I welcome the Minister, Deputy Browne, to the House. I also welcome students from Inver College in Carrickmacross, County Monaghan, who are guests of Deputy Matt Carthy. They are most welcome to Seanad Éireann. I not too sure if they get any homework, but there is no homework for the rest of the week when you visit Seanad Éireann.

The debate will follow the normal pattern. The Minister will speak for ten minutes, group spokespersons for eight minutes and all other Senators for five minutes.

The Bill will amend the current system of rent control significantly and provide new measures to protect tenants. It will come into effect for new tenancies created on or after 1 March 2026. At the heart of this Bill is the fact we want to provide certainty, clarity and stability for the rental sector and drive new supply of homes to rent.

The Bill's new national rent control, which is an unprecedented action, will come into effect on 1 March 2026 immediately following the expiry of rent pressure zones, RPZs. The Bill has been informed by the findings of the Housing Agency review of rent pressure zones, which clearly indicated that the RPZ rules we had in place, and were extending year on year but in a temporary fashion each time, were restricting supply. The potential policy options were presented to Government by the agency, along with the preferred recommendation to modify the existing operation of the current rent controls. There was no possibility of leaving things as they were, leaving us only with a choked rental market with no new homes on the horizon, despite significant shifts in our population and a huge number of people at home without the option to rent due to a lack of supply, as well as the issue of affordability.

This Bill is finely balanced because it has to be. It balances the rights and protection of tenants with the need for further private investment in the rental market, taking account of stakeholder engagement. It recognises the power imbalance between renters and their landlords and seeks to adjust it to make things as fair as possible and, crucially, to provide certainty for tenants. The fear our tenants and renters nationwide have of notice to quit, particularly on a no-fault basis, had to be tackled. I was determined to make an intervention, as Minister, to do this. That has not made the decisions in this Bill easy but I am determined to change how our rental market provides for people.

The Bill contains 31 sections. Sections 1, 3, 4 and 25 contain standard provisions dealing with the definitions, Short Title, commencement, collective citations and construction of the Bill.

Sections 2, 9 and 23 provide for the repeal of the RPZ provisions and make consequential, technical amendments.

Section 5 clarifies that notices and other documents may be served or given by electronic means under the principal Act.

Section 6 requires a landlord to serve a notice on a tenant, and copy the Residential Tenancies Board, RTB, explaining how the rent was set upon the commencement of a new tenancy.

Section 7 obliges a tenant to allow viewings of a dwelling where the landlord intends to sell.

Section 8 provides for a new national rent control in respect of new tenancies, that is, first-time tenancies between parties, created on or after 1 March 2026. Provision is made for an annual rent increase restriction, that is, in line with the consumer price index, or, if lower, 2% per annum pro rata , for both new and existing tenancies. However, a restriction linked to the CPI only will apply for new apartments and student-specific accommodation. From 1 March 2026, a new exemption from the annual rent increase restriction is provided for the first rent setting for a new tenancy in an existing rented dwelling after a tenant ends their tenancy, a tenant breach of the tenant obligations or where the accommodation is no longer suitable to the accommodation needs of the tenant household. In addition, in respect of a new tenancy, after six years, or three years in respect of student-specific accommodation, during which the rent increase restriction applied to that tenancy, a landlord may reset the rent to market rent.

Market rent is something that will be monitored closely and robustly by the RTB. Section 10 requires a landlord, when notifying their tenant of a new rent, to copy the RTB. Landlords must, in setting the rent, have regard to the newly published register by the board and the most recent comparable rents for similar dwellings with regard to floor area, dwelling type, number of bedrooms and bed spaces and the building energy rating, BER. Contravention by a landlord of the amended section 22(2) will be an offence and improper conduct and the RTB may prosecute or sanction. I want to be very clear about this and the seriousness with which any breaches by landlords will be dealt with.

Section 11 updates the definition of "market rent" by requiring, in setting a rent for a dwelling, regard to be given to the rent information contained in the published register.

Section 12 requires a smaller landlord - a landlord that is not a company and is a landlord under not more than three tenancies of dwellings - when terminating a new tenancy created on or after 1 March 2026, that is, a tenancy of minimum duration, TMD, during or after its six-year term, to make certain statutory declarations. A technical amendment allows engineers to certify, for the purposes of grounding a tenancy termination on substantial refurbishment or renovation, that vacant possession is required for at least three weeks for the health and safety of the tenant.

Section 13 provides that where a smaller landlord wishes to end a tenancy of minimum duration during its six-year term on the ground that the dwelling is needed for occupation by a family member, the termination can only be grounded in respect of the intended occupation by the landlord’s spouse, civil partner, child, adoptive child, stepchild, foster-child, parent, step-parent or parent-in-law. This is a tightening of the position in this respect. The smaller landlord must make a statutory declaration that he or she is a smaller landlord. This will be known. There will be no ambiguity about what status a landlord has, which is critical so people know their rights and responsibilities.

Where a smaller landlord wishes to terminate a TMD during its six-year term on the ground that the landlord intends to sell the dwelling, the landlord must make a statutory declaration that, on the date the notice of termination is served, he or she is a smaller landlord and the sales proceeds are required to avoid undue financial or other hardship. Where the smaller landlord wishes to terminate a TMD on ground five, substantial refurbishment or renovation, or ground six, change of use, at the end of a six-year TMD, a statutory declaration will also be required to be made by a smaller landlord that, on the date the notice of termination is served, he or she is a smaller landlord. A declaration and statement will also be required to be made by a smaller landlord that the notice period in the related notice of termination, served during the TMD, expires on a specified termination date that falls on or after the expiry of the six-year TMD.

Section 14 restricts the termination of certain tenancies by certain landlords. During a six-year tenancy of minimum duration, a smaller landlord will be permitted to terminate a tenancy in the following circumstances: the dwelling is needed for occupation by the landlord or a family member; to avoid undue financial or other hardship; the sales proceeds are required by the landlord to provide a principal private residence for the landlord or for the spouse or civil partner of the landlord; the landlord, or spouse-civil partner of the landlord, is legally required to discharge a debt, or make a payment, of more than 15% of the asking price - expected consideration - within nine months of the termination date, including a payment to the Revenue Commissioners, for example, to discharge a debt under the fair deal scheme or to pay a tax liability; or where a personal insolvency practitioner has been appointed to the landlord, or spouse-civil partner of the landlord, or at least one of those parties is bankrupt, or subject to proceedings for a declaration of bankruptcy or is an arranging debtor, or has made a composition or arrangement with creditors.

At the end of a six-year TMD, a smaller landlord may terminate a tenancy on any of the limited grounds for termination under the principal Act, subject to making any necessary statutory declaration and statement. A larger landlord will no longer be able to use the grounds for termination under paragraphs 3, 4, 5 or 6 of the table to section 34 of the principal Act but will continue to be able to gain vacant possession where the tenant voluntarily leaves, breaches their obligations or the dwelling is no longer suitable for the accommodation needs of the tenant household.

