Doreen Lawrence says Grenfell tragedy was linked to racism

[wilberforce]

Oh dear, how sad, never mind.


Stay put isn’t madness, hundreds of people walking down a staircase full of products of combustion hampering firefighting operations and falling over the hoses is very mad along with wrapping a building in flammable insulation. LFB have been chucked under the bus on this one and it’s f***ing shit though not remotely surprising.

yep, if the compartments were fire resistant, as per building regs, the fire wouldn't have spread, but because of cost cutting this was ignored.
but when lfb rocked up to that incident, they would never have suspected that the building wouldn't be spec'd up to the hilt, hence the stay put policy ! ive been to loads of high rises, and we have always stuck to these guidelines, because every building should be up to current standard re fire regs !

 

[I'm Spartacus]

As an architect I specify building materials daily - including cladding. We check compliance and certification and specify performance requirements and compliance with building regulations.

The specifications and drawings are then checked by building inspectors - if the aren’t satisfied - we respecify.
The materials are procured by the contractor who also checks for compliance. The installation and materials are checked on site for compliance by the building inspector.

The system is robust - but there been a catastrophic failure somewhere in the process.

I cannot for the life of me think why someone would manufacture a cladding material that doesn’t comply . It’s certified prior to mass production - if it fails it’s illegal and no one would make it , specify it or buy it.

There are different classifications of surface spread of flame but the system would or should have picked that up.

We need to know what part of a history robust system of specification , certification and manufacture has failed..... and fix it quick.


The building is designed for detection and escape with containment at source. The prime target is saving lives not the building.

The stairwells are fire escape shafts and there should be no hazardous debris in them - that’s buil maintenance issue which I think will come out later .

I know all this and clearly the building failed miserably in every department. Also we will fuck it up as the current sops don’t allow us to plug in on the fire floor (which I find f***ing ludicrous) we plug in the floor below for the covering jet and 2 below for the attack jet so that’s 2 floors of stairwell with doors propped open and trip hazards.

 

[PNEFC111]

yep, if the compartments were fire resistant, as per building regs, the fire wouldn't have spread, but because of cost cutting this was ignored.
but when lfb rocked up to that incident, they would never have suspected that the building wouldn't be spec'd up to the hilt, hence the stay put policy ! ive been to loads of high rises, and we have always stuck to these guidelines, because every building should be up to current standard re fire regs !

The escape routes would have been fire protected- whether the fire doors self closed or the emergency lighting kicked in .... or there was obstruction or debris in those shafts is a building maintenance issue.

I take your point on compliance with current regulations- it is almost impossible for every building to comply with the current regulations- my house doesn’t comply neither current regulations despite being only 20 years old - the building regulations arent retrospective.

The new cladding should comply and the fire plan should be up to regulations.

I m not pointing fingers here just putting the architects head on it.

I know all this and clearly the building failed miserably in every department. Also we will fuck it up as the current sops don’t allow us to plug in on the fire floor (which I find f***ing ludicrous) we plug in the floor below for the covering jet and 2 below for the attack jet so that’s 2 floors of stairwell with doors propped open and trip hazards.

One would hope that there is a feedback procedure for your very valid concerns.

Either way I wholly respect the job you do and thank you genuinely.

 

[wilberforce]

The escape routes would have been fire protected- whether the fire doors self closed or the emergency lighting kicked in .... or there was obstruction or debris in those shafts is a building maintenance issue.

I take your point on compliance with current regulations- it is almost impossible for every building to comply with the current regulations- my house doesn’t comply neither current regulations despite being only 20 years old - the building regulations arent retrospective.

The new cladding should comply and the fire plan should be up to regulations.

I m not pointing fingers here just putting the architects head on it.


One would hope that there is a feedback procedure for your very valid concerns.

