We are ever so slightly worried by this announcement:
The government is proposing a national minimum bedroom size as part of a drive to stop landlords carving up houses into ever smaller rooms to maximise rental income.
Bedrooms in houses of multiple occupation would have to be a minimum of 6.5 sq m (70 sq ft), and landords letting rooms smaller than that would be guilty of a criminal offence.
The proposal was sparked by an outcry over “rabbit hutch properties”, many costing as much as £1,000 a month, as landlords cash in on the booming housing market, particularly in London.
Lots of people wish to live in parts of the country where there are not many bedrooms. Therefore people are living in small bedrooms rather than large ones: that's just what happens. If there's a shortage of food then people eat smaller meals, if the pub runs out of beer then everyone drinks shorts. Shortages lead to smaller measures.
Government would not ban the consumption of gin if beer were to go short, government would not ban smaller plates if food were to be short, so quite why government thinks that the banning of small bedrooms is going to increase the supply of bedrooms is unknown to us.
All we're really left with is wondering how we might manage to get adults into government. You know, the people capable of doing that mature, joined up, thinking stuff?
Sadly, we're not even sure where you'd send the postcard if you did have an idea about it.