UKPOL.CO.UK

Category: Housing

  • Kemi Badenoch – 2022 Comments on Housing

    Kemi Badenoch – 2022 Comments on Housing

    The comments made by Kemi Badenoch as part of her leadership bid, published by the Telegraph as part of a longer article on 16 July 2022.

    We need new homes in the right places. We need them to spread prosperity, give the next generation a stake in the future and allow families to grow. We also need to recognise that pressure on housing comes from increased migration and from families breaking up. Solving these interlinked questions needs honesty and rigour.

    On housing, we’ll never get the homes we need where we need them if we insist on ever-higher inflexible top-down housing targets. We need to bring people with us by delivering infrastructure first and insisting new homes are built to a higher standard and look more beautiful. We need to break the stranglehold of the identikit cartel of land banking house builders.

    But we need to consider the demand side of housing, not just the supply side. People – rightly – recognise that building more homes while doing nothing to bring immigration down is like running up the down escalator. We’ll never get to where we need to with that approach, and we won’t persuade people to accept more homes if it is being done due to immigration failures. If we can bring immigration down to a sustainable level, we can then protect green spaces for our children and precious agricultural land.

  • Eddie Hughes – July 2022 Update to Grenfell Residents

    Eddie Hughes – July 2022 Update to Grenfell Residents

    The letter sent by Eddie Hughes, the Minister for Rough Sleeping and Housing, to residents in the area of Grenfell Tower on July 2022.

    Letter (in .pdf format)

  • David Martin – 1988 Speech on the Abolition of Gazumping

    David Martin – 1988 Speech on the Abolition of Gazumping

    The speech made by David Martin, the then Conservative MP for Portsmouth South, in the House of Commons on 5 July 1988.

    I beg to move,

    That leave be given to bring in a Bill to prevent gazumping in connection with buying and selling homes.

    The disgraceful practice of gazumping has been raised in the House on several occasions over the years, notably by my hon. Friend the Member for Mid-Staffordshire (Mr. Heddle). It has also been the object of attention by the Law Commission and, from time to time, by the legal profession’s magazines and the press. A remarkable number of right hon. and hon. Members have shared with me the experiences of their constituents, and I have been helped by them.

    The word “gazump” is based on “gazoomph,” which is a graphic Yiddish word meaning to swindle or to cheat. It applies when the purchaser and the vendor of a home have agreed on a definite price and then, before contracts are exchanged, the vendor raises the price to that purchaser or sells at a higher price to someone else. It does not apply to the converse case of the purchaser withdrawing before exchange of contracts. That is a nuisance and the breaking of an agreement, but it is not gazumping. I have some ideas on that, too, but I have only 10 minutes in which to speak, so they must be developed at another time.

    Gazumping has been described as a method of parting rich men from their money—and it certainly does that. The greater problem is that it also parts the relatively less well off from theirs, especially young people and first-time buyers.

    Scottish law and practice is far nearer to what I would like to see happen in England and Wales. It has been said that nothing stops us operating the same system. That may theoretically be true, but it will never happen without legislation.

    First, my main aim it to give 14 days to a purchaser to exchange after the price has been agreed. During those 14 days, if the vendor backs out, the vendor would have to pay the purchaser 5 per cent. of the agreed price, plus any specific and reasonable costs incurred by the purchaser during that time. Any sum less than 5 per cent. would not be a deterrent, because gazumping is in multiples of thousands of pounds these days, even on less expensive property. Therefore, as in Scotland, the price would be fixed at the outset. In England and Wales exchange would follow in a short time and certainly would exist at an earlier stage. The parties could then agree either a long or short period for completion, depending significantly on the need for the purchaser to sell his or her home in the meantime.

    Secondly, considerations of time would be more important. My Bill would promote a speeding up of the all too ponderous and needlessly mystifying processes of conveyancing. For all the welcome increases in home ownership in recent years, in many respects we are still in the age of the quill pen when it comes to law and practice. Solicitors, in particular, must grow more used to the idea that they are in a commercial world. Their negative attitude to advertising is revealing. The advent of licensed conveyancers has helped to bring the profession face to face with commercial reality. Many have recognised and seized the opportunities to co-operate with or to operate property shops, but more needs to be done.

    Thirdly, home purchase would be helped by insisting on more, and more accurate, information in the agents’ particulars. That is a subject in itself. I have seen particulars offering me

    “a modern system of central hating”,

    “gilt” spelt “guilt” and even

    “rent and rat free accommodation”.

