Vol. 436 No. 3
11 Mr. Gilmore asked the Minister for Justice if, arising from her statement to Dáil Éireann on 11 May 1993, concerning the sale of the Mespil Flats, she has given any further consideration to amending the Landlord and Tenant Law; and if she will establish a working group consisting of representatives of her Department, the Department of the Environment and Thereshold who have suggested such a working group.
Since I replied to the Private Notice Questions on 11 May about Mespil Estate my Department has been engaged in an assessment of what amendments might be desirable and possible in the relevant areas of our landlord and tenant law.
As the Deputy will appreciate, the key issue which needs to be addressed is the nature of the legislative arrangements in place dealing with security of tenure. While the rights of the tenant in the first place fall to be dealt with by reference to the terms of the lease or other tenancy agreement under which the property is held, certain statutory rights exist in relation to security of tenure. For example, the Housing (Private Rented Dwellings) Acts, 1982 and 1983, which are the responsibility of the Minister for the Environment, provide a measure of protection to tenants but are confined largely to tenants of dwellings which were formerly controlled under the rent restrictions Acts.
The provisions of the Landlord and Tenant Act, 1980, however, apply to a wider range of tenancies and, in particular, give to residential tenancies of 20 years' standing a right of renewal of tenancy for up to 35 years. I should mention that, where a new tenancy is availed of under these provisions, there is a procedure, in the absence of agreement, whereby the rent falls to be determined by a court and the court has to set a rent which, essentially, would in its view represent an open-market rent for the property in question.
I am sure the House will appreciate that any changes to the law in this area would have to be approached with considerable caution. There is clearly a very difficult balance to be drawn between, on the one hand, the level of protection which can be reasonably afforded to tenants and, on the other, the position of the owners of such property. I should emphasise that what we are dealing with here is the private rented sector and that changes in the law which might be considered desirable in the context of the rights of tenants cannot be considered in isolation from their likely effect on the willingness of people to make available their property for rental in this sector.
Various suggestions have been made to me about possible changes in the law in this area such as through reducing the period of 20 years before a right to a new tenancy arises and giving existing tenants first refusal where a property is to be relet for residential purposes. These and other issues have been under consideration as part of the assessment under way in my Department to which I referred earlier.
Given the stage the assessment which has been under way in my Department has reached, the clearly complex issues which arise, the involvement of the Department of the Environment in related areas and the broad nature of the considerations which have to be taken into account, it would now be appropriate to put in place a structure which would most effectively be able to advance this matter. Some form of working group along the lines suggested by Thereshold would be appropriate and, accordingly, I propose to consult the Minister for the Environment about the early establishment of such a group. In deciding on its membership and terms of reference I will, of course, take into account the views of interested parties such as Threshold. In that context I hope to arrange a meeting between representatives of Threshold and officials of my Department shortly to discuss this matter.
I welcome the Minister's indication that she intends to establish a working group along the lines suggested by Threshold. Does she share my concern that, since the Mespil Flats affair, there have been other cases involving landlords and tenants which have shown the degree to which tenants are vulnerable, in particular the sale of the Ashurst Flats in Mount Merrion? Indeed, only yesterday in a case involving Temple Buildings the Circuit Court issued three eviction notices, in one case against an 83 year-old widow. Is the Minister concerned that at present landlords are driving a coach-and-four through the 1980 Act and are not allowing any tenant to have 20-year tenancy in order to qualify for protection under that Act by terminating tenancies and shifting tenants around between one flat and another within the same building or complex of buildings? Does she accept that there is a necessity to amend the 1980 Act in order to give tenants better protection than is afforded at present and to prevent landlords from abusing the provisions of the 1980 Act as some landlords are doing?
The constitutional implications, and how far an amendment to the 1980 Act should go, have been assessed in my Department. Involving the Department of the Environment, which has a crucial role to play, and organisations such as Threshold is the proper way to go. Amending legislation may be necessary but, as the Deputy appreciates, it will be difficult to come up with an amendment within the constitutional provisions for property and property owners which at the same time affords the necessary protection to tenants. The establishment of the working group is a positive step forward and I appreciate Deputy Gilmore's welcome for it. I will be specifying a time by which the group must report to me because time is of the essence. I am aware of the cases to which Deputy Gilmore referred since the Mespil Flats affair and I have been concerned about them as have the people making the assessment within the Department.
I note that the Minister's concern about constitutional rights seems to be confined entirely to the constitutional rights of the landlord.
Not necessarily.
Does she accept that tenants have a constitutional right to shelter?
Yes.
Does the Minister accept that what they are experiencing at present is continuing evictions by landlords who find that their property is worth more on the open market or because they want to rid the building of tenants in order to move up market in the private rented sector and that the constitutional rights of tenants are being overridden in these circumstances? What timescale does the Minister envisage for the completion of the study and the implementation of amending legislation, since it is now several months since the Mespil Flats controversy?
I am making arrangements for officials of my Department to meet representatives of Threshold within the next couple of days so that they can nominate a member of the committee. Then it will be a matter for the Department of the Environment to nominate a member. The official from my Department is already working within the appropriate section. While I would not like Deputy Gilmore to tie me to a specific date, I envisage the committee being in place before the end of this year and their report being completed by early 1994. This is not something that can be put on the long finger and the group cannot be given an indefinite period within which to report.
I also welcome the Minister's statement on the establishment of a working group. Does she accept that so far the problem has been put on the long finger? It is a number of months since the Mespil Flats case got a great deal of publicity and much concern was expressed, but so far it seems that nothing effective has been done. I feel strongly about this and I attended court yesterday with tenants of Temple Buildings in Dominick Street which is in my constituency. Those tenants had no protection, were not even in a position to make statements in court and they were served with eviction notices. It is very difficult to represent elderly people who have lived in an area for a long time when a new owner decides to redevelop the building purely for profit by removing all the tenants. Although this is very late for the tenants of Temple Buildings, will the Minister deal urgently with this matter and ensure that the working group reports as quickly as possible so that the experience of tenants, such as those in Temple Buildings, will not be repeated elsewhere in this city? It is a absolutely disgraceful that this should happen to any citizen of this State and it is foisted on them by people whose sole motivation——
The Deputy is making a speech now. His question has been put.
——is to make profit.
I share the concern of the vulnerability of tenants. The purpose of the assessment which is being done as a result of the Mespil Flats episode is to tighten up the law in so far as it is possible to ensure that tenants are given the protection they need. The setting up of the working group is an important step forward. This is something which I do not want to put on the long finger. I want to give the group a definite date by which they must report back to me because whatever amendments are made to the legislation will be based on their recommendations.
I welcome the setting up of the review group. Will the Minister ensure that tenants know their rights? In one case this week a landlord notified a young woman with a family to get out of the house next week. It is unsatisfactory that landlords are using illegal methods to evict people. Perhaps the review committee will recommend some regulations under existing law so as to ensure that tenants and landlords are made aware of their duties and obligations. Some of the cases which have come to light are tragic.
One of the advantages of involving Threshold in the working group is to ensure that tenants' rights under the legislation would be made known immediately to tenants. The involvement of Threshold with vulnerable tenants shows that Threshold has the capability to advise the members of the working group on what action is necessary to ensure that we do what Deputy Wallace suggests.
