Thousands of you have been corralled into potential death traps that are that way so as to look pretty to your betters in private homes. How the f... do you sell that as a Government?!
I'm sure that most of us live in houses and flats that don't comply with modern best practice in terms of fire safety. But, that's a risk that many of us are prepared to take.
The standards in a tower block simply have to be higher though. I know my hob isn't strictly to standard, but I have a very good chance to get out through the bathroom window should my misses somehow set the house on fire whilst cooking downstairs. It is different when you're on the 15th floor up in a flat.
I think the cladding has to be checked, and if it's flammable, then it must be replaced.
But, most fire deaths and injuries don't take place in tower blocks.
A house is full of wood and plasterboard, a tower block is full of concrete, thats why tower blocks are normally a safe place to be when there is a fire in another flat.
For the government two things work in their favour:
1. If this is an endemic problem then it won't have materialised in 2010 and hence all governments can be found responsible.
2. Notwithstanding Pt.1, having withstood an onslaught of legitimate and less legitimate attacks over the past two weeks, I'm not sure anything can bring the govt down and any new news will be put into the existing pot.
That said, they need to do something pretty bold and inspired now and I'm not sure that included buying luxury blocks of flats for those people up and down the country.
Yes, quite. Plenty of high end stuff with cladding, not just social. Whether the luxury flats are affected as badly, or whether the issue is social housing specific will be a factor in how this is viewed down the line.
The next problem for the government may come now the PM has announced nobody will be left to live in an unsafe block. When that is followed by the '600' statement, a reasonable question from tenants is 'are we safe?' And'where will you house us?' Messy.
Thousands of you have been corralled into potential death traps that are that way so as to look pretty to your betters in private homes. How the f... do you sell that as a Government?!
Do you really think that they have clad these buildings to make them look pretty?
Well it sure wasn't for fire safety was it?!
The main purpose of cladding is insulation. It's a good thing, because tower blocks have been plagued with damp in the past. But, if the cladding is flammable, it's going to have to be taken down and replaced.
As an interim measure why not fit external sprinkler systems? Fuel storage sites use them in tank farms.
For the brave there is an 8% return available on BF for May being PM after QS vote i.e. forms a government after royal assent. 1.08 that it is May. 8% in a week is better than a bank account.
If I had more money to 'risk' in betting scenarios I might be tempted on this one.
There's a 15% return on Merkel being returned as Chancellor in September. A better return and less risky I would have thought. But you have to wait a bit longer. I have a lump on but not the whole bank.
Watershed moment. There will be civil unrest over this.
The problem isn't money, because huge amounts were spent putting this cladding on the towers in an effort to make them more environmentally friendly.
It's not the money spent on cladding though, it's the sudden realisation of Tower block residents they may not be safe. Fairly or unfairly the disaster will focus minds on that and it will be a nightmare to sort out. It will also take time, we must hope against hope that no further fires, even limited ones, take hold of cladding.
All this stuff about hard/soft Brexit seems pointless to me now the DUP have confirmed they are in favour of leaving the single market and customs union and will be voting with the government?
Even accounting for Con rebellions from the likes of Clarke and Soubry the government should still have the numbers for the Brexit they want (especially as you'll have a few people on the Labour side like Field and Hoey also voting with the government)
Looks like we're leaving the single market and customs union. The only question is whether there's any transitional arrangements and if so how long they last.
I think the DUP issue is that they are also committed to a "frictionless" border with the Republic of Ireland. If they have to choose between passport checks plus customs booths and single market/customs union, which way do they jump?
Or customs checks on the UK mainland for flights and ships coming from NI - which is the easiest way to ensure a frictionless border between north and south.
Thousands of you have been corralled into potential death traps that are that way so as to look pretty to your betters in private homes. How the f... do you sell that as a Government?!
Do you really think that they have clad these buildings to make them look pretty?
Well it sure wasn't for fire safety was it?!
The main purpose of cladding is insulation. It's a good thing, because tower blocks have been plagued with damp in the past. But, if the cladding is flammable, it's going to have to be taken down and replaced.
As an interim measure why not fit external sprinkler systems? Fuel storage sites use them in tank farms.
Not all tall older buildings are suitable for sprinklers.
The next problem for the government may come now the PM has announced nobody will be left to live in an unsafe block. When that is followed by the '600' statement, a reasonable question from tenants is 'are we safe?' And'where will you house us?' Messy.
The cladding has also been used on brand new apartments. This one is in a Labour borough so the Council will not be at fault at all.
For the government two things work in their favour:
1. If this is an endemic problem then it won't have materialised in 2010 and hence all governments can be found responsible.
The regeneration of tower blocks dates from 2000, the Decent Homes Programme (specifically the part that specified insulation levels). That's not something unique to Britain either, any number of countries have made similar choices.
Remember the Japanese government's paper on Brexit which demanded we stay in the customs union and single market and stay under the EU regulatory umbrella?
Thousands of you have been corralled into potential death traps that are that way so as to look pretty to your betters in private homes. How the f... do you sell that as a Government?!
