Rehousing issue for Grenfell Towers survivors

How do you know that's what he was doing if you didn't listen to him?

Didn't you do political point scoring when you were a socialist?
Do you think it's tight that the Grenfell survivors were told not to speak to their Labour MP, or they would not get rehoused?

Using such a tragedy for political point scoring, shame on the shadow housing minister , no way would I listen to him using the dead

John Healey speaking about Grenfell at the moment on BBC parliament channel.

But what is the truth, it is being used for political scoring, eight have been charged for claiming money they were not entitled to. If they have been given that money why use food banks

It's being discussed now on parliament thread.
Labour councils in London offered to help, and the help was refused by Kensington and Chelsea.

"She also claimed some survivors had been advised not to approach her for help as it would affect their chances of getting housing.

“Some have been told not to speak to their MP, or not to speak out at all, or they will not get what they want,” she said.

Councillor Elizabeth Campbell, Leader of Kensington and Chelsea Council, said: “Emma’s team have raised previous issues directly with our Care for Grenfell team here at the council, so we were surprised that she mentioned these new cases in remarks at a conference before referring the issues to us.

“That said, and putting any politics to one side, we will be looking into this urgently and would welcome more details if they are available.”

I can't believe that they didn't know. They should know everything that happens to Grenfell survivors.
As Dent Coad says, the council should be taken out of it, and others brought in to run the Grenfell situation.
Surely all council officials could be implicated in what has happened.

All very sus

I think it's the council. They are also responsible for the disabled woman who was forgotten by her carers.

Surely it's the charities who are administering this?

The money raised by the Standard (about £5m) is administered by The London Community Foundation. They say that they have made payments of £25,000 per household. They have the payment schedule in the 'news' section on the website - they started by paying £1,000 per household on 20th June.

www.londoncf.org.uk/grants/grenfell-tower-emergency-appeal-.aspx

If that's the case, I cannot see why someone would need to use a food bank. Maybe Emma Dent Coat needs to get in touch with the charities administering this?

I don't know the situation with the other charities, but some of them have a focus on particular groups, such as bereavement.

Who is overseeing the money?

www.24housing.co.uk/news/grenfell-survivors-forced-to-use-foodbanks/

Anyone who donated to Grenfell survivors, would you have expected this to happen?
Absolutely appalling.
Please write to your MPs to complain and get them to sort out this mess.
It cannot wait until the end of the enquiry.

Oh not this "group" again. I was very upset last time because there was a clique and I didn't know who was in it. Now there's a group and no-one's told me

maryeliza, no group are more unwilling to respect the views of those who do not agree with you than your group , the group which doesn't exsist according to those who are part of it.

Sorry I didn't read your comment properly and just flipped through it-me apology accepted and hope mine is too.

Sorry I was replying to lemon - apologies that wasn't clear - I just really hate that of high horse comment she's used twice and that's what I was addressing

I refuse to agree with anyone who is racist, sexist or discriminatory in any way maryeliza54 sorry but it's the way I was brought up and the way I have brought up my children. If you think it's wrong say so.

PC high horse comment is unnecessary and quite frankly rude - why does your post have to be so unpleasant? Believing in diverse representation is not PC - you may not think it matters but you shouldn't be dismissing those of us who do in such a cavalier fashion. And because it matters to us does mean we are on our high horses - that phrase just shows a complete unwillingness to show the slightest respect for anyone's views you don't agree with

So having proved that the class basis you advocated was unfounded and that there are equally qualified people of all ethnicities who can serve on the inquiry panel you still insist it shouldn't be as diverse as possible and an all white panel is acceptable- in my book that's the definition of racism. Get to the back of the bus the rest of you we're still sitting up here!

The statements and experiences of the Grenfell residents will be heard, with some sympathy I expect, by the enquiry, and is entirely right and relevant.That still doesn't mean that the panel who hold the enquiry must be racially diverse in order for the proceedings to be done fairly and properly.
I would think the main thing is that the inquiry is done thoroughly, and some answers found, in other words no stone left unturned.
If this isn't enough for some posters, then I stand by my
PC high horses comment, and frankly, too bad if they don't like it.

Okay, I'll stick to calling you patronising instead.

BTW, dj, was it the Grenfellers United or toodle-pip, chucks that you found unpleasant? Just curious because neither were intended to be at all. Quite the reverse.

Haha! Some of you lot are funny. Since the words pleasant (meaning unpleasant), patience (interpreted as patronising, not by me as I know that poster is straightforward), and aggressive have been associated with my recent posts, I reckon I must be getting it about right.

Why the focus on the poster? Oh yes.... because that's what you do when you can't actually answer an argument with proper debate.

Chuckle McChuckle. Thanks for the morning amusement.

I've said my bit which you are entirely free to disagree with, as usual. No skin off my nose. Now it's up to Time.

www.independent.co.uk/voices/grenfell-tower-inquiry-residents-judge-martin-moore-bick-a7947061.html

lemongrove So now you suggest that those who have a different view from you, Baggs, et al, are merely being supercilious in following a supposed PC agenda and are not genuine in trying to express the point of view of the Grenfell residents. Added to that, anyone non-white who is concerned about the make up of the panel is said to be "playing the race card".

You say:

"The inquiry is not a debate of some kind where you can include all races, class, etc. The people concerned with heading the inquiry are chosen either for their skill, experience or relevance to the inquiry".

Do you really feel that there are no non-white people in this country who have the necessary knowledge and expertise to sit on an inquiry panel of this nature. And are you seriously suggesting that the people who have experienced this terrible tragedy have no relevance to the inquiry?

I don't think anybody has suggested that all races, classes and other groups should be represented. Some of us feel that the people from Grenfell have had their lives changed for ever by this fire. Their warnings were ignored before the fire and the authorities performed very poorly immediately after the fire. It is hardly surprising that the residents find it difficult to have faith in local or national government and more effort should have been made to address their concerns.

I find your remark to Baggs (that she is being extremely patient) patronising - and not strictly accurate. Perhaps you hadn't noticed her comment "Racism has fuck all to do with the Grenfell fire". This is quite an aggressive way of giving her opinion. Others should also be able to express their opinion without the implication being made by you that they are rather stupid and tiresome.

Incidentally, concern about the make up of the panel was expressed by several people, as an article in the Guardian set out in August:

"The Rev Graham Tomlin’s remarks echoed the voice of local campaign groups such as Justice4Grenfell, which said local people “must be placed at the heart of this inquiry” and argued that the former judge’s advisory panel was “unrepresentative and non-diverse”.

The Rev Graham Tomlin said ‘Local people must be placed at the heart of this inquiry’

"Tomlin suggested that a panel reflecting the diversity of the community could “ represent both the local community and win their confidence, and … can bring the perspectives of a wider range of our society, socially and ethnically, to the important issues the inquiry will examine”.

Anniebach You say "some have complained there is no one of colour on the panel, why ? they live in England, they choose to live in England, the majority of English are not of colour .." I think that remark speaks volumes.

Pleasant as usual, Baggs.