Joint Committee on Housing, Local Government and Heritage debate -
Tuesday, 10 Oct 2023

Analysis of Private Rental Sector Discrepancies: Discussion

An Cathaoirleach

I welcome everyone. Today the committee meets to discuss discrepancies in data collection in the private rental sector. We are joined by Mr. Cormac Halpin, senior statistician with responsibility for census outputs, and Mr. Kieran Culhane, senior statistician with responsibility for the statistical systems co-ordination unit, Central Statistics Office, CSO. They are very welcome and I thank them for their time. We are also joined by Mr. Niall Byrne, director, and Ms Lucia Crimin, deputy director, Residential Tenancies Board, RTB; and Dr. Michael Byrne, school of social policy, social work and social justice, University College Dublin, UCD. I thank them for their attendance.

The minutes have been circulated and I thank the witnesses for their opening statements, which were submitted in advance. They have been circulated to members.

Before we continue, I will read a quick note on privilege. I wish to remind members of the constitutional requirement that members must be physically present within the confines of the place where the Parliament has chosen to sit, namely, Leinster House, in order to participate in public meetings. For those witnesses attending in the committee room, they are protected by absolute privilege in respect of their contributions to today's meeting. This means that they have an absolute defence against any defamation action for anything they say at the meeting. Both members and witnesses are expected not to abuse the privilege they enjoy and it is my duty as Chair to ensure that this privilege is not abused. Therefore, if their statements are potentially defamatory in relation to an identifiable person or entity, they will be directed to discontinue their remarks and it is imperative that they comply with any such direction.

Members and witnesses are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice to the effect that they should not comment on, criticise or make charges against a person outside the House or an official by name either by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable. As I mentioned, the opening statements will be published on the committee website after this meeting.

I will invite the witnesses to make their opening statements. I will first call Mr. Halpin, followed by Mr. Byrne and Dr. Byrne. We have competition with the budget, hence the sparse attendance at this meeting. There will be seven-minute segments for members to ask questions and the witnesses to respond.

I think we have a bit of time today. I call Mr. Halpin.

Mr. Cormac Halpin

I thank the committee for the invitation to the CSO to attend the committee meeting to consider data relating to private rental accommodation. I am the senior statistician for census outputs. My colleague, Mr. Culhane, is the senior statistician in charge of the statistical system co-ordination division. As Ireland’s national statistical institute, the Central Statistics Office is an independent office under the Statistics Act 1993 responsible for the production, co-ordination and qualitative oversight of official statistics for Ireland. The CSO provides independent statistical information to support and promote understanding and debate across government, business and society. Data are a modern-day natural resource and the office’s role is to extract value from those data. The CSO provides high-quality statistics, independent insight and information for all in an accessible and user-friendly manner. Official statistics are a public good and an essential input to creating an informed society. Increasingly, the CSO is providing a suite of data and statistical services to the broader civil and public service. This move towards a cross-organisational, co-ordinator role across the entire civil and public service is mandated in both the European regulation on statistics and in the Statistics Act 1993. There is an ever-increasing demand for our products, data and services from across the civil and public service as organisations work to extract insights and evidence within data to inform policy development. To this end, the CSO has worked with several housing bodies and agencies to provide valuable statistical information to inform policy with respect to the housing sector, including the RTB, with which a data exchange agreement has been in place since 2016.

Turning to the census of population, this is our largest primary data collection activity, reaching every household in the State, with the delivery and collection of more than 1.9 million forms to households and communal establishments in 2022. The production of results from census 2022 commenced in May and, to date, we have produced five detailed analytical reports and small area population statistics, which provide detailed statistical data for a wide range of geographies. Accompanying these releases are multiple statistical tables allowing users to generate their own analysis and insights into the census data. These tables are available for all users on the CSO’s Px-Stat database tool on the office’s website, www.cso.ie. As part of the extensive census 2022 dissemination programme, the CSO has, to date, produced more than 80 statistical tables relating to housing, as well as a dedicated thematic release in July that aimed to interpret some of the key findings for a broad audience. The data the CSO produced on the number of households that rent from a private landlord was based on a question that appeared on the second page of the census 2022 form. The questions on this page related to the accommodation in which the household lived and were answered by an adult member of the household present on census night. The question, No. H2, was in two parts. The first part asked, “Does your household own or rent your accommodation?” The householder was instructed to mark one of the four response options, namely, "Own with mortgage or loan", "Own outright," "Rent" or "Live here rent-free". The second part of the question was directed to those who indicated that they rented their accommodation. It asked, “If renting, who is your landlord?” The three response options to this part of the question were, "Private landlord", "Local authority" and "Voluntary or co-operative housing body". The headline findings from this question were that 330,632 households indicated that they rented their homes from a private landlord. A further 531,207 households owned their homes with a loan or mortgage, 679,718 owned their homes without a mortgage or loan, 153,192 rented from a local authority, 29,880 rented from a voluntary or co-operative housing body, 31,864 lived in their home rent-free and no data were available for 80,235 households. The 330,632 households that rented from a private landlord represented an almost 7% increase compared with census 2016, when 309,728 households indicated that they rented from a private landlord. The 2016 figure was, in turn, a more modest increase of just over 1% relative to the number of private tenancies reported in census 2011. It should be noted that the question used to capture this information has remained unchanged since 2011, which facilitates direct comparison between the data generated from each iteration of the census in 2011, 2016 and 2022.

To provide some background on the phrasing of the census question on nature of occupancy, it was originally introduced in census 2011 following a public consultation on the census questionnaire and subsequent pilot testing. Following this process, the census advisory group, a representative body of census data users and key stakeholders, recommended that the question be adopted in census 2011, a decision which was subsequently approved by Government. It was retained in census 2016, when no public consultation was conducted, and again in census 2022, when the census advisory group again recommended its retention to Government, which approved this recommendation. The RTB estimates that 276,223 private rented tenancies were registered at the end of 2021. This represents a gap of more than 54,000 tenancies compared with the census 2022 figure, indicated previously. When the CSO became aware of the discrepancy, we met the RTB to discuss possible reasons for the difference and undertook some initial analysis to identify some high-level potential reasons for the gap.

At this juncture and following this analysis, it is possible to identify some possible reasons for the differences between the two data sources.

First, it should be noted that the method of data collection is significantly different. This can cause differences to arise between ostensibly highly comparable data sets. The census data is compiled from self-completion paper questionnaires, with an adult member of the household, in this case a tenant, responsible for completing the form. The Residential Tenancies Board, RTB, data is based upon registration by private landlords.

We have also estimated that approximately 1,000 dwellings that were reported as private rental dwellings by householders in the census may more appropriately be categorised as having a landlord that is a voluntary or co-operative housing body. This, again, is based on preliminary analysis of both the RTB and the local property tax, LPT, data and further work is required to confirm this number.

We are aware that there may be differences in how student accommodation is treated between the two data sources. In the census, some student-specific accommodation may have been included as private rentals, whereas they may have been removed from the figure that the RTB has reported. While more analysis is required to better quantify this difference, it is unlikely to account for a large number of tenancies in the census data.

Finally, it is possible that more informal letting arrangements, for example, between parents and children, are captured in the census as private rentals but may not be registered with the RTB. It is difficult to estimate the extent of this currently, but further analysis may reveal more detail.

These initial findings are indicative but given the importance of understanding the discrepancies and CSO’s access by law to both the census 2022 housing data and the RTB data relating to registered tenancies, the CSO is proposing to undertake a matching exercise between the two files to better understand and quantify as much as possible the reasons for the differences between the two published figures. The expected output from this exercise will be a statistical report providing more insight into the discrepancies potentially, including a geographical breakdown and more information on the characteristics of the households involved. Depending on how this exercise develops, it may be necessary to involve other data sources to shed more light on the discrepancies such as the data from census 2016, the LPT and housing assistance payments. The CSO is planning to begin this work in November. On completion, the CSO will be happy to share this report with the committee and generally make it publicly available. It should be noted that consistent with section 33 of the Statistics Act 1993, the CSO cannot provide information about individual dwellings to any other organisation, and this will not be an outcome of the matching exercise.

As the CSO works through the planned analysis, we will continue to collaborate with the RTB to assist in the understanding of both data sets and to discuss the board's views on the findings from the work and its views on the possible reasons for the discrepancies in the data.

Mr. Culhane and I are happy to take any questions the committee might have.

An Cathaoirleach

I thank Mr. Halpin. I now invite Mr. Byrne to make his opening statement on behalf of the RTB.

Mr. Niall Byrne

I thank the Chair and members for the invitation to attend this afternoon. I am the director of the Residential Tenancies Board, RTB. I am accompanied this afternoon by my colleague, Ms Lucia Crimin, deputy director at the RTB. To assist the committee today, we have sent some briefing information in advance.

The RTB was established under the Residential Tenancies Act 2004 and is an independent public body under the aegis of the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage. Our role is to register tenancies, to operate a dispute resolution service and to regulate aspects of the residential rental sector in Ireland. We also provide information to the public and we provide advice to the Minister.

