Dermot Ahern (Louth, Fianna Fail)

I am responding to the representations and points validly made. When I set out to change the law in this respect, I did so on the basis that some traders are having grave difficulty in meeting the rent for commercial premises they leased at the top of the market, of which all Members are aware in their constituencies.

It is important the House sends out a strong signal to the market, and particularly to those renting commercial premises, that it is better to get some rent than no rent at all. Putting people out on the street is in no one's interest. I accept some landlords are circumscribed as they can perhaps be part of a chain with a banker, for example, putting pressure on them about their rate of return. When I became aware of the difficulties occurring on the high streets across the country, I believed it was right for the Oireachtas to send a signal to exhort landlords to be as reasonable as possible in cases where traders were locked into, for example, a 35-year lease with upwards rent reviews. I wrote to all the professional bodies in the property sector to exhort their members to deal reasonably and rationally with such cases. Anecdotal evidence strongly suggests that the vast majority of landlords are accepting lower rents from tenants, if they can, and thereby easing the situation. As I have said, there are circumstances in which landlords cannot reduce rents because of the organisation higher up the chain. I believed it was opportune for us, as an Oireachtas, to send a strong signal to the market. That is why I introduced this amendment. Obviously, I had to introduce it on the basis of advice from the Attorney General. I was trying to ensure that the Oireachtas, when it agrees this change, does not distort the existing market. It was always my intention to have this legislation passed before July to ensure that those who pursue repossession orders in respect of houses have to start in the Circuit Court, rather than the High Court.

See this speech in context