These tragic events, for many, have highlighted the gulf that has opened between the poor and those with money. The majority of the public believe that the consequences of these fatal events would not have occurred if it was on the affluent side of town.

To an extent, I would have to agree.

A fire can happen anywhere but the spread of that fire is what we are talking about here. I have seen a lot of interviews with understandably angry local residents talking about the manufactured tragedy. The wounds are far too fresh for this type of prodding so it’s a rabbit hole I will avoid. Instead, I will concentrate on what we know and what we know is that the events that unfolded were avoidable. The reasons they were not, MP’s self-interest.

They get to vote on the regulations they have to abide by, to the standard they must uphold. That’s like getting the people who make bullets and bombs to decide if we go to war…

A vast percentage of MP’s are landlords, earning thousands on top of their overly generous salary. Take into account that these figures are only from the MP’s that declare such an interest and there will be a much higher ‘real’ figure which would include those who rent out properties in their partners’ names, business names, directors of property companies and a lot of other manipulations of the truth. And this is not just the conservatives or other right wing parties. The lefties are in on the act as well with almost a quarter of Labour MP’s being landlords although relatively low with the conservatives nearing half of their MP’s being landlords.  

You may wonder what the fuck this has to do with the price of fish, well…

These people vote on whether landlords should be forced to spend money out of their own pockets to bring the buildings they rent up to a reasonable standard, how much they spend on safety etc. They get to vote on the regulations they have to abide by, to the standard they must uphold. That’s like getting the people who make bullets and bombs to decide if we go to war…

Does anyone else see the stupidity in this? Surely we can see this is wrong?

We all know that the building was ‘improved’ for those who reside in the surrounding area not those within the tower itself. So those in the expensive houses don’t have to face the fact that the poor exist and that their breakfast is not ruined by looking up at the ‘concrete monstrosity’. That’s why the ‘refurb’ centred on cosmetics rather than safety. No one wants their social get together spoiled by the view of the great unwashed, a reminder they exist… It’s also easier to get money for a refurb if it will add value, not only to the tower but to the properties in close proximity. Unfortunately, just like us as people, a pretty face always attracts more than what’s inside. Despite what your mother tells you. This is just a fact of life. The old rich lady looks in the mirror and sees an ugliness, does see work on herself to become a better person and see real beauty? No. She gets a shit tonne of botox and a set of fake tits. Risking her life on the surgery table for an outside beauty while the inside rots. We are that beauty inside trying to burst out but are being beaten down by their decay.

Lilly Allen talking about completely different shit

 

Going forward all MP’s should have no second income that crosses over the political sphere, which would mean almost everything. If they feel they can then no longer earn the amount of money they desire then maybe they should rethink why they are an MP. But this would be near impossible and would expose every MP. So until we can reach that point the minimum that should happen is that all MP’s who have a vested interest in a particular remit should not be able to take part in votes that concern that subject. If you’re an MP and landlord then you don’t get to vote on what happens to landlords. It seems so simple you have to ask why this is not already happening. We of course already know the answer. This would also mean that all MPs declare any shares, directorships, relationships with companies not only for themselves but their family. They represent us and should come under a strict scrutiny and if they are found to be lying then this would be perjury and treated as such.

With the country gripped in a housing crisis as it is why do we continue to let our MP’s buy homes that could house people who need them and not only charge them extortionate prices but force them to live in unsafe substandard conditions? Whether that’s through their own rented properties or the votes they made to protect their own self-interests.

Duke.

 

 

PublicHouse® Magazine Ltd. © 2020
|