Response to Estimates- 19|11|03
Residential Tenancies Bill- 20|11|03

Mr. Gogarty: It seems the more things change, the more they stay the same. This year we are seeing further cuts in the Estimates. Last year, in my first year as a TD, we had cuts. and I remember getting into a spat with Deputy Ring over the question of TDs taking a pay cut in line with the cuts that would affect the most underprivileged members of society. I have much respect for Deputy Ring, but we argued over that. Later in the year Deputy Fiona O'Malley called for something similar.

I reiterate, not in a spurious way, that some TDs are seen, aided by certain well-off media figures, to be taking long holidays, to be working in the Dáil only for short periods and to be making lots of money at the expense of those who are most vulnerable in our society, who have been hit once again in these Estimates and will no doubt be hit again when the budget comes out - for example, those who suffer from coeliac disease. The trouble with this disease is that one must pay for special food which is very expensive. A person on social welfare who finds the dietary allowance is being phased out will be hit hard. It will not hit TDs, who will shortly receive another pay increase. The Minister for Finance should put forward a proposal to freeze TDs' pay in line with proper Dáil reform. Deputy Boyle pointed this out recently in our submission on Dáil reform, as have members of other Opposition parties.

Last year I was castigated about the subsidies in this House. Dublin TDs are paid more than €61 per day just for turning up. Who is watching? Who says one is turning up? One can just walk in and walk out without anybody knowing. Unless we tighten up our procedures within this House and are seen to be setting an example, this urination on the less well-off in society will cause long-term damage.

Mr. Gogarty: My constituency has a high level of rented accommodation. I alluded to this some time ago and I think the Minster for Justice, Equality and Law Reform was paying me a compliment when he accused me of having constituency envy. While many of the people in my constituency may live in rented accommodation, they are still fine, decent and upstanding people drawn from many races and religions. I hope the Minister was paying me a compliment, otherwise he was insulting those people. I would prefer if the Minister were around for that debate.

Mr. English: It was insulting.

Mr. Gogarty: The Deputy is quite correct. In many cases, the constituents of leafy Dublin Mid-West have no choice but to live in rented accommodation. While some parts of the constituency - at least those areas where Deputy Harney dares to canvass - may be called leafy, some of the other areas are among the most deprived parts of Ireland. When people cannot find a home or have no security of tenure, it diminishes the sense of community. The breakdown of community leads to other problems and, inevitably, anti-social behaviour and crime. Net Garda strength has increased by only 31 since the Government came into power. The stoppage of overtime payments affected public order vehicles. If one looks at the cycle, one can see that lack of proper legislation can contribute to social breakdown and crime. As long as one is well off and does not live in such areas, one does not have to suffer.

I point this out because the idea of owning a home is a dream that may never be realised by many of my constituents. They may never get a home from a local authority as local authorities are not given enough funding, or are encouraged to sell land to developers rather than build. The Bill seems to be a genuine attempt to address the problems facing tenants and landlords under current legislation. Sections 12 to 14 make a reasonable attempt to ensure that landlords meet their obligations and that tenants are not penalised for seeking their rights. I have some concerns regarding the provision preventing a rent review more than once every 12 months. That period could be extended but even the 12 month limit is welcome, as is the right to review rents where no right is currently provided. Even as it stands the Bill will improve the position of tenants by promoting greater regularisation and professionalism within the housing sector.
The Bill has many weaknesses and enforcement will present problems. Even local authorities have problems enforcing the law so the new board will also have problems.

The private rented sector is currently increasing following a decline until the mid-1990s. One in every eight households now lives in private rented accommodation. I hope what I say about these households will have an impact on the Minister of State with responsibility for housing and on the Tánaiste, if she reads the Official Report. These households include the most impoverished and marginalised members of society. As my colleague and party leader, Deputy Sargent, has already pointed out, at least one third of tenants in private accommodation are in receipt of social welfare rent supplement, which reduces the choice of rented accommodation for many people unlucky enough to be in this position. Many adults and children live in appalling conditions. In my constituency there is some fairly good quality rented accommodation in the suburbs of Lucan and Clondalkin although there are cases of large families being packed into houses. In other places, particularly in inner city areas, tenants live in appalling conditions.

