Paul Murphy (Dublin South West, Socialist Party) | Oireachtas source

Yes, two people, Alan and Kellie. They were forced to occupy South Dublin County Council because they could not get any emergency accommodation that was suitable considering that Alan had 50% custody of his son, and they had been sleeping in a tent. It was a disastrous situation which is illustrative of the broader problem and crisis we have in housing and that makes it especially disgusting that the Government would now go after tenants in terms of trying to bully them into paying water charges.

That owners are being obliged to register or to hand over the name of their tenants is also discriminatory and unnecessary. Corresponding obligations do not exist to the same level for home owners. I also object to the fine of up to €5,000 for filling in false information in a registration form.

It is clear that what is at issue is scaremongering. That is the only explanation of the proposed measures. I do not understand why the Government cannot accept Deputy Ó Cuív amendments Nos. 11 to 21. It seems reasonable that the measure would be reviewed by the PRTB and a report made to the Oireachtas after one year. However, I would also like to explore the matter and question the Minister on the reality of how the system will operate.

The Minister said scaremongering is occurring and has implied that those of us who are campaigning against the water charges are scaremongering. We are not interested in scaremongering. We want to explain the reality of it, which is less scary than some of the headlines that have been generated around it. The Government is out to scaremonger to try to force people to pay.

If a landlord hands over a tenant's name to Irish Water, which is now a legal obligation, and if the tenant declines to register or pay, there will be no negative consequences for the landlord's relationship with Irish Water. Irish Water will not pursue a landlord for water charges, given that they are the legal responsibility of the tenant or occupier once the landlord has fulfilled the obligation to hand over the tenant's name. I would like the Minister to confirm that this is the case. If so, and if the Bill is enacted, tenants can clearly tell landlords that while they are obliged to hand over the tenant's name, the matter has nothing more to do with the landlord but is a matter between the tenant and Irish Water.

A number of leases already specify that the tenant is required to pay all utility bills, which can include water charges. There have been no cases of tenants who failed to pay water charges being evicted. The fact it could happen is scary, discriminatory, bullying and wrong. However, it has not happened. There is no incentive for a landlord to evict a tenant for non-payment of the water charges given that non-payment would have no negative consequences for the landlord. Tenants should not be intimidated, if the legislation passes, and think they have two obligations to pay the water charges, one to their landlords and one to Irish Water, and feel they have to do it. Landlords will not evict tenants who do not pay water charges given that non-payment has no impact on landlords. The legislation is not retrospective. Those who have existing tenancy agreements that do not specify that people must pay water charges will not experience any change. They would need to have a new tenancy agreement with a new or existing private landlord for it to come into effect and to insert an implied clause into the tenancy agreement about the need to pay water charges.

I would like the Minister to clarify the following point. When a landlord complies with the obligation to hand over a tenant's name, it removes responsibility from the landlord for the water charges bill. Irish Water will send a bill in the tenant’s name. If the tenant does not pay, at the end of the lease when the tenant moves on, the bill follows the tenant. If a tenant fails to pay an electricity bill that is in his or her name, and moves home, the landlord has nothing to do with it. The electricity supplier continues to pursue the tenant, given that the bill is in his or her name. If the bill is in the landlord’s name, the landlord has the right to deduct it from the tenant’s deposit. The same applies in this case. Under the legislation, landlords will not be empowered to deduct water charges from people’s deposits. The Minister has threatened more legislation that may empower them. I will believe it when I see it.

The amendment is outrageous, discriminatory, bullying and bad behaviour by the Government against tenants, the more vulnerable sections of society who are more susceptible to pressure, because of the housing crisis, responsibility for which lies with the private market and this and previous Governments. However, we will do our best to debate it here and convince the Government by the strength of our argument to withdraw it. If the Minister does not do so and if the Government uses its majority to get it through, tenants should not be scared or intimidated by it but stick to the boycott. It is very unlikely that a question of eviction will arise and if it does, the landlord is legally obliged to specify the obligation to pay water charges in the lease. People can leave it to that point, and it is very unlikely that many, if any, tenants would come to that point. Tenants should not be intimidated but should have confidence over fear, stand up to the bullies and continue to boycott the water bills even if they are in council, private rented or housing association accommodation.

See this speech in context