I'm sure that most of us live in houses and flats that don't comply with modern best practice in terms of fire safety. But, that's a risk that many of us are prepared to take.
The standards in a tower block simply have to be higher though. I know my hob isn't strictly to standard, but I have a very good chance to get out through the bathroom window should my misses somehow set the house on fire whilst cooking downstairs. It is different when you're on the 15th floor up in a flat.
I think the cladding has to be checked, and if it's flammable, then it must be replaced.
But, most fire deaths and injuries don't take place in tower blocks.
One of the 'worst offenders' apparently is liquid paraffin or similar based treatments for leg ulcers. Material soaks into the bedding and the whole becomes a fire-trap. These are often used by less mobile elderly, who are also more likely to be smokers.
Remember the Japanese government's paper on Brexit which demanded we stay in the customs union and single market and stay under the EU regulatory umbrella?
Did any PBer warn that some in the financial services industry might relocate from the UK after Brexit?
*Innocent Face*
before transferring fewer than 100 employees from London to the city
How many does Nomura employ in the UK? Is this much more than a nameplate?
Even a relatively small numerical loss of well remunerated jobs will have an impact on the overall tax take given how much of income tax comes from the top 5% of those who pay it.
Watershed moment. There will be civil unrest over this.
The problem isn't money, because huge amounts were spent putting this cladding on the towers in an effort to make them more environmentally friendly.
It's not the money spent on cladding though, it's the sudden realisation of Tower block residents they may not be safe. Fairly or unfairly the disaster will focus minds on that and it will be a nightmare to sort out. It will also take time, we must hope against hope that no further fires, even limited ones, take hold of cladding.
The questions are: (a) is it feasible to remove the cladding, and (b) how quickly can the job be done if it is possible.
Remember the Japanese government's paper on Brexit which demanded we stay in the customs union and single market and stay under the EU regulatory umbrella?
Privatised South West Trains use Smart Card and Oyster. And lets not forget that National Rail inherited their 'antiquated' ticketing structure from the public sector British Rail.
British Rail minority.
Many of British Rail's public sector values still run deep within the railway industry. BT is another classic example of entrenched views clinging on.
LOL. Only an arch privatiser could excuse the failures of the franchising shambles on a public body that ceased to exist 20 years ago. Your argument is undermined somewhat by the fact that the nationalised TfL is integrated, ticketless and cashless – including the buses. Only tourists buy a ticket despite being implored not to by endless PA announcements. The franchises are backward.
Oh for the heady days of British Rail. Filthy, dangerous and ancient rolling stock, dwindling passenger numbers and multiple fatalities.
As a non regular rail user my main objection to nationalisation is that it may well long term cost me more. But East Coast Mainline, the tubes and the fact alot of our rail is effectively owned by foreign governments in some form or another (Deutsche Bahn) put paid to the idea it would go back to the "bad old days of British Rail" in my mind. I think it would work, and work well for rail users - wouldn't trust Corbyn to implement it though treble pay rises all round for the unions. Mind you with Southern seems that may well happen in the private sector...
Read "Rail" magazine. It explains the ins and outs of privatisation very clearly and thoroughly, and how it revitalised the whole industry.
Contrary to what you read in some of the press, privatisation commands a lot of support from railway insiders:
All this stuff about hard/soft Brexit seems pointless to me now the DUP have confirmed they are in favour of leaving the single market and customs union and will be voting with the government?
Even accounting for Con rebellions from the likes of Clarke and Soubry the government should still have the numbers for the Brexit they want (especially as you'll have a few people on the Labour side like Field and Hoey also voting with the government)
Looks like we're leaving the single market and customs union. The only question is whether there's any transitional arrangements and if so how long they last.
I think the DUP issue is that they are also committed to a "frictionless" border with the Republic of Ireland. If they have to choose between passport checks plus customs booths and single market/customs union, which way do they jump?
Or customs checks on the UK mainland for flights and ships coming from NI - which is the easiest way to ensure a frictionless border between north and south.
That could be a key DUP sticking point.
Wouldn't the easiest method be to arrange for an Irish re-unification referendum and manage a 50.1% vote in favour?
Mr. Glenn, if the EU had suggested the status quo was available, that might be so.
They've instead indicated (Verhofstadt[sp]) that remaining means on worse terms than those we rejected. Doubt it'll happen.
I don't think that's what he said. IIRC, he said if we wanted back in, the terms would be worse. I don't think he opined on whether we could revoke article 50 and remain on our current terms.
Watershed moment. There will be civil unrest over this.
The problem isn't money, because huge amounts were spent putting this cladding on the towers in an effort to make them more environmentally friendly.
It's not the money spent on cladding though, it's the sudden realisation of Tower block residents they may not be safe. Fairly or unfairly the disaster will focus minds on that and it will be a nightmare to sort out. It will also take time, we must hope against hope that no further fires, even limited ones, take hold of cladding.
The questions are: (a) is it feasible to remove the cladding, and (b) how quickly can the job be done if it is possible.
Wherever cladding is found to be dangerous it must be removed as quickly as is feasible. How quickly that is will be another matter...
