What does a Hung Parliament mean for Landlords?

What does a Hung Parliament mean for Landlords?

6:47 AM, 9th June 2017, About 5 years ago 145

Text Size

It is official the 2017 General election will be a Hung Parliament.

What Does this mean for Landlords?

With the two major parties both being Anti-Landlord could this be a Good thing?

Will any new minority Conservative or Coalition Government find it difficult to implement further new Anti-Landlord agendas?

What would potentially a Softer Brexit mean and possibly retaining some form of Freedom of movement?

We wait to see in the coming hours days and months, but what do readers think?

Property118 Poll Got It Right – AGAIN!

Below are the final results from our election Poll.

I believe this clearly demonstrates that landlords who read Property118 are representative of the whole of society, which is very different to the way media try to pigeon hole us.

Below are the actual election results



Comments

by Dr Rosalind Beck

0:22 AM, 10th June 2017, About 5 years ago

Reply to the comment left by "Gareth Wilson" at "09/06/2017 - 23:48":

Brilliant analysis Gareth. One which needs to 'get out there' somehow.

by Dr Rosalind Beck

7:39 AM, 10th June 2017, About 5 years ago

What on earth is Jeremy Corbyn and his Politburo up to, preparing an 'alternative Queen's Speech'? Does he think he can bully his way into power, ignoring the democratic result? He thinks failing and losing the election is a 'victory.' Chakrabati on Question Time even repeated this nonsense on Question Time again, saying he had 'won the election.' Obviously the audience burst into laughter when it was pointed out several times that Labour had LOST.

They think saying 'black is white' or 'Labour has won' enough times will make it true.

The 80% of Labour MPs who can't stand him now need to speak up. They kept quiet for the election campaign in the hope that each one of them would keep their seats, but now is the time for them to 'break ranks' once more and as it seems constitutionally impossible for them to oust Corbyn, they have to set up a new party. If for no other reason, they need to do this to leave the democratically-elected Conservative Government to get on with the Brexit negotiations, without having to constantly be using their energy fending off Labour assaults from the back. At the same time they can then rebuild the moderate and sensible Labour party that is needed.

These Labour MPs should do the honourable thing (Corbyn and McDonnell won't) and serve their country.Forget 'alternative Queen's Speech.' They need an 'alternative Labour Party.'

by Mandy Thomson

12:55 PM, 10th June 2017, About 5 years ago

I believe Gary Dully and Mike D make some good points in their analysis of the inefficiency in many public services, and as usual, the quickest, easiest option is chosen by governments, i.e. cut services at the point of delivery without doing the work of making any real long term efficiencies, as well as failing to listen to those who have to deliver those services. I say “governments” as successive governments have done this kind of thing, not just the last last three.

For example, when the credit crunch hit, in desperation Gordon Brown’s government decided to raid the piggy bank and cut back the Land Registry, which unlike many other government services actually makes money and is self-funding. Five offices were closed (all but one in the South East) and many buildings that Land Registry owned, including the iconic and historic headquarters at Lincoln Inn Fields, were sold off with many job losses. All this was done against the advice of many business consultants.

There is a resonance here with clause 24; go for the easy, lazy option to save or raise money and as we know only too well, clause 24 has the bonus of winning brownie points with the landlord envying public.

As this forum demonstrates (Gareth Wilson hits the nail on the head, “They have been laissez-faire and conservative towards their wealthiest friends and allies, while being destructive tax and spend socialists towards small businesses who are the real economic backbone of Britain.”) one reason for the election result was the alienation of many traditional Conservative voters – landlords and other small businesses, but that wasn’t the only reason.

While Theresa May completely underestimated this alienation, she compounded it with poor PR in her election campaign, which Jeremy Corbyn was ready and waiting to exploit. He engaged mostly young voters as well as others who are fed up with rising housing costs and austerity. I can understand where many of Corbyn’s supporters are coming from; in my teens and early twenties I too was a passionate left wing socialist, after coming from a mostly Labour voting household. It has only been some horrible experiences and running my landlord business that has given me a broader perspective over the years.

For all the Conservative’s faults, I still believe they are the best party to run the country, and despite clause 24 they are still much more landlord friendly than Labour, the Lib Dems and the Greens.

However, having said that, yes, there is more at stake than the livelihood of landlords or even the economy alone; while I agree that control of immigration is important, and we really need the best Brexit deal, I am very concerned about the rhetoric of UKIP – for example, banning the burqa and the niqab, and I believe the swing toward both extreme right and left wing politics is not only worrying but the biggest threat our country faces.

by Mandy Thomson

13:22 PM, 10th June 2017, About 5 years ago

Check out The Book of Jeremy Corbin - hilarious!

by Luk Udav

18:13 PM, 10th June 2017, About 5 years ago

Reply to the comment left by "Lindsey " at "09/06/2017 - 11:10":

Lindsey: you asked about my comment on "deferential working class". Round here there are still a large number of people who openly say that their "betters" should be in control. It's an area of outstandly low educational attainment or aspiration.

