Thread by @LiamSpender

#FireSafetyBill THREAD

The Lords is currently considering the item before the Fire Safety Bill. This is a new law to exempt the square footage of public toilets from business rates. The idea is the tax break will encourage private building owners to provide more toilets.

Proceedings are live here: parliamentlive.tv/Event/Index/39…

I am working with @nbdbuk and a team of volunteers to explain today's proceedings via live tweets. Thank you to everyone helping.

The Lords will debate whether to add one of 3 amendments to the bill. The first is @BishopStAlbans. It bans leaseholders from paying costs associated with the #FireSafetyBill until the gov't produces a comprehensive scheme to prevent leaseholders paying for others' mistakes.

The second is the Earl of Lytton's. He proposes an amendment to make it a statutory duty on freeholders to apply for all available government funding before billing leaseholders.

The third is by @KathPinnock. It bans leaseholders and tenants from paying any costs under #FireSafetyBill. It requires the government to set up an inquiry to examine the cladding scandal, to report within 12 months of the Act being passed.

Full text of the amendments is here: bills.parliament.uk/Publications/4…

Not all amendments may get to a vote. The government is asking peers to approve the bill as is. Only if one of the three people above asks for a vote will that motion be amended.

The debate is scheduled for about 2 hours today.

The House of Lords is now taking its short break whilst the despatch boxes (which ministers rest on whilst speaking) are cleaned. #FireSafetyBill proceedings will start at 2.30

The important thing to remember about today, whilst important, is that it is not the end of the fight. There will be many other opportunities to help leaseholders. And the government doesn't need a law to provide financial assistance. It is a question of political choice.

#FireSafetyBill And we're off.

The Deputy Speaker is explaining the process for the debate and vote today. @team_greenhalgh now called to speak.

#FireSafetyBill: @teamgreenhalgh is asking the government to pass the bill as it stands, the Commons having rejected the Lords' previous amendments on 22 March.

@team_greenhalgh says we all agree to protect leaseholders "as far as practicable" but that the three amendments proposed are neither workable nor practicable because they will damage the #FireSafetyBill

@team_greenhalgh setting out why the #FireSafetyBill is necessary, to clarify the extent of what is covered when assessing the fire safety of a residential building. It is important these changes are made, to implement Grenfell Inquiry recommendations.

@team_greenhalgh reminds Lords that the Commons has voted to reject the Lords' amendments twice already, by substantial majorities. Making the constitutional point that the Lords should not continue to frustrate the wishes of the government and the Commons by trying to amend.

@team_greenhalgh repeats the same tired old trope that there is £5 billion to protect leaseholders already. The point here is that this is nowhere near enough.

@team_greenhalgh repeats the same platitudes that the correct place to deal with leaseholder costs should be dealt with in the Building Safety Bill. Although there is no guarantee that this will actually happen. And would you trust this government's promises?

This is the same government that promised 17 times that leaseholders would not pay, before reversing course in February and announcing leaseholders would have to pay, perhaps 2/3rds of the estimated cost or more.

@team_greenhalgh is pressuring the Lords not to try to amend the bill again, because it is delaying implementation of important fire safety measures. He gives examples of peers now moving amendments who previously accused the government of not moving fast enough.

This is a nonsense point. The government itself waited more than 3 years for introducing the bill. There is no point passing a law passing further costs onto leaseholders without a mechanism to protect leaseholders from those costs.

@BishopStAlbans called to speak. He says he will push for a vote on his amendment. He says when there is a crisis we look to the government to take action.

@BishopStAlbans is saying that if the government can call urgent summits and look at changing the law to prevent the European Super League in football then it can do the same for leaseholders

@BishopStAlbans is saying he understands the constitution of this country. He appreciates it is rare for the Lords to keep trying to amend a bill. He says he wants the law passed, but not at any price to leaseholders. The key issue is preventing leaseholders from going bankrupt

@BishopStAlbans says he appreciates that the government has provided some money and a forced loans scheme and he has had two meetings with @team_greenhalgh to discuss this. But what is offered is not clear and not enough.

@BishopStAlbans explains that his amendment is to freeze the situation so leaseholders cannot be forced to pay until the whole situation is addressed. It's #NotJustCladding but also insurance, waking watch costs and internal fire safety defects.

