I had always been of the opinion that so long as it had met the standards that were required at the time of installation then nobody had done anything wrong. Doesn't stop it being tragic of course but sometimes tragic things happen even when everyone is squeaky clean. From what I'd read in the months after the incident I'd understood that to be the case. It started to look like a witch hunt early on so I stopped paying attention. If the tests were faked though that's entirely different. I'm genuinely shocked if that is the case, I wouldn't think anyone in that position would risk it.
There has been an admission at the inquest. Reported in the news this week.
Democratic dissent is not disloyalty, it is a positive civic duty
Tom, at #65 makes a good point. Building and planning controls have been massively affected by spending cuts. Anyone remember George Osborne and SR2010?The apparent failure of several different regulatory controls is a significant factor in the tragic events.
Aside from that, in London in the 21st century, to be installing combustible cladding with apparently poor construction practices that affected further the fire resistance is for me unforgivable.
I don't see a witch-hunt here, rather a very necessary search to find out why the incident happened, and why so many people died.
The fault is simple the architects drew the plans the council passed them ,,,so take your pick ,,,it also depends when they were built what the regs were ,,,plus building control sign the building of