oh
so him supporting the home owners is not a good thing than
fair enough
Tory chumocracy.
And the company's that intentionally misold the not fit for purpose cladding.The local councils who passed these off should be the ones who should pay.
Maybe the UK could adopt the French model:My view is that the owners of the leasehold or if they a new building built or refurbished in the last 10 years then the developers should cough up to rectify the faults.
You mean like Boris repeatedly refuses to explain who paid the bill?Ultimately, it’s the fault of the French company saint gobain. John talks about Boris’s morals, what about the Saint Gobain directors who repeatedly refused to provide requested information & refused to attend the Grenfell inquiry.
You could equally say why should taxpayers pay benefits for poorer people could you not?Somebody has to pay for the work. The tax payer is coughing up 3.5bn, why should poorer people in brick houses or timber frame apartments pay for enhancements to other peoples homes?
Then make those responsible pay. But not at the cost of those not responsible having to eke out an existence for many years trying to get justice or to recover from the damage caused.Somebody has to pay for the work. The tax payer is coughing up 3.5bn, why should poorer people in brick houses or timber frame apartments pay for enhancements to other peoples homes?
The thing that is needed is some innovation in retro fitting fire risk reduction without ripping out the cladding. The politics of this issue, is that nobody is brave enough to try to "retrofix". The government does need to make sure landlords don't profiteer from the work with management fees. A bit of work here wouldn't not hurt.