Either way I wholly respect the job you do and thank you genuinely.

surely though, a tower block and a private residential home don't have the same fire regulations mate ?
the problem with Grenfell was that there wasn't adequate fire protection between compartments, meaning the fire spread was inevitable ! the oic of the lfb would have been making his plans on all of this being in place, and wouldn't have had a clue that none of this was in place due to cost cutting when it was refurbed a year or so previous
if I had one criticism of him, it was that he should have just said ecvacuate a bit earlier. but, and this is a MASSIVE BUT, they have made senior managers so policy driven that if they veer off it, they fear the sack, or jail for corporate manslaughter. so because of this they are shit scared to step outside of procedure. once again mind, if the correct spec was in the building, the stay put policy would have worked, Christ there wasn't even any fire doors inside ! lfb deal with around 20 high rise flat fires per night, it's their bread and butter, this one was way way out of the ordinary

 

[Beau Peep]

Surely given her awful experiences, she is the last person likely to give a moderate view on a topic that doesn't have anything to do with her? Which is of course why she was asked.

 

[PNEFC111]

surely though, a tower block and a private residential home don't have the same fire regulations mate ?
the problem with Grenfell was that there wasn't adequate fire protection between compartments, meaning the fire spread was inevitable ! the oic of the lfb would have been making his plans on all of this being in place, and wouldn't have had a clue that none of this was in place due to cost cutting when it was refurbed a year or so previous
if I had one criticism of him, it was that he should have just said ecvacuate a bit earlier. but, and this is a MASSIVE BUT, they have made senior managers so policy driven that if they veer off it, they fear the sack, or jail for corporate manslaughter. so because of this they are shit scared to step outside of procedure. once again mind, if the correct spec was in the building, the stay put policy would have worked, Christ there wasn't even any fire doors inside ! lfb deal with around 20 high rise flat fires per night, it's their bread and butter, this one was way way out of the ordinary

The regulations are different between my house and tower blocks of course - I was trying to point out that building regulations aren’t retrospective.

If the compartmentation within the building was inadequate that’s a serious issue - I didn’t know that had come out in the inquiry. And why are Fire doors missing ? Have they been stolen ? No one in their right mind in authority would remove them.

I understood the flame spread was so rapid due to flames coming out of a window and getting behind the cladding in a chimney effect. This due to no fire stopping around the windows and at each compartment externally ( party walls and floors).

No doubt there’s more to come out - I wish they would get a bloody move on !

 

[pavarotti1980]

You've lost me. Are you saying the huge amount of Tory cuts to the fire service and the lack of attention to the building itself wasn't to blame? I'm confused.

Has that been demonstrated as the cause or just a stupid sound bite?
Were tory cuts to blame for the fire service sending people during the refurbishment of the building to assess it despite not been qualified to do so?

ps Im not a tory by the way

the report is completely upside down ! the last 2 and a half years should have been spent on working on why it happened, and how to prevent it in future, instead of placing the blame on anyone, or anybody
it will take another 2 and a half year for that part to come out, then in the meantime it is possible that it could happen again !

Surely making recommendations into the response first would make it less likely to happen again instead of waiting 2 and half years if they did that bit in phase 2?

 

[PNEFC111]

Has that been demonstrated as the cause or just a stupid sound bite?
Were tory cuts to blame for the fire service sending people during the refurbishment of the building to assess it despite not been qualified to do so?

ps Im not a tory by the way

Good call - I m non party political and I think blaming Tory cuts is currently a political weapon.

If it is due to cost cutting then all hell will break loose - quite rightly - until then I m keeping an open mind.

 

[pavarotti1980]

yep, if the compartments were fire resistant, as per building regs, the fire wouldn't have spread, but because of cost cutting this was ignored.
but when lfb rocked up to that incident, they would never have suspected that the building wouldn't be spec'd up to the hilt, hence the stay put policy ! ive been to loads of high rises, and we have always stuck to these guidelines, because every building should be up to current standard re fire regs !

I have just heard that it wasnt actually cost cutting. It cost £200k more to put this cladding on rather than something which would have met building regulations. Not sure how true that is

 

[b1gals]

As an architect I specify building materials daily - including cladding. We check compliance and certification and specify performance requirements and compliance with building regulations.

The specifications and drawings are then checked by building inspectors - if the aren’t satisfied - we respecify.
The materials are procured by the contractor who also checks for compliance. The installation and materials are checked on site for compliance by the building inspector.