    Fourthly, the vendor would be required to provide far more information to a purchaser when he puts his property on the market. He would be required to provide a survey from a surveyor with proper professional qualifications. No honest vendor should object to that. If the purchaser wished to be more thorough, he could obtain a further survey on his own. At the same time, the vendor would also be required to provide the usual standard searches and inquiries.

    Local authorities should be able to produce all the relevant information quickly and efficiently. This week, Portsmouth city council is pioneering a new computer system, as too is Wigan. The system will be part of a national network, where solicitors, estate agents, banks and others will be able to obtain direct answers to the usual searches and inquiries. One third of Portsmouth property is now held on computer, and the aim is for complete coverage by the end of 1989. We have tolerated for far too long too many expectations of delay in what ought to be a quick and simple process.

    I understand that the current ministerial response is that law reform should stay out of this area, that the remedy lies in the hands of those involved in house buying rather than in the law, and that there is nothing to stop people in England and Wales using the Scottish system if they want to. The trouble with that line is that it is far too complacent. Unless we have legislation, ordinary house buyers will never be able to bring about any significant change in the practices and customs of professionals, just as they could not tackle the scandal of the conveyancing monopoly without legislative help.

    All that is lacking is the political will to legislate. I hope that my effort today, added to those of many others of all parties, will have its effect. My system is not perfect, but it would make things better. That is no more or less than most legislation can hope to achieve.

    A gazumper is a swindler, a cheat and a racketeer. The present state of the law and practice allows him or her to operate without sanction of any kind and regardless of the damage caused to innocent parties. That is neither ethical nor just. It cannot be right. My Bill would provide some redress. I commend its introduction to the House.

    Question put and agreed to.

    Bill ordered to be brought in by Mr. David Martin, Mr. Matthew Carrington, Mr. Barry Field, Mr. Ian Gow, Mr. John Heddle, Mr. George Howarth, Mr. Richard Livsey, Mr. Ian McCartney, Mr. Keith Mans, Mr. Rhodri Morgan and Miss Ann Widdecombe.

  • Rishi Sunak – 2018 Comments on Long-Term Empty Properties

    Rishi Sunak – 2018 Comments on Long-Term Empty Properties

    The comments made by Rishi Sunak, the then Communities Minister, on 28 March 2018.

    It is simply wrong that, while there are 200,000 long-term empty properties across the country, thousands of families are desperate for a secure place to call home.

    This new power will equip councils with the tools they need to encourage owners of long-term empty properties to bring them back into use – and at the same time tackle the harmful effect they have on communities through squatting, vandalism and anti-social behaviour.

  • Rachael Maskell – 2022 Speech at the Sir David Amess Summer Adjournment Debate

    Rachael Maskell – 2022 Speech at the Sir David Amess Summer Adjournment Debate

    The speech made by Rachael Maskell, the Labour MP for York Central, in the House of Commons on 21 July 2022.

    I, too, wish to pay tribute to Sir David Amess and the indelible mark he left on this place. His family called for a legacy of kindness and love across Parliament. I think we still have some way to go on that journey, but he was never afraid to speak truth to power, which I trust I will do today. It is an honour to follow the hon. Member for Mid Sussex (Mims Davies). I, too, will be picking up on the issue of housing in my speech.

    Normally, we enter the summer with relief, but this year it is different. We have chaos across Government and across the country. The scale and depth of the multiple crises is weighing heavy on my constituents: it is taking five years to see an NHS dentist; GPs are under unbelievable stress and struggling with demand, with appointments now being issued for 16 August, with nothing before; we have the elective surgery backlog; we have the mental health crisis— I do not know where to begin there—covid is, yet again, dangerously on the rise; children’s social care is unable to meet demand; children are in dilapidated schools; we have the courts backlog; we have the passport backlog; we have the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency backlog; we have the visa backlog; we have a climate crisis; we have an economic crisis of inflation at 9.4% today; and we have a cost of living crisis. After 12 years, this is what the Tories have given our country. We are in meltdown, not just because of the temperature, but because of the temperature of what is coming out of the policies of this Government. It is left to us as constituency MPs to pick up the pieces.

    Today, however, I want to focus on the biggest crisis facing York: the housing crisis. Having spent weeks on the Levelling-up and Regeneration Bill Committee, it is clear that the Government are yet to get to grips with the housing crisis and the solutions that are needed. My amendments have focused on addressing the lack of community voice in planning and matching need to what is being delivered in housing. It does a disservice for Government because, as they set these targets, if they are building not to need but to the market, they are unable to deliver also.

