| Grenfell 09:52 - Sep 4 with 4301 views | Trequartista |
Big report out today. 3,280 buildings still have dangerous cladding seven years on.
I don't understand how that can be legal or anyone think that is ok? We spend our life putting up signs saying don't fall over that cliff or don't put your head in a blender, and yet 3,280 buildings have dangerous cladding. I just don't understand the world nowadays. I know I'm old and maybe that's why. |  |
| |  |
| Grenfell on 18:34 - Sep 4 with 796 views | OldFart71 |
| Grenfell on 13:40 - Sep 4 by HotShotHamish |
I find it most amusing when people criticise the Conservatives for freezing the tax personal allownace rate. This rate was hugely increased by the Conservatives during their time in power. It has never been something that rose in line with inflation throughout all its history.
The Conservatives increased it by record margins then you criticise when it isn't increased every year.
Absolutley crazy and goes a long way to highlight how dangeropus it is to liasten to commentators who give little, or no, truthful contaxt to an argument. |
Firstly I will admit as a pensioner I am not particularly struggling. But I am one of the lucky one's. I worked for a then major company which gave me a final salary pension. I don't say I don't need money as although 74 still have a mortgage. Partly due to financial errors myself, partly due to getting to nearly forty one and getting divorced and having to start a new mortgage. When I get an increase in State pension it takes more of my Company pension away due to the taxable allowance. If the Sunak freeze on personal allowance stays until 2028 there's a possibility of people on just the State Pension being taxed. At £12,570 that isn't by any means a decent wage when the average wage is around £27,000 and as I say a person on the minimum wage at £11.44 doing a 38 hour week takes home in excess of £18,000 per year after tax and N.I. so nearly £6,000 a year more than a pensioner. Also today it has been stated that next years SP could rise by over £400. But they have taken £300 away in winter fuel payments, So in effect an increase by only £100 or less than £2 a week. Whilst on about the Winter fuel payments these were also given to people earning vast sums of money. Martin Lewis has suggested and will put forward to the Government that those in Council tax bands A,B, C and possibly D continue to receive Winter fuel payments. But as he says' they may listen but it's another thing whether they do anything about it. |  | | |
| Grenfell on 18:49 - Sep 4 with 765 views | OldFart71 |
No, you are quite correct. It seems elf and safety only applies when it suits. Daft laws which mean if you are at work you cannot go beyond a certain height from the ground. You cannot change a light bulb. Everything has to be pat tested and yet these things don't apply when your at home. Yes I agree you shouldn't fiddle with gas and electricity items in your home and that is of course covered by the fact that if say you are having a cooker installed this has to be carried out by someone who is qualified. But these builders get away with saying we carried out the building of whatever under the rules of the day. Or the product used just squeezes into the necessary qualifying quality. | | | |
| Grenfell on 09:30 - Sep 7 with 629 views | Zapers |
| Grenfell on 14:32 - Sep 4 by noggin |
So long as I'm better than you, I'm good. Thanks for your input though. |
Trust me, you're not better, but carry on being deluded.
And what was your input, apart from your normal whine. | | | |
| Grenfell on 10:05 - Sep 7 with 596 views | noggin |
| Grenfell on 09:30 - Sep 7 by Zapers |
Trust me, you're not better, but carry on being deluded.
And what was your input, apart from your normal whine. |
You ok petal? 😂 |  |
| |
| Grenfell on 10:22 - Sep 7 with 567 views | Zapers |
| Grenfell on 10:05 - Sep 7 by noggin |
You ok petal? 😂 |
Clearly better than you  | | | |
| Grenfell on 11:38 - Sep 7 with 506 views | DJR |
In my view, deregulation (occurring from the 1980s onwards and something I always opposed) had a great role to play in the tragedy.
Part 2 of volume 1 of the report is worth reading in full in connection with this https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/66d817aa701781e1b341dbd3/CCS09234 but here are some extracts from it.
"After much debate about the nature of the legislation required, the Building Act 1984
and the Building Regulations 1985 were enacted. The new legislation resulted in a radical change to the system of building regulation in England and Wales. The new regulations extended to only 25 pages (in contrast to the 306 pages of the Building Regulations 1976). All technical requirements were eliminated from the regulations, which were now cast purely in functional form."
"One of the principal policies of the government that came to power in May 2010 was
deregulation. The idea was not new and indeed the Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order
2005 is an example of an earlier initiative of a similar kind. The policy was based on the
proposition that national productivity and economic growth were being held back by
unnecessary regulation which needed to be swept away. The policy was best expressed in
a letter dated 6 April 2011 from the Prime Minister, the Rt Hon David Cameron MP, to all
government ministers, in which he described the government’s ambitious deregulation
agenda which included a new “one in, one out” rule relating to new regulations and a
drive to reduce the overall burden of regulation. Ministers were told they were personally
accountable for the number of existing and new regulations for which their departments
were responsible.1060 Although Lord Pickles characterised that letter as “veneer”,1061 it
was intended to send a serious message to ministers and we have no doubt that the
Prime Minister intended it to be taken seriously.
The “one in, one out” rule was an administrative policy introduced within government
in January 2011 under which no new regulation would be introduced without a
compensating reduction in regulation being made. For the purposes of the rule, a
regulation was defined as
“a rule or guidance with which failure to comply would result in the regulated
entity or person coming into conflict with the law or being ineligible for continued
funding, grants and other applied for schemes.”
The policy was extended to “one in, two out” in January 20131064 and to “one in, three out” in March 2016."
"We heard detailed and consistent evidence from civil servants about the effect of the
deregulatory policies on the department in the period 2010 to 2017. They had all clearly
understood that the “one in, one out” policy and its successors applied to changes to the
Building Regulations and the Approved Documents1167 and they all spoke about the effect that those policies had had on their approach to their work and on the culture within the department at the time.
Anthony Burd told us that the “one in, one out” policy meant that he and his team spent
an inordinate amount of time looking at how they could deregulate. He understood that the policy applied to the Approved Documents as well as to the Building Regulations.
He felt that, as time went on, it had become increasingly difficult to oversee the
Building Regulations because of the reduction in the number of staff and the changes
involved in deregulation" [Post edited 7 Sep 2024 11:42]
|  | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
