Virgos Groove Posted September 4 Posted September 4 Quote The Grenfell Tower disaster was the result of "decades of failure" by central government to stop the spread of combustible cladding combined with the "systematic dishonesty" of multimillion-dollar companies whose products spread the fire that killed 72 people, a seven-year public inquiry has found. In a 1,700-page report that apportions blame for the 2017 tragedy widely, Sir Martin Moore-Bick, the chair of the inquiry, found that three firms – Arconic, Kingspan and Celotex – "engaged in deliberate and sustained strategies to … mislead the market". Quote Studio E demonstrated "a cavalier attitude to the regulations affecting fire safety". Its failure to recognise that the plastic-filled panels on the high-rise tower were dangerous was not the action of a "reasonably competent architect" and it "bears a very significant degree of responsibility for the disaster", the inquiry found. Quote The inquiry was highly critical of the tenant management organisation (TMO), which was appointed by the local authority, the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea (RBKC), to look after its thousands of homes but, according to the report, consistently ignored residents' views. The TMO chief executive, Robert Black, established a "pattern of concealment … in relation to fire safety matters" and the TMO "treated the demands of managing fire safety as an inconvenience" in "a betrayal of its statutory obligations to its tenants", the report said. Quote The inquiry found that the government was "well aware" of the risks posed by highly flammable cladding "but failed to act on what it knew". Eric Pickles, Cameron's housing secretary until 2015, had "enthusiastically supported" the prime minister's drive to slash regulations and it dominated his department's thinking to the extent that matters affecting fire safety and risk to life "were ignored, delayed or disregarded", the inquiry concluded. The Guardian Heads need to roll for this.
Archetype Posted September 4 Posted September 4 This is the case with many late 1900's and early 2000's housing projects in the west. Most are in dangerous states of disrepair but the governments that funded them did not realize cheap building methods of the time would not age well, and that they're more expensive to upkeep over time. So, they just do nothing and hope the worst doesn't happen. It can be cheaper to point fingers and blame others than fix the problem.
Mikeymoonshine Posted September 4 Posted September 4 Seven years just to come to a conclusion that was blatantly obvious from the start and what consequences will come from this? They still haven't removed the dangerous stuff from a lot of buildings, I have a friend living in a building with this stuff on it. 1
Princess Aurora Posted September 4 Posted September 4 This is what happens when you choose quantity over quality
Recommended Posts