|
|
Post by wapentake on Sept 4, 2023 8:20:03 GMT
A little kicking the can down the road by the Westminster party as usual, you might think if somebody told you it has a 30-year lifespan you might at least keep it inspected rather than let it fall down. Yep and displays the short termism of various administrations down the years. I have little time for Sunak but why is this all his fault? I see a retired uncivil servant has managed to stick the boot in,you have to ask is this a public spirited interjection or another display of them showing their political allegiance,and it’s so often not to this country. |
|
|
|
Post by oracle75 on Sept 4, 2023 8:20:52 GMT
When the material was used the advice was that it would last 30 years.
The average citizen would expect building checks after 30 years.
60 years later there is a problem.
Short termism and the hope that the inevitable repair work would fall on someone else's shoulders has come to fruition.
I dont care which party authorised what, or whether the decisions were made in London or by local authorities out of assigned budgets.
The fault lies with the need for short term publicity and the dismissal of long term results.
|
|
|
|
Post by jonksy on Sept 4, 2023 8:24:16 GMT
A little kicking the can down the road by the Westminster party as usual, you might think if somebody told you it has a 30-year lifespan you might at least keep it inspected rather than let it fall down. Yep and displays the short termism of various administrations down the years. I have little time for Sunak but why is this all his fault? I see a retired uncivil servant has managed to stick the boot in,you have to ask is this a public spirited interjection or another display of them showing their political allegiance,and it’s so often not to this country. I see now many of the council civil servants are now working on the beach FFS. Not a bad number in the woke country these days. The Establishment at its best... |
|
|
|
Post by wapentake on Sept 4, 2023 8:27:03 GMT
When the material was used the advice was that it would last 30 years.
The average citizen would expect building checks after 30 years.60 years later there is a problem. Short termism and the hope that the inevitable repair work would fall on someone else's shoulders has come to fruition. I dont care which party authorised what, or whether the decisions were made in London or by local authorities out of assigned budgets. The fault lies with the need for short term publicity and the dismissal of long term results. Actually the average citizen would be aghast at the sort of moronic thinking that it was acceptable to erect public buildings at great cost to the taxpayer with such a short lifespan. |
|
|
|
Post by wapentake on Sept 4, 2023 8:31:55 GMT
When the material was used the advice was that it would last 30 years.
The average citizen would expect building checks after 30 years.60 years later there is a problem. Short termism and the hope that the inevitable repair work would fall on someone else's shoulders has come to fruition. I dont care which party authorised what, or whether the decisions were made in London or by local authorities out of assigned budgets. The fault lies with the need for short term publicity and the dismissal of long term results. Actually the average citizen would be aghast at the sort of moronic thinking that it was acceptable to erect public buildings at great cost to the taxpayer with such a short lifespan. Well they wouldn’t want to show their faces or is that faeces in an office and actually have to do some work. |
|
|
|
Post by oracle75 on Sept 4, 2023 8:44:16 GMT
When the material was used the advice was that it would last 30 years.
The average citizen would expect building checks after 30 years.60 years later there is a problem. Short termism and the hope that the inevitable repair work would fall on someone else's shoulders has come to fruition. I dont care which party authorised what, or whether the decisions were made in London or by local authorities out of assigned budgets. The fault lies with the need for short term publicity and the dismissal of long term results. Actually the average citizen would be aghast at the sort of moronic thinking that it was acceptable to erect public buildings at great cost to the taxpayer with such a short lifespan. I wonder how much the public knew. As a taxpayer you assume the materials are of a good quality. The scam reminds me of mafia construction in the USA. Amid much fanfare, if a sparkling school opened in your neighbourhood and your child got a new state of the art chemistry lab, the last thing you would think of would be "will it fall down in 30 years". You wouldnt care. ISTM a clear example of lack of health and safety regs, not to periodically check the principal structural integrity of public buildings, especially when their "use by" dates were known. |
|
|
|
Post by Fairsociety on Sept 4, 2023 9:23:07 GMT
Yep and displays the short termism of various administrations down the years. I have little time for Sunak but why is this all his fault? I see a retired uncivil servant has managed to stick the boot in,you have to ask is this a public spirited interjection or another display of them showing their political allegiance,and it’s so often not to this country. I see now many of the council civil servants are now working on the beach FFS. Not a bad number in the woke country these days. The Establishment at its best... Makes me laugh WFH .. Work From Home ... more like lounge about from home, I bet if you had a hidden camera on them today they'd have their feet up in the garden with a glass of wine, cheese and biscuits, with their ipads watching Netflix FFS. |
|
|
|
Post by buccaneer on Sept 4, 2023 9:55:37 GMT
A little kicking the can down the road by the Westminster party as usual, you might think if somebody told you it has a 30-year lifespan you might at least keep it inspected rather than let it fall down. Well, in fairness that is the job of Department of Education to keep on top of their works. It's not the govenrments job. |
|
|
|
Post by oracle75 on Sept 4, 2023 10:30:25 GMT
The buildings involved are publically owned.
The responsibility of the state, via whichever department is assigned to run the funds through.
|
|
|
|
Post by buccaneer on Sept 4, 2023 19:00:59 GMT
They are the responsibility of the departments.
If a publicly owned building needs restoration work, the government aren't called in to put that to tender. That is the remit of the department and its employees. Simple.
|
|