Section 15 requires a landlord, when terminating a non-Part 4 tenancy, to state the reason for its termination. Resetting to market rent is only allowed following a termination by a tenant, or by a landlord grounded on the breach of tenant obligations, or where the dwelling no longer suits the accommodation needs of the tenant household.

Technical amendments are also made. Sections 16 to 18, inclusive, update the requirements for the RTB’s residential tenancies register and requires the board to confirm for a tenant whether their landlord was a smaller landlord on the date of service of a notice of termination. The published register will be required to include: the rent; the tenancy registration number; the tenancy commencement date; the number of bed spaces; the local electoral area; the floor area; and, where applicable, the BER in addition to the number of bedrooms and the dwelling type of individual rented dwellings. This is a massive and important change in the rental landscape that will provide significantly more transparency, which we know is needed and has been called for.

Section 19 requires the following particulars in an application to register a tenancy with the RTB: the number of bed spaces; the floor area; and, where applicable, the BER.

Sections 20 to 22, inclusive, provide for data sharing between the RTB and the Minister for Social Protection, the Revenue Commissioners and the Sustainable Energy Authority of Ireland, SEAI.

Section 24 provides a contravention of section 22(2) of the principal Act relating to rent review requirement as improper conduct by a landlord that may be investigated and sanctioned by the RTB.

Part 3 provides for amendments to the Civil Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2022 to provide that a dwelling that is or was required to be registered under the residential tenancies Acts since 4 March 2022 is not eligible for the accommodation recognition payment, ARP. In addition only owners of dwellings may apply for the ARP.

Part 4 provides for technical amendments to maintain the pre-existing planning provisions for short-term letting following the repeal of the RPZ provisions.

This Bill will provide significantly stronger tenancy protections and is finely balanced between the interests of tenants and the need for further private investment in the rental market. I am acting because we are in a housing crisis. I am acting because this Bill is needed to provide certainty and clarity but also to boost the supply we need. I commend this Bill to the House.

I commend the Minister on his great efforts on this Bill and his wholehearted determination to resolve the housing crisis. I am struck by a couple of points. A statistic I heard yesterday was that over the past ten years, we have built 220,000 houses in this country. That is the equivalent of rebuilding Galway, Limerick and Cork. That is phenomenal output over a ten-year period. We accept that the right to a house is a basic and fundamental right. No party has ever been more earnest in the delivery of housing than Fianna Fáil. Our greatest critic and the party that has sought to weaponise and make the core principal issue of housing a political issue is Sinn Féin, the party that will always criticise regardless of which new initiative we bring in. We brought in croí conaithe, which is one of the most successful housing initiatives of our time, and the help to buy initiative, which was equally successful. Both of them were condemned by Sinn Féin yet both have been critical in delivering new housing. It is notable that despite Sinn Féin being severely critical of this very significant legislation in its sound bites, only one of its Members is here to listen to the Minister. I must correct myself; Senator Andrews has joined us. The reinforcements have arrived.

I commend the Minister on the work he is doing. This is hugely important because the current system, as he rightly said, is not working. We need a viable rental sector because of a lack of supply of suitable rental accommodation. We need reform in this sector. These reforms will provide greater certainty to renters and make the sector more attractive in order to increase the number of rental homes we need. The Minister has acted decisively since he came into office. Here again, he is acting decisively to shield tenants from higher market rents. This is why we are introducing for the first time in this State a national system of rent control, which is significant. The first time Fianna Fáil came to power in this country was in the 1930s and immediately we launched what was probably the most seismic housebuilding project across Europe at that time. We took people out of what were literally slums in Dublin city and in provincial towns right across the country and built a whole raft of housing estates right across Ireland. Many people of a certain vintage will still remember that, which is why they feel confident that Fianna Fáil will be the party that will turn the tide on this housing crisis.

This Bill will significantly restrict no-fault evictions. These changes will further enhance the current provision of tenancies of unlimited duration with the introduction of rolling tenancies of a minimum duration of six years. Tenants in Ireland will soon have the most robust set of protections they have ever had. Tenants entering into a tenancy with larger landlords from 1 March 2026 will no longer face no-fault evictions while tenants entering into a tenancy with smaller landlords, that is, landlords with three or fewer tenancies, will also benefit from substantially improved tenancy protections.

We also want to grow the supply of rental homes available, attract more landlords and retain existing landlords in the market. Providing the policy conditions for a sustained increase in supply is essential because it will help ease price pressures across the rental market and will widen the pool of available rental properties. These new measures provide for a simplified national rent control system that will apply to all tenancies. Landlords will be able to reset rents to market rate between tenancies, a change that is viewed as critical to retaining existing landlords and attracting new investment into this critical sector. Rent increases in new apartments will be solely linked to inflation to provide certainty and clarity and encourage investment. This measure will help us to significantly increase the number of rental properties available.

Some people may indeed benefit from the current system and naturally be resistant to change but for most people, the current system is simply not working for renters or potential new landlords. Doing nothing is simply not an option and that was made clear by the Housing Agency report. Changes need to be made to provide for a national rent control to replace RPZ, tenants need to be protected and the sector needs certainty. The changes the Government is proposing today will provide significantly stronger protections for tenants and are finally balanced between the interests of tenants and the need for future private investment in the private market.

I am more than happy to see this legislation before the House. It is very timely and offers great support for the rental market. We appreciate the challenges this market faces but it will also be critical in attracting new investment into this critical market. Our most vociferous critic is, of course, Sinn Féin, which tells us that it will build left, right and centre. However, if we are looking for a timely example of what Sinn Féin can build, we only have to look at 2023 in Northern Ireland, a place where it does have an input into power. It built 5,380 houses in 2023. It was a low point - the lowest point in housebuilding and house delivery in Northern Ireland in 60 years. I will leave it on that note. This is the party that is going to turn around housing when it could only build under 6,000 houses in 2023 at a time countries across Europe were in the midst of a building boom. At that time, all Sinn Féin could build was just under 6,000 houses.

I welcome Patricia Doherty, Nina Greene and Jodi Greene who are accompanied by Councillor Anna Grainger. They are all guests of Senator Brady.

I am going to address the Bill from the perspective of disabled citizens. I will make some brief points and leave some questions for the Minister in regard. I acknowledge the points that the Senator made about the construction of houses. I know that we have not reached the targets that were set out. As a father to four adult children aged from 25 down to 18, I do recognise and acknowledge that an effort is being made to address the building of social and affordable housing. However, it is also clearly and patently not enough and I imagine that is something that we all agree on.

