Rehousing issue for Grenfell Towers survivors

So perhaps people are just "playing the race card" for some other unfathomable* reason.

* unfathomable to me.

Diversity (race, ethnicity, gender, etc) is an in thing at the moment. That doesn't mean it always needs to be considered.

I just don't understand this demand for a non white person to be included in the panel. Is grief, fear, anger , not universal?

Please will people stop using this term "playing the race card" It is racist and I will report it (I already have once).
To play the race card
(idiomatic, often pejorative) To assert that race or racism is involved in a situation, especially in order to exploit racist or antiracist attitudes

Anniebach to paraphrase Mandy Rice Davies "Well you wouldn't would you"

I think now that what is being played is the victim card. In part that is totally justified considering that fire safety concerns were raised by residents over quite a period of time.

But the part that is about victimhood because of my race and ethnicity is pure tosh and should be ignored.

I will change my view on this when someone explains, really explains, why race and ethnicity has anything to do with fire safety in council owned buildings.

Without rock solid proof I will not believe that Kensington Council ignored the Grenfell residents' concerns because of their race and/or ethnicity.

It's not about the feelings being universal, it's about the whole context in which the feelings arise and are experienced and why. I'm not widowed, I haven't and can't experience the grief, fear and anger that arise from that experience. I've felt all those feelings but in different contexts. I've not been a long term career so haven't experienced the emotions that arise from that

Baggs serious question - why do you think they were ignored? We know they were.

I really don't know, maryeliza. I don't think anyone knows, thus the inquiry. I suspect the answer is very complex and has a lot to do with money and a head in the sand attitude to safety.

maryeliza, you think the panel should only be people who have experienced being in a fire in a block of flats ?

This is about feelings being universal. All the survivors of the Grenfell Tower disaster will be feeling anger, loss, horror, frustration, etc, etc, etc in relation to what happened and in varying degrees depending on how well they are coping, how satisfied or not that they are with their rehousing.

Other feelings, dependant on their life stories up to the disaster, are irrelevant to the inquiry. NB That's not saying those feelings are irrelevant full stop, just that the feelings associated with the disaster will be universal (which doesn't mean exactly the same in every individual).

Baggs etc The problem is that justice must not just be done it must be seen to be done. So unless there is someone on the panel who the majority of tenants feel is trustworthy and has their best interests at heart, who has access to all the evidence,is present at all the discussions and can ask the questions they want asking they will never have closure on this. It is easy to dismiss their concerns as a member of the white majority, but we should remember that there are racist people in society, and that there has been institutionalised racism in the recent past. A panel that is as diverse as possible will lead to an inquiry whose findings are more widely accepted and will give peace of mind to more of the victims and their families which is surely the very least they are entitled to

The experience needed for the inquirers is going to be mainly about law and justice and how councils spend their money.

Where did I say that annie?

Racism has fuck all to do with the Grenfell fire. Why has it been brought up? Fire safety and the treatment of tenants by their councils and landlords are not race issues. They could well be issues of relative poverty but that affects every kind of person.

As do true justice and fair laws.

How can law and justice be addressed without exploring why people's concerns were ignored over the years? its about marginalised groups and the disdain with which wealthy Tory councillors in K&C held them - more of the group were non white so the issues inevitably get inter meshed with that.

Council's are run by ordinary people who are elected Baggs not financial experts so there is no reason why their accounts shouldn't be understood by anyone with basic maths. Law and justice are delivered every day by juries who are composed of ordinary people, why should this inquiry be different? And are you suggesting, and I do hope you aren't, that only white people have knowledge of the law, justice and finance?

Being 'colour blind' in this case is a nonsense. Racism is bound to be thought to be a relevant issue, given that the majority were non- white. I personally think there are other sociological-economic factors in play as well

No maryeliza, racism is not permitted to be mentioned

Says who annie?

Racism can be mentioned and is rife on GN Annie, racist language is unacceptable. Interesting that you can't see the difference.

You should make your instructions on what you will permit on a thread clearer Trisher

Nothing to do with me Annie it's against the forum Guidelines. You've had one post deleted because of it. It is also illegal you know.

I expected it to be deleted Trisher , you advised in advance you would report it

Just because it was reported didn't mean it would be deleted - it was deleted because it broke the guidelines