    My city should be the very best place to live. We know its assets. People visit it and it is a wonderful city, with amazing people living there, but it is rapidly turning into a complete nightmare. The Airbnb market is surging in York. Short-term holiday lets are moving up at a rapid pace. Just a couple of weeks ago, we had 1,999; today we have 2,068. The number is rising rapidly as people are seeing the opportunity to make money out of my city. We have a rise in second homes and empty homes, but I wish to focus on the issue of Airbnbs and what is happening across the housing economy. We are seeing an extraction economy, instead of an investment economy—housing, money and opportunity extracted from my constituents, instead of investment in housing, people and communities for the long term.

    This issue needs to be addressed urgently. It is disrupting the economy. We are unable to recruit to the care sector or to local jobs. It is undermining local businesses, such as B&Bs and guest houses. It is having a significant economic impact, but it is also hollowing out rural communities. Some places have only one place to let, but in York the Airbnb and short-term holiday lets market is turning family streets into party streets, and I can tell the House that it is not pleasant when there is a hen do next door every single weekend.

    Section 21 notices are being issued at such an alarming rate that my constituents are being forced out of the city because there is nowhere else for them to live. Instead of getting an average—and it is high—£945 per calendar month for renting a property, landlords can make £700 over a weekend. Cash buyers, mainly from London and the south-east, are buying up swathes of housing in York in order to make money, but not to provide the housing that we desperately need. We have a real crisis in social housing and affordable housing. Couples who have saved for their first deposit are not getting the opportunity to buy because cash buyers are putting down up to £70,000 in addition for each property. The York Central development, which should be transformative for my city, risks becoming Airbnb central, with 2,500 units being built but probably not lived in by people from my local community.

    We need the Government to get a grip. I will be bringing forward a Bill in December, and I trust that the Government will get behind it, because we need to license these properties and ensure that we have local homes for local people.

  • Mark Francois – 2022 Speech at the Sir David Amess Summer Adjournment Debate

    Mark Francois – 2022 Speech at the Sir David Amess Summer Adjournment Debate

    The speech made by Mark Francois, the Conservative MP for Rayleigh and Wickford, in the House of Commons on 21 July 2022.

    It is an honour to follow the hon. Member for Hackney South and Shoreditch (Dame Meg Hillier), the redoubtable Chairman of the Public Accounts Committee, on which I also serve. I entirely empathise with her points about passport delays.

    Let me begin by thanking Mr Speaker, the Leader of the House and the House authorities for very kindly naming this debate in memory of my great friend Sir David Amess, who remains sorely missed across this House, not least by me. This was already known unofficially as the Sir David Amess debate because of the inimitable style in which he conducted it, but it is wonderful to know that what was unofficial is now official, and I simply say thank you.

    Before the House adjourns for the summer recess, I wish to raise a mere four issues. First, my hon. Friend the Member for Southend West (Anna Firth), who now represents part of the new city of Southend, has been campaigning hard for the release of Government funding to help expand capacity at Southend Hospital. I—along with my hon. Friends the Members for Rochford and Southend East (James Duddridge) and for Castle Point (Rebecca Harris), have been supporting her in her campaign. I was delighted to hear only this morning that she has apparently been successful in her efforts, and that the funding is now very close indeed to being released. This sum, totalling over £7 million, will pave the way for a much-needed expansion in capacity, so I hope it will go some way to help ease the considerable pressures on Southend Hospital and the ambulance service. I think that Sir David Amess would have welcomed this crucial funding, too, and, knowing him, I think he would immediately have asked for more.

    Secondly, I very much welcome the fact that Rochford District Council has recently announced that it will reopen the popular Mill Hall arts and community centre in the heart of Rayleigh in September. This has been an issue of considerable concern to many of my constituents, and I thank the council, led by Councillor Simon Wootton, for doing the right thing. In the longer term, I understand that the council is now looking at plans to materially refurbish the Mill Hall, and perhaps even extend the building slightly in order to provide some new facilities. Only yesterday, the council began a community engagement programme to invite interested parties to bid to run the Mill Hall in the future. I very much hope that the council will also launch a further detailed consultation once the refurbishment plans have evolved, so that all of my constituents in and around Rayleigh can have their say, as this is an issue that really matters in the town.

