Every Tory MP in Cornwall voted last night in Parliament against ensuring that Landlords are only letting out properties to tenants which are (the actual bill wording) "fit for humans".
You would have thought that, especially as this does not cost the public purse a single penny, that even this Government would be ok with this. But no....
I haven't checked the others but Sheryl Murray, the MP for SE Cornwall is listed as a "landlord" in the Parliamentary list of interests, as are 72 other Tory MPs who voted in the same way as she did.
Corruption - only in Bangladesh or Nigeria? Smelly, smelly business.

[Daz]

Every Tory MP in Cornwall voted last night in Parliament against ensuring that Landlords are only letting out properties to tenants which are (the actual bill wording) "fit for humans".
You would have thought that, especially as this does not cost the public purse a single penny, that even this Government would be ok with this. But no....
I haven't checked the others but Sheryl Murray, the MP for SE Cornwall is listed as a "landlord" in the Parliamentary list of interests, as are 72 other Tory MPs who voted in the same way as she did.
Corruption - only in Bangladesh or Nigeria? Smelly, smelly business.

Are you suggesting that they voted against it as they want people to let properties that are not "fit for humans"?

Or is there possibly another part of the bill that they didn't agree with, so voted against it.

Such one sided spinning is pathetic.

Maybe you could do your own checking and come up with some evidence. But no you Daz as usual, can't be bothered with that, you just trash someone for putting forward a view because you think you can and your Genghis Khan instinct makes you disagree. You are a symptom of the nauseous side of this country where people think they have a right to a view without taking some responsibility for being informed..

Mind you this is standard Daz territory.... Pop back under your stone and watch the country become more and more fascist.

[Daz]

Are you ok?

Probably something in the fine wording of the bill. They're always very picky (and that's not necessarily a bad thing I know).

Probably something in the fine wording of the bill. They're always very picky (and that's not necessarily a bad thing I know).

The wording would be 'fitness for human habitation.'

This is the standard that was in use for many years but has largely been superceded by use of the HHSRS which is a safety rating system based on hazards and 'danger' to residents (and others).

The only other possibility is the requirement for a landlord to be a 'fit and proper person' to run let property, especially Houses in Multiple Occupation that carry multiple risks too, especially with a stupid or ruthless owner.

Seems to be a lot of argument without anybody really knowing what you are arguing about. Classic MP material!!

I don't know which bill is referred to, if it is a Private Members Bill then most MPs would vote as whipped by their party.

History teaches us that many politicians are driven by greed and self interst, they also possess a natural tendency to kiss butt. I believe the reason given by the government as to why this amendment was voted against was that it would result in unnecessary regulations. Yeah right.