I would question the the Hillsborough inquiry that took place 28 years after the incident was justice, but that's a whole other story. A story that probably has no bearing whatsoever on the events at Grenfell tower or the coming inquiry into that disaster. Never let an emotional headline go to waste if you write for the Guardian, though
Three months after the horrific fire, the Grenfell inquiry begins. But even at the outset, there are significant concerns that justice will not be served. There is a fear that those most affected will not get a seat at the table. This is crucial. Without building trust in the inquiry process, and placing victims, survivors and their families at the heart of the process, it will be doomed to failure.
Victims, survivours and their families are NOT at the heart of the inquiry. The only people who should be 'at the heart' of this inquiry are experts in the fields of fire safety, fire fighting, architecture and building design, with a few others
If affected tennents do get a seat at the table, it should only be to keep quiet and observe the proceedings, not to contribute
Survivors hoping to witness Sir Martin Moore-Bick’s opening statement at the Grenfell Tower inquiry will need to get to the Connaught Rooms early on Thursday morning. The venue has a capacity of 200: there were 900 homes on the Lancaster West estate alone. Seats will be allocated on a first-come, first-served basis.
Then get there early. You're only observers. If you don't get a seat, read the report when it's completed or watch the reports on the news. If you want to attend so you can vocalise your feelings and demand some sort of social justice or disrupt proceedings, you should stay at home
Although arrangements have been made for screenings elsewhere, justice will not be served if those who should be at the heart of the process do not attend because they are unsure they will get in.
Those 'at the heart', the experts needed to hold an official inquiry, will have no problem getting in. The public, those who are there to observe only, may do so, but as stated, other arrangements have been made
Trust. It is so difficult to build, and so easy to undermine. For the survivors and victims’ families, there is no aspect of life that has been untouched by the morning of 14 June 2017. Nothing is, or ever will be, the same.
Of course not. It was a huge thing. But that isn't part of the inquiry
Conversations with survivors, evacuees and volunteers are full of examples of broken promises, survivors being placed in situations that are undignified, in which they are forced to beg for their rights. I have heard stories of survivors being left without money to meet weekly expenses, of being moved from hotel to hotel without notice, of being continually sent to the wrong offices. There is no trust.
I'm assuming then, that none of these survivors had insurance with a decent company? When you rely on the state, you rely on the efficiency (or not) of the state
Each day brings fresh reports of traumatised survivors forced to return to the area near the tower to access key services, of suicide attempts, families living on top of each other in small rooms. Against the ongoing daily indignities, major concerns about justice continue to erode trust in the authorities.
I've also heard stories about illegals living in overcrowded conditions, but I can't say if they're true or not, they're just stories
This is a terrible situation for those involved, but turning a public inquiry into a sob story, does nothing to help expidite the goal of the inquiry; to find out how this happened and what should be done to prevent it happening somewhere else in the future
This week, news broke of a police investigation into allegations of theft from a property in Grenfell Walk. These allegations raise significant questions around the management of the crime scene in the weeks after the fire.
No it doesn't. The only question it raises, is the morals of people who think it's ok to steal from others
On Monday, lawyers for the family of Hesham Rahman, who died in the fire, wrote to Theresa May warning that the inquiry risked breaching the public sector equality duty of the Equality Act 2010. There are concerns about a failure to give due regard to these obligations, about the lack of diversity in the inquiry team, and of the chair’s failure to appoint a multi-ethnic panel.
Oh give me strength! Diversity and having a selection of various hues of brown on the panel are completly irrelevant. The panel should be made of of people with the necessary expertise and nobody else
On Tuesday, lawyers from campaign group BME Lawyers 4 Grenfell, sought a judicial review that was rejected by the government “before the ink was even dry”, according to Peter Herbert of the campaign.
Good. Any group with a name like BME Lawyers, cannot possibly be objective
The process has been laborious, if not downright insulting: survivors have told me they have been offered flats in blocks about to face further refurbishment, or offered temporary accommodation in buildings earmarked for demolition.
They've been offered accommodation. Would you prefer the Government to simply tell them there's nothing they can do and they should all get in touch with their insurance companies instead?
It seems that justice is no longer supposed to mean justice, for some people; it's supposed to mean whatever the next BME campaign group and their Guardian lapdogs interpret it to mean
3 Comments:
Post a Comment