    Thirdly, I turn to the Home Office’s initial proposals to house cross-channel asylum seekers at the Chichester Hotel near Wickford. I have received a considerable number of emails about this plan from very concerned constituents. Let me put firmly on the record my strong opposition to these misguided proposals. Many constituents have raised worries about the hotel’s conditions, previous cancellations of events there without proper reimbursement, and, most alarmingly, staff redundancies with little or no notice. There have also been worrying allegations, including by former staff, concerning irregularities in the payment of tax and national insurance by the hotel management.

    I have attempted via my office to contact the owners of the Chichester Hotel on multiple occasions to seek urgent answers to those very alarming suggestions, yet they continue to ignore requests for clarity and answers from me, as the locally elected MP, and, indeed, from the local and now even national press. Given all of that, I have requested an urgent meeting next week with the Minister for Immigration, in which I will seek to ascertain the exact details of these initial proposals, alongside taking the opportunity, in my usual understated manner, to raise my objections face to face.

    We must tackle the vile industry of people trafficking across the channel. It is a form of moral blackmail and has led to many sad deaths already. In the medium term, I believe that we must use the arrangements with Rwanda to break the business model of these awful human traffickers, in which case accommodation such as that at the Chichester would no longer be required.

    Fourthly, Sangster Court is a sheltered housing unit in Rayleigh, run—allegedly, at least—by Notting Hill Genesis. This housing association has frequently increased the charges that the elderly residents have to pay, even once charging one resident 79p for depreciation on a communal sofa. This is why some people now refer to the building as “Gangster Court” instead. On top of this, Notting Hill Genesis has consistently had a poor maintenance record. For example, it recently left the building’s communal TV aerial broken for three weeks, despite frequently milking the residents of ever-increasing charges. I can only express the hope that Notting Hill Genesis will soon be overtaken by a larger and more professional housing association that will do a much better job for my constituents.

    Finally, it is a great pleasure to see the Deputy Leader of the House of Commons, my hon. Friend the Member for Wellingborough (Mr Bone) at the Dispatch Box. I think he knows already that I got married recently to a wonderful girl called Olivia, and what Mrs Francois wants to know is: can he promise me, all of Sir David’s friends and colleagues and this House that this will now be known as the Sir David Amess debate forever, because I think that that is the answer we would like to hear?

  • Greg Clark – 2022 Article on Protecting Leaseholders

    Greg Clark – 2022 Article on Protecting Leaseholders

    The article written by Greg Clark, the Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities, published in the I newspaper and issued as a news release by the department, on 13 July 2022.

    Writing for i, Levelling Up Secretary Greg Clark announces that contracts to turn the building safety pledge into legally binding requirements have been sent to major housebuilders to be signed within a month.

    Just under 4 weeks ago, we marked the 5th anniversary of the Grenfell Tower tragedy. That devastating tragedy should never have happened and nothing like it must happen again.

    To achieve confidence in this requires far-reaching action by many people and organisations: government, parliament, local councils, regulators, fire and rescue services, housebuilders, insurers, building owners, construction product manufacturers, contractors and many more.

    Progress has been made, though it has taken too long. Nevertheless, it is now becoming irreversible. The Building Safety Act came into force last month – the biggest reform to building safety in a generation. Leaseholders are now protected in law from unfair bills to make their homes safe, and a rigorous regulatory regime will bring order to decades of lax practice.

    My predecessor, Michael Gove, was absolutely right in his drive to ensure that companies should fix the buildings they played a part in constructing. A landmark agreement has seen a majority of the UK’s major housebuilders pledge an estimated £2 billion to this end. That pledge was given to the house building industry in March and there have since been over 45 signatories. I welcome the proactive approach taken by those developers like Barratt that have gone beyond the commitments in the pledge.

    But it is time these commitments are put into force.

    I will today publish the contract that will turn that pledge into legally binding undertakings.

    I will make it available for comment for 4 weeks, after which the contract will be finalised. The faithful translation of these pledges into action is essential to the reputation for dependability that such an important sector of our economy must maintain.

    Nor will there be backsliding on the £3 billion building safety levy. The taxpayer is contributing £5 billion towards fixing those buildings which have been left orphaned by absentee developers: the industry must pay its share too. The levy will be raised against all qualifying projects in England, and companies and firms who headquarter themselves overseas will pay it, as well as home-grown developers. Ensuring that this funding is available to all affected buildings is essential to re-building confidence in the sector. The approach to industry contributions and leaseholder protection has the strong and unambiguous support of all parties in parliament.

