heads need to roll and some people should be doing jailtime over this.
Even if the building was built to building standards requirements?
Yes, then whoever put those requirements in place has a part to play in this. The requirements were inadequate.
IMV it's up to the architects to specify materials, and the people doing the work to use the material specified in the manner shown on the plans. The architect should have designed and specified everything to code. Any changes should be passed by the architect.
However it doesn't always work that way: architects can mis-specify things (e.g. by misinterpreting regulations), or the people doing the work can substitute other materials, either to cut corners or to react to problems found as work progresses. Or the supplier supplies shoddy materials that do not match the specification, and this is not detected.
Many accidents have happened because of all of these. But it's perfectly possible for none of these to happen and there still to be a disaster, as the building codes everyone is working to are not fit for purpose.
Oh he's not missing is he? And clearly the professionals on the team who were ignored by these over promoted prats are looking to protect their own reputations as well.
Comments
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/revealed-how-theresa-mays-two-aides-seized-control-of-the-tory-campaign-to-calamitous-effect-a3566796.html
Can May really survive this weekend without a stalking horse appearing?
However it doesn't always work that way: architects can mis-specify things (e.g. by misinterpreting regulations), or the people doing the work can substitute other materials, either to cut corners or to react to problems found as work progresses. Or the supplier supplies shoddy materials that do not match the specification, and this is not detected.
Many accidents have happened because of all of these. But it's perfectly possible for none of these to happen and there still to be a disaster, as the building codes everyone is working to are not fit for purpose.