Lord Shipley (LD)

My Lords, I remind the Committee that I am a vice-president of the Local Government Association. I listened carefully to the noble Baroness, Lady Scott of Bybrook. I can see the merit in a clause defining the Bill’s purpose, and Ministers will advise us on that—except that the whole Bill defines its purpose. I noticed that the noble Baroness, Lady Scott, used the word “secure” several times in her speech, confirming that: “The purpose of this Act is to improve the ability of renters in the rented sector to obtain secure, fairly priced and decent quality housing”, as in subsection (1) of the proposed new clause in Amendment 1. I do not understand how the noble Baroness can propose an amendment that talks about the security of decent-quality housing at the same time as Amendment 8 proposes that small landlords—that is, those having fewer than five properties—could continue to be able to issue Section 21 no-fault notices. I have to assume that it is now the Conservative Opposition’s intention to withdraw Amendment 8, for otherwise I do not see how, in all honesty, a statement can be made in Amendment 1 that the objective is for secure, decent-quality housing in the private rented sector when for many properties no-fault evictions would be allowed to continue under the Conservatives’ Amendment 8.