• YOUR reporting and many letters printed indicate that Camden’s local authority was in a position to know very well what the qualities of the cladding applied to tower blocks were, and no whistles were blown after such works were completed, not until the Grenfell Tower disaster.

What with demands for responsibility to be pinned on someone for misdemeanours as far as for corporate manslaughter, can it be that there was quiet legal advice to authority leaders that if drastic steps to improve fire safety were not taken, very soon, then “heads would have to roll” with the result that wholesale clearance was ordered?

Now, if some of the displaced families, perhaps the most disabled and or elderly were to suffer health trauma due to being summarily moved out of home, and possibly even die, might those who ordered removal (if it is shown that upgrading of fire precautions could have been carried out while people remained in residence) be liable for “corporate manslaughter” charges?

It would seem likely that, even without ubiquitous fire doors and with unsafe gas ducting, Camden’s residents have learned over the years to maintain a high degree of discipline in keeping public areas such as corridors, lifts and stairwells clear of possibly flammable litter.

It is to be hoped that that lesson too will have been learned, not just in Camden.

MALLORY WOBER
Lancaster Grove, NW3