The system is robust - but there been a catastrophic failure somewhere in the process.

I cannot for the life of me think why someone would manufacture a cladding material that doesn’t comply . It’s certified prior to mass production - if it fails it’s illegal and no one would make it , specify it or buy it.

There are different classifications of surface spread of flame but the system would or should have picked that up.

We need to know what part of a history robust system of specification , certification and manufacture has failed..... and fix it quick.

As a manufacturer of drainage equipment that finds it's way onto sites we see the opposite of a robust system - we often receive a BOQ that says "Item A - per manufacturers specification" totally void of the info we require to size something and quote with confidence. I wish I had £1 for every estimate we've submitted 'in the absence of full details'.
Where your robust system breaks down, in my opinion, is when it reaches the sub-contractors who 'won' the tender at virtual cost and now has to make profit to operate. They, in turn, put their enquiries out to the builders merchants. Now, i'm sure there are some decent merchants out there, but we deal with some right dickheads, both individuals and branches, who have one interest and one interest only ... their margin. They drive the price down and cut corners, often paying no attention to the 'spec' argument. In the end the site gets what suits the middle man, not what the architect specified.

 

[Sir Lancelot]

The regulations are different between my house and tower blocks of course - I was trying to point out that building regulations aren’t retrospective.

If the compartmentation within the building was inadequate that’s a serious issue - I didn’t know that had come out in the inquiry. And why are Fire doors missing ? Have they been stolen ? No one in their right mind in authority would remove them.

I understood the flame spread was so rapid due to flames coming out of a window and getting behind the cladding in a chimney effect. This due to no fire stopping around the windows and at each compartment externally ( party walls and floors).

No doubt there’s more to come out - I wish they would get a bloody move on !

The inquiry so far has only been about what happened on the night of the fire, hence the focus on the fire service. Over the next year focus switches to the design and construction and maintain ace of the building itself.

 

[Boz33]

Want a pathetic and insincere apology.
She’s only done it as she was called out on it.

Pretty much and let’s be honest the damage has been done by her now, so a mealy mouthed apology will mean nowt as some will just stick with her pathetic initial allegations

 

[MattyM 09/109]

Man that incredibly divisive statement by someone who makes them must have unintentionally generated a lot of hits and revenue for C4.

(FWIW there was an racial element to the deaths at greenfell - but unrelated to effort and solely due to the massive correlation between social class and race we are suffering from meaning that more bame folk end up living in more dangerous environments)

 

[Hulkster]

I think the fire brigade union should sue her.

 

[safcforever]

Does She have owt to say about those that hoyed claims in for compo despite not living there?

They would have accepted them if they were white

 

[DisillusionedOldGit]

I think the fire brigade union should sue her.

Imagine the depth of shit a white member of the House of Lords would be in if he were to say that black doctors and nurses don't try hard enough to save white people . Rightly he would be condemned as a racist a liar and an idiot but that baldy bag of shite Lawrence will get away Scott free . Why ?

 

[PNEFC111]

Man that incredibly divisive statement by someone who makes them must have unintentionally generated a lot of hits and revenue for C4.

(FWIW there was an racial element to the deaths at greenfell - but unrelated to effort and solely due to the massive correlation between social class and race we are suffering from meaning that more bame folk end up living in more dangerous environments)

Grenfell could have happened anywhere in the U.K.Its geographical location meant there was a higher proportion of the BAME community lived in the tower and the surrounding area.

There are poor non BAME folk living in dangerous environments in other locations where the demographic is different than London.

So I m not sure how you conclude a racist element to this tragedy. Unless you are suggesting those responsible for the specifications and maintenance purposely spend less because of the ethnic mix of the occupants.

Imagine the depth of shit a white member of the House of Lords would be in if he were to say that black doctors and nurses don't try hard enough to save white people . Rightly he would be condemned as a racist a liar and an idiot but that baldy bag of shite Lawrence will get away Scott free . Why ?

Because political correctness has finally trumped common sense and rational debate.

