London Fire -2

I don't think news (or any ) blackout is negative. Surely it refers back to the absence of lights during WWII and total "blackness" at night?
However, I digress.

Mawbroon Two out of the four examples you give of phrases containing the word "black" are not a physical description but are used to express something negative:

news blackout
black moods

Then there are these examples:

blackmail
black books
black looks
black list
black magic
black mark
black sheep
black market, etc, etc, etc

It's all about context isn't it. If the almost universal experience of white people was being subjugated and discriminated against by black people, isn't it quite possible that the word "white" frequently being linked to negative things or experiences would anger you?

Language is power and power is often demonstrated and exerted through the use of language.

Much is said about lack of integration in this country, with idiots like Lammy and his obsession with race then not surprising, his comments about the judge in this enquiry will have raised doubts in the victims minds

As you say Mawbroon, why should we listen to him - he appears to be mischief-making and deflecting from the seriousness and aim of the enquiry - the terms of which may be limited but that is because a result is needed fairly quickly rather than dragging on for years.

Quote from the Evening Standard at the time, (I KNOW!)
David Lammy has apologised after accusing the BBC of racial innuendo in reporting the black and white smoke used at the Papal conclave.

The Labour MP for Tottenham was browsing Twitter during a Commons debate and saw a BBC news item about the chimney erected over the Sistine Chapel with the caption: “Will smoke be black or white?” Within seconds he tweeted: “This tweet from the BBC is crass and unnecessary. Do we really need silly innuendo about the race of the next Pope?”

He clearly misunderstood the BBC's tweet and the procedure in Rome. But an educated man (which he is) should surely be a bit more aware as this is the sort of gaffe one might expect from perhaps a child or someone ignorant of the wider world.
As I said , daft, why should we listen to a man whose racial sensitivities overrule common knowledge even common sense?
What next? Chess pieces? Black clouds? News blackouts? Black moods? Get real!!

I just don't see why the tenants need to approve of the judge, their opinion only counts when the judge delivers his findings. This tragedy is being used for political gain.

anniebach Lammy is not renowned for having been a Corbyn supporter:

Sunday Express January 2017
"Labour turmoil as furious David Lammy refuses to endorse Corbyn as Tristram Hunt quits. ... David Lammy refused to say whether he thought his party could win a general election under Jeremy Corbyn before telling a news anchor to ask the Labour leader himself."

Rigby Are you saying he should have kept quiet about the limited scope of the inquiry he has been asked to head? Presumably, he was told what was to be examined and what was not. Wasn't he, in a way, drawing attention to, and questioning, the fact that its scope is narrow?

The thing is, whether the public at large cares or doesn't care about the background of the retired judge is, I think, not as important as whether the people who have suffered as a result of this fire have confidence in him.

It is so common now for charities to be sponsored/supported by businesses and I feel it must compromise a charity's ability to draw attention to certain issues. Since businesses often provide substantial financial and other support, I would imagine it is difficult to turn down donations and tempting sponsorship proposals but there appears to be a downside to accepting them.

So not an official complaint Jen, but doesn't make a difference, he said the Beeb was racist fir saying - black or white smoke . You said he apologised when hus error had been pointed out to him . I think he has a problem

I'm against families being sent all over the place but I don't think it shows lack of sympathy on his part - his job was to interpret the law, and many judges are overruled.

A hard-nosed expert in Contracts could be just what is needed to get to the truth - he doesn't need to prove any 'liberal' credentials or have anything socially in common with the victims to do a good job.

That's interesting Riverwalk.
My main concern sprang from another article about his lack of sympathy in sending a family miles away from home and the fact that his decision was subsequently overruled.

However you make a valid point about his experience with contract law.

Can be also see things from the point of view of the distressed tenants I wonder?
A very difficult combination of problems and perhaps the ideal would be to pull in a second judge (although I don't know if that would be legally permissible ).

'He lodged a complaint of racism against the BBC when the Vatican were voting for the new Pope,'

Your exact words, Annie.
He didn't lodge a complaint.

