Rights of Boat Dwellers Bill [HL]

Baroness Miller of Chilthorne Domer Excerpts

2nd reading
Friday 17th July 2026 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Miller of Chilthorne Domer (LD)]

My Lords, it is a pleasure to follow the noble Lord, Lord Cashman, in his long campaign on this issue. My noble friend Lady Bakewell of Hardington Mandeville has long fought for those members of society who have found it hard, or impossible, to have their non-traditional homes recognised as a home, be they Travellers, Gypsies or, in this case, boaters. She has laid out extremely well why this Bill is needed. I lived on a houseboat on a rented mooring in the 1980s. Frankly, even nearly 50 years later, the issues have not really changed.

My noble friend talked about how difficult it is to access services because a boat address is not recognised by many authorities. Clause 4 is absolutely key. Last year, the noble Lord, Lord Cashman, introduced an amendment to the then Renters’ Rights Bill on this issue and, on 14 May 2025, the noble Baroness, Lady Taylor of Stevenage, who will reply today, mentioned a couple of points that are worth thinking about.

First, she told the House that a boat is regarded as a chattel, not a home, so security of tenure is—I paraphrase—already in the “too difficult to consider” government box. Nevertheless, that chattel is someone’s home. The boat needs to be redefined; it is insulting to call it chattel these days when it is somebody’s home. She also mentioned the implications for the navigation authorities. The Canal & River Trust is well aware of the issue but has no duty to have regard to a boat being someone’s home. Then there is the added complication that some boat owners own their moorings, some rent their moorings and some have no mooring and must move on every 14 days.

This Bill would give all these groups some extra security, particularly in the recognition of a home. With no such definition, boat dwellers fall down the gap in the legislation that should recognise the status of a home. There are also the duties of local authorities. They have a duty to recognise someone as homeless if they can no longer live on their boat, but they make very little or no effort as a planning authority to address the need for more moorings, both temporary and permanent. That is possibly because land-based communities do not want to see more permanent moorings, but it still needs to be addressed.

My noble friend expounded very clearly why Clause 4 is essential. It is very hard to see how you can get through life when you are denied the rights to healthcare, financial services and voting. There may be a need to amend the definition in Section 99 of the Housing Act 2004 to include boats.

Recently, the Canal & River Trust commissioned a report on the future of boat licensing. It has reported, and is now working through the recommendations. It is worth reflecting on its CEO Campbell Robb’s comment on receiving the report:

“It is … clear that some of the issues the Commission has highlighted are a symptom of the wider housing crisis, driven in part by the cost of living. More people are finding it harder to afford somewhere to live … and more people are vulnerable. We know that the recommendations in the report will not solve this. While the Trust is not a housing charity, we do recognise this reality”.


That is a welcome and constructive statement. The very least that the Government can do is to take a far more engaged attitude to the issue. It is complex, but there are amendments to legislation and to guidance that would be really constructive and helpful. I hope that my noble friend’s Bill will help the Government to move forward in this direction.