Skip to main content
Normal View

Seanad Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 6 Feb 2013

Vol. 220 No. 10

Private Rented Sector: Statements

I am very pleased to be back in the Seanad to have an opportunity to speak on the subject of the private rented sector. The past five years have been turbulent and traumatic in the housing market. An obsession with residential property as an investment vehicle rather than as a home was driven by the failed pro-cyclical policies of the past decade. Home ownership, a noble aspiration, mutated into a speculative mania and an entire generation was cajoled or encouraged to chase an out of control housing bubble. When the music stopped, the damage to individual households and the wider economy was clear to see. Spuriously inflated property prices, lax lending policies and weak central oversight have bequeathed large-scale negative equity and the dream of owning a home has turned into a nightmare for some families. Many are struggling to pay their mortgages, with some at risk of losing their homes. What should be viewed as a place of comfort and shelter is now for too many a millstone and constant worry.

I am acutely aware of the real difficulties people are experiencing and there is no question but that we face a difficult path in finding a solution to the housing crisis. It will not be solved overnight. What is needed is sound and humane decision-making, imaginative policies that produce the greatest possible housing yield to the widest range of people at the best return to the taxpayer and, critically, an understanding of the mistakes of the past and an ability to learn from them. We must not return to the unsustainable and unprecedented growth that represented the boom years. The greater the boom, the worse the bust and we must seek to provide a moderating structure that will allow for sustainable and long-term growth. However, future housing policy cannot just be a reaction to the madness of the past. It must confidently set out a vision for the future based on values such as community, neighbourhood, security and safety. In doing so, we need to look at international best practice and learn from the innovation and initiatives that guide housing policy, specifically social housing policy, among our European neighbours.

For all these reasons, I am absolutely committed to the development of a genuinely sustainable approach to housing policy in Ireland. Such a policy has the interests of communities at its heart; is based on choice, fairness and equity across tenures; and will enable all householders to access good quality housing appropriate to their household circumstances and in their community of choice. I am committed to a vision of housing where people, once again, view their house as a home, not as a dubious investment.

We must do things differently. The Government's housing policy statement published in June 2011 marked a profound change in the State's approach to housing policy. This clear and concise statement was based on a number of fundamental principles and goals which form the basis for reform under way. It is a framework document that does not claim to contain all the answers to the issues it raises. It takes account of the dramatic cycle of growth and collapse in the residential property market. In that context, it charts a way forward for housing policy by placing explicit emphasis on choice, equity across all housing tenures and delivering quality outcomes for the resources invested. The housing policy statement provides a framework for legislative and policy initiatives in the short to medium term, many of which are in train.

Key to these aims is a move from a focus on the promotion of home ownership to a more equitable treatment of tenures. If there is one thing the crisis has taught us, it is that home ownership need not be the ultimate goal. I stress that this does not mean we are turning our backs on home ownership or that we are seeking to impede people from realising their valid home ownership aspirations. Far from it - the reality is that for the majority of households, home ownership will continue to be the tenure of choice and this is recognised and welcomed by the Government. However, there are other households that may not want or be in a position to own their home. We increasingly see households moving between both options at different stages of their lives. Our goal for such households is to provide a choice based on household circumstances and needs rather than on the expectation of house price growth. The current crisis has given us an opportunity to reassess our attitudes to housing and home ownership. The emergence of rented housing as a real, viable housing option is part of this reassessment. A well balanced housing sector requires a strong, vibrant and, I stress again, well regulated rental sector which is an integral part of the Government's housing policy for the future.

The Residential Tenancies Act was passed in 2004 and represented the most significant legislative reform in the private rented sector in over a century. Prior to 2004, the rental market operated in a crude and fragmented manner. There was little or no security of tenure for tenants and recovery of possession presented a nightmare scenario of long and expensive court proceedings for landlords. Even minor disputes arising during the course of a tenancy had no avenue of resolution other than the courts. Standards in rental accommodation were notoriously low and while minimum standard regulations had been in place since 1993, they were already out of date and characterised by very low levels of enforcement. The combination of these factors resulted in the absence of a secure, regulated rental market that could offer a real, attractive long-term housing solution to people searching for an appropriate home. Rented housing represented a tenure choice of last resort. For many, it was synonymous with student accommodation and grotty bedsits - a short-term or the only solution for the most marginalised and vulnerable in our society who could not afford anything better.

This, thankfully, is not the private rented market of today. More people are renting than ever before. Census figures from 2011 show an increase of almost 64% in the number renting from private or approved housing body landlords since the last census in 2006. The proportion of overall home ownership has declined by 5% and the rental market now accounts for 29% of the total housing market. In the eight years since the passing of the Residential Tenancies Act and the establishment of the Private Residential Tenancies Board, PRTB, we have seen significant strides in the development of the private rental market which is largely unrecognisable from where it was at the end of the millennium.

The Residential Tenancies Act introduced real security of tenure for tenants in the private rented residential sector for the first time. It set out minimum obligations for landlords and tenants and provided access for both tenants and landlords to a relatively cheap, informal and independent dispute resolution service. It laid out conditions for rent reviews and prohibited the charging of rents in excess of market levels. It set out fair procedures for the termination of tenancies and provided for notice periods linked with the duration of a tenancy.

The PRTB was established as an independent statutory body under the Residential Tenancies Act on 1 September 2004. Its principal activities include the registration of private residential tenancies and the resolution of disputes between tenants and landlords, as well as the provision of information, assistance and advice for the Minister on the private residential sector. It has achieved much since it was established. It can now offer clients a full suite of online services, including online tenancy registration and payment facilities. Since 2012, it has introduced online dispute applications, with electronic case management of files, which allows parties to register an adjudication, mediation and tribunal online. From the perspective of internal efficiencies, this takes 1.2 million items of post and paper out of the system through scanning, electronic case management and remote access via secure portals. In addition, new software rolled out by the PRTB allows effective interrogation of databases provided by sister public sector organisations, primarily the Department of Social Protection, and is proving to be a very effective tool both in identifying unregistered landlords and electronically managing their case files to secure registration compliance and bring prosecutions, where necessary. It has allowed the PRTB to lay the groundwork for a compliance programme for the prosecution of landlords who fail to apply for tenancy registration. However, more remains to be done.

It is recognised that it can be a considerable period before cases are heard by the PRTB and it is essential that, as much as possible, we supply the board with the necessary tools to reduce delays. I am aware that this issue is a concern for Senators. It must also be acknowledged, however, that the number of dispute cases referred to the PRTB has grown by 25% since 2008. During the same period, staff numbers decreased by 53% from their peak as a result of the employment control framework's relentless downward pressure on public sector numbers right across the board. Notwithstanding these challenges, the PRTB is actively pursuing a range of modernisation initiatives such as outsourcing of work and shared services.

It is hoped that in the longer term this will enable the PRTB to continue to do more with less and significantly reduce delays. Outsourcing of its paper registrations process and of its telephony services has allowed the PRTB to cope with a reduction in staffing numbers, while offering an expanded telephone contact service. It has worked closely with other public bodies and public service partners such as the Revenue and the NTMA on ICT developments. Its investment in ICT is a key element in its corporate plan and modernisation agenda under the Croke Park agreement. A new tenancy management system came on stream in mid-2012 and will considerably reduce processing times in 2013. It must be recognised, however, that there will be considerable challenges for the PRTB in the years ahead and the Government is committed to helping it to meet these.

My Department conducted a review of the Residential Tenancies Act in 2009, with a specific emphasis on whether it best supports the PRTB's key functions and on whether legislative amendments would support either the achievement of additional operational efficiencies by the PRTB in the delivery of those functions or the broader good working of the private rented sector. The outcomes of the review were announced in April 2010 and the drafting of the general scheme of a Bill to give effect to the recommendations of the review was approved by Government in July 2011. The Residential Tenancies (Amendment) (No. 2) Bill 2012 has just concluded Second Stage in the Dáil. I very much look forward to what I hope will be a constructive debate on the Bill when it comes before the Seanad later in the year. It builds on what has been achieved by the Residential Tenancies Act and the PRTB and provides for the further development of the rental sector into the future by introducing into law a number of programme for Government commitments. While it contains a number of quite significant policy developments, this is very much an evolutionary rather than revolutionary item of legislation.

