Grenfell Tower

Joined
31 May 2016
Messages
20,368
Reaction score
3,313
Country
United Kingdom
I know it will be a surprise. But I agree with Angela Rayner on this:

You can't leave it there forever.

obviously in other news she's stitching up democracy with her carefully selected devolution targets, but on Grenfell, I think she has it right.
 
People die every day in all sorts of structures-cars, boats, aeroplanes and many buildings. You can't just leave the remains of the places people die or you'll have the world littered with piles of decaying junk. But what to do with the place when it's demolished? Would people be happy to live in a rebuilt block, or other accommodation built on the site? I would suggest a garden of remembrance, I don't think the footprint of the building is going to make a huge difference if not used for housing.
 
Target vulnerable labour councils, get them to agree to have Mayoral elections in exchange for not being put before voters, giving Labour a chance to improve their ratings.
 
Target vulnerable labour councils, get them to agree to have Mayoral elections in exchange for not being put before voters, giving Labour a chance to improve their ratings.

So the council elections have been cancelled?
 
Keeping re form out is a plus but Ange is genuinely going to rid of County Councils which are traditionally torey run nimby authorities. . It makes economic sense to have unitaries, but devolution as a whole is a con, central government just gets to control finance more efficiently, the big decisions are still taken via central government national development consent orders nationally e.g. regional rail and road schemes, or via national policy e.g. strategic housing targets and new settlements. Not against that, but it is still top down.
 
I'm not sure you can justify the economic sense to those whose council taxes will rise to find the extra layer.
 
I am in one of these areas and I have to say this is the first I knew about it. I am not happy.
 
Back
Top