Tories reject move to ensure rented homes fit for human habitation

Last Updated: January 13, 2016By

Amendment which Labour said would give additional protection to renters was defeated by 312 votes to 219 [Image: Alamy].

It would be funny if it weren’t real.

Only days after David Cameron announced a plan to bulldoze “sink” estates – social housing characterised by economic and social deprivation – to make way for new build, only half of which would be social housing and all of which would cost more, the Tories have ensured that private landlords don’t have to make their properties fit for use.

Result: Prices of the decent properties will go up and people will be driven out or forced to live in filthy pits.

Even if they are, these poor people will never be as filthy as the Tories who put them there.

Conservative MPs have voted against proposed new rules requiring private sector landlords to ensure their properties are fit for human habitation.

A Labour amendment to the government’s housing and planning bill, designed to ensure that all rented accommodation was safe for people to live in, was defeated by 312 votes to 219 on Tuesday, a majority of 93.

[Shadow housing minister Teresa Pearce, who proposed the amendment] said that the condition of some rented accommodation would not be tolerated in other sectors, citing reports of mouldy walls in privately rented properties.

The local government minister, Marcus Jones, said Pearce’s proposal would result in “unnecessary regulation and cost to landlords” that would deter further investment and push up rents for tenants.

Source: Tories reject move to ensure rented homes fit for human habitation | Society | The Guardian

Join the Vox Political Facebook page.

If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!

Vox Political needs your help!
If you want to support this site
(
but don’t want to give your money to advertisers)
you can make a one-off donation here:

Donate Button with Credit Cards

Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
fighting for the facts.

Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:

SWAHTprint SWAHTeBook

No Comments

  1. amnesiaclinic January 13, 2016 at 5:57 pm - Reply

    If it affects the bottom line of tory landlords….

    Despicable.

    I shall be checking to see how my MP voted.

  2. chriskitcher January 13, 2016 at 6:42 pm - Reply

    As a retired Environmental Health Officer I can only call the Tories murdering b*****ds. Most landlords don’t give a s**t about tenant safety they only want the rent and housing benefit.

    • Mike Sivier January 14, 2016 at 3:12 pm - Reply

      Yet again, may I politely remind you (all) that swearing is not permitted on this site.

      • chriskitcher January 14, 2016 at 5:34 pm - Reply

        Sorry Mike I should have said that most landlords are of questionable parental lineage and don’t care a single specimen of excrement with respect to tenant safety.

      • chriskitcher January 14, 2016 at 5:36 pm - Reply

        …and of course I associate landlords wholey with the copulating Tories.

        • Mike Sivier January 15, 2016 at 1:03 pm - Reply

          Tories should never be allowed to copulate.

  3. Michael Broadhurst January 13, 2016 at 8:21 pm - Reply

    after he’s made millions homeless,his next move will be to bring in a law that its against the law to be homeless.is this the reason that that they are going to build all these new prisons ?
    i think he’s been taking lessons from Mugabe.
    can anyone have any doubts now that this is a Fascist government ?

  4. paul4cowick January 17, 2016 at 7:29 am - Reply

    At least 72 of the 312 Tory MPs who voted this down are listed as private landlords in the Register of Members’ Interests

    As a local councillor, they would have to declare a disclosable pecuniary interest [DPI] and leave the room. There is NO way they could take part in the debate, let alone actually vote on it.

    So why is it one rule for local councillors and another for MPs?

Leave A Comment