Is it me or are the authorities drip feeding the likely casualty/fatality total? I can't find a definite figure for those actually accounted for, but figures of 65 rescued out of a potential several hundred occupiers means it will be a lot more than 17 deceased. Obviously there may be some who simply walked off in a state of shock or are with friends/family etc. and not checked in but realistically we could be looking at well into three figures here.
As regards a price on safety, well when landlords and building owners have a duty of care to their tenants it should be no expense spared. However without agreeing entirely with Mr Wilson, every corner of life looks to do things in the most cost effective way. Back in the days when I was hard up, did I put new Michelins on the car or a couple of remoulds? On a couple of occasions it was the latter, because they were cheap and 98% of the time would suffice. However at the back of my mind was the nagging doubt that the 1.999% could be the difference between killing myself or someone else if they blew out on the dual carriageway. My point being we all do it - cut costs - consciously or not to some extent.