Labour - party of building?

DaisyAnneReturns

Germanshepherdsmum

Grenfell Tower was built in 1974.

External cladding made of aluminium composite material (ACM), installed when the 1970s tower block was refurbished between 2012 and 2016, caught light during a kitchen fire and rapidly spread. The building, which contained 129 flats over 20 floors, became a blazing inferno killing 72 people.

Source: Big Issue

It wasn’t just that though DaisyAnne, the building had had a very bad fire safety report before the cladding work started and known hazards hadn’t been rectified. Two of the women who died in the fire had been campaigning for years about it, which is what stuck in my mind.
The role of successive governments was to ensure that laws were in place to prevent landlords not keeping buildings safe, as well as specifically banning known unsafe materials like the cladding.

That is what building regulations are for - it is not the fault of the government if a developer or contractor doesn’t comply with them. Inspection for compliance is the statutory responsibility of local authorities.

It is quite clear that lack of adequate regulatory oversight of the later use of combustible cladding and the contracting out of tenant management contributed to the Grenfell fire during the Tory period in office (and recall Kensington and Chelsea was Tory run). It is entirely irrelevant that Grenfell was built in 1974.

As I have said already, it was not the responsibility of the government. The colour of the local authority is entirely irrelevant.

Then it follows Grantanow the Labour Government were responsible for the deaths of 144 in Aberfan ,1966

Germanshepherdsmum

That is what building regulations are for - it is not the fault of the government if a developer or contractor doesn’t comply with them. Inspection for compliance is the statutory responsibility of local authorities.

I wonder how much cuts to LA budgets since 2010 contributed to the effectiveness, or ineffectiveness, of the LA's planning inspectorate? I assume that might be clarified in the final report of the Grenfell Inquiry.

Building regs are nothing to do with planning Maizie. The signing off by a building inspector of work such as was done at Grenfell is mandatory. It may take longer for a building inspector to turn up to inspect the work but it has to pass an inspection. I know from experience that some building inspectors are less thorough than others and some are shall we say overly friendly with some developers and contractors. I am not for one moment alleging that that happened at Grenfell but, having worked with developers for many years, I know of some whose practices are questionable.

And of course the Tories have and intend to continue to relax planning laws.

Building regulations are nothing to do with planning.

Keir Starmer has won the backing of Larry Fink, the CEO of BlackRock and one of world's most influential financiers.

BlackRock was the architect of Tory austerity, George Osborne

Germanshepherdsmum

Building regs are nothing to do with planning Maizie. The signing off by a building inspector of work such as was done at Grenfell is mandatory. It may take longer for a building inspector to turn up to inspect the work but it has to pass an inspection. I know from experience that some building inspectors are less thorough than others and some are shall we say overly friendly with some developers and contractors. I am not for one moment alleging that that happened at Grenfell but, having worked with developers for many years, I know of some whose practices are questionable.

The cladding was approved for refurbishing buildings, it wasn’t just one set of building inspectors that got it wrong there were dozens of properties clad in exactly the same way.

Nobody envisaged that risk,

Which is not the fault of the government.

The manufacturers were aware of the fire risk of the cladding in 2002. The governments were aware.
www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2022/feb/28/cladding-danger-evidence-15-years-before-grenfell-tower-fire#:~:text=A%20senior%20official%20has%20admitted,be%20used%20on%20tall%20buildings.
That’s why I said it wasn’t only a Tory Government issue, successive governments failed to act.

Michael Gove said on the Housing documentary in relation to Grenfell that, 'we (i.e., the Tories) presided over' a regulatory structure not fit for purpose. Why did they continue to 'preside' rather than improving it?

Grantanow

Michael Gove said on the Housing documentary in relation to Grenfell that, 'we (i.e., the Tories) presided over' a regulatory structure not fit for purpose. Why did they continue to 'preside' rather than improving it?

For once Gove is being honest, the building regulations allowed that cladding system, so it was used, building inspectors have no power to stop a builder using approved methods.

The Grenfell cladding did not meet building regulations requirements.
www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwjM1eC-z4KCAxUxVUEAHVMuDQAQFnoECA0QAw&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.cibsejournal.com%2Fnews%2Fexternal-cladding-did-not-meet-building-regulations%2F%23%3A~%3Atext%3DThe%2520public%2520inquiry%2520into%2520the%2520Grenfell%2520Tower%2520fire%2520has%2520found%2Cinstead%2520%27actively%2520promoted%2520it%27.&usg=AOvVaw21mUNzuN9xuddAPi-wlv0_&opi=89978449

Germanshepherdsmum

The Grenfell cladding did not meet building regulations requirements.
www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwjM1eC-z4KCAxUxVUEAHVMuDQAQFnoECA0QAw&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.cibsejournal.com%2Fnews%2Fexternal-cladding-did-not-meet-building-regulations%2F%23%3A~%3Atext%3DThe%2520public%2520inquiry%2520into%2520the%2520Grenfell%2520Tower%2520fire%2520has%2520found%2Cinstead%2520%27actively%2520promoted%2520it%27.&usg=AOvVaw21mUNzuN9xuddAPi-wlv0_&opi=89978449

So with 2020 hindsight it was discovered that it did not meet building regulations, after 400 buildings had been clad

Indolently and complacently 'presiding over' wholly unsatisfactory regulations does not cut the mustard.