There are 16,900 homeless people in Ireland and the homelessness phenomenon is intimately linked to the provisions of this Bill because in order to buy a one-bedroom house or apartment in Dublin, a person needs to be in the top 10% of earners in the EU. To buy a two-bedroom house or apartment, he or she needs to be in the top 1% of earners within the EU. This basically puts a home or an apartment beyond the reach of most Irish citizens. I have a 25-year-old, a 24-year-old man who is disabled, a 21-year-old-daughter and an 18-year-old son and they cannot reasonably expect to own a home within the next five to six years. All of the life decisions that they would like to make are out of their control. We know that shelter is a functional prerequisite for human self-actualisation. In Maslow's hierarchy of needs, shelter is right there among the top. If as a society and a political collective, we cannot provide shelter and homes for our citizens, it is by definition a dysfunctional society. We have to recognise that this is a crisis that requires an emergency response and emergency intervention. The homeless crisis fits the definition of what constitutes an emergency as set out by the Government in 2007 in a booklet that went to every home in the country.

We have an emergency, a crisis, but I do not see the assets of the State mobilised in the manner in which they should be in order to respond to this emergency as they were in the financial crisis, for example, when we had the intellectual honesty to recognise that our financial system had become so dysfunctional that it required the Irish citizens to bail out the banking debt, so the debt was socialised. If we could do that for financial institutions, surely we can do it for our citizens in regard to the provision of affordable and social housing.

I grew up in Finglas. In 1970, before Ireland joined the European Union, before we had a pot to produce something into and when Ireland was still the land of the candlestick and the pitchfork, we were building thousands and thousands of social and affordable housing units every year. I remember standing on Ballygall Avenue in Finglas with my sister in 1970 and seeing prefabricated housing units on the backs of lorries at the end of Ballygall Avenue going through Finglas village to Finglas south and Finglas west. My sister thought they were dolls’ houses. They were not perfect. Finglas south, Finglas west and other parts of Finglas have had social problems but at least people had a home. They had a roof over their heads. For human capital, you absolutely must have a home in order to thrive and to make a contribution to society. I come from a Finglas where hundreds of thousands of people like me have made a valuable and worthwhile contribution to Irish society. For people who do not have a roof over their heads or are in insecure rental accommodation or in a family hub or homelessness provision, that human capital is lost.

My father was a garda. He put five of us through university on a garda's wage. He was also able to buy a house in the community he policed. The average rents in Dublin of €2,178 per month in the city centre and €2,320 per month in the greater Dublin area put such rental accommodation beyond the reach of teachers, gardaí, nurses and most public servants. While I recognise this is an attempt to deal with some of the fundamental, underlying causes of rent insecurity and the fear of being evicted, it has echoes going back to the 19th century when we looked for fair rent, fixity of tenure and freedom to move. Imagine, here were are in the 21st century and over a period of maybe two decades, we have lost those principles. The concept of house ownership, fixity of tenure and fairness of rent has evaporated. Respectfully, I absolutely accept the Minister’s sincerity and his bona fides. I know the Government is trying to do something about this but it is not enough.

My questions about disability are as follows. Does this Bill protect disabled citizens? One in four homeless people is disabled. On average, disabled citizens are on the waiting list for social housing for in excess of ten years. Approximately 1,500 disabled citizens under the age of 65 are inappropriately placed in nursing homes in Ireland, some of them for as long as 20 years, because they cannot get accessible housing units. Does the Bill reinforce or correlate with the provisions in the national housing strategies for people with disabilities from 2011 to 2016 and from 2016 to 2021 and the newly published national strategy for housing for disabled citizens up to 2027? Are disabled citizens protected or enhanced in any way? Has the Bill been referenced to the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities? Is it commensurate with the legal requirements the State has in relation to participation in society and inclusion in communities for disabled people? I have had a cursory look at the Bill and it does not. That is a missed opportunity and a failure here.

I commend the Government’s attempts to deal with this but we need to do more. We have to declare this an emergency and mobilise the assets of the State in the manner that we did for the financial crisis.

I thank the Minister for his detailed explanation of the Bill. What the Government is doing in this Bill is striking a balance between improving security of tenure for tenants and encouraging more private investment into the rental market. I will look at some of the facts about this Bill. I know there is a lot of concern out there, particularly among smaller landlords and accidental landlords right across Ireland, about the effects this might have on the control they have over their rental property and on their property rights. For people in existing tenancies, rents will not rise because existing tenancies are unaffected. The new rules apply to new tenancies after 1 March only. For students, the new controls are tailored for the fact that their tenancies generally change every year. The rent increase restriction will apply to all student-specific accommodation, SSA, during the first three years of operation of the new national tenancy control. It is not proposed to allow student accommodation landlords to reset rents upon the commencement of each student licence. Student accommodation landlords can reset rents only to market value after three years and after every three-year period that follows while it continues to operate as SSA.

For new tenancies from 1 March 2026, all landlords will be able to set rent at market rates if the previous rent was below the market level and the previous tenant left voluntarily or breached their tenant obligations. Thereafter, rent increases will be capped at the rate of inflation according to the CPI or 2%, whichever is lower. For tenancies existing on or before 28 March 2026, rent increases will be capped at a rate of inflation according to the CPI or 2%, whichever is lower.

On the protection of tenants, new tenancies created from 1 March 2026 will be subject to tenancies of minimum duration. These will be rolling six-year tenancies, offering tenants greater stability. That was a major concern for a lot of tenant representative bodies. During the six-year period, landlords will only be able to end tenancies in specific situations such as the tenant not meeting their obligation or the property no longer suiting the tenant’s needs.

The rules apply somewhat differently in the case of smaller landlords, and rightly so. Smaller landlords, with three or fewer tenancies, are generally in the business accidentally or for different reasons. Landlords with three or fewer tenancies will be able to terminate tenancies at any time in the following cases: for financial hardship requiring sale of the property, as the Minister outlined, or if the landlord or a close family member, as defined by the Minister, needs to live in the property. A smaller landlord can also terminate the contract at the end of each six-year term. Smaller landlords may end a tenancy using existing legal grounds including selling the property, occupation by the landlord or a family member, major renovations or changing the use of the property. However, larger landlords, with four tenancies or more, will not be allowed to end a tenancy for sale, renovation, occupation or change of use. They may still end a tenancy for tenants not meeting their obligations or if the property is no longer suitable for the tenant’s needs. That addresses a lot of the concerns that many landlords had about this Bill.

The measures being proposed in this Bill are fair and provide absolute clarity and long-term stability for both landlords and tenants. I commend it to the House.

I am going to take some points from the opening statement and ask some questions. I am not going to waste my time trying to deflect from what we are actually here to discuss. When the Government side has to spend its time attacking Sinn Féin rather than explaining how this Bill is going to affect renters, it is saying all we need to say. The irony is striking. The Government side has plenty to say about Sinn Féin and nothing to say about the Bill. Sinn Féin has detailed alternatives that the Government has ignored. I do not need to deflect because I want to discuss the Bill.