Almost all the contributors here believe in voting to support their own self interest. Nothing wrong in that. But if you do then you must agree that working people who have suffered 7 years of dreadful, misguided Tory austerity must be misguided in voting for more pain.

One of the great things about the young is that they are less deferential, and rightly so, to their elders who have messed up big time.

Dickens didn't believe in maintaining the status quo. He hated much of what he saw the "betters" doing.

by Grumpy Doug

19:03 PM, 10th June 2017, About 5 years ago

Gavin Barwell announced as Theresa May's new chief of staff !!

by Dr Rosalind Beck

19:09 PM, 10th June 2017, About 5 years ago

Reply to the comment left by "Grumpy Doug" at "10/06/2017 - 19:03":

Wow! I just wrote to him this morning. I thought he'd have time on his hands now...

I think this is good news for landlords, as he does understand what Section 24 is, I think and could have some influence.

by Dr Rosalind Beck

19:18 PM, 10th June 2017, About 5 years ago

Reply to the comment left by "Dr Rosalind Beck" at "10/06/2017 - 19:09":

A massive amount of influence, in fact - much more than he had as Housing Minister. He's always struck me as honourable but a bit powerless - I more or less told him that in my email. Fingers crossed that he can make a difference for us. He could be more powerful than Philip Hammond - who has been a bit of a sod as far as we're concerned.

by Lindsey

19:42 PM, 10th June 2017, About 5 years ago

Reply to the comment left by "Luk Udav" at "10/06/2017 - 18:13":

Luk, that's really interesting. My "day job" is all around confidence and aspiration (property was never intended to be full time for me) and I can believe this is the case. I see it as a failure of the education system.

I think some of us are forced into a position of looking after our own self-interest, even when habitually we would be more altruistic. I have tried (unsuccessfully) to explain to liberal friends why it is impossible to not think that way when you are in fear of losing everything you have worked a lifetime for, when faced with ludicrous changes to a system that it's not possible just to walk away from (negative equity for some, CGT trap for others, dead market in some areas - people who fear loss of their own home and security are less likely to be altruistic.

I agree with you on the austerity - I think we passed the point of this being effective a while ago and should have increased infrastructure spend. But I think there is a widespread fear that a Labour government would spend excessively, and look to the working and middle classes to pick up the tab (we all know that it is impossible to tax the super rich). Frankly, I share that fear. I could never vote for a man who states his personal opinion is that right to buy should be imposed on landlords, at big discounts. This goes beyond the question of who would pay off mortgages, what happens if you're in negative equity etc - and finishes in the point that this man thinks it's morally justified to take security from people who have worked hard for it, in order to give to people who have perhaps not taken the same risks or made the same sacrifices.

I've found it amusing that many of the left are making cracks about people voting for their own self-interest, while according to FB many of the young people are voting for free Uni. I actually agree with free Uni. I just don't agree that everyone needs to go (but then I support grammar schools too - as I do technical colleges and apprenticeships. Horses for courses. I have no idea why Labour ever thought everyone should have or want a degree). But the idea that voting Labour makes you a better person than voting Conservative I reject.

I thoroughly enjoy Dickens, and actually he was probably my first motivator for putting what remained of my pension into property deposits (I wanted to provide good quality housing for people who would not normally have the chance of that. It's the stupidest thing I've ever done). But the world of Dickens' day was entirely different. I do believe in social justice, and that Dickens' astute observations on the miserable living conditions of the poor were well needed. But nobody lives like that now. People have protections (tenants much more than landlords). And what we have lost now is not social justice - it's a universal work ethic, and a desire to reward aspiration rather than tax it.

by Mandy Thomson

20:44 PM, 10th June 2017, About 5 years ago

Reply to the comment left by "Dr Rosalind Beck" at "10/06/2017 - 19:18":

I agree with you about Gavin Barwell. I have met him a few times and he was very supportive of our campaign against Croydon council's landlord licensing scheme. He does not approve of clause 24 on a personal level, but as a party whip and then as a newly promoted housing minister, and junior cabinet minister, he was in no position to publicly condemn his party's policy.

How many people on this forum now or in the past have worked for an employer whose policies they didn't always 100% agree with? What would you do - publically condemn the organisation that pays your wages (and most likely lose your job or at least face disciplinary procedures or demotion), or simply speak to your managers in private, hoping to change their minds?

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 15

Leave Comments

Please Log-In OR Become a member to reply to comments or subscribe to new comment notifications.

Forgotten your password?

BECOME A MEMBER