The Gazette 1981

INCORPORATED LAW SOCIETY OF IRELAND GAZETTE Vol. 75, No. 6 July/August 1981

Rent Control—What Now?

M UCH print has been spilt in the aftermath of the Supreme Court decision holding unconstitutional the two principal parts of the Rent Restrictions Act. A Bill, effectively restoring for a six month period, the previous system of rent control has been hustled through a new Dail and a curiously "lame-duck" Senate. It is disappointing that all that the Department of the Environment has been able to produce by way of a solution to the problem is this "stalling" legislation. It might have been expected that, once the High Court had, in April 1 9 80 pronounced that major parts of the legislation were unconstitutional, steps might have been taken to draft legislation which could cope with the situation, if and when the Supreme Court upheld the High Court's decision. It is unlikely that anything has happened in the intervening period which would have made the drafting of such replacement legislation any easier. Rent control clearly affected only a modest part of the private letting market. Since it applied principally to premises built or converted prior to 7th May 1941, the widest category of excluded premises comprised virtually all of "flatland" in our major urban areas. Market forces have been seen to operate in these areas for many years, so the results of freeing premises from rent control can clearly be seen. There have been calls for the extension of rent control or the provision of security of tenure to all residential accommodation. There are examples from other jurisdictions to show that such measures are not entirely beneficial. Ignoring the position in the U . K ., where rent control has become a political shuttlecock, examples are to be found in France and the United States where rent control has led to a decline of the housing stock, if not in quantity, certainly in quality. This, of course, has been a feature of our own rent restrictions legislation, where numbers of landlords either could not or would not

expend the appropriate sums on repair and maintenance because of the poor return.

Ifthere is to be rent control and security of tenure given to tenants, it must not be at the expense of the housing stock. Too much attention has been given in Ireland to the provision of new and expensive owner-occupied housing and too little to the preservation of existing habitable rented accommodation. One of the most unsatisfactory aspects of the excessive length of, operation of, and strict control imposed by our Rent Restrictions legislation was that in many cases the landlord and the tenant were in an equally unhappy economic plight; s ome landlords relying on static rents from controlled premises in periods of high inflation were little better than their tenants. The argument for allowing rents to reach market levels is a strong one; even stronger is the argument that, if some members of the community need financial aid to enable them to meet such rents, it is the business of the State to provide such subvention. A pensioner has as much right to state assistance in maintaining his rented home as first-time buyers have of substantial grants for new houses. If there is a need for a tribunal to monitor rents, its jurisdiction, supported hopefully by amending legislation, should enable it to ensure that the landlords are not tempted to indulge in extra-legal bullying activities to obtain possession of rented property, nor to avoid registering their property with such local authorities as have introduced byelaws governing rented accommo- dation. Equally, landlords deserve some protection against the minority of tenants who cause serious damage to the rented property or its contents. It is to be hoped that any new legislation will not become a mere political football and that the broader concern of the community in the maintenance of a substantial market in rented accommodation will take precedence over narrower sectional interests.D