David Norris (Independent)

I support the thrust of both these amendments but prefer Senator Hannigan's on behalf of the Labour Party because it includes Senator Coffey's amendment through its reference to "tenancy services". Senator Coffey made a very good case for this and this may be the way of the future, that more people will live in rented accommodation, as they do on the Continent. People will find it very difficult to afford houses, even with the collapse in house prices. It is important we move to a situation whereby tenants in rented accommodation should be also protected and live in decent conditions. The Minister has this in mind and the Government is moving on it, which I very much welcome. Substandard accommodation is not tolerable. I know of some appalling cases of people living in these dreadful, ghastly bed-sitters. The Government is taking action. I rent out an apartment in my house. I have just spent €50,000 on it and it is a hell of a good apartment. I am not milking money out of it and I have declared every penny, partly out of morality and partly because I am too stupid to fiddle tax. I find it a much better policy to be completely open and above board about it.

The other reason I support Senator Hannigan's amendment, which he advocated very well, is that he anticipated a ministerial response. I am in this House long enough to know that sometimes when one puts down such definitions the response is that the Minister agrees with it all but that the amendment is unnecessarily limiting and the recital incomplete. Senator Hannigan and his advisers cleverly anticipated and met this point by including the phrase "including but not limited to" as a pre-emptive strike in amendment No. 12. That is an important element of the amendment. I hope it will help to persuade the Minister of State to accept this amendment.