London fire

Trouble is DD that some places which are viable travelling distances to London are not financially viable for many people due to the cost of travel and then there is the extra time it puts onto the working day. Many people in needed social jobs such as teaching and nursing and also the other staff which are required to run necessary services cannot afford to live in a suitable distance to their places of work.
There must be some brownfield sites which are in areas suitable for development - thinking around the problem is needed here - all these families deserve a safe and clean home.

There are always spiteful, horrible people who make remarks such as silversurf reported but I think the vast majority of people - whatever their views about immigration - feel nothing but horror about this terrible event and want to see justice for the people affected. I am going to try and concentrate on the decency of those people rather than the lack of basic humanity of the small, and in my view twisted, minority.

skwawkbox.org/2017/06/18/grenfell-residents-offered-rooms-in-carbon-copy-hotel-with-cladding/

Kensington council covering itself in glory again.

That's what I was thinking about suzied. It needs taxation to stop it - or, at least slow it down. I doubt if foreign investors can actually be stopped, but it could certainly become a less attractive financial proposition. But...as you say...what would it do to property prices?

Welshwife I wasn't only thinking about work in London. I was thinking more of supporting relocating high paid work outside London and the South East. State planning is needed to build new towns, give grants to new employers and to improve transport infrastructure.

Trouble isDD many companies do not wish to relocate outside London - I suppose they think they have a wider range of talent to draw on if they are in London. DGS will be looking for work next year and has thoughts of moving to London from about 200 miles away - his partner lives on the outskirts of London within commutable distance and I don't think she has any wish to move. His friend has moved from Wales to London and is doing a similar, but for him more interesting, job and his salary increased by10K but he says that he is no better off due to extra costs of living in London.

Getting angrier and angrier. Have just read this about Kensington council' s reserves and the rebate they offered. www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/jun/16/my-council-tax-rebate-from-kensington-and-chelsea-is-blood-money.
Mentioning this to DG she said she had read the rebate was only given to prompt payers who paid in full within a month and not to those on any sort of benefit.

I disagree. The BBC has moved some of its operations to Salford Quays and people are beginning to form a talent pool in North Manchester. Pharma and IT moved to Cambridge, which has caused its own problems, because it's another cit with limited land. Scientific research is moving outside the golden triangle of Oxford, Cambridge and London. Milton Keynes, one of the first new towns, has attracted all sorts of businesses. My DD has a well-paid job in Manchester and walks to work. If she came back to the South East, she would have a lower quality of life and would pay at least £6k a year out of taxed income on fares.

There are already people in the South East travelling 50 or more miles to work, which has gentrified and pushed up house prices in a town like mine. It's unsustainable.

Companies do realise that there are advantages to moving outside London and a bit of government "nudging" would help.

But you say what would it do to property prices, daphne.
Surely a drop in London and South East property prices would be a good thing.

I read that too Nandalot. K & C council tax rates are already relatively low and that was the last straw. The borough also has millions in reserve, because it won't spend.

I'm not the slightest bit surprised that people are angry and I really hope that it's all made public.

It's just so tragic that it took something like this to highlight have/have not Britain and, make no mistake, there couldn't have been a more visible symbol than Kensington and Chelsea.

Of course it would be a good thing dj, but not if you happen to be one of the millionaire property owners - the bessie mates of politicians.

It might lead to a shortage of rental properties, which is why the state has to intervee. It

Ooops! Clicked too soon...

It must not be left to the market, which has failed to provide people with sufficient and adequate housing.

Just catching up on Peston as someone phoned when it was on.

Please, please, please watch it and complain.
People who have lost everything have just been given ten pounds by the council when they turn up at the hotels.
The money that we have all donated cannot be accessed by the volunteers.

Please complain as much as you can about it.

www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/jun/18/cladding-on-grenfell-tower-banned-in-uk-says-philip-hammond

Maybe the most eligible bachelor in the world holds the key:

www.grosvenor.com/news-views-research/news/2017/grosvenor-commits-to-%E2%80%98generation-rent%E2%80%99-with-its-%C2%A35/

It was very unfortunate that the draft plans were published on the same day as the Grenfell Tower fire.

If the rents are genuinely affordable, this (and other developments) could do for London what the Peabody Trust did in the nineteenth century.

I think they might be having a rethink about the 26 storey blocks close to the railway station.

That was my initial reaction.

However, there wouldn't be a problem if it were well-built.

The Shard is four times higher than Grenfell Tower, as are many skyscrapers all over the world where land is scarce. It wasn't the height of the building in itself which caused the problem.

But I couldn't imagine many people wanting to rent at the top of 26 storeys, or even above 12 storeys.

In Hull, lots of the high rise has been knocked down, or had the top few storeys removed because nobody wanted to live in them.
The hospital is the highest building now, and the authorities are having to reassure that it is safe.

I'd love to live on the top floor of Canary Wharf. Unfortunately, many other people love to live there, which is why rents are so high.

I suspect the location is more of a problem than the height of the buildings.

Yes - I see where you are coming from DD and I think if people willingly moved outwards and probably northwards they would have a much more enjoyable life all round. The SW could do with companies moving there too although their roads would need greatly improving! Wales could do with more employment too - some businesses would be more suitable than others though because of accessibility.

inews.co.uk/essentials/news/grenfell-fire-survivors-getting-just-10-kensington-officials/

jackofkent.com/2017/06/on-regulation/

About regulation and deregulation. Jack of Kent is a legal commentator for the FT.

These are the fire instructions and system for One Canada Square in Canary Wharf:

Fire system
In the event of a fire, One Canada Square is not fully evacuated. The floor that has the fire and all other floors above are evacuated. The air conditioning is set to work in reverse to extract smoke and fresh air is blown into the fire escape staircases to increase air pressure and therefore slow the entry of smoke into these areas. The sprinkler system will not operate unless there is sufficient heat acting on any sprinkler head (which are independent of each other and do not operate in unison).
The only time when One Canada Square was fully evacuated was on 30 October 2001,[25] during a test drill in response to the 11 September 2001 attacks. The test drill was unsuccessful as tenants were notified beforehand, hence evacuation was much quicker than expected by Canary Wharf Security.
Procedure for fire alarm
When the fire alarm activates on a floor, audio instructions tailored to each floor of the building sound. All floors will receive an evacuation message, with a controlled evacuation message replayed to each floor in order of priority. On floors below the source of the alarm a stand-by notification is given. Digital signage throughout the building displays alert messages followed by instructions tailored to each floor of the building. On certain floors, the instructions ask employees to leave the floor. Exit signs flash. The access control system unlocks doors as necessary. Fire dampers open. Throughout the building, cameras turn on and look for problems that intelligent video software applications have been programmed to detect. Within 2 minutes, the access control system sends a memo to the Security Director itemising how many people have left the affected floor and how many remain.

(Thank you Google)

Compare them with systems and procedures in Grenfell Tower.

I'm impressed - so it can be done!