The much sought after equality line has been passed and we are in negative territory where certain groups cannot be criticised.

This isn’t new ....

Abbott denies attack on nurses was racist

LABOUR MP Diane Abbott yesterday defended herself against charges of racism after criticising the appointment of ``blonde, blue-eyed'' Finnish…

www.heraldscotland.com

As a manufacturer of drainage equipment that finds it's way onto sites we see the opposite of a robust system - we often receive a BOQ that says "Item A - per manufacturers specification" totally void of the info we require to size something and quote with confidence. I wish I had £1 for every estimate we've submitted 'in the absence of full details'.
Where your robust system breaks down, in my opinion, is when it reaches the sub-contractors who 'won' the tender at virtual cost and now has to make profit to operate. They, in turn, put their enquiries out to the builders merchants. Now, i'm sure there are some decent merchants out there, but we deal with some right dickheads, both individuals and branches, who have one interest and one interest only ... their margin. They drive the price down and cut corners, often paying no attention to the 'spec' argument. In the end the site gets what suits the middle man, not what the architect specified.

Yep - that certainly happens. The drawings and B of Q should specify exactly what is required or at least offer a minimum performance specifications - otherwise it’s a race to the bottom.

Using your analogy to grenfell , if the contractor / supplier / merchants have ignored the spec ( or it was not clear in the first place) then substandard ( and cheaper) kit has arrived on site and been fitted.

Everyone assumes it the right kit and no one checks the performance/ certification.

Someone , somewhere has ignored the spec.( which would have been approved at design stage by building inspectors) and made a decision to send / supply / fit substandard gear.

It’s all speculation of course - I still cannot understand why anyone would mass produce cladding that didn’t comply . That said it’s been sold and fitted elsewhere in big numbers .

 

[MattyM 09/109]

Grenfell could have happened anywhere in the U.K.Its geographical location meant there was a higher proportion of the BAME community lived in the tower and the surrounding area.

There are poor non BAME folk living in dangerous environments in other locations where the demographic is different than London.

So I m not sure how you conclude a racist element to this tragedy. Unless you are suggesting those responsible for the specifications and maintenance purposely spend less because of the ethnic mix of the occupants.


Because political correctness has finally trumped common sense and rational debate.

The much sought after equality line has been passed and we are in negative territory where certain groups cannot be criticised.

This isn’t new ....

Abbott denies attack on nurses was racist

LABOUR MP Diane Abbott yesterday defended herself against charges of racism after criticising the appointment of ``blonde, blue-eyed'' Finnish…

www.heraldscotland.com

Yep - that certainly happens. The drawings and B of Q should specify exactly what is required or at least offer a minimum performance specifications - otherwise it’s a race to the bottom.

Using your analogy to grenfell , if the contractor / supplier / merchants have ignored the spec ( or it was not clear in the first place) then substandard ( and cheaper) kit has arrived on site and been fitted.

Everyone assumes it the right kit and no one checks the performance/ certification.

Someone , somewhere has ignored the spec.( which would have been approved at design stage by building inspectors) and made a decision to send / supply / fit substandard gear.

It’s all speculation of course - I still cannot understand why anyone would mass produce cladding that didn’t comply . That said it’s been sold and fitted elsewhere in big numbers .

racIAL.

 

[S.S.R..]

If you're in the House of Lords, the bare minimum entry requirement should be a grasp of British History and some insight into the lives of people over the last couple of hundred years. Some people with chips on their shoulder seem to be operating on the misapprehension that anyone with pale skin has had generations of sitting in a chaise longue getting fanned and grapes peeled for them and not done back-breaking, life-shortening work while living in slums.

 

[Pop]

Man that incredibly divisive statement by someone who makes them must have unintentionally generated a lot of hits and revenue for C4.

(FWIW there was an racial element to the deaths at greenfell - but unrelated to effort and solely due to the massive correlation between social class and race we are suffering from meaning that more bame folk end up living in more dangerous environments)

Do more BAME folk live in more dangerous environments?

I'd wager there are more white British people in poverty than BAME which would in turn lead to a higher number living in dangerous environments.