a lot of recommendations covering a great many issues. I'd hope there will be people working on this.

There are partial accounts in the trade press, for example:

Architects Journal - Grenfell Tower inquiry second report: Key recommendations (archived)
Construction Management - Grenfell Inquiry: what are the recommendations? - (archived)

But none of them are comprehensive. They have clearly been written rather hurriedy. They concentrate on the particular sector they are written for (rather illustrating what the report says about the unacceptably siloed nature of the current system). And needless to say most of them are paywalled.

In the meantime the recommendations can be found in full on the Inquiry's site here (web format)

 

[GarveyLives]

It may be worth comparing that political ghoul's 'analysis' with that of another former leader of the same political party (who actually went to meet survivors of the massacre on the day after it occurred and who has offered support for them in the intervening seven years):

​

"Grenfell campaigners have called on Tony Blair to apologise and take responsibility for decisions made by his government that contributed to the fire that killed 72 people.

The former prime minister said on Thursday that tragedies such as the west London fire, which came after years of missed opportunities to regulate combustible cladding, were a result of unavoidable mistakes.

The final report of the public inquiry into the Grenfell Tower fire was published this week and included several criticisms of decisions made under Blair’s premiership ..."

Tony Blair told to ‘take responsibility’ after Grenfell criticism

​

 

[taperoo2k]

If there is one thing we know about Blair, is he never makes apologies or takes responsibility for his mistakes.
Corbyn is a decent human being, which is rare in a politician who makes it to the
leadership of a political party.

 

[Lurdan]

Final episode of the BBCs Grenfell podcast went up last night. (This is not the recent 10 part series setting out the background before the final report was released, but the long podcast series produced during the public hearings). This final episode is available here to listen to or download. There's a roundtable discussion about the Inquiry's final report with Beryl Menzies, one of the Inquiry's expert witnesses, Peter Apps and Phil Murphy a former high rise residential fire safety consultant, and interviews with Paulos Tekle whose five year old son died as the family were leaving the building, and Tiago Alves who was 20 when he and his family got out.

Barbara Lane another of the Inquiry's expert witnesses wrote a short piece for the FT
The Grenfell tragedy exposed an entire industry’s lack of accountability - FT (archived)

Detective Superintendent Garry Moncrieff who is in charge of the police investigation gave an interview to the Times, together with his boss Deputy Assistant Commissioner Stuart Cundy.
We will seek manslaughter charges, say Grenfell case detectives - Times (archived)

The Inquiry's final report recommends wide ranging changes to the way building construction and the construction industry are regulated. The FT posted an article pointing to possible tensions between big changes in this area and the Governments ambition to kickstart house building.
UK government faces tension between post-Grenfell safety rules and housebuilding ambitions - FT (archived)
The Building Safety Act 2022 handed responsibility for all Building Control functions in respect of 'high risk buildings' to the Building Safety Regulator, a dedicated division of the Health and Safety Executive. This article quotes the chief executive of housebuilders Vistry

One of the areas where there is a hold-up . . . is with the Building Safety Regulator. Frankly, I suspect they are struggling to keep pace with the approvals that are required. But it is a very important step.

Doubtless a sample of the complaints about the burdens of red tape which will greet any adoption of the Inquiry's recommendations.

As housing association trade journal Inside Housing immediately pointed out the Inquiry did not make any recommendations in respect of social housing providers but invited them to give 'careful consideration' to the very strong criticisms of KCTMO, the so called 'tenant management organisation' which managed Grenfell Tower on behalf of the Council. Peter Apps has written a comment piece for Inside Housing about this
The Grenfell Tower Inquiry report may not have made recommendations to social landlords, but it is still a major call for change (archived)

He cites the example of how after the coroner made recommendations at the end of the Inquest into the deaths in the Lakanal House fire---but before the Government had officially responded to them---KCTMO contacted the Department for Communities and Local Government and were privately assured that the recommendations were unlikely to be taken up and would not be mandatory. More details of this fine example of KCTMO's attitude to fire safety regulation in this article:
Grenfell management company ignored Lakanal recommendations after government said they would ‘not be mandatory’ - Inside Housing August 2019 (archived)

 

[Lurdan]

Another of 'Britain's Greatest Prime Ministers' favours us with his views on the Grenfell Inquiry report

Spoiler: Full text of David Cameron's xtweet and link

The bereaved families of the horrific Grenfell tragedy have this week received some of the answers they have been searching for after what must have been the longest, most agonising seven years. As someone who lives near Grenfell, my heart goes out to all those who lost loved ones on that terrible night; the survivors; and those who have suffered as a result of the events on 14 June 2017.

