Jacob Rees Mogg

[Hopkirk]

Is it just journalists who are affronted by his Grenfell comments?

Perhaps a little insensitive, but I can't see much wrong with his comments. To listen to the BBC this morning, you would have thought he lit the fire.

[jim360]

As Naomi says, quite correctly, staying put is sometimes, and indeed usually always, much better in such a large building. The point is that the fire does not usually spread so quickly as it did at Grenfell. So if you leave the building you may end up getting closer to the fire than you were to start with.

[dannyk13]

Gromit,The fire chief admitted that the order to stay put was wrong:-

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/10/16/london-fire-chief-admits-stay-put-advice-not-suitable-grenfell/

[naomi24]

Spath, Stop making it up. I’m saying what I’ve said. The Grenfell flats were storeys high – and that’s a hell of a long way down in stairways filled with thick toxic smoke - even for the fittest.

[naomi24]

*I wrote '24' storeys but the '24' has disappeared. Odd.

[spathiphyllum]

"and that’s a hell of a long way down in stairways filled with thick toxic smoke - even for the fittest."

Yep, who can be bothered with that? Might as well wait and burn to death then! Can't be going all the way down those stairs.

[naomi24]

Your choices are yours, spath.

[Gromit]

dannyk13
The advice is based on the flats being contained and spread of fire between flats and floors is supposed to be impossible.
The signage in the building advised to stay put, until the fire brigade make an assessment (and maybe decide evacuation is necessary).

The cladding on Grenfell meant the fire did spread (rapidly). Unfortunately the advice to stay put should have been changed from stay to evacuate. But the fire brigade did not change its advice, and many more people died than needed to.

The mistake was the fire brigade’s not the victims

[spathiphyllum]

And as i've said numerous times, I would have evacuated.

If you check gromits link, (here is is again https://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/newpix/2018/06/04/01/4CE3AE9200000578-5801903-image-a-59_1528072169333.jpg ) if you look at the second section, the advice "if you wish to evacuate". Make note?

[AuntPollyGrey]

I agree with his comments but he should have known better and kept them for around the dinner table with the Port.
I would rather try to escape, with 50% chance of dying, than remain in a burning building with 100% chance of dying.

[naomi24]

APG, me too ... but how could those people possibly know they had a 100% chance of dying? They couldn't. It was an unprecedented situation for victims and for the fire fighters.

[spathiphyllum]

They knew there was a possibility of them dying. I still wouldn't take the chances.

If people stay put, how on earth are they to know where in the flats the fire is? If it's above, then yes maybe stay put and allow those above to evacuate first, but if it's below, surely the wisest decision would be to evacuate?

[Gromit]

Spath,
If you read the note above that, it says the fire brigade will make an assessment and assist with evacuation if required.
The Fire Brigade either did not make an assessment or they decided not to evacuate.

Clearly that was an error on their part. You cannot blame the victims for following the professionals order to stay in their flats. With hindsight they should have ignored it, but people obey the law and rules whenever they are told to.

[spathiphyllum]

Gromit, I feel in a life or death situation, it comes down to natural instincts and the ability to do critical thinking

[Khandro]

Sorry, but the fault lies with the giving of bad advice by the Firemen, not what JRM says now.

If you want a full account of the disaster you can find it here, it's a big read, the London Review of Books dedicated a whole edition to it, - first class journalism;

https://www.lrb.co.uk/v40/n11/andrew-ohagan/the-tower

[AuntPollyGrey]

Yes naomi, hindsight is a wonderful thing.

Spath you have a valid point ( faint...) . I would not hesitate to evacuate if I knew the fire was above me, but below, well I might think it better to stay put, but might have a go anyway until I was forced to retreat back.

[diddlydo]

The whole point (I thought) of this thread was to say whether or not Rees Mogg should apologise for what he said about Grenfell. Oc ourse he should apologise for his insensitive and crass comments.

[Gromit]

The advice to stay in your flat seems counter-intuitative and I was surprised it is standard practice.
But the fire brigade have attended dozens if not hundreds of flat fires, and the advice was based on knowledge gleaned from previous incidents. The problem was that Grenfell was a unique fire (and the advice was inappropriate in that one instance).

[naomi24]

Spath, the fire service gives the advice to stay put because often it is not wiser to evacuate. They wouldn’t give bad advice on purpose now would they? They do what they think is safest. As I said, this situation was unprecedented.

[AuntPollyGrey]

^^^^^ really diddlydo -The OP question is actually
"Is it just journalists who are affronted by his Grenfell comments? "
The need for an apology is not mentioned in the OP...……..

[spathiphyllum]

"I would not hesitate to evacuate if I knew the fire was above me, but below, well I might think it better to stay put, but might have a go anyway until I was forced to retreat back."

You have it the wrong way around. It would be better for the fire to be above you. Heat rises and if the fire is below you, it may be affecting the structure of the building. So if the fire is above you, it's best to let those above you evacuate. If the fire is below you, it's best to evacuate ASAP in my personal opinion.