Conor Sheehan

as opposed to a tenant who would come under the cartilage of the RTB Act.

So if you're a renter at the moment, particularly if you're a renter with a new tenancy, you have the six years security of tenure, but you won't have that

if you are renting out one of these modular units under the rent-a-room scheme.

And the reason for that is because basically, if you were to rent out a modular unit at the rear of your property to me and then sell your house, if I came under the cartilage of the RTB Act, then...

I would have to be left there and sold at your house, essentially.

Well, the argument I would make is that some people would talk about investing up to 80,000 and they can invest up to 80,000, but not every landlord is actually going to do that.

And we have seen examples over the years of substandard rental accommodation, modular type accommodation.

rental accommodation garages sheds etc we've all seen it on on daft and i think that this is going to open the back door to poor quality expensive units um of which the rent will not now be capped because they're going to raise the threshold let's have a word with barry ward about this that is the concern isn't it that you'll have tenants in the hen house what do you say

Because it's pretty much the same thing.

I'm not opposed to the rent-a-room scheme, Clare, nor am I opposed to more flexibility when it comes to exempted development.

And just in relation to that point,

The revised exempted development guidelines have been delayed a number of times, and we do need to go through these in great detail at the Housing Committee in relation to what's exactly being proposed.

My issue here is in relation to enforcement, because these units are going to be exempt from planning permission.

So it's going to be quite difficult to pinpoint accurately where they are.

And how we know that we have a balance in this country between the landlord and between the tenant.

We have a fairly weak system of tenant rights.

And how are you going to be able to enforce, number one, that these units are of a decent standard?

And number two, that the landlord is actually, as Barry said, is the intention that the landlord would live in the house.

I think this is absolutely rife for exploitation in my view.

But if it's attached to the house, it is part of the house.