The finding that the deaths of all 72 victims were avoidable is chilling and highlights the scale and breadth of failure over three decades and more.

While there is nothing that can bring adequate comfort to the victims’ families, the survivors and the local community who have lost so much and suffered greatly, I hope that Sir Martin Moore-Bick's comprehensive and forensic final report answers their questions about what led to this unparalleled tragedy.

It is clear that there are many lessons to learn from the Inquiry’s findings – lessons for national and local government; for the construction industry and corporate sectors; for regulators; and for our public services.

All of us who have served in positions of power over the past few decades need to acknowledge that mistakes were made over too many years; community concerns were too readily sidelined or dismissed; voices too often unheard; and more could have been done to learn lessons from past tragedies.

The report is clear that fire safety and building safety regulations were explicitly excluded from the Coalition Government’s greatly-needed ‘red tape reviews’, given the importance we placed on safety and build quality. Indeed, the Coalition and post-2015 governments took steps to increase fire safety regulation. However, it is important that this and future governments take note of this week’s findings to ensure that essential protections can never be brushed aside, minimised or dismissed.

I associate myself fully with the powerful statements delivered in the House of Commons this week by the Prime Minister and Leader of the Opposition; and I echo their unreserved apology. To the bereaved families; to the survivors; to the community; and all who have suffered: the British state let you down; it should not have happened; it must not happen again.

It now falls on the new government to implement the recommendations contained in the Inquiry report. But all of us in public life owe it to the families of the Grenfell victims, the survivors, the campaigners, and all in society, to demonstrate that we have learnt the lessons from this heart-breaking catastrophe, and will work to ensure that a tragedy like this can never, ever be repeated.

6:00 PM · Sep 6, 2024

It includes these sentences demonstrating that Cameron hasn't lost his appetite for porkies

The report is clear that fire safety and building safety regulations were explicitly excluded from the Coalition Government’s greatly-needed ‘red tape reviews’, given the importance we placed on safety and build quality. Indeed, the Coalition and post-2015 governments took steps to increase fire safety regulation.

Peter Apps takes this claim apart - twitter thread archived as a web page here
It starts:

Ah christ, I can't even begin with this one, but I do feel the need to say that the paragraph below is demonstrably and very clearly total bullshit. The report quite firmly found the opposite

 

[taperoo2k]

It's the usual merry go round of former PM's popping up to deflect attention from themselves
to protect their legacies. Not sure if May has said anything yet.

 

[GarveyLives]

The names of the companies responsible should be mud.

Really?

Rydon was the principal contractor on the Grenfell Tower refurbishment.

It was severely criticised in final report of the inquiry into the Grenfell Tower fire. Now we learn the following:

"The building firm found to have borne “considerable responsibility” for the Grenfell fire with its “casual attitude to fire safety” was handed contracts worth tens of millions of pounds by councils, colleges and NHS trusts after the tragedy.

Property group Rydon was the lead contractor overseeing the refurbishment of Grenfell Tower between 2014 and 2016, including the installation of combustible cladding. The inquiry found that the firm should have been aware of “the risks of using combustible materials in the external walls of high-rise buildings”.

Grenfell building firm criticised by inquiry handed contracts worth millions after fire (Note: It may be more accurate to state that they were "awarded", rather than "handed" contracts)

“As principal contractor, Rydon saw its role as little more than the conductor of a large and varied orchestra.”

"The overall quality of Rydon’s work fell significantly below the standard that could be expected of a reasonably competent design and build contractor”.​

 

[DaveCinzano]

Really?

