Jan O'Sullivan (Limerick City, Labour) | Oireachtas source

We will not obstruct this motion either because these are things that need to be done. I share Deputy Ó Broin's concern about the process. We did not deal with the issues at the appropriate time. I am especially concerned about student accommodation, a relatively recent issue for the Houses of the Oireachtas, which we all campaigned for and welcome. Dealing with it in this way is not ideal in the context of how we do business. I am not a member of the Joint Committee on Housing, Planning and Local Government so I have not been involved as much in the detail as others, although I recognise that I have the right to attend, but I am a member of the Joint Committee on Education and Skills, which takes up a great deal of my time.

I am concerned about the process. The elements of it that the Minister of State outlined are understandable, relating to the Office of the Planning Regulator, for which the timing is important, the issue of Cork City Council and Cork County Council, which is self-explanatory, and student-specific issues. We want to ensure that the parts relating to student-specific matters work well because we have all seen protests outside Leinster House about the provision of student accommodation, where rents were substantially increased. We want to see them included in the rent pressure zones. While I am talking about rent pressure zones, I welcome the extension to include the rest of Limerick city, something for which I had been campaigning for a long time. There are many other things that I could say about what we need to do in the context of rent protection but I welcome the fact that Limerick city north and Limerick city west will join Limerick city east on the list of rent pressure zones. There are other areas just outside some of the zones, including some of the counties represented here, that will come under pressure. That is not relevant to what I am supposed to be speaking about so I will go back to the motion.

What the Minister of State said about protected structures concerns me somewhat. I know that this about the content of amendments rather than what we are doing right now. I understand that the owners of protected structures cannot avail of some of the measures relating to energy ratings, etc., but I am concerned that the first rent set for a tenancy in the previous 12 months is deemed to be the market rent. The Minister of State will presumably explain the position during the debate on the Bill but I am concerned that this is an open-ended way to set rent. Other than that, I think the issue of regional assemblies, etc., is understandable. I will not try to stop this from happening but we certainly need appropriate debate on all of these issues, especially where long amendments are being proposed at this stage in the legislative process. We will have an opportunity to address the matter but it would have been better if we had more scrutiny and if we did not deal with complex Bills by adding provisions that do not deal with the relevant issue, which is the case with some of the proposed amendments.

See this speech in context