The point is that this is how it will be perceived. It's a natural leap from where we are and how things have been. It's a disgrace, there can't really be any other conclusion. And I make no bones about stating what I think will be the reaction, it's something the country needs to be ready for and address.
It would be helpful if the opposition didn't try exploit the issue to to stir up hatred based on misrepresentation. Fat chance, I know.
I do find it grmily amusing though that the argument is that refurbishing a building at public expense to make it warmer as well as visually more attractive is somehow an evil plot against the proletariat by wicked Tory capitalists. The implication is that the Left think that the proletariat should properly be left shivering in ugly concrete monstrosities.
This point is exactly what has annoyed me about the "lack of investment" claims regarding Grenfell Towers. The simple fact is if the building had not been modernised then the fire would have been confined to one flat.
But the cladding was botched due to a lack of adequate time and money spent on ensuring it was safe. Some of the "red tape" so despised on the right would have been handy here.
O/T This is a very good article about the Bank of England's dilemma on interest rates and on the UK economy generally, by someone who knows a thing or two about the subject:
He’s been close friend of TMay since they were at Oxford together in the 1970s and they were both at different times Presidents of the Union.
OGH is mis-informed. May never got past Librarian - Green became President - in hindsight possibly because he's a lot more 'clubbable' than May. I'd also rate him as the more astute politician. If I'd just returned from Mars and been told that one of either May or Green had become PM I'd have guessed Green in a heartbeat. His lack of advancement under the posh boys is high on my list of 'exhibits for the prosecution'.
I suspect May will see through Brexit then step down before GE2022 - and the Tories will have a proper leadership election, which Green would not flourish in. If however, some further calamity were to overcome May before then, Green would be an excellent choice.
Like May he's had a long and happy marriage to a very smart partner (who neither forgives nor forgets, so a Green premiership might have some extra piquancy...)
We have seen the scandalous living conditions many migrants are forced to live in to be able to accept the crap wages on offer in many jobs. The fact that they are w
@KateProctorES: Cladding to be removed five Camden tower blocks: Dorney, Bray, Burnham, Taplow, Blashford. Residents will stay while material removed.
This seems very risky. Bluntly, if you were Isis would you not see this news and think that those named tower blocks could be an easy terror attack target?
On topic, 70/1 is a very good price for Green. Punters should remember that Tory leadership elections are often (nearly always) about who the candidates are not rather than who they are. Green has the advantage of few negatives.
That's not to say he should be favourite either - he would need positive support (indeed, he'd need to choose to run in the first place, which would be no given), and there's no great evidence to suggest he has that support: Theresa May doesn't have a long-standing machine in the party in the way that some politicians develop one over years, and what she does have can't be assumed to be strong or cohesive enough to be transferable to a successor. All the same, there are no candidates who shine out as head and shoulders above the field and Green could easily simultaneously fulfil the roles of stop-Boris, stop-Davis, stop-Leadsom and stop-Gove.
But the cladding was botched due to a lack of adequate time and money spent on ensuring it was safe. Some of the "red tape" so despised on the right would have been handy here.
Not necessarily, red tape often makes it worse. There's so much box-ticking that the big picture is missed and no-one has overall responsibility. Always remember: the utterly disastrous RBS take-over of ABN-AMRO was fully compliant with massive amounts of red tape, all carefully checked by an army of compliance officers. No-one actually bothered to ask whether it might crash the UK banking system.
All this stuff about hard/soft Brexit seems pointless to me now the DUP have confirmed they are in favour of leaving the single market and customs union and will be voting with the government?
Even accounting for Con rebellions from the likes of Clarke and Soubry the government should still have the numbers for the Brexit they want (especially as you'll have a few people on the Labour side like Field and Hoey also voting with the government)
Looks like we're leaving the single market and customs union. The only question is whether there's any transitional arrangements and if so how long they last.
I think the DUP issue is that they are also committed to a "frictionless" border with the Republic of Ireland. If they have to choose between passport checks plus customs booths and single market/customs union, which way do they jump?
Or customs checks on the UK mainland for flights and ships coming from NI - which is the easiest way to ensure a frictionless border between north and south.
That could be a key DUP sticking point.
Wouldn't the easiest method be to arrange for an Irish re-unification referendum and manage a 50.1% vote in favour?
Indeed, if we're going to have customs checks on everything moving between NI and GB then it's hard to argue they are in the same country.
But the cladding was botched due to a lack of adequate time and money spent on ensuring it was safe. Some of the "red tape" so despised on the right would have been handy here.
Not necessarily, red tape often makes it worse. There's so much box-ticking that the big picture is missed and no-one has overall responsibility. Always remember: the utterly disastrous RBS take-over of ABN-AMRO was fully compliant with massive amounts of red tape, all carefully checked by an army of compliance officers. No-one actually bothered to ask whether it might crash the UK banking system.
Then the problem is what the tape is being applied to, not the tape itself
Can someone stick down an amendment to remove this cookie shit in the Great Repeal Bill, please?
Like internet cookies?
