|
|
Post by Pacifico on Sept 6, 2023 21:55:23 GMT
Where does it say 1996? - especially as the government have no clue how many schools are affected as they are still waiting for some Councils to report back. |
|
|
|
Post by Steve on Sept 6, 2023 22:22:06 GMT
Link please showing it was a known risk of collapse during his term. From the Guardian (which is gospel according to lefties ) and Blair's government is well within this expert's timeline www.theguardian.com/education/2023/sep/01/how-long-has-raac-in-schools-been-a-concern-and-what-happens-now>>>>>>>>>>>>> Geoff Wilkinson, a senior building inspector, said: “The risk has been known about for decades. There should have been an ongoing maintenance plan for these buildings to be upgraded and replaced over the last 40 years. They are all past their serviceable lifetime. It’s shocking to discover that the maintenance plan wasn’t in place and there hadn’t been a programme of demolitions.” >>>>>>>>>>>>>> There was indeed such a plan. The blue rosette wearers canned it. |
|
|
|
Post by Steve on Sept 6, 2023 22:26:37 GMT
Oh I can certainly read, did you actually read that 1999 report? RAAC use was stopped after that 1999 report but that did not mean all buildings with it were in danger of imminent collapse. It said very much the opposite:
'Owners of both school and non-school buildings
that have pre - 1980 RAAC plank roofs should
arrange for these roofs to be inspected if this has
not been done since 1994, although generally the
deterioration of RAAC planks does not
jeopardise structural safety'
And as Pacifico's post shows some schools were identified as needing repair and it was the Tories not Blair that refused those repairsThat’s not what civil engineers were saying,I get the feeling you just want to be right rather than accept any nuance in arguments. It's a direct quote from the authoritative 1999 civil engineer led report as already linked to. Do keep up |
|
|
|
Post by jonksy on Sept 6, 2023 22:28:18 GMT
I am not wrong but your link to the BBC is.. |
|
|
|
Post by Steve on Sept 6, 2023 22:30:12 GMT
Lets be accurate about this Problems were known about RAAC for a long time before 2018, as in that RAAC was not a suitable building material, but it was not until 2018 that it was proven to be dangerous, in that it could give way, or cause buildings to colapse without warning. But worse ( for the government ) In 2021 the government released funds for the rebuilding of FOUR delapodated schools out of a planned 500 over ten years. I always believed that it would be the NHS which would see off the Tories, but in the end it looks like it will be a combination of crumbling public services, including schools falling apart and bankrupt councils and the NHS. From where I am sitting, this government has little chance of re-election THANK GOODNESS The downside of RAAC was known by Blair and his massively expensive PFI scenes but it still didn't stop the use of RAAC in his white elephants. Not only are these the most expensive buildings but will need either demolition or massive investments to keep the fucking things. A bargain not for the UK taxpayers. Rubbish, you've been given the timelines of RAAC building and PFI. No apology that they use 4 digit year numbers that may have left some struggling to understand. The first PFI built school opened in 1999 (Barnhill) it is not affected by RAAC which by then was out of use. |
|
|
|
Post by Steve on Sept 6, 2023 22:32:41 GMT
Errr, that was 13 years ago and the Tories scrapped the Labour policy to renew them. That's 'deliberately scrapped' their plans, that's not incompetence it is criminal. If Labour had fixed them then there would have been nothing for the Tories to do.. They are both as bad as each other Labour knew they needed fixing but that they didn't need fixing there and then. A reduced life doesn't not mean immediate risk of collapse as the 1999 report shows. They planned repairs and then the Tories came into office and canned those repairs. And they kept on canning needed repairs.
'The number of schools confirmed to have reinforced autoclaved aerated concrete (RAAC) and which had building projects cancelled in 2010 has risen to 17, BBC research has found.
They had been set for rebuilding under a Labour scheme, later scrapped by the Conservative-led government.' |
|
|
|
Post by wapentake on Sept 6, 2023 22:41:52 GMT
That’s not what civil engineers were saying,I get the feeling you just want to be right rather than accept any nuance in arguments. It's a direct quote from the authoritative 1999 civil engineer led report as already linked to. Do keep up Sadly facts are inconvenient,both colours of governments have known of public sector buildings containing RAAC since 1994 but only started to monitor their condition and manage the potential risks in 2018. In other words the risks were known but ignored. |
|
|
|
Post by jonksy on Sept 6, 2023 22:43:12 GMT
The downside of RAAC was known by Blair and his massively expensive PFI scenes but it still didn't stop the use of RAAC in his white elephants. Not only are these the most expensive buildings but will need either demolition or massive investments to keep the fucking things. A bargain not for the UK taxpayers. Rubbish, you've been given the timelines of RAAC building and PFI. No apology that they use 4 digit year numbers that may have left some struggling to understand. The first PFI built school opened in 1999 (Barnhill) it is not affected by RAAC which by then was out of use. The only rubbish is the excuses in support of blair and labour. Even the links that your side of the fence provided have been total rubbish and DO NOT support your stance. They supposedly officialy stopped using RAAC in 1999 but we now know it was still being used in public buildings well into the 2000's when people were noticing the decay of these buildings and it was obviouse the cause. |
|
|
|
Schools.