A central regulatory function of the RTB is the maintenance of an accurate register of residential tenancies. This includes private tenancies, social tenancies provided by approved housing bodies, cost-rental tenancies and student-specific accommodation. The RTB register of tenancies is an important national data set.

Since April 2022, all landlords are required to renew the registration of their tenancies on an annual basis. This, still relatively new, annual registration requirement is greatly improving the quality and the currency of the RTB register.

To facilitate annual registration and to provide new functionality and customer service, the RTB redesigned its registration system in 2021. During 2022, issues arose with system performance which caused difficulty for the public. Over the last year, we have worked hard to stabilise the system and we have successfully introduced changes to improve the user experience and our data quality.

Despite these issues, the new system has already yielded many benefits, including, for example, enhanced data quality due to strict validation of identities and the capability to automatically remove tenancies from the system which are not renewed on time. We know it is critical that the highest standards of data quality and integrity underpin our register and we will continue to work to ensure that this is the case.

We share the concern of the committee that there are differences between the RTB's registration data and the figures produced by the CSO from the 2022 census. We have been engaging with colleagues from the CSO on this matter since July this year.

We understand from the CSO that an analytical exercise will commence in November. Our colleagues here from the office will doubtless describe that process in more detail. I have agreed with the director general of the office that the RTB will support this work as a priority and that, when concluded, both organisations plan to issue explanatory statements.

Before finishing, I will mention two examples of how the RTB works to produce accurate information, research and insights to inform the public and policymakers. We partner with the ESRI to produce the quarterly RTB rent index. This is the most accurate and authoritative rent report of its type on the private rental sector in Ireland. A comparison between rent levels in new and existing tenancies, informed by the more comprehensive and current data generated as a result of annual registration, will be a permanent feature of the rent index as from November of this year.

We also carried out large-scale research in 2022 and 2023 on the experience and sentiment of landlords, tenants and agents. We have included excerpts from that research in the briefing pack and we will circulate the six reports from the research once they are published, in November.

We are very happy to address any questions committee members may have.

An Cathaoirleach

I thank Mr. Byrne. I invite Dr. Michael Byrne to make his opening statement.

Dr. Michael Byrne

I thank committee members for the invitation to take part in this important debate. I will begin, if I may, by talking about some of the reasons that potentially explain the discrepancy between the two data sets. Then I will step back a bit to consider some related issues that have implications for policymaking in particular.

The discrepancy is likely the result of a combination of two issues. First is the licensee issue already mentioned. The number of licensees is, of course, not captured in the RTB data set as licensees are not technically tenants. Obviously, it is a cause for concern in its own right that we do not know the number of licensees, although Revenue could use data gathered as part of the rent-a-room scheme to shed some light on that.

The second issue is the AHB issue mentioned by our colleagues from the CSO. The only other thing I will add to that - I will not go over this because it has been discussed - is that there has been a small change since 2016 in that AHBs now fall under the Residential Tenancies Board and the Residential Tenancies Act, and AHB tenancies are now Part 4 tenancies. That is the only significant change since 2016, which may have led to some confusion as to how tenants categorise themselves, perhaps miscategorising themselves as private rental tenants.

The third issue, which appears likely to be the most significant by far, although it is too early to say with any certainty, is the non-registration of private rental sector tenancies. Again, we do not know the level of non-registration. In collaboration with Threshold, however, we took a sample of 146 tenancies associated with clients who contacted Threshold in early September 2023. Of those, 52% were not registered with the RTB. That is obviously a very large and concerning figure and it suggests that non-registration may be a significant concern, although it is important to underline that further research is necessary. It is also worth noting that the decline in the number of tenancies registered with the RTB began in 2016, and 2016 was also the year in which the current phase of increased regulation and reform in the private rental sector began, with really important changes such as the rent pressure zones legislation. If it is the case that non-registration is a significant part of explaining the discrepancy between the two data sets, it suggests that in recent years we may have witnessed not so much a case of landlords fleeing the sector, as has been reported, so much as landlords fleeing regulation, which should be a major concern.

I wish to step back and consider a number of related issues that relate to the question of small-scale landlords exiting the sector, which has been the subject of much public commentary in recent times and is often put forward in the media debate, for example, as the main reason explaining the decline in the number of tenancies registered with the RTB since 2016.

To be clear, we do not know the number of landlords exiting the sector in any given year, and some of the data discussed in respect of that issue are sometimes misinterpreted.

As has been noted, the fall in the number of tenancies registered with the RTB since 2020, which has been quite dramatic, is partially or potentially related to the non-registration issue but, importantly, also coincides with the change in the registration system we have already heard about. That is one matter it is important to note. Second, another data source frequently referenced is the number of notices of termination registered with the RTB. This has increased markedly since mid-2022 but this can be explained by a legislative change at that time, which means that if notices of termination are not registered with the RTB they are not valid. In other words, the increased number of notices of termination registered is a sign of greater compliance rather than a greater number of landlords exiting the sector, as is sometimes claimed. Moreover, that data set, which begins in 2019, covers a short period. During much of that time eviction bans were in place, which further distorts that data set and makes it difficult to make claims based on it. Most importantly, because the data set begins in 2019, we do not know what the long- or medium-term average number of notices of termination issued in any given year or quarter might be. We have no way of saying whether the current levels are higher or lower than what we would normally expect.

My final point is related but slightly more conceptual. In a given year, a certain number of landlords will always exit the sector. Landlord exits from the sector are part of a normal functioning rental market. Thus, we ideally need to consider what level of landlord exits is appropriate or consistent with a functioning market. Absent such a figure, we have no way of saying with any certainty whether the current number of exits should be a cause for concern or for a policy response. Relatedly, we cannot assess with any certainty what level of policy response might be warranted. There is a bit of an analogy with the housing vacancy figures. Often, when we see the figure for the proportion of housing that is vacant it can seem alarming, and in some senses it is, but a certain proportion of the housing market will always be vacant. It is a normal and necessary component of the market. There is an analogy in that regard. I thank members for their attention.

An Cathaoirleach

I will now move to members. We will take seven-minute slots.

Senator Mary Fitzpatrick

I thank all the witnesses for being here. It feels as if there will be more questions than answers, even from their side. It is an important piece of work. There is a concerning discrepancy between the two data sets in a general sense, so it is good that the organisations represented are all engaged in it and there is a commitment to try to come up with a unique, authoritative and verifiable data set.

My first question will be for the CSO which is, as I understand it, taking the lead on that exercise with the support of the RTB. Has it any timeline for when that piece of work, or at least a first iteration of it, will be complete?

Mr. Kieran Culhane

We do not have the timeline yet. We are starting the work in November. From experience, in these kind of exercises, when taking various data sets and trying to link or compare them, how long the work will take and how easy it will be can depend a lot on the quality of the data being dealt with. In general, these kind of projects take three to six months. I expect this to be similar.

Senator Mary Fitzpatrick

Do both organisations believe they are resourced to undertake that piece of work?

Mr. Kieran Culhane

I think so at the moment, yes.

Mr. Niall Byrne

Yes. As I said, it is a matter of priority for us. We will, therefore, engage closely with the Central Statistics Office, CSO, throughout.

Senator Mary Fitzpatrick

Okay. It really is important that we get to the bottom of this. We can accept the analogy of the vacant properties and so forth, but it is very frustrating for people. There is obviously always going to be an amount of churn. That is a feature of the whole housing sector. However, we need at least one verifiable baseline, let us say, from which to do analysis and potentially develop policy responses.

Dr. Byrne mentioned the very large figure from the sample he did with Threshold. When he said it is a large figure, I presume he is suggesting that the 52% is a large figure but the actual number of 146 tenancies is a tiny percentage of whichever of the two numbers we are talking about. I would read from this that anybody or any renter who is contacting Threshold is generally doing so because they are in fear or at risk of losing their tenancy and their landlord is probably not behaving terribly ethically or properly. As well as being a really small numeric sample, that would also be a sample of people who are possibly coming up against less than best practice. Would Dr. Byrne agree with that?

Dr. Michael Byrne

Yes, to a certain extent. Certainly, it is a very small number. It is not a representative sample so it would not be correct to over-interpret it, absolutely. The only thing I would say is that Threshold clients come from a reasonably broad range of experiences in the private rental sector. Issues can arrive in a tenancy for a wide variety of reasons, so it does not necessarily reflect that. I think less compliant landlords would be over-represented. However, there would certainly be a mix. I would add that in my previous research and from discussions with Threshold, that type of figure is what the Threshold advisers would expect. They were not-----

Senator Mary Fitzpatrick

Anecdotally they would say that.

Dr. Michael Byrne

Yes, from their experience working with tenants across the years, they were not at all surprised that such a high number were not registered.

Senator Mary Fitzpatrick

Okay. It just seems like a very high percentage, but it is based on a very small sample. It is important that we would clarify that. I would expect that the vast majority of landlords are compliant or at least are registering, otherwise we would not have as high a number of registered tenancies as we do.

