Is that the Tories' fault too?
Fire chiefs seek extra funding after £10m budget underspend.
Damn those nasty Tories and their cuts.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/...funding-after-10m-budget-underspend-2g23s2sf0
You do know The Times is behind a pay-wall,right? :unsure:
I'm perfectly willing to accept that social housing has been a "cinderella service" for at least the last 40 years,which obviously includes the Blair/Brown governments but I don't think there's any denying that since 2010, the cuts brought in by successive Tory led governments (including 40% cuts in local council budgets) hell-bent on austerity, as a deliberate policy choice, have exacerbated the situation.
The local council in question had "stockpiled £274m of usable reserves following years of chronic underspending", according to the Independent. But hey, people didn't like the election result so......nasty Tories, cuts, austerity etc.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...274m-despite-warnings-residents-a7795411.html
You realise that the local council is a Tory one, right? It sort of makes Barna's point more salient that they'd rather stockpile money (and give back £100 bonus I believe to residents - but not to those on benefits or living in social housing) than spend money on those who needed help the most....so yes, nasty Tories.
You realise that the local council is a Tory one, right? It sort of makes Barna's point more salient that they'd rather stockpile money (and give back £100 bonus I believe to residents - but not to those on benefits or living in social housing) than spend money on those who needed help the most....so yes, nasty Tories.
Money isn't this issue, they spent £10m on Grenfell house. The problem was they used fire lighter material rather than non combustible.
Oh yes it is.The material used in the cladding was considerably cheaper than non-combustible material.
Well if you buy the cheaper car on the forecourt you still expect it to be road worthy.
You'll have to ask how this material past so called 'professional' tests when its banned in other countries and people have died in previous fires that spread because of the cladding.
It would seem the obsession with all things green and energy saving created a corrupt testing culture that overruled safety and alarming concerns by the ordinary Jo's of Britain.
I would expect this to come out in the public enquiry into the Grenfell fire.Unless, of course,that is the complete whitewash that many of the residents and survivors expect it to be.
I'm also interested to know why cheaper combustible materials were used in the mix instead of 100% non-combustible ones? It seems to me, that either or both the contractors concerned and the KC council were culpable, the former for seeking to cut costs at the risk of public safety, the latter for allowing them to do so.
See first line of post 212.
I chose to clad the outside of my building with Siberian larch wood. Had I gone for a cheaper man made product I would not expect it to act as an accelerant in a fire or give off cyanide gas. Regardless of cost.
I've seen the videos and spoke to people who were there. Even the jets from the ALP were struggling to make any effect on the flames. Almost unheard of in a fire situation unless its a chemical or metal etc. Certainly not any domestic fire.
I'll wager when the tests are completed that material has the same properties as a fire-lighter. Regardless of who is the builder, council or in government that should have never remotely passed any tests that allowed this product to be used.
Seem to rember something on C4 news last week or (possibly) Newsnight to the effect that one of the contractors concerned also owns the company which runs (some of) the tests.Poor show.
Really? No conflict of interest there at all then!
See first line of post 212.
I chose to clad the outside of my building with Siberian larch wood. Had I gone for a cheaper man made product I would not expect it to act as an accelerant in a fire or give off cyanide gas. Regardless of cost.
I've seen the videos and spoke to people who were there. Even the jets from the ALP were struggling to make any effect on the flames. Almost unheard of in a fire situation unless its a chemical or metal etc. Certainly not any domestic fire.
I'll wager when the tests are completed that material has the same properties as a fire-lighter. Regardless of who is the builder, council or in government that should have never remotely passed any tests that allowed this product to be used.