Plainly and simply, this new rent hike Bill is a financial attack on renters. The Minister talks about security of tenure. What good is it if the rents are going to be too high in the first place? There is nothing good that this is going to do for rent or renters in this country. Most tenancies, if the Minister is aware, only last three and a half years. This is the information that we know. We see cases of eviction coming in and out of our offices day after day at the moment. The Minister said this Bill was "finely balanced", but balanced where? It is absolutely top heavy. It is only looking after landlords and vulture funds. What about the regular renters? They cannot find a place to rent. The Minister said it was going to address how they "rent due to a lack of supply, as well as the issue of affordability." How in the name of the Lord is this going to sort out affordability when all it is going to do is bring up the price of rent? I actually think we are living on totally different planets here. This is going to raise rents for people in Laois. This is going to raise rents by €3,100 per year. What are these people supposed to do? They are coming into my clinics every single week and they are saying to me that they cannot afford the rent, and that is if they can even find a place to rent. What is the Bill going to do for them? There is nothing good that we can say here beyond it is okay, there will be a reset to market rent and it will not happen again for six years. For a rent who may only be paying €900 because they are in an historical rent agreement, does the Minister think any landlord is going to say they will not reset to market rent now that the Minister has just given them a free pass through legislation to put it right up to the market rate? It is absolutely throwing renters under the bus.

Government Senators might listen to the real people on the ground rather than try to come in and slate Sinn Féin. Opposition party after Opposition party has told them where the problems are. They are in government. They are responsible for this. They are responsible for people sleeping on the streets and people in homeless hubs. How can we say that Fianna Fáil is doing everything it can to fix this homelessness crisis when every single month we see housing and homelessness figures increase? We have women and children who are in homeless hubs and cannot get out of them. This Bill is going to rents more. It is having an absolute laugh. It is another dizzying piece of legislation that will do nothing to fix a broken housing system.

At the very heart of this legislation is the reset to market rent. As things stand, the current rule for setting rents is when someone moves out and another tenant moves in, the new rent is based on inflation or 2%, whichever is lower. The Bill will mean that from the beginning of the March, when a tenant moves out and another moves in, the landlord in most cases just resets the rent to the market rate at the start of that tenancy. I am just saying this loud and clear so that the Minister understands what he is doing to the rental market and families who are already suffering. They cannot buy a house. There is not enough social and affordable housing. Deputy Eoin Ó Broin has clearly stated the clear alternatives here, but the Government refuses to listen. It can back bite and back bite at Sinn Féin but it refuses to listen to the clear plans that we put forward.

According to the Residential Tenancies Board, the average tenancy is three and half years. However, we are not listening to that part. We do not need to listen to the Residential Tenancies Board when we are in government. We just make our rules. A quarter of all tenancies registered annually are new first-time tenancies. What is going to happen to them? Market reset. If someone is a landlord or vulture fund, they can do what they want to me if I am a renter. We can conclude that, within a matter of months, up to 60,000 tenancies could be affected each year. Within four to six years, the majority of private renters will be captured by this reset to market rent.

There are 507 households in Laois in receipt of the housing assistance payment, HAP. These are private rental properties, meaning that 37% of the social housing list in Laois is at the mercy of private landlords. We know that slow delivery of social and affordable housing has forced low-income households into being heavily reliant on the private rental market. If any those tenancies receive an eviction notice - more and more are, now that the landlords are seeing the great thing the Government is doing for them on 1 March - because no-fault eviction rules still allow small landlords to sell under certain circumstances, what then? The Simon Communities in Ireland have warned us that high and unaffordable rents are a direct driver of homelessness, yet when we are in government, we do not need to listen to the Simon Communities, and we do not need to worry about homeless figures. We can stand in here and clap one another on the back. There is nothing for the Government to clap itself on the back here.

In this House and the Dáil, legislation is being rushed through without proper time for consideration. We have a real problem with this one here. This is how bad legislation and mistakes are made. Why are we having to deal with this Bill at all? The answer is quite simple. Fianna Fáil, Fine Gael and the Healy-Rae and Lowry Independents are on the side of big landlords, vulture funds and giant profit-making developers. There is no balance there. It is top heavy. Those profiteering from the housing crisis will be the only ones who will benefit here again, as they did with the tax breaks. It will be ordinary workers and families struggling to keep a roof over their heads who will be caught up with their earnings each month and will have to cough up more in line with silky pockets of pure greed. What is this Government doing standing with it here today? Is legislation going to freeze rents? No. We should be seeing budgets each year that will increase spending to accelerate building social and affordable homes. That is what this country needs. It does not need more money for landlords and developers.

Sinn Féin will continue to oppose this rent hike Bill in the Seanad and the Dáil. I am absolutely disgusted. This is a really sad day - doomsday - coming on 1 March. The Minister should be hanging his head in shame.

Once again, this Government is introducing a Bill that, quite frankly, it is trying to gaslight us with. The very idea that somehow introducing market rent is a good idea and will decrease rents or will in some way increase supply is absurd and insulting. The framing of the Bill from the Government is that it is about protecting renters in some way, yet every renter I have heard from is terrified about the consequences of this and what effect it is going to have on their lives in the coming months. The Government has framed it as technical reform to give security to rental tenancies, but its real-world impact will be anything but technical. It will be a path to homelessness and despair for many. It will be devastating. This Bill will push people from what is already a brutal rental market into one that appeases developers and big landlords. It is a market defined by extortionate rents, scarcity and fear. When housing policy creates fear, it is the most vulnerable people in our society who pay the price.

I wish to focus on those vulnerable groups today. This is the vulnerability of so many people that I do not believe that the Minister or the rest of the Government has considered when it comes to this legislation. I am particularly focusing on victims and survivors of domestic violence. For a woman experiencing violence at home, housing is not a policy issue. It is the difference between safety and danger. It is the difference between leaving and staying. For some women, it can quite literally be the difference between life and death. However, when the Government allows rents to spiral beyond reach, brings in market rents and weakens protections that may allow women to leave by exposing them to these rents, we create a cruel calculation for women experiencing abuse. Do they leave the homes they share with their abusers and face unaffordable rents at market rent prices? Do they face homelessness or do they go into the trauma of emergency accommodation? Do they stay and endure violence because at least there are roofs over their heads and the heads of their children?

That is not a choice anyone should be forced to make and yet the Minister's Bill makes that choice more likely for many women. With this Bill, landlords will be able to increase rents between tenancies and women experiencing domestic violence will have to leave at any given time and enter a new market.

The consequences of this Bill are staggering and cruel. It is deeply flawed and it shows how much the Minister has surrendered to the lobbying of landlords. The only thing the Minister has done is to allow already-record rents to spiral out of control. He will be aware that almost no rental properties fall within the HAP limit any more. The latest report indicates that no properties within HAP limits are available. Therefore, I appeal to the Minister to increase the ceiling for HAP since no properties currently are available that fall within it. It is absurd to be offering this to people as a solution to the crisis.

