Scrutable

discovolante wrote: Wed Sep 04, 2024 8:39 pm Not read any of it yet sorry but if anyone thinks any of this (or other things like Awaab's law) has made a significant difference to attitudes to tenants then think again.

/anecdote

Brightonian wrote: Thu Sep 05, 2024 9:03 am Just started listening to the BBC podcasts. One interesting thing was the funding model for the Building Research Establishment which is responsible for certification and standards.

The BRE's funding seems to be from companies in the industry, not from HMG since privatisation in the 1990s. An excellent cost-saving idea - perhaps the police could be properly funded by getting contributions from organised crime groups (am expecting someone to jump in now with "well, actually...").

Brightonian wrote: Thu Sep 05, 2024 9:03 am Just started listening to the BBC podcasts. One interesting thing was the funding model for the Building Research Establishment which is responsible for certification and standards.

The BRE's funding seems to be from companies in the industry, not from HMG since privatisation in the 1990s. An excellent cost-saving idea - perhaps the police could be properly funded by getting contributions from organised crime groups (am expecting someone to jump in now with "well, actually...").

None of the documents or any of the witnesses, other than Lord Pickles, supported the conclusion that Part B of Schedule 1 to the Building Regulations or Approved Document B was exempt from the policy on deregulation. We have been unable to accept his evidence on that question, which was flatly contradicted by that of his officials and by the contemporaneous documents. Moreover, in its written closing statement the department accepted that the policy on deregulation being promoted across government since 2010 created an environment in which officials working on Building Regulations felt unable to propose regulatory interventions or refer their concerns to more senior managers.[1212] It is a matter of serious concern that officials in the Building Regulations and Standards Division were so affected by the deregulation policy that they were inhibited from giving candid and clear advice to ministers on the implications of not taking certain regulatory steps. It is impossible to know with certainty whether an exemption from the policy would have been granted, if it had it been sought, but it is clear that the limits of the deregulation policy and the process for seeking an exemption from it were not fully understood across government. Given the fact that many regulations affect public safety, that was a serious flaw.

El Pollo Diablo wrote: Thu Sep 05, 2024 8:11 am I'll be astonished if any of this leads to jail time for anyone. Hard to see where personal culpability may lie to that extent. This is a systems failure