@BishopStAlbans says that leaseholders are facing impossible choices: sell-up at a loss, go bankrupt, or face losing their own by forfeiture of their leases. Bishop says he accepts #FireSafetyBill is not the right place to deal with costs, but he as a moral duty to stand up

and stop the government from imposing negative, far reaching consequences for people who have only tried to do the right thing by buying their own homes.

@BishopStAlbans says he is trying to amend the bill in such a way that gives flexibility to the government to implement a workable solution, provided they don't simply dump the costs on leaseholders, as is the current proposal.

@BishopStAlbans expresses frustration that the government simply hasn't listened to what has been said on costs. He says the taxpayer doesn't have to pay the full bill, merely to be a backstop whilst the costs are allocated fairly among those responsible.

Deputy Speaker explains Lords will be asked to vote to amend the government's motion to incorporate @BishopStAlbans motion.

#FireSafetyBill Earl of Lytton now speaking to his proposed amendment. Earl of Lytton agrees that the bill is required, but echoes what @BishopStAlbans has said about not passing a law that will impose an intolerable burden on leaseholders.

Earl of Lytton repeats that this is #NotJustCladding and the revised Fire Safety Order will apply retroactively to cladding and other defects that leaseholders could not have foreseen or detected before buying.

Earl of Lytton says that leaseholders will face unconstrained exposure to risk if the bill is not amended to protect them. That is while the government sorts out how to categorise buildings by risk under the new Fire Safety Order.

Earl of Lytton says that currently policing fire safety is left to insurers and mortgage lenders. There will be a delay before risk-based guidance is introduced to remove this decision from them. So leaseholders need protection whilst that is being done.

Earl of Lytton says he disagrees that leaseholders should be exempted from costs and these handed over to freeholders, who also cannot afford the costs, as @BishopStAlbans appears to propose.

Earl of Lytton says government has offered some partial funding, unlikely to be enough, to address some of the problems faced by leaseholders.

Earl of Lytton says he encourages the government to come up with more money. An entire market sector is being blighted. He expects a lot of building owners are waiting to see if more money will be provided following passage of the #FireSafetyBill

Earl of Lytton says that it is appropriate for the government to intervene to address this market failure. The government should intervene to ensure costs are shared fairly between all responsible, including the vested interests in the construction industry.

Earl of Lytton says he supports a loan scheme to pay for inspections and urgent works. He says government should produce a scheme before any leaseholder has to pay. He does not think a loan scheme would affect resale value of flats.

Not sure I agree. I appreciate the Earl is a surveyor, but it stands to reason an asset being acquired with a debt attached is reduced in value by the same amount as the debt. Try loading up a £150,000 flat with a £100,000 mortgage and a £50,000 cladding loan and you reach zero.

Earl of Lytton says he will not press his amendment to a vote. He only wants the minister to give further and better explanations on how works will be funded, given the looming disaster faced by leaseholders.

Earl of Lytton asks whether Treasury has considered the potentially disastrous financial consequences for the banking sector if mortgages have to be written down (or off entirely) if costs prove to be higher than the government expects.

Earl of Lytton makes the fair point that nothing in life is zero risk. Parliament itself is creaking at the seams. We need to be proportionate in how much money we are spending to address these issues.

@KathPinnock speaking now, to her proposed amendment. Welcomes the comments made by previous speakers and the constructive solutions offered to the government so far.

@KathPinnock says that buying a home is the biggest investment most people ever make. Yet the legal system is hopelessly inadequate in protecting buyers, particularly when Building Regulations are breached.

@KathPinnock says that leaseholders have been left with no recourse against the "stark failings" of construction companies. Says this contrasts sharply with how consumer goods are treated, where manufacturers are responsible for making good defects in their products.

@KathPinnock says that construction companies are being let off too lightly. They are only being asked to pay 13% of the estimated £15 billion cost, at a rate of £200 million a year over the next 10 years.

I might add that the same large developers have received a £30 billion taxpayer subsidy in the form of Help To Buy

@KathPinnock says there is plainly a need for urgent financial assistance. She refers to leaseholders receiving bills for tens of thousands of pounds.

@kathpinnock is pointing out quite clearly that leaseholders are facing ruinous costs for things that are not their fault. There is an urgent need for upfront funding.

