London Fire -2

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.

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

Oh deary me, a white middling class chap,

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

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

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."

60 companies now, Riverwalk.

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.

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

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

'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.

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 ).

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.

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

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.

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."

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.

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!!

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.

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

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.

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.

PS Eloethan I hope I haven't given the impression that any of this has "angered" me. Mildly amused and entertained by David Lammy's apparent ignorance and heightened sensitivities, no more.

We use colour to express feelings not race, black is dreary, yellow is sunny, no idea why green is linked to envy or blue to feeling sad

Possibly Lammy experienced racial abuse when young and that is sad but he should not let it explode now