Pets shouldn't have more rights than tenants

In the UK we have a lack of policy preventing landlords excluding tenants who receive benefits and an opposition party suggesting we should focus on whether or not landlords should allow pets

Kirsty Major
Wednesday 14 February 2018 02:18
Comments
Labour's animal welfare proposal is welcome, but so would housing welfare reform.
Labour's animal welfare proposal is welcome, but so would housing welfare reform.

The Tories are currently engaged in operation puppy-wash: a raft of animal welfare policies designed to repair the damage incurred to their party during the general election campaign in which they reneged on banning hunting and stopping the ivory trade. It’s a situation which hasn’t been helped by a poorly communicated vote on transferring EU regulations on animal welfare into the EU Withdrawal Bill#

I doubt it’s been completely resolved by that photo of Michael Gove hugging a puppy, either. But it’s clear that it’s an issue a lot of people care about.

Not to be outdone, Labour has announced plans to ban the live export of animals for slaughter; strengthen the Hunting Act; enshrine the principle of animal sentience in law; end the badger cull; implement a review of animal testing; expand affordable vet care for people on low incomes. In a new policy paper released today, it also pledges to consult landlords on giving tenants the right to keep a pet. This is obviously the party for the many pets, not the few.

Labour has an impressive legacy on animal rights – from banning the hunting of wild animals to protecting the treatment of pets, which should be celebrated – and the policy paper on tenants’ pets is a welcome move to improve the treatment of animals. But by using animal rights for political capital, Labour runs the risk of denigrating political debate. Let’s talk about animal rights once we’ve secured fundamental human rights.

Take housing, a market in the UK that is failing. There are basic rights that tenants do not currently have proper access to – affordable, well-maintained properties with secure tenancy contracts are a pipe dream for many.

Yes, this is a policy which focuses on animal welfare rather than housing but had Labour instead made it part of a wider housing announcement then it would have been far more welcome. Of course, Labour has done some great work on suggesting policies that would correct the private rental market – such as coming out against Section 21 no-fault evictions – but these ideas haven’t gone far enough.

In the UK we have a lack of policy preventing landlords excluding tenants who receive benefits and an opposition party suggesting we should focus on whether or not landlords should allow pets. Clearly, there’s something wrong here with the way our political priorities are shaped by public debate.​

Take housing, a market in the UK that is failing. There are basic rights that tenants do not currently have proper access to – affordable, well-maintained properties with secure tenancy contracts are a pipe dream for many.

Yes, this is a policy which focuses on animal welfare rather than housing but had Labour instead made it part of a wider housing announcement then it would have been far more welcome. Of course, Labour has done some great work on suggesting policies that would correct the private rental market – such as coming out against Section 21 no-fault evictions – but these ideas haven’t gone far enough.

In the UK we have a lack of policy preventing landlords excluding tenants who receive benefits and an opposition party suggesting we should focus on whether or not landlords should allow pets. Clearly, there’s something wrong here with the way our political priorities are shaped by public debate.​

Take housing, a market in the UK that is failing. There are basic rights that tenants do not currently have proper access to – affordable, well-maintained properties with secure tenancy contracts are a pipe dream for many.

Yes, this is a policy which focuses on animal welfare rather than housing but had Labour instead made it part of a wider housing announcement then it would have been far more welcome. Of course, Labour has done some great work on suggesting policies that would correct the private rental market – such as coming out against Section 21 no-fault evictions – but these ideas haven’t gone far enough.

In the UK we have a lack of policy preventing landlords excluding tenants who receive benefits and an opposition party suggesting we should focus on whether or not landlords should allow pets. Clearly, there’s something wrong here with the way our political priorities are shaped by public debate.​

Take housing, a market in the UK that is failing. There are basic rights that tenants do not currently have proper access to – affordable, well-maintained properties with secure tenancy contracts are a pipe dream for many.

Yes, this is a policy which focuses on animal welfare rather than housing but had Labour instead made it part of a wider housing announcement then it would have been far more welcome. Of course, Labour has done some great work on suggesting policies that would correct the private rental market – such as coming out against Section 21 no-fault evictions – but these ideas haven’t gone far enough.

In the UK we have a lack of policy preventing landlords excluding tenants who receive benefits and an opposition party suggesting we should focus on whether or not landlords should allow pets. Clearly, there’s something wrong here with the way our political priorities are shaped by public debate.​

This isn’t the only area where Labour has fallen short on offering up policies which properly prioritise according to the reality of the situation. The party has proposed an inflation cap on rent rises – but when you have rents which are already unaffordable and inflation is rising, the caps only address one tiny part of the problem (the inflation), rather than the fundamental affordability of a property. Any rent cap that does bite affordability can push landlords out of the rental market, which is a boon for those with deposits saved to buy up the new housing stock but not for those without.

What is actually most effective in the long term is more social housing – which both the Conservative Government and Labour have committed to – and in the short term, until these houses are built, an increase in housing benefit. With housing benefit being reduced each year, and rent prices soaring, year on year people are finding that they can’t afford the homes they live in, which will inevitably lead to an increase in homelessness (and has done so in the last few years).

As it stands, we could face a situation where animals will have more of a right to a home than their owners. This policy announcement press release makes Labour look ridiculous – they have done some great work on reforming the private rental sector, but they need to go much further in protecting people’s right to safe, secure and affordable housing before they start concentrating on animals.

Register for free to continue reading

Registration is a free and easy way to support our truly independent journalism

By registering, you will also enjoy limited access to Premium articles, exclusive newsletters, commenting, and virtual events with our leading journalists

Please enter a valid email
Please enter a valid email
Must be at least 6 characters, include an upper and lower case character and a number
Must be at least 6 characters, include an upper and lower case character and a number
Must be at least 6 characters, include an upper and lower case character and a number
Please enter your first name
Special characters aren’t allowed
Please enter a name between 1 and 40 characters
Please enter your last name
Special characters aren’t allowed
Please enter a name between 1 and 40 characters
You must be over 18 years old to register
You must be over 18 years old to register
Opt-out-policy
You can opt-out at any time by signing in to your account to manage your preferences. Each email has a link to unsubscribe.

By clicking ‘Create my account’ you confirm that your data has been entered correctly and you have read and agree to our Terms of use, Cookie policy and Privacy notice.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy policy and Terms of service apply.

Already have an account? sign in

By clicking ‘Register’ you confirm that your data has been entered correctly and you have read and agree to our Terms of use, Cookie policy and Privacy notice.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy policy and Terms of service apply.

Register for free to continue reading

Registration is a free and easy way to support our truly independent journalism

By registering, you will also enjoy limited access to Premium articles, exclusive newsletters, commenting, and virtual events with our leading journalists

Already have an account? sign in

By clicking ‘Register’ you confirm that your data has been entered correctly and you have read and agree to our Terms of use, Cookie policy and Privacy notice.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy policy and Terms of service apply.

Join our new commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in