I hope not, while I'd like that shit to be removed too the Great Repeal Bill is not the place. If everyone starts passing amendments for every bit of stupid crap the EU has ever done the Great Repeal Bill will be the longest bill ever and never get through Parliament.
But the cladding was botched due to a lack of adequate time and money spent on ensuring it was safe. Some of the "red tape" so despised on the right would have been handy here.
Not necessarily, red tape often makes it worse. There's so much box-ticking that the big picture is missed and no-one has overall responsibility. Always remember: the utterly disastrous RBS take-over of ABN-AMRO was fully compliant with massive amounts of red tape, all carefully checked by an army of compliance officers. No-one actually bothered to ask whether it might crash the UK banking system.
Then the problem is what the tape is being applied to, not the tape itself
No, the problem is that contrary to what the Left seem to believe, more regulation is not synonymous with good regulation., in fact often the opposite.
But the cladding was botched due to a lack of adequate time and money spent on ensuring it was safe. Some of the "red tape" so despised on the right would have been handy here.
Not necessarily, red tape often makes it worse. There's so much box-ticking that the big picture is missed and no-one has overall responsibility. Always remember: the utterly disastrous RBS take-over of ABN-AMRO was fully compliant with massive amounts of red tape, all carefully checked by an army of compliance officers. No-one actually bothered to ask whether it might crash the UK banking system.
Yeah, I shudder to think what calamity might have befallen the residents had the building management been too busy not cladding their homes in flammable materials to sit back and think about the big picture.
But the cladding was botched due to a lack of adequate time and money spent on ensuring it was safe. Some of the "red tape" so despised on the right would have been handy here.
Not necessarily, red tape often makes it worse. There's so much box-ticking that the big picture is missed and no-one has overall responsibility. Always remember: the utterly disastrous RBS take-over of ABN-AMRO was fully compliant with massive amounts of red tape, all carefully checked by an army of compliance officers. No-one actually bothered to ask whether it might crash the UK banking system.
Then the problem is what the tape is being applied to, not the tape itself
No, the problem is that contrary to what the Left seem to believe, more regulation is not synonymous with good regulation., in fact often the opposite.
Yeah, I shudder to think what calamity might have befallen the residents had the building management been too busy not cladding their homes in flammable materials to sit back and think about the big picture.
Leaving aside the potential libel in your post, yes, you are right: thinking about the big picture of the fire risk, rather than micro-regulations, might well have averted all these unnecessary deaths.
But the cladding was botched due to a lack of adequate time and money spent on ensuring it was safe. Some of the "red tape" so despised on the right would have been handy here.
Not necessarily, red tape often makes it worse. There's so much box-ticking that the big picture is missed and no-one has overall responsibility. Always remember: the utterly disastrous RBS take-over of ABN-AMRO was fully compliant with massive amounts of red tape, all carefully checked by an army of compliance officers. No-one actually bothered to ask whether it might crash the UK banking system.
Then the problem is what the tape is being applied to, not the tape itself
No, the problem is that contrary to what the Left seem to believe, more regulation is not synonymous with good regulation., in fact often the opposite.
Actually, the biggest problem the Left have is that they think that if they come up with good or perfect rules, then everyone will obey them.
But the cladding was botched due to a lack of adequate time and money spent on ensuring it was safe. Some of the "red tape" so despised on the right would have been handy here.
Not necessarily, red tape often makes it worse. There's so much box-ticking that the big picture is missed and no-one has overall responsibility. Always remember: the utterly disastrous RBS take-over of ABN-AMRO was fully compliant with massive amounts of red tape, all carefully checked by an army of compliance officers. No-one actually bothered to ask whether it might crash the UK banking system.
Then the problem is what the tape is being applied to, not the tape itself
No, the problem is that contrary to what the Left seem to believe, more regulation is not synonymous with good regulation., in fact often the opposite.
Actually, the biggest problem the Left have is that they think that if they come up with good or perfect rules, then everyone will obey them.
And if they don't, publish a further 10,000 pages of regulations which no-one will ever have time to read.
But the cladding was botched due to a lack of adequate time and money spent on ensuring it was safe. Some of the "red tape" so despised on the right would have been handy here.
Not necessarily, red tape often makes it worse. There's so much box-ticking that the big picture is missed and no-one has overall responsibility. Always remember: the utterly disastrous RBS take-over of ABN-AMRO was fully compliant with massive amounts of red tape, all carefully checked by an army of compliance officers. No-one actually bothered to ask whether it might crash the UK banking system.
Indeed. My regular example of that directly related to fire safety is the moronic rules on fire extinguisher colours which have made it far more difficult to identify types of fire extinguishers at a distance.
I see that Leavers' preferred solution to the problem of finding agricultural workers is still self-picking fruit.
Why do we need to pick fruit here? Isn't supplying such exotic produce what colonies are for?
Brave man.....you know how touchy the Nats are about that sort of thing.....used to pick strawberries and raspberries during the summer holidays in the Vale of Strathmore.....day 1 - gorge yourself on said berries, day 2 - 20, never want to eat another berry again....
