Protecting the second home income?

Cam me cynical if you must, but, in the wake of the expenses scandals and second home allowances etcetra, I found it rather amusing and oddly coincidental that the most popular Early Day motion thus far this session with 102 signatures and wide-ranging cross party-support reads thusly,

That this House notes that the repeal of the furnished holiday lettings rules announced in the 2009 Budget will have negative and unintended consequences for providers of holiday lettings; believes that the negative impact of the repeal will lead to a reduction in the supply of self-catering accommodation in particular, resulting in a significant loss of jobs and damage to rural and seaside economies; further notes with concern the lack of any industry consultation on the repeal; and calls on the Government to conduct a full consultation and review of this policy change as soon as possible to ensure all affected parties have the opportunity to voice their concerns and to promote an understanding of and mitigate against any unintended consequences on tourism, especially in rural and seaside areas.

For those wondering, the rules referred to are available in more detail here. Basically it;s another of those things where the Government is grabbing some more tax.

Now, I wonder, given the apparent cross-party support against a tax rise (from socialists to capitalist), how many of those MPs signing have furnished holiday lets of their own?