[0762]

Good comments and this looks like a possible loophole in material specification that has already been detected 'across the pond' and rightly vetoed! I'd luv to read the spec for this cladding because there is still a distinct possibility that it's spec reveals that it is a fire hazard that should at least have been 'flagged up' for attention! As the saying goes - 'The devil is in the detail' and what is the material!? Polyethylene has alarmingly been mentioned and that would explain a lot if confirmed to be true!! The comment that it was 'aesthetically pleasing' is mind-boggling TBF! Also I must emphasise that The Client can specify the fire resistant integrity of all materials or certain materials deemed necessary in the contract document anyway and go beyond any 'middle of the road' iffy spec - all in the name of setting out a more robust document with tenant safety and fire safety paramount within the whole contract! Call it being proactive and forward thinking!

[St Charles Owl]

Polyethylene though is not banned in the UK as a form of insulation as long as it is encased with a more fire resistant material, which in this case it was. Other countries have banned it, most recently Australia, but it is still ok in the UK. I have no problem with aesthetically pleasing being a pre-requisite for cladding, to me that is the whole point of modern day cladding, it looks better than the core materials used to build a building!!

You last statement though highlights the need for stringent building regulations. It doesn't matter whether its construction on this level or building an extension on our own house, using cheaper materials is always an issue usually due to the fact that the cheapest bid generally wins the project and therefore if a profit is to be made then the cheapest possible material will be used to complete the job. Most of the time this is ok, that material is not going to effect any aspect of safety on a project but where it might, then the building codes need to be specific as to what can and can't be used. Clients are going to build, design and specify buildings that meet the building codes (as is likely in this case), those that bid these jobs are going to try to do it as cheaply as possible within those guidelines and the lowest bid will generally be chosen - all of that requires robust codes or else this sort of thing will happen!!

[0762]

Yep! And that's where the hired Quantity Surveyor 'earns his corn' St Charles Owl as soon as a multi million pound tender document is received by any competing construction company - sifting through it 'with a fine tooth comb' and, from the Client's point of view, beware if your contract doc is a poorly compiled one that 'you could drive a truck through'!! Hence the QS plays his part in the company ensuring that it can maximise the profit margin if they win that tender. This can occasionally happen and a Client could end up paying more money on top of the original price as well as being compromised on certain contractual issues. There are historical 'case studies' that epitomise contracts that have a 'them and us' feel about them instead of a joint partnership where good practise prevails and a common goal is to advance positively from day 1 with everyone on board!

[hibeejim21]

Theresa Mays Ministers sat on recommendations for dealing with inappropriate building practices.

A former chief fire officer has said they stonewalled action to tighten building regulations.

The government has yet to act on recommendations made by the All-Party Parliamentary Fire Safety and Rescue Group in 2013 in the wake of a deadly blaze at Lakanal House, Camberwell, four years earlier.

Tory MPs (70 of them landlords themselves) voted down corbyns amendment to ensure that all housing "was fit for human habitation" last year.

Heads should be xxxx rolling for this.

[0762]

I actually found myself agreeing with sinn fein on this. It's a bad idea for Westminster and a NI party to do a deal like this,it threatens the good Friday agreement for a start off. The Good Friday Agreement clearly states that the ruling party in the UK is supposed to remain neutral to the two ruling parties in the Northern Ireland administration.

The tories are now verging on traitorous IMO,gove (murdoch's point man back on the cabinet) and the odious DUP. The british people are getting treated like mugs by these arseholes. Our only hope now is that the conservative moderates bring this farce to an end and we go for some kind of cross party national unity style gov to get us through brexit.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-40339330

There is already some tasty media coverage of the DUP's unhealthy association with the UDA and certain allied members of the DUP with Foster refuting all terrorism but refusing to be drawn into it's suspicious association with a shady organisation that has been enduring it's own inner strife and violence as a power struggle prevails with consequent casualties. Why this pact is not embarrassing to this Tory govt is beyond me and just proves again the extent that desperate politicians will go to fuel their power egos!!

[ritchiebaby]

What you say is quite right, but remember that, in order for the "progressive alliance" to defeat the Tories, they will probably need the votes of the "odious DUP".

[St Charles Owl]

What you say is quite right, but remember that, in order for the "progressive alliance" to defeat the Tories, they will probably need the votes of the "odious DUP".

Actually, they would not only need the DUP but they would need the Sinn Fein MPs to take their seats and back it as well!! As we stand the only party that can form a "majority" coalition is the Tories, the DUP are not the only ones they could use to achieve this but they are likely the only ones who will deal with them. For Labour to get this progressive alliance off the ground they would need virtually all the other parties to join with them, and that is never going to happen. We are either heading for a Tory/DUP coalition or another election.

[Ska'dForLife-WBA]

We are either heading for a Tory/DUP coalition or another election.

Interesting use of the word "we". Haven't you got your own orangeman in power to worry about?

[hibeejim21]

Legal challenge launched against dup coalition. It breaks the good Friday agreement....undeniably so.

This will go to the supreme court. "coalition of chaos" indeed.

[0762]

Aye! That's a good point Jim and an ironic one after previously listening to various robotic pro Tory backers uttering their irritatingly pre-programmed comments with 'coalition of chaos' or 'strong, solid leadership' fitted in to suit their rhetoric and innuendo!