• Welcome to the ShrimperZone forums.
    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which only gives you limited access.

    Existing Users:.
    Please log-in using your existing username and password. If you have any problems, please see below.

    New Users:
    Join our free community now and gain access to post topics, communicate privately with other members, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and free. Click here to join.

    Fans from other clubs
    We welcome and appreciate supporters from other clubs who wish to engage in sensible discussion. Please feel free to join as above but understand that this is a moderated site and those who cannot play nicely will be quickly removed.

    Assistance Required
    For help with the registration process or accessing your account, please send a note using the Contact us link in the footer, please include your account name. We can then provide you with a new password and verification to get you on the site.

Not to mention the Tories going over and above the weak recommendations in regards to the cladding of buildings after Grenfell. I'm not used to this, it's disturbing. I hope tomorrow the bring in a law about sacrificing your first born to balance the books.
for context the cladding replacement was something they seemed to initially offer to pay for then dithered for close to a year before eventually conceding they would do what should have been done from the off.
 
I suspect around a third of the UK's 9,000-ish betting shops will close over the next three-four years as a result of this.

FOBTs account for well over half of shop profits these days - they provided a lot of shops with a stay of execution as the reasons for regular sports bettors to bet in shop rather than online have been decreasing for the last 18 years.

betting companies knew this day was coming (oh yes you did)
they have been creaming millions from these awful machines - it is nothing short of a national disgrace.
don't even bother with security for the staff having to deal with often violent, abusive and in many cases, very damaged people.
No sympathy - none.
 
for context the cladding replacement was something they seemed to initially offer to pay for then dithered for close to a year before eventually conceding they would do what should have been done from the off.

Even when the Tories (eventually) do something right you can't help but have a dig to score a political point can you. You sure you've never been in politics?
 
for context the cladding replacement was something they seemed to initially offer to pay for then dithered for close to a year before eventually conceding they would do what should have been done from the off.

Even when the Tories (eventually) do something right you can't help but have a dig to score a political point can you. You sure you've never been in politics?

What would be doing "something right" IMO would be introducing some prescriptive legistation banning the use of inflammable cladding on all high rise buildings in future and replacing all such cladding on existing high rises,rather than just "consulting" on this issue.

In addition, no new high rises should be built without two functioning staircases.Sprinklers should also be installed.

As Labour's shadow housing secretary John Healey responded re-cladding: "Don't consult on it, do it."
 
Last edited:
Even when the Tories (eventually) do something right you can't help but have a dig to score a political point can you. You sure you've never been in politics?
totally agree they are doing the right thing and totally agree with your use of the word 'eventually'. As a government they scupper their own good policy - if they had just done this 11 months ago then they would have been applauded for dealing with the situation, by dragging their heels and giving mixed messages for all of that time it seems like they are taking responsibility for the fix begrudgingly.
They are doing the right thing and investing a lot of tax payers money in safety but managed to do it in a way where they don't come out looking like heroes.
 
totally agree they are doing the right thing and totally agree with your use of the word 'eventually'. As a government they scupper their own good policy - if they had just done this 11 months ago then they would have been applauded for dealing with the situation, by dragging their heels and giving mixed messages for all of that time it seems like they are taking responsibility for the fix begrudgingly.
They are doing the right thing and investing a lot of tax payers money in safety but managed to do it in a way where they don't come out looking like heroes.

And just to reiterate my point. Absolutely no need to include the words I've bolded as all government money is tax payers money but hey, it's a cheap point so why not.

And in other news.

Is anyone really that surprised why Labour did so much worse than expected at the last locals.

The Tory gift that just keeps on giving.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZO5akibFFHc
 
And just to reiterate my point. Absolutely no need to include the words I've bolded as all government money is tax payers money but hey, it's a cheap point so why not.

And in other news.

Is anyone really that surprised why Labour did so much worse than expected at the last locals.

The Tory gift that just keeps on giving.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZO5akibFFHc

That woman really is a cretin.
 
What would be doing "something right" IMO would be introducing some prescriptive legistation banning the use of inflammable cladding on all high rise buildings in future and replacing all such cladding on existing high rises,rather than just "consulting" on this issue.

In addition, no new high rises should be built without two functioning staircases.Sprinklers should also be installed.

As Labour's shadow housing secretary John Healey responded re-cladding: "Don't consult on it, do it."

Did he also say looking back it was a disastrous mistake by the Labour government to take Fire safety away from the Fire service and give it to private companies.

They had the warnings 10 years ago but the Fire service were ignored. Apparently an expensive lap top generated report overrules the LFB who struggled to put out these fires due to not just the cladding it is also the way it is fitted.
 