Yeah, I shudder to think what calamity might have befallen the residents had the building management been too busy not cladding their homes in flammable materials to sit back and think about the big picture.
Leaving aside the potential libel in your post, yes, you are right: thinking about the big picture of the fire risk, rather than micro-regulations, might well have averted all these unnecessary deaths.
So the regulation either didn't exist or they didn't comply with it, but they did spend enough time dwelling on it that it prevented them from thinking about fires?
Remember the Japanese government's paper on Brexit which demanded we stay in the customs union and single market and stay under the EU regulatory umbrella?
Thousands of you have been corralled into potential death traps that are that way so as to look pretty to your betters in private homes. How the f... do you sell that as a Government?!
Do you really think that they have clad these buildings to make them look pretty?
Well it sure wasn't for fire safety was it?!
The main purpose of cladding is insulation. It's a good thing, because tower blocks have been plagued with damp in the past. But, if the cladding is flammable, it's going to have to be taken down and replaced.
As an interim measure why not fit external sprinkler systems? Fuel storage sites use them in tank farms.
A very good point. I have one of them on my balcony, it's a cross between a one gallon extinguisher and a sprinkler, the water pressure held back with a glass bulb, no power needed or moving parts. Must only cost £20 or so and took 20 mins to fit with three big screws into the wall. Can't be screwed to alu cladding though.
So the regulation either didn't exist or they didn't comply with it, but they did spend enough time dwelling on it that it prevented them from thinking about fires?
I have no idea whether or not the regulations were complied with, and if not then who was to blame, but common sense would suggest that cladding a building in an inflammable material is not a good idea, whatever the regulations might say. However, as soon as you have highly detailed regulations in place, the question changes from 'is this a good idea?' to 'does this meet the regulations?', which isn't always a good thing.
But the cladding was botched due to a lack of adequate time and money spent on ensuring it was safe. Some of the "red tape" so despised on the right would have been handy here.
Not necessarily, red tape often makes it worse. There's so much box-ticking that the big picture is missed and no-one has overall responsibility. Always remember: the utterly disastrous RBS take-over of ABN-AMRO was fully compliant with massive amounts of red tape, all carefully checked by an army of compliance officers. No-one actually bothered to ask whether it might crash the UK banking system.
Then the problem is what the tape is being applied to, not the tape itself
No, the problem is that contrary to what the Left seem to believe, more regulation is not synonymous with good regulation., in fact often the opposite.
Actually, the biggest problem the Left have is that they think that if they come up with good or perfect rules, then everyone will obey them.
And if they don't, publish a further 10,000 pages of regulations which no-one will ever have time to read.
The Left believe they have the answers as to how people should behave, and are prepared to force them to comply.
But the cladding was botched due to a lack of adequate time and money spent on ensuring it was safe. Some of the "red tape" so despised on the right would have been handy here.
Not necessarily, red tape often makes it worse. There's so much box-ticking that the big picture is missed and no-one has overall responsibility. Always remember: the utterly disastrous RBS take-over of ABN-AMRO was fully compliant with massive amounts of red tape, all carefully checked by an army of compliance officers. No-one actually bothered to ask whether it might crash the UK banking system.
Then the problem is what the tape is being applied to, not the tape itself
No, the problem is that contrary to what the Left seem to believe, more regulation is not synonymous with good regulation., in fact often the opposite.
Actually, the biggest problem the Left have is that they think that if they come up with good or perfect rules, then everyone will obey them.
And if they don't, publish a further 10,000 pages of regulations which no-one will ever have time to read.
The Left believe they have the answers as to how people should behave, and are prepared to force them to comply.
But you cannot force people to comply unless each one has a watcher assigned 24/7 and then Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
But the cladding was botched due to a lack of adequate time and money spent on ensuring it was safe. Some of the "red tape" so despised on the right would have been handy here.
Not necessarily, red tape often makes it worse. There's so much box-ticking that the big picture is missed and no-one has overall responsibility. Always remember: the utterly disastrous RBS take-over of ABN-AMRO was fully compliant with massive amounts of red tape, all carefully checked by an army of compliance officers. No-one actually bothered to ask whether it might crash the UK banking system.
Then the problem is what the tape is being applied to, not the tape itself
No, the problem is that contrary to what the Left seem to believe, more regulation is not synonymous with good regulation., in fact often the opposite.
Actually, the biggest problem the Left have is that they think that if they come up with good or perfect rules, then everyone will obey them.
And if they don't, publish a further 10,000 pages of regulations which no-one will ever have time to read.
The Left believe they have the answers as to how people should behave, and are prepared to force them to comply.
But you cannot force people to comply unless each one has a watcher assigned 24/7 and then Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
Go and read a book about the Stasi....
And then remember that was in Europe. Within my lifetime.
But the cladding was botched due to a lack of adequate time and money spent on ensuring it was safe. Some of the "red tape" so despised on the right would have been handy here.
