Renters' Rights Bill: Reasoned Amendment to Second Reading
104Ayes
424Noes
Defeated · majority 320 · Government won119 did not vote
647 Members · Aye 104 · No 424 · DNV 119 · grey dots in centre are abstentions
Analysis
Commons
Commons
On 9 October 2024, the House of Commons voted on a Conservative reasoned amendment (a formal motion objecting to a bill proceeding) that would have blocked the Renters' Rights Bill at its Second Reading (the first major parliamentary debate on a bill's principles). The amendment was defeated by 424 votes to 104, allowing the bill to proceed through Parliament. The Renters' Rights Bill is a significant piece of housing legislation that would abolish Section 21 "no-fault evictions," under which landlords can currently end a tenancy without giving a specific reason. The bill also strengthens other tenant protections across the private rented sector. Its passage through Second Reading means it will continue towards becoming law, affecting millions of private renters in England as well as landlords and letting agents across the country. The vote divided almost entirely along party lines. All 97 Conservative MPs who voted backed the amendment, joined by 6 Reform UK and 3 independent MPs. Labour, the Liberal Democrats, the Greens, and the smaller Northern Irish and other parties voted unanimously against the amendment. There were no notable rebels on either side. The vote sits in a broader political context in which the previous Conservative government had itself promised to abolish no-fault evictions but repeatedly delayed doing so; the Labour government is now pursuing a version of that reform with considerably wider-ranging tenant protections attached.
Voting Aye meant
Support blocking the Renters' Rights Bill from progressing, opposing the Government's approach to ending no-fault evictions and reforming the private rented sector
Voting No meant
Support the Renters' Rights Bill proceeding, backing measures to end section 21 no-fault evictions and give renters greater security and rights
Each row is one party. The stacked bar gives the within-party split of Aye / No / Absent; the columns on the right give the raw counts. The whip column shows the published party position — “Free vote” means the whip was formally removed for this division.
Party
Whip
Aye / No / Abs
Aye
No
Abs
Labour Party
Whipped No
0
312
49
Conservative and Unionist Party
Whipped Aye
97
0
19
Liberal Democrats
Whipped No
0
62
10
Labour and Co-operative Party
Whipped No
0
35
7
Independent
—
2
8
4
Scottish National Party
—
0
0
9
Reform UK
Whipped Aye
6
0
1
Sinn Féin
—
0
0
7
Democratic Unionist Party
—
0
1
4
Green Party of England and Wales
Whipped No
0
3
1
Plaid Cymru
—
0
0
4
Social Democratic and Labour Party
—
0
1
1
Alliance Party of Northern Ireland
—
0
0
1
Restore Britain
—
1
0
0
Speaker
—
0
0
1
Traditional Unionist Voice
—
0
0
1
Ulster Unionist Party
—
0
1
0
Your Party
—
0
1
0
Source · Hansard · UK Parliament Votes API · whip status from announced positions; “free vote” indicates the whip was formally removed
As Housing Secretary, strongly supporting the Bill as necessary reform to end the 'scandalous practice' of no-fault evictions, ensure decent homes, and protect tenants from unfair rent increases while recognising most landlords are responsible.Labour · Voted no · Read full speech (3,590 words) →
Opposing the Bill, arguing it will fail to help renters, reduce housing supply, cause court gridlock, and create unintended consequences as seen in Scotland; notes the previous Government recognised these flaws and abandoned their own similar Bill.Conservative · Voted aye · Read full speech (2,770 words) →
Welcoming the Bill as addressing long-delayed tenant security, but raising concerns about tribunal capacity, council enforcement capabilities given funding pressures, and need for proper ombudsman support.Labour · Voted no · Read full speech (1,781 words) →
Generally welcoming the Bill and end to no-fault evictions, but urging retention of fixed-term tenancy options, proper court investment, council funding, and broader social housing ambitions beyond private sector regulation.Liberal Democrat · Voted no · Read full speech (2,222 words) →
Acknowledging landlord vilification is wrong and majority are responsible; questioning Government transparency on cost impacts, unintended consequences for rent levels, and funding for local authority enforcement.Conservative · Voted no_vote_recorded · Read full speech (815 words) →
Strongly supporting abolition of section 21 evictions, highlighting human cost of current system (117,450 families in temporary accommodation, deaths of babies due to inadequate housing) and necessity of urgent reform.Labour · Voted no · Read full speech (803 words) →
Welcoming most of the Bill but arguing it does not go far enough; advocating for rent controls to address astronomical, unaffordable rents driving working-class communities from inner-city areas.Independent · Voted no · Read full speech (857 words) →
Sources
Division dataUK Parliament Votes API
DebateHansard · Commons
Stance analysisAI analysis · Claude 4.x
LicenceOpen Parliament Licence v3.0