I appreciate that the witnesses are here today largely to talk about the statistics and gathering of statistics and data on the market, but I will ask Mr. Byrne a couple of questions about the RTB report. The documentation he provided us with gave much detail on the challenges the RTB faced back in 2022, specifically in trying to respond to both tenants and landlords. Mr. Byrne has provided all the contact details and the target response times. As I read them, however, the target response times relate generally to when people would make initial contact, be they either tenants or landlords, with a query or issue. In terms of moving to the second stage, let us say, if there is a dispute between a tenant and landlord, does the RTB have any target timelines for how those disputes are responded to, managed, escalated and resolved? Are there statistics available on that?

Mr. Niall Byrne

We are principally here today to discuss the subject of the register and registration numbers. However, obviously, yes, the whole area of dispute resolution is an important part of our functions in the RTB. That is an area we regard as a priority alongside other priority areas. All the priority areas are called out in our RTB Statement of Strategy for 2023-2025: Public Consultation Report. We have plans to examine much more closely our dispute resolution service and particularly the performance of the service itself. Clearly, the public - the public being landlords, tenants and people affected - want that service to be available, effective and very timely.

At the moment, our 2022 performance numbers are reported in the annual report for 2022. They are what they are. The mediation service we provide is a very timely and effective service. We provide telephone mediation, which allows quite a quick turnaround time and sometimes disputes are dealt with in eight weeks or even less. Adjudications are, of course, much more difficult by definition to resolve. It is cases where people had not thought mediation was an option so clearly there is something much more at issue, and then they follow a much more quasi-judicial type process. There is evidence and there must be due process. That all takes time. Cases that go to the tribunal on appeal take quite a bit of time as well.

We are concerned about the timeframes. We are concerned to try to reduce the timeframes. We have been doing quite a lot of analytical work this year to examine the processes ourselves, to make sure the processes are properly defined and are fit for purpose. Some of them have drifted away somewhat over the last few years from being as effective as they should be. That is one of our core priorities for 2024.

Senator Mary Fitzpatrick

I thank Mr Byrne. I realise I am out of time. Perhaps Mr. Byrne could return to this and provide the committee with some further detail on the work that the RTB is doing to look at the timelines, look at the availability and look at the effectiveness on the mediation, the adjudication and the tribunals. I appreciate it is only anecdotal but the feedback I get is that it is taking far too long and it is far too ineffective. I get that from both parties. I appreciate that these are people who are stressed and in very difficult situations but it would be really helpful for this committee to understand the work the RTB is doing to improve how that service is being delivered.

Mr. Niall Byrne

We are very happy to send that information to the committee and we will collate that after today's meeting. I thank the Senator.

Senator Mary Fitzpatrick

I thank Mr. Byrne.

Deputy Eoin Ó Broin

I thank all of the witnesses for their presentations. I will set a bit of context. The spirit in which we decided to hold this meeting was not necessarily to give anybody a hard time for the discrepancy but obviously it is a matter on which we are keenly interested to get more clarity. We really wanted to be helpful as opposed to adversarial, so my questions are very much in that vein. This is not just a question of a statistic because so much of our debate within this committee and in the Oireachtas on the state of the private rental sector over the last years has been influenced by the available data at the time and the RTB registration and notice of termination data were key. On top of that we were also looking at the age profile of certain cohorts of single-property landlords, we were looking at the return of positive equity, which also came in roughly about the same time as the rent pressure zones, and we were looking at what was happening in our own constituencies. We were particularly looking at the exit figures of families from emergency accommodation over a comparable period. All of this was leading all of us to believe that a significant portion of single-property landlords were exiting and those properties were leaving the private rental sector. The reason this debate is so important is because the CSO data really challenge that. This is not a bad thing. Obviously accurate data are really important. If this committee can do anything to assist the witnesses' organisations not only in reaching that goal but then making sure that the public debate is properly informed, we will be keen to do that.

I have some quick points. I am interested in the CSO's initial estimate of about 1,000 AHB tenancies underestimated. If one actually compares the RTB approved housing body registration data for 2021, it is significantly higher than in the census. According to the Irish Council for Social Housing, in the intervening year the AHBs delivered 8,500 or 9,500 new units. Not all would have been delivered, tenanted or registered during 2022, the census year. It would seem to me that the underestimation of AHB properties is much greater than 1,000. I am interested in the witnesses' views on that.

There is also the difference between AHB registrations and leased properties. I believe that a fair number of tenants in leased properties are unclear who their landlord actually is: there is a private property owner, there is a local authority and then there is a property managing agent. It may be something that the CSO would look at for questions in future years.

Maybe there is a requirement for fourth and fifth options, leased properties - because they are a different nature - as well as licensees. The issue of licensees is obviously more challenging because how many licensees actually fill out the census form versus the primary property owner? I suspect the number of licensees is a little bit smaller.

On some other data sources - and Senator Fitzpatrick's point is right on the piece of research that Dr. Byrne and Threshold did - if one does a county by county comparison of housing assistance payment, HAP, registrations and RTB registrations, it throws up some pretty big anomalies. There are some counties where there are dramatically more HAP tenancies being funded by the State than there are RTB registrations. Again, although some of that HAP data would be general data protection regulation, GDPR-protected, HAP registrations by county are already available in the public domain. I recommend that an attempt be made to look at that.

I am keen, first of all, to get a sense of the AHBs and to see if HAP registrations can be brought into the discussion in a manner that is GDPR compliant. Obviously enforcement is a key thing. Mr. Byrne and I have spoken before, and there was a significant drop-off in enforcement activity over the past number of years. Clearly, if registrations are a significant portion of that 54,000, enforcement then becomes even more important. Mr. Byrne might give us some indications as to where things are going in that direction. Can we hear from Mr. Halpin first, and Mr. Byrne second?

Mr. Cormac Halpin

I thank the Deputy. Regarding AHB rentals, basically we started looking at this work, as we mentioned, around July, when we were in contact with the RTB and the discrepancy became obvious. We did an initial high-level matching exercise that indicated to us that it looked like there might have been about 1,000 properties where the householder indicated they were in a private rental situation but the RTB data indicated they were an AHB. We are not generally in the business of changing the responses that people give us in the census. That is what we produce from the census outputs. What is important is that it said to us that there is value in undertaking this matching exercise, and to properly quantify, scope out and actually do the line-by-line matching exercise so we can give a more definitive figure, as well as the other-----

Deputy Eoin Ó Broin

On that point, when one compares the registration of AHB tenancies, for example, versus the self-declaration of AHB tenants in the census, there could be as much as a 10,000-unit gap in that, which would account of a very large portion of the 54,000. Is that something that can be looked at in the piece of work from November? Is that Mr. Halpin's intention?

Mr. Cormac Halpin

Yes, that will certainly form part of it. I cannot, at the moment, preempt what is done because we have not scoped it out but I expect that will be part of the exercise.

On the Deputy's second question around the leasing situation, there is a process under way at the moment to look at the content of the 2027 census questionnaire. I can certainly take that back when the questions are being formulated. What I would say is that for all census questions, a key principle is that they should be as comprehensible and easy to understand as possible. They go to a very wide range of households across the country in terms of literacy and the ability to understand the questions. There is an onus on the CSO to make sure they are as comprehensible to as many people as possible but we want to capture good data. That is the overriding priority as well. That is a point that we can take back in and present to the census advisory group, which makes the decisions on the content of the questionnaire.

Deputy Eoin Ó Broin

Mr. Byrne might respond on the enforcement question.

Mr. Niall Byrne

I thank the Deputy. If I can put it this way, a core concern for the RTB is that everything that should be registered is registered. That is the definition of the effective register to be held by the RTB for all of the purposes for which it is used. We are very focused on that now, and more focused than the RTB has been heretofore. I have already mentioned our statement of strategy for 2023 to 2025, which is in the pack. That is called out as one of the core areas for attention. That is what drives a lot of our other activities.

We have to make sure that everything is in place to be able to say that the register can be trusted to be comprehensive, maintained in an accurate way, and kept up to date. There are lots of challenges in making that happen because it is a particular kind of register. It is a self-declare register. There are no checks imposed by the RTB before a tenancy is registered. Landlords go on to our online site and they register the tenancy, so there are no barriers to entry as such. It is a register that, by definition, will always have degrees of inaccuracy built into it but it is highly important that the RTB is focused on doing everything it can to ensure it is as accurate as it can be.

Everything we do on the technology side, including developing the systems, is part of making that happen. I mention everything we do to develop new sources of information to underpin the register, whether that comes from the HAP service centre or local authorities, and we are in discussions with the Revenue Commissioners about much richer data that could potentially come to us from Revenue records coming from the form 11 tax returns. All of that underpins the register. We welcome the opportunity to engage with the CSO on the analysis of the data because we are concerned to understand what is going on here as well and we will be interested to see what comes through at the end of that exercise.