We know from Women's Aid, Safe Ireland and other front-line domestic violence services that housing insecurity is one of the biggest barriers to women leaving abusive relationships. They are staying in situations of danger because they have nowhere else to live. Perpetrators routinely use housing instability as a tool to coercively control the person they are abusing. Yet, instead of strengthening security of tenure and ring-fencing protections for those fleeing violence, this Bill exposes them to market rents that are simply beyond their reach. This is, therefore, not a gender neutral policy. It will have specific gendered consequences because housing insecurity deeply affects women who are living through domestic violence and those who have no independent income or low incomes. Finding somewhere to move to is already extremely difficult, but with the new market rents, the Bill will make it impossible.

Unfortunately, the consequences do not stop there. Carers, who are overwhelmingly women already balancing unpaid labour with insecure incomes and living in private rented accommodation will be forced to pay higher rents with fewer protections when their tenancies end or might be evicted because no-fault evictions have been allowed by the Government. Under the scheme, evictions are still possible for so-called small landlords. They can boot tenants out and raise rents to market prices. The Minister might say that will only be possible in a limited set of circumstances. However, rules can be bent and broken. We know that from looking at the number of landlords who have not registered tenancies with the RTB.

As Senator Clonan has already outlined at length, disabled people who live in private rented accommodation and rely on stability and proximity to services will face disruption and displacement. The average private rental tenancy is three and a half years, so the six-year window will not apply to anyone, including the most vulnerable in our society. In the coming months, we will see more disabled people being priced out of any accessible accommodation that is available.

I will make a light segue to note disabled people have not even been consulted on the national development plan. We talk about all the new buildings and rental accommodation we will be building. Have disability clauses been put in for procurement to address inclusion and disability? What is the minimum number of properties we are planning to build with disability metrics? That is a separate issue and I will bring it up at another stage.

Students, who move into new rental properties year after year - because that is the nature of student life - and who have no ability to absorb sudden rent hikes will be pushed further into precarity. Older people who believed they had some security in later life will find that security quietly eroded. The Simon Community report released in recent weeks challenges the assumption that older people are homeowners. Many older people now rely on the private market and the level of homelessness in this age group is growing. This is a vulnerable age group, made up of people who may have fixed incomes or are living on limited pensions. The new market rent system the Minister is introducing will only push levels of homelessness higher for older people.

Women experiencing violence will be hit incredibly hard. The State has committed repeatedly to the idea of a zero tolerance approach to domestic and gender-based violence. It is utterly meaningless, though, when we have legislation like this. I cannot see that this has taken any gendered lens by looking at the impact on domestic violence and women fleeing violence. Our commitment to zero tolerance cannot stop at criminal law or awareness campaigns. It has to be reflected in housing policy because a State that says people need to leave if they are unsafe, while simultaneously pricing women out of the rental market, is not offering protection. It is once again offering empty platitudes.

At the very least, this Bill should explicitly protect victims and survivors from displacement into unaffordable rental markets. It should strengthen and not weaken security of tenure. It should recognise that housing is a cornerstone of safety, not a commodity to be gambled with, but the Bill does none of these things. This legislation increases the risk for those living with violence. It is a terrifying prospect for any woman who is right now considering whether she will stay or leave. This approach will not work. The Minister needs to listen to those working in the front-line services for domestic, sexual and gender-based violence to ensure housing policy becomes part of the solution and not another barrier to safety because no woman should ever be forced to choose between violence and homelessness.

I thank the Minister for being here. It is important, as a Senator who is a member of a Government party, to make a few things clear and straight. I am disappointed that Senator McCormack has left the building because I would like to give her a few answers.

This Bill will give renters far more legal protection than they have ever had in the history of the State, while increasing the supply of homes available on the market. It is about striking a balance but it is also a necessary intervention. We are in a housing crisis, an emergency and we have to make decisions that will increase the much needed supply of homes for rent to people. This is the biggest improvement in rental protections in the history of the State. From now on, when tenants sign a lease, they can have far more confidence that they will have their home for at least six years. The days of being evicted on spurious grounds are over. We are putting real protections in place for tenants. Ultimately, the best way to stop rents increasing year after year is to boost supply and that is what the Bill will do by encouraging more investment in the market. These are difficult decisions to take but we are in a housing crisis. We could sit back and avoid making any decisions but that would mean the situation would only get worse and we are not prepared for that.

There are a lot of slogans but no real solutions are coming forward. It means there will be new rules and new tenancies from 1 March that offer greater protection. What we did not hear from Opposition speakers was about the 240,000 existing tenancies that will not be affected until the tenants decide to leave their accommodation. Tenants will be hit by enormous rent increases, according to what I heard for the past eight minutes. That is not the case. No one will be able to increase the rent beyond the average rent for the area. At most, people will end up paying the average rent. Rents are high in Ireland. No one denies that at all. There is no doubt about it, but that is why we are only allowing landlords to bring rents up to the average rent. That is not 10% above the market or 20% on top of it. It is just to the average rent. I completely understand that even the average will be difficult for a lot of people but these changes will ultimately allow us to start bringing rents down by boosting supply.

The Bill does three things and it is important to keep saying them over and over again. It strengthens tenants' rights far beyond where they have ever been. It will increase supply of places to rent and ultimately, it will help to bring rents down by boosting supply. I heard Senators talk about incentivising landlords. I have heard it repeatedly now. It is the complete opposite. This Bill introduces far stricter limits on when people can be evicted than existed before. On top of that, we have increased the funding for the RTB by 70% to ensure rules are properly policed. I do not know how the Opposition can stand and watch the supply of apartments dry up. Every expert we have talked to has said rent resets are necessary if investors are to start coming back into apartment building and the best way to stop runaway rents is to boost supply. I commend this legislation to the Seanad and I will be supporting the Minister through all Stages in the Seanad.

I welcome the Minister to the House. I will speak openly and try not to get lost in the nuts and bolts of the legislation because this issue reaches into every corner of our community. It is not just legislation or lines in a document. It is about our neighbours, families and young people trying to find and keep a place they can truly call home. For years, we have watched the rental system strain under the pressure. We have seen families forced to move and move again. We have seen young adults pushed further and further away from the place they grew up. We have also seen landlords, many of them small, local, ordinary people, feel uncertain about their future in the market. No one has been winning in this situation.

That is why the Residential Tenancies (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill matters. It does not pretend there is a simple fix. Instead, it takes on the challenge honestly. It strengthens protections for tenants because people deserve stability, dignity and fairness. It gives renters clearer rights and stronger safeguards so they can build their lives without fear of sudden upheaval. That stability is not a luxury. It is the foundation of a healthy community.

There is another part that is just as important. The Bill also recognises that we cannot protect tenants if we do not have enough homes. We all know what happens when supply dries up. Rent rises, competition intensifies and people get squeezed out. This Bill gives clarity and confidence to those who are providing houses. It avoids pushing landlords away and creating a system so rigid that it scares off the very people who build and maintain the homes we rely on.