Rydon was the principal contractor on the Grenfell Tower refurbishment.

It was severely criticised in final report of the inquiry into the Grenfell Tower fire. Now we learn the following:



Grenfell building firm criticised by inquiry handed contracts worth millions after fire (Note: It may be more accurate to state that they were "awarded", rather than "handed" contracts)

“As principal contractor, Rydon saw its role as little more than the conductor of a large and varied orchestra.”

"The overall quality of Rydon’s work fell significantly below the standard that could be expected of a reasonably competent design and build contractor”.​

Rydon took over the maintenance contract at my NHS workplace last year. It would be fair to say it has not gone swimmingly.

 

[PTK]

Really?

Rydon was the principal contractor on the Grenfell Tower refurbishment.

It was severely criticised in final report of the inquiry into the Grenfell Tower fire. Now we learn the following:



Grenfell building firm criticised by inquiry handed contracts worth millions after fire (Note: It may be more accurate to state that they were "awarded", rather than "handed" contracts)

“As principal contractor, Rydon saw its role as little more than the conductor of a large and varied orchestra.”

"The overall quality of Rydon’s work fell significantly below the standard that could be expected of a reasonably competent design and build contractor”.​

Really?

Rydon was the principal contractor on the Grenfell Tower refurbishment.

It was severely criticised in final report of the inquiry into the Grenfell Tower fire. Now we learn the following:



Grenfell building firm criticised by inquiry handed contracts worth millions after fire (Note: It may be more accurate to state that they were "awarded", rather than "handed" contracts)

“As principal contractor, Rydon saw its role as little more than the conductor of a large and varied orchestra.”

"The overall quality of Rydon’s work fell significantly below the standard that could be expected of a reasonably competent design and build contractor”.​

What is your point?

 

[taperoo2k]

Rydon took over the maintenance contract at my NHS workplace last year. It would be fair to say it has not gone swimmingly.

I'll guess the maintenace has either not been done or carried out so poorly a toddler could have done
a better job.

 

[DaveCinzano]

What is your point?

I think the point they are making is that whilst Rydon's name should be mud, clearly it is not yet amongst those with responsibilities in the public sector for signing contracts

 

[DaveCinzano]

I'll guess the maintenace has either not been done or carried out so poorly a toddler could have done
a better job.

 

[taperoo2k]

I think the point they are making is that whilst Rydon's name should be mud, clearly it is not yet amongst those with responsibilities in the public sector for signing contracts

I expect it'll be the old "They can't bid for government contracts" whilst letting current contracts run their course.

 

[Lurdan]

Natasha Elcock (of Grenfell United) on where the Inquiry Report didn't go far enough and what it didn't address
We the survivors and bereaved of Grenfell cannot sleep easy even now. Too many others are still at risk - The Guardian

Peter Apps has written the first of a couple of pieces about the Inquiry recommendations. It's on his substack here. It contains one or two paywalled links, some which are only temporarily accessible and links to things like the Spectator. Here's an archived copy with mostly archived working links.

 

[GarveyLives]

Could someone familiar with the matter (or members of the groups concerned) please explain the difference(s) between Grenfell United, Justice4Grenfell, and Grenfell Next of Kin?

 

[taperoo2k]

Another Grenfell waiting to happen are converted Office blocks, lots of get outs from the building regulations and property developers cutting corners accordingly. If this is anything to go by...

 

[Lurdan]

Could someone familiar with the matter (or members of the groups concerned) please explain the difference(s) between Grenfell United, Justice4Grenfell, and Grenfell Next of Kin?