Also then, in an integrated way, all of our compliance work is directed towards that same end to underpin the register. Heretofore the RTB's policy around compliance would have been to react to incoming information which suggested that properties were not registered. The RTB did not have any proactive compliance-type programmes, such as one sees in lots of other public bodies where proactive compliance is the bedrock on which regulatory bodies operate. That development is really only happening now in the RTB. That is a primary focus for us going into 2024. We had ambitions to move that work forward much more in the last 12 months. Ms Crimin’s post was originally intended to do exactly that and she was to be our head of compliance. However, because of issues we ran into with the registration system that had to be prioritised, Ms Crimin, among many other colleagues, and I ended up having to put a huge amount of our time and effort into remedying the registration issues.

Happily, we are now coming out of that time so we can return to some of these other concerns which are equally important. We are committed to building a much more proactive compliance approach that is based on data, led by risk and involves proactive engagement with the register itself and the sector. That has to be built; it is not something that arrives ready-made or that can be imported from another public body, although lessons can be learned from other public bodies. Our commitment is to move away from the reactive and into the proactive. If we were to come back to the committee this time next year, assuming we do not run into circumstances where our efforts are unexpectedly diverted into other areas in the next 12 months, we would be in a position to give the committee a lot of assurance on the effects of that work and what the benefits flowing from it would be.

This is not to be seen as something separate related only to prosecutions and that kind of thing; it is also about developing the protective functions of the RTB. The RTB does not really have a protective function, as it were, although sometimes it is assumed that we do. It is also sometimes assumed that we are all-seeing and all-knowing as regards the entirety of the residential rental sector but that is not the case either. Our focus and function are to register tenancies and if there is no tenancy, the RTB does not have any role or remit. We are keen to build out the RTB in the future and to build the agenda around effective and proportionate regulation.

We must also recognise that there are many good landlords in the sector. A lot of our research supports that view and most of the time things work quite well for most tenants and landlords. That is good and we should not lose sight of it. There are definitely some bad actors in the sector who are only interested in exploiting potentially vulnerable people, evading their responsibilities and exploiting loopholes in the law. For this reason, we have to have a parallel track to make sure those serious bad-intentioned actors are dealt with by the RTB. The RTB's current capacity to do that is not anywhere near as developed as it should be but we are clear that this has to happen, alongside supporting those people who wish to comply to actually comply. There are lots of reasons people forget or get confused.

There are many older people in the residential rental sector. We see this in the data. Many people who struggle with compliance requirements are not trying to be non-compliant but are accidentally becoming so. We are also committed to having an education and supportive function to encourage and support those people to comply.

It is about coming at it in an integrated, joined-up way. I think we are now in a position to do that. We thought we would have been in that position last year but that did not turn out to be case. We will publish our business plan for 2024 on our website so there is public accountability around these objectives at the start of 2024, assuming the RTB board signs off on it in December, which is what we expect.

Deputy Eoin Ó Broin

I will come back in during the next round if there is time.

An Cathaoirleach

That is absolutely fine.

Deputy Emer Higgins

My first question is for each organisation. Do they believe there are 50,000 missing landlords?

Mr. Niall Byrne

The honest answer is that I do not know. I am not someone who will speculate about what might or might not be in the sector. I await the results of the analysis that the CSO will lead on with input from the RTB. Let us see what we see there. The 50,000 number is a gross number. There are various explanations and I think that number will reduce. I am interested in the net number at the end of the exercise. Let us see what that is and what we can learn about the constituent elements within that number.

Deputy Emer Higgins

Does anyone else have anything to offer?

Mr. Cormac Halpin

Where the CSO can bring value to this is that, by law, we have access to both the data sets we are talking about here, and we are the only organisation that does. In addition, we have a mandate to do statistical analysis and produce a statistical report where there is a public interest, and there clearly is in this case. Similar to the RTB, our process is to scope out the exercise, bring in the relevant data sets, conduct the analysis and produce a report. We are not in the business of speculating on that number until we have conducted that report. We can bring quite a lot of value once we get into the nuts and bolts of the analysis.

Deputy Emer Higgins

Dr. Michael Byrne made the point in his contribution that the likes of Revenue’s data on the rent-a-room scheme might need to be included in this overall conversation too. I believe there was, anecdotally, quite an increase in the uptake in rent-a-room last year, but the year prior to that, there were almost 11,000 units – as in individual houses – where there could have been multiple people. That would be significant to bake into those numbers as well. That is a minimum of a fifth of that overall figure of 50,000.

My second question is whether the witnesses believe that landlords are leaving the market and, if so, what data is that determination based on? That question is for everybody.

Mr. Niall Byrne

I might ask my colleague, Ms Crimin, to comment on that from the data available to the RTB.

Ms Lucia Crimin

What we can say and what we published in our annual report for 2022 is the number of tenancies that are registered. We have confidence now in that figure. As Mr. Byrne explained earlier, we now operate a system of annual registration, which is giving us high degrees of confidence in the currency and up-to-dateness of the register. It is very early to comment on annual registration. It is just a year and a half in place now, so the data set we have is still rather immature. We expect to see the quality and quantity of that data improving over the coming months and into the coming years. We will have greater insights in the fullness of time as to the behaviour of tenancies and landlords insofar as the tenancies turning over over the lifetime of the rented property.

Deputy Emer Higgins

"We do not know" is the answer, effectively.

Ms Lucia Crimin

We do not but, over time, I expect we will know more and have greater insights arising from this better quality data.

Deputy Emer Higgins

Does anyone else have anything to add?

Mr. Kieran Culhane

We do not know either. We use the data. The census does not ask questions on landlords; it asks the tenant whether they rent their property.

It does not ask who a tenant's landlord is or for any information about him or her. As Dr. Byrne pointed out, landlords can sell and move in and out of the market without the property moving in and out of the market. There is turnover in there. We have seen that in any data sources we have looked at. Part of this exercise will be trying to see if there has been anything significantly outside of what would usually be expected in a functioning market to be seen over recent years. That is one element we can look at in the exercise we are carrying out with the RTB.

Dr. Michael Byrne

I could talk about this issue for a long time and, therefore, I hope the Cathaoirleach will cut me off when the time calls for it. Landlords are leaving the market. That is for sure but that will always be the case. We know that many landlords purchase a rental property as a retirement investment so there is a natural endpoint to that investment. Given the age profile in the sector, it is not surprising that we would see a number of exits associated with that. RTB research published in summer 2021 showed that, if memory serves, 14% of landlords had owner-occupier mortgages, which suggests that they may be accidental landlords, although not everybody likes that term. It would be expected that some of those people would be looking for opportunities to leave the sector. Looking at the nature of our private rental sector and the type of investors within it, I would argue that it should not be too surprising that there is volatility. That is an important point to underline.

A second point is that, on balance of probability, it is likely that a higher number of landlords has been leaving the sector in recent years than is normal or desirable. When considering the evidence and anecdotal data from industry actors such as real estate agents and what homelessness organisations are reporting in the round, it is likely that the numbers leaving are currently higher than would normally be expected or higher than would be seen as consistent with a functional rental market, although we do not know.

Notwithstanding that, it should be noted that, from a supply point of view, there are two issues relevant to this question. From the supply point of view, the issue is net investment. It is not the number exiting but the difference between the number exiting and the number entering, which we do not know. In an ideal world, the property price register would collect data that would allow us to determine the exact level of landlord investment every year. I believe such information is collected through stamp duty filings. We currently do not have that information for the small-scale sector. We have a much better idea for the institutional landlord sector. That is all I wanted to say.

Deputy Emer Higgins

That makes sense. I compliment the research that was done. It was funded by the RTB and the ESRI. Some 100,000 tenancies were looked at and a report on the private rental market was published last month. Dr. Byrne had it in a nutshell when he talked about the property price register. There has to be some way for us to capture this information. As legislators, we need this kind of information. We rely on people in the sector to provide us with data on these matters so that we can formulate policies accordingly. Perhaps that is something the CSO and the RTB could give consideration to as they continue to collaborate.

An Cathaoirleach

I will take the next slot. As has been mentioned, the collection of data and evidence is highly important when we are setting policy and trying to do things properly. The committee saw that in the research we did on vacancy and dereliction. A figure of 166,000 vacant homes goes around but, when it is broken down, they are not always homes that are ready to be occupied. There are many reasons for them being vacant. I have a question for Dr. Byrne. The Threshold survey of 146 tenancies showed that 52% were not registered with the RTB.

Were those tenants asked had they completed a census form? I notice it was within nine months of the census so I wondered was there a correlation.

Dr. Michael Byrne

No, it was just a case of checking the addresses against the RTB register.

An Cathaoirleach

There is something in the table regarding tenancies registered with the RTB between 2005 and 2022. When it was at its peak, the number of registrations was approximately 320,000 and that went down to 246,000. If somebody does not appear on the RTB register, is that flagged in any way or is there any way to see where that tenancy is gone? Does the RTB just look at the whole number every year?

Mr. Niall Byrne

The register is very much a point in time. In the past, the RTB worked on that basis of what the number was each year. That time series goes way back beyond where we are today. Now the RTB register gets huge attention and is used for a multitude of purposes. I always feel we must be careful about using something that was designed for one purpose to inform a multitude of complex policy areas, which is what the State is faced with now.

