Residential Tenancies (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill 2026: Committee Stage
Seanad Éireann — 2026-02-18
============================================================

Christopher O'Sullivan (FF), Cork South-West

I thank the Senators for their contributions. I get that the crux of the amendment is to seek a report within three months but, as the amendment is presented here today, that is simply impossible because what the amendment does is delete the lines within the legislation that enable me to move the provisions of the Bill, yet at the same time the Senators are asking us to produce a report within three months. It does not make any sense. It cannot happen. The amendment proposes to delete the lines that would allow me to move the provisions of a Bill but within the same amendment it is suggested that a report be produced within three months. It is contradictory and I am surprised that it was not ruled out of order for that reason because there is a complete contradiction within the amendment.
Speaking of reports, Dáil Éireann Standing Order 204 provides that within:
Twelve months following the enactment of a Bill, save in the case of the Finance Bill and the Appropriation Bill, the member of the Government or Minister of State who is officially responsible for implementation of the Act shall provide a report which shall review the functioning of the Act and which shall be laid in the Parliamentary Library.
Irrespective of this requirement, the proposed amendments to require various reviews after just three months of operation simply do not afford enough time as a basis for any meaningful review of the significant changes being introduced in the Bill. The changes apply to first-time tenancies created on or after 1 March 2026. In the student-specific accommodation, as was referenced by some of the Senators, it will be 1 March 2029 before existing stock can be reset to rents beyond the rent increase restriction. A much longer review period would be required to measure the impacts of these changes in the rental sector generally and in student-specific accommodation.
Considerable time has been spent on report writing and recommendation making to inform these policy measures. I believe there has sufficient analysis of the rental market over the past two years, in particular, and this Bill is the outcome of that process. I, my Department and the RTB will continue to keep the operation of the residential rental sector and the Residential Tenancies Act, as amended, under constant review with a view to making any necessary legal changes in a timely manner. The legislation is always under review. The legislation can be amended. As our approach to housing policy is flexible and often open to amendments and changes, this legislation will be kept under constant review with a report required within 12 months anyway.
I think the Senators will agree that this Government and the previous Governments have not delayed in making necessary, justifiable changes. Equally, the Government wants to provide certainty, clarity and stability for the rental sector and that is key. Any potential review after three months would take away any of that certainty or stability. These measures have been informed by the finding of the Housing Agency's review of RPZs, its potential policy option for rent controls and the agency's preferred recommendation to modify the existing operation of the current rent controls. Their view involved having extensive stakeholder engagement and a comprehensive examination of the current RPZ system that showed that the existing rules are restricting supply and need to change. The work and recommendations of the Housing Commission have also been taken into account. The approved policy measures aim to boost investment in the supply of homes available for rent and strengthen tenancy protections. Delivering on these policy measures is now a priority for the Government.
I will speak to some of the comments that have been made. Almost all Senators referenced availability and the lack of it, of rental accommodation in particular, and that is the exact tenet of this Bill, namely,to try to increase supply and the supply of apartments in particular. There is a chronic shortage of apartments to lease or rent and that is exactly what this Bill is trying to do. Whether we like it or not, we will require some element of the private sector for the delivery of homes. Some people do not like to hear that and will not accept that but that is a fact if we are to increase supply and delivery of apartments. So far, the reaction of industry to these measures has been good.
Also, many Senators referenced the anxiety or fear tenants have about being served with notices of termination. Again, what this legislation aims to do is extend the security of tenure; to extend the security of the tenancy to six years. That is unprecedented and it is essentially rolling. The Bill tries to strike that balance. For the past number of years when I was in here, the Housing Agency was referenced and the question of why we were not listening to the Housing Agency and the Housing Commission was asked a number of times but we have done so.
What they have asked us to do is strike a balance between ensuring that landlords remain in the market for rental accommodation and increasing the supply of apartments and securing the protection of tenants. That is what we have done, especially by expanding the RPZs nationally. That never happened before. I often use the example of my hometown of Clonakilty, which was not in an RPZ. It was not offered the protection that RPZs offer to tenants, and now it is. We also have to think of those people who are renting outside RPZs. There was reference to homelessness numbers. That is exactly what the Bill is trying to deal with. It is trying to increase supply in order that, once and for all, we can see the homelessness figures go in the opposite direction to the one in which they are going at present.
There was reference to the fact there is no evidence it would work. As already stated, the response of the industry so far has been quite positive. We expect to see an increase in the supply of apartments in particular. This legislation has been described as confusing, but I would describe the amendment as very confusing. As stated, it would delete the lines that allow me to move the provisions in the Bill but asks for a report at the same time. I do not see how that could work.
This legislation is aimed at supply. I have said it before that all of us have people coming to our clinics and offices who are desperately seeking rental accommodation. They all refer to the fact that they have been on daft.ie and other platforms that offer places to rent but that those places are not there. We are trying to fix this by increasing supply. The legislation will do that. We cannot accept the amendment for the reasons I have outlined.

---

Source: Houses of the Oireachtas. Licensed under CC BY 4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). The Official Report is revised after first publication; the fetch timestamp below identifies the version quoted.

Record URI: https://data.oireachtas.ie/akn/ie/debateRecord/seanad/2026-02-18/debate/main
Retrieved: 2026-08-14T04:54:39+00:00
Sitting date: 2026-02-18