By Tom Innes

Copyright jerseyeveningpost

A SENIOR politician’s attempt to bring about major changes to the Island’s proposed rental laws through a self-confessed “wrecking amendment” has been narrowly defeated in the States Assembly.

After around four-and-a-half hours of debate, Deputy Sir Philip Bailhache failed by three votes to win support for his amendments to Housing Minister Sam Mézec’s proposition to change the Residential Tenancy Law.

Many Members focused on the admission by Deputy Bailhache during the early stages of the debate that “wrecking” was an appropriate label for his amendment, and said he had brought it because he felt the minister’s proposals were “so deeply flawed”, not based on data and “based on a misapprehension that something is badly wrong” with the current law.

After the principles of Deputy Mézec’s proposition to change the law were approved as the final act of Tuesday’s proceedings, several Members pointed out that Deputy Bailhache’s amendment would effectively torpedo the minister’s move.

“This would stop the original proposition in its tracks, we should carry on debating the details and would be in a much better place if we did that,” said Chief Minister Lyndon Farnham.

Deputy Catherine Curtis criticised Deputy Bailhache’s move, saying: “It’s not in the spirit of the Chamber to vote for a proposition one day and then the next day debate