Richard Boyd Barrett: Warns of Second Class Tenants from Exempt Dwellings

Well it kind of makes somewhat redundant the questions I have. The Minister thinks they're separate. I mean, the idea we're allowing exemptions for these structures and, I mean by the way, I don't have a problem with it if it's family members. I don't have a problem with it if it's family members, although I still think there has to be, you know, we have to ensure quality and quality of building and so on. But the fact that they can then be rented changes everything, as far as I'm concerned. Because, and the fact that they're also, a tax break is being extended, right, because we're now incentivising, we're providing a pretty significant incentive for people to build these structures and for them to enter into the rental market on a very large scale. If Progress Ireland, the Collison Brothers think tank who apparently floated this idea first, predictions are correct, they're talking about 350,000 of these things. That's huge. So, like, that's a big matter and you're incentivising it. And huge numbers of these are going to end up in the rental sector. So the idea we can separate the sort of planning dimension from this, from what's going to result from it, which is tens and tens of thousands of structures which will be rented out but where the people who live in them won't have the normal protections of renters. I mean, is that not a concern for you? And what, I mean, on a planning matter, well, I just ask you that, first of all, are you not concerned about it? Because I certainly am because we're going to have a second tier of tenants. That's what's going to happen. A second class group of tenants who do not enjoy the same protections and the government are incentivising, they're actively encouraging people to do this. So, to me, that is a huge problem. And the idea that you haven't consulted, let's put it that way, that you're not consulting with the Minister who is going to sort of ensure protection for people who might be living in these things is appalling. So, Deputy, licensing is currently provided for. Yeah, and the experience isn't great. It's not great for tenants. Licensing is currently provided for. And you said at the top of your contribution there that you have no issue in relation to a planning exemption being applied if it is for a family member. But yet there has been derogatory terms that have been used to describe these proposals. And what I would say to deputies or anybody who has commented in derogatory manner towards the description of these as so-called beds and sheds, it doesn't make sense then that you're saying it's okay for a family member to avail of what you are determining, a bed and a shed. But yet it's some way okay if it's a family member, but it's not okay if somebody is renting. Very simple distinction. In one case, there's a commercial gain to be made. There's profit to be made in the second instance. And that just changes the relationship between the person who would be living in the structure and the person who is providing that residence. It fundamentally changes the relationship. But Deputy, what is your answer to the point which I had to consider when I was considering these regulations of an older person who has facilitated that intergenerational movement for them to move into the auxiliary dwelling unit and then they pass away? Your response is that that property should lie vacant? Surely it isn't. Well, I certainly think that under no circumstances should it be rented out where the tenant, bear with me, where the tenant doesn't have the same rights afforded to them as people who rent in the normal residential tenants. That's different to what you said a moment ago. No, it isn't. It is. I said that you can't separate the two issues, is what I said. Because what you're doing is incentivising something that is going to lead to the proliferation of these structures into the rented sector with potentially, well very quickly I would say, thousands and then fairly soon after that, tens of thousands and possibly hundreds of thousands of tenants but who won't actually have the rights afforded to other tenants. Well Deputy, you said you had an issue with them being rented full stop in your contribution there. And I have put a point to you that your solution here would leave properties vacant and I'm not willing to facilitate that is what I would say. That I would have vacant properties in this country at a time of such a housing crisis. We all want vacant and derelict properties to be brought back into use. We can't on one hand call for that and then on the same side of things then say we're okay with having vacant auxiliary dwellings. You wouldn't expect a tenant to live in a derelict property, would you? Deputy, the point is that both of us share the ambition of ensuring that there are no vacant or derelict properties because there is such housing need out there in the country and my point to you is the alternative to availing and allowing for the rental of these properties is that we will see vacant units across the country and I'm not willing to allow that to occur. You are willing to allow a second class category of tenant that will not have the protections against eviction, excessive rent increases or just poor behaviour by unscrupulous landlords which we know exists. As I said Deputy, I'm bringing forward the planning regulations here. I know the licence in peace is part of the housing miscellaneous legislation that has been through the Oireachtas. We don't know in terms of the numbers here. You have put numbers out there. Obviously there are strict criteria that are attaching to this. We'll keep the numbers under review. Obviously there is a sunset clause in this regulation that is here but as with all policies we will keep them under review. Thank you.