Lord Empey (UUP)

My Lords, I again note my interest in the register as the owner of a single rented property. The Minister has asserted, as Ministers are required to do, that, in her view, “the provisions of the Renters’ Rights Bill are compatible with the Convention rights”. I am just wondering, because it does tend to be a bit of a routine that those of us who have ever done this sign these things: can she tell the Committee whether there was a very specific examination of the circumstances in the Bill? I must also say that the tour de force by the noble Lord, Lord Jackson, was impressive. We all felt that his Latin was very good—we will give him marks for that, I think—and he raises a very significant point. It is not unique to have retrospective legislation, but it is certainly frowned upon, bearing in mind the number of people who could be directly affected—their financial welfare, their own welfare, their concerns and the worries that can be generated by having something done, in effect, long after they had agreed and thought they had a deal. I am sure that President Trump will be listening to this debate, because he might be learning lessons; we might be teaching him things to do. Can the Minister assure the Committee that when she signed that, or gave her views on the convention rights, that it was actually properly assessed, and legal advice was provided, rather than it simply being a piece of routine that departments do when they bring legislation to Parliament? Having listened to the contribution of the noble Lord, Lord Jackson, I think there could very well be people who will feel aggrieved if something happens subsequent to an agreement that they entered into freely and, all of a sudden, things have changed. I think we do need an explanation.