I cannot accept amendments Nos. 9, 31 and 38. The Emergency Measures in the Public Interest (Covid-19) Act 2020 provided for an emergency period during which a landlord is prohibited, under section 5 of the Act, from serving a notice of termination. Section 4 of the Act provided that the emergency period could only be extended from its initial three months, under very specific circumstances in the interest of public health during the Covid-19 pandemic. The Government could, on the request of the Minister for Housing, Local Government and Heritage make - after consultation with the Minister for Health, and with the consent of the Minister for Public Expenditure, Infrastructure, Public Service, Reform and Digitalisation, - from time to time, by order extend the emergency period for such period as they considered appropriate if they were satisfied that, having regard to the threat to public health presented by Covid-19, the highly contagious nature of that disease, and the need to restrict the movement of persons in order to prevent the spread of the disease among the population, the making of such order was in the public interest. As the emergency period under the Act expired on 1 August 2020, its provisions relating to residential tenancies are effectively spent. It would not be appropriate or legally sound to now use legislation intended to prevent the movement of persons in the interest of public health during a pandemic and to ease consequential rent affordability pressures, to introduce a three-year moratorium on tenancy terminations and rent increases at a time when thankfully, we have no pandemic to deal with. Irrespective of how the Opposition wishes to give effect to an eviction ban or a rent freeze, the Government rejects such policy interventions. We wish to grow the supply of rental accommodation. We want to help renters into the future. We know that some renters are facing significant challenges, which Deputies have articulated in their contributions. The State provides support and assistance, where needed. The Government’s new plan, Delivering Homes, Building Communities, will provide 90,000 affordable supports to help people secure a home of their own. Since 2022, 4,500 homes have been delivered by AHBs, local authorities and the LDA. There is a strong pipeline of future developments, with over 5,150 additional affordable purchase homes approved for support from the affordable housing fund across 22 local authority areas. From budget 2026, cost-rental homes will be exempt from corporation tax, making projects more viable and ensuring the 25% discount is maintained. The rent tax credit, introduced in budget 2023, has been of significant help for renters, with almost 400,000 people benefiting in 2023. In budget 2026, the credit was extended for three more years, until the end of 2028. As promised in the programme for Government, the amount of the credit will increase gradually over the lifetime of this plan. A lengthy eviction ban or rent freeze would hamper supply and ultimately, help nobody. We do not have to look too far away from here. In Berlin, the Government introduced a rent freeze that resulted in a 50% reduction in rental supply within 12 months and was struck down by the Supreme Court there. The Residential Tenancies Acts provide tenancy protections for both tenants and landlords. The constitutionally protected property rights of landlords have to be respected by the balanced provisions in both this Bill and the Residential Tenancies Acts. A landlord has the right to terminate a tenancy on one or more of the limited grounds for termination under the Acts. This Bill strengthens protections for tenants by restricting the rights of landlords to terminate a tenancy, including on the ground of family occupation. I encourage anyone at risk of homelessness to make contact with their local authority for help. For new tenancies, that is, first-time tenancies between parties created on or after 1 March 2026, a smaller landlord can only terminate a tenancy of minimum duration during its six-year term on the ground of occupation by the landlord or an immediate family member, which is restricted to a spouse, civil partner, child or parent, or both. A smaller landlord can terminate, as usual, on one or more of the limited grounds for termination at the end of this six-year tenancy of minimum duration. Landlords with four or more properties can only terminate a new tenancy where there is a breach of tenant obligations or the dwelling no longer suits the needs of the tenant household. As a result, I reiterate I cannot accept amendments Nos. 9, 31 and 38.

Sentiment score: 0.15

Nobody in this Chamber has a monopoly on understanding and compassion for families and individuals-----

Sentiment score: 0.46

With all due respect, I did not interrupt the Deputy. Nobody here has a monopoly on compassion when it comes to the difficulties and challenges being faced by individuals and families regarding the shortage of housing supply, whether social, affordable or rental. At my constituency offices in Waterford city and Dungarvan, I deal with constituents in the exact same way as do other Deputies. The Minister and I are not blind to the challenges facing the public. We have a difference of view on how to address those challenges. The Government is investing record sums in increasing provision of social and affordable housing to try to assist the very people of whom we have been speaking. Our housing plan commits to deliver 72,000 social homes and 90,000 starter home supports. Contrary to what was said by Deputies on the opposite side of the Chamber, everything in this Bill is about trying to enhance protections to ensure there is a reduction in notices of termination. That is what is contained in the Bill. Deputies can dress it up and try to present and package it in a different way but the fact is there will be restrictions on notices of termination as a result of the measures we are putting in place. In his amendment No. 38, Deputy Sheehan seeks to restrict the grounds for evictions where a family member has to return. I ask him to consider that we want rental properties to be put on the rental market where, for example, a family member is going off to work abroad. Is it better for such a property to sit vacant because that person will need it on his or her return or for it to be put on the rental market? I would argue it is better that it be put on the rental market and put to good use while the person is abroad. The Deputy's amendment would prevent that person from being able to return to the property. Balances must always be found when it comes to putting legislation in place. That is why we are not accepting the amendments that have been put before us. It is all about balance and, contrary to the contributions we have heard from Opposition Deputies, the Government is trying to strike that balance.

Sentiment score: 0.10