We need to be honest about something else. For far too long, housing policy has been shaped by fear of upsetting one group or another or of taking a decision that might not please everyone. Leadership is not about pleasing everyone. It is about doing what is right, even when it is difficult. This Bill reflects that. It recognises that tenants deserve stronger protections but it also recognises that landlords deserve certainty and fairness too. It acknowledges that if we want a functional rental market, we cannot afford to lose either side. This is the balance we need. We do not need a system that pits tenants against landlords but one that brings both sides into a fair and workable partnership. The truth is that we simply need each other. Tenants need homes, landlords need certainty and our community needs both.

Some will say the Bill should go further in one direction or the other but the truth is that political and ideological extremes have held us back for far too long. We have heard some of that in here today. We all hear the arguments that any regulation will drive landlords away or that any support for supply is somehow a concession to vested interests. These positions might make loud headlines but they do not build homes or solve problems. Real progress happens in the space between the two extremes. That is exactly where this Bill sits. It is measured and constructive and recognises that housing is both a social need and an economic system. If we ignore either side, we fail the people we are here to serve.

I will say clearly that I welcome the approach the Minister, Deputy Browne, has taken not only on this legislation but in other difficult decisions he and his colleagues have been willing to make. At a time when others call for easy answers and dramatic gestures, they have chosen the harder path, the middle ground, the practical ground and the ground on which real solutions are actually delivered. That commitment to balance deserves recognition because it is exactly what our housing system needs right now.

Before we move on, I welcome Roisin McLoughlin from St Brigid's College, Loughrea, and Anne Whelan, who are guests of Senator Anne Rabbitte today. Tá fáilte rompu.

This Bill is another attack on private renters, who have been completely neglected and taken advantage of by Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael. If this Bill is passed, thousands of people will be forced to pay higher rents at a time when families and workers are already struggling with the cost of living. We do need measures that will give tenants long-term stability but not in the way proposed by this Bill, which will result in higher rents for those starting new leases. Likewise, we do need to incentivise private investment in our housing system, but not in this way, which will only benefit unaffordable, elite-level apartments that are not available to the vast majority of prospective tenants.

This Bill is deeply flawed from top to bottom and is not a step towards resolving the housing crisis. According to the RTB, this Bill will result in an annual rent increase of over €3,600 per year for new tenants in Dublin city. The average monthly rent in Dublin is already €2,200 and this will allow landlords to increase this amount by hundreds of euro every month. How are people going to afford that? Private renting is already not an option for a huge number of people in this city. They have simply been priced out. If you are from the inner city, what hope do you have of renting a home in the area where you and your family have lived all your life? Renting your own apartment in the inner city would cost thousands. The average rent for a one-bedroom apartment at the glass bottle site is just over €2,500 a month. That is absolutely insane. At an apartment block 500 yd from here, the rent charged for a one-bedroom unit is €2,700 a month. That is incredible. You would be lucky to even find a room in a shared apartment for less than €1,000 per month. Even then, you are likely to be living in squalor.

A huge number of people in this city cannot afford to rent privately but are not able to access social housing. They make too much for social housing but not enough to get on the housing list. They are left in limbo. Even for those who qualify for social housing, the list is years or even decades long. We do not have nearly enough public homes to meet the need. For many people, their only option to get by is to live in their family home, potentially for decades, or to try to find a HAP property. It is worth remembering that the HAP scheme was supposed to be a stopgap measure to patch up some of the holes in our social housing systems. Nowadays, this scheme is completely dysfunctional. It is nearly non-existent, with only a handful of properties available in Dublin for hundreds, if not thousands, of applicants. The reality is that successive Governments’ failure to invest in our permanent public housing stock has resulted in a broken social housing system that cannot meet demand, resulting in more pressure on the private rental market, which in turn is inflated by State subsidies like HAP. It really is hard to see any hope for people to afford to live in this city under this Government unless they are very wealthy.

Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael have rammed through several Bills relating to the rental market in the past number of years, and every single one has resulted in ever higher rents and a worsening housing situation. This Bill is clearly another favour to investors, developers and big landlords. Everyone else is yet again being left to deal with the consequences. Renters have got absolutely nothing from this. No progress has been made since the crisis began. We desperately need legislation to freeze rents across this country, to provide relief to tenants, to get social housing built and to make existing housing available and affordable to renters and buyers. This Bill is a absolutely disgraceful legislation. I hope the Government parties eventually wake up to the disastrous failure of their developer-led approach to housing in this State. The Government says the market will solve the housing crisis. That is not the market's job but the Government's. The Government has failed. It has failed renters and communities right across the State. It is just not acceptable. We need something to give renters some relief and some certainty. I know the Minister will say this Bill does give certainty but it does not. It increases rents and provides no certainty into the future.

I welcome the opportunity to contribute to this very important debate. First and foremost, we have to recognise the important contribution the private rental sector makes in providing accommodation right across the country, whether to people who have moved out of their house for the first time or people who are moving for study or work purposes. One of the most common experiences people have when they start out at third level college is moving out of their parents' home and into a rented house. It is important that any legislative framework we introduce in this Chamber recognises that landlords have an important role to play in providing accommodation up and down the country. It is also important that any measure that comes in does not reduce the supply of private rented houses. First and foremost in this legislation is the need to find that balance between the competing rights of tenants and landlords.

We must have a functioning private rental market to ensure that people who want to avail of accommodation are in a position to do so. I understand that the Department is conducting a review into the current HAP rates. It is very important that the review is fast-tracked, made available and published so that people who find themselves on the housing lists but who are not yet able to access a social house have the ability to go into the private rental market with adequate resources backed by the State. It is also very important that the HAP rates reflect the real-world lived experiences of people who are looking for private rented accommodation.

I believe balanced legislation has been achieved. First, it recognises the fact that we need private landlords. Second, tenants require security of tenure. Tenants need to know that once they actually get a house for themselves that it can be their home for a continuous period and there is an end to the day-to-day cycle where tenants wonder whether they will be issued with a notice of quit this week, next week or in a few months' time. We must acknowledge that this legislation contains a provision for a six-year continuous security of tenure for tenants who have availed of private rental accommodation. That was not the case previously. An important reform is how this legislation strikes a balance by allowing the resetting of market rents and caps the increase in average rents year-to-year at 2%. There are constitutional concerns about private property rights, ownership and obligations if that balance did not exist. In fairness to the Ministers, they have produced balanced legislation.

For a few moments, I will address some of the contributions made by the Opposition, who want to completely eliminate the private rental sector by withdrawing all supports. They have produced a model whereby schemes that help people to purchase their first house, like the help-to-buy and first home schemes, will be phased out and eliminated in the alternative budget put forward for housing by Sinn Féin. We must be serious about this issue because at the moment, across the country about 100 houses are being built every single day. Is that enough? No, but clear and tangible progress is being made. I believe that the reforms that have been brought forward, and will soon see, will increase that figure yet again. At the moment about 600 first-time buyers every week up and down the country are purchasing their first home. Many of them do so using the supports available through the help-to-buy scheme, which gives people back the taxes that they have paid over the past four years. This is a scheme that the Opposition proposes to withdraw. They would remove the safety blanket and existing security that supports people to purchase their first homes. I cannot understand how anybody would say no to a scheme that supports people to get a deposit together.

