Thread by @LiamSpender

1/13 #EndOurCladdingScandal

Commons today debated housing parts of the Queen's Speech.

Gov't defeated Labour's motion to set a deadline of June 2022 to remove all cladding by majority of 138 (358-220).

Vote as expected, but there were some encouraging signs, discussed below.

2/13 The result was as expected.

The record shows 3 Conservative MPs abstaining.

SNP also abstained.

Record here: bit.ly/3eX5U2E

If the gov't had been defeated today then it may have been expected to resign, see here for details: bit.ly/3tZbBBl

3/13 Main encouraging sign from today's debate is that more Conservative backbench MPs started to speak out on the issue, including that it's #notjustcladding

This mirrored Lords last week, showing there is increasing concern inside the gov't over its handling of the issue

4/13 Another encouraging sign is that the gov't repeated that its Property Developer Levy is now expected to raise "at least" (as opposed to the previous "at most") £2 billion.

Which suggests the developers may have to cough up more than first thought, which is an improvement.

5/13 @RobertJenrick's speech, whilst repeating all the spin we've come to expect, also used two interesting dog whistles.

The first was a reference to Harold Macmillan's home building record in the 50's. The second was a reference to Margaret Thatcher's Right to Buy in the 80's

6/13 These dog whistles were blown to please Conservative MPs looking for fresh direction from the gov't.

Harking back to past glories of "you've never had it so good" and "property owning democracy" are pleasing lines for Conservatives to hear.

7/13 These dog whistles cast a bad light on the current gov't approach to #EndOurCladdingScandal

Many houses built in the 1950's and 1960's were system houses, built from precast reinforced concrete (PRC).

By the early 1980's, some PRC houses turned out to be defective.

8/13 By then the Right To Buy had already transferred around 140,000 of these PRC houses to private buyers.

The repairs involved replacing the external walls.

Since they were freehold, there was no legal doubt that the freeholders had to pay.

Sounding familiar?

9/13 But what did the Conservative gov't of the day do?

Leave the new homeowners to pick up the bills for replacing the external walls themselves?

Tell them it was a case of buyer beware?

No. It passed the Housing Defects Act 1984.

10/13 The Housing Defects Act 1984 offered grants of up to 90% of the cost of rebuilding the external walls of affected PRC houses.

Councils were required to set up schemes to do the works. 16 different PRC house designs were condemned and their owners could claim the grants.

11/13 Compare that to #EndOurCladdingScandal, where at least two-thirds of the cost is being dumped on leaseholders.

This short history lesson shows a better way is possible.

So perhaps using the two dog whistles Mr. Jenrick chose today was not such a good idea.

12/13 If the current government wants to hark back to this idea of a property owning democracy, it needs to be prepared to uphold its end of the bargain: protecting the innocent when things go wrong, as they have with cladding.

13/13 The gov't can still choose to act in precisely the same way that Mrs Thatcher's gov't acted to protect house buyers who were victims of botched construction in the 50's and 60's.

It wasn't difficult then. It isn't difficult now.

#EnoughIsEnough #EndOurCladdingScandal