Grenfell: Institutional Racism A Factor In The Fire

[EdmundD]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-53320082

I thought it was the cladding......

[Mozz71]

//there would have been very little chance of my gran being allocated a flat in that area.//

It was clearly a hypothetical question NJ, not to be talen literally.

[naomi24]

Whether my gran was in the building or not, I wouldn't blame racism for the tragedy.

[Mozz71]

I guess the question being asked is "would things have been done differemtly had the fire been in a better off area?" I don't know, I suspect the cladding would've been replaced long before the fire took hold. It's still not racism, classism maybe, but rascism, no.

[naomi24]

Areas don’t come much better off than that one, Mozz, and after the fire, if I recall, quite a number of blocks of flats in other areas were found to have similar cladding. I don’t think the fire was related to any ‘ism’.

[youngmafbog]

Neither the fire or the cladding is related to any 'ism'. Incompetence perhaps but nothing racial about it. Other flats have it (and still have it) with different ethnic mix.

PP, as ff has pointed out you completely misread my post, perhaps deliberately so you could dig at the 'far right'?

[Mozz71]

I tend to agree, I'm playing devil's advocate somewhat.

What does need to be done, in my view, is find out who was ultimately responsible for okaying that cladding. There must be a case for something like corporate manslaughter.

[youngmafbog]

I agree Mozz. Seems a long time coming.

[Deskdiary]

Hmmm - I’m not so sure about Corporate Manslaughter.

The UK has a ‘State of the Art’ defence, so if the cladding was legal at the time of installation, if the specification legal, if the designers, structural engineers, architects etc fulfilled their roles competently and if the cladding was installed correctly, then who could be held accountable?

[Mozz71]

DD, weren't safety warnings given out before the fire happened? I'm sure I saw that at the time.

Of course, the fact that this cladding is still in use despite the danger shows the lack of care those responsible feel. Do we need Grenfell mark 2, before anything is done? Will lessons ever be heeded if no action is taken?

[Peter Pedant]

// There must be a case for something like corporate manslaughter.13:25
I agree Mozz. Seems a long time coming.//

OK I think I have 'got' these posts

it is a long time coming because ..... There is no case at all for something like corporate manslaughter.

you have to show the board knew of the risk and ran it
they didnt

[Peter Pedant]

// The UK has a ‘State of the Art’ defence, //
erk does it?
certainly not for asbestos - do you have a reference?

and a judge said about a Hospital - I dont care how long it has been custom and practice - it something is negligent I will find it so ( no I cant name the case)

[Mozz71]

//you have to show the board knew of the risk and ran it
they didnt//

That brings me back to the point I made earlier: Weren't warnings about the cladding made before the fire? If so, surely the lack of action makes someone liable?

[Old_Geezer]

Surely those in charge are responsible for getting knowledge of the risks for something they are putting into action ? If risks were unknown, why were they unknown ? If they were known and those responsible didn't bother to find them out, then why not ?