What we are trying to do at this stage is to look at the register in a much more developed way and recognise that if this register is to be capable of doing what is now expected of it, the RTB needs to manage and maintain it in a very different kind of way. It predates my time with the board, but to be fair, there was investment in new technology to manage and maintain the register. That programme of work was completed in 2021 and came into effect in 2022. We did have issues with it but, as I said earlier, we have overcome those issues. Now we are a position, as my colleague said, stand over the data. We stand over the 246,000 number, not withstanding what our colleagues from CSO are saying. If it turns out the number is not correct, we are the first people who want to know why and we are the first people who need to act on it and we will. However, our system now is much more capable of assisting us in fulfilling the responsibilities that Deputy Higgins mentioned earlier, of informing people such as everyone here and the broader policy arena as well as the general public about what the RTB can say about the private rental sector in particular where much of the concern is.

In our annual report for 2022, we have called this out explicitly. It is in the information that went to the committee on page 26. Our data improves year on year, which is consequent on the introduction of annual registration. That was a major change and is only in since April last year. That gives us a basis on which we can work to generate much deeper and more accurate insights and to develop a profile of the register, including such issues as those that have been mentioned: the numbers and types of landlords; the dwellings and the tenancies; the movements in registered tenancies - we all want to know what is going on, which is the dynamic nature that we all want to understand; and data on the landlords leaving and entering the sector because now every landlord is identified to a very rigorous identity process so we can identify the individual landlords and then, over time, track their comings and goings and the changing of properties. This takes a bit of time. There is no point in my saying we will have all of that next year but by this time next year we will be much more aware. Then, into 2025, we think we will need two cycles of registration and we will be able to visualise and present the dynamic nature of the activity in the sector.

That is not just the register; that is just a snapshot. It is very once-off by nature whereas there is a dynamism to this, as Dr. Byrne has said.

An Cathaoirleach

That sounds fair. I saw Dr. Byrne nodding in agreement with some of that on the data collection methods and the benefits of what it is used for.

I will now turn to the CSO. The question asked was: are you a local authority tenant; voluntary community housing co-operative or private rental. Was it able to correlate between how many local authority tenancies there are and how many people responded that they were local authority tenancies? Is there any confusion for AHB tenants, referred by the local authority, that they might say they are a local authority tenant even though they are living in AHB accommodation? Is there good correlation between those who answered that they were local authority tenants and how many local authority tenancies there are in the country?

Mr. Cormac Halpin

I would say what I said previously to Deputy Ó Broin. We take what people give us as their census response and we publish that. I would expect that as a by-product of the matching exercise that we are going to do, we will be able to identify that. We will use other sources to be able to identify that the property might be identified in other sources as having a local authority landlord whereas the census record shows that it is a private rental, and we will be able to quantify that. That is very much getting to the heart of what the matching exercise will be able to do.

An Cathaoirleach

I think I know the answer to this but a tenant cannot register a tenancy with the RTB. It is only a landlord can do that. Okay.

I call Senator Cummins.

Senator John Cummins

This session is useful, as is the piece of work that is to be done here. I do not think there is a mystery to this or that there is a host of missing landlords out there. I think it is probably a miscategorisation and a non-catagorisation. I am not sure how the CSO will capture this but there are many people out there who rent from a family member. There is no requirement for them to be over here on the RTB side. They are probably captured in the CSO data because if someone answers the CSO questionnaire, they are a tenant in a rental property, but they will not be in this data set here. I do not think that will be quantifiable. Can that particular piece of information be quantified?

Mr. Kieran Culhane

I would have to check the RTB regulations. Is this where a person is living in the same house?

Senator John Cummins

No, if someone is renting from a family member, it is not required that it be a registered tenancy.

Mr. Niall Byrne

That is correct, yes.

Senator John Cummins

That is a big cohort, I would suggest. I am not certain how the CSO's matching exercise will be able to capture that data set. Will it?

Mr. Kieran Culhane

I will not pre-empt the results but we will see what other data sets are available that might help us. In the opening statement, Mr. Halpin mentioned that under the Statistics Act, we have access to the LPT, so we will have some information on the ownership of the properties and that might help point towards information.

Senator John Cummins

Somebody who is renting from a family member is not entitled to avail of a renters tax credit because it is not a RTB-----

Mr. Kieran Culhane

Yes we might not have a register of a tenancy there.

Senator John Cummins

-----that will not be there. I suggest that there is a significant cohort in that space. That is along with what the Chair spoke of with AHBs and licences in terms of rent-a-room and so on. I think that will get you a long way towards the figure. Dr. Byrne mentioned a sample size of 146 and he accepted Senator Fitzpatrick's point.

It is a very small sample of 0.04% or 0.06%, depending on which data set it is being compared to, of the 146 that were examined. While I am not for one second suggesting there are not landlords who do not register a property - we are not fools, of course there are and there is probably a cohort - but it is not anything like the figure that has been suggested. Would Dr. Byrne care to comment on that?

Dr. Michael Byrne

I probably should have clarified this. This was something I did with Threshold because the issue of non-registration had not previously been part of the discussion around this discrepancy. There is no available data on it. The idea was to simply do something that would be very quick and straightforward and could just flag the issue rather than attempt to document or measure the extent of the issue. The Senator is absolutely right and I do not disagree with anything he said. It really was a question of flagging the issue and ensuring it was on the agenda. That is absolutely the case. Nevertheless, I am sure the Senator will agree it is a concerning figure.

Senator John Cummins

Of course. Would Dr. Byrne care to comment on the piece about people who rent from family members? It was not mentioned in his submission but-----

Dr. Michael Byrne

It is a good point. I find it very hard to even form a view of what the size of that cohort may be and whether they would describe themselves on the census form as renting privately. It probably is the-----

Senator John Cummins

What was the census question for clarity?

Mr. Cormac Halpin

Question H2 on the census form was, "Does your household own or rent your accommodation?" The first part of the question stated: "Mark one box only: own, with mortgage or loan; own outright; rent; or live here rent free. The second part of the question is, "If renting, who is your landlord? Private landlord; local authority; voluntary or cooperative housing body."

Senator John Cummins

If someone is renting from a family member and is not living rent free but paying rent, which a lot of people do, the only option they would have ticked would have been a private landlord because they would not have ticked a local authority nor would they have ticked a co-operative housing trust.

Dr. Michael Byrne

Yes, that is correct. A number of people did not complete the question, but other than that, yes.

Mr. Kieran Culhane

In our analysis we will try to see what we can find out as much as possible and if there is a gap at the end then that might be one of the explanations.

Senator John Cummins

It might frame the next census question, potentially.

Mr. Kieran Culhane

We might be able to find some meaningful information that points towards that. There is a question on how much rent is being paid and whether somebody living in a family member's house paying below market rent. Something else in the analysis might point towards that.

Senator John Cummins

I am just thinking that there are scenarios where somebody is in a nursing home or somebody is availing of the house. There are a lot of houses where somebody might be in a stopgap situation where their mortgage has been approved or they are waiting for a house, or they are stuck for a property and they go into a family member's house. I know of a lot of people in this position. I am putting it out there. I am not certain how it will be captured but I wish the CSO the very best of luck with it. Can I ask if the Chair wants me to come in on another round?

An Cathaoirleach

Go ahead. I let everybody else run over. I will go to Deputy Ó Broin after this.

Senator John Cummins

Perfect. I will ask the RTB about the dispute resolution issue. We had a discussion about it when RTB representatives attended the committee this time of last year, from memory. How many disputes is the RTB involved in this year? Officials suggested there may be approximately 8,000 disputes to year end in 2022. Did that materialise?

Mr. Niall Byrne

I am looking at our annual report for the relevant page for 2022. In 2022, the total number of applications we had was 7,400 in total, which is an increase on 2021 and may not have been a typical year. The last typical year was 2019 and there were 6,185 then, which is an increase.

I do not have the numbers with me because we came here to discuss the registration question today but the indication for this year is that the number will be higher in 2023, again.

Senator John Cummins

How is the RTB getting on in terms of the desired times, the mediation process, and the adjudication process? Have the timelines in respect of them come down or is the RTB making progress with regard to them?

Mr. Niall Byrne

In 2023 the situation is - again, I do not have the actual details with me - that timelines are coming under pressure due to the increase in the number of disputes coming to us. One thing the RTB is doing, which is an action under Housing for All, is that we actively encourage people who come to us with disputes to engage in mediation because mediation is demonstrably the more successful route, and the less adversarial and less time consuming route. It is very preferable that people go the mediation route. We encourage people to opt into mediation.

We also have a pilot programme under way, which is just beginning to deliver very interesting results. This is a programme involving our staff intervening early in the process where people have a dispute to see if we can resolve it before it even gets into the process. That is showing some really positive signs.

Senator John Cummins

Last year, the RTB said it was between nine and 16 weeks, in terms of mediation. Has that changed?

