Government 'faces £600m cladding safety bill after Grenfell Tower disaster'

[DB]

The Government faces an estimated bill of more than £600m for replacing flammable cladding on housing blocks after the Grenfell Tower disaster. Sixty blocks have so far failed cladding fire safety checks - every one tested so far - with another 540 still to be looked at. Industry experts told the Telegraph the cost of replacing the cladding on each block would top £1m and costs would spiral far higher if residents had to be evacuated during building work.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/06/25/60-tower-blocks-have-now-failed-cladding-fire-safety-test-grenfell/

[DB]

@Smokin Joe it looks like they used the flammable cladding on hundreds of buildings in the UK... Wow!

[Smokin Joe]

@Smokin Joe it looks like they used the flammable cladding on hundreds of buildings in the UK... Wow!

@EC Frankly, it is a miracle this hasn't happened sooner.

[driftdiver]

The real problem here is the number of people they have on govt welfare.

The great and once mighty UK brought down by a cheap decorative panel.  Isn't socialism great.

[sneakypete]

The real problem here is the number of people they have on govt welfare.

The great and once mighty UK brought down by a cheap decorative panel.  Isn't socialism great.

@driftdiver

BINGO!

Maybe the fear of dying in a fire will inspire a few of the professional slugs to get off of welfare and out of public housing?

Beggars can't be choosers,but people spending their own money have choices.

[DB]

The real problem here is the number of people they have on govt welfare.

The great and once mighty UK brought down by a cheap decorative panel.  Isn't socialism great.

It sounds like it was the enviro-nuts that wanted the cladding to make the buildings "green"... They often charge ahead with their good intentions without really considering the consequences. Remember MTBE?

[Smokin Joe]

It sounds like it was the enviro-nuts that wanted the cladding to make the buildings "green"... They often charge ahead with their good intentions without really considering the consequences. Remember MTBE?

The ethanol in your fuel came from the same legislation.

[EC]

The real problem here is the number of people they have on govt welfare.

The great and once mighty UK brought down by a cheap decorative panel.  Isn't socialism great.

Our unemployment rate is 4.6%. Our economic inactivity rate 16-64 (covers everyone not technically unemployed, but not in the workforce - students, housewives, early retirees, long term sick, and dole scroungers) is 21.7%.

[driftdiver]

Our unemployment rate is 4.6%. Our economic inactivity rate 16-64 (covers everyone not technically unemployed, but not in the workforce - students, housewives, early retirees, long term sick, and dole scroungers) is 21.7%.

@EC
Yep we are headed in the same direction.   Although a few locations and states seem to be a lot closer.   Illinois, California, Baltimore, Detroit for example.

[EC]

Opposite directions. 

Our figures for both are on a steady downward trend - Economic inactivity is the lowest it's been since they first started measuring (using exactly the same rules to measure, they have never changed) in 1971. In 1971 it was 45%.