Did he also say looking back it was a disastrous mistake by the Labour government to take Fire safety away from the Fire service and give it to private companies.

They had the warnings 10 years ago but the Fire service were ignored. Apparently an expensive lap top generated report overrules the LFB who struggled to put out these fires due to not just the cladding it is also the way it is fitted.

The reason why the Tory government (and possibly Labour) might be reluctant to prescriptively ban the use of inflammable cladding -as I understand it-is down to what Dominic Raab on QT called " a technical issue".Namely that future improvements might be able to make such cladding safe.Diane Abbott was quite right to call him out on this. That is the situation now.We are where we are.

http://www.bbc.com/news/av/uk-politics-44163731/grenfell-abbott-and-raab-on-cladding-ban
 
I'm 'in the business' of buildings insulation and fire resistant building materials I can assure you that to make the cladding fire resistant/retardant is.....

A. Cost prohibitive on an industry wide scale and would make each square meter of cladding approximately 10 to 15 percent more expensive to produce (raw material additives) and consequently either make the price of each new building that much more expensive to build or reduce the footprint of the project. Neither of which is palatable to the industry.

B. It's not that easy to just add chemicals to make a substance fire resistant. It takes months of trials, and failures, on any given substance in order to meet the very stringent Government safety legislation and building standards already in place regarding FRA grade building insulation and it's use.

Sherif will know what I'm talking about. It can be done but there will undoubtedly be a lot of resistance to any such move.
 
Anyway....a few Sunday papers think that there could be an autumn GE as the whole Brexit process is apparently in stalemate. 3 GE's in 3 years....crazy times.....:stunned:
 
I'm 'in the business' of buildings insulation and fire resistant building materials I can assure you that to make the cladding fire resistant/retardant is.....

A. Cost prohibitive on an industry wide scale and would make each square meter of cladding approximately 10 to 15 percent more expensive to produce (raw material additives) and consequently either make the price of each new building that much more expensive to build or reduce the footprint of the project. Neither of which is palatable to the industry.

B. It's not that easy to just add chemicals to make a substance fire resistant. It takes months of trials, and failures, on any given substance in order to meet the very stringent Government safety legislation and building standards already in place regarding FRA grade building insulation and it's use.

Sherif will know what I'm talking about. It can be done but there will undoubtedly be a lot of resistance to any such move.

The cost of the cladding is not that much for refurb or new build. So for example I have heard quotes that the fire resistant cladding on Grenfell would have cost another £200,000 on a total of £10m.

On my property where I now live I had to pass the new sound tests. So between the first and second floors I have two layers of 12mm plasterboard one of them is fire check. Then a suspended ceiling with sound proof insulation,bars and two layers of 15mm sound proof board. I also had to build an independent stud wall next to the party wall with sound proof insulation, bars and two layers of 15mm sound board

This cost me 7 times what the larch wood cladding ( top half of the building) did. I had to do it because it was the rules. If you don't pass the sound test you don't get a completion certificate.

One thing that would not cost much would be to have fire stopped the cladding at Grenfell on each floor. Even with such a poor choice of cladding that fire would have never spread more than couple of floors if that had been done. Instead we had a oriel bay type design for aesthetic reasons and with no fire stopping it led to a chimney like effect which allowed such a rapid fire spread.

This was absolutely known about because we had near misses, Bethnal Green where the LFB could only put the fire out from the roof. 6 people died at Lakanal House 2009 due to the cladding and poor workmanship. Up until then fires spreading over several floors on of a residential tower block was a thing of Hollywood movies but not in London.

That's why this sort of cladding is banned in other countries so if the industry cant come up with a fire proof affordable solution it should be banned.
 
Last edited:
Anyway....a few Sunday papers think that there could be an autumn GE as the whole Brexit process is apparently in stalemate. 3 GE's in 3 years....crazy times.....:stunned:
I'd love this to be true and I believe The Times reported it first and don't see why they would make it up - but I don't see what Tories think they can achieve by emphasising their divisions on the EU and calling a GE. It just looks like they don't want to govern.
 
I'd love this to be true and I believe The Times reported it first and don't see why they would make it up - but I don't see what Tories think they can achieve by emphasising their divisions on the EU and calling a GE. It just looks like they don't want to govern.

Recent polling has been much more in their favour than one might expect, maybe that has emboldened them. But still, sounds like an odd one.

I'm with Brenda.

[video=youtube;d3PKE8uTSp8]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d3PKE8uTSp8[/video]
 
Back
Top