Perhaps the most significant achievement of the Bill, if enacted, will be the extension of the remit of the Residential Tenancies Act to approved housing body dwellings. Approved housing bodies generally provide rental accommodation for families and persons with specific categories of need who are on the social housing list. However, the relationship between these tenants and their approved housing body landlords is not generally provided for in either the Housing Acts or the Residential Tenancies Acts. Instead, they operate on the basis of lease agreements, the various Landlord and Tenant Acts and common law. As such, formal regulation of the tenant-landlord relationship in the sector lags considerably behind the private rented sector and there is an urgent need for a modern legislative basis for approved housing body tenancies. The Bill will afford to those in the approved housing body sector the same rights and obligations as those afforded to landlords and tenants in the private rented sector. This is a logical follow-on from the June 2011 housing policy statement, which sets out the key role envisaged for the approved housing body sector in the delivery of social housing.

Extending the 2004 Act to approved housing body tenancies will create a unified legislative base for the private rented and approved housing body sectors, assisting movement between tenures and making more efficient use of rental stock across both the public and private sector. Creating a unified legislative basis assists in the objective of affording equal treatment to households in similar economic circumstances and is consistent with my belief that broadly similar rights and responsibilities should apply to all forms of rented accommodation. This raises the logical question as to whether the same framework of rights and responsibilities should be extended to the local authority sector. My view is that this is a natural next step but it will not be dealt with in the context of the Bill before the House. In that context, we are dealing here with a very broad area and an extremely large number of tenancies. I am of the view that the extension to which I refer will occur in the future.

An area still under development, which I will raise for consideration during the Bill's passage through the Oireachtas and about which Senators are very concerned, is that of deposit protection. This is a priority I identified when I was appointed as Minister of State last December and it remains so. As the House will be aware, the programme for Government 2011 contains a commitment to establish a tenancy deposit protection scheme to address this issue. On foot of this commitment, I asked the PRTB to commission research on such a scheme and, following a selection process, the research contract was awarded to Indecon economic consultants. I received the final report on the topic from Indecon in November and I have given a commitment to act on the establishment of a deposit protection scheme in the context of the passage of this Bill through the Oireachtas.

On an initial examination of the report, it seems that Indecon has prepared a comprehensive analysis of the range of options for delivery of the programme for Government commitment. I will need to weigh up those options and determine how best to offer the greatest protection to tenants in this area at the least cost to the Exchequer. Critical issues currently being addressed include whether a scheme should be custodial or insurance-based in nature, whether it should be operated by the PRTB or a third party and how it should interface with the current legal system and the PRTB. In order to inform wider debate and thinking on this topic, I published the report on my Department's website before Christmas. I very much look forward to hearing Senators' views on the report, particularly as there is a great deal of expertise in the House in respect of this issue.

Given the rapid growth in the size of the sector, it is imperative that an acceptable set of minimum accommodation standards be applied in the private rented sector. During the past 20 years, since the first minimum accommodation standards were set down, our expectations as to what constitutes acceptable housing have advanced a great deal. The new regulations reflect the requirements of a modern rental sector and wider quality-of-life expectations. Outdoor toilets, no hot water and open fires as the only heating source have been consigned to the past as today's minimum standards cover a broad range of requirements from structural repair to sanitary facilities and from heating and ventilation to the safety of gas, electrical supply and fire safety.

The first day of February 2013 was particularly significant in the ongoing drive to improve standards as the four-year phasing-in period that had been allowed for existing rented accommodation under the Housing (Standards for Rented Houses) Regulations 2008 expired. Since that date, all rented accommodation must have its own sanitary facilities in a separate room. This means that the days of multiple rented units sharing a single bathroom are over. The fact that this reform is being introduced in the centenary year of the 1913 Lockout - a struggle which brought to worldwide attention the plight of tenement dwellers in Dublin - will not be lost on Senators, who have taken a keen interest in the decade of centenaries that we have embarked upon. One can see, from the exhibitions relating to the housing which obtained at the time of the Lockout, that we have come a long way. I intend to ensure that the reform to which I refer is fully implemented.

Enforcement of these standards is a key challenge for the local authority sector but I am satisfied that the new standards regulations provide for a much strengthened sanctions and enforcement regime. The penalties for non-compliance with the regulations can amount to a fine of up to €5,000 and-or imprisonment for up to six months. Local authorities will also have the power to serve prohibition notices on properties which prevent the landlord from renting the property out until such time as it complies with the standards. I am very confident that local authorities have an active programme of targeted inspections in place to ensure compliance with standards. In 2011, for example, almost 20,000 inspections were carried out nationwide, more than 2,500 improvement notices were issued and, while most compliance issues were addressed, 60 prohibition notices were served. Dublin City Council is particularly active in this regard and initiated 36 prosecutions in 2012 under the standards regulations.

My Department placed advertisements in national newspapers in October outlining these new requirements and we will continue to work with key stakeholders such as the local authorities, Threshold and the Irish Property Owners Association, IPOA, in order to spread awareness of the standards and improve compliance. It is important to note that in 2008 each of the aforementioned entities played an important role in the consultative and drafting phase relating to the new regulations. It is for this reason I am somewhat puzzled by the IPOA's sudden public pronouncements of concern regarding the perceived negative impacts of the new regulations on tenants and landlords. I am of the view that a four-year lead-in period is more than adequate notice of these changes and I expect landlords to comply with their legal and moral obligations in this area. I also expect vigorous enforcement of these standards by local authorities. I understand that Dublin City Council, in particular, has a strong current focus on this area. I reiterate that there was a four-year lead-in period and that there is no excuse for landlords who have not yet brought their properties up to standard. In general, however, I am satisfied that significant progress has already been made with regard to minimum standards in recent years. The final implementation of the Housing (Standards for Rented Houses) Regulations 2008 represents a significant step forward.

We have minimum standards for rented accommodation to protect the most vulnerable in society. Strong standards and robust enforcement, allied to an ever more professional rental sector, will contribute to the creation of sustainable communities and healthy and happy homes.

Some comment in the media in recent days has attempted to introduce outlandish claims that this progressive move will increase the level of homelessness. The former Minister of State, Mr. Michael Finneran, was right to introduce these regulations in 2009 and they will not be rescinded or diluted under my watch. This is an issue of human dignity. It is about raising the standards of accommodation availed of by some of the poorest in society. Threshold, the voluntary organisation working with private rented sector tenants, fully concurs with this view and welcomes the introduction of the new standards, the only purpose of which is to provide citizens with decent and modern living conditions.

I look forward to tabling detailed amendments on Committee Stage relating to the issue of rent arrears. I am very aware of the concerns of landlords about unpaid rent and of the difficulty of repossessing a rental property in cases in which the rent remains unpaid. In these difficult times, when many are struggling to pay mortgages on buy-to-let properties, it is essential to take action on this issue. We have made significant progress in dealing with the complex legal and policy issues surrounding this topic, but it was not possible to finalise the necessary provisions in time for inclusion in the published Bill. It is a case of balance and ensuring both landlords and tenants are protected.

The Government is committed to a ten year neutral approach to housing. We will continue to support the development of a strong, vibrant and well regulated private rented sector. Strong standards and robust enforcement, allied to an ever more professional rental sector, will contribute to the creation of sustainable communities, equity of choice and decent living conditions. This must be our long-term goal.

I thank my colleagues in the Seanad for inviting me to attend today. I look forward to the debate. I know that all Members are willing to work with us in finding solutions to the problems we face. I welcome the views of Members, as we know significant challenges lie ahead. The state of the economy means we do not have the money we had in the past to spend on social housing. We want to ensure the private rented sector is properly regulated, treated equally and can be a real option in modern Ireland. We will provide the legislative base and the enforcement regulations required to make this happen.

I welcome the Minister of State and thank her for her comprehensive contribution. The average Irish landlord owns one or two properties, while fewer than 10% of landlords own two or more properties. This reflects the underdeveloped and amateur market compared with the European standard of large landlord companies operating multiple properties, which in many cases is to be welcomed. The rental market is changing rapidly, particularly in the context of the collapse of the housing bubble to which the Minister of State referred. This presents a new set of challenges which the original Private Residential Tenancies Bill 2004 did not accommodate. I welcome the Government's new Bill to address the outstanding legal aspects of the Private Residential Tenancies Board, PRTB.

It is interesting to note that approximately 29% of the population are renting accommodation, with 18.5% renting in the private sector. What is more interesting is the speed of change. Numbers renting in the private sector have increased by 86%, up from 9.9% since 2006.