Sept 6, 2023 23:15:34 GMT
via mobile
Post by andrewbrown on Sept 6, 2023 23:15:34 GMT
Where does it say 1996? - especially as the government have no clue how many schools are affected as they are still waiting for some Councils to report back. Use of RAAC is stopped as concerns emerge 1994: Concerns about the risks of using RAAC in public buildings started to appear in research. 1996: Excessive cracking and corrosion was found in some roof planks that had been designed before 1980. The finding - from a former government-owned research laboratory called the Building Research Establishment - led to the use of RAAC being effectively stopped. However, the report also said: "There is no evidence so far to suggest that RAAC planks pose a safety hazard to building users". |
|
|
|
Post by wapentake on Sept 6, 2023 23:38:36 GMT
Where does it say 1996? - especially as the government have no clue how many schools are affected as they are still waiting for some Councils to report back. Use of RAAC is stopped as concerns emerge 1994: Concerns about the risks of using RAAC in public buildings started to appear in research. 1996: Excessive cracking and corrosion was found in some roof planks that had been designed before 1980. The finding - from a former government-owned research laboratory called the Building Research Establishment - led to the use of RAAC being effectively stopped. However, the report also said: "There is no evidence so far to suggest that RAAC planks pose a safety hazard to building users". The problems Andrew Is that it wasn’t stopped on a whim,the risks were real and known they were effectively ignored and it all comes back to short term thinking and policy. It’s easy to point the finger at the tories because they were effectively in government for the greater part of time this material was used but that’s a mistake in that others were in part culpable,labour of course for their time in power and the Lib Dem’s to a lesser extent as part of a coalition. The focus is on the last few years and I’m no apologist for the tories but the longer term is the reality,laughably if we’re going to judge on the last few years will the snp in Scotland and labour in Wales held equally to account? it seems not it’s all Rishi’s fault. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 7, 2023 6:21:54 GMT
Errr, that was 13 years ago and the Tories scrapped the Labour policy to renew them. That's 'deliberately scrapped' their plans, that's not incompetence it is criminal. If Labour had fixed them then there would have been nothing for the Tories to do.. They are both as bad as each other So Labour should have fixed the schools half way through their 'shelf' life? Don't talk daft. Labour had a plan to replace or renew the schools but the Tories ditched it. |
|
|
|
Schools.
Sept 7, 2023 6:34:37 GMT
via mobile
Post by andrewbrown on Sept 7, 2023 6:34:37 GMT
Use of RAAC is stopped as concerns emerge 1994: Concerns about the risks of using RAAC in public buildings started to appear in research. 1996: Excessive cracking and corrosion was found in some roof planks that had been designed before 1980. The finding - from a former government-owned research laboratory called the Building Research Establishment - led to the use of RAAC being effectively stopped. However, the report also said: "There is no evidence so far to suggest that RAAC planks pose a safety hazard to building users". The problems Andrew Is that it wasn’t stopped on a whim,the risks were real and known they were effectively ignored and it all comes back to short term thinking and policy. It’s easy to point the finger at the tories because they were effectively in government for the greater part of time this material was used but that’s a mistake in that others were in part culpable,labour of course for their time in power and the Lib Dem’s to a lesser extent as part of a coalition. The focus is on the last few years and I’m no apologist for the tories but the longer term is the reality,laughably if we’re going to judge on the last few years will the snp in Scotland and labour in Wales held equally to account? it seems not it’s all Rishi’s fault. I totally agree, no one comes out of this smelling of roses. I wasn't trying to exonerate Labour, contrary to popular opinion, but merely correct Jonsky's incorrect point that Labour's PFI was responsible for these buildings when that clearly isn't true. I'm also with you on the short term thinking of politicians. I wish there a lot more of politicians of all parties working together on longer term goals, things like energy policy and health, housing and immigration, rather than just government of the day playing with things, only for the next government to reorganise it. Unfortunately the way that our politics works is very adversarial. You can see it on almost every thread on here, everything is designed to divide people into two groups. It's almost like two groups of rival supporters lobbing bricks at each other, you have to be one side or the other. But of course it isn't true, politics is more a 3-dimensional scale. There's a really good example on this thread where I've pointed out Jonsky's error on Labour's PFI projects, and both Jonksy and Fairsociety have therefore jumped to the conclusion that this makes me a Labour supporter. Simply not true and not a logical conclusion from what I've said, but simply their thinking that if you don't agree with us you must be for the enemy. Just look at all the threads on here that just descend into abuse, just throwing the words "righties", "lefties", "Nazis", "woke snowflake", "Remoaner", "Brexiteer". Either people want to "pull up the drawbridge" or "let them all in". But those two positions don't reflect anyone's opinion accurately. It's not good and it's not conducive to constructive conversation. |
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Sept 7, 2023 6:38:09 GMT
If Labour had fixed them then there would have been nothing for the Tories to do.. They are both as bad as each other So Labour should have fixed the schools half way through their 'shelf' life? Don't talk daft. Labour had a plan to replace or renew the schools but the Tories ditched it. Their shelf life was 30 years and Labour did not fix them. |
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Sept 7, 2023 6:39:14 GMT
Where does it say 1996? - especially as the government have no clue how many schools are affected as they are still waiting for some Councils to report back. Use of RAAC is stopped as concerns emerge 1994: Concerns about the risks of using RAAC in public buildings started to appear in research. 1996: Excessive cracking and corrosion was found in some roof planks that had been designed before 1980. The finding - from a former government-owned research laboratory called the Building Research Establishment - led to the use of RAAC being effectively stopped. However, the report also said: "There is no evidence so far to suggest that RAAC planks pose a safety hazard to building users". Well it doesnt quite say that all use of RAAC stopped in 1996 does it? |
|
|
|
Post by sheepy on Sept 7, 2023 6:41:35 GMT
So Labour should have fixed the schools half way through their 'shelf' life? Don't talk daft. Labour had a plan to replace or renew the schools but the Tories ditched it. Their shelf life was 30 years and Labour did not fix them. You can't fix something that has a 30 year timeline, you have to build something else to replace it before the 30 years is up or face the consequences at a later date, which is exactly what is happening now, while the plebs blame each others chosen politicians while actually they are all guilty of neglect of their duty. |
|