Some people live in neglected forgotten areas which many politicians would not even visit to canvass but where the gardaí are charged with trying to maintain order in the face of huge under-resourcing. The decent citizens, who are the majority in these areas, live in a constant state of fear of the increased incidence of thuggery and criminal activity. I do not wish to mention Limerick, because this behaviour is found everywhere. When social conditions break down crime increases, criminals mobilise, drug pushers move in and take over and the people who have been living in the area for a long time have to suffer. The gardaí, to their credit, do the best they can with the resources they are given. I make no apology for pointing out this under-resourcing during this debate. The gardaí will be under even more pressure unless we ensure a proper social mix with the proper planning and facilities provided. People who do not come from salubrious areas such as Dublin South-East live in difficult conditions.

Deputy Dan Boyle has already spoken about the poor quality of the housing provided, even in the areas designated for urban renewal schemes. Deputy Sargent mentioned insulation and energy efficiency. Not many Deputies read up on energy matters but I have been doing so. Some experts suggest that oil production is likely to peak between 2006 and 2013. What the Greens have been predicting about global warming, possible climate change effects on sea levels and how we will cope with increased flooding is already happening. Of even greater significance is the fact that when oil production peaks and it costs more to extract the remaining oil from the ground we will see a major increase in the price of oil. Much rented accommodation uses oil or gas for fuel. Our gas reserves are also quite small and gas prices will rise along with oil prices. The issue of renewable energy must be addressed. A measure could be added to this Bill to ensure that private rented accommodation is properly insulated and as energy efficient as possible. Rented accommodation should have even higher standards of energy efficiency than owner occupiers currently enjoy. That is a matter for a number of Departments but an energy efficiency measure could be added to the Bill.

I note the media attention given to Punchestown and the criticism of the Minister for Finance. The PD tail wagging the Fianna Fáil dog is coming home to roost again. This is the sort of dog that eats greedily from the hands of developers, nuzzles up to those well-off enough to pay for dietary supplements if they are coeliacs and are insulated from the cutbacks but cocks it leg to the rest of society. That is why I referred in the Estimates debate yesterday to people feeling they are being spat upon and urinated upon. Unless politicians are seen to take proper action in the provision of housing as well as in cutbacks we will be seen as elitist and separate. I do not know of even one Deputy who lives in rented accommodation, unless in a second house close to the Dáil in Dublin. Mr. Pádraig Flynn sent out the wrong message about politicians on the Late Late Show a few years ago when he said it was difficult to keep three houses. That sort of patronising arrogance is perceived to be typical of politicians. It behoves us to change those perceptions and to be seen to take action, even if it means clamping down on landlords who would exploit tenants. Many landlords are business people who wish to make an honest living but there must be legislation and rules to control this sector.

It seems that in some areas of Dublin, Limerick, Cork and other parts of the country horses have better accommodation than people living on rent allowance. This is not good enough. I hope the amendments proposed by organisations such as Threshold and tabled by Deputies are seriously considered by the Government so that the Bill, which is a genuine attempt to address some of the problems facing tenants and landlords, can be improved.

Tenants in private rented accommodation are currently exposed to rent increases almost at will. While there is some protection for longer term tenants, periodic or probationary tenants are liable to be evicted with only 28 days notice and no valid reason. For the 100,000 people who are in receipt of rent allowance and others who are in receipt of family income supplement or on low wages day to day life is fraught with insecurity and worry. Their situation is not improved by this Bill. Unscrupulous landlords can and do take advantage of those not in a position to argue for their rights. This can be because of a lack of options, because they feel intimidated or because lack of education means they do not know their rights. In many cases they receive no assistance in these difficulties. A notice period of more than 28 days is required and the time required to qualify for decent notice needs to be reduced. One might call me naive but I believe two months would be ideal in both these cases. A qualification period of three months would, nevertheless, be acceptable.

Some flaws stand out in the Bill like members of the Progressive Democrats on a CE scheme or, given that there are no members of the Progressive Democrats in the Chamber, like Members of the Cabinet who subscribe to the principle of collective Cabinet responsibility. The flaws have the effect of watering down the Bill and making it a little too ambiguous. Maybe this was the intention. This legislation should be as rights based as the Education for Persons with Disabilities Bill.

