Brendan Ryan (Dublin North, Labour) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the Bill. The private rental sector is an area which requires stronger legislation and I believe this legislation is a step in the right direction. As the Minister of State, Deputy Jan O'Sullivan, said here last week, it is a Bill which strengthens the operational efficiencies of the PRTB and broadens its remit in order to ensure the good working of the private rental sector.

A strong and functioning PRTB is vital for a well-functioning and transparent private rental sector. This is something, however, which does not exist in Ireland at this time. In the history of the State, the private rental sector was a small - some would say niche - sector; a short term option for people before they took their first steps onto the property ladder and bought their first home. Now the private rental sector has become a long-term housing option for many people, particularly young people setting out on their way in the world.

What we need is strong legislation to strengthen rights and provide adequate protection for tenants in the private rental market. If people are to raise a family or want to commit to a particular community or area, then a mortgage should not be a precondition. People need to feel secure in whatever home they have and I welcome this Bill as a step towards providing this protection and security.

I do have some concerns that the two aims of this Bill may be in conflict with each other. They are: bringing the voluntary and co-operative housing sector under the governance of the Residential Tenancies Act; and speeding up the dispute resolution service provided by the PRTB.

The inclusion of approved housing bodies under the auspices of the Residential Tenancies Act will only further burden the resources of the PRTB. I ask the Minister to address this as the Bill moves through the House to ensure the PRTB is adequately resourced to deal with any increase in its case load. In this regard, I share the concerns that other Deputies have expressed in the House today.

In recent times, we have seen a centralisation of rent allowances, medical cards, Garda vetting, as well as the effects of SUSI. In all of these cases the problems got worse as a result of centralisation, which was due to a lack of resources. I urge the Minister of State to examine this area to see what resources are required to deliver these services.

The PRTB is already overladen with work and it is taking upwards of eight months for tenants to get a resolution to their claims from the date of application. The vast amount of claims from tenants to the PRTB centre on the issue of deposit retention, with the most recent figures stating that such claims make up 72% of all tenant claims to the PRTB. Of those, 45% of deposits were returned in full. There is obviously a major problem in this area and I know the Minister of State is aware of it.

The issue of deposit retention is not covered in this Bill. However, there is a commitment in the programme for Government to establish a tenancy deposit protection scheme. The Minister of State has stated her commitment to enacting this in subsequent legislation and I ask her not to delay in this regard.

Deposit retention is a critical issue for many in the private rental sector and for those on low incomes. It can form a crucial financial bond which gives them the flexibility to move address. When a deposit is held by a landlord, especially on spurious terms, the tenant can be stuck in a difficult situation. They are unable to stay at their current address due to a desire to move, and a breakdown in relationship with the landlord, but unable to afford the deposit and first month's rent in advance for a new property.

It is not unusual for a person to need the assistance of community welfare officers, who themselves are operating under stricter and tighter budgets. It is an unsustainable situation and needs to be addressed as a matter of urgency.

Tenants of approved housing bodies have existed in a legislative limbo for a number of years. While I welcome some legislative clarity in this area by bringing these tenants under the protection of the PRTB, a mechanism is needed whereby the local authority still has responsibility for tenants and can still support the tenant in his or her dealings with the approved housing body as a landlord. This also applies in the internal RAS scheme.

I am talking about a simple amendment whereby if the tenant has difficulties with a landlord, that is, the approved housing body, he or she may ask for the local authority to intervene on his or her behalf. This should be dealt with specifically in the legislation by way of an amendment, so I ask the Minister of State to consider this seriously.

Approved housing bodies can and do charge higher rents than the standard 11% differential rent charged by local authorities. This is an anomaly. The AHBs and RAS schemes can often be the solution to local authorities' housing provision to these clients. Once that is done they are left to their own devices in dealing with private landlords or AHBs. It is an important issue which I hope the Minister of State will take on board.

We must ensure that once a person is on the housing list their application is not too easily discharged by a local authority to an approved housing body or, indeed, a RAS arrangement.

I welcome this Bill as a positive step forward but we still require much further legislation in this area. Private rental arrangements have turned into long-term living arrangements and, as such, we need a comprehensive suite of legislation to protect people and ensure they have security in their homes. This is a step in the right direction, as I said, but further legislation is required in this area.

See this speech in context