Grenfell United was formed in one of the resue centres immediately after the fire. It's open to survivors and relatives. Outside activists descended on the area after the fire but were not allowed to join. Some activists formed Justice4Grenfell. Don't know much about Grenfell Next Of Kin. They are relatives of people who died in the fire. The main difference between them and Grenfell United is their attitude to the Inquiry - they think it has delayed criminal proceedings. See for example this xtwitter post on Sept 6th

Spoiler: Text of Grenfell Next of Kin xtwitter post and link

GRENFELLNEXTOFKIN @Grenfellnextkin

Everybody now talking about Justice for our kin. But "it was never about anything except Justice. We were 'stitched up' from the start."
10 questions to understand why there's been no prosecutions:
Q1: why has there been no criminal prosecutions in over 7 years?
A: Because of the Inquiry taking place before criminal prosecutions.
Q2: Is this normal?
A: NO. Criminal prosecutions take place before Inquiries. The MET and CPS confirmed that in their experience they have never known a situation where the Inquiry has taken place before criminal charges.
Q3: when was the decision taken to launch a public Inquiry?
A: On 15th June 2017 the morning after the fire announced by the newly elected Theresa May days after a contentious snap General Election 'the brexit' election on 8th June 2017. Let's say it again for those in the back: The new Prime Minister ordered the public Inquiry on the morning of 15th June just hours after the fire. The building was still 'not under control'. The survivors were still in their slippers and pyjamas on the streets. We were searching for our families in hospitals or in a coma hanging on to life.
Q4: What was the impact of the Inquiry on criminal prosecutions?
A: The police could not present files to the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) for Charging decisions until the Inquiry was over.
Q5: what is the longterm impact of the Inquiry going first on potential criminal prosecutions for manslaughter?
A: A lot. And the outlook for manslaughter charges is pessimistic because the Inquiry gave potential defendants that may have been charged the opportunity to practice their defence therefore making it difficult that the high bar of 'probable conviction' could be met. ie the 'web of blame' is the get out of jail free card for all the 'crooks & killers'
Q6: does anyone think of any of this when they are commentating wall to wall?
A: No.
Q7: Why did the lawyers not say anything? How was it covered up for so long?
A: Because they are Inquiry lawyers. The Grenfell Inquiry cost£173million. And there is a juggernaut State sponsored machine put in place by the previous government, still in place, promoting narratives, setting agendas, analysing 'optics', marketing, spin and comms all branded with green hearts, balloons and spectacles laid on.
Q8: was it deliberate? Or was it benign incompetence, an unintentional 'whoops' moment but with enormous unforgiveable ramifications for justice for our kith and kin?
A: Governments like Inquiries. It gives the illusion something is happening and helps dampen societal anger. Grenfell was a 'tinderbox' moment or as put at the Inquiry 'it was a testing moment for our country and we were very live to that' Nick Hurd MP.
Q9: who knew?
A: Hmmmm....NOT the next of kin of the deceased. We would never have agreed to it. Indeed on the morning of the 15th June 2017, the morning after the fire on the 14th, we did not even know we were going to be next of kin. We would not have delayed our own justice or jeopardised it.
Q10: How did it happen?
A: it starts with Theresa May and her announcement on 15th May. See the letter below, signed by Alok Sharma and Nick Hurd two Government Ministers promising it would not delay prosecutions, is either a deliberate lie or incompetent and ignorance.

The immediate families of those killed have always prioritised Criminal prosecutions. Manslaughter charges for those with blood on their hands. But our justice was delayed, derailed, and denied.
We were silenced and even now continuously marginalised by a powerful well oiled machine. The worst and most tone deaf? the @BBCNews

xtwitter link - Last edited1:36 AM · Sep 6, 2024

WE ARE GRENFELL UNITED - Grenfell United (Their primary communications are via their xtwitter account)
Justice4Grenfell
GRENFELL REBORN - The Grenfell Next of Kin - their xtwitter account

 

[Lurdan]

One of the themes in the responses to the Inquiry report is that it although it severely criticises KCTMO, the Arms Length Management Organisation which the Council delegated management of it's housing stock to, it made no recommendations concerning the social housing sector. For example about the consequences of the imbalance of power between landlords and tenants . In the piece I linked to above by Natasha Elcock of Grenfell United she wrote:

We needed the report to demand a culture shift in social housing. It is undeniably damning about the Kensington and Chelsea Tenant Management Organisation (KCTMO), our landlord. But unfortunately, Moore-Bick did not understand the residents’ predicament and the way we tried to protect ourselves from an uncaring and bullying overlord that belittled and marginalised us. That, for many of us, has really undermined his report.
Between tenant and landlord, there are clear lines of responsibility. Residents did everything they could to stop the abusive relationship, and the report makes clear just how right we were about KCTMO. But Moore-Bick’s report didn’t censure social-housing providers, and it didn’t take any steps to identify the power issues with KCTMO and residents.

