Michael Finneran (Roscommon-South Leitrim, Fianna Fail)

I appreciate Senator Norris's concerns but it is worth putting the issue surrounding rent arrears in context. The differential rent scheme operated by housing authorities is based on the fundamental principle of ability to pay in that the rent is related to the household's income. That is a very affordable form of housing. Research carried out in 2001 on Dublin City Council tenant population suggested that the differential rent scheme plays an important role in combating poverty. Where people get into difficulty in paying rent, ample opportunity is provided for tenants before consideration of the serious step of termination of tenancy.

The provisions in section 31 envisage that a rent scheme would include provisions for temporary waiver of rent on hardship grounds and section 33 includes provision for instalment payments of money due under that section and where hardship arises. These form part of a process of encouraging people to keep up their rent repayments on one hand and having a balanced and fair approach when difficulties arise for a household. Against that background it is only reasonable that a person who is being evicted for arrears would not be immediately considered for another letting, otherwise there would not be an incentive to pay rent. That would not be particularly fair to the majority of tenants who keep up their rent payments. However, I think it is reasonable that this period of ineligibility should be limited and that is the reason I have put forward the official amendment to clarify that consideration would only be given to arrears in a tenancy over the past three years. In light of this clarification, which I believe improves the provision, I ask that the Senator withdraw amendment No. 38.

In response to Senator Bacik, the intention of section 25 is to underline the seriousness of actions such as a breach of tenancy agreement or non-payment of rent. The consequences of these actions are that they are to be taken into consideration by a housing authority in determining the household's eligibility for further support. I wish to put this explanation on the record. While the amendment proposed by the Senators seeks to include some discretion for local authorities in application of this provision, this desire needs to be balanced with the requirement for clarity about eligibility requirements. For that reason, the wording in the official amendment improves the situation.