Eoin Ó Broin (Dublin Mid West, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

I thank the officials for their presentations and presence. I will make a number of introductory comments before asking my questions. The intention behind the Bill relates to a concern shared by all committee members, namely, that student rents, particularly in the purpose-built private sector, are rising too rapidly. Many of us share the view expressed by the Residential Tenancies Board, RTB, in a written submission to us that student licences, certainly in purpose-built private student accommodation, are already covered under many provisions of the Residential Tenancies Act, particularly in terms of rent reviews, the rent pressure zones and dispute resolution. Therefore, we are not necessarily trying to change the law, but clarifying it to ensure that all students have those protections. We are mindful not to, for example, confuse matters by extending to student licences the entitlements of a Part 4 tenancy. We, the sponsors of the Bill, mentioned our willingness to make amendments to address that issue, but our preference is for the Minister to introduce amendments to the upcoming residential tenancies (amendment) Bill. If he does so, we have stated on the record that we will withdraw our Bill, as that would be the most effective way to proceed.

I have a number of concerns with the two submissions. For example, the Department of Housing, Planning and Local Government is of the view that the most effective way of limiting the cost of purpose-built student accommodation generally is to increase supply.

Many of us have been arguing for a long time that supply increases alone will not guarantee affordability without adequate protections, such as the rent-review mechanisms. We have already seen a very significant increase in private sector supply, but we are also seeing very significant increases particularly in areas of high demand such as Dublin and Galway. On the targets in the student accommodation strategy, we have a shortfall of 21,000 beds in the system. By 2024 if all the targets in that strategy are met, we will still have a shortfall of about 20,900 bed spaces at that point. Therefore the demand-supply problem will not be resolved even though the targets are ambitious and we will significantly increase supply. Unless we deal with affordability now, we could have this problem throughout the timespan of that strategy.

The Department's submission refers to striking a balance between regulating prices in the market and providing certainty for students, but without creating disincentives for investment. That balance has already been broken with students being asked to pay in many instances €800, €900 or €1,000 a month. In spite of the protection of the rent-pressure zones, landlords can hit students with rent increases of 18% to 24%. My concern is that that line in the Department of Education and Skills submission suggests it does not fully understand the extent to which that balance has been broken for a significant number of students. We will hear later from USI about the very negative impact it is having on students' ability to take up the courses they are offered or the very significant additional stress it places on them as a result of having long commutes to and from college, particularly for students from rural areas.

Do both Departments accept the view in the Residential Tenancies Board's submission today that student licences in private student-specific accommodation are already covered by rent-review, rent-pressure-zone and dispute-resolution legislation? Can the officials reassure us that they appreciate the urgency of it and that work is going on behind the scenes? Do officials from both Departments intend to assist the Minister to introduce his own wording to amend the Residential Tenancies (Student Rents, Rights and Protections) Bill to deal with the issue?