A grave injustice is being perpetrated against the providers of private rented accommodation who provide accommodation for 700,000 people. Private landlords are seen as easy pickings in the obsessive manner in which the Government is seeking to raise revenue. However, in the process, it has not given any thought to the issue of fairness. The landlords' national representative body, the Irish Property Owners Association, has invented a new verb to describe the position - "to taxault". The latest taxault is the double taxation this year of the non-principal private residence charge and the local property tax. The Minister for Finance told the Dáil that the local property tax would be tax-deductible, but he then quietly announced that it would be phased in at some stage. Either it is a legitimate expense in the business of letting property or it is not. It is a legitimate expense. If it is a legitimate expense, it cannot be simply phased in as if it is some fantastic concession from the Minister. This is only the latest in a series of taxaults against private landlords. It must be a grave injustice and against all the rules of equity that landlords should this year have to pay a charge of €200 next month on the non-principal private residence, followed so far by an undetermined charge by way of the local property tax which we believe will be in the region of €1,000 a year, based on location, followed so far by undetermined water charges in 2014, estimated to be an average of €500 per household.

The non-principal private residence charge was introduced to pay for local services. However, the users of these services are not the ones who are levied. The household charge was introduced to pay for local services and, again, the users were let off the hook, while landlords were levied. It is not yet known how the water charge will be levied or on whom it will be levied in the case of rented accommodation. I, therefore, ask the Minister of State to clarify the position. To compound the problem, neither the NPPR nor the household charge can be offset against rental income. This surely is another gross injustice.

The Revenue Commissioners describe rental income as unearned income, even though landlords are operating a business, just like other self-employed persons. The Minister for Finance, Deputy Noonan, was questioned in the Dáil late last year and his reply was that Revenue designated rental income as unearned income, as if he was not the Minister for Finance who made the final decisions in this regard.

Private landlords are asking to be treated fairly. I refer to the grossly unfair situation where 25% of mortgage interest cannot be written off against rental income, which, in many cases, leads to payment of tax on a business loss. Where is the equity? The Minister for Finance and the Minister of State, Deputy Jan O'Sullivan, must realise that private landlords cannot continue to be targeted in this way, when their so-called unearned income is being slashed owing to mortgage costs and the continuing reductions in rent supplement imposed by the Minister for Social Protection, Deputy Joan Burton. If private landlords were not providing accommodation for the 700,000 who are renting, the Government would be left to provide accommodation for them. It is time private landlords were regarded as partners in the provision of housing for those who need it. Landlords who make a profit will pay tax each year at the marginal rate, with the universal social charge and PRSI contributions, without tangible benefits to them. They also pay stamp duty when purchasing properties and will be required to pay capital gains tax when selling properties. All they want is fairness, which they are not getting.

I welcome the Minister of State's comments about the deposit protection scheme and minimum standards. I congratulate her on the work of her office and Department on unfinished housing estates, an issue also prioritised by Deputy Willie Penrose when he was for a short time Minister of State with responsibility for housing. I note the many good points in the Minister of State's contribution and appeal to her to ask the Minister for Finance to give some consideration to the private landlord who is doing his or her best to provide accommodation for those who need it.

I welcome the Minister of State and the debate on the private rented sector. Historically, the private rented housing sector was described as the forgotten sector. The Minister of State is changing that perception and the sector can no longer be described as such.

The area received little policy attention and as a result the role of private rented accommodation in the housing system went into decline. Ireland has traditionally had a very high owner occupancy rate compared with peer countries. By the 1990s, when it peaked, four out of five households had purchased their residence. The reasons for the strength of the owner-occupied sector can be attributed to cultural and historical factors that have led to a strong desire on the part of Irish people to own their dwelling - "the field" was very important - rather than rent or lease it. However, this trend has started to reverse in the last five years, no doubt as a direct result of the property crash that began in 2008. Over the five years to 2011, Ireland not only fell to the EU average of 73.5% home ownership, but crashed through it. Fewer than 70% of homes in Ireland were owned by their occupants on census night in April last year, demonstrating quite dramatic change in home ownership in Ireland.

Traditionally, Government policy on housing has had two goals - to provide adequate housing for all and to promote owner-occupation. As the 1970s and 1980s passed, the goal of promoting home ownership began to take precedence to an excessive and unbalanced extent and culminated in a bloated and unsustainable property sector that inevitably crashed in 2008. Some people say we were all responsible. Most of us were, but not all. Not everybody bought a property. The housing market now is undergoing the most significant and seismic change since the foundation of the State. The Government faces the challenge of supporting the transition to a mixed-tenure market that does not prioritise one form of housing tenure over another, that recognises that households' housing needs will change over time and that provides a safety net to assist the most vulnerable to find housing solutions to meet their needs at a particular point in time. We are all aware of the little matchbox apartments that were built in the city centre. People are now stuck in them, with no way or means to get out of them. That is a sector we must cater for as well.

The critical role of the private rented sector in this regard is explicitly recognised in the Government's 2011 housing policy statement. There has been rapid growth in the size of the private rented sector, from 156,000 households in 2006 to 305,000 in 2011, according to the Central Statistics Office, CSO. It is imperative that there be acceptable minimum standards. These have now been put in place and, indeed, they were being put in place under the last Government. It is also imperative that those minimum standards are implemented. The first major reform to the sector was introduced in 1992. Further reform has been taking place over the years.

Over the last 20 years, since the first minimum accommodation standards were set down, our expectation as to what constitutes acceptable housing has advanced. As the Minister of State outlined, on 1 February 2008 the housing standards for rented houses regulations expired, and landlords were given four years to implement the standards set down under the previous Government. I compliment the Government on introducing them at the time because what tenants had to put up with was pathetic. The regulations removed the substandard accommodation which had not been modified or updated for years. Some of it even dated back to the 1950s. A Senator related to me today how he went up the stairs of a house and could see the sky peeping through the structure. That is no longer acceptable. The new regulations will have a most positive impact on studio flats, apartments and bedsits that are to be found in period dwellings.

Enforcement of these standards is a key challenge for the local authority sector but I am satisfied that the new standards provide for much strengthened sanctions and enforcement. The penalties for non-compliance with the regulations can amount to a fine of €5,000 and/or imprisonment for up to six months. Many of us come from the local authority sector and we are aware that rules and regulations must be enforced. The Minister of State has provided some funding for this to ensure that inspections can take place. I have the figures for inspections. In 2011, for example, more than 2,500 improvement notices were issued by local authorities and, while most compliance issues were addressed, 60 prohibition notices were served. Dublin City Council is particularly active in this regard and it initiated approximately 40 prosecutions in 2012 under the standards regulations. South Dublin County Council, of which I was a member, has also been quite active, even though it would not have the same capacity of rented accommodation as Dublin city. However, it carried out 5,192 inspections on rented properties from 2005 to 2011.

The allocation of funding to local authorities for this area increased significantly between 2005 and 2011, rising from €1.5 million to €4 million. The Minister of State has said that in 2012 her Department allocated a total sum of €2.4 million to housing authorities for the purpose of carrying out their functions under the Housing Acts with regard to rented accommodation. Clearly, funding from the Department is being maintained in this area. The upkeep of minimum standards of accommodation in the private sector cannot be neglected.

The Minister of State spoke about the Private Residential Tenancies Board, PRTB. That was introduced by the previous Government in 2004. It was a very necessary initiative. It has played its role well since its establishment. It is a significant reform that could not escape reference in a debate on the private rented sector, as it was of profound significance. There are also provisions in the Act for a dispute resolution service through the PRTB. This is a very valuable initiative as well. The Act also sets out clearly the statutory tenancy obligations of landlords and tenants' powers to address anti-social behaviour. This is an area that must be given huge attention. In the past week there was media coverage of an estate in County Clare which people were afraid to visit due to anti-social behaviour. The hand of the local authority is strengthened in this regard to ensure that people cannot run riot in estates.

In recent years, the State has taken on a major role in the private rental market through the rent supplement scheme. The Department currently funds approximately 30% of the private rented sector. The rents are kept under review and reflect current market conditions. There are approximately 90,000 persons in receipt of rent supplement, for which the Government provided €436 million in 2012. Revised maximum rent limits came into force on 1 January 2012 and are in place until June 2013. I understand these limits were set after an analysis of the most up to date market data available for private rented accommodation. It ensures that accommodation can be secured by tenants under those limits. The Department of Social Protection continues to work with rent supplement tenants to ensure that their accommodation needs are met and that there will not be an increase in homelessness. The Minister of State has dealt with that and I will not reiterate what she said.

I wish to refer to the shared ownership scheme. I realise it has been suspended due to the reality of market conditions. However, there is a clause in the shared ownership agreement which prevents co-owners from sub-letting. People who have secured jobs in other areas of the country or even in England or elsewhere cannot let out their shared ownership, but must pay their mortgage. This is not fair or right. We always talk about what we can do for mortgage holders. These people are mortgage holders with the local authority. They are tied into this situation through no fault of their own. It was attractive at the time, but it is not attractive now. Their houses and apartments are now empty because of this clause. It should be revoked and the reality of market conditions should be acknowledged.

