There is an error in the printed list of amendments. The side heading of Government amendment No. 4 should read "Amendment of section 85 of Act of 1980".
Landlord and Tenant (Amendment) Bill, 1993: Committee and Final Stages.
An Leas-Chathaoirleach
Sections 1 to 3, inclusive, agreed to.
NEW SECTIONS.
An Leas-Chathaoirleach
Amendment No. 1. Amendment No. 2 is an alternative to amendment No. 1 and amendment No. 3 is consequential on amendment No. 1; Amendment No. 4 is consequential on amendment No. 2. Therefore, amendments 1 to 4, inclusive, may be discussed together.
I move amendment No. 1:
In page 2, before section 4, to insert the following new section:
"4.—The following subparagraphs shall be inserted after subsection (1) (a) (v) of section 17 of the Act of 1980:
`(vi) in the case only of a tenement falling within the description of the tenement referred to in section 13 (1) (a) (as amended by section 3 of the Landlord and Tenant (Amendment) Act, 1994), the tenant prior to the commencement of a tenancy, which provides for the exclusive use of the tenement as an office has executed whether for or without valuable consideration a valid renunciation of his entitlement to a new tenancy under Part II of this Act.
(vii) A renunciation for the purpose of subparagraph (vi) shall not be valid unless the tenant prior to executing such renunciation first obtained independent legal advice.'.".
This amendment allows for longer leases than five years and the rights to opt out and renew in the case of office premises only. This argument was made on Second Stage and was discussed with the Minister. It would suit people in an office situation to have tenancies for longer than five years, say, for ten years; it would be advantageous to the landlord and the tenant. The original Bill allowed for an opt out clause for all commercial properties but the argument was made on Committee Stage in the Dáil that in the case of retail premises this would be unfair on tenants who have built up goodwill in their businesses which is of value and whose landlords could benefit from a windfall gain if the right of renewal was not contained in the Bill. This amendment allows for an opt out clause only for office premises and only after a tenant has obtained legal advice. Such advice may not be usual in legislation but is not unique. It was proposed in the opt out situation provided for in the Matrimonial Home Bill, which was unfortunately found to be unconstitutional. The opt out situation should apply to offices where a value is not put on the goodwill of the premises which results from a trading situation.
I think the House will accept that Senator Neville's amendment and those proposed by the Government attempt to achieve precisely the same thing, which is that tenants entering into leases for premises to be used exclusively as offices should be free to renounce their statutory rights to a new tenancy under the 1980 Act at the time of entering into the tenancy, provided they receive independent legal advice. When I spoke on Second Stage, I went into some detail about opting out. I mentioned in particular that the Government does not favour a global opting out provision as had been included in the Bill as originally presented. However, we accept the case which has been made for allowing opting out where offices are involved. In these cases goodwill does not arise and it has been represented to us that allowing this new flexibility for leasing arrangements in the office sector should work to the advantage of lessors and lessees in this area. A case has been made for extending the opt out to other types of premises but the issues which arise in these cases are not as clearcut as those which arise in relation to offices alone and I would not be prepared to go any further at present.
The wording of the Government amendments was prepared by the parliamentary draftsman. While there is no real difference of substance between these and Senator Neville's amendments, the advice we have is that the approach taken in the official amendments is the clearest and tightest way to achieve what we both want. In these circumstances I hope Senator Neville can withdraw his amendment and allow the Government's to go through. He and I have the same objectives in mind and both my amendments and his achieve the same thing. My advice is that our amendments achieve this in a slightly better way. As we are ad idem on the objective, I hope the Senator will see his way to comply with my request.
I thank the Minister for taking the content of our amendment on board. We will bow to the better advice and expertise which the Minister has available to him. However, that is not to in any way criticise the expertise which we have in the person of Deputy Shatter on this issue. We are achieving the same objective and I thank the Minister for taking on board our amendment.