There was a huge national failure of regulation, but let’s not forget that fundamentally we were failed by our landlord. It provided us with homes, which it turned into a death trap. And throughout that refurbishment process, we were treated as second-class citizens who should be happy for getting something for nothing.
There are urgent reforms that need to be made to social housing, but the report has failed to make any recommendations here. The evidence was there, even if the panel wasn’t looking, even if it was outside the remit. Maybe Richard Millett KC, the lead counsel to the inquiry, and his team ran out of time to properly consider what is in the Social Housing Regulation Act to see if it matched the evidence from the inquiry. But, in our opinion, the act did not address the critical cultural issues, and now we have a gaping hole in both recommendations and legislation to properly address this.

Peter Apps (it's that man again) wrote a piece last week containing the immediate thoughts of Shah Ahmed, the Chair of the Grenfell Leaseholders Association, who had repeatedly raised questions over fire safety in the building after a previous small fire in 2010 on the 6th floor had led to smoke spreading up to the 15th floor injuring some residents.
Former chair of Grenfell’s leaseholder association criticises lack of recommendations for social housing providers - Inside Housing (archived)

Yesterday Apps wrote a piece for Prospect
The missing lesson of Grenfell? Give tenants a voice - Prospect

Grenfell was blessed with diligent, highly intelligent and highly engaged residents, who were brave enough to stand up on behalf of their neighbours and canny and well organised enough to attract major political support to their cause.
The issues they raised were extremely pertinent. The person who spoke out against the appointment of inexperienced architects Studio E for the tower’s refurbishment was tenant Eddie Daffarn, not any of the expensively assembled project consultants.

The person who raised the issue of evacuation from the tower, given the narrow staircase and malfunctioning smoke system? Not the internationally respected fire engineering consultancy appointed to produce a fire safety strategy, but chair of the leaseholder’s association Shah Ahmed.
Those who raised serious concern about fire door self-closers and the new plastic windows? Tenants such as Betty Kasote, Natasha Elcock and Marcio Gomes—not the official fire risk assessor or the clerk of works.

The trouble was that the system did not give these people power. It did not give them status in the scrutiny process. It did not give them legal aid or representation—even when they were experiencing chronic disrepair.
At a national level too, the inquiry report tells a story of a missing tenant voice. When the government commissioned guidance on managing fire safety in blocks of flats, it consulted landlords and landlords’ representatives, but not tenants and particularly not disabled tenants.

The guidance concluded that planning for the evacuation of disabled residents in a fire was too much bother. Would a tenants’ group have ever agreed with this?
The answer is clear: give tenants and tenants groups more power, both on their estates and on the national stage. That would be a more important contribution to fixing the problem than regulators and ombudsmen—with their high bar for investigation and slow timelines—can ever be.

The Grenfell Tower Inquiry clearly identified the need for this, but then failed to recommend it.
And that—in an otherwise powerful report—represents a major missed opportunity for change.

**********************************

Well I can already hear some of the "yes buts". Wouldn't 'giving tenants a voice' whatever that means, just make life much harder for the already overstretched petty administrative and management strata? Wouldn't that be a bad thing?

Hmmm. let me think about that for a moment.

 

[SpookyFrank]

I expect it'll be the old "They can't bid for government contracts" whilst letting current contracts run their course.

Or, as in the case of G4S, contracts will still be agreed but just not rubber-stamped until the end of whatever arbitrary moratorium.