Not necessarily, red tape often makes it worse. There's so much box-ticking that the big picture is missed and no-one has overall responsibility. Always remember: the utterly disastrous RBS take-over of ABN-AMRO was fully compliant with massive amounts of red tape, all carefully checked by an army of compliance officers. No-one actually bothered to ask whether it might crash the UK banking system.
Then the problem is what the tape is being applied to, not the tape itself
No, the problem is that contrary to what the Left seem to believe, more regulation is not synonymous with good regulation., in fact often the opposite.
Actually, the biggest problem the Left have is that they think that if they come up with good or perfect rules, then everyone will obey them.
And if they don't, publish a further 10,000 pages of regulations which no-one will ever have time to read.
The Left believe they have the answers as to how people should behave, and are prepared to force them to comply.
But you cannot force people to comply unless each one has a watcher assigned 24/7 and then Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
Slowly but surely the Tories are falling back in love with Theresa. She will certainly lead them at the next general election. She will be branded as the woman who entered the maelstrom but came out the other side stronger.
But the cladding was botched due to a lack of adequate time and money spent on ensuring it was safe. Some of the "red tape" so despised on the right would have been handy here.
Not necessarily, red tape often makes it worse. There's so much box-ticking that the big picture is missed and no-one has overall responsibility. Always remember: the utterly disastrous RBS take-over of ABN-AMRO was fully compliant with massive amounts of red tape, all carefully checked by an army of compliance officers. No-one actually bothered to ask whether it might crash the UK banking system.
Then the problem is what the tape is being applied to, not the tape itself
No, the problem is that contrary to what the Left seem to believe, more regulation is not synonymous with good regulation., in fact often the opposite.
Actually, the biggest problem the Left have is that they think that if they come up with good or perfect rules, then everyone will obey them.
And if they don't, publish a further 10,000 pages of regulations which no-one will ever have time to read.
The Left believe they have the answers as to how people should behave, and are prepared to force them to comply.
But you cannot force people to comply unless each one has a watcher assigned 24/7 and then Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
But the cladding was botched due to a lack of adequate time and money spent on ensuring it was safe. Some of the "red tape" so despised on the right would have been handy here.
Not necessarily, red tape often makes it worse. There's so much box-ticking that the big picture is missed and no-one has overall responsibility. Always remember: the utterly disastrous RBS take-over of ABN-AMRO was fully compliant with massive amounts of red tape, all carefully checked by an army of compliance officers. No-one actually bothered to ask whether it might crash the UK banking system.
Then the problem is what the tape is being applied to, not the tape itself
No, the problem is that contrary to what the Left seem to believe, more regulation is not synonymous with good regulation., in fact often the opposite.
Actually, the biggest problem the Left have is that they think that if they come up with good or perfect rules, then everyone will obey them.
And if they don't, publish a further 10,000 pages of regulations which no-one will ever have time to read.
The Left believe they have the answers as to how people should behave, and are prepared to force them to comply.
But you cannot force people to comply unless each one has a watcher assigned 24/7 and then Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
Go and read a book about the Stasi....
And then remember that was in Europe. Within my lifetime.
What we often forget in this country -- and why Brexit came as such a shock to our neighbours -- is that Britain alone has not been under a totalitarian dictatorship within living memory. For us, probably uniquely, the EU is not seen as a guarantor of peace and freedom.
But the cladding was botched due to a lack of adequate time and money spent on ensuring it was safe. Some of the "red tape" so despised on the right would have been handy here.
Not necessarily, red tape often makes it worse. There's so much box-ticking that the big picture is missed and no-one has overall responsibility. Always remember: the utterly disastrous RBS take-over of ABN-AMRO was fully compliant with massive amounts of red tape, all carefully checked by an army of compliance officers. No-one actually bothered to ask whether it might crash the UK banking system.
Then the problem is what the tape is being applied to, not the tape itself
No, the problem is that contrary to what the Left seem to believe, more regulation is not synonymous with good regulation., in fact often the opposite.
Actually, the biggest problem the Left have is that they think that if they come up with good or perfect rules, then everyone will obey them.
And if they don't, publish a further 10,000 pages of regulations which no-one will ever have time to read.
The Left believe they have the answers as to how people should behave, and are prepared to force them to comply.
But you cannot force people to comply unless each one has a watcher assigned 24/7 and then Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
So.... You're an anarchist?
No. I am a "me"ist
Seriously, though. You can invent all the rules and red tape you like but unless people have a reason to follow them then those rules will get actively or passively ignored.
If people can see an advantage to a rule - like seatbelts or drink-driving - then generally they comply with it even if they find it onerous, but trying to legislate every event or every possible situation and eventuality is just doomed to failure.
Sometime people have to make judgement calls and live with the outcome.
But the cladding was botched due to a lack of adequate time and money spent on ensuring it was safe. Some of the "red tape" so despised on the right would have been handy here.
Not necessarily, red tape often makes it worse. There's so much box-ticking that the big picture is missed and no-one has overall responsibility. Always remember: the utterly disastrous RBS take-over of ABN-AMRO was fully compliant with massive amounts of red tape, all carefully checked by an army of compliance officers. No-one actually bothered to ask whether it might crash the UK banking system.
