Cian O'Callaghan (Dublin Bay North, Social Democrats) | Oireachtas source

I will start close to where Deputy Nash finished, namely, with the issue of tenancies of indefinite duration. I will certainly support such a measure when the Government brings it in. I was a member of the commission on the private rented residential sector approximately 20 years ago. I did not agree with the commission's decision to include a get-out clause in respect of the very limited improvements and tenancy rights that it recommended. That get-out clause was put in place because landlords lobbied very heavily for it. It meant that some rights would accrue in terms of tenancy but these would be effectively wiped clean after a small number of years. I was one of a minority of people representing tenants - I represented students at the time - and I did not support that decision. It is incredible that only now, approximately 20 years later, it is proposed to get rid of that get-out clause.

Let us be clear. Tenancies of indefinite duration alone are not enough. No-fault evictions need to be brought in to bring us into line with the European norm. It should be the case that if somebody is paying the rent and is not in breach of the tenancy agreement or engaged in antisocial behaviour, he or she should not be subject to eviction. There should be recognition that the property is that person's home. It may be someone else's investment. It may well be someone else's pension fund or whatever. It is, however, the home of the person renting and the primacy of that should be respected. His or her children will go to the local school, be involved in the GAA club or drama group, make friends and take time to settle into school. That potentially would be disrupted by the person being evicted for whatever reason. The primacy of that should be recognised.

This is linked to the whole area of rents and rent regulation. The rent pressure zones have not worked. That is not my opinion. We know categorically that they have not worked. The Residential Tenancies Board has published its latest data which show that the RPZs have not worked in a single county in which they have been introduced. They have been breached in all of them. Those data come from the RTB.

We know that the latest measures brought in by the Government have not worked either. The Minister stated when he brought in these measures that he would review them in the context of inflation. It is also true, however, that many Opposition Deputies warned at the time that inflation was increasing and those measures would be insufficient and would not work.

Something else about these measures fundamentally does not work. There are two issues. First, with rents here among the highest in Europe, having almost doubled in the last decade, we clearly do not need any rent increases. Second, there is an issue around allowing for any rent increases and the implementation and enforcement of that. As previous speakers have said, there are insufficient resources in the RTB. That issue, which there have been warnings about for years, needs to be corrected.

The more fundamental issue, however, is the power imbalance between tenants and landlords when tenants attempt to assert their rights. The following are the words of a renter cited in an article compiled by Michelle Hennessy in TheJournal.ie.

I currently rent in Dublin and live with my partner and two children. My experience of a power imbalance is that of our landlord attempting to increase our rent by 8%. When we pushed back to the letting agent they rightly agreed that the rent increase must be in line with inflation. However the landlord turned up at our home unannounced and demanded that we pay the 8% increase in cash, which he will collect personally, or he would have us and our children evicted.

That leaves tenants in an impossible situation when they are trying to assert their legal rights. They know that if they continue to assert their rights, the landlord can legally turn up and evict them and their family for a whole myriad of reasons, even though they are paying their rent and are fully compliant. That is the situation we have created. It makes no sense if we are serious about supporting tenants having a right to live in their homes if they pay their rent and so forth.

If the Government is in any way serious about this, tenancies of indefinite duration, while a start, are nowhere near what is needed to increase security of tenure for tenants just in order that they can assert their minimum and basic rights without the fear that if they try to do so, they will be evicted.

I was talking to someone else recently who is renting. The heating in the building is included in the rent. Does the landlord turn on the heating when it gets colder? No. Do the tenants in the building feel they are in a position to strongly assert their rights on this with the landlord? Of course not because they are living in fear that if they do so, the landlord could evict them on whatever grounds and reasons he or she wants. That goes to the heart of all of this.

When the Minister was in the Chamber he asked for honesty in our contributions. It is important we are honest in this. The Minister referred to cost rental and the Government's plans for 18,000 cost-rental homes. That is a great aspiration but let us be honest about what the Government has delivered. So far this year, 25 cost-rental homes have been delivered. The Minister has attacked the Opposition several times, not just tonight, for plucking the number of 20,000 public homes out of the sky. He said this evening that the number had been "pulled out of the sky". That is an interesting phrase because Fianna Fáil, in its election manifesto for the last election, committed the party to deliver in government at least 10,000 social homes and 10,000 affordable homes per year. That is 20,000 public homes. Does the Minister believe the figures in the Fianna Fáil election manifesto were pulled out of the sky? It seems he thinks they were. If he wants an honest debate about that, he should explain why it was okay for him in his manifesto in the election campaign to commit to 20,000 public homes, while repeatedly attacking the Opposition for having the same aspiration.

The new line from the Government side appears to be to ask who will build these homes, as if the skills shortage has nothing to do with the Government. The Construction Industry Federation has warned for years about the skills shortage and has been crying out for the Government to do something about the lack of support for apprenticeships. Apprenticeship levels in key construction trades, wet trades, are running at approximately 10% of what they were in 2004. The Government has a key role to play in this. It is the largest purchaser of construction contracts in the country, especially through infrastructure and the national development plan. It spends billions and billions. The Government should now build a minimum number of apprenticeships into each public procurement contract. In some other countries, they have insisted that approximately 10% of the labour force on each of these public contracts are apprentices. That means these countries have an ongoing supply of apprenticeships and skills being built up. They are building that into their large-scale public spending plans. There is no reason we should not be doing that as well. I would much prefer to hear the Government talk about what it will and can do to plug that skills gap than listen to this new line where we are asked who will build the homes and we hear this has nothing to do with the Government and it does not know what will happen or where these people will come from. The Government has a key role in ensuring that is done.

If we look at the newspapers today, two headlines stick out. In one we learn that one in four households believes they will still be paying rent or a mortgage when they retire. The second states that renters are being asked to pay extra to keep cats in a pet-friendly Dublin apartment. A monthly charge of €75 for keeping a pet is now being levied in a new-build apartment complex on Griffith Avenue in my constituency. That is on top of the baseline rent of €2,250 per month and €50 per month for those who want to park their car. That is the kind of rental market which has become a reality. I have to say I feel ridiculous reading out that headline. What sort of country are we living in when we have that carry-on from these people? Amy Molloy of the Irish Independent told us today that she found on daft.ie a €1,000 per month charge for a studio where a wardrobe and bed have to be moved to access the shower. I appeal to the Government. It is an utterly unacceptable, ludicrous situation in which renters find themselves. We need every urgent action taken on this, not a "Who will build the homes?" or "Nothing to do with us" kind of response.

See this speech in context