Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Conservative Council (Grenfall Tower Fire) has £274m of reserves! Watch

    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/...budget-surplus

    No money for working fire alarms.
    No money for protective cladding.
    No money for sprinklers.

    But...

    "The Conservative council responsible for the tower block where at least 79 people died in a fire described by the mayor of London as preventable has stockpiled £274m of reserves and offered rebates to residents paying the top rate of council tax"

    Was Oliver Twist not supposed to be a fictional narrative on the inequalities faced by Victorian Britain. Looks like the poor in the UK still ask for more and get laughed at. It's as if Charles Dickens is shaking his head beyond the grave. The *******s still not getting it in 2017? fools.

    I don't care if you vote Greens, Labour, Tory or UKIP. If you call yourself a Brit, you have a patriotic duty to care for everyone in this country and if someone is in need of more help, be it your elderly grandmother or ill second child. You rightly prioritise your attention to them over someone else who is not elderly or ill. The same is said of those who are working but on low pay vs those in million pound flats. It's not to argue if you are working class you spit on the rich but it is to argue that working, middle and upper class people need to put pressure on those around them who keep implementing political policies and attitudes that leave working class people at the mercy of fate.

    How can you call yourself proud to be British when British politicians elected by ourselves are happy to give rich people more money in tax rebates but refuse to install proper fire safety measures that have been demanded by experts over and over? Disgusting.

    Rant over.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    It would be irresponsible for them not to have reserves.

    Working sprinklers and fire alarms would seem like required systems. The inquiry will uncover why they weren't present.
    Offline

    17
    (Original post by Reformed2010)

    How can you call yourself *proud to be British when local councils are happy to give rich people more money in tax rebates but refuse to install proper fire safety measures for the British working poor? Disgusting.

    Rant over.
    *human
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Reformed2010)
    How can you call yourself proud to be British when local councils are happy to give rich people more money in tax rebates but refuse to install proper fire safety measures for the British working poor?
    There is no excuse for not ensuring proper fire safety measures.

    Do you know the difference between giving rich people money and taking less of their money?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RogerOxon)
    It would be irresponsible for them not to have reserves.

    Working sprinklers and fire alarms would seem like required systems. The inquiry will uncover why they weren't present.
    people like you...

    They were and are legally required in all new tower blocks in Scotland and Wales. Several reports by experts have called on the UK government, many times, to make it a legal requirement.
    • Very Important Poster
    Offline

    19
    (Original post by Reformed2010)
    people like you...

    They were and are legally required in all new tower blocks in Scotland and Wales. Several reports by experts have called on the UK government, many times, to make it a legal requirement.
    Why are you ranting at Roger? he is being quite reasonable?

    Sprinklers are mandatory only in new blocks and Grenfell was built before the requirement. Seems silly they were pit in place and I expect they will now be made compulsory following the Inquiry. I am sure it will uncover what happened, why the tiles were fitted and how the flats were managed. guess you will know in a 2-3 years time.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Reformed2010)
    They were and are legally required in all new tower blocks in Scotland and Wales. Several reports by experts have called on the UK government, many times, to make it a legal requirement.
    I would be amazed if it isn't made a legal requirement now.

    Regulations always lag somewhere. I simply don't accept that there is some hidden agenda to allow poor people to die. Once all the factors in this tragedy are understood, action can, and will, be taken. I appreciate that past incidents did not achieve this, but this one is too big for anyone to ignore.

    Governments do place a value on a life, as unpalatable as that is. It's the same regardless of how rich you are.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RogerOxon)
    I would be amazed if it isn't made a legal requirement now.

    Regulations always lag somewhere. I simply don't accept that there is some hidden agenda to allow poor people to die. Once all the factors in this tragedy are understood, action can, and will, be taken. I appreciate that past incidents did not achieve this, but this one is too big for anyone to ignore.

    Governments do place a value on a life, as unpalatable as that is. It's the same regardless of how rich you are.
    Too late for children who burned alive. When people are telling you with evidence that health and safety laws can help save lives and you refuse to implement them you are partially responsible when people are put in homes that lack them and they die. It's why criminal negligence is a legal concept. I don't need to have a debate with you on this because I have actually lived through and studied such events in British history to know of government negligence and cover ups. But rather than you search and learn about say Bloody Sunday or Hillsborough disaster, you'll keep replying with willful ignorant comments. It's simply wrong to suggest 'politicians place equal value on life regardless of your wealth or occupation. It's factually incorrect.

    Please, don't go into law or politics. You'd kill so many people.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Reformed2010)
    Too late for children who burned alive. When people are telling you with evidence that health and safety laws can help save lives and you refuse to implement them you are partially responsible when people are put in homes that lack them and they die. It's why criminal negligence is a legal concept.
    Agreed, although it's more difficult to prove if all applicable regulations were followed.