I will conclude by saying that it is important that we have robust debates on this legislation but, in this instance, the balance has been struck and the legislation should go forward.

Is the Government codding itself? What planet does this Government live on if it thinks it is solving this housing crisis? Context is everything. At present, over 17,000 people are homeless in this country, of whom 5,500 are children. There has been a 100% increase in rents since 2016 and the average rent in Cork is now €2,200. To buy a house in this country, it costs over eight times the annual salary. Earlier a Senator said that people of a certain vintage will remember when the housing supply was better. I suggest that those people of a certain vintage, or a certain "mintage", also need to look to the future and realise that a whole generation has been locked out of security. We cannot have a whole generation of pensioners renting in the future in Ireland. This is a poverty ticking time bomb. If renting is so good then why do only eight Members of the Oireachtas rent? I am one of them. To be clear, these laws primarily are being made by people who own their own properties.

I try to make measured contributions in this House. I am being measured and fair today but we need to see real solutions here. Last night, the Government rejected sensible amendments to this legislation. We will bring forward more on Committee Stage in the Seanad but I am hearing a lot of blame from the Government. They are blaming the Opposition and immigration for the problems in housing but we need to work together to solve this.

We, in the Labour Party, have called for a rent freeze while we increase property supply. We know that allowing rents to be reset to market value will ensure that rents will increase for many tenants. We also know that the six-year tenancy reset will not work because the average duration of a tenancy lasts three and a half years so we will see market resets before that. We also have no clarity when it comes to student accommodation. I have been told that they might be reset in three or four years so we need clarity on how that will affect the rental market. This has caused a lot of confusion for renters and landlords. I believe that this legislation very much favours big landlords, big developers and vulture funds more than the average small landlord in this country.

This morning, the Simon Communities in Ireland published a new report which said that for the first time ever since they have collected data, there are currently no properties available to rent, using the standard housing assistance payment, across the 16 areas surveyed. That fact is really worrying. We all need to work together to improve the situation for renters and anyone who wants to buy property in this country. It is really concerning that we are losing key workers in health and education now in Ireland due to the housing crisis. We are losing health workers, teachers and gardaí because wages are not keeping pace with the cost of living and the price of renting in this country. We have too many people who are trapped in renting.

There has been a phenomenal transfer of wealth in Ireland, in particular over the last decade, between those who rent and those to whom renters pay rent and this is a generational issue. For the first time in many generations, we will have younger people who will be less well off than their parents. I meet people in the Cork South-Central constituency in clinics who tell me that they have three generations living in the one house. There are the grandparents, their children who are trying to start a family and then their children. Some of them live in the one bedroom. These are the kinds of current living situations in this country, which is wealthy and the rent crisis and rent rules contribute towards this situation. I do not believe that this legislation will fix the problem and believe it will make things worse.

Before I bring in Senator O’Loughlin I welcome the KITE group from Gorey. They are guests of Senator Cathal Byrne and I am sure that he will look after them for lunch afterwards. A nice three-course dinner is on the way for them. Senator O'Loughlin has five minutes.

As somebody who rented for 16 years I know only too well the vulnerability of being a tenant. There is the lack of security of tenure and not knowing month to month if a place will remain home.

It is important to point out that this is the first time that any Government has introduced a national system of rent control, which I welcome. One of the earlier speakers said that this legislation will not fix the housing crisis.

It will not. It was never meant to fix the housing crisis because a lot of measures need to work together in tandem to support the different types of occupiers we have in houses. We have people who are in social housing and affordable housing. There are people who can buy privately and those who rent while they are waiting to try to buy a home. Of course, there are those who want to rent for different reasons as well. It is really important that those who are renting have greater certainty. It is also important that we have balance and that we incentivise investment in the sector to increase supply. The biggest answer in all of this is to be able to increase the supply of houses and apartments. No matter what any of us say, the current system is simply not serving those who need a viable and working rental sector because of a lack of supply of suitable rental accommodation. There is no doubt that we need reform. This Bill contains the reforms we need to give that greater certainty to renters and to make the sector more attractive to those who can invest in the types of homes we need.

It is good to see the Government acting decisively to shield tenants from higher market rents. Significantly, the Bill will also restrict no-fault evictions. Changes will further enhance the current provision of tenancies of unlimited duration with the introduction of rolling tenancies and the minimum duration of six years. That is a really important measure and something we should all support.

Based on this legislation, a tenant entering into a tenancy from 1 March 2026 will no longer face no-fault evictions. That is for the larger landlords. For the smaller landlords the tenants will also benefit from substantially improved tenancy protections. These along with other measures provide for a simplified national rent control. That will apply to all tenancies nationally. We know that landlords will be able to reset rents to market value between tenancies. That is viewed as critical to retaining existing landlords and to attracting new investment. We cannot have a system where landlords are exiting the market and we are not able to get new ones.

Under this legislation, rent increases in new apartments will be solely linked to inflation in order to provide certainty and clarity and to encourage investment. That will really help to significantly increase the number of rental properties available.

Some people may benefit from the current system and naturally be resistant to change. While always have to think about the common good, the current system is simply not working for renters or for potential landlords. Doing nothing is simply not an option. That was made very clear by the Housing Agency report. These changes need to be made now to provide for national rent controls to replace RPZs. Tenants need to be protected and the sector needs certainty. That is why this legislation is being proposed today and that is why I support it.

I welcome the Bill. I welcome the Minister of State, Deputy Cummins, who has replaced the Minister, Deputy Browne. I compliment both of them along with their officials on taking the steps they did. It is very hard to bring in any legislation which will only have long-term benefits. Some people want to see the gold-plated results the next day and if they do not, they will not make a decision at all. I compliment the Minister and the Minister of State on the courage of their convictions. There are hard decisions to be made and they are making them.

One can only welcome a Bill that will increase the supply of rental homes, restrict no-fault evictions and enhance tenancy protections. It is replacing the RPZs, which were not working. We are big enough to admit they were not working and we are now bringing in national rent control. It is easy for people who champion themselves as the representatives of tenants to put out soundbites that we are pro-landlord, pro-major developer and pro-vulture fund. Without landlords, we would not have tenants. We have to have landlords. We are not lining anybody's pockets. We are enhancing the potential for their homes to be rented to potential tenants at the market rate and no more, with longer terms of fixed tenure.

I will not go into any more detail on the Bill. We will have plenty of time next week. Contrary to what was said earlier, we have allocated plenty of time next week to go through this Bill with a fine-tooth comb and deal with amendments and whatever. I cannot accept the rhetoric, the soundbites and the Facebook ticks of populism. This is a move in the right direction and will be accepted by the people who will see through the rhetoric of the hurlers on the ditch who portray themselves as representatives of tenants but think we can have tenants without having landlords. It is not possible.