The Minister of State mentioned the report on deposit retention. The previous speaker dwelt on the situation of landlords. As he said, they are providing accommodation which the State would otherwise have to provide. It is important that the rights of the landlord, as well as the rights of the tenant, are protected. Where tenants move away leaving big debts, the bill should follow the tenant. They should not be able to proceed to clean out another landlord in the same way as they cleaned out the last one. It can become a vicious cycle. We talk about money following the patient but the bill should follow the patient too in the housing context, rather than leaving the landlord stuck.

The Minister of State has inherited the tax situation regarding landlords. It is an area that must be examined. Commercial business can offset rates for businesses against income, but landlords cannot do this because rent is not regarded as earned income. It never was. The Minister of State has not been in office for long and has not yet examined this. That was always the situation, but if it is a rental business-----

The Senator is two minutes over time.

I have not said anything about landlords.

The Senator is two minutes over time.

I am not neglecting them but I am being shut up. However, the Minister State knows what I am talking about.

I welcome the Minister of State, Deputy Jan O'Sullivan, and I welcome this debate. One in five households in Ireland lives in private rented accommodation. We have not had that proportion of people in the private rented sector since the 1950s. It is a significant turnaround in the housing context, and there is every indication that the number of people renting privately in Ireland will grow rather than decline.

The Minister of State mentioned that we are living in a time of change in respect of housing policy.

Our private rental sector is reflecting very much what is happening in the European and international context, that is, the decline in home ownership. Social housing provision is also in decline but private rental is increasing. This presents us with a number of challenges, to which I will refer.
Let me focus on the positive points. As stated, the regulation of the rental sector has come a long way. Having been very much involved at the coalface of housing as chair of Threshold housing organisation - I have worked in housing since the mid-1980s – I note there is no doubt that the private rental sector was very much neglected historically. It was the sector of those who could not obtain social housing or become homeowners, and was associated with people in transition, such as students or others on their way to home ownership or social housing. Happily, what has happened over the past decade has been very significant in the evolution of the private rental sector.
When the Residential Tenancies Act 2004 was introduced, there were many naysayers saying that if one regulated the rental sector, it would cause it to collapse in its entirety. This has not been the case. In fact, more robust regulation has occurred hand in hand with more interest in the private rental sector as a place where people, including families, can spend longer periods. In the past, families would not have considered spending much time in private rented accommodation.
Some of the positive aspects, particularly regarding the Residential Tenancies Act 2004, were mentioned by the Minister of State. There have been very significant achievements, including security of tenure. Many do not realise that, before the introduction of the Act, the maximum security of tenure for a tenant, unless he had a lease, was 28 days, irrespective of the time he had spent in the property. A property is one's home. We call rented places dwellings and properties but they are not dwellings and properties for those who live therein; they are their homes and should be regarded as such.
Since the introduction of the Act, there has been some rent certainty. A landlord cannot simply increase the rent whenever he feels like it. Perhaps the most important change has been access to dispute resolution mechanisms. Many tenants have poor economic means and do not have the capacity of wealthier people to go to court. This has been a very significant departure.
The Minister of State mentioned some of the challenges faced by the Private Residential Tenancies Board, PRTB. I am very much aware of these. It is easy to criticise the board over some of its failures and to fail to recognise some of its very significant achievements. As stated, there have been delays, but it must be remembered the board has offered a cheap, accessible service to people who would otherwise not have been able to gain access to the court system.
With regard to the changes, I very much welcome the review of the Residential Tenancies Act and the measures that will be included in the forthcoming Bill to make the board more effective.
The Minister of State mentioned the Government's commitment to the deposit protection scheme. I have campaigned for this for many years. My support for the scheme arises very much from my front-line involvement with the housing sector. I have seen at first hand the importance of the introduction of such a scheme. Aside from the fact that I believe the scheme will make the whole rental sector more efficient and effective, there is evidence that large multinational companies, for example, want the measure introduced because it actually makes renting property in Ireland more secure. It will actually improve the conduct of business in the country. More important, over many years a loss has been incurred because of an attitude in society. To be honest about the matter, some landlords just do not return deposits. For many, a deposit of €800 may be a life's savings. I very much welcome the deposit protection scheme to be introduced in the upcoming legislation. I genuinely believe it will reduce the level of homelessness and, as such, will represent a saving for the State in the longer term.
The Minister of State mentioned the very welcome change on 1 February, namely, the end of the bedsit. I have seen some of the coverage in the newspapers and some of the statements by the Irish Property Owners Association implying the measure results in homelessness. That is absolutely not the position. As the Minister of State said, landlords have had four years to do as required. I am aware of a building with 17 bedsits that share three bathrooms. There is an elderly lady in her 70s who was afraid to leave her room after 6.30 p.m. because she was sharing with a number of men. Consequently, she was using a pot under her bed. Let us be absolutely honest: that is not the kind of housing in which the poor and people with low incomes should be made live. It behoves us to abolish the bedsit. There is nothing fuzzy or cuddly about the bedsit. It is telling that most people's only experience of a bedsit is as a university student or sharing the floor with a friend overnight. That is the reality and people should remember it when they talk in warm, fuzzy terms about the bedsit. This kind of outdated, substandard accommodation has no place in this country. It now behoves us to ensure that every local authority will take the steps necessary for us to see the end of the bedsit.
It is not normal in the House to mention an individual but I must mention the work of Mr. Colm Smyth of Dublin City Council, who stands out as a beacon of light among local authorities.
I ask the Minister to consider the introduction of a certification system that would require landlords to conduct the equivalent of an NCT. It would put the onus on landlords, rather than local authorities, to ensure their properties are compliant.
With regard to the transfer of the rent supplement to the local authorities, I very much believe it would be positive to provide for the housing assistance payment. It would be very positive, both for local authorities and people in receipt thereof.
My final point relates to arrears in the buy-to-let market. The threat facing that market is very significant. For a tenant, a rented property is his home. Statistics from the Central Bank show that in the region of 20% of buy-to-let mortgages are in arrears. This is very dangerous. The number is higher than that pertaining to residential mortgages. I ask the Minister of State to consider a measure introduced in regard to commercial property under legislation permitting the creation of real-estate investment trusts. This might allow conglomerates to take over without discommoding the residents. I refer to portfolios of buy-to-let properties that are being held by the banks.
I thank the Minister of State for attending. The work she is doing is excellent and leading to a better housing system.

I bow to the Senator's greater expertise in this area. I know she has many points to make but unfortunately the Chair is constrained because of the time allocated on the Order of Business.

I welcome the Minister of State and endorse the statements of Senators Wilson, Keane and Hayden. I wish I had read the first pages of the Minister of State's speech approximately ten years ago because they capture very well what occurs when housing is used as a bubble and a means of acquiring tax-free capital gains and reducing income tax liabilities rather than a place in which to live. Let us return to a position in which houses are people's residences.

There are three ways of coping with housing, as the Minister of State said. The proportion of the total market represented by owner occupancy is now in decline, as is direct provision by local authorities. Let us consider the position on direct provision. As evident from a report commissioned by Mr. Gay Mitchell when he was Lord Mayor of Dublin - the reporting group was chaired by the late former Taoiseach, Dr. Garret FitzGerald - the difference between the rents and the costs was considerable and there were concerns about the social consequences.

The local authority house building programme declined because of these factors. It was mentioned that tenants had a dependency culture, that maintenance costs were extremely high, that the restrictive practices in the building industry meant it was too expensive for the State to maintain the local authority housing stock and that there was a far higher call-out fee for Dublin Corporation compared to, say, the Northern Ireland Housing Executive. We then had the splurge of owner occupancy.

An article in The Economist on 15 September 2007 entitled, Houses built on sand, noted that Irish house prices in that decade had increased faster than anywhere else, a most unwanted gold medal. This reflected the banking policy at the time and the factors the Minister of State mentioned about the pursuit of housing as an asset rather than as a place in which to live. In the article it was estimated that the price of an average house in Dublin had increased from €104,000 in 1997 to €512,000 in 2006. It is probably now back to somewhere around €200,000, leaving a large number of people in negative equity. That surge in real estate lending figures after we joined the euro from €4.8 billion in the base year to €97.5 billion precipitated the price rise and, unfortunately, the Central Bank of Ireland and the Department of Finance were asleep and the bankers certainly needed better economic intelligence than what they showed. In many ways, the Minister of State's Department was a kind of downtown office for the construction industry. Once the building boom kept going, everybody was happy and there was no one to say it was not sustainable.