It highlights something which I have been raising for some time, which is that Opposition spokespersons should have expertise from the various Departments available to them to assist them in wording amendments or developing Private Members' Bills. Working alone we feel very isolated. Those of us who do not have legal expertise do our best to grapple with the legislation. I am pleased to withdraw my amendment in favour of that of the Minister which achieves the objectives which we set out to achieve.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Government amendment No. 2:
In page 2, before section 4, to insert the following new section:
"4.— The following subparagraph shall be inserted after subparagraph (iii) of section 17 (1) (a) applies to the tenement, the terms of the Act of 1980:
`(iiia) if section 13 (1) (a) applies to the tenement, the terms of the tenancy provided for the use of the tenement wholly and exclusively as an office and, prior to the commencement of the tenancy, the tenant had executed, whether for or without valuable consideration, a valid renunciation of his entitlement to a new tenancy in the tenement and had received independent legal advice in relation to the renunciation, or'.".
Amendment agreed to.
SECTION 4.
Amendment No. 3 not moved.
Government amendment No. 4:
In page 3, after line 3, to insert the following:
"The following subsection shall be inserted after subsection (1) of section 85 of the Act of 1980:
`(2) Subsection (1) does not apply to a renunciation referred to in subparagraph (iiia) (inserted by section 4 of the Landlord and Tenant (Amendment) Act, 1994) of section 17.'.".
Amendment agreed to.
Question proposed: "That section 4, as amended, stand part of the Bill."
This section allows a court to fix a tenancy of 35 years or less as the tenant may require. As the Minister is aware, if a person in private rented accommodation has 20 years tenancy then they may seek a 35 year lease from their landlord. At present a number of my constituents are under threat of eviction because they have not reached the twentieth year. One has been a tenant for 19 years and 11 months, which is just one month short. It is now before the courts as a private eviction notice case.
I understand that when this Bill came before the House the Minister of State gave an assurance that he was setting up a working group to look at private rented accommodation. When does the Minister of State expect this working group to report to him and when does he intend to bring in comprehensive legislation to relieve the anxiety of tenants in rented accommodation?
The Bill, which was presented by Deputy Shatter and accepted by the Government, deals with commercial tenancies only. Senator Doyle is dealing with the private rented sector. He is right in saying that we set up a working party. I indicated in the other House to Deputy McDowell that I had hoped that the working party would have reported by now. It will not be a very difficult job to draft the legislation — I understand that it can be drafted in a matter of hours if we accept the recommendations of the working party when it reports.
It is matter of making choices. The working party has not reported yet. I am disappointed with that and I have been in contract with the working party over recent days to see if we could get definite decisions from it. When it reports, legislative proposals will be brought to Government based on its report. The Government will have to agree those legislative proposals, although I would be fairly optimistic that it will agree them.
The working party has met a number of the associations involved, including the tenants in Mespil Road. As a result of that meeting the association representing the tenants in Mespil Road agreed to send in a submission to the working party which, as I understand it, only arrived two or three weeks ago. The secretary of the Mespil Road group will have a response to that from the working group tomorrow which raises certain issues.
Much work has been done and we received a large number of submissions from many areas to which the working party has given detailed consideration. I hope to have legislative proposals ready for the next session and I will work very hard to achieve this.
The case mentioned by Senator Doyle involves a technical legal point relating the format of a notice to quit. I obviously cannot comment on that because it is before the courts.
I am most grateful to the Minister for his reply.
Question put and agreed to.
Title agreed to.
Bill reported with amendments and received for final consideration.
Question proposed: "That the Bill do now pass."
I thank the Minister of State for bringing the Bill to the House and I thank both him and the Minister for Justice for accepting it. It is simple but important legislation which will assist commercial enterprises and encourage the development of enterprises especially among people starting businesses. They will have more flexibility in terms of tenancy and in terms of having time to establish themselves. I am convinced that the effects of the Bill will lead to job creation and a better climate for job creation.
I again recognise that this is Deputy Shatter's legislation, which the Government accepted with some amendments. The final shape of the Bill does not correspond exactly to its original format. However, the acceptance of a number of Deputy Shatter's Bills reflects the fact that the Government does not have a monopoly of expertise and wisdom, even though it has the whole public sector at its disposal.
Deputy Shatter's Bill, which we have now accepted with our own amendments, will, as Senator Neville said, make a significant change in this area. It will create flexibility in the commercial letting sector and, I have no doubt, will lead to job creation. That is what we should be doing here.
I congratulate Deputy Shatter and Senator Neville for guiding this legislation through both Houses so well. I also congratulate the Minister for being so open and accepting the intention and tenor of the document from the Opposition party. As both the Minister of State and Senator Neville have said, this will make commercial activity easier and will hopefully lead to job creation.
Question put and agreed to.