That Grenfell Tower went up in flames was appalling, that so many lost their lives a tragedy. It was, of course, all about the cladding used on the outside of that building.
It would appear that the problem is more widespread. Not just that the specific type of cladding is used elsewhere, but that other types of cladding are equally or near as dangerous:
Cladding material used on thousands of tall buildings in the UK has dramatically failed a safety test, a study has found.
In a fire test, the material, previously deemed safer than that used on Grenfell Tower, burned almost as rapidly as the aluminium and plastic panels blamed for the disaster.
The test will heap pressure on building owners to continue to remove the high pressure laminate (HPL) panels, which are common in the UK.
The government recently agreed to fund their removal but it was deemed less urgent than the removal of the aluminium and plastic type, known as ACM.
OK. Well, take the report as it is, it is only one report after all. But now to the important question here.
Who approved this cladding for use?
Well, there’s a government system which tells everyone which sorts of building materials they can use where and to do what. There’s a system of building inspectors that at least tries to make sure said rules are complied with.
Who runs this system? Government.
So, our faith on government to do stuff is reinforced, or has taken a bit of a knock? And we should carry that attitude over to other things that government proposes to do, right? They’re going to get gender equality, climate change, the Green New Deal, nationalisation of the railways and all just perfectly ticketty boo?
You know, they are competent to take on ever more of our lives given that their attempts to make a building fireproof included cladding the thing in an accelerant?