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

I will speak in favour of half of the amendment and explain why I do not support the other half. With respect to landlords and particularly the legal grey area, the general practice is for receivers or banks and funds that repossess properties to behave like landlords. They accept the rent and that means there is a tacit acceptance that they are accepting the obligations of a landlord. In general, they employ a property management company to meet them. The problem is that it is the general practice but it is not codified in law. There is an urgent need to ensure that the law is crystal clear when a bank, a receiver or a fund takes over a property from a landlord. As more buy-to-let properties exit the market, some through repossessions, etc., this is urgent. I know the Minister will not accept the amendment and I know nothing Deputy Boyd Barrett or I say will change his mind. However, he needs to address the issue at some point.

There is one significant Part in the Residential Tenancies Act that should not apply to students. They have appeared before the committee and told us they do not want Part 4 to apply to them. Everything else, with the exception of subletting, which does not apply to students, will apply as a consequence of the Government amendment. All the measures students have requested, including on rents and access to the RTB for disputes, are provided for.

Through the Deputy's amendment, we would end up giving students a set of legal rights that they neither want nor need in Part 4, which would complicate student accommodation. Nonetheless, I want to insist that, with regard to the definition on landlords, at the earliest opportunity the Minister needs to come back to us with something because it is a pressing matter.