Renters’ Rights Bill: Motion to disagree with Lords Amendment 18
402
Ayes
—
97
Noes
Passed · Government won
147 did not vote
Analysis
Commons
Commons
Parliament voted on 8 September 2025 to reject Lords Amendment 18 to the Renters' Rights Bill, a change that the House of Lords had introduced to modify the government's original legislation. The motion to disagree with the Lords passed by 402 votes to 97, a commanding majority of 305. This was one of several votes held on the same day in which the Commons pushed back against multiple Lords amendments to the bill, part of the parliamentary process known as "ping-pong," in which the two chambers negotiate the final text of legislation. The vote matters because it keeps the government's preferred version of the Renters' Rights Bill intact on whichever provision Amendment 18 addressed, advancing a piece of legislation that the government has framed as a significant reform of the private rented sector in England. The bill as a whole is designed to strengthen the rights and security of tenants, with measures affecting millions of renters and landlords across the country. By rejecting the Lords' modification, the Commons reasserted its version of those protections, preventing the upper house from diluting or redirecting the policy as drafted by ministers. The division was almost entirely along party lines. Labour MPs, including those sitting under the Labour and Co-operative Party designation, voted unanimously in favour of rejecting the amendment, as did the Liberal Democrats, the Democratic Unionist Party, the Greens, and several smaller parties, giving the government its large majority. The Conservatives voted unanimously against, joined by Reform UK and two independent MPs. There were no notable cross-party rebellions. This vote was one of at least five similar divisions on the same day, with comparable results across Lords Amendments 11, 19, 26, and 39, suggesting a coordinated Commons effort to restore the bill to the government's preferred form ahead of final passage.
Voting Aye meant
Support keeping the 12-month restricted re-letting period to protect tenants from being evicted under false pretences of a property sale, rejecting the Lords' proposal to reduce it to 6 months
Voting No meant
Support the Lords' amendment to reduce the restricted period to 6 months, arguing 12 months is excessive or overly burdensome on landlords with legitimate reasons to sell
499 voting MPs. Each dot is one vote; left-to-right by party. Grey dots in the centre are the 147 who did not vote.
Aye
No
Absent
Labour PartyWhipped Aye
289
0
73
Conservative and Unionist PartyWhipped No
0
89
27
Liberal DemocratsWhipped Aye
62
0
10
Labour and Co-operative PartyWhipped Aye
36
0
6
Independent
6
2
5
Scottish National Party
0
0
9
Reform UKWhipped No
0
7
1
Sinn Féin
0
0
7
Democratic Unionist PartyWhipped Aye
4
0
1
Green Party of England and WalesWhipped Aye
3
0
1
Plaid Cymru
0
0
4
Social Democratic and Labour Party
1
0
1
Alliance Party of Northern Ireland
0
0
1
Speaker
0
0
1
Traditional Unionist Voice
0
1
—
Ulster Unionist Party
1
0
—
Your Party
1
0
—
Government must reject most Lords amendments as they undermine core Bill principles; supports amendments on agricultural workers and maintains 12-month no-let restriction to prevent abuse.Labour · Voted aye · Read full speech (4,162 words) →
Bill is poorly thought through and counterproductive; will drive landlords out and reduce housing supply; Lords amendments attempt to address real problems the Government has created.Conservative · Voted no · Read full speech (2,220 words) →
Supports Bill's core aims but backs certain Lords amendments including those on shared owners (19), carers (64), and military housing (39) to improve fairness and accountability.Liberal Democrat · Voted aye · Read full speech (2,366 words) →
Bill is groundbreaking and must be protected; opposes amendments that weaken discrimination enforcement and the 12-month no-let restriction; urges rapid implementation.Labour · Voted aye · Read full speech (344 words) →
Bill essential to address sector imbalance; opposes amendments on standard of proof (26-27), pet deposits (11), and re-let periods (18) as they undermine tenant protections.Labour · Voted aye · Read full speech (1,319 words) →
Bill overdue; strongly opposes amendments on pet deposits (11), re-let periods (18), and standard of proof (26); backs military housing standard (39).Liberal Democrat · Voted aye · Read full speech (1,023 words) →
Bill's core principles must be preserved; opposes Lords amendments expanding eviction grounds and raising standard of proof; criticises Opposition for abandoning no-fault eviction commitment.Labour · Voted aye · Read full speech (687 words) →
Bill provides critical opportunity for survivors of domestic abuse; opposes amendments that weaken tenant protections and stability.Labour · Voted aye · Read full speech (197 words) →
Sources
Division dataUK Parliament Votes API
DebateHansard · Commons
Stance analysisAI analysis · Claude 4.x
LicenceOpen Parliament Licence v3.0