    The Building Safety Act has given strong powers to disrupt the business of those developers that do not deliver on their pledge. Parliament rightly expects that the powers it has legislated be used unflinchingly, and they will be. The new Act also gives us new tools to pursue those who have contributed to this problem, not just housebuilders. I have instructed my department’s new Recovery Strategy Unit to target any individuals or companies – not just developers, but freeholders, product manufacturers, and contractors, wherever they register themselves – that do not step up to do what is required of them. For those large developers yet to commit to doing the right thing, it is time to step up and be prepared to pay up. As we identify more developers responsible for fire safety defects in buildings, I expect them to follow suit and take responsibility for repairs – and to do so quickly.

    During the months and years ahead, we have an opportunity to have a productive partnership between housebuilders, the government, local councils and housing associations. I want to increase housebuilding and the most straightforward way is with existing housebuilders. I am proud that when I was a minister in this department for the first time, the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), which I led, galvanised housebuilders, increasing planning permissions granted from 166,000 in the year before it was published to 268,000 within 3 years of it being adopted.

    Developing the NPPF, I worked closely and effectively with housebuilders as well as local authorities, environmentalists and the planning profession. It is rare to meet anyone today that does not believe the NPPF was the most significant advance in planning in decades.

    It is an object lesson in how a good working relationship between all parties can achieve big results. I want this to be our approach again. But a working relationship depends on the efficient discharge of commitments given, without havering after agreements have been made.

    This is true in the normal course of business and policy. In the case of Grenfell, where we have a strong moral obligation to put right the failures that robbed families of the lives of 72 innocent people, that requirement is absolute.

  • Sadiq Khan – 2022 Comments on Millennium Mills and Silvertown Development

    Sadiq Khan – 2022 Comments on Millennium Mills and Silvertown Development

    The comments made by Sadiq Khan, the Mayor of London, on 5 July 2022.

    I am delighted to see work getting underway at this landmark East London location that has vexed planners and politicians alike for the last 40 years.

    The regeneration of this area is long overdue and I’m excited by the plans for Silvertown which respect its past whilst embracing East London’s vibrant and creative future.

    Not only will this project create a vibrant new neighbourhood with 50 per cent genuinely affordable homes but it will also create highly skilled jobs while supporting the regeneration of the Royal Docks as we build a better, fairer and more sustainable city for everyone.

  • Stuart Andrew – 2022 Comments on Changing Street Names

    Stuart Andrew – 2022 Comments on Changing Street Names

    The comments made by Stuart Andrew, the Housing Minister, on 5 July 2022.

    Street names are often a proud part of a community’s identity and hold cherished memories for those that have lived there past and present.

    As part of our mission to level up across the country, we want communities to take back control so we are putting the power over street names changes into the hands of local people who would be most directly affected.

    Our new laws will stop councils pushing through street names changes that communities don’t want.

  • Eddie Hughes – 2022 Statement on the Government’s Private Rented Sector White Paper

    Eddie Hughes – 2022 Statement on the Government’s Private Rented Sector White Paper

    The statement made by Eddie Hughes, the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities, in the House of Commons on 16 June 2022.

    The Government have today published their White Paper “A fairer private rented sector”.

    The private rented sector currently offers the most expensive, least secure, and lowest-quality housing to a growing number of vulnerable people, including 1.3 million households with children and 382,000 households over 65. This is driving unacceptable outcomes and is holding back some of the most deprived parts of the country.

    Many renters face a lack of security as they can be evicted without a reason at just two months’ notice (so called “no fault” section 21 evictions, under the Housing Act 1988). This means many tenants do not challenge their landlords or agents on standards. Renters also feel that they cannot put down roots in their local areas, which does nothing for community cohesion.

    The system does not work for good landlords either, the majority of whom do right by their tenants and offer them a positive, secure living situation. They lack the ability to effectively tackle antisocial behaviour or deliberate and persistent non-payment of rent. Most landlords are trying to do the right thing but simply cannot access the information they need. Further, inadequate enforcement is allowing criminal landlords to thrive, which harms tenants and reputable landlords.

    The A Fairer Private Rented Sector White Paper builds on the vision in the Levelling Up White Paper and sets out our plans to fundamentally reform the private rented sector and level up housing quality in this country. It sets the strategic direction for the PRS for the first time in a generation and demonstrates our ambition and determination to give private renters a better deal.

