Mick Barry (Cork North Central, Solidarity) | Oireachtas source

I want to direct my questions to the representatives of the Union of Students in Ireland and Threshold. Before doing so, I would like to comment briefly on some of the issues that have been raised by the representatives of the IPOA. I congratulate the association on its gallant attempt to persuade the committee that landlords are one of the most oppressed groups in Irish society. The information and data provided to this committee and to Members as public representatives tells a different story. For example, we were recently informed that the average return on an investment in residential property in this State is 7.08%. When compared with 27 other European Union countries, not only is the return here higher than in any of those 27 countries, it is higher by some distance.

Reference was made to Airbnb. We would love to have more information on what is going on in this area but Airbnb does not share its data. Anecdotal evidence suggests that increasingly Airbnb is moving from an informal sharing arrangement between people, householders and so on to an opportunity that is making significant money for investors and speculators. Across Europe, in cities like Barcelona, Berlin, Paris and Amsterdam, regulation has been introduced but Ireland is lagging behind in this regard.

On refurbishment, I can cite a dozen or more examples of landlords in Cork city who have got around the rent pressure zone requirement by laying new carpets and painting the inside of a house. This practice is rampant. According to recent statistics from the Central Statistics Office rental income over the last few years, albeit before profit, has increased by more than €1 billion per annum. If the IPOA has an issue with that I suggest they take up with the Central Statistics Office. I have not been convinced that landlords are among the more downtrodden groups in Irish society. I do agree with the representatives of the IPOA that there is a political agenda here. Unfortunately, that political agenda is different to the one indicated. There is a political difficulty with the fact that 37% of the largest party in this Parliament and 33% of the second largest party are landlords. I am not suggesting that they act as a conscious group or lobby but their thinking is informed in significant measure by their vantage point within society and this is one of the reasons for the delay in introducing the legislation that is needed to protect the rights of tenants.

I will now move to questions. My first question is to the representatives of the Union of Students in Ireland. I was recently informed by a person involved in a student union in a college in Cork that she was aware of at least three students who study by day and sleep in their cars by night because they cannot afford the rents being asked by landlords in the vicinity of the college. The issue was taken up in the local media and it became a talking point for a day or two. Another issue that she raised with me, which I tried to highlight and I think is a more significant issue, is that bedrooms in at least 25 residences in the vicinity of the college have been partitioned off to cater for between nine and 15 students. She also said that the landlords had attempted to gain legal backing for this on the basis of it being hostel type accommodation. Many of these properties are owned by one landlord. By my calculation, there are close to 400 students in this situation.

Has that come across the USI's radar and, if so, and would Mr. Kerrigan like to comment?

The representatives of Threshold gave a very interesting presentation. Their points about some of the unintended consequences have been noted, particularly the point about the 28 days which the committee would do well to look at. The representatives of Threshold on the ground in Cork city will be familiar with this case. It relates to substantial refurbishment as grounds for issuing notices to quit. The Leeside apartments were purchased last year by a vulture fund. Notices to quit issued within a matter of days. It is not a question of applying a lick of paint or throwing down a few carpets; substantial refurbishment is indeed taking place here. The apartments have been turned into a de factobuilding site with Kango hammers while people are trying to live their lives, put children to sleep and so forth. Everybody knows that when the work is done the rents there will be substantially increased, possibly up to being doubled. Do the representatives of Threshold have a comment to make on such a scenario? What legislative changes would be appropriate to stop such profiteering at the expense of ordinary residents?