Group 5: Restrictions on giving notice (Amendments 1, 2,3, 4, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 22, 23, 24, 28, 29, 30, 31, 8)

Part of the debate – in the Senedd at 1:50 pm on 10 February 2021.

Alert me about debates like this

Photo of Laura Anne Jones Laura Anne Jones Conservative 1:50, 10 February 2021

Restrictions on giving notice. Minister, we will be abstaining on amendments 1 and 2, and their consequential amendments. This is not because I disagree with the intention of increasing security of tenure, but because I want to raise issues discussed by my colleague Mark Isherwood MS during Stage 2.

At Stage 2, we brought forward an amendment based on recommendations made by the NRLA to allow for a six-month section 173 notice to be served after four months, but to take effect at the end of the six-month fixed term. The NRLA, whilst not disrupting the Bill's intentions, have voiced concerns about the impact that this may have in markets where the preservation of an annual cycle, mainly the student sector, is essential for the smooth running of the rental sector. This was also supported by the leader of Ceredigion County Council, a Plaid Cymru councillor, in a recent letter received by the NRLA.

The Minister refused to accept this amendment, instead arguing that students would not be treated differently. This was not the intention of this amendment. Nor would this amendment have encroached on the Welsh Government's objective of a year's security of tenure and increased notice period. All it sought was to give the landlords extra flexibility to preserve the business cycle that is essential to the efficient running of the sector. Minister, how do you respond to the legitimate concerns of some within the housing sector about the impact that this provision will have on the student housing sector, in particular, and how can you alleviate these concerns?

Moving on to amendment 2, we put forward a compromise amendment at Stage 2, allowing for a six-month, 10-year tenant-only break, which was proposed by the NRLA. However, this was rejected by the Minister. This was based on concerns that some tenants want some flexibility so that they can respond to changes in their personal lives. As such, will the Minister provide confidence about how the Bill provides for tenants who require flexibility, while also increasing security of tenure?

Finally, we are abstaining on amendment 15, as it does not seem to fully resolve the judgment of the recent Jarvis v. Evans case. Indeed, it returns to the status quo, as outlined in the Housing (Wales) Act 2014. As such, I wanted to ask whether this is a stop-gap amendment ahead of further changes, or whether you are satisfied that it responds to the recent judgment. Thank you.