Róisín Shortall (Dublin North West, Labour)

I move amendment No. 3:

In page 6, between lines 7 and 8, to insert the following:

3—The Principal Act is amended in section 198 by inserting the following subsection after subsection (3D)—

"(3E) (i) The payment of a supplement towards the amount of rent payable by a person in respect of his or her residence shall be paid in its entirety by the Health Service Executive to the landlord.

(ii) The tenant shall pay to the Health Service Executive the portion of the rent for which they are liable.".

The amendment proposes to tackle the issue we discussed earlier, whereby in more than three quarters of rent supplement cases rent supplement is paid directly to the tenant. There are a couple of reasons this is a mistake. We must bear in mind that the new rental accommodation scheme does not operate in such a way. Public representatives who have been involved in such cases will agree that the scheme is popular and successful. In such cases rent is paid directly to the landlord. Apart from other attractive aspects of the scheme, the fact that the rent is paid directly to the landlord frees up tenants.

One of the most important aspects is that, as well having a substantial part of the rent met by rent supplement, another portion is paid by the tenant. We are also seeing a third element, the top-up that increasing numbers of tenants are required to pay. These additional top-ups are completely illegal because the official documentation has the rent at X amount, whereas the landlord is receiving X amount plus €50 per week. This is increasingly become a common phenomenon whereby illegal top-ups are sought. If rent was paid directly to the landlord, as happens under the rental accommodation scheme, it would eliminate that practice of bleeding tenants dry. We know that many tenants in receipt of rent supplement are particularly vulnerable and, thus, open to exploitation. If rent was paid directly to landlords, it would certainly eliminate that practice.

The other reason this change would make sense is that it would be possible to keep close tabs on who was receiving rent. It would provide a means of ensuring the proper amount in tax would be paid on rent received. Given the vast amount of public money, some €420 million, that goes on rent supplement, taxpayers have a right to expect that adequate levels of tax are being paid by landlords in receipt of the money.

For both of these reasons and because the system under which rent is paid directly to landlords has proved so successful under the rental accommodation scheme, I strongly propose that we switch to that system in respect of rent supplement.

See this speech in context