    I expect that building regulations for this type of building will be changed. It will be interesting to see why sprinklers weren't included in the refit of this particular building.

    It's simply wrong to suggest 'politicians place equal value on life regardless of your wealth or occupation. It's factually incorrect.
    Feel free to post evidence.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Reformed2010)
    But...
    Are you aware of the difference between reserves and money? I have not read the accounts in detail but the headline is that the authority has only £8.7 million in in cash form, and this is most likely needed to be on hand able to pay salaries and suppliers. Reserves include theoretical profits on investments and assets, not realisable without selling that asset.

    Do you think the council should have sold a tower block to realise the profit on it so that they could improve another one?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RogerOxon)
    Feel free to post evidence.
    No you stop being lazy and google search Bloody Sunday Northern Ireland, Hillsborough Northern England and Stephen Lawrence London. I don't need to spoon feed you. People need to stop using 'post evidence' as an excuse to continue their ignorance.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Good bloke)
    Are you aware of the difference between reserves and money? I have not read the accounts in detail but the headline is that the authority has only £8.7 million in in cash form, and this is most likely needed to be on hand able to pay salaries and suppliers. Reserves include theoretical profits on investments and assets, not realisable without selling that asset.

    Do you think the council should have sold a tower block to realise the profit on it so that they could improve another one?
    1. The cost of installing sprinkler systems would have been less than £300,000.
    2. Plenty of assets can be liquidise rather quickly and many can be within a year.
    3. They refused to use their assets to pay for sprinkler systems.
    4. You need stop defending the indefensible. It's pretty sad and sickening.

    The Government and local council ignored repeated warnings from experts, lawyers, and residents Get at the way and let them be held accountable.
    • Very Important Poster
    Offline

    19
    (Original post by RogerOxon)
    I would be amazed if it isn't made a legal requirement now.

    Regulations always lag somewhere. I simply don't accept that there is some hidden agenda to allow poor people to die. Once all the factors in this tragedy are understood, action can, and will, be taken. I appreciate that past incidents did not achieve this, but this one is too big for anyone to ignore.

    Governments do place a value on a life, as unpalatable as that is. It's the same regardless of how rich you are.
    You are ofc correct. Sprinklers are also easier and cheaper to fit these days as technology has improved. It wouldnt surprise me if they have cut costs and neglected their housing as youd suspect Kensington and Chelsea arent too bothered if the less affluent leave. The costs I saw for Grenfell has been as low as 200k for spirnklers. I bet theres an audit going on of all high rises at the moment.

    The inquest should reveal who did or didnt do what. If found culpable then I hope they go to jail. the figure ive seen is just over £5,000 would have bought the flame resistant tiles except they went for the cheaper version, which it now turns out are illegal.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Reformed2010)
    You need stop defending the indefensible.
    I don't need to stop anything, not least because I have not defended the council. I merely wanted to stop you from misleading people into thinking the council had a huge pile of cash burning a hole in its pocket. It doesn't. I expect, especially given its location, most of its reserves are tied up in assets that have appreciated but which are of no use in spending.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Reformed2010)
    It's factually incorrect.
    Factually? Or supposedly?
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    This is what happens when too much power is given to the government.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Reformed2010)
    people like you...

    They were and are legally required in all new tower blocks in Scotland and Wales. Several reports by experts have called on the UK government, many times, to make it a legal requirement.
    All tower blocks built since 2007 are required to have sprinklers. It is not required, in any UK jurisdiction, to apply such measures retroactively.

    Oh, and by the way, you're an appalling person.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Reformed2010)
    1. The cost of installing sprinkler systems would have been less than £300,000.
    Which is a fair sum of money. I wonder how exactly the leaseholders in the building would have reacted to getting a £1,500+ bill for a sprinkler system.

    Sadly, people don't generally value things like high-level fire safety. They're inclined to take reasonable risks. It's only after a tragic event that we examine things with hindsight.
    • Very Important Poster
    Offline

    19
    (Original post by RogerOxon)
    Agreed, although it's more difficult to prove if all applicable regulations were followed.

    I expect that building regulations for this type of building will be changed. It will be interesting to see why sprinklers weren't included in the refit of this particular building.


    Feel free to post evidence.
    Just drawing this to your attention. I hope they get someone decent for the inquest.


    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-40330789
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Reformed2010)
    They were and are legally required in all new tower blocks in Scotland and Wales.
    They were only required in Welsh new-build blocks from last year. There is apparently no requirement to retrofit them, so even the parts of the UK that are further ahead, wouldn't have changed this tragedy.

    I hope that it does become a legal requirement, although I would also expect that councils will now fit them without delay.
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: July 6, 2017
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Break up or unrequited love?
    Useful resources
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.