Motion 1: “The Home” is a special type of property and

should have special legal protection”

Thank you very much Mr Martin, ladies and gentlemen, good morning and
lovely to see you all this morning, we are having a very entertaining morning
since it’s a very special topic that going to be discussed.
From the other side of house, let me begin by saying as a person who lived
nearly 20 years in my beautiful tall house whom I admire, as a law student who
consider all land are precious, I would consider myself a law-abiding citizen, a
strong believer that all laws are very powerful weapon, its very important how
you use it against whom.
So, in that capacity let me begin by apologizing to the recent event that
occurred on 14th June 2017, where it nearly killed 72 people in the building
while on fire. They call it the Grenfell Tower fire. One of the deadliest
structural fire in the United Kingdom.
I mean Astoning claims to make in the very first speech, Free Thinkers trying to
stand for motion proposed, if you do and make these comments on why home
deserve to have legal protection, I’m guessing you’ll have to wait till
withdrawn, but then again you keep on the rise, then someone else might have
something to say about your views, again and again…you views never be
accounted.
By the way, on a factual point, normal people spends home insurance would
up to 2,500 to 3,000 quits per year just on insurance, and that doesn’t cover
the whole house, only covers certain areas. You said homes need absolute
legal protection, but homeowners end up spending half of their salary each
year spending for insurance you need extra legal protection which costs more
and doesn’t cover almost everything but covers the rarest of them all that
bankruptcy.
In what good setting legal protection to these homes can do any good, when
the government surprisingly fails to protect the most vital aspect of all time,
that is the people in it, NOT the homes!! Instead, the government should
priories in focusing legal protection to the ‘PEOPLE IN IT’ not the home!! Yes,
nothing is done until now.
If there is legal protection to all the homes in the United Kingdom, ‘cough
cough’ actually there is, just to point a shed of data, there are 29 million homes
currently located in the UK, home-protective legislation, policies which
includes bankruptcy protection, creditors, property tax relief, has been
implanted. What about something important? Like fire, thief, burglary? But
astonishingly, according to Michigan law review, no one has questioned
whether empirical evidence exist to support these theories. Bare in mind,
these are the legislative that the government somehow created that never
exist. I’ll tell this, it’s a waste of time, implementing this law, even if its not
created in the first place.
Never ever even, during 27th October this year, in the Autumn budget and
spending review never discussed on Homes at all. I’m not surprised! In another
nutshell, government was really busy finding a bigger fish. Which is making
bigger buildings and setting out investments. totally understandable in this
situation, but what about the homes?

As John Gummer and his committee indicated in a 2019 study in the article ‘fit
for future? He researched that, UK homes are not fit for the future as most
homes were made in high-carbon, low energy, and usually not resilient to a
changing climate especially our constant rainy season.
As evidence suggested by the building research establishment (BRE), poor
housing costs, the health service £600 million every year and total cost to the
society could be as high as (drum roll) everyone £1.5 billion. In other words, we
don’t need legal protection but better infrastructure.
In light of psychological evidence and the absence of economic and political
justifications, I advocate having special legal protection is not important and
useful.