Malcolm Noonan (Carlow-Kilkenny, Green Party) | Oireachtas source

I will respond to some of the comments from Deputies before I make my closing remarks. I thank all the Deputies for their contributions. This has been a useful debate, sparked by Deputy Ó Broin bringing the Bill forward.

I note the comments made by Deputy Ó Broin on the support provided by the previous Minister for housing back in 2017 to this type of approach. Even since 2017, significant progress has been made while it is far from perfect. Deputy Ó Murchú spoke about the issue of the four-year lead-in. I was not sure if he was referring to a four-year lead-in or a four-year cycle, but it is the four-year cycle with which the Government has an issue in terms of reinspections. It is creating obstacles that could hinder the effective approach to an inspection regime. That is not something which any of us wants to see happen. He also mentioned two points around the RTB registration. That has been raised before by Deputies. I think it is being resolved. There is also the matter of tenant in situ in relation to two- and three-bedroom homes. I might get back to the Deputy on that.

Deputy Patricia Ryan said the numbers are going in the wrong direction. That is not the case. The numbers of inspections are going in the right direction. There are certainly not enough of them. We have a very stringent system in place in the context of the inspection regime, and rightly so. It is right that we do that. I do agree with the Deputy that a good inspection regime will protect good landlords as well. It is absolutely correct to say that.

Deputy Andrews also stated that the majority of landlords would have welcomed these inspections. I agree with him. The Deputy and I have spoken at length here, including on in respect of a Topical Issue matter relating to Dublin City Council flats and the issues relating to responsibility for their upkeep. It is not the case that there are no minimum standards. There are standards in place. The Deputy previously raised the issue of mould in Dublin city flats. Our Department has met with Dublin City Council in relation to this. We produced a leaflet and a short video, which is available on our website. It is important to note that the issue of mould could be addressed by public awareness and better awareness of ventilation in flats. This is the direct responsibility of the local authority, which, in this case, is Dublin City Council. Our Department does engage with Dublin City Council on these issues.

Deputy Nash referred to overcrowding in rental properties. We acknowledge that this can be an issue and it can lead to some of the other issues raised by Deputy Andrews. I thank all the Deputies for their contributions.

This intent behind the Bill is undeniably positive, as is the principle that informs it. The quality of rental accommodation is critical to the success and sustainability of the residential sector and by extension of course to the wider social and economic needs of the country. As I stated earlier, while the Bill, as presented, has obvious technical and practical operational shortcomings and would give rise to significant unintended consequences, the Government will not oppose it on Second Stage.

It is probably worth stating that all landlords have a legal obligation to ensure that their rented properties comply with the standards set down in the regulations relating to such properties. Responsibility for enforcement of the regulations rests with local authorities. Anyone letting or offering to let accommodation that does not meet the standards is in breach of the regulations and acting illegally. Anyone – including a prospective tenant who views the property, a sitting tenant, a neighbour or another landlord – can report such properties and landlords to their local authority. They do act promptly and inspect the property. If it is found not to meet the standards, they can and do take action to ensure compliance with the regulations, up to and including a prohibition on the reletting of the property.

Local authorities already have a strong legislative framework available to them which provides for the issuing of improvement notices and prohibition notices where landlords are in breach of their obligations. Failure to comply with these notices is an offence. The maximum fine for an offence is €5,000 and €400 for each day of a continuing offence. The current approach taken by most local authorities is a pragmatic one that seeks to balance the needs of tenants, particularly around property availability, and those of landlords. Increasingly, it is working as inspection and numbers ramp up and standards improve. It causes minimal disruption to the market at a time when any adverse impact on supply would be, to say the least, unwelcome.

It is important to note that the average number of inspections per annum in the period from 2008 to 2017 was about 20,000. The provision of increased Exchequer funding to local authorities in recent years to aid increased inspections of properties and ensure greater compliance with the regulations has enabled local authorities to build inspection capacity incrementally. This, coupled with the Department’s more active involvement in the area through, among other things, setting yearly inspection targets for each local authority, saw the number of inspections increase to approximately 29,000 in 2018 and 41,000 in 2019. However, because of the need to protect tenants, landlords and inspectors, pandemic restrictions saw the number of inspections fall to approximately 26,000 in 2020 and 20,000 in 2021. In 2022, inspections climbed to an all-time high of close to 50,000, more than 20% up on pre-Covid levels. The current system is improving rapidly all the time and this reflects a concerted and focused effort over the past 18 months by the local authority sector and by my Department in terms of investment and support.

See this speech in context