Eoin Ó Broin (Dublin Mid West, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

I thank the Minister. I will keep my comments brief because I want to ensure that everybody gets an opportunity to talk to as many of the amendments as possible. As the Minister knows, Sinn Féin supports the Bill but there are a number of small changes that he can make to it today and tomorrow or that he can consider immediately afterwards.

My amendments Nos. 13 and 14 are a part of this group. The particular problem with the section of the Schedule those amendments seek to change is that if someone receives a notice to quit following the introduction of the legislation but their tenancy is of such a length that they would get, say, 196 or 224 days' notice, they do not get any additional protection from the legislation. I know from talking to the Minister's officials that there is a logic to that. Those who have shorter tenancies and, therefore, might be more vulnerable because of an inability to secure alternative private rental are getting more protection. There is logic and a rationale to that argument. The problem, however, is that it will be difficult, given what has happened in the private rental sector, even for those with 196 or 224 days' notice, to find alternative private rental properties by the new deferred notice dates in the two Schedules I am seeking to amend. That needs to be examined. The Minister needs to try to ensure we are not back here in April, realising that, in fact, there was a group of people who did not get any additional protection to what currently exists under the Residential Tenancies Act 2004. I urge the Minister to consider that point.

In respect of Deputy Boyd Barrett's amendments, I also urge the Minister to consider some mechanism for those people whose due date falls before this legislation and, therefore, cannot be covered by it because it defers the due date, which has passed for those people. Is there some other mechanism whereby when dealing with an overholding dispute case and someone whose due date falls before the passage of the legislation, the Residential Tenancies Board, RTB, can be given an additional level of discretion so where somebody genuinely cannot access emergency accommodation or alternative private rental, the board can give them at least some of the protections that are provided for those tenants whose due dates fall after the legislation? I appreciate that is beyond the immediate scope of the narrowly defined Bill. I had an amendment to that effect but it was ruled out of order. However, something could be done in that respect.

I appeal to the Minister to remove the overcrowding exemption. There is no requirement for it. I am taking a liberty here because we may not get to these amendments. The Minister's officials made it clear to us that this applies in only a small number of cases, and we appreciate that. However, with respect to large families, particularly Travellers, Roma and some African nationalities, the Minister introduced a measure which we supported in August 2021. He gave local authorities the opportunity to buy vacant four-bedroom homes because those large families, when they enter emergency accommodation, are the most difficult to move on. The Minister is providing the overcrowding exemption from the delay, which would mean a landlord could move to evict such people at the worst possible time. I see no reason for that exemption. I do not believe any argument was made for including it in his discussions with his officials. Perhaps it was more the case that no argument was made for not including it. That also creates a loophole. A small number of unscrupulous landlords may use that provision in the absence of, for example, a sale of property or other loophole.

When the Minister introduced a Covid-19-related ban on evictions, he issued a circular to local authorities. Local authority tenants get no protections from this Bill, nor do Travellers on local authority sites or other sites. He issued at that time a good circular to local authorities to say that they should follow the spirit of the ban to ensure that local authority tenants in similar circumstances were not in any way affected. I acknowledge the circumstances of this ban are slightly different but there needs to be some clarity and protection for local authority tenants and, in particular, for Travellers on local authority sites and on some unofficial sites on which local authorities may consider taking action over the emergency period. If those people are forced into it, they are the ones who spend longest in emergency accommodation and whose cases are the most difficult.

Those are the four areas about which I am appealing to the Minister. Even if he is not going to accept our amendments, he can take action on those points today, tomorrow and in the coming days to give those people the protections that other tenants are securing.

See this speech in context