In the news

Did you see the May interview? "If there are lessons to be learned.."

If? If? Ffs

This is pretty much what Javid was saying on Today this morning. He got a kicking from John Humphrys, quite deservedly. I'm not sure this could ever go well for the Tories given the history and context but they are compounding this by handling it dreadfully.

Please bear in mind this a flier drawn up by ex-residents looking for help and perhaps guidance from people with a greater grasp of what is achievable and what potential options are.

Complicated issue this one. Some residents may not want to be rehoused in the immediate area. The tower is going to be there for a long time and people may easily feel retraumatised by being in it's vicinity. Also, we're ony a few days in. Rehousing isn't a simple action and very much still in the temporary accomodation stage. Rushing into immediate rehousing can easily cause as many problems as it is attempting to resolve.

Yes rehousing is difficult and will take time someone needs to take a few minutes and let individuals know what is happening and when.

This is a bit of a meaningless request. Funds have already been immediately released for things like temporary accommodation and other welfare related needs. We know this and can see it happening. Losses are a whole other issue and without a permanent home for them, where would victims be putting their replacement stuff? This and a whole load of other issues need to be resolved as they come up. Hopefully RBKC, the insurers, underwriters, Central Government and everyone else involved will make a concerted effort to get through the necessary processed as efficiently and effectively as possible and advocate for the victims. However, again, this is one of those things that necessarily takes time.

Having been there I saw a lot of intercommunity help but little evidence of Government local or national help. So far people are sleeping on the floor in sports halls and the like, RBKC has offered a high rise hotel as well apparently!

Theresa May has already committed to a full public enquiry. Whether this takes the form of an Inquest or an Enquiry remains to be seen but this appears to have been taken out of the hands of RBKC.

A promise by Theresa May means what exactly? or perhaps Are you fucking kidding me.

Are you fucking kidding me.We have a protocol in place that families are contacted to notify them of the deaths before the names are released. We do that for a number or reasons, not least of all so that families don't find out because a horde of journalists are on the front door step and ringing them out of the blue. Also, there is no full list. RBKC honestly won't have a clue at this time of everyone who is and isn't dead. There's no way you can condone giving out bad information to potential grieving relatives.

This I would suggest stems from the difficulty encountered so far for individuals to locate their injured and displaced friends and relatives, being turned away from hospitals with neither confirmation or denial that their children are there. With no where else to turn just countless visits and being stonewalled and not surprised they feel something needs to change. So far many have dealt with no information.

Commission investigation into all other similar buildings in the borough to identify fire, health and safety risks and put in place immediate control measures.

This highlights a degradation in building control privatisation which has happened over time and needs addressing.
edited from a computer to try and address your points

Attack on Borough Market; Tories smell opportunity to curtail Civil Liberties;
'Enough is enough'.
Grenfell Tower fire; hmm, market forces save £5k on cladding leading to avoidable deaths;
Silence.

So far people are sleeping on the floor in sports halls and the like

How about govt foots the bill for hotel rooms and short stay apartments up front, with a plan to the money back from insurer in the long term.

That's what they are doing, or are trying to do, I believe.

I wouldn't expect it to be done well - the situation is unprecedented.

Guardian confirms they used the cheaper cladding
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/jun/16/manufacturer-of-cladding-on-grenfell-tower-identified-as-omnis-exteriors

No 'Duty of Care' on the manufacturer when it was aware of the application?

Not quite unprecedented, council's dealt with similar levels of displacement during events like the 2012 floods.

But it never really gets any easier. The council have already reported that 77 out of 120 households have been put up in West London hotels. Yes, some of those are high rise but the luxury of a variety of options are something that local authorities have when dealing with the sudden displacement of 300-400 people. Of the remaining 43 households, some of them will be staying with family or friends. There's a lot of criticism of family and friends "bearing the burden" of rehousing but it can be a preferred option. Being in the presence of someone who will be able to identify of someone isn't coping or suffering from post-trauma stress can be a good thing. Another reason for using hotels rather than apartments (as well as the lack of ready availability).

The common practice in events like this is that firstly the MIRG will get a reception center open for displaced people to get into (300+ people necessarily means multiple centers). This gives the authority the opportunity to track as many people as possible right from the outset. They will then be moved to short-term accommodation such as a hotel and then on to long-term accommodation before permanent rehousing. This is designed to minimise the amount of traumatic and disruptive moves any person or family has to make.

If anything, money isn't really a big issue, it's dealing with traumatised people that's slows progress through the stages. I've heard anecdotes of people refusing to leave reception centers because they fear losing touch with what's going on.

It will be for the courts to sort that out, but I suspect it's the project manager who probably has the overall responsibility.

"Where is this Mr Fein of whom you speak?"

Nominative determinism in reverse

no 'duty of care' on the manufacturer. they may have a product liability if the product was not in line with advertised specs.

A much more likely question is whether the parties that specified and approved the cladding were negligent in performing their contractual duties when making the recommendation to use that particular specification of cladding.

The only people that might have a duty of care is the building's managing agent, but that is beyond my knowledge

Cladding for Grenfell Tower was cheaper, more flammable option

This sort of misleading headline makes it sound like they chose the cheaper and more flammable option.
I don't think the cheapskates chose this cladding because it was more flammable.

Amazon has bought Whole Foods.

The internet has officially been gentrified.

Not quite unprecedented, council's dealt with similar levels of displacement during events like the 2012 floods.

I thought that, but then the circumstances were so different, even if logistically the numbers might be similar.

Even Tories are now putting the boot into May
https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2017/06/those-who-died-at-grenfell-tower-were-the-victims-of-bad-government/

$13+ bil too... fuck. Them's some expensive chia seeds.

Have we had KCTMO hand delivering anti social behaviour letters (ignoring 'no ball games' signs) to flats round the corner from Grenfell today:

https://twitter.com/PaulBrandITV/status/875710145845710848

From B3TA
http://b3ta.com/blog/grenfell-tower-putting-the-i-into-austerity/

Manufacturer offers two grades, one labelled 'FR', and sells the one that is more flammable?

https://twitter.com/AFP/status/875736256990326784

Protesters storming the town hall.

i was there earlier many police and journo's but no ptrotesters
they must have been on their way

not entirely sure what you are asking here?

He thinks the manufacturer is at fault for selling the flammable version.