Yes he did Maw, accused the Beeb of being racist for saying white or black smoke, I think this shows this man has a problem

I am surprised he is a Corbynite, Corbyn is a white, middle class male who hasn't lived in a tower block

The attribution of racist connotations to black or white smoke in the election of the pontiff has to be one of the daftest things I have ever heard of. Did he really?

I didn't say he contacted the Vatican, he accused the Beeb of being racist for calling the smoke black, no matter how much time this took, the fsct is this is a man who fjnds racists comment in the most innocent of remarks.

60 companies now, Riverwalk.

He apologised when his error was pointed out to him, though. The Vatican did not hold a grudge.
Anyway, he didn't lodge a complaint, he just tweeted that he thought the BBC was being racist.
It was all over in less time than it took you to write that post.

"Note to self: do not tweet from the Chamber with only one eye on what you're reading. Sorry folks, my mistake."

As the judge specialised in Commercial Law no doubt he'll be an expert on Contracts, and so he could well be the right person for the job and discover who is to blame for the consequences of the fire.

Can't remember the radio programme but I heard over the weekend that there could have been 50 different contractors/sub-contractors/consultants/inspectors, etc who worked on Grenfell.

If you scroll down this article you see chain of the main contractors, many of whom would have used sub-contractors.

Chain

Lammey has a problem and in my opinion little notice should be taken of him.

He lodged a complaint of racism against the BBC when the Vatican were voting for the new Pope,

Seems he decided the Beeb was racist because it was said , will the smoke be White or Black ?

this qualified barrister didn't know the black or white smoke signal is always used to announce a decision of the new Pope

www.theguardian.com/society/2017/jun/26/shelter-under-microscope-over-partnerships-with-construction-industry

Oh deary me, a white middling class chap,

They obviously had problems finding a judge - it took some time. Apparently he has just recently retired and had the time. I don't care about his gender or ethnicity (most judges still are white men from privileged backgrounds). However,May did say that the terms of reference would be decided in consultation with local,people so it's been badly handled. Surely he should not have said what he did - inevitably it smacks of a stitch up.

The retired judge, Sir Martin Moore-Bick, specialised in commercial law (in particular, shipping). Whether that is more appropriate than a judge who had formerly specialised in other areas of law, such as health and safety, building and construction, etc. I really don't know.

He acknowledged that the scope of the inquiry was very narrow and, as such, was unlikely to seem adequate for those whose lives have been turned upside down by the fire. I think many of the people affected by this tragedy have confirmed that that is indeed how they feel, and many other people feel similarly.

I'm not sure it's correct to say that he is not the right person for the inquiry because he made a controversial judgment in the Westminster case. It is, I think, a judge's job to interpret the law as it applies to a variety of situations. Such interpretations can differ from judge to judge; that is why there is a system of appeal. I'm not sure it would be possible to find a judge who had always arrived at judgments that everybody agreed with and which were never overturned by a higher Court.

However, I think it is the case that one of the primary principles in law is that justice be seen to be done. Some people will think it is perfectly acceptable for this man to be appointed but it appears that many of the victims of this fire feel differently. On top of the unease felt about the previous Westminster judgment (whether that unease is justified or not), they see a white man from a privileged background - perhaps similar in many ways to the senior council officers who, it appears, ignored concerns about safety in the tower block - being appointed to head this inquiry.

I don't know what the answer is because I don't know if there are other more suitable candidates for the task. But if the victims of this fire don't have confidence in this man and have suspicions about his neutrality, then I can't see how the inquiry can be considered to have legitimacy.

Also, if this inquiry is only to look at the immediate causes of the fire rather than the sequence of events that led up to it - and who authorised certain decisions re internal and external building issues - then is it just down to the police to investigate these issues? Presumably, they would need a considerable number of experts to assist them. Maybe I haven't followed this all properly, but has May made a statement as to exactly how the many other wider issues (whether building regs are adequate, etc.) are to be investigated?

t.co/4m01TtNbEu

Shelter, to write to your MP and support the Grenfell survivors to stay in Kensington and Chelsea.
I have just been reading about a woman who knows very little English whose daughter is in hospital having been shown a flat in another area of blocks outside Kensington. She refused to look at it or anywhere until her daughter is well enough to look with her.

Has the enquiry even begun properly yet?