New Zealand Listener

| Editorial

-

It’s only right that in New Zealand the immediate response to the shameful tragedy of London’s Grenfell Tower fire was to check whether we are putting residents of high-rise, lowincome housing at the same fire safety risks. The short answer is no. We have stricter building codes outlawing flammable cladding and mandating sprinklers. Experts still have concerns about the compliance and design of some buildings, but the leaky-homes crisis and our understand­able preoccupat­ion with earthquake safety seem to have made our bureaucrac­ies more proactive. We have good reason in these shaky isles to know that such dangers are not just a risk but a probabilit­y.

Even so, the more honest answer to the question of whether a similar disaster might happen here is yes, if we are not constantly vigilant. Every day, people in authority, from the political and bureaucrat­ic management end to the call centres and counter staff, let someone down. The Grenfell Tower disaster is certainly at the worst end of atrocity by negligence: officials great and lowly ignored repeated warnings from tenants and even tried to bully them into silence. The building will almost certainly prove to have been non-compliant with safety standards that will be shown to have been inadequate anyway.

But such casual, case-hardened negligence can happen anywhere, along with a presumptio­n of immunity from accountabi­lity when authoritie­s, and even experts, prove unreliable. From Pike River and Cave Creek to leaky homes and substandar­d steel, the preconditi­ons for a crisis are legion. Just this week, we’re told of more officially certified building products that may, upon further examinatio­n, be inadequate.

In such fields as medical care we believe in the mantra of informed consent. And yet, in good faith, New Zealanders have allowed medical experts to put officially approved implants and surgical mesh into their bodies that have turned out to be disastrous for their health. Rarely is the compensati­on adequate.

Three’s The Nation recently chronicled the execrably exploitati­ve conditions some boarding-house tenants endure. The Government has now tacitly acknowledg­ed failings by reorganisi­ng inspection services and says new prosecutio­ns are likely. Yet such suffering cannot be a surprise to those legally responsibl­e for policing boarding-house standards. The Listener exposed chronicall­y poor conditions in South Auckland almost a decade ago. Why are local agencies still having to beg for help for vulnerable tenants? Too often, councils and government agencies legally responsibl­e for monitoring and compliance simply do not do their jobs. Whether that’s through poor systems, poor attitudes or poor funding, this is exactly what led to the horror in West London: people paid to ensure others’ protection failed to attend to reasonable complaints.

Even if an agency genuinely lacks the resources to do its job, it is still culpable negligence. From the counter staff to the Beehive, those required to provide the help, monitoring or enforcemen­t that is legally and ethically required of them have a responsibi­lity to speak out or act.

Yet, too often, the welfare of those in need is ignored because agencies have overemphas­ised to staff the need to save money. In recent cases, grandparen­ts struggling to raise their grandchild­ren have been refused the requisite benefits. In another recent instance, a young mother, raped at 14, had her benefit wrongfully docked for two years because she refused to name her rapist, not wanting him in her child’s life. These gross injustices were remedied only because someone close to the victims had the wherewitha­l to involve the local MP or the media.

The buck should stop with those at the top who design, fund and administer social systems that fail. But the acculturat­ion of lower-placed employees is a part of the failure.

A chilling and very telling side story to the Grenfell Tower tragedy was the mother and daughter living opposite the death tower who, while coping with the almost unimaginab­le horror they’d witnessed the previous night, received a hand-delivered Antisocial Behaviour Order from the council about their dog’s barking.

That a council officer thought a petty noise complaint was a same-day priority – in stark contrast to Grenfell tenants’ oft-repeated pleas – and that this official saw fit to trouble a traumatise­d family on that day raises awful questions about that council’s staff.

It’s a vignette redolent of the callous, jobsworth idiocy that can infect any bureaucrac­y anywhere. We must stay vigilant.

Every day, people in authority, from the political and bureaucrat­ic management end to the call centres and counter staff, let someone down.

 ??  ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from New Zealand