3 ms·

The Tories have been dangling rental reform in front of the electorate for a decade now. Considering the number of MP's who are landlords and where the Tories g

The Tories have been dangling rental reform in front of the electorate for a decade now. Considering the number of MP's who are landlords and where the Tories get there money from, I'll believe this when it's actually through parliament.

smcl 3y ago
Yeah I had to read a the headline a couple of times to be sure I understood it correctly. It's a little unbelievable to me that they'd actually do something beneficial like this, and I'm a little suspicious ...
- chris12321 3y ago
  They've only just abandoned their manifesto commitment to leasehold reform last week. https://www.theguardian.com/money/2023/may/10/plans-abolish-feudal-leasehold-system-england-wales https://www.theguardian.com/money/2023/may/10/plans-abolish-...
- tialaramex 3y ago
  These are obviously necessary reforms, like when they reformed Ground Rent† The argument for the Tories to do it is that if they do it then politically that looks better, and they can control exactly how it's done, choosing alternatives that the opposition wouldn't have but which are nonetheless acceptable, normal politics. Of course just because it makes sense for the party strategically doesn't mean individual members who stand to lose out won't fight it. † Almost all homes that don't occupy their own distinct footprint (e.g. flats/ apartments) and some which do are owned as "Leasehold" which means that you don't own the land in perpetuity, instead you own a "Long Lease" (e.g. 125 years) which can be extended for a fee, and entitles you to occupy the property. Because it's a Lease it can require rent, traditionally such Long Leases specified a rent of "One peppercorn" (if you've never seen it, black pepper is made from tiny dried berries, such a peppercorn is technically something of value, therefore it constitutes a valid rental payment) for the ground - "ground rent". But in recent years new long leases had begun to make the rent real money - I pay £250 per year for example, which isn't much money for a home but it's a lot more than one peppercorn. This made the freehold ownership (and thus right to collect these ground rents) into a valuable investment for offshore property companies. Tory legislation made it illegal for new Long Leases, including extensions to existing ones, to set rent above one peppercorn, and additionally required that freeholders not demand the actual peppercorns or charge any sort of "fees" (such as to collect and store the peppercorns) to the leaseholder on the rationale that in fact obviously nobody wants peppercorns, they're just a legal device, knock it off. However, the Tories did not reform existing ground rents. Until your lease is renewed, or you give it up, you have to pay. So this nonsense investment doesn't grow but it also didn't vanish.
  - smcl 3y ago
    Oh yeah these things do sound necessary. And additionally the freehold/leasehold system was a shock to me when I first learned of it, it's not a thing north of the border. I'm just surprised that the Conservatives would implement things that at face value are good without also sneaking something sinister in at the same time. I'm maybe just a little too suspicious of them, it's entirely possible they're doing something genuinely good that doesn't have a catch.
thinkingemote 3y ago
The Tories are appealing to their voters or future ones. They realise that there's a bunch of new voters, or who they want to vote for them, are renters. I imagine some of the more radical changes will be watered down in favour of some of the weaker but popular ones such as allowing pets. I forget the term for it, but it's a kind of poaching from Labour. The Conservatives are promoting themselves as "for the working people" as in people who actually work where Labour used to be for the "working class". In both parties we see them shedding past core beliefs, Labour have chosen the middle class and view the working class as vulnerable people with no agency and the Tories have dumped prioritising the rich landlords and big money as they know they are going to be loyal anyhow and are choosing more crowd pleasing things. I think the time of core values have passed, its all slippery chameleon politics in my view.
- tialaramex 3y ago
  The current Labour party is starting to think old Labour policies looked good too. In particular Nationalisation. Once upon a time Labour's principles said you should Nationalise industries. The Tories are a "Free Market" party, and over the past decade plus have a lot of policies which can be summarised as "The Free Market didn't work, so we tried the Free Market and that didn't work, then we tried the Free Market and that didn't work, and then we tried the Free Market again and it still didn't work". The trains are an especially dismal example. Trains are necessary, heavily regulated, and benefit from very long term investment, so periodically when another short term for-profit train franchise collapses, the Government is obliged to run those trains (typically the franchises run trains for some portion of the railway network e.g. the West Coast Mainline), this goes pretty well because governments can do this sort of thing, then (because Free Market) a new franchise is brought in, that's a total shit show, wash and repeat. The Tory party can't philosophically learn this lesson, it's necessary to the fundamental ethos of their party that the observable facts aren't true, the Free Market must work. So they're never going to fix this, and Labour can just nationalise the railways and tada - things get better. The Tories will say it's worse of course, that's politics - but, if they've any sense, if they get back into power they would decide to maybe run a "consultation" or something in which they never quite get around to undoing the nationalisation and so the much better system continues.

