Ruairi Ó Murchú (Louth, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

What is being proposed by Deputy Ó Broin is a straightforward set-up on a national car test, NCT-type inspection and a checklist. We can all see the wins with this for tenants, particularly for those who are in substandard and the nightmare-to-rent type tenancies which do not work for anybody.

This is a very easy sell and I was listening to the Minister of State in respect of what he said about unintended consequences, and all of that. First, and excuse me if I am mistaken, I believe we are talking about a four-year lead-in. As Deputy Ó Broin has said, he is looking forward to working with the Government side to find a solution. We are open to anything which can deliver this because there is an acceptance that we want to offer this kind of service to good landlords where they have their checklist done. The RTB inspections create difficulties for landlords when they happen. I fully understand what the Minister of State has said where one could be non-compliant on some very basic issues that need to be and can be rectified in a non-expensive way, or others that involve major building work. There are significant works which need to be done in certain properties and there are some properties which should not be in play at all and that is the main issue we are dealing with here.

It is unfortunate we are addressing this issue in the middle of what is a complete disaster, crisis, or call it what one wants. The Minister of State brought up the issue in respect of the eviction ban and as much as we welcome these exchanges with the Government side, it is very difficult not to mention that issue given the period we are facing into.

I am probably going to put a couple of questions to the Minister of State on issues on which I am looking for clarity. They are issues that constituents are facing and about to face. The Government proposed solutions but I find there is insufficient detail at this point on criteria and timelines.

The Bill is easy to explain but since I am fairly sure I will do a really bad job of explaining it, people will do far better to listen to Deputy Ó Broin. The fact is that we are talking about a straightforward, NCT-style checklist, because people understand that. We need to make sure, when we have a system, that it is effective and that we do not create huge obstacles for those trying to use it.

Issues arose in the public domain regarding RTB registration. At the time, my constituency office got a considerable number of calls from landlords who experienced difficulties trying to use the RTB system, including when trying to contact the RTB. Rental agencies approached us because they were not able to do what they had done previously for their clients, thus creating obstacles. Those affected were trying to be compliant. This has to be avoided. It creates another issue for landlords. Some of the conversations in the past while have been about those landlords who have left, so we need to make sure when putting the checklist and systems into play that the service can be easily accessed. However, let us be absolutely clear: we have all seen really bad accommodation where you would not put an animal. We have also seen the accommodation offered by a considerable number of really good landlords who are attempting to do the right thing. This Bill could facilitate them.

Until we get to grips with the crisis we are dealing with, we will have difficulties and considerable issues. I hope the Minister of State will interact with Deputy Ó Broin and others to try to find a solution to this problem. There is not much point in having unopposed legislation if it withers on the vine. That is of no benefit to anybody and is a complete waste of the time of all of us who are in here talking.

It is very hard to talk about checklists and private rental without talking about local authorities themselves. We are all looking for solutions whereby local authorities can increase supply, including of council housing. We are possibly talking about tenants in situand even about local authorities, alongside approved housing bodies, possibly purchasing for those who are not in HAP tenancies or on housing lists but who face eviction. There are timelines for all the solutions.

One of the criteria will entail inspections of properties but we know local authorities absolutely hate dealing with transfers. They say that since the two properties concerned must be done up to a particular spec, it entails a cost at either end. They much prefer somebody new coming off the housing list and a single property. However, a large number of their own tenants are in properties that do not meet any spec whatsoever. I am sure many Deputies note this. Let us consider the circumstances if I contact Louth County Council, for example, in the hope that somebody will be put on the retrofit list to deal with an issue that has not been dealt with for many years regarding windows, doors and all the rest of it. The plan may have a ten-year run-out, meaning a considerable number of people would be at the tail end of it, resulting in huge issues.

There are questions for both local authorities and the Department on the funding streams for maintenance. That is one of the worries when people talk about a tenant in situ. Local authorities state that if they were to buy more properties, they would need to ensure they are given sufficient money and resources to ensure their upkeep. That is a question that needs to be dealt with – over many years, I would imagine. I would imagine that local authorities were happy enough with AHBs doing some of the work that they probably should have done, on the basis that they found it easier to draw down funds. Not only that, they probably had a better set-up in regard to having sufficient moneys for the maintenance work.

There were policy shifts over many years to move away from council housing and from local authorities building council houses, but we see at times the unintended consequence of local authorities always opting for AHBs in the circumstances in question. This has changed somewhat but we are not going to deal with any of this until we get absolutely real about accepting we are in the middle of what is an absolute disaster and that we really need to do all and sundry to address it. In dealing with this matter as a crisis and emergency, we should react as we did to Covid. It was dealt with as an emergency and crisis. People were put in position and one made sure that whatever needed to be done was done. This is irrespective of whether we are talking about emergency procurement rules, planning legislation or other measures because we are way beyond the place we need to be.

We also need to ensure we have targets that make sense. We really need to increase what we offer, whether we are talking about affordable mortgages, cost rental accommodation or council housing.

I said I had questions. I am back here asking about tenants in situ. Is there going to be a change to the criteria for councils? I have used the example of Louth County Council. It will buy a property only if the person in it on the HAP is five years on the housing list. If you were subject to choice-based letting, you could bid on a two-bedroom house but could not do so if the property happened to be a three-bedroom house. We will have major issues in this regard. I would like to see what flexibility there is. The Government really has to push that. What is the timeline for the legislation or whatever is required to deal with those who are not in HAP tenancies? When will the cost-rental piece be in operation?

As regards the legislation, we all accept that we want the outworkings to involve a checklist system that will provide tenancies of a good standard. That will help both tenants and landlords. However, we really need to get to grips with the circumstances we are in.This was not a particularly good week from the point of view of delivering a solution.

See this speech in context