Mr. Niall Byrne

If I had the numbers with me I would imagine I would be telling the Senator that it was beginning to lengthen, but I do not have the actual numbers. We told Senator Fitzpatrick that we would send in the information.

Senator John Cummins

Sure. Regarding the adjudications, Mr. Byrne said it was between 20 and 30 weeks. Is it the same in respect of that?

Mr. Niall Byrne

It is similar. It certainly has not shortened, I will put it that way.

Senator John Cummins

Mr. Byrne said he aimed that by mid-2024 to have 40% of cases dealt within ideal timeframes which he described as between four to six weeks for mediation and 12 weeks for adjudications. Is that still desirable? Is that still the target? Regarding the RTB annual report, Mr. Byrne said there were targets and it was going to set out those targets by quarter 3 but I do not see them set out anywhere on the website. Am I missing it?

Mr. Niall Byrne

No, the Senator is correct. This is partly due to us having to prioritise all the issues we had with the registration system. We did not unfortunately make as much progress on the disputes function as I would have liked to have seen. However, we have engaged in analysis, as I mentioned earlier, to go down into detail in terms of the processes to really examine where the time goes. We now have insights from that exercise that we would not have had before. Those indicative numbers being quoted by the Senator are quite ambitious.

Senator John Cummins

They are Mr. Byrne's numbers, though.

Mr. Niall Byrne

Well they are ambitious. I could be criticised for over-ambition.

Senator John Cummins

We will not criticise Mr. Byrne for that but we will criticise him for not needing them.

Mr. Niall Byrne

I fully accept that and the accountability piece. We remain very committed to this and know it is a matter of huge public importance. I will mention, by way of contextualising, that even with the increasing number of disputes coming to the RTB, it only represents approximately 3% of all registered tenancies. Therefore, 97% of registered tenancies do not appear in front of the RTB as a dispute. That is a good and positive thing to recognise.

Senator John Cummins

I am out of time and have asked all of my questions but the RTB has in its annual report that it will set those out by quarter 3 and it has not. When will those target times be published on the website?

Mr. Niall Byrne

That will be in 2024 now.

Senator John Cummins

In quarter 1.

Mr. Niall Byrne

We are working on our business plan for 2024.

Senator John Cummins

Will it be in quarter 1?

Mr. Niall Byrne

All things going well, we could possibly get it done in quarter 1. It is probably more of an objective that we will determine the targets during the course of quarter 1 and publish them in quarter 2.

Senator John Cummins

I thank Mr. Byrne.

An Cathaoirleach

I can go to Deputy O'Callaghan next if he wishes, or to Deputy Ó Broin and come back to him? Is he ready?

Deputy Cian O'Callaghan

I am, and I thank the Chair. I want to ask the RTB a question. I have met different landlords who are very upset around the registration process. They are really distraught and doing their absolute level best to get themselves registered. They feel they are facing brick walls. Some of them who have multiple interactions with the RTB. They send their form in and it gets sent back. This goes on repeatedly for weeks and months, with different emails and phone calls. They cannot manage to talk to a human being, so they can get this sorted. Is this something the RTB is aware of, and what is it doing to address it?

I will give one recent example. An agent for a landlord was on to me about this. The RTB was not accepting the registration from the landlord because there was no personal public service number, PPSN, provided. The landlord has explained to the RTB that they do not have a PPSN. They simply do not have one as they are not resident in Ireland and they are not Irish. The RTB is failing to accept the landlord's registration because they have not provided the PPSN. This is going back and forth endlessly, causing huge stress. Why are the RTB's systems not working and why are some landlords being put through these processes that just seem to be preventing them from registering, when they are trying their level best to do so? Why can they not talk to someone who can actually sort these things out? Why are there multiple communications without the ability to sort this out, or for it to be understood or resolved? Why keep sending back forms? The RTB just says it is incomplete, when the person has explained why a particular field might be incomplete and has given a good, valid reason for it. They send it back in and it just keeps coming back marked incomplete. This is certainly a problem for some landlords.

Mr. Niall Byrne

I will comment on the Deputy's question, and then my colleague, Ms Crimin, whose has responsibility for registration, can explain where we are regarding current performance. Much of that was going on in the autumn of last year and into the first part of this year. That has been significantly reduced, so that now that is very much the exception rather than the norm. Unfortunately, this time last year, that kind of experience was somewhat the norm for a lot of people but we have worked extremely hard with our colleagues on the customer service functions we provide and by investing in our information technology, IT, system so that the system itself provides a better service, and people can navigate it successfully.

I have apologised extensively to all stakeholder interest groups since last year. It is not part of my function or role to make people's lives a misery. In fact, it is our role to facilitate compliance with the registration requirements by putting in place systems that work and facilitate compliance by the people who are willing to comply. That is absolutely our core concern. Everything that we have been doing has been directed towards that. Unfortunately, not everything that was in our system last year regarding how the system performed allowed that to happen. Hence, people ran into these difficulties.

I have dealt with a lot of these. Many of them have come to me, so I have that experience. I got one just this week, and I said to my colleagues that I did not understand what was going on that this was still be happening, where a particular type of landlord wanted to register a number of properties and seemed to have got involved in an endless loop that was leading to intense frustration. We have since worked through that one and sorted it out.

At a level of policy, that is our commitment, and notwithstanding what the Deputy said, we can show, and our data demonstrate, that we have largely overcome those problems that were very prominent this time last year.

Some of those data are in the briefing document that went to the committee. There is a particular graph in there. I will ask my colleague Ms Crimin to give a bit more detail on that, if that is okay with the Deputy.

Ms Lucia Crimin

I thank the Deputy for the question and for bringing this to our attention. First, on behalf of myself and the RTB, that is not the standard that we would hold ourselves to. It is not an example of what we could call good customer service. In that regard, we very much regret that it has been this particular landlord's experience with us.

Without going into the details, the Deputy mentioned that the person is a non-national. This time last year, the system had no pathway through for non-national landlords. I am pleased to say that since 12 July, through our online portal non-national landlords can now register. This was an unfortunate feature of our system. This time last year, there were a number of landlord types that could not come through, and that has been the programme we have worked on implementing over the last 12 months.

As Mr. Byrne mentioned, as any regulator or registration body like the RTB would want, we want to make compliance with the requirement to register as simple as possible. I very much appreciate what the Deputy is saying, in that it has not been any kind of a model for that individual. I am happy to speak with the Deputy afterwards, if that is okay, to get some of those details and see if we can resolve matters for that individual. As Mr. Byrne has said about our approach over the last 12 months, we know there were many of those kinds of examples this time last year. They were coming to me in various directions. We have resolved the vast majority of those. We are trying to build a customer service and a registration portal that is easy and effective. I would go so far as saying that we have come a long way in the last 12 months but I reiterate that the experience of the Deputy's constituent is not what we would accept.

Deputy Cian O'Callaghan

It is positive to hear that the vast majority of this has been resolved but if people are still experiencing this problem, what are they meant to do? If they are caught in this endless loop of being asked for things they have explained they cannot provide, as some landlords are currently experiencing, what are they to do?

Ms Lucia Crimin

We have an outsourced contact centre and we have a process in place between them to escalate complex matters into RTB staff for specialist resolution. It seems that unfortunately, in the case the Deputy is describing, that process has not kicked in. As I said, the vast majority of landlords and agents who are having very particular, nuanced issues are being resolved and have been resolved by our in-house team.

Deputy Cian O'Callaghan

Landlords can ask the call centre to escalate it directly to RTB staff if it is not getting resolved?

Ms Lucia Crimin

Yes.

Deputy Cian O'Callaghan

Okay.

Deputy Eoin Ó Broin

I want to come back on a previous query about the fact that the CSO's registration data for local authorities is very similar to that of the National Oversight and Audit Commission. It reported in its 2022 report that there were 146,000 local authority properties, while the CSO reported around 150,000. There is a strange anomaly because the public private partnership social homes are owned by the local authority but actively managed by AHBs, so they do not fall under the RTB. That could create additional confusion for the tenant because if they are dealing with Oaklee Housing for example, as they do in my constituency, there might not be clear ownership. There are not 4,000 of those but there are probably at least 1,000, or maybe shy of 1,000 of them.

For me, the key thing is not whether there are missing tenancies or landlords. It is whether the private rental sector is growing or shrinking. That is the really crucial thing. I share Dr. Byrne's analysis, which is that I think it is but one of the things that the census data ask us to query is whether it is shrinking at the rate at which we thought it was shrinking previously. That is the kind of conversation we need to have.

I have a couple of questions that are all related to that.

I am keen to know when the 2022 registration data will be published. At what point does Mr. Byrne think the RTB will be in the position to report 2023 registration data – not the quarterly registrations, but the total quantum of registrations? We have had no annual registration data since 2021 because of the issues with the new systems, so that information would be helpful.

There is the issue around the challenges of individual property landlords. There was a commitment at an earlier stage to allow AHBs to bulk register to allow them to improve their process. Can Mr. Byrne give an update on that?