We have had to fall back on the private rented sector, for which we have better rules which the Minister of State described. On the massive boom after Ireland joined the euro, approximately 1.9% of the extra lending was directed at manufacturing or agriculture, while all of the rest of the money went into property-related activities, towards financial intermediation and personal lending. For example, it destroyed the building society movement, in addition to wrecking the banks and requiring a €64 billion bailout. The building society movement was a co-operative, philanthropic body to help people to buy houses. The Educational Building Society was an example of teachers helping one another to buy houses. This became probably one of the most corrupt parts of the system, as we know from the examples of the conduct of some of the people involved in running building societies which the Exchequer and the taxpayer are now trying to bail out.

The Minister of State should move to get ghost estates and NAMA properties onto the market. There are 80,000 empty houses which are deteriorating. In Longford NAMA had a set of houses knocked down. That is crazy in a society which will need these houses. I would welcome it if property prices fell. The wage costs caused by property increases would then decline, which would help to develop export-led growth, on which the Minister of State, the Minister for Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation and so on depend. It might mean the banks will need another rescue package, but why artificially make banks look good by keeping properties off the market? NAMA should be asked serious questions by people like the Minister of State and an evaluation should be made. We tried to persuade the former Minister of State, Deputy Penrose, to move in that direction also when he held the portfolio. If we are to make Ireland competitive again, keeping houses off the market to make banks look better is not the way to proceed.

Renting represents much better value because of the decline in capital values, although it is tough on those who are in negative equity. However, it may suit some and it is a more flexible option. As several Senators said, we are getting back to the normal European pattern. In Germany the market is nearly 50:50, but we developed this house ownership model - almost a fetish - regardless of the cost and in the process did ourselves serious damage. I saw a headline in The Sunday Business Post last Sunday stating eight out of ten millionaires around the world had made their first million on a property-based transaction. It might have worked for the individual millionaires, but it certainly does not work for a country and we have just conducted that experiment at huge cost to us all.

The Minister of State's rules for better conduct in renting are very welcome and she will find there is support for them in the House. They represent part of the cure for the economy in a disastrous era in banking and in the context of a property fetish beyond all reason. These data were published internationally. We should have known that what we were doing was unsustainable and have had brainier individuals in banks to realise this. The Minister of State's corrective measures are absolutely right and, as other Senators have said, she will have the support of the House in making a very necessary adjustment. It is a pity we did not start on this path five to seven years ago. I welcome the Minister of State's speech and the policy reforms and radicalism implied therein.

I am glad of the opportunity to contribute to the debate. I would like to raise an issue others wanted to raise in regard to the statement on buy-to-let investors. Some of the 600,000 homes rented are supported with rent support payments. The recent statement by the Governor of the Central Bank of Ireland encouraging banks to foreclose on buy-to-let mortgages is one we should take very seriously. Has the Minister of State conducted any research in this regard? I am sure she is aware of it, but has there been an examination of the impact this could have? Many buy-to-let mortgages were taken out at a time when banks were encouraging individuals to take out loans. I will not lay blame in this regard because there is fault on many sides, but families and individuals are dependent on these properties for their homes and should the banks foreclose on them, there will be social consequences for the families and individuals affected. It is an issue on which others and I have concerns and I have seen it documented. It is one I want to raise with the Minister of State directly because there will be consequences. We have heard many contributions from banks and their representatives on how they are moving forward in dealing with individuals who find themselves in difficulty. These properties are the family homes of many tenants. This needs to be recognised.

I commend the Minister of State in many respects. I mention quality and standards which were highlighted this week as the new regulations came into force on 1 February. There is a large number of rented houses in Cork city, providing accommodation for students in Cork Institute of Technology and University College Cork. During the years the standard of some of these houses left a lot to be desired, despite the fact that they were commanding high rents. The sale value of properties in and around the western suburbs of Cork city was always very high which I am sure was reflected in the income landlords received on them. Much purpose-built student accommodation was provided in Cork which was of a very high standard. This, in turn, resulted in improvements in the standard of rented accommodation, which was a positive development. It was always a contentious issue trying to get the local authorities - Cork City Council and Cork County Council - to inspect, but the level of inspections has improved in a big way. For a long time, the contribution local authorities received from registration bodies was not reflected in the level of inspections, but the number has increased. Given that the new regulations have been in place since 1 February, I am sure there will be a spotlight on the issue to ensure inspections happen.

The rental sector is a very important part of the economy. The State depends on private rented properties to house individuals it is supporting.

The rental accommodation scheme, RAS, is an important element of the housing policy. I would like to see it encouraged as it has worked extremely well, even though it took a while. The downturn in the economy has resulted in many landlords approaching local authorities and volunteering to have their properties taken on by the local authorities. It is a good scheme because it gives protection to the tenants and they no longer have to deal with a landlord. Landlords also benefit from continuity because a tenant may rent for five or six years. Local authorities gain because they can guarantee the rent is below market value as a result of a landlord agreeing to let his or her property for 12 months of every year. That measure also benefits landlords. I would like the Minister responsible to encourage all of the local authorities to expand the scheme whenever possible. Nobody wants to rent forever. Some tenants take a long-term view while for others it is a short-term measure, and this is how the rental support scheme has been described.

Rental rates continue to be challenging. Individuals in receipt of rent supplement find it difficult to access properties, particularly in Dublin and in Cork city. It is difficult to get landlords to comply with the level of rent required for the scheme. Landlords are unwilling to reduce rents in many areas. Tenants who are in receipt of rental income also become used to living in an area and their children attend the local schools, which are factors when it comes to choosing areas. Tenants may be able to rent a property for less but it would mean moving to a town that is located outside of the city in which they live. In many cases such a move would have a detrimental effect on families.

Fluctuating rents continues to be a source of friction. According to figures I have researched, rents in Cork increased by 2% last year. The local authorities must compete with the private rental sector and with a young mobile population who work. At the same time, individuals have been forced out of the city due to fluctuations in the rental property market. I know the Minister of State is aware of the problem. It continues to be a source of friction and difficulty for tenants, particularly in areas that now demand higher rents.

I welcome the Minister of State. I thank her for and acknowledge the good work she has done in this area and I respect her for it. I watched the monitor when she made her opening remarks. I noted that she acknowledged the work that was done by her predecessor, Michael Finneran, which is good.

The Government has made massive progress with the sector over the past 18 months and previously. Colleagues have referred to the Residential Tenancies Act and to the great changes in security of tenure for tenants. I am drafting a dispute resolution process. In a previous life I was a student union officer at Trinity College Dublin so I know about the nightmare scenarios faced by students. For example, there were poor standards in accommodation and students were at the mercy of landlords because there was no independent dispute resolution process. However, great improvements have been made.

I support the Minister of State's remarks on bedsit regulations. Four years is plenty of notice, and it is remarkable that anybody would try to justify bedsits in this day and age. It is incredible to hear about the conditions in bedsits that people had to live in, which persisted for so long.

Focus Ireland has made suggestions on how to roll out the new regulations and asked us to do as much as possible to support tenants. Some of its suggestions have merit and I shall mention some of them. It recommended that local authorities implement an information campaign to inform tenants about the new regulations and about non-compliant bedsits, and deliver leaflets in areas with a high concentration of bedsits, such as particular parts of Dublin. A leaflet drop would let people know about the new regulations and advise them about their options. It could also advise them about housing agencies that would help and urge them to contact their local authorities. A suggestion has been made that tenants living in bedsits should be fast-tracked for housing needs assessments. In terms of prioritising people on a housing list, the local authority should consider bedsit dwellers in the same way it does everybody else. It is important to arrange assessments straight away if we want tenants to move out of bedsits.

There have been great improvements in tenants' rights, which is welcome, and other improvements are in train. However, many find themselves experiencing certain conditions. First, we must identify the landlords. As Senator Wilson pointed out earlier, the vast majority of landlords have one or two properties. A large number of them never wanted to be landlords and do not want to be landlords now. I have two friends who each bought a one-bedroom apartment before they married but bought a house when they started a family. They rent out both apartments now because they are so deep in negative equity that they cannot sell them. There are a lot of people trapped in a similar situation. Many of these families are also tenants because they cannot afford to buy a house. They must rent a house while renting their previous properties. People are caught in a messy downward spiral that is the fallout from the property crash.

Many landlords do not earn money from renting their properties because they are losing a fortune on properties they cannot sell. It is unfair that they must pay tax on losses from rental income. At present people must pay the universal social charge on rental income even if they make a loss. Changes were made to the mortgage interest supplement so now they can only write off 75% of their mortgage interest. People are paying tax on losses, which is extraordinary when one compares them to multinational companies earning massive profits that can write off every expense under the sun to minimise their tax exposure. At the same time families are losing money on apartments and houses that they cannot sell and the properties are a millstone around their necks.

