I have no disagreement with a memorial park; I just think it's about as likely to happen as a lot of other things where money talks louder than people.
Owain
- Vote on answer
- posted
5 years ago
What is the plan for Grenfell?
Loading thread data ...
- Vote on answer
- posted
5 years ago
Lots of things in public ownership have a very high value today. Doesn't mean they had at all times. I'd guess the value of the land that Grenfell is on is now many times what it was when built. But then the same applies to pretty well every public building in London and other similar cities. So why not sell off the British Museum etc and redevelop as high cost housing? If money is the only thing that matters?
- Vote on answer
- posted
5 years ago
Because Grenfell Tower burned down and was not a National Treasure.
The British Museum hasn't, and is.
It's not just what matters, it's what they can get away with.
Owain
- Vote on answer
- posted
5 years ago
No, it burned inside & outside, but not down - it's still standing.
- Vote on answer
- posted
5 years ago
You've not seen beyond that? You snipped the bit about current land values being critical to what happens to the Grenfell site.
As ever.
- Vote on answer
- posted
5 years ago
Council housing should be safe, of course, but as basic as can be. Otherwise where is the incentive to do what the rest of us do, namely work hard to better our standard of living?
There is no question that the cladding wasn't safe. However, there is also no question that all those who approved it believed that it was safe.
- Vote on answer
- posted
5 years ago
At least it gave Dianne Abbott a new lease of life, allowing her a break from her 3 times table practice every weekend to find a street corner to stand on and blame everyone.
- Vote on answer
- posted
5 years ago
So only layabouts live in council houses?
I expect they though it was safe *enough* for the residents.
- Vote on answer
- posted
5 years ago
Where did I say that?
The cladding in question was considered *safe*, and passed as such under the regulations in place at the time as far as I understand it. It was perhaps not the most expensive option, but it was safe, which is all that mattered.
I don't recall anyone (Dianne Abbott excluded - I wouldn't trust her if she told me it was Sunday today) claiming otherwise. I'll be happy to be corrected.
- Vote on answer
- posted
5 years ago
But the makers of the product said it wasn't suitable for high rise blocks.
- Vote on answer
- posted
5 years ago
what's that got to do with anything?
who said money was the only thing that mattered?
NT
- Vote on answer
- posted
5 years ago
It's Dave's black-or-white thing again. if you don't believe in whatever twaddle he's peddling at the time, you obviously believe in the polar opposite.
- Vote on answer
- posted
5 years ago
Sad you weren't at that Grenfell fire. You could have pissed on it from a great height.