Watch out for the unintended consequences of Britain’s rent act The government’s new law threatens to make renting worse, not better May 7th 2026 FOR TWO decades the private rental market in England boomed. Cheap finance, tax incentives and laissez-faire regulation encouraged buy-to-let investors to pile in. The number of privately rented homes rose from 2m in 1996 to 4.7m in 2016. Cheap finance and intense competition kept prices down for tenants. In the decade since then, mortgage costs have risen, tax has become burdensome and landlords must navigate a thicket of rules. As a result there are just 20,000 more privately rented homes than in 2016, even though the population has grown by 3.3m. Sweeping legislative reforms that came into force on May 1st mean that renting privately may become worse. The act attempts to tackle genuine
insecurity. The new law abolished fixed-term (typically 12-month) tenancies and replaced them with ones that roll on indefinitely. Tenants’ notice to landlords will be set at two months and “no-fault” evictions will end. Instead landlords will need a valid reason—such as selling or rent arrears—for ousting tenants. The new law will also restrict landlords’ ability to raise prices. Bidding wars above the asking price for new lets are now banned. Tenants will also be able to challenge annual rent reviews at a tribunal. They will have every incentive to do so, as the new rent will be payable from the tribunal’s decision rather than backdated. The government had been rumoured to be considering capping rent rises for one year in response to inflation pressures from the Gulf war. Although the current occupants of Downing Street have pooh-poohed the policy, rent controls are favoured by much of Labour’s left, including Andy Burnham, the ambitious mayor of Manchester. The Green Party, the most popular outfit for voters in their 20s, would also cap rents if it gained power. Such caps would offer temporary relief for sitting tenants. But landlords squeezed by lower returns might skimp on maintenance or exit the market altogether. The result would be a smaller, shabbier sector.
The perception that rents have spiralled out of control in recent years is misplaced. Rents increased by an average of 2.1% a year between 2005 and 2021, whereas over the past four years they have shot up by 6.7% a year. But pay has kept pace. As a share of renters’ median incomes, the rent burden has fallen from 40% to 33% over the past two decades. In London, with 1m rented homes, that burden has been closer to 50% of income, but is little changed from 20 years ago (see chart). Landlords tend to get a bad rap. Yet a government-commissioned survey of private landlords found that one-third did not increase rents upon renewal in 2024, even though the market was frothy at the time. Similarly, most tenants are happy in their homes: 77% reported in 2024 that they felt “physically safe and secure”. There are a few bad apples. Some unscrupulous landlords took to issuing no- fault eviction notices ahead of the law changing on May 1st, with the intention of turning their properties into short-term lets. Around 10% of private renters report problems with damp, compared with only 7% of people in social housing (a difference partly explained by private renters’ preference for Victorian terraces). The new act implements “Awaab’s law”, named after a two-year-old child who died from prolonged exposure to black mould in a council flat in Manchester. For the many baby-boomers who entered the buy-to-let market in the late 1990s, the good times are over. Richard Donnell from Zoopla, a property website, says that “the numbers don’t stack up for many landlords any more.” Four-fifths of all landlords own four or fewer homes and most purchased them to supplement pensions that they are now spending. Landlords that remain are more likely to be corporates that drive a harder bargain with tenants. As the sector stagnates, the risk is that the new law benefits incumbent tenants but makes access to renting more expensive for everyone else. ■ For more expert analysis of the biggest stories in Britain, sign up to Blighty, our weekly subscriber-only newsletter. This article was downloaded by zlibrary from https://www.economist.com//britain/2026/05/07/watch-out-for-the-unintended- consequences-of-britains-rent-act
Britain’s deer are thriving. It’s a nightmare for the countryside Oh deer! May 7th 2026 The Hundred Acre Wood, Winnie the Pooh’s fictional home, was inspired by Ashdown Forest in East Sussex. Pooh’s adventures feature many creatures; noticeably missing are any deer. That would not be so were they written today. The forest is now home to 15 deer per square kilometre. Walk its hills and there’s a decent chance you’ll spot a 30-strong herd. If not, the keen- eyed can easily see signs of their presence: from bark-stripped saplings to trees nibbled neatly up to the “browsing line” some 1.6 metres off the ground, the highest point most fallow deer can reach. Nobody knows how many deer live in Britain. The most common estimate, 2m, is at best an educated guess. But it is clear that their numbers are rising.