Section 4 contains a glaring omission in terms of bedsits. The wording should include "units where bathrooms may be shared by occupants of different tenancies within the same building". Otherwise, those who live in bedsits will not have recourse to the new board. The board is supposed to be the bee's knees when resolving disputes. My colleagues and I do not necessarily agree that the establishment of the board is the best option. The allocation of more power locally, where possible, in addition to proper funding, might make the current system work. It has not worked in terms of enforcement because the resources have not been in place. However, this is beyond the scope of this debate.

Section 6 refers to the servicing of notices by post. Many have alluded to this during the debate and therefore I will not discuss it in detail, but I hope an amendment will be made in this regard. However, the best method - this cannot really be included in the Bill - would be for the landlord to issue the notice in person. If landlords are looking for money they visit one in person as quickly as they can.

Section 9 lists the penalties for committing offences under the proposed Act. A daily fine of €250 is touted for each offence. This is small in relative terms and should be increased in line with other fines. Threshold, in its submission, called for a fine of €500, which is the per diem fine in the Licensing of Indoor Events Act 2003. I have no reason to disagree with Threshold in this regard.

I already praised parts of sections 12 to 14 because they spell out the obligations of landlords and tenants much more clearly than was hitherto the case. However, there is still ambiguity. Threshold stated in its submission that section 12(1) provides that the obligations under this section are "in addition to the obligations arising by or under any enactment". Furthermore, it stated: However the inference that section 18 of the 1992 Act and the 1993 standards regulations are part of a landlord's obligations will not be recognised by all those concerned. Compliance with minimum legal dwelling standards at the low priced end of the rental market has been problematic, and an express obligation in the Bill should help to improve matters. An amendment should make explicit the landlord's obligation to ensure that the rental property complies with the minimum standards legislation as currently enacted or as amended from time to time.
Threshold's request seems reasonable and I hope the Minister will see fit to heed it.

Section 12 also requires tightening up to ensure that deposits are promptly returned because, in some cases, the money involved is crucial to the families concerned, particularly if they are seeking a new home. Furthermore, under this section, the reasons for which landlords could reimburse tenants for repairs could be specified. Again, there may be a reason for the ambiguity that exists in this instance. Threshold lists various reasons for reimbursement, including a burst water pipe, a blocked toilet and an inoperative cooker. Other reasons could include an inoperative washing machine. These reasons could be specified and provision could be made for others, yet to be decided. This would copperfasten the section.

Section 14 has some good provisions to discourage landlords from retaliating against, threatening or intimidating tenants who seek to assert their rights. However, we know tenants will be able to inform the board about non-compliance with the provisions of the Bill, but a far better deterrent would be to make certain actions an offence, particularly if the enforcement issue is catered for.

I agree with the landlords in respect of the provisions under section 16 to address anti-social behaviour. I and my party do not want to be regarded as anti-landlord but we are in favour of proper legislation. Tenants can approach the board to draw attention to non-compliance with measures in the Bill. However, we must examine what constitutes anti-social behaviour of tenants. Section 16 needs to be transparent to rule out unjust accusations.

Section 19 does not clarify who has to prove a rent is above the prevailing market rate. Tenants who may not have had proper educational opportunities may have fewer means at their disposal to obtain the necessary information needed to make a case to their landlord. The board will provide no clarity in terms of how one proves rents are excessive or who does so. We need to examine this. Threshold, with which I do not necessarily agree, suggested that further details be provided. I agree with it in this instance.

There is a need for enforcement because local authorities have consistently failed to register landlords. What chance will the new board have without the adequate resources? Will the resources be provided? Who is more likely to go to jail for non-compliance? Will it be the landlord, for evicting a family wrongfully, or the family who, for genuine financial reasons, defaults on a payment? These issues need to be raised.
Time does not permit me to discuss Part 4. I wanted to get a few issues off my chest regarding the impact of bad housing policy on society and communities. I hope the points my colleagues and I have made will be taken on board. I draw the Minister's attention to the submission by Threshold, which also made some valid points.