A narrow, winding path through a dense forest. Fallen branches and twigs litter the ground, while a small patch of green ferns grows on the side. Tall trees cast shadows over the path, creating a dark and mysterious atmosphere.

Grenfell — Reflections

While following a trail carved out by mountain bikers through a dark plantation in Hutton Lowcross, I came across upon this lively burst of green pushing its way through the thick blanket of fallen larch needles. I believe it might be the northern buckler-fern, Dryopteris expansa. But meanwhile …

The report into the Grenfell fire disaster has revealed malpractice, though it is hardly surprising. It might appear to unravel the cosy relationships between manufacturers and regulators, but such efforts are likely to be futile. The report labels the key figures involved with predictable terms: “deliberate,” “dishonest,” “dismissive,” and “dangerous,” all displaying a “cavalier attitude” to safety. Yet, for all the righteous indignation, I have my doubts whether any substantial changes will emerge. The same old patterns of negligence and self-interest are likely to persist, unaffected by this latest report.

I can only speculate about my reaction had I been one of those minions toiling away for one of the companies named. Could I manage to sleep soundly? It is hard to believe that none of those employees: draughtsmen, technical clerks, junior architects, or others further down the corporate ladder would not have had some inkling that corners were being cut, and choosing to remain silent for fear of jeopardising their careers and livelihoods.

The Grenfell fire disaster serves as a grim reminder of a culture that dates back to the 1990s, when I was employed in the construction industry, though thankfully not in high-rise residential blocks. My work was more focused on heavy engineering and petrochemical projects; and I had no hand in specifying materials—merely facilitating the flow of money. Safety and finance may be worlds apart, but I witnessed firsthand the art of massaging accounts to obscure less palatable truths from financial reports. One client I was seconded to specifically instructed me to inflate the value of Work in Progress to boost the organisation’s apparent profitability. It is not hard to imagine a similar attitude to design specifications.

I am not here to absolve them, but those CEOs served their time in the 70s and 80s—dare I call it the Thatcher era? They were my contemporaries, shaped by a long tradition of cutting corners in the name of profit. The seeds of these were germinated many generations before. Fingers kept crossed and a hope for the best. And we have had the cover-ups: thalidomide, tobacco, asbestos, and now, apparently, talcum powder. All part of the same dreary story. Not much different, really, from the slow-motion catastrophe we call the climate crisis.

Those chickens invariably return to roost, as the saying goes.


Posted

in

,

by

Tags:

Comments

One response to “Grenfell — Reflections”

  1. Jane Elson avatar

    I know what you’re saying about product suppliers and the construction industry, having spent the last 25 years working with parts of that industry. Like all sectors there are good and bad and often the good are over shadowed by the shabby. However, when the specifiers and contractors were ordering products i.e. insulation etc, for the Grenfell project, they approached one of the largest UK specialist suppliers of such products. I know from a main board director of that business…. That business looked at the plans and the specified products on the list……There was then a detailed written response back to the parties saying…. We have examined your request and we can confirm that we are unable to supply the product mix you require as technically / professionally we are concerned at the product selection you intent to use for this project as we consider the prodcuts are inappropriate for these reasons and xxxxxxshould not be used in this environment xxxx…. Etc etc. So there are a few suppliers, behind closed doors who take their responsibilities and liabilities seriously. Many just see a contract to supply, a quick fix and money. The company that i speak of did disclosed their experience to relevant parties and are not listed in the roll call of guilty suppliers. It takes professional guts to walk away from such huge contracts, but some do! Such folks are few in number unfortunately. As another example … me, now retired, my village a hamlet of 32 houses, in NYorks, are fighting NYCC and a huge development group who are far too cosy…. The plan is to build 3 to 4000 houses on top quality green belt, in the middle of no where, no infrastructure for many miles, we are told the full development will take 15 years to complete….the developers are trying to make more modification, and a major land owner doesn’t want to sell. NYCC have formally told the land owner, to have constructive dialogue with the developer or they will compulsory purchase the land and sell to the developer as its part of NYCC’s big picture…. Houses for all … ticking all the boxes in theory and gaining brownie points with the Government. The village isn’t against housing, what we are saying its in the wrong place, no infrastructure at all and the area floods and always has…. It has been said by local architects, surveyor and other professional in the area… its in the wrong place, its far too big, and.. how many brown envelops have passed between “interested parties”. Unfortunately we all know there are folks who work a life time quietly trying to do the right thing. Then there are those who say … what’s in it for me… and how much £ can i make… those folks are long gone after the buildings are up. They don’t live in what they make money from!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *