Should I accept an unenforceable access clause to avoid a Section 21?

Hi All

I have received this email from my landlord (I'm a tenant in England on a standard AST which finishes on 30th June 2026):

"

I hope you are well. This email is to enquire about your renewal of tenancy at £950ppm excluding bills only subject to you lawfully agreeing that you allow & give us access to your flat for inspection, viewings, safety checks etc to our letting agents, managers and contractors, in your presence or absence with our management key. 

If you do not accept any of our clauses we shall not be able to let you the flat for next year. Can you kindly confirm clearly whether you accept the new rent alongside the clauses set or you decline the offer.

Please let us know possibly by end of this week on Friday midday.

"

The landlord has always been awkward about giving notice for inspections etc, and while I've always allowed access, I have on occasions had to rearrange them when I've not been available to be there.

I believe any agreement would be unenforceable, as despite what any clauses they add to the contract might say, I'm still allowed to refuse access (which I wouldn't do unreasonably).

Unfortunately, I think if I declined they'd still have time to issue a Section 21 before the Renters Rights Bill kicks in, and while I am confident I could contest that, I'd rather not have the hassle.

Is there any downside to just accepting?

If I did sign a new fixed-term contract starting 1st July 2026, would it actually become active? Since my current AST will automatically become a periodic tenancy on 1st July, would signing a new contract effectively replace the periodic tenancy (meaning the new clauses would apply), or would there be some conflict?

I'd appreciate any advice, thanks in advance.