 

[GarveyLives]

Grenfell United was formed in one of the resue centres immediately after the fire. It's open to survivors and relatives. Outside activists descended on the area after the fire but were not allowed to join. Some activists formed Justice4Grenfell. Don't know much about Grenfell Next Of Kin. They are relatives of people who died in the fire. The main difference between them and Grenfell United is their attitude to the Inquiry - they think it has delayed criminal proceedings. See for example this xtwitter post on Sept 6th

Spoiler: Text of Grenfell Next of Kin xtwitter post and link

GRENFELLNEXTOFKIN @Grenfellnextkin

Everybody now talking about Justice for our kin. But "it was never about anything except Justice. We were 'stitched up' from the start."
10 questions to understand why there's been no prosecutions:
Q1: why has there been no criminal prosecutions in over 7 years?
A: Because of the Inquiry taking place before criminal prosecutions.
Q2: Is this normal?
A: NO. Criminal prosecutions take place before Inquiries. The MET and CPS confirmed that in their experience they have never known a situation where the Inquiry has taken place before criminal charges.
Q3: when was the decision taken to launch a public Inquiry?
A: On 15th June 2017 the morning after the fire announced by the newly elected Theresa May days after a contentious snap General Election 'the brexit' election on 8th June 2017. Let's say it again for those in the back: The new Prime Minister ordered the public Inquiry on the morning of 15th June just hours after the fire. The building was still 'not under control'. The survivors were still in their slippers and pyjamas on the streets. We were searching for our families in hospitals or in a coma hanging on to life.
Q4: What was the impact of the Inquiry on criminal prosecutions?
A: The police could not present files to the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) for Charging decisions until the Inquiry was over.
Q5: what is the longterm impact of the Inquiry going first on potential criminal prosecutions for manslaughter?
A: A lot. And the outlook for manslaughter charges is pessimistic because the Inquiry gave potential defendants that may have been charged the opportunity to practice their defence therefore making it difficult that the high bar of 'probable conviction' could be met. ie the 'web of blame' is the get out of jail free card for all the 'crooks & killers'
Q6: does anyone think of any of this when they are commentating wall to wall?
A: No.
Q7: Why did the lawyers not say anything? How was it covered up for so long?
A: Because they are Inquiry lawyers. The Grenfell Inquiry cost£173million. And there is a juggernaut State sponsored machine put in place by the previous government, still in place, promoting narratives, setting agendas, analysing 'optics', marketing, spin and comms all branded with green hearts, balloons and spectacles laid on.
Q8: was it deliberate? Or was it benign incompetence, an unintentional 'whoops' moment but with enormous unforgiveable ramifications for justice for our kith and kin?
A: Governments like Inquiries. It gives the illusion something is happening and helps dampen societal anger. Grenfell was a 'tinderbox' moment or as put at the Inquiry 'it was a testing moment for our country and we were very live to that' Nick Hurd MP.
Q9: who knew?
A: Hmmmm....NOT the next of kin of the deceased. We would never have agreed to it. Indeed on the morning of the 15th June 2017, the morning after the fire on the 14th, we did not even know we were going to be next of kin. We would not have delayed our own justice or jeopardised it.
Q10: How did it happen?
A: it starts with Theresa May and her announcement on 15th May. See the letter below, signed by Alok Sharma and Nick Hurd two Government Ministers promising it would not delay prosecutions, is either a deliberate lie or incompetent and ignorance.

The immediate families of those killed have always prioritised Criminal prosecutions. Manslaughter charges for those with blood on their hands. But our justice was delayed, derailed, and denied.
We were silenced and even now continuously marginalised by a powerful well oiled machine. The worst and most tone deaf? the @BBCNews

xtwitter link - Last edited1:36 AM · Sep 6, 2024

WE ARE GRENFELL UNITED - Grenfell United (Their primary communications are via their xtwitter account)
Justice4Grenfell
GRENFELL REBORN - The Grenfell Next of Kin - their xtwitter account

Thank you for this explanation.

 

[GarveyLives]

"The new building safety minister has attended a secretive conference sponsored by a company condemned by the Grenfell inquiry ten times in recent years ..."

New building safety minister banqueted with Grenfell boss

 

[AnnO'Neemus]

I expect it'll be the old "They can't bid for government contracts" whilst letting current contracts run their course.

The problem is that there will be clauses in the contract that ensure the company is richly rewarded, I mean compensated, should the contract be terminated early.