Then the problem is what the tape is being applied to, not the tape itself
No, the problem is that contrary to what the Left seem to believe, more regulation is not synonymous with good regulation., in fact often the opposite.
Actually, the biggest problem the Left have is that they think that if they come up with good or perfect rules, then everyone will obey them.
And if they don't, publish a further 10,000 pages of regulations which no-one will ever have time to read.
The Left believe they have the answers as to how people should behave, and are prepared to force them to comply.
But you cannot force people to comply unless each one has a watcher assigned 24/7 and then Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
Go and read a book about the Stasi....
And then remember that was in Europe. Within my lifetime.
What we often forget in this country -- and why Brexit came as such a shock to our neighbours -- is that Britain alone has not been under a totalitarian dictatorship within living memory. For us, probably uniquely, the EU is not seen as a guarantor of peace and freedom.
Britain, Malta, Ireland, Sweden, Finland and Cyprus, to be exact.
But the cladding was botched due to a lack of adequate time and money spent on ensuring it was safe. Some of the "red tape" so despised on the right would have been handy here.
Not necessarily, red tape often makes it worse. There's so much box-ticking that the big picture is missed and no-one has overall responsibility. Always remember: the utterly disastrous RBS take-over of ABN-AMRO was fully compliant with massive amounts of red tape, all carefully checked by an army of compliance officers. No-one actually bothered to ask whether it might crash the UK banking system.
Then the problem is what the tape is being applied to, not the tape itself
No, the problem is that contrary to what the Left seem to believe, more regulation is not synonymous with good regulation., in fact often the opposite.
Actually, the biggest problem the Left have is that they think that if they come up with good or perfect rules, then everyone will obey them.
And if they don't, publish a further 10,000 pages of regulations which no-one will ever have time to read.
The Left believe they have the answers as to how people should behave, and are prepared to force them to comply.
But you cannot force people to comply unless each one has a watcher assigned 24/7 and then Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
Go and read a book about the Stasi....
And then remember that was in Europe. Within my lifetime.
What we often forget in this country -- and why Brexit came as such a shock to our neighbours -- is that Britain alone has not been under a totalitarian dictatorship within living memory. For us, probably uniquely, the EU is not seen as a guarantor of peace and freedom.
And also why so many who should know better are prepared to vote for Corbyn & McDonell.
Chalcot Estate Camdem Building No 9 and by far the largest value.
I feel sorry for the minions there, the company will probably go to the wall over this.
If any company involved turns out to have screwed up or cut corners, they'll be praying they have enough public liability insurance for the corporate manslaughter charge.
But the cladding was botched due to a lack of adequate time and money spent on ensuring it was safe. Some of the "red tape" so despised on the right would have been handy here.
Not necessarily, red tape often makes it worse. There's so much box-ticking that the big picture is missed and no-one has overall responsibility. Always remember: the utterly disastrous RBS take-over of ABN-AMRO was fully compliant with massive amounts of red tape, all carefully checked by an army of compliance officers. No-one actually bothered to ask whether it might crash the UK banking system.
Then the problem is what the tape is being applied to, not the tape itself
No, the problem is that contrary to what the Left seem to believe, more regulation is not synonymous with good regulation., in fact often the opposite.
Actually, the biggest problem the Left have is that they think that if they come up with good or perfect rules, then everyone will obey them.
And if they don't, publish a further 10,000 pages of regulations which no-one will ever have time to read.
The Left believe they have the answers as to how people should behave, and are prepared to force them to comply.
But you cannot force people to comply unless each one has a watcher assigned 24/7 and then Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
Go and read a book about the Stasi....
And then remember that was in Europe. Within my lifetime.
What we often forget in this country -- and why Brexit came as such a shock to our neighbours -- is that Britain alone has not been under a totalitarian dictatorship within living memory. For us, probably uniquely, the EU is not seen as a guarantor of peace and freedom.
Maybe we need to look a bit further? We might not have been under a dictatorship but when our near neighbours were under one, it had a direct impact on us.
If the EU keeps peace in Europe that that is definitely to our advantage
Chalcot Estate Camdem Building No 9 and by far the largest value.
I feel sorry for the minions there, the company will probably go to the wall over this.
If any company involved turns out to have screwed up or cut corners, they'll be praying they have enough public liability insurance for the corporate manslaughter charge.
I see that Leavers' preferred solution to the problem of finding agricultural workers is still self-picking fruit.
That joke might not be quite as funny in 10 years time once AI fully takes off, though.
Substitute Omelas for the EU & the child for the immigrants who live a dozen to a flat and it's Remain vs Leave
"The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas" is a 1973 plotless, short, descriptive work of philosophical fiction, though popularly classified as a short story, by American writer Ursula K. Le Guin. With deliberately both vague and vivid descriptions, the narrator depicts a summer festival in the utopian city of Omelas, whose prosperity depends on the perpetual misery of a single child."
I see that Leavers' preferred solution to the problem of finding agricultural workers is still self-picking fruit.
That joke might not be quite as funny in 10 years time once AI fully takes off, though.