@KathPinnock criticises the government for saying it is dealing with affordability issues, but is only offering the minimal level of support. It is not enough to address the problems.

@KathPinnock is now making the point that the government said yesterday it will change the law to bail out investors who lost money in the failure of London & Capital Finance.

@KathPinnock says that if government can act to protect blameless investors in LCF, victims of the FCA's regulatory failure, then it can do the same for leaseholders.

@KathPinnock calls on the government to come up with a fair and just solution for leaseholders, so they do not have to pay the price. Says she will move her amendment to a vote unless @BishopStAlbans amendment succeeds.

Deputy Speaker now reading out names of other Lords who wish to speak and announcing running order.

@Fox_Claire now speaking. Says she reluctantly supports the amendments. Regrets that the Lords is having to have to push again for these amendments. Says the government is heading for disaster if it passes #FireSafetyBill in current form, which will bankrupt leaseholders.

@Fox_Claire says it is unfair to ask leaseholders, who bought in good faith, to have to pay ruinous costs of making good defects dating from the time of construction.

@Fox_Claire says she welcomes government financial support announced to date, but is shocked this support is still not yet available and is insufficient to address the costs being forced onto leaseholders. There is also no protection for those who have missed the deadlines.

@Fox_Claire refers to the financial carnage currently being experienced by leaseholders, many of whom are key workers. Refers to @Waterside_E16 and the £650 a month for waking watch.

@Fox_Claire also refers to @BrindleyRTM and their ruinous remediation costs of £45k per flat. Also refers to the fact that a large number of leaseholders bought via Help To Buy. Builders benefitted from a subsidy and must now take moral responsibility for their failings.

@Fox_Claire says that @Conservatives like to refer to themselves as the party of home ownership. Says #FireSafetyBill cannot be passed to turn Generation Home Ownership into Generation Bankrupt. Praises the other peers who have moved amendments for trying to help.

@Fox_Claire says that no-one pretends these issues are easy to resolve. Notes its #NotJustCladding but also insurance and EWS1 and myriad other issues.

@Fox_Claire says this is a case of market failure. Says it needs urgent intervention, as with furlough. Government has allies here in coming up with creative solutions to solve this problem. Says leaseholders have their own solutions too. Gov't must listen.

Plug for @LKPleasehold proposal for a levy on developers here, proposed last December. Government can go much further than a £2 billion levy over 10 years.

@RichardNewby3 now speaking. Says last time he spoke on this bill, he accused @team_greenhalgh of acting like he was reading from a script of "Yes, Minister" finding bureaucratic excuses to avoid taking action.

@richardnewby3 says that @team_greenhalgh continues in his "Yes, Minister" approach to this. There is no substance to any of the government's objections to the amendments proposed.

@richardnewby3 is taking apart @team_greenhalgh's objections to the amendments. Says that if the government is not happy with what is proposed it should produce its own amendments. It has had four months to do so.

@RichardNewby3 says that Sir Humphrey [Appleby] would have been proud of @team_greenhalgh's performance. Says government has done nothing to address the legitimate concerns of leaseholders. Criticises minsters for having done nothing to press Civil Service to come up with a

solution, including getting contributions from developers.

He is right. The civil servants who failed to supervise the system are now trying to dump on leaseholders the costs of their negligence.

Baroness Warwick is now speaking. She says that leaseholders are blameless and praises peers for repeatedly pushing for the #FireSafetyBill to be reconsidered to protect leaseholders.

Baroness Warwick says the building industry must be held accountable for its mistakes. Says it is not acceptable that the funding offered to date will still pass along costs to leaseholders.

Baroness Warwick also says the government has not done enough to help social housing providers cover the costs of remedial works. There is no money available to fix flats let to tenants.

Baroness Warwick also notes the contradiction between the government's huge financial support for people affected by the coronavirus and climate change, compared with the minimal amounts done to help leaseholders.

Baroness Warwick repeats the warning she made last time that if housing associations are not provided with funds then they will have to reduce the number of new homes supplied, further worsening housing shortages.

Baroness Warwick notes that there is huge support in both Lords and Commons for developers to pay for the consequences of their mistakes. The taxpayer needs to provide up front funding and then collect the cost back from developers.