Birdwatchers have reported both bird and mammal sightings to the British Trust for Ornithology since the 1990s. Over the past 15 years sightings of both fallow and muntjac deer have more than doubled; those of roe are up by 42% (see chart). The government’s recently published policy paper on deer impact says, bluntly: “It’s clear that the management approach to date has failed.” That is a problem. Deer cause up to 74,000 road accidents a year. They destroy crops and are a nightmare for biodiversity. In 2023 Derriford Hospital, in Plymouth, had to increase security after two bucks were filmed gallivanting down a corridor. In Britain six species act, as Jochen Langbein, a researcher, puts it, like “lots of different lawnmowers mowing at different heights”. Diminutive muntjac can reach only about 1 metre off the ground. Red and sika can stretch as high as 1.8 metres. But each species also has its own dietary preferences— picking and choosing its favourite flora in a way that can devastate the natural environment. Particularly vulnerable are woodlands, 33% of which showed signs of deer damage in 2021 (in 1971 it was 12%). That can ruin the habitats of wildlife like dormice, nightingales and turtledoves.
The covid-19 pandemic, which kept hunters inside, accelerated a long- standing problem. Milder winters and longer growing seasons have made life easier for British deer over the past 20 years. The trouble has arguably been brewing since the early 1900s, when deer-hunting aristocrats thought it fashionable to populate their estates with more exotic species. The real culprit is underculling. Around 350,000 deer are culled each year. That probably needs to double. But deer stalking (a form of hunting) is an arduous hobby, and a dying trade. In 2022 the average age of a stalker was 58; now it is 62. A landowner’s permission is needed, which complicates culling. And deer have a knack for figuring out where they are safe. Besides, Britain lacks the game-eating culture of many of its European neighbours. Without a strong venison market there has been little incentive for deer stalkers to go to the trouble of hunting and preparing more deer than their friends and family can eat (perhaps 15 a year). Deer-hunting estates actually benefit from overpopulation. An extra stag can add £50,000 ($67,000) to the value of a property. The result of all this is that Britain’s deer population has been doubling roughly every 20 years since at least the 1970s. Compound interest means the country is now at the acute end of a chronic problem. What can be done? Government plans to boost demand for venison might help. Some favour more humane alternatives to culling, such as tall fences and contraceptive bait. But muntjac are notoriously hard to contain and contraceptive doses are fiendishly tricky. The sheer number of wolves (easily 15,000) needed to manage a deer population lacking any natural predators makes reintroduction, popular with environmentalists, a pipe dream. The most radical solution would be to reform Britain’s feudal hunting laws, with the government issuing licences and permits. That is hard to imagine. Roger Seddon of the Countryside Alliance says such a change “would be enormously destructive to the culture of the countryside”. ■ For more expert analysis of the biggest stories in Britain, sign up to Blighty, our weekly subscriber-only newsletter.
This article was downloaded by zlibrary from https://www.economist.com//britain/2026/05/06/britains-deer-are-thriving-its-a- nightmare-for-the-countryside
The surprising supply-chain choke point for cricket bats A shortage of English willow changes the batting order May 7th 2026 China may have a chokehold on rare earths and Iran can close the Strait of Hormuz, but there is one corner of global supply chains that is forever England. High-end cricket bats, which can retail for over £1,000 ($1,350), are almost all produced from English willow. No other wood provides the same ping. The price of English trees has tripled since 2017, driven by demand from cricket-mad India. At the Essex headquarters of J.S. Wright & Sons, supplier of wood for about three-quarters of willow bats globally, the yard vibrates to the sound of chainsaw on willow. Trucks deposit trees from across Britain. Each trunk is cut into about 40 wedge-shaped clefts, which are then dried in heated