Like everything about Brexit, the supposed benefits are 10 years or so away without any clear route to those benefits and with lots of obvious major drawbacks first.
For the government two things work in their favour:
1. If this is an endemic problem then it won't have materialised in 2010 and hence all governments can be found responsible.
2. Notwithstanding Pt.1, having withstood an onslaught of legitimate and less legitimate attacks over the past two weeks, I'm not sure anything can bring the govt down and any new news will be put into the existing pot.
That said, they need to do something pretty bold and inspired now and I'm not sure that included buying luxury blocks of flats for those people up and down the country.
IANAE, but I am unsure that the reaction of moving everyone out of blocks with this cladding on is necessary or sensible, and in fact might miss other problems. I'm writing out some of my (inexpert) thoughts elsewhere.
One thing to note: a top guy in Camden Council was on R4 at 13.00, and he said that some of their tower blocks had such cladding. He also said that it was not as commissioned.
If he is right in this, then what went wrong (at least in Camden's case) becomes more focused. Why was the material not as commissioned (a slightly odd phrase to use), and why did the council's inspectors not pick up on it?
Although what went wrong in Camden's case might be very different from Grenfell Tower.
Comments
Messy.
I suggest he goes away for a few days and works out what went wrong.
Lab far from off the hook here.
"New approach to social housing" could be a game-changer. Could.
One should always be careful about using tragedy to make party political points.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-40368427/grenfell-cladding-used-on-tottenham-tower-block
How many does Nomura employ in the UK? Is this much more than a nameplate?
The one 'like' is by Martin Boon
These are often used by less mobile elderly, who are also more likely to be smokers.
They've instead indicated (Verhofstadt[sp]) that remaining means on worse terms than those we rejected. Doubt it'll happen.
If the EU does genuinely want the UK to remain they'll agree to a prolonged transition to try and delay our departure.
Contrary to what you read in some of the press, privatisation commands a lot of support from railway insiders:
http://www.railmagazine.com/news/network/study-claims-privatisation-cost-more-than-br-but-now-outperforms-it
http://www.railmagazine.com/research-hub/comment/dft-and-nr-need-to-step-up
https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2017-06-22/the-bank-of-england-s-growing-policy-dilemma
OGH is mis-informed. May never got past Librarian - Green became President - in hindsight possibly because he's a lot more 'clubbable' than May. I'd also rate him as the more astute politician. If I'd just returned from Mars and been told that one of either May or Green had become PM I'd have guessed Green in a heartbeat. His lack of advancement under the posh boys is high on my list of 'exhibits for the prosecution'.
I suspect May will see through Brexit then step down before GE2022 - and the Tories will have a proper leadership election, which Green would not flourish in. If however, some further calamity were to overcome May before then, Green would be an excellent choice.
Like May he's had a long and happy marriage to a very smart partner (who neither forgives nor forgets, so a Green premiership might have some extra piquancy...)
Unless we abandon it.
That's not to say he should be favourite either - he would need positive support (indeed, he'd need to choose to run in the first place, which would be no given), and there's no great evidence to suggest he has that support: Theresa May doesn't have a long-standing machine in the party in the way that some politicians develop one over years, and what she does have can't be assumed to be strong or cohesive enough to be transferable to a successor. All the same, there are no candidates who shine out as head and shoulders above the field and Green could easily simultaneously fulfil the roles of stop-Boris, stop-Davis, stop-Leadsom and stop-Gove.
Sounds like golden gates for every Ulster man are on their way.
I hope not, while I'd like that shit to be removed too the Great Repeal Bill is not the place. If everyone starts passing amendments for every bit of stupid crap the EU has ever done the Great Repeal Bill will be the longest bill ever and never get through Parliament.
Brexit "done"...
https://twitter.com/EU_Commission/status/877826007721537536
And then remember that was in Europe. Within my lifetime.
http://www.harleyfacades.co.uk/page/feature-video
Chalcot Estate Camdem Building No 9 and by far the largest value.
I feel sorry for the minions there, the company will probably go to the wall over this.
£280k net worth, 150k cash at Y/E 2016.
No way can it afford to rectify its work/pay all the legal fees heading its way - definitely heading for El busto.
Seriously, though. You can invent all the rules and red tape you like but unless people have a reason to follow them then those rules will get actively or passively ignored.
If people can see an advantage to a rule - like seatbelts or drink-driving - then generally they comply with it even if they find it onerous, but trying to legislate every event or every possible situation and eventuality is just doomed to failure.
Sometime people have to make judgement calls and live with the outcome.
If the EU keeps peace in Europe that that is definitely to our advantage
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Ones_Who_Walk_Away_from_Omelas
One thing to note: a top guy in Camden Council was on R4 at 13.00, and he said that some of their tower blocks had such cladding. He also said that it was not as commissioned.
If he is right in this, then what went wrong (at least in Camden's case) becomes more focused. Why was the material not as commissioned (a slightly odd phrase to use), and why did the council's inspectors not pick up on it?
Although what went wrong in Camden's case might be very different from Grenfell Tower.