Seanad debates

Thursday, 17 December 2020

Planning and Development, and Residential Tenancies, Bill 2020: [Seanad Bill amended by the Dáil] Report and Final Stages

 

12:30 pm

Photo of Darragh O'BrienDarragh O'Brien (Dublin Fingal, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I thank Senators for their responses. Senator Seery Kearny is 100% correct that this requires two pieces of paper to be downloaded. We sent out 450,000 letters and engaged in radio communications on the new tenancy rights and protections. Threshold is part of the homelessness task force, which I chair, and has met the RTB on this issue. The new system is working well.

I will quickly answer a couple of the queries because I know there are other amendments to be discussed. It is not a disappointment that only 328 people have sought protections under self-declaration. It is good that people do not feel they need to seek the protections. The protections work well because they are available.

To answer Senator Moynihan's question, if a tenant has made a declaration, he or she is covered under the current Act. That will continue into next year but that person needs to have made contact.If someone made a declaration on 1 August and has not made any contact with his or her landlord, he or she would now be required to make contact with the landlord, but there is no need to make another declaration. Right now, people have up to and including 10 January to make a declaration under the current arrangement.

I thank the officials and I thank Senator Moynihan for acknowledging the work they have done. They have done an incredible amount of work in a relatively short space of time. We have made sure that briefings have been made available for members of the joint committee and for others, including housing spokespersons such as Senator Moynihan. In addition, they have responded in writing to queries. We are trying to work collaboratively.

I am acutely aware that the Act we introduced in August did not have cross-party support and that some Members did not support it. I am genuinely pleased that Opposition Members who did not support the previous protections have now looked at what is there and are supporting the extension of the Government protections. That is a good thing. Members should please take that in the manner in which it is intended. It is a good thing, because we do need to make sure our protections are proportionate.

Reference was made to something Senator Cummins said. I think it is reasonable to acknowledge this point. There are approximately 16,000 buy-to-let mortgages in arrears. From time to time, there are instances where rents are illegally withheld. Senator Moynihan, like everybody else, knows that. It is a tiny proportion of cases and should not in any way reflect on all tenants. Likewise, it should not reflect on landlords that a small number are in dereliction of their duties to their tenants and break the law. That is why I have given the RTB more powers and resources to carry out more inspections, carry out investigations and make prosecutions where landlords breach the rights of tenants or break the law. Currently, 200 investigations are taking place. That must happen.

Ideally, the Government wants to ensure there are other supports for people. Fundamentally, that is why on Monday of this week I put out a call for cost-rental schemes for working people, which is a minimum of 25% below the market price, involving long-term leases. The first will be delivered next year. We have been talking about that for long enough. That is a new tenure under which housing will be available. The Government is going to build and deliver more than 12,750 new public homes next year. Some 9,500 of those will be new builds. It will be the single biggest delivery of public housing in any year in the history of this State. That is our ambition and it is realisable. We want to make sure people can have safe, secure and affordable homes. That includes those in the private rental sector. That is why I believe the measures we are bringing forward are proportionate. We must have regard to constitutionality and the balancing of rights. I cannot just disregard that. I know people will appreciate that.

On the question of five days versus 28 days, if there is a potential rent arrears situation it is better that it is dealt with much sooner. All of the advice I get from Threshold, MABS and others is that the sooner one can engage with a rent arrears situation, or a potential rent arrears situation, the better the chance there is of resolving it before it becomes a systemic issue. While the intentions behind a 28-day period, which is effectively another month, are obviously good, in real terms it can have the reverse effect by bedding in the arrears before we have had an opportunity to deal with them. I have covered the amendments in detail. I will not be accepting them. That is my contribution on group 3.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.