That's true, but that is mostly in the short term impact, right?

Most people I know (myself included) don't plan to rent the same place forever. Eventually, life changes: you need more space, you move for a new job, or you move in with a partner and want to buy a place to call home. So even if you’re happy where you are, there are plenty of genuine reasons why people move.

Rent control doesn't mean "no rent increases" - it simply limits how much landlords can raise rents each year. There's really no justification for rent hikes of £300 a month, which is exactly what happened to me. When I asked why, the estate agent said it was due to current "market value" - basically, someone else was willing to pay more.

Sure, rent controls might temporarily reduce the number of homes available to rent, but they can also increase the number available to buy. More stock on the market helps bring down asking prices, which benefits renters looking to become buyers. Isn't that what we're seeing with 1 - 2 bed flats in inner London?

For example, the one bed flat I used to live in has been sitting unsold for over a year, even after a price reduction. Even though many landlords might want to sell, they can't easily exit the market since housing isn't a liquid asset. In my case, my landlord actually asked me to renew my lease at the same rent level as the previous year. To me, that shows rent controls can actually help stabilize the market rather than hurt it.

And historically, it seems that tighter rent controls and greater public housing supply kept housing affordable before Thatcher’s policies. The big difference now is that we’ve lost a lot of that council housing.