smcl 3y ago

Yeah I had to read a the headline a couple of times to be sure I understood it correctly. It's a little unbelievable to me that they'd actually do something beneficial like this, and I'm a little suspicious ...

chris12321 3y ago
They've only just abandoned their manifesto commitment to leasehold reform last week. https://www.theguardian.com/money/2023/may/10/plans-abolish-feudal-leasehold-system-england-wales https://www.theguardian.com/money/2023/may/10/plans-abolish-...
tialaramex 3y ago
These are obviously necessary reforms, like when they reformed Ground Rent† The argument for the Tories to do it is that if they do it then politically that looks better, and they can control exactly how it's done, choosing alternatives that the opposition wouldn't have but which are nonetheless acceptable, normal politics. Of course just because it makes sense for the party strategically doesn't mean individual members who stand to lose out won't fight it. † Almost all homes that don't occupy their own distinct footprint (e.g. flats/ apartments) and some which do are owned as "Leasehold" which means that you don't own the land in perpetuity, instead you own a "Long Lease" (e.g. 125 years) which can be extended for a fee, and entitles you to occupy the property. Because it's a Lease it can require rent, traditionally such Long Leases specified a rent of "One peppercorn" (if you've never seen it, black pepper is made from tiny dried berries, such a peppercorn is technically something of value, therefore it constitutes a valid rental payment) for the ground - "ground rent". But in recent years new long leases had begun to make the rent real money - I pay £250 per year for example, which isn't much money for a home but it's a lot more than one peppercorn. This made the freehold ownership (and thus right to collect these ground rents) into a valuable investment for offshore property companies. Tory legislation made it illegal for new Long Leases, including extensions to existing ones, to set rent above one peppercorn, and additionally required that freeholders not demand the actual peppercorns or charge any sort of "fees" (such as to collect and store the peppercorns) to the leaseholder on the rationale that in fact obviously nobody wants peppercorns, they're just a legal device, knock it off. However, the Tories did not reform existing ground rents. Until your lease is renewed, or you give it up, you have to pay. So this nonsense investment doesn't grow but it also didn't vanish.
- smcl 3y ago
  Oh yeah these things do sound necessary. And additionally the freehold/leasehold system was a shock to me when I first learned of it, it's not a thing north of the border. I'm just surprised that the Conservatives would implement things that at face value are good without also sneaking something sinister in at the same time. I'm maybe just a little too suspicious of them, it's entirely possible they're doing something genuinely good that doesn't have a catch.

thinkingemote 3y ago

The Tories are appealing to their voters or future ones. They realise that there's a bunch of new voters, or who they want to vote for them, are renters. I imagine some of the more radical changes will be watered down in favour of some of the weaker but popular ones such as allowing pets. I forget the term for it, but it's a kind of poaching from Labour. The Conservatives are promoting themselves as "for the working people" as in people who actually work where Labour used to be for the "working class". In both parties we see them shedding past core beliefs, Labour have chosen the middle class and view the working class as vulnerable people with no agency and the Tories have dumped prioritising the rich landlords and big money as they know they are going to be loyal anyhow and are choosing more crowd pleasing things. I think the time of core values have passed, its all slippery chameleon politics in my view.

tialaramex 3y ago
The current Labour party is starting to think old Labour policies looked good too. In particular Nationalisation. Once upon a time Labour's principles said you should Nationalise industries. The Tories are a "Free Market" party, and over the past decade plus have a lot of policies which can be summarised as "The Free Market didn't work, so we tried the Free Market and that didn't work, then we tried the Free Market and that didn't work, and then we tried the Free Market again and it still didn't work". The trains are an especially dismal example. Trains are necessary, heavily regulated, and benefit from very long term investment, so periodically when another short term for-profit train franchise collapses, the Government is obliged to run those trains (typically the franchises run trains for some portion of the railway network e.g. the West Coast Mainline), this goes pretty well because governments can do this sort of thing, then (because Free Market) a new franchise is brought in, that's a total shit show, wash and repeat. The Tory party can't philosophically learn this lesson, it's necessary to the fundamental ethos of their party that the observable facts aren't true, the Free Market must work. So they're never going to fix this, and Labour can just nationalise the railways and tada - things get better. The Tories will say it's worse of course, that's politics - but, if they've any sense, if they get back into power they would decide to maybe run a "consultation" or something in which they never quite get around to undoing the nationalisation and so the much better system continues.