I listened to the debate in the other Chamber on the budget speech by the Minister for Finance. I was genuinely shocked when he said that the Government had decided to impose PRSI on rental income. It is incredibly unfair that people must pay PRSI on a loss from next year onwards. I do not think anyone would dispute that landlords should pay tax if they make a profit from their rental accommodation, but a landlord should not have to pay tax if he or she makes a loss. That is a basic principle and one that is accepted across the taxation system for companies and everybody else. At present the only people who pay such tax are landlords, but many of them never wanted to be in that situation and have problems with negative equity properties and mortgages. I know the Minister of State is a reasonable person and I urge her to ask the Government to reconsider that tax before the PRSI change comes into force.

The Minister of State's smiling face is always welcome in the House.

I hope I can keep smiling.

A Senator mentioned the housing crisis, but there are many forms of housing crisis here. This morning I had intended to raise homelessness in Dublin city on the Order of Business. My route to work took me along Talbot Street, O'Connell Street, Westmoreland Street, Grafton Street and Molesworth Street. Along my way I counted seven homeless people lying in doorways with rucksacks, which is unacceptable in this day and age. I empathised with their situation because they had to sleep in sub-zero temperatures last night. As far as I can see, the same problem does not exist in rural areas, but it is a trend in cities.

It is something few people are talking about it but the leaders of our country are not talking about it either. The Taoiseach is committed to the abolition of the Seanad but I do not believe he is committed to dealing with homelessness. We had an example of that this week in regard to the Magdalen laundries report. In a few years from now will we look back and say we were guilty of a crime against our citizens for not dealing with the problem of homelessness? With the number of empty houses in the country I cannot believe so many people are lying in empty doorways and we are unable to do anything about it.

Senator Hayden raised the bedsit issue. In the 1980s I shared a bedsit with a friend of mine in Dublin which consisted of two single beds, a wardrobe and a cooker. Today, most people have an en suite that is much bigger. When I moved to Ballaghaderreen in the mid-1980s I could not get accommodation because there was no rental property in the town. One person rented a place to me. It had shutters on the windows, the floorboards were sagging and mushrooms were growing from the ceiling and on the floor. In fairness, in the 1990s the builders began to provide housing which took a great deal of pressure off the county councils at the time. More builds then came on stream which took even more pressure off the county councils but in the Celtic tiger era we provided the country with far too many houses. My town is an example of that because over 200 houses in the town are empty. I do not know whether to call a housing estate a ghost housing estate if ten out of 90 houses are occupied but 80 of those 90 houses are boarded up. I do not know whether that was done by the banks or NAMA but the estate is an eyesore. We need to know what will happen with those houses. I am aware that in some cases they have been stripped of all the copper and the wiring and are fit for nothing other than to be knocked down.

I agree with what Senator Power said. Landlords got sucked into this system in the Celtic tiger era and nobody could see what would happen in terms of a crash. Landlords bought properties that were over-valued. Some of them are friends of mine and they have five and six houses but they are not worth one third of the mortgage they have on them. Most of them are unoccupied because they cannot rent them, and now they are being hit with a second home property tax which is to be replaced by the new property tax to be introduced in the middle of the year. I know in my heart that some of those landlords are on the point of being driven over the edge, and I have to sympathise with them to a large degree because they were the people who provided accommodation for us when we needed it for our people.

I had reason to discuss an issue regarding anti-social behaviour with my council some weeks ago and I found that the rules and regulations, if they are accurate in terms of what I was told, are wrong and unfair. If a family is engaging in anti-social behaviour not in their own estate but in another estate or another town, and if they have been arrested numerous times for everything and anything, they can be housed in an adjacent estate and wreck it. If they did not engage in the anti-social behaviour in their own estate the council said it cannot do anything about it. That is staggering. I think I have about a minute left, a Chathaoirligh.

Not according to my clock. The Senator has only five minutes.

I was timing it and some Senators were given an extra two minutes.

The leaders of the groups have extra time, Senator.

I will make three final brief points. I mentioned previously that the shared ownership scheme must be examined because as the mortgage part of the shared ownership goes down, the council's share of it goes up. I am aware in one case that when the mortgage is paid off the tenants will owe the council €35,000. We need to examine that. I made a submission on that to the then Minister of State, Deputy Penrose.

Rent caps must be examined because they are all over the shop, so to speak. A rent cap for a single person in Roscommon town where one cannot get property is €69 and a rent cap for rural County Galway, just up the road, is €104.

I agree with the Senator who raised the issue of the second home property tax having to be paid in full for this year even though the new property tax will be introduced in July. That is unfair. There should be a way of dealing with it. If the €200 must be paid for some reason or another, a reduction of €100 in the property tax should be applicable to the person, and the Revenue should deal with that.

I welcome the Minister of State to the House. I live in rented accommodation. I am fortunate that I have had a very good relationship with my landlord. I have not had any problems with him. It is a very professional relationship but I know not everyone is fortunate to have that kind of relationship.

Along with other Members I spend a good deal of my time doing constituency work with people who live in private rented accommodation in the private rented sector. There are concerns about a number of problems that are becoming increasingly widespread in the sector. The first issue I will touch on is rent supplement and rent supplement reviews. The dramatic increase in the number of households claiming rent supplement is a direct consequence of the failure of successive Governments to invest in social housing in a meaningful way, and more of that is needed. As a result of that the cost to the Exchequer from rent supplement claims has reached stark levels. To cut the cost the Department of Social Protection has cut the rent supplement caps and introduced annual rent supplement reviews. We are told the purpose of that is to force down the price of rents in the rental sector but there is growing evidence that the impact of these cuts and reviews is to force low-income families deeper into poverty as they struggle to meet the rent shortfalls from their low salaries or social welfare payments.

I am aware of two cases where young mothers were made homeless as a result of the rent supplement reviews that left them unable to afford their rental accommodation. In one case, six months on the family involved are living with family as they are unable to find suitable accommodation at the rates offered post the review. Has the Minister of State's Department conducted any research into the impact of the rent supplement reviews on the caps, rent levels and household poverty and financial hardship?

The other issue that is emerging as a growing problem is buy-to-let properties about which Members spoke earlier and those properties being placed in receivership by banks when the owners default on their mortgages. I am aware some rental tenants are being left in an uncertain, insecure position as both the receiver and the landlord are demanding rental payments. If the tenant transfers rent payments to the receiver there is not an automatic guarantee that the receiver will accept all of the landlord obligations outlined in the tenancy agreement or honour the return of the deposit. In light of that I ask the Minister of State if she would consider requesting the Central Bank and the Financial Regulator to develop a code of conduct for the banks and receivers detailing the obligations the receiver takes on when appointed to a rental property, including respect for the duration and terms of the tenancy agreement and honouring the tenant's deposit.

Many of the other issues have been dealt with and I do not want to cover old ground when other Senators wish to speak.

I welcome the Minister of State to the House. I will be brief and to the point. In fairness to the previous Minister, former Deputy Michael Finneran, and the previous Government, the 2004 Act was revolutionary. It created a new dimension to rental markets and gave rights in what was a haphazard and landlord-driven scenario prior to that. I find it amusing that we spent 800 years trying to eliminate the absentee landlord only to replace the absentee landlord with landlords of our own who were very cruel in certain respects. However, the vast majority of landlords are very good people who are doing their best. They usually own second or third homes and they are doing their best to provide quality accommodation for their tenants.

Where I live in County Clare we have a large number of holiday homes. People rent a house for nine months and are expected to vacate it for the following three months. During those three months the landlords can get a large amount of money from renting as a holiday let on a weekly basis. I do not know what can be done but it appears unfair that a house can be rented to a person from 1 September to the end of May and then he or she must leave for the three months of the summer. That is certainly an issue.

I would have a concern about the fees paid to the Private Residential Tenancies Board. It is an expensive process for landlords. The fees were increased recently. The fee was €70 for a tenant who was registered in the first month and increased to €140. I understand those amounts were increased recently. Obviously the landlord is the person who pays the fee. If one is in difficulty there are probably good resolution mechanisms in place. I believe it is an expensive process and the PRTB should be made to reduce its fees. For the vast majority of small landlords who try to do their best, they would prefer if the money spent on registration was used to paint or raise the standard of their properties. Unfortunately, I have to attend a committee meeting but I will listen to the Minister of State's response later. She is welcome to the House and I ask her to keep up the good work. From my experience she is one of the very good Ministers of State.

Flattery will get one everywhere.