I thank the Senators for their contributions on the Bill today. We can all agree that a well-functioning rental market is key to individuals and families in all our areas and constituencies. The rental sector has grown considerably over the last few decades and we need to grow it further in light of the continuing increases in the population and the demand for housing. Through this Bill, the Government is establishing a more robust legal and policy framework to support increased investment in the rental sector to increase supply and choice for renters, which over time, coupled with our significant investment in the likes of cost rental, will reduce rents. The Bill aims to enhance the legal framework to support domestic and international investment in new rental properties, in particular, the supply of new apartments.

The private rental sector review, published in July 2024, highlighted the need to improve certain aspects of rent regulation as did the Housing Commission, which is often cited by Members of the Opposition. As a result, the Housing Agency was requested to undertake a review of RPZs and its Review of Rent Pressure Zones and Consideration of Potential Policy Options for Rent Controls in the Private Rented Sector was published by the agency in June 2025. A key focus of the review was to examine the impact of RPZs on the rental market and to make recommendations on whether rent controls should be removed, modified or amended. The Housing Agency report recommended that the existing system of rent controls be modified with the introduction of a national system of rent controls allowing rental prices to adjust with inflation within a tenancy, and for rent resetting between tenancies to reflect market rents, with enhanced tenancy security measures to protect against economic evictions. That is exactly what we are doing with this Bill.

The review involved extensive engagement with a wide variety of stakeholders, including investors, representatives of landlord and tenant advocacy groups, academics and the Residential Tenancies Board. The review involved an extensive analysis of domestic and international research on rent regulation. From the review, it is clear that areas covered by RPZs had significantly lower rent increases than those outside of RPZ areas. As the House knows, we have already moved to introduce an extension of those RPZs and the Bill provides for national rent control.

It is important to point out that the review suggested that there was a negative supply impact linked to the 2021 tightening of the RPZ rent controls including the imposition of a real price cut when inflation exceeds 2%, which correlated with an increase in the supply of homes for sale and a decline of rental registrations.

The review also noted international research on rent control, which suggests that controlled rents deliver a considerable price reduction to sitting tenants. However, they might not significantly improve affordability. Tenants might have faced higher rents upon tenancy commencement in new rental accommodation with the rent increase restriction priced into the initial rent set. Over time, reduced supply is likely to see higher rents impact on tenant mobility. There is also the risk that landlords will not make the necessary investment in maintenance and refurbishment. The review also identified that Ireland's current RPZ system appears to be severe for two reasons. First, it set the rent cap at 2% or rate of inflation, whichever was lower, meaning that rent increases could not keep pace with inflation and, second, it did not allow for resetting of rents to market rent after a tenancy ended. The linking of rent regulation to a property rather than a tenancy, as is the case with RPZs, is viewed as a more stringent system of rent control. The review highlighted that RPZ reform could incentivise investment and would likely have a positive effect on supply. It also noted other factors such as interest rates and measures to support viability that the Government was actively considering during the period of the review and that have subsequently been introduced, such as the VAT cut for apartments announced in budget 2026. This is why, at a meeting on 10 June 2025 the Government approved new policy measures to provide for the enhancement of rent controls and tenancy protections from 1 March this year.

The stronger tenancy protections will provide further improvements in security of tenure, contrary to what Members have suggested in their contributions. The rental sector provides homes for a significant proportion of the population. We need to give people more certainty, stability and confidence that their tenancy will not be ended.

Under the new reforms, all landlords will continue to have the option to sell with their tenants in situ at any time, with specific provisions for smaller landlords, that is, those with three or fewer tenancies, that allow more flexibility in recognition of family realities that may be faced by the owners of those rental properties. To stimulate investment and keep existing landlords in the market, the resetting of rents to market value for new tenancies created after 1 March this year will be allowed as part of the reform of rent controls. By allowing rent resetting for new tenancies from 1 March, existing and new landlords, who are vital for the sector, will be able to ensure that their investment remains viable. Importantly, however, rent resetting cannot apply where the most recent tenancy ended through a no-fault eviction.

A point that has not received much coverage is the fact that rent resetting also allows for landlords to charge lower rents for long-term tenants in the knowledge that they will be able to reset to market rent at the conclusion of a tenancy, which was not the case under the previous legislation where such a practice was effectively penalised. Rent resetting will be also be allowed at the end of each six-year period of a long-standing tenancy that commenced on or after 1 March 2026.

Given the critical need to attract investment in new apartment development for the rental market, rent increases for apartments, subject to both a commencement notice and a certificate of compliance on completion under building control regulations on or after 10 June 2025, will be linked to the rate of inflation as per CPI without the application of the 2% cap. These reforms aim to encourage investment in, and the development of, new housing supply, including new rental apartments. We are seeing some evidence of increased confidence in investment in the sector since the announcement of these measures last June.

In line with the commitment in the programme for Government and a recommendation of the Housing Commission, the Bill provides for a rent price register as set out by the Minister in his introduction. The RTB’s published register will include the rent amount and other relevant tenancy information such as the floor area, number of bedrooms and bed spaces and BER of the dwelling. The aim is for rent information available through the published register to support landlords to set lawful rents and to help prospective tenants to assess the prevailing rents in their area.

The Government has committed to providing a stable and predictable rental sector to attract and retain the private investment needed to meet housing demand. The impact of the current rent control system on the supply of new homes for rent has informed the development of this Bill. Its provisions aim to attract more investment into the rental sector as soon as possible, which is vital, not in place of State investment as some have suggested, but in addition to it. We all know that more than €20 billion is required every year to ensure we can increase supply. This year, the State will provide up to €9 billion but it cannot do everything. We require private investment in both the rental sector and in the supply of homes going forward. If we cannot acknowledge that, we are burying our heads in the sand. Increasing the supply of private rental accommodation is crucial to meeting the housing needs of the public and improving rent affordability. Rent controls are a key protection while housing demand is greater than housing supply.

I wish to touch on some comments Senators have raised. One in particular referred to a rent freeze, which is often put out there as a soundbite. It sounds great in theory but we do not have to look too far away for an example. We can look to Berlin, where the government tried this. What happened was that within 12 months, there was a 50% reduction in rental supply and the supreme court ruled it unconstitutional. I did not make that up. They are the facts. Yet, it is touted as the panacea to the challenges we face. We need to be real with the public and be honest when we are making proposals. There is dishonesty in the argument that is put forward in that respect.

As a Government, we will continue to invest in the supply of homes. I mentioned €9 billion. Our housing plan will deliver 72,000 social homes and 90,000 starter homes supports over the course of the plan. We will continue to increase the investment in the supply of housing because we acknowledge that it is the defining issue of my generation and all generations in the time ahead.

I thank Senators for their contributions. I commend the Bill and look forward to being in the Chamber next week to debate it further.

I thank both the Minister and the Minister of State for coming before us today.

When is it proposed to sit again?

Is that agreed? Agreed.