My post from yesterday:
Various media now reporting that it was the cheaper 'plastic' core cladding used. Whether that's from leaks from people involved in the project or experts getting hold of bits of debris from around the base of the tower (which they're certainly doing, because they're taking a handful and crumbling it for the cameras), they're not saying. That seems pretty clear from the videos, the obvious observation that most of it has clearly burnt away and the comparisons to the Australian incident.
I get that there has to be an inquiry, and it has to consider every aspect of regulations and contributory factors. But people are living in tower blocks with the same cladding - a couple of hundred yards away, or elsewhere in London and across the country. If I lived in one, I'd want it ripping off like now. Or to be not living there.
As for point scoring... clearly this is 'political'. Not party political, but real policies-affect-people's-lives political. It's impossible to avoid the history of complaints made by local tenants organisations and local political representatives being ignored; it's equally impossible to ignore the entirely different safety and standards applied to new luxury accommodations in the city; and relaxations of building regulations, highlighted for years by fire brigades, architects and campaigners. And clearly, the lack of coordinated response to the disaster by the local council. It's impossible to ignore Boris's "get stuffed" comment while London Mayor, or the four years without even consulting on putting together a plan to think about reviewing regulations on enforcing sprinkler systems following the 2013 coroner's inquest.
This is a Hillsborough-scale event, with - it appears, and certainly needing inquiry - Hillsborough-levels of criminal negligence; but played out in the full glare of social media, mobile phone footage and 24 hour rolling news. A public inquiry concluding "oh yeah, that cladding is shit" in a few years isn't going to cut it.
