Jas Athwal, the newly-elected MP for Ilford South, owns 15 rental flats, but some tenants have claimed they regularly have to clean their bathroom ceilings to remove mould.
In an investigation first reported by the BBC, one tenant in a block of seven flats in Seven Kings, Redbridge, said “there are ants everywhere” including on their child’s body and clothes.
Responding to the investigation, Mr Athwal said he was “shocked” to hear of the reported condition of his properties, adding that they were managed by an agency which did not communicate any problems back to him.
Formerly the leader of Redbridge Council, Mr Athwal is also required to have a selective property licence in order to rent out the block of seven flats - a system he introduced in 2017 when he was in charge of the council.
It comes after the BBC found the council’s public licence register indicated that none of the seven properties had a licence.
Every politician in every nation should be banned from owning rental income units.
Every politician in every nation should be banned from having any side business or income of any kind, including after retirement, to avoid potential conflicts.
(E.g. an MP being offered a paid seat on a Landlord’s Association for when they retire, which would conflict woth their duty to serve the people whilst an MP)
The government income and pension should be enough to live on so that these issues can be avoided.
If you want to become a public servant, that’s a high calling that you undertake to serve your nation, and there are some small sacrifices that should come with it.
It should NEVER be a potential avenue for fame or riches. It should be a sacrifice you make to serve the people and country you care deeply for.
Ah so only rich people can ever be politicians as everyone else simply can’t afford it.
Did you read their entire comment?
The government income and pension should be enough to live on so that these issues can be avoided.
So how do you stand for election with no income for months on end?
One option is to publicly fund candidates equally. In such a system someone could apply to run for a position, the position would require a specified amount of people to nominate that person, if that person is nominated they get a grant that covers their campaign costs. The amount wouldn’t be excessive so campaigns would look very different than they do now in places like the US.
Another option is to limit campaign donations from any individual to $100 total. This would force politicians to put effort into building a grassroots campaign while keeping big moneyed interests out of the process.
When politicians get into a position of power, they should be paid enough that they’re firmly in the upper middle class, so they’re comfortable and less likely to accept bribes, and they should not be given any opportunity to accept bribes or profit off of their position in any way.
It’s not campaign costs that are the issue. You’re working full time on a campaign, you really have to quit or take six weeks off with your boss being ok with you never coming back.
Many people work jobs where this would be seen as a great thing for the firm, many do not
Potentially losing your job would be part of the risk/sacrifice a potential candidate would have to accept. Yes, it would be difficult for someone living paycheck to paycheck to do this. Ideally, election reform like this would go hand in hand with economic reform that leads us to a society in which much less people are living paycheck to paycheck. This could happen easily if we start electing real people instead of rich people only.
That’s the way it is now.
https://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/wealthiest-ministers-uk-government-cabinet-23666390
It would skew it even more to rich people. Since… you know… everyone else has to work.
It wouldn’t be Britain if rich assholes didn’t end up becoming MPs.
You’ll find that “student accomodations” are probably the biggest scams in the UK. A lot of Indian-origin residents/citizens esp. the first-generation, they have the same “Indian” mentality. You’ll find that the 2nd-gen children of these people are more “British” and less “Indian” mindset.
Case in point, the elderly property owner does less than the “minimum” maintenance, charges crazy rent-prices, re-arranges rooms to fit the maximum occupants, almost regular issues like heating, plumbing, mold, etc completely ignored. While suddenly announcing that rent is increasing by 20% “due to inflation, or needed for maintenance” … don’t pay? get out and your deposit is forfeit. Ever showered in cold water during the entire February in the UK ?
You will find that the 2nd-gen children if they find out the elder is doing this, will immediately rectify the situation and probably takeover if they can. Else you are outta luck and on your bum in the middle of winter which no one will want to be.
There are 85 UK MPs who own rental properties and not all of them are of Indian descent. Source
Greed is not defined by race.
Edit – I see the racists are out in full force today.
I know from real experience unlike a lot of REEEEEEE … sorry but not sorry that you like to jump to conclusions.
The mold definitely should be fixed… But are ants not a tennant problem, not a landlord problem?
It really depends. One tenant could have an ant problem because another adjacent tenant is attracting them, which the landlord needs to address. If the structure has decaying wood, that can attract carpenter ants which is a landlord issue. Some ants like humid environments, so a poorly ventilated structure (like one with mold) could be the cause–also the landlord’s problem.
In the states, a significant bug infestation of any kind is a landlord problem.
Sky News UK - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)
Information for Sky News UK:
MBFC: Least Biased - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: High - United Kingdom
Wikipedia about this sourceSearch topics on Ground.News