The software and IT systems are related to the efficacy or accuracy of the data. Can Mr. Byrne give us an update on who is responsible for dealing with those challenges within the online registration system? What is the cost of that? If Mr. Byrne does not have that information, he can send it to the committee in writing afterwards - that would be fine. Does the RTB have sufficient funds?

I will raise an issue I raised with the RTB previously. To make things more complicated, in some senses, the exits are not the issue; rather, it is the entrants and the net flow. There was a conversation in an earlier period suggesting that the actual number of single property landlords leaving each year could have been even greater and that while the new rental stock coming in from the build-to-rent private rented sector was reducing the net reduction – if there is a net reduction - it did not acknowledge the fact that they are two very different sectors because the new stock coming in is at the higher end cost-wise and much of the single-property stock is at the middle or lower end. I have always been keen for the RTB to try to find some way of grappling with that in order that we would not just know what the net change is but would also get a better sense of whether, as some stock exits, the stock coming in is in a different price range. It is not, therefore, only about whether the stock coming in is equal in number. Does Mr. Byrne have any thoughts on that?

I am interested in what was said on RTB compliance capacity. That sounded like a very diplomatic request for additional resources. I invite Mr. Byrne not to be diplomatic. If there is a compliance challenge, the committee should know because we could write to the Minister and raise the issue. I know there was some additional funding for the RTB in the budget announcement today but I would like to hear more about that.

Senator Cummins made a good point. I have no idea what number of renters renting are from family and are therefore not required to register with the RTB. It is not something I have come across a lot and I live in and represent a constituency with a huge rental sector. That might be an issue the CSO could consider for future censuses. If it is a big number, it would be good to know what it is. The CSO could increase the number of options provided in the census from three or four to five or six. Obviously, the questions cannot be overcomplicated but that would be useful.

The issue of trying to find a way on the property price register to clearly distinguish between properties purchased for owner occupation and properties purchased for rental stock is something we should write to the Minister about. Does the property price register sit under the Department of Justice? I think it does. The only reason I suggest this is that there was quite a lot of news coverage before Covid and in the early period of Covid about small institutional investors that had small- to medium-sized funds buying up portions of second-hand homes. The Business Post reported on the matter significantly. We were never able to get a clear read on that, however. Given that there is an issue there with compliance and so on, it would be interesting for us to consider asking the Department whether that could be clearly delineated, not just in terms of stamp duty but also the intent of property purchase. While that may not be possible, the more data sources we have, the better.

Perhaps Mr. Byrne could respond to those questions.

Mr. Niall Byrne

I think I made a note of everything the Deputy asked.

Deputy Eoin Ó Broin

I will remind Mr. Byrne if he forgets.

Mr. Niall Byrne

If I miss anything, I am sure the Deputy will remind me. On registration figures, the 2022 numbers are published in the 2022 annual report, which was laid before the Houses of the Oireachtas.

Deputy Eoin Ó Broin

That is the figure of 246,000.

Mr. Niall Byrne

Yes.

Deputy Eoin Ó Broin

What about the 2023 numbers?

Mr. Niall Byrne

They will be in the 2023 annual report, which we expect will published around September next year, although it might get approved by Cabinet before the summer recess, in which case it would be July.

Deputy Eoin Ó Broin

The rents reports the RTB is now publishing are great. The fact it is doing them in a periodic way and there is a form of prenotification is good. Will the RTB get to a point where it will be able to give quarterly updates on the total number of registrations at any one time in real time? With an annual report, Cabinet approval is needed, and I appreciate that.

We are all interested in the real-time data.

Mr. Niall Byrne

Yes, there is much interest in that. Ms Crimin might comment.

Ms Lucia Crimin

I am happy to make a brief comment on that. As I mentioned, the annual registration data we have now are very immature. We are monitoring the register now. I would like to see it mature and perhaps settle a little bit so we understand seasonal impacts and try to get to a point of stability where we know and understand. I think the work we will do with our colleagues in the CSO will shunt us forward in our understanding of our register. That is a long-winded way of me saying it is our intention to publish that but-----

Deputy Eoin Ó Broin

Just do not press Ms Crimin on a date yet.

Ms Lucia Crimin

Do not press me on a date but we need to be responsible as well. People could potentially draw false or inaccurate conclusions if we publish the size of the register without having full knowledge of how the register is behaving. That would be a very irresponsible thing for a body like the RTB to do. It is our full intention to promote full transparency of our data, and I am very much in favour of doing so, but we must do it in a responsible way and at a time that is right. “At the earliest possible opportunity” is the answer I will give the Deputy.

Deputy Eoin Ó Broin

I asked Mr. Byrne about the AHB bulk registrations, the funding and who is responsible for the website.

Mr. Niall Byrne

The bulk uploads are a business issue for the AHBs, particularly the larger ones. The issue is not just one for AHBs but also for large landlords of any kind, including some of the corporate landlords operating in the market. Our intention is to implement that in our registration system as soon as we can. However, “as soon as we can” has to be part of fitting in with the planned development upgrade path for the system. At this stage, I hope we will get that in as part of developments to the system next year. We thought we could get it in this year. We had a big development programme to remedy some of the immediate problems – the pathways Ms Crimin referred to earlier. That was under way from last October. It has been successful but we were not able to include the bulk upload in it.

Deputy Eoin Ó Broin

Does Mr. Byrne have an idea of what quarter of next year the RTB is aiming for?

Mr. Niall Byrne

I would say the AHBs and others would like it as soon as possible. By the time we specify it and get it designed, implemented, tested and deployed, I imagine it would be quarter 3 of next year at best.

Deputy Eoin Ó Broin

What are the costs involved and who is looking after the system’s upgrades?

Mr. Niall Byrne

We have technical partners contracted to us who provide support and maintenance for the system.

Deputy Eoin Ó Broin

Who are they? Can that information be shared with the committee?

Mr. Niall Byrne

Yes, it is a matter of public record. The current support and maintenance contract is with OpenSky Data Systems.

Deputy Eoin Ó Broin

What is that contract costing annually?

Mr. Niall Byrne

It is not straightforward. I will end up giving the Deputy the wrong number because there is a range of-----

Deputy Eoin Ó Broin

Mr. Byrne could share it with the committee in writing after the meeting. I presume there is a base figure and then there is a figure for maintenance or additional work.

Mr. Niall Byrne

The company supplies a range of services to us; it is a matter of extracting out that part of the overall service that we take from it.

Deputy Eoin Ó Broin

If Mr. Byrne could share that information with us, it would be great.

Mr. Niall Byrne

All of that is in place. As I said, we are much more technologically developed than we were last year but there is still much to be done by way of the future digital pathway for the RTB. The board of the RTB is very concerned about and focused on that in terms of specifying what that is and moving down that pathway. Technology is a big part. The CSO had some nice language in its opening statement about the nature of these data sets nowadays. There is a need to invest in them, which brings me to the Deputy’s question on resources.

The RTB is satisfied with the support we receive-----

Deputy Eoin Ó Broin

Mr. Byrne said that with a straight face.

Mr. Niall Byrne

-----from the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage. We had an uplift in our grant last year and I believe there has been an uplift in the grant this year.

The RTB also has reserves and its board is focused on developing a plan for the investment of those reserves. I am referring to the functions of the RTB and making the RTB as efficient and effective for the future as it can be.

Our issue is not really about resources. It is more about skills than about scale, although there are questions about whether we have the right numbers of people doing the right jobs and whether they have the right skills. We have a process under way under our strategy whereby we are seeking to develop, with the help of consultants, a new operating model for the RTB that would take into account many of the things we are talking about today in the context of our strategy and the future structure that would make the RTB much more capable of delivering on the strategy set out. We think the strategy approved by the board last year is very sensible and relevant to many of the things we talked about today and that, by the end of 2025, it would bring the RTB to a very different position than it was in coming into 2022, for example. That is the path we are on but we have to have an appropriate structure. The process associated with defining relevant staff skill sets and competencies and how we might engage those through the market is under way, and we expect to have a recommendation for a changed organisational structure by the end of this year.

An Cathaoirleach

On the suggestion on the property price register, I believe reference was made to the Department of Justice. Did Dr. Byrne suggest the purchaser would indicate the intended use of the property?

Dr. Michael Byrne

I think my colleagues from the CSO might be in a better position to comment. Currently, what are recorded are data on whether it is a household and whether the purchaser intends to occupy the property. There is a category of household non-occupier and this is the one that covers landlords or people purchasing a house for the purpose of becoming a landlord. It also includes other categories, such as people purchasing a holiday home or those purchasing a home for a relative or for some other reason. I suspect the category primarily includes landlords and holiday home owners – a mix of the two. However, it would be really valuable to clarify the proportion of landlords.

An Cathaoirleach

Could I have clarity on the number of landlords entering the market through purchasing or acquiring new properties?

Dr. Michael Byrne

Just to be clear, that would clarify the number of people who are purchasing a property with the intention of entering the market. As I mentioned, we know a large proportion of landlords have owner-occupier mortgages or have become landlords unintentionally. However, if policy is trying to shape investment levels or target the behaviour of people who intend to invest, then the key figure relates to people purchasing with the intention to invest.

