Wasnt it May's advisor that recently put money into those blocks and opted for flammable cladding instead of sprinklers? Like this discussion should have been over with donkeys ago.

They should have gone in year's ago - long before the tories were in government more recently.

But you surely see how when actively looking for ways to spend money on a building... like May's advisor literally was... this isnt hypothetical.. he recently looked for ways to spend money on that building.. and opted for flammable cladding instead of literally anything else.. you surely see how that one mans decision drastically shaped the outcome.. surely. Surely?

The flammable cladding wasnt there before he put money into that building.. his personal actions literally made the tower burn from top to bottom. You get this, right? F-l-a-m-m-a-b-l-e cladding.

I don't get this desperation to blame the current Labour opposition for the actions of the last Labour government - nearly a decade ago? It's almost entirely irrelevant to be honest.

Like I wouldn't even blame May for the actions of Cameron's Tories (except where she had direct involvement in the cabinet) and she's his direct successor.

Its clutching at straws, surely.

He didn't knowingly pick flammable cladding, to imply he did is laughable and intentionally inflammatory. How many did know that, if any. Without sprinklers the casualty rate would not have been as bad. I did say that both parties were to blame, tories included, because they are.

Watch my lips IF when Labour were asked to invest in the safety of that building all those years ago, sprinklers etc would have been installed,they DIDN'T invest,so all these years later their bad judgement led to the building not being safe,but hey ho it's ok the government now can take the wrap,but that is labours calling card isn't it. We could blame any number of things,the fridge manufacturer,the guy who had the fridge, the cladding ,the electrics,it's a collective blame game NOT just one set of people.OK,got it,get it,good.

Exactly :wavey:In other words if EVERYONE had done their jobs properly it may no have happened,but it has,so let the investigation begin.

:clap2: Thank goodness for some common sense.

No doubt there will be some blame on all sides.
But until we know any actual facts it's pointless pointing a finger at anybody.
Why was the cladding passed as fit for use and by whom was it passed by is the first thing that I would want to know.

i am still betting that indeed all regs were observed.

not that that means much

They've been in power for 7 years Kazanne, they've had plenty of time to review safety.
I see you avoid that it's this govt who chose cheaper cladding in these blocks,not Labour.

I got sick of Labour blaming the Cons at times after being in power for 5 years or more by 2002.

It is ridiculous now looking back and only blaming Labour for underinvestment on this when they've been our of power for over 7 years.

This govt has done absolutely nothing to address safety on this issue, and even took the dangerous cheaper option as to cladding too despite new warnings.
You can ignore that all you like and just fire off from your hate of Labour.
It doesn't change the fact this govt had done nothing on this for 7 years and endangered as much as if not more.

Even Mrs May has been forced too to admit the response to this tragedy was too slow again I see no criticism of that from you or those hell bent on just blaming Labour for all that's bad.while sidestepping this govts endless list of faults.

Totally ridiculous in my view.
I give up with you I thought you fairer than that,unbelievable.

He chose the cheaper, flammable cladding as opposed to the more expensive, non-flammable cladding for the sake of saving 5k, yes. I dont think either parties are to blame personally.

Are you drunk? Youve literally blamed Labour throughout posts on several different threads.

If Labour chose not to put in sprinklers, an obvious fire safety system in tower blocks, then who can say whether they would/wouldn't have chosen cheaper cladding. They showed no more concern for fire safety than the Tories are being accused of.

Totally right Withano,all the way.

Kaz blamed everyone involved, including the tories, unlike some. Twisting/ignoring people's words won't achieve your end goal - due to others being able to read.

Totally wrong all the way!

NO,I have just put it on a level playing field,I was defending the goverment of today when they and they alone were taking all the blame,the neglect started from somewhere and that was back in 1999 !!!! I assure you if I was drunk,you would of gotten the reply you deserved.

Read my posts again Joey,I have not just blamed them.

You know as a fact do you that he chose cheaper cladding whilst been fully aware of its flammability. He likely chose the cheaper cladding for other reasons without any knowledge of how flammable it was.

I dont completely understand the aggressive tone in your posts. Puts you in a terrible light. I also dont understand how you think a fridge can set an entire tower ablaze without the help of flammable cladding that surrounded the building. That wasnt a tory decision, wasnt a labour decision, that was one mans decision.

I almost wish you had been drunk! :joker::joker::joker::joker:

I dont know, only he knows that, and he wouldnt admit it if he did. Either him being cheap, him doing poor research, or him prioritising the way a building looked appose to its safety caused the fire that was. The fire would have died down without the cladding, and thats a fact.

No-one said it wasn't flammable - show me where they did. What was said was that most were not even aware of that. We don't know anyone was.

The cladding was flammable - we all know that NOW. Without the benefit of hindsight or mind-reading abilities this was not known at the time.