    The White Paper sets out a 12-point action plan of how we will deliver a fairer, more secure, higher quality private rented sector:

    Safe and decent homes

    The PRS has some of the worst housing of all tenures. We will improve this by:

    Delivering on our levelling up housing mission and require privately rented homes to meet the decent homes standard for the first time. This will give renters safer and better value homes and the blight of poor-quality homes in local communities.

    Accelerating quality improvements in the areas that need it most. We will run pilot schemes with a selection of local authorities to explore different ways of enforcing standards and work with landlords to speed up adoption of the decent homes standard.

    Increased security and stability

    For too long tenants have felt powerless and unable to challenge poor practice. We want to change this. We will rebalance the law to deliver a radically fairer deal for renters, while making sure that landlords can regain possession of their property when needed. We will achieve this by:

    Delivering on our manifesto commitment to abolish section 21 “no fault” evictions and introducing a simpler, more secure tenancy structure. A tenancy will only end if the tenant ends it or if the landlord has a valid ground for possession, empowering tenants to challenge poor practice and reducing costs associated with unexpected moves.

    Reforming grounds for possession to make sure that landlords have effective means to gain possession of their properties when necessary. We will expedite landlords’ ability to evict those who disrupt neighbourhoods through antisocial behaviour and introduce new grounds for persistent arrears and sale of the property.

    Improved dispute resolution

    Tenants and landlords need structures in place that allow them to resolve disputes efficiently and fairly. We will deliver on this by:

    Only allowing increases to rent once per year, ending the use of rent review clauses, and furthering tenants’ ability to challenge excessive rent increases through the first-tier tribunal to support people to manage their costs and to remain in their homes.

    Strengthening tenants’ ability to hold their landlord to account and introduce a new single ombudsman that all private landlords must join. This will provide fair, impartial, and binding resolution to many issues and be quicker, cheaper and less adversarial than the court system.

    Working with the Ministry of Justice and Her Majesty’s Courts and Tribunal Service (HMCTS) to target the areas where there are unacceptable delays in court proceedings. We will also strengthen mediation and alternative dispute resolution to enable landlords and tenants to work together to reduce the risk of issues escalating.

    Better compliance and robust enforcement

    Landlords, tenants, and local authorities need access to the right information and, for local authorities, the right powers, to crack down on poor practice. We will deliver this by:

    Introducing a new property portal to make sure that tenants, landlords and local authorities have the information they need. The portal will provide a single “front door” for landlords to understand their responsibilities, tenants will be able to access information about their landlord’s compliance and local councils will have access to better data to crack down on criminal landlords. We also intend to incorporate some of the functionality of the database of rogue landlords, mandating the entry of all eligible landlord offences and making them publicly visible (subject to consultation with the Information Commissioner’s Office).

    Strengthening local councils’ enforcement powers and ability to crack down on criminal landlords by seeking to increase investigative powers and strengthening the fine regime for serious offences. We are also exploring a requirement for local councils to report on their housing enforcement activity and want to recognise those local councils that are doing a good job.

    A positive renting experience

    We want to improve the experience of everyone who rents in the private rented sector and will:

    Legislate to make it illegal for landlords or agents to have blanket bans on renting to families with children or those in receipt of benefits and explore if action is needed for other vulnerable groups, such as prison leavers. We will also improve support to landlords who let to people on benefits, which will reduce barriers for those on the lowest incomes.

    Give tenants the right to request a pet in their property, which the landlord must consider and cannot unreasonably refuse. We will also amend the Tenant Fees Act 2019 so landlords can request that their tenants buy pet insurance.

    Work with industry experts to monitor the development of innovative market-led solutions to passport deposits. This will help tenants who struggle to raise a second deposit to move around the PRS more easily and support tenants to save for ownership.

    We have already taken significant action to improve private renting, including significantly reducing the proportion of non-decent private rented homes, banning tenancy fees for tenancy agreements signed after 1 June 2019, and introducing pandemic emergency measures to ban bailiff evictions—these reforms will finish the job that we started in 201—and deliver a fairer private rented sector.

    We have also today published the Government response to the 2019 consultation “A new deal for renting” that sets out how the new tenancy regime will work once section 21 evictions are abolished, the Government response to the “Considering the case for a Housing court: call for evidence”, and the Government response to the 2019 “Tenancy deposit reform: a call for evidence”. We will be depositing copies of these documents in the Library of the House.

    We will deliver on these reforms in the forthcoming parliamentary Session, which will drive real change and make the private rented sector fit for the 21st century. These reforms will apply to England only.