Certainly the Minister of State is getting much praise and it is justified to say the least. She has done much good work in her Department since her appointment and we wish her well. It is a challenging Department involving as it does the whole housing area and the manner in which housing and homes are changing.

During the Celtic tiger people purchased dwelling houses for investment purposes. Some of my friends would have purchased houses as a pension pot for their retirement. Unfortunately, the situation has changed dramatically and those people who invested in such properties are in negative equity and paying the same level of mortgage as in the boom years. Those who were most culpable in enticing people to invest in such properties were the bankers. We have all heard the stories of the period from 2000 to 2008 where bankers received incentives for enticing people to take out mortgages. The banking and financial sectors campaigned throughout the country to incentivise people to take out mortgages, buy a car and go on holidays, all of which people did in good faith. Those bankers are not being held accountable but the individuals concerned are left with the properties. Many of those properties are rented in the private property sector which is an excellent resource for individuals who are not in a financial position to provide properties for themselves.

It is interesting to note the home ownership rate in Ireland is 73.5% compared with 26% who rent. Of the 26% who rent, almost 15% rent at lower than the market rate and 11% rent at the market rate. Those figures are comparable with those in the UK and Belgium. In Austria the rate of home ownership is only 57%. In Ireland there was always a culture of home ownership which drove the initiative during the years when people invested in property and now find themselves in a very difficult position. As my colleague, Senator Averil Power, outlined they face a multitude of difficult scenarios this year, next year and in the following years. A very difficult situation arises where a person who invested in a property and is struggling to service the loan associated with it is providing that property as a home for somebody else. Obviously that person has legal obligations to ensure the home meets the desired standard as set out in the 2004 Act, which the Minister of State is proposing to amend. It is unreal that the State is asking those who are in a loss-making position, struggling to pay a mortgage and under pressure from a bank, to pay additional taxation. That does not make sense. Unless that issue is addressed people will hand the keys back to the banks to deal with the consequences. They will not be in a position to pay the mortgages on those properties if continuing charges are imposed on them. I ask the Minister of State to examine that issue as the private rental accommodation sector is crucially important to those who are renting as it is a home.

For example, in Foxrock in Dublin, people may have borrowed for a very large property or built or purchased a large property and due to no fault of their own, perhaps losing one job, they have to move out of the property and rent it and move into a smaller rented property. That is happening in the city of Dublin and in other parts of the country. This area is a minefield. If new legislation is being brought forward the Minister of State will have our full support. However, I urge her to look at the issue in as broad a context as possible and to meet the Irish Property Owners Association which has made valid points and must be listened to as it has a legal obligation to protect the tenants who are renting from the association. It is doing that as the law is in place to protect the tenant and the landlord. It is important to take all those issues into consideration in the new changed environment in which we find ourselves.

I welcome the Minister of State to the House. One of the most important issues facing the Government is housing - social housing and private rented accommodation. In the past, people alluded to the "flatland" which was part of Dublin for many years. As a student in Dublin, Ranelagh was known as "flatland" because everyone had a bedsit there or stayed in a bedsit with friends or family. That day should be gone. I am pleased the minimum standards regulations have been introduced as I do not think we can expect anyone, no matter what the age, student or pensioner, to share sanitation and cooking facilities in old run-down properties. I am sure landlords will come up to the mark and, if not, the law will apply to them equally.

In regard to the private rented sector, I sympathise with many landlords who got into the business as a long-term investment. It is good for the economy that they would provide long-term accommodation. In Ireland people get into the property market for a short-term profit. I can only relate the experience of the housing estate where I live in Letterkenny. I have noticed over the years that people came in and bought a property which they sold a year later and probably got €50,000 or €60,000 equity.

Many of these houses were bought up by investors leading to half of the houses on the estate being owner-occupied with the other half rented. This is a pattern that was repeated across the country which destroyed many estates. One upside of the economic downturn is that people are choosing to keep their homes for longer which gives estates a sense of community. Many of us will have attended resident association meetings one year only to note the following year all the members had left because they had moved on.

As a member of the Simon Community in the north west, I am delighted the Minister of State will include voluntary housing associations in the Residential Tenancies (Amendment)(No. 2) Bill 2012. Some claim there is no homelessness in certain areas. However, the definition of homelessness is not just confined to someone living on the street under a cardboard box. It also includes those who have nowhere to stay but reside temporarily with friends or have left home. There is a significant homeless population that does not come on the radar. Organisations such as Clúid, Threshold and Simon are playing an important part in getting these people who county councils cannot always assist into accommodation.

When I was a county councillor in Lifford, I was on record for praising the former Minister of State with responsibility for housing, Michael Finneran, for the rental accommodation scheme, RAS. It was much better for people to get accommodation under the scheme as it tended to be clean and new, as well as being monitored by the county councils. Senator Ó Domhnaill's colleagues on the council did not praise their own Minister but I did as he was concerned with the housing issue and did much good work on it. This is being continued by this Government.

Will the Minister of State clarify the position of the private-rented sector with the property tax which will replace the non-principal private residence charge? Many landlords have invested in their properties and we need to clarify their position on the tax. Many citizens will also be renting for the long term now too. In Switzerland, probably the most stable economy in the world, private home ownership has not gone beyond 38% in the past 60 years. Ireland is probably going in that direction. Many of our citizens under the age of 35 have no desire to own a property but wish to have a job and settle down.

I welcome the Minister of State to the House and commend her on her work. The introduction of minimum standards and obligations for the private-rented sector is to be expected. I welcome the ongoing drive to secure standards as the four-year phasing-in period that has been allowed for existing rented accommodation under the Housing (Standards for Rented Houses) Regulations 2008 expires. On 1 February, we said "Goodbye" to the original bedsit which is a good development. Rented accommodation will also be required to have fixed heating appliances controlled by the tenants in every room, another basic standard. The new regulations reflect the requirements of a modern and much more complicated renting market. Senator Power alluded to this and I know many of my peers own properties which they are renting out.

I commend Dublin City Council for its positive record in enforcing the regulations. It initiated 40 prosecutions in 2012 under them. There is a major imbalance in liability for property tax, however. As Senator Wilson pointed out, landlords have paid the NPPR in March 2012, will have to pay the property tax in July 2013 and a subsequent water tax in 2014. While it is to be welcomed that the local property tax is a tax deductible expense, it is not proposed to provide legislative backing for this immediately but introduce it on a phased basis, according to the Minister for Finance. We need to address the balancing of rights between landlord and tenant in this regard in a more holistic way. Landlords are perceived to be wealthy but most people now realise - or should realise - that they are in a worse financial position than the tenant with many just trying to keep their heads above water. As Senator Ó Domhnaill said, many of them are in loss-making positions and suggested they hand back the keys. The banks do not want the properties as they will have to find a way to make the property work. Ultimately, everyone loses.

While I commend the Minister of State for her work and welcome the regulations, we need a much holistic approach to the current private rented sector.

I welcome the Minister of State to the House and her commitment to the deposit protection scheme. More than €30 million was paid by the Department of Social Protection in rent deposits for social welfare recipients between 2006 and 2012. Many of the deposits could come between €500 and €1,000 but sometimes they were even higher. Normally, deposits are refunded at the end of the tenancy but none of the moneys in the case of social welfare recipients' deposits has been returned to the Department. The Department does not know whether these moneys are withheld by the landlord or by the tenant. Obviously, a tenant may move on to new accommodation and needs a deposit for it. However, if they move back home, move in with a partner, leave the country and, accordingly, do not need a deposit, then the money should be returned to the Department. Considering that 50% of tenants bringing disputes to the Private Residential Tenancies Board, PRTB, are rent supplement tenants and almost three quarters of disputes, 72%, relate to deposits, it is clear some landlords are profiting from retaining State moneys. The State cannot continue to waste such resources as these moneys could be used to assist others.

The introduction of a deposit protection scheme would ensure that deposit moneys would be returned to the State at the end of a tenancy. It would also ensure deposit moneys would only be paid to landlords who have proved a legitimate claim to the moneys either because the tenant was in rent or utility arrears or caused damage to the property. I know the Minister is considering a range of options provided by Indecon. However, I would suggest the Department does not lodge the moneys with the deposit protection scheme but rather provide a guarantee that the moneys would be available should the landlord have a legitimate claim. This could be effectively done by a bond similar to the one for developers when they are developing an estate.

They lodge an insurance bond. The Department could do the same and this would mean it would have the use of the money during that period rather than the landlord having the use of the money. The landlord would have the security of knowing that if things go wrong with his tenants, backup would be secured in the form of the bond. I call on the Minister of State to consider this proposal for the Department of Social Protection because we need the money circulating in the country rather than sitting in a landlord's bank account.

