Eamon Gilmore (Dún Laoghaire, Labour)

First, I compliment my colleague, Deputy Ciarán Lynch, onbringing this Labour Party Bill to the House in response to the economic emergency in which we find ourselves.

The evidence of the economic emergency mounts by the day. Some 270 people lost their jobs every day since this Government took office. One in every three young men of the workforce is on the dole. Established businesses, such as Hughes and Hughes, are going to the wall because of unrealistically high rents. Empty shop fronts are spreading across our towns, cities and suburbs.

While the casualties of the recession grow, this Fianna Fáil-Green Government prefers to stay in its bunker, more concerned about its members own job security than the security and livelihoods of the people who keep this country on its feet. Only people who are living in a bunker can ignore the desperate plight of businesses experiencing the sharpest economic downturn in our history, while trapped in leases that only allow for an upward revision of rent. Only people who are living in a bunker would ignore the steady stream of redundancies from mostly small and medium-sized businesses, which are folding under the twin pressures of their rent burden and their inability to access credit.

The Labour Party first raised the issue of upward-only rent reviews in commercial leases in June of last year. We raised it on the floor of this House on numerous occasions because we believed then, as we do now, that this is an issue of vital national importance. We believe that every job, and every livelihood, is worth fighting for in this recession. If viable businesses are going to the wall because they cannot legally negotiate a more appropriate rent, then we as legislators have a duty to respond and we have a duty to find a solution.

Unfortunately, this Fianna Fáil-Green Government does not agree. In response to pressure from the Labour Party last year, it made a small change to the law to allow for a downward review of commercial rents. However, this change only applies to new leases negotiated on or after 1 March this year. It does nothing for the vast majority of businesses placed under unbearable pressure because of the terms of their existing lease.

In fairness, the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform has not entirely forgotten the sector. He decided to do what the Government always does when faced with an urgent problem – he set up a committee. This committee, he tells us, is due to report on the negotiation process for commercial rent reviews in June of this year – almost a year to the day after the Labour Party first raised the issue. I want to ask him how many viable businesses have had to shut up shop since last June because they were not entitled to negotiate a more appropriate rent, and how many more will close before next summer, when his committee is due to report.

In 2009 alone, 30,000 people lost their jobs in the retail sector, at a cost to the Exchequer of €600 million. How many more jobs will be lost because the Government would rather save face than pass the Labour Party's legislation?

Make no mistake about it, more jobs will be lost. There is already evidence of owners of NAMA properties demanding large increases in rent from their tenants in order to maximise the value of their property in the NAMA process. It is clear that some landlords are not interested in the long-term viability of their tenants' business, but rather are looking to save their own skin now that the property bubble has burst.

Yesterday in the Dáil I asked the Taoiseach a straight question, whether his Government would support our legislation to allow for downward revision of commercial rents in existing leases for a limited period. I asked would he and his Government support a straightforward measure that would ease the pressure on the retail sector, and save jobs. He said, "No." He stated that our proposed legislation is unconstitutional, but he refused to publish the advice he received from the Attorney General to that effect.

This is a typical response from this jaded Government - negative, closed to solutions that come from outside and closed to compromise. The Taoiseach will shortly be meeting a world leader whose motto is "Yes, we can.", yet our country's leader and the Government seems in every instance to say, "No, we can't."

The Taoiseach is mistaken in this. We can have a solution to this problem. The Labour Party's proposal is in keeping with both the letter and the spirit of the Constitution for the following reasons. First, our proposed legislation is in the public interest. It is a clear response to the national emergency of high unemployment and a devastated retail sector. Retail sales fell by 14% in 2009, following on from their sharpest ever decline in 2008. The value of goods sold in 2009 was down almost 20%. People are consuming less overall and spending less when they do. This is a response to the catastrophic rise in unemployment on the Government's watch, a drop in people's disposable income due to a raft of income tax increases and pay cuts and a steep decline in consumer confidence and security. On top of this precipitous drop in demand, businesses find themselves unable to secure credit from the banks. In short, they find themselves in an impossible situation without any of the usual means of weathering a downturn.

The Labour Party has made positive proposals to address these issues to get our economy moving again. The Government, however, has consistently chosen to ignore them. This legislation would provide some immediate relief to businesses experiencing the sharp end of the Government's economic mismanagement and going some way towards halting the haemorrhaging of jobs in the retail sector.

We are not proposing, as the Minister claimed last night, a wholesale assault on property rights. It is far from it. Our legislation is a measured and proportionate response to the perfect storm that has beset our economy. Our legislation provides for a two-year period, in which rents under existing leases may be reviewed downward, upward or remain the same. This is simply to allow viable businesses and their landlords to negotiate a realistic market rent, which reflects the prevailing economic climate.

We are not asking that landlords accept less than the market rate for their property. Rather, we are proposing the market be allowed to find its level in a way that is equitable for both landlords and tenants. As the law stands, it is only tenants who are feeling the full brunt of market economics while landlords are cosily protected. As one business owner in my constituency wrote-----

See this speech in context