John Dardis (Progressive Democrats)

I welcome the Minister of State and this legislation as it has been required for some time. One of the difficulties in legislating for this area is dealing with the competing interests of landlords and tenants. The welcome primary result and worthy objective of the Bill is preventing disputes winding up in the courts. Historically, property ownership is at the heart of the Irish family. I recently noted that EU statistics indicated that Irish owner occupier levels are higher than in the rest of the Union. This is clear from our history but it is changing rapidly as Irish society moves quickly to the European norm of tenancy of private dwellings. This highlights the urgent necessity for this Bill.

Private landlords provide a valuable function, as Senator Brian Hayes mentioned. A supply in volume of rented accommodation of a reasonable and required standard is essential and will be beneficial to economic performance and society in general. Members referred to the spectacular results for private houses in the building programme. Anything that can be done to encourage building for rent is desirable. Obviously, there is a taxation aspect to this and the Minister of State correctly pointed out that it would be better dealt with in the budget. He is correct that the Irish Property Owners' Association's concerns in this regard will be dealt with in the Finance Act.

I am a member of the All-Party Oireachtas Committee on the Constitution that recently published a report on property rights. It did not deal with all the issues raised in this Bill. However, one issue covered was the need for transparency in property dealing. A record of house sales transactions is essential to know where prices stand. The committee undertook a study of the Australian market where there is more transparency in property dealing and auctioneers are regulated. Senator Brady made the point that rent and house prices need to be known. The Minister of State gave a figure on the reduction of private rent levels in the last two years which is confirmed by auctioneers and estate agents. How can this figure be verified when the registration system is not properly enforced and statistics are not available? When passing legislation, we hope it will have beneficial results but its enforcement does not match our expectation.

I remember there were great expectations at the time that the registration of properties with local authorities would lead to much more transparency and meaningful control of landlords. That did not occur and we intend to rectify that, but the legislation is only as good as its backup and enforcement. It is essential that we have an arbitration system to avoid the need to go to court.

The issue of anti-social behaviour, raised by Senator Cummins and others, is important. The tenancies are arising in well established estates where the owner occupiers are dying or going into nursing homes. Families are forced to rent their accommodation to fund the nursing home costs and that again raises the issue of property being treated as a pension fund. Difficulties arise in such settled areas where young people move in, who might like to party, stay up late and play music loudly, and although there is nothing wrong with those activities, the effects on elderly neighbours can be very disturbing. The degree to which regulation can be applied in that area is questionable but the issue needs to be addressed.

The Minister of State rejected the proposition of rent control and I agree with him. It is for the market to decide and the market level is the one which should operate. The experience in the past two years, during which rents decreased, underlines that point. Rent control can be a two-edged sword and where it has been used in the past, the experience has not been happy. The system of reviewing rents is important and in the event of a dispute there should be some reference points or arbitration system. Such a system is well established in England with regard to agricultural tenancies and I have some experience in that regard. It is possible there to resolve disputes through arbitration. Allowing the market to decide, and not establishing rent control, would solve the problem Senator Cummins raised regarding the standard of some accommodation. He spoke of how when canvassing he could readily identify, as we all can, some of the rented accommodation within housing estates. If the market is operating well and the supply is good, that problem will be solved. If there is competition, landlords will be required to keep their properties in a reasonable state and the same will apply to tenants.

I wish the private residential tenancies board well. It is a step in the right direction and I applaud it. I note what was said earlier about Mr. Dunne and I acknowledge the work he has done in this area. The question has arisen of imposing an administrative burden on landlords. It is reasonable and not unduly rigorous to expect people who are deriving an economic gain to be required to keep certain records. Marine legislation was before the House in the past few days and it was suggested that leisure boats should be registered. If such boats are to be registered, surely houses should be registered, as a minimum requirement.

Senator Ormonde raised an important issue regarding long-term tenants. I accept that there should be a type of apprenticeship period, which is allowed for in the Bill, where after six months it should be possible to continue the tenancy for a further three and a half years and that there should be mechanisms there to terminate those tenancies on either side if necessary. There is, however, a difficulty with people in very long-term tenancies, elderly people who have looked after a property very well over an extended period, have always paid their rent on time and who, because the property is about to be sold, find they are out on the street, so to speak. That is not acceptable. I do not underestimate the difficulty of dealing with this issue but I know from agricultural practice in England that certain safeguards have been built in to ensure that very long-term tenants enjoy certain rights. That arrangement is worth considering.

I also welcome the new arrangements proposed regarding the long-term needs of the sector and the partnerships between the local authorities and the private rented sector. There are benefits to be gained there. It is easy to say that local authority housing has reduced and thankfully it has because at least the economic performance of the country has allowed a great many people to buy out the houses in which they were previously tenants. Many local authority houses which initially had tenants are now owned privately and the estates where they are situated have benefited as a result.

This is a good Bill, for which I applaud the Minister. I hope it will have the desired effects. The fact that it was greatly amended is to be welcomed. It is a measure of the flexibility of the Minister and the ability of the Government to listen to reasoned argument and improve the legislation accordingly.