I could speak all day on housing issues. Having been a county councillor I am aware of the issues affecting people. The affordable housing scheme was a great way to get people into their own private rented accommodation but it is now closed. The banks are approving mortgages again. Will the Minister of State consider the re-introduction of the affordable housing scheme? I know for a fact that in Killarney four houses available under the affordable housing scheme could not be allocated to people because they could not get a mortgage. The four houses have remained empty for the past two or three years. They should be transferred to social housing or the affordable housing scheme should be re-opened. Either way the houses should be given out because people are crying out for accommodation while many houses remain empty.

I know of a young man who left home and moved into a flat but he could not get rent supplement because he had to get a letter from the Garda stating that he could not live at home. I realise this is more an issue for the Department of Social Protection. It is a terrible thing to ask any young person to get a letter from the Garda stating that he could not live in the family house because of trouble at home. I could speak all day on the matter but I realise another Senator wishes to contribute. I call on the Minister of State to take on board those suggestions.

I recognise the part being played by the private landlord in providing accommodation at a time when little social housing is being built in any part of the country. I wish to highlight one experience of my own. Some two years ago, I visited a family in a three-storey premises in Dundalk. They lived at the top but the bathroom was at the bottom. Senator Keane referred to poor accommodation as well. The family of three included a husband and wife living on the top floor, where it was possible to see the sky. They had to move the mattress when it rained at night. Thankfully they have been accommodated by Dundalk Town Council in a new home. However, I wish to alert the Minister of State to the fact that there are bogus landlords who do not meet any standards or regulations. In some cases they will not rent accommodation to someone entitled to a rent supplement. One of the questions possible tenants are asked is whether they will be applying for rent supplement. Dreadful accommodation is still available and if it is in one town it is in all towns.

Someone referred to anti-social behaviour. Houses are being rented out by landlords in private estates on a weekly or weekend basis. They are being used to accommodate ten or 12 people. They are taken up by boys and girls who come to a three-bedroom home for the weekend, for example, and pay €1,000. Can we stipulate to landlords who meet the standards that there should be a limit on the number of people who can be accommodated in a two-bedroom, three-bedroom or four-bedroom home? In some cases, ten, 12 or perhaps more are living in houses for the weekend and engaging in anti-social behaviour which is impacting on residents nearby. Such people are in town for a hen or stag party. Can we limit the number of people and state that landlords should not accommodate hen parties for a weekend? Is it possible to legalise that? I am particularly concerned about this issue because I come from the tourist town of Carlingford where such anti-social behaviour is occurring every weekend. What responsibility rests with a landlord to ensure that anti-social behaviour does not take place in the house he or she is renting out for the weekend or the week? I commend the Minister of State on the work she is doing. Coimeád ag obair.

I thank all Senators who contributed to the debate for the positive support for the progress being made. I particularly appreciate the support on the matter of bedsits, which has come from all sides of the House, because we are keen to ensure that we improve standards. There were several common themes among the contributions and I will address these and refer to some of the individual Senators as well.

One theme raised by Senator Wilson related to the difficulties for landlords. I appreciate that there are difficulties for landlords. Senator Keane and others referred to the fact that we are trying to strike a balance. There are issues for landlords and tenants and we are keen to ensure that we address the issues on both sides. A number of Senators referred to the difficulties for landlords. Part of this area is not under my responsibility but under the responsibility of the Minister for Finance. However, I am a member of the Cabinet sub-committee on mortgage arrears, as is the Minister for Finance. Representatives from the Central Bank of Ireland and the Financial Regulator attend these meetings as do several other Ministers and senior officials from various Departments. That is one forum for addressing the difficulties of landlords and the issue of distressed mortgages in the buy-to-let sector. There are genuine difficulties here and I recognise that they exist.

Senator Barrett remarked on the extent of the emphasis on investment in the property sector instead the productive sector of the economy. We are trying to address that. He also raised the issue of the NAMA units, as did other Senators. We are trying to get these NAMA units on the market. The Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government, Deputy Hogan, and I meet representatives from NAMA from time to time. We are trying to get some units for the social housing sector and we have had some success. I was in Drogheda last week visiting people who are in NAMA units. NAMA is also working to ensure it gets property into the private market as well, although perhaps we should put more pressure on it in this regard.

Issues of enforcement and inspections were raised by several people. There was much commendation for Dublin City Council. I agree it has carried out some very good work on inspections and enforcement and we are positively encouraging this.

Issues of money and funding were raised, mainly by Senator Conway. The Private Residential Tenancies Board, PRTB, is self-financing but a percentage of the money is allocated to the local authorities for inspection and enforcement. We expect the local authorities to spend this money on inspection and enforcement. Dublin City Council has led in this regard as have the local authorities in Cork, to which Senator Clune referred. A court case arose in Cork recently in Bishopscourt which vindicated rights of residents in that area and that is to be welcomed. We are putting an emphasis on inspection and enforcement.

Another issue raised by several Senators on both sides was the prevalence of anti-social behaviour. There is a problem with the law at the moment because of a court case which struck down section 82, a provision which had been used by housing authorities to address anti-social behaviour. We need to address that issue.

Senator Brennan referred to issues of overcrowding where it may lead to anti-social behaviour. I will have to get back to Senator Brennan with regard to whether we can specifically address overcrowding. I am keen to address issues of anti-social behaviour because it causes real misery for residents, tenants, neighbours, etc. It is a difficult problem to resolve but the PRTB has some powers in this area.

If we can address this issue, whether in the context of legislation or otherwise, we will certainly consider doing so.

I compliment Senator Hayden on her wide knowledge of this area. She raised specific issues regarding the certification system. We would probably need a lead-in time if we were to address the issues raised because they would place certain obligations on landlords. The writs for the buy-to-let sector touches on the other issue I referred to earlier.

I will address the general issues raised in regard to housing if I have time but first I want to speak about deposit protection because it is a central part of what we want to achieve in this legislation. I am minded to introduce amendments in the Seanad rather than on Committee Stage in the Dáil in order to allow them a full airing.

I thank the Minister of State for recognising the benefits of the Seanad.

We are trying to learn from systems already in place in neighbouring jurisdictions. Several good schemes have been put in place in Britain and Northern Ireland has recently introduced a scheme. We still have quite a bit of work to do on the measure but I intend to have it ready to bring before the Seanad.

Senator Reilly raised the issue of rent receivers. My Department has entered discussions with the banking sector to clarify the responsibilities of rent receivers vis-à-vis landlords and we intend to produce clear guidelines for lenders and tenants in conjunction with the Irish Banking Federation. I acknowledge the problems that arise with shared ownership. It arises in some counties more than others. Senator Keane referred to the practice of letting out properties and issues also arise in regard to substantial repayments on moneys borrowed by local authorities in earlier times. The payback is now falling on those who are in shared ownership schemes.

The issue of caps on rent supplement is not the direct responsibility of my Department but reference was also made to the rent allowance scheme. The Department of Social Protection is monitoring market values.

Senator Kelly raised the issue of ghost estates. We are working hard to address this issue. A sub-committee has been established in my Department to deal with ghost estates and we are gradually reducing the number of estates that are in bad condition, in conjunction with the various stakeholders. It is true to say that a small number of estates will never be brought back to any kind of use but where we can we are working very hard with NAMA and local authorities to remediate them.

Senator Moloney raised an important point in the context of deposit protection. The State is paying for many of these deposits through community welfare officers and the money is not returned in many cases. This is one of the reasons we should establish a deposit protection scheme. Deposits involve State money as well as individuals' hard earned savings and they can contribute to homelessness if they are not returned when tenants attempt to move elsewhere. I will take on board the Senator's suggestion regarding a bond rather than cash for State deposits. We have not gotten far enough in drafting the proposal to determine exactly how we will achieve that. We are also examining the issue of left-over units on the affordable housing schemes. It does not make sense to leave empty houses that were intended for sale under a scheme which may no longer be affordable. We want to find ways of bringing those houses back into use.

I think I have addressed all the issues raised. I apologise if I left anything out and I will revert to Senators if I have not responded to them. I thank Senators for their wide knowledge and interest in this area. Considerable progress has been made already but more can be done. We intend to make progress with the legislation that is currently proceeding through the Houses of the Oireachtas. We also intend to work on enforcement because there is little point in introducing rules if they cannot be enforced. We are conscious of need to achieve a balance between the rights of tenants and landlords and we will address both sets of rights in the legislation in so far as we can.

Sitting suspended at 1.45 p.m. and resumed at 4.30 p.m.
Top
Share