@Andrew_Adonis now speaking. Says that he urges @BishopStAlbans to push his amendment to a vote. Says @team_greenhalgh's speech must have been written by an advisor who wanted to tell the Lords to "get lost"

@Andrew_Adonis criticises @team_greenhalgh for describing the amendments as "inappropriate and unworkable" without offering any reason in support of that comment. It suggests that the government in fact has no arguments to oppose the amendments.

@Andrew_Adonis says that all @BishopStAlbans is proposing is that costs are frozen until the government comes up with a comprehensive scheme. Asks what is wrong with that? It seems perfectly sensible.

@Andrew_Adonis says that what @BishopStAlbans proposes cannot be unworkable, because it is calling on the government to produce its own scheme!

@Andrew_Adonis says that there are many harrowing stories of the potentially hundreds of thousands of people who are affected by ruinous costs being imposed on them as a result of the building safety crisis.

@Andrew_Adonis says that government has repeatedly promised that those responsible should pay, but it has not done enough to make the industry pay. We are still lacking details of what will happen.

@Andrew_Adonis says that what @BishopStAlbans is seeks by his amendment is already built into the government's plans. The government is supposedly coming up with a developer levy and a financing scheme.

@Andrew_Adonis says the reason the #FireSafetyBill has been delayed is entirely due to the government's choice over timing. The Trade Bill amendments were considered by the Commons on the same day as Fire Safety Bill and came back within days.

@Andrew_Adonis is accusing the government of trying to run down the clock to pressurise Lords to dropping amendments to #FireSafetyBill. Says that government can act quickly when it wants to, it only needs to choose to do so.

@Andrew_Adonis says that it is also the government's fault it has delayed so long since the Grenfell Tower fire in bringing forward the #FireSafetyBill. It has nothing to do with leaseholders or attempts to protect leaseholders.

@Andrew_Adonis says what @team_greenhalgh's speech writer was trying to do was to ensure that the #FireSafetyBill will become law before the financial impact on leaseholders is known. That is what needs to be looked at before the law is changed.

@Andrew_Adonis says that Parliament should not be prepared to play the government's game. Hundreds of thousands of people face bills of tens of thousands. Parliament should have the full facts before making the #FireSafetyBill law.

@Andrew_Adonis is making entirely fair points. The government is trying to ram through this legislation because it suits the civil servants who failed to regulate, developers who didn't build properly and a Treasury who thinks taxpaying leaseholders don't deserve support.

@LordRoyKennedy now speaking. He is the Labour Shadow Minister. Says it is disappointing the Lords is back considering the #FireSafetyBill for the third time.

@LordRoyKennedy says he has spoken to many victims in recent weeks. Their stories are difficult to hear. Says it is a "disgraceful, monumental scandal" that innocent leaseholders have been left in this position.

Says that leaseholders have done the right thing, paid their taxes, played by the rules. They rightly expect that the government will stand by them when others have made mistakes, when the law does not help and when insurers won't pay.

@LordRoyKennedy says that if the government's fine words on protecting leaseholders mean anything then it should support @BishopStAlbans amendment. This merely protects leaseholders until the government comes up with a proper, comprehensive scheme to allocate the costs.

@LordRoyKennedy says that if the #FireSafetyBill fails to pass, the government has only itself to blame. It has tried to run down the clock. It has delayed consideration of the amendments. Lords will not be pressurised out of doing the right thing.

@LordRoyKennedy (to knowing smile from @BishopStAlbans) says if government can convene a summit on the European Super League then it can bang heads together and get insurers and developers in for a summit on how to pay for these costs.

@LordRoyKennedy recalls that the government has made repeated promises to leaseholders, victims of the building safety crisis. The government should be held to its promises. The @BishopStAlbans amendment will take things forward and should go to a vote.

@team_greenhalgh now begins his winding-up speech. This will be followed by a vote. Naturally, he has to get on record his opposition to the European Super League.

@team_greenhalgh says that the #FireSafetyBill will not result in catastrophe in the way @Fox_Claire and @RichardNewby3 claimed in their remarks. Says government has everything under control with funding and with risk management.

@team_greenhalgh reels off a list of all the support the government has already arranged and offered.
It's all well and good. The history of the last 4 years shows the government only offers too little, too late.

@team_greenhalgh promises details of the developer levy and forced loans very soon, as soon as the Treasury can produce them. Says that the £5 billion support offered to date is unprecedented.

@team_greenhalgh says that the schemes @BishopStAlbans wants are already up and running. He concedes the point that none of the existing funding schemes require a change in the law.

And this is precisely the point: the government has the power to produce upfront funding and collect it off developers and others responsible later. It is a question of political choice.

@team_greenhalgh reads from a prepared speech, sounding like it was written by a civil servant, saying that the amendments deal with Landlord & Tenant law and do not belong in the #FireSafetyBill

@team_greenhalgh says that Earl of Lytton's amendment is not required because the government is already rewriting the Building Safety Bill to require freeholders to explore alternative funding before billing leaseholders.

@team_greenhalgh's argument is weak. Freeholders are treating leaseholders as their corporate piggy banks. One only needs to look at Galliard and Ballymore, who built defective buildings but immediately turned to leaseholders to pay for the costs of their own mistakes.

@team_greenhalgh says @BishopStAlbans amendment is unworkable because it would stop all costs being passed on, such as a new smoke alarm. Says that these are "minor costs" to be paid by leaseholders. Really? Is £100k+ for a new smoke a fire alarm a minor cost?

@team_greenhalgh repeats (I bet) word for word the same excuse he gave last time about the amendment needing a heavy redraft before it can stand as part of the bill. This is rubbish. The government has had months to draft its own amendment. It has chosen not to do so.

@team_greenhalgh responds to @KathPinnock saying her amendment is too similar to previous amendment she tabled. Claims it will prevent all types of costs from being recovered and is too broad, including costs caused by wear and tear.

@team_greenhalgh says gov't is overhauling the entire regulatory system to ensure building safety. Refers to a "globally unprecedented" funding package.

Funding of £5 billion is unprecedented. Then again, so is the enormous cost of a globally unprecedented regulatory failure

@team_greenhalgh is spouting the usual rubbish about the litigation risk of amending the bill. I do not understand where this risk comes from. I'd have thought interfering in the TV rights of billionaire football club owners wanting to set up the European Super League was...

a much bigger litigation risk, but what would I know?

@Andrew_Adonis questioning @team_greenhalgh on his objection that the amendment would cause further delays while costs were allocated between parties. Says replacing the word "statutory" with the word "government" in the amendment would deal with this issue.

@team_greenhalgh says no. Says that no more government (i.e. taxpayer) is going to be put up. Says that the current scheme is good enough to address the risks that have been identified.

@BishopStAlbans speaks again. Acknowledges that the government has put up substantial public funding. Says he would hope the government would come up with a solution to solve the problem, which it has not yet done. Says he thinks his amendment is a practicable, helpful and just

contribution which tries to find a way forward.

@BishopStAlbans says that he believes his amendment will be welcomed by MPs in the Commons because it merely freezes costs whilst a comprehensive financial solution is developed. Calls for a vote on his amendment.

Lords is now voting on whether @BishopStAlbans amendment should become a part of the bill. This will be done remotely. Should take about 10 minutes and then we will get the result.

Sorry for the delay in the Tweet feed earlier (around @KathPinnock). My boiler is broken and I had to let the plumber in to fix it. It is fixed now!

@KathPinnock #FireSafetyBill we are expecting the result of the vote on @BishopStAlbans amendment in a few minutes.

#FireSafetyBill Lords votes 322-236 (88 vote majority) to add @BishopStAlbans amendment to the bill.

#FireSafetyBill now goes back to Commons. We should know when on Thursday morning when business for the week is announced.

#FireSafetyBill another substantial vote in favour of protecting leaseholders in the Lords. Shows there is clear support for this approach. Government now in difficult position.

As on 22 March, it will have to whip (order) its MPs to vote to throw out this protection for leaseholders. Last time 41 Conservatives voted against or abstained, only 4 shy of a defeat for the government if all MPs had voted.

It will be interesting to see what (if any) concessions the government is prepared to offer to avoid another round of ping-pong between Lords and Commons on #FireSafetyBill

There is now a very real risk that the government will either be defeated in the Commons or else lose the #FireSafetyBill unless it changes course.

And that's it for today's thread. Thank you to @nbdbuk and everyone who helped with the Tweet tree. I hope it was useful to anyone reading.