Peter Burke (Longford-Westmeath, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I thank Senators for their contributions. I cannot accept amendment No. 5 as we deem it unnecessary. Section 19(5), which is referred to in the amendment, provides for limited exemptions for RPZ rent control, including where a substantial change in the nature of accommodation provided for under the tenancy occurs. Section 76 of the Residential Tenancies Act provides, inter alia, that either or both of the parties to an existing or terminated tenancy of a dwelling may, individually or jointly, as appropriate, refer to the board for resolution any matter relating to the tenancy in respect of which there is a dispute between them. Section 78 provides for a non-exhaustive list of particular matters that may be referred to the board for dispute resolution.This section specifically provides that without prejudice to the generality of section 76, the matters in respect of which disputes and, where appropriate, complaints may be referred to the board for resolution include a time at which a review for rent, as referred to in Part 3, should take place or the amount of rent that should be determined on foot of that review. The requirements for the rent control exemption to apply in this respect are fair and reasonable, given that we want to encourage new investment in the private rental sector. Satisfying the requirements for a substantial change in the nature of accommodation provided under the tenancy will constitute a significant investment on the part of the landlord and an exemption from rent control in respect of the first setting after which the works are warranted. Accordingly, I cannot accept this amendment.

Senator McDowell made a timely contribution. Through the first four amendments, I have referenced the fine balance we are trying to achieve in the landlord and tenant relationship. I have clearly outlined that 86% of tenancies are in homes owned by landlords with either one or two properties. Such landlords are leaving the market in large numbers. That is an issue of which the Government must take cognisance. We obviously need to ensure that investment in that marketplace is incentivised. We also must consider society at large. It is a fine balance. In the economic cycle we find ourselves, if I were to look for a rental accommodation in my own town of Mullingar, I would be unable to find one. The harmonisation index shows almost a double-digit increase, quarter-on-quarter. We are at a difficult point until supply catches up to meet demand. The laws of economics in any marketplace dictate that when demand significantly outstrips supply, prices go up. We are working hard to provide an adequate supply and meet the Economic and Social Research Institute targets but until that happens, it will be difficult to ensure that rent prices are stable. That is what this legislation is doing. It is a reaction to ensure that the market does not leave vulnerable citizens behind which, unfortunately, has happened too often. We must work hard to ensure that.

I heard the Senator's points. I note that some political parties in this House, notwithstanding the legislation that is proposed here and the arguments and amendments involved, are proposing enormous charges on those one-property and two-property landlords. They have suggested additional taxation of more than €500 for additional properties. That is not reflective of the Thirty-third Dáil or where this Government is coming from. It ignores the backdrop to the circumstances in which we are operating. We are hearing extreme voices in this debate. On balance, this legislation is proportionate for the point of time we are in. It is a response that I consider reasonable, on balance.

I worked in practice as a chartered accountant for more than a decade, looking at the rental return for small landlords. It is a difficult space for landlords and the figures back that up. It is difficult to balance the rights of landlords and the rights of vulnerable citizens. This legislation is a reasonable response.