Tyranny of the Month - The Renters' Rights Bill

"Until August 1914 a sensible, law-abiding Englishman could pass through life and hardly notice the existence of the state, beyond the post office and the policeman."

Fighting for a Free Future is pleased to introduce its new monthly series by the Rt Hon Steve Baker, Tyranny of the Month.

A. J. P. Taylor’s English History, 1914 - 1945, famously opens:

“Until August 1914 a sensible, law-abiding Englishman could pass through life and hardly notice the existence of the state, beyond the post office and the policeman. He could live where he liked and as he liked. He had no official number or identity card. He could travel abroad or leave his country for ever without a passport of any sort. He could buy goods from any country in the world on the same terms as he bought goods at home. … Since 1911, it helped to insure certain classes of workers against sickness and unemployment. This tendency towards more state action was increasing. Expenditure on the social services had roughly doubled since the Liberals took office in 1905. Still, broadly speaking, the state acted only to help those who could not help themselves. It left the adult citizen alone.”

How far we have fallen! Imagine, for a moment, if a person were to fall asleep in 1914 and wake up today in 2025: in a country rife with division, and at its heart an ever-more powerful state which has injected itself into every component of their life; an economy minutely controlled by technocratic regulation, but which feigns liberalism; a national life where the individual is not seen as sovereign, but as a problematic pawn to be carefully controlled.

What might the man from 1914 say? We believe this person’s perspective is not only valuable, but sorely missing in modern discourse. This is why we are introducing Tyranny of the Month, a new monthly series on Voices for a Free Future written by the Rt Hon Steve Baker.

---

Once upon a time, if you owned a house, you could actually, well, own it. Revolutionary concept, I know. You could rent it to whomever you fancied, agree on a price over a nice cup of tea, and the government would politely mind its own business. The most bureaucratic ordeal one faced was dealing with the postman, and even that was enough to warrant a stiff drink.

Fast forward to October 2025, and the Renters’ Rights Bill has waltzed through its final stages. Royal Assent awaits, which means it is about to become a problem for all of us.

Let’s begin with the “Private Rented Sector Database”: a government spreadsheet with delusions of grandeur, essentially a glorified guest book where the local busybody takes attendance. Every landlord must now register, presumably so bureaucrats can ensure you’re tucking your tenants in properly at night. Forgot to sign up? That’ll be £7,000, please. Still rebellious? Make it £40,000. And if you’re not on this magical list, you cannot even ask a court to give you back your own property (unless your tenant is hosting gladiatorial combat in the living room, apparently).

Ownership now requires permission from the government. In 1914, this would have caused several monocles to pop clean off.

The abolition of “Section 21”, which sounds like a classified military operation but is actually just bureaucratic jargon for “this is my house, please leave”, means you can no longer simply give notice. Want to sell your own property? Splendid! Just wait twelve months, and give four months’ notice; you’ll only need sixteen months to dispose of what you foolishly thought was your asset! Planning to move into your own home? Same delightful obstacle course. I’m half expecting the next Bill to require a permit for moving your sofa three inches to the left.

The level of micromanagement is genuinely impressive, like watching someone organise grains of sand alphabetically. Landlords must meet the “Decent Homes Standard”; there are clearly issues with some landlords and some properties, but the idea that 21% of properties currently embody Victorian squalor, requiring over £8,000 each to achieve government-approved adequacy, is ridiculous. Rent increases now require annual notices following procedures more elaborate than those applying to MI6. You cannot refuse tenants with children, benefits, or pets without providing “reasonable” justification that satisfies some civil servant’s afternoon crossword puzzle. And fixed-term contracts, which provided that quaint old thing called “certainty,” are now simply banned.

The Renters’ Rights Bill represents the replacement of boring old liberty with exciting new bureaucratic superintendence. We are swapping ownership for state-granted privilege.

This might sting less if the Bill’s secret mission was to discourage renting altogether. But glancing around at the current landscape, young people seem tragically undrowned in affordable rental options. In 1914, property ownership wasn’t just meaningful; it was the bedrock of civil society. Requiring permission for everything short of breathing represents a rather spectacular inversion of this liberty, and will doubtless further cripple what we optimistically call the “housing market.”

In my first tyranny of the month article, I have said many true things in jest. Sadly, there were numerous other state tyrannies I could have selected for this article. Perhaps next month’s Budget will introduce a breathing tax too. Even then, there would still be competition for the next tyranny of the month!