Fire Safety Bill — After Clause 2 — Prohibition on Passing Remediation Costs on to Leaseholders and Tenants — 27 Apr 2021 at 15:15

The majority of MPs voted to allow the owners of buildings to pass on the costs of legally required fire safety improvements to leaseholders and tenants.

MPs were considering the Fire Safety Bill.[1][2]

The purpose of the Bill was "to clarify that the Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005 (the Fire Safety Order) applies to external walls (including cladding, balconies and windows) and individual flat entrance doors in multi-occupied residential buildings. The 2005 order consolidated fire safety legislation. The Bill also provided powers for ministers to change the definition of premises to which the order applies.[2]

The motion supported by a majority of MPs in this vote was:

  • That this House disagrees with Lords amendment 4J.

Amendment 4J[3] stated:

  • After Clause 2, insert the following new Clause—
  • Prohibition on passing remediation costs on to leaseholders and tenants pending operation of a statutory scheme
  • (1) The owner of a building may not pass the costs of any remedial work attributable to the provisions of this Act on to leaseholders or tenants of that building.
  • (2) This section has effect only until a statutory scheme is in operation which ensures that leaseholders and tenants of dwellings do not have to pay for remedial work attributable to the provisions of this Act.
  • (3) Subsections (1) and (2) do not apply to a leaseholder who is also the owner or part owner of the freehold of the building.”

The Clause, if it became part of the Bill, would surely amount to a "statutory scheme" itself.

A vote on a similar proposal had taken place the previous month.


Debate in Parliament |

Public Whip is run as a free not-for-profit service. If you'd like to support us, please consider switching your (UK) electricity and/or gas to Octopus Energy or tip us via Ko-Fi.

Party Summary

Votes by party, red entries are votes against the majority for that party.

What is Tell? '+1 tell' means that in addition one member of that party was a teller for that division lobby.

What are Boths? An MP can vote both aye and no in the same division. The boths page explains this.

What is Turnout? This is measured against the total membership of the party at the time of the vote.

PartyMajority (Aye)Minority (No)BothTurnout
Alliance0 10100.0%
Con320 (+2 tell) 30096.7%
DUP0 80100.0%
Green0 10100.0%
Independent0 40100.0%
Lab0 195 (+2 tell)099.0%
LDem0 110100.0%
PC0 30100.0%
SDLP0 20100.0%
Total:320 255097.6%

Rebel Voters - sorted by party

MPs for which their vote in this division differed from the majority vote of their party. You can see all votes in this division, or every eligible MP who could have voted in this division

Sort by: Name | Constituency | Party | Vote

Sir David AmessSouthend WestConno
Caroline AnsellEastbourneConno
John BaronBasildon and BillericayConno
Bob BlackmanHarrow EastConno
Peter BottomleyWorthing WestConno
Rehman ChishtiGillingham and RainhamConno
Elliot ColburnCarshalton and WallingtonConno
Philip DaviesShipleyConno
David DavisHaltemprice and HowdenConno
Iain Duncan SmithChingford and Woodford GreenConno
Roger GaleNorth ThanetConno
Chris GreenBolton WestConno
Damian GreenAshfordConno
Stephen HammondWimbledonConno
Philip HolloboneKetteringConno
Tom HuntIpswichConno
Julian LewisNew Forest Eastwhilst Conno
Jason McCartneyColne ValleyConno
Stephen McPartlandStevenageConno
Esther McVeyTattonConno
Anne Marie MorrisNewton AbbotConno
Bob NeillBromley and ChislehurstConno
Caroline NokesRomsey and Southampton NorthConno
Matthew OffordHendonConno
Mary RobinsonCheadleConno
Andrew RosindellRomfordConno
Royston SmithSouthampton, ItchenConno
Thomas TugendhatTonbridge and MallingConno
David WarburtonSomerton and FromeConno
William WraggHazel GroveConno

About the Project

The Public Whip is a not-for-profit, open source website created in 2003 by Francis Irving and Julian Todd and now run by Bairwell Ltd.

The Whip on the Web

Help keep PublicWhip alive