An Cathaoirleach

If we had those data, we would expect, within 12 months or another period, to see the associated registrations – when they go up for tenancy, I suppose. This is not necessarily the case as the properties could be vacant.

What is the normal, acceptable turnover of landlords entering and leaving a rental system? Dr. Byrne referred to how we measure that. I suspect there is a different attitude to rental in Europe than in Ireland. The dream here has always been home ownership, with rental being something done on the way to home ownership. I suspect that, in many European countries, rental is seen as a much more long-term option. How would one work out the normal, acceptable turnover of landlords?

Dr. Michael Byrne

The short answer is that I do not know. It would be a function of policy objectives for the sector, so there would not be a level that would apply across sectors. If, for example, you regarded growth in the private rental sector as a policy target, there might be one number; however, if the policy were more focused on growing home ownership and social housing, another figure might be regarded as appropriate.

In the short term, in the absence of significant research that could investigate this, it would be ideal to develop a benchmark based on the number of exits over a period. This would at least allow you to assess what constituted an unusually high or low number of exits, etc., so you could at least get a picture of how the private rental market behaves over a period and the levels that are more typical of the market. Ideally, you would go significantly beyond that and gain a better understanding.

An Cathaoirleach

The number of RTB registrations dropped between 2015 and 2022. Dr. Byrne is not convinced that this reflects landlords getting out of the market and believes they may just be disappearing from regulation or registration. Is that what he was suggesting earlier?

Dr. Michael Byrne

It is a possibility, especially considering that the private rental has changed very decisively in the period in question. To understand the nature of the change and its implications for the sector, and to inform policy-making, it would be really useful to understand whether the number of non-registrations is increasing or decreasing and whether there is a relationship between increased regulation and higher levels of non-registration.

An Cathaoirleach

How would those data be captured? Where an RTB registration disappears or a tenancy is not registered the following year, we do not chase the person concerned and ask about the property. Resource-wise, that could not be done anyway. How could something be put in place to capture the information?

Dr. Michael Byrne

To gain a robust understanding, I do not believe one could just draw on existing data produced by various bodies. It would be more useful to commission specific research to investigate the relationship between the various factors. This would be difficult because if there are people who are not registered, there are clandestine arrangements by nature.

An Cathaoirleach

Nobody would put their hand up. Even if the research allowed them to remain anonymous, I do not think they would get involved. They would not want to be under any spotlight at all.

Dr. Michael Byrne

Social scientific research often addresses similar issues. There is plenty of research on tax non-compliance and other issues. It is not impossible but it would be challenging.

An Cathaoirleach

I thank Dr. Byrne.

Deputy Thomas Gould

I was listening online. I thank the representatives for coming here today. Their work is really important. I am referring to their detailing of why there are discrepancies between census data and RTB data and what they are now doing to examine the data. Dr. Byrne implied, in answering a question from the Chair, that we need to draft policies on the private rental market and the level of home ownership. We cannot set the figures but it is useful to have the data and know what people want. When I was growing up, everyone had a local authority house or a house they bought. There were probably very few renting whereas there is now a huge number. I know many who want to rent. The data are key to developing policy and giving us insight.

The RTB does important work on landlords and tenants, especially tenants. I deal with many tenants. I compliment the representatives on the work they do in this regard. I would like to see the RTB get more powers and resources. I am aware that there are many really good landlords. The RTB has come a long way but could go further. I encourage the Minister in this regard. There is an opportunity to structure the whole private rental sector in a really positive way that supports not only landlords and what they have to do but also tenants.

I know tenants who live in shocking accommodation. Their landlords are not registered with the RTB and many of them will not accept HAP because they do not want to be seen by Revenue. They know if they take HAP, they will be inspected and will probably fail a HAP inspection. They would be given a list of work to do. I would like the RTB to be given more powers in that area also, in trying to identify rogue landlords and, at the same time, supporting good landlords. There seems to be a lot of disagreement about the policy the Government announced in the budget today to give landlords tax rebates without having data to support the decision. It was not the right decision, but if we had the data, they would tell us what to do.

Will the witnesses comment on the idea of the RTB having more powers and more resources and how they see its role in the future?

Mr. Niall Byrne

I am happy to comment on that. The RTB is not a full service regulator for the residential rental sector as currently configured. We have come from the legacy of the old Private Residential Tenancies Board, PRTB. It started small and was not seen to have enormous public importance. As the Deputy mentioned, the rental sector was not seen as a major issue back in 2004 when the PRTB was established. We are now in a dramatically different situation.

I have been in this role since the start of 2022 and I am still surprised by some of the things I come across as regards expectations of the RTB and the reality of what it is authorised to do. We can only do what we are authorised to do, although is it important that we operate to the full extent of our remit and that we push the envelope out to the maximum extent. However, there is a limit beyond which we cannot go. We are not a full service regulator. I would welcome that development.

We have a commitment in our strategy to work with the Department on the current legislation, which could be streamlined in everyone's interests. Lots of requirements fall on the RTB. People think regulatory burden is all about the regulated sector but regulators are often tied up in huge amounts of regulatory burden. We call it "grey tape" rather than "red tape". I am bound by many provisions that do not necessarily help me to regulate the sector or make the RTB as effective as it could be.

Thinking about it from a broad policy perspective, the private residential rental sector now provides an essential public service, not something optional that people use for a while when they live in a bedsit in Rathmines when they come to Dublin first, as I did when I first started work. The expectation was that they would not live in the bedsit in Rathmines forever. Now we are in a very different situation. People use the sector long term. Data from research we conducted recently show that many tenants now expect to live in the rented residential sector for long periods, such as ten and 20 years. It is now viewed differently. My point, from a broad policy perspective, is that it is now an essential public service. It is not a private matter in the way it was 20 or 30 years ago. From a regulatory standpoint, essential public services, broadly speaking, should be regulated in the public interest in a fair, reasonable and proportionate way. That is an argument for better regulation in the sector than we have at the moment. For example, there is no regulation whatsoever of the rent-a-room scheme. There is surely a strong argument to introduce regulation there in the public interest because that is an environment within which all kinds of exploitation can happen. I hasten to add that I do not make policy, but on what the RTB could do if it were in a position to be that kind of full service regulator, it would not only be about data, or about us being a passive registration body; it would also be about us being an active and proactive element of the sector.

We would exercise control in the public interest and support the good landlords. I know from talking to landlords, as I am sure many members do, that the good landlords want the RTB, or someone, to deal with the deviant ones.

Deputy Thomas Gould

Yes

Mr. Niall Byrne

That has always been the case. I have been involved in this work for many years in different environments. The good operators always want the regulator to deal with the people who are giving everyone a bad name. I am conscious of that because there are so many decent people - all our data support this - who most of the time do the right thing by their tenants. One of the frustrations we have is that the RTB is not currently properly authorised, with the right kind of regulatory powers, to regulate the entirety of the sector. That would involve substantive change from the current regime, but in circumstances where, as I say, it is much more akin to an essential public service, the argument for seeing it as a public rather than purely private matter is well made.

We can all remember when private nursing homes were regulated in a hands-off manner by the State. Then a particular case gave rise to a public scandal and that whole area was reformed from a regulatory standpoint in quite a dramatic way. I became responsible for the regulation of private nursing homes under the revised framework. The Health Act 2007 did something interesting. It said that all operators of residential care had to register with the regulator whether they were private, public or voluntary. I grew up in a local authority house in Carlow and my parents were renters in the 1950s. They were happy to get a council house in Carlow in the 1950s. I still wonder why people who live in local authority housing do not have access to the benefits that come from the RTB.

Deputy Thomas Gould

One hundred percent.

Deputy Eoin Ó Broin

Mr. Byrne is absolutely right. That is a political decision.

Mr. Niall Byrne

That is a commentary. It does not represent a policy position of the RTB. However, in response to the Deputy's question, it is where we could go if we were really ambitious in a context where private rental has become a different proposition than it was 20 years ago.

Deputy Eoin Ó Broin

Does the RTB have the capacity to take on the additional 150,000 social rental tenants?

Mr. Niall Byrne

I definitely have the ambition, which Senator Cummins raised with me earlier, but it would require quite an amount of reform and a step-by-step approach.

Deputy Eoin Ó Broin

The point is well made.

An Cathaoirleach

I thank everyone. It was interesting. We did not get to the bottom of it, but it was an interesting discussion.

Deputy Eoin Ó Broin

It would be good to give the parties present an open invitation to give us advance notice of when the research is done so we can schedule another discussion. That would not only be helpful for the committee, but would also help to inform the accuracy of the public debate. We would be keen to reconvene when the research has been done. No pressure.

An Cathaoirleach

Perhaps the CSO will take that on board.

I thank the CSO for providing Oireachtas Members with regular updates on the data as they come out. The reports are very helpful. I can get lost for hours on the CSO website.

I thank the witnesses for their contributions today.

The joint committee adjourned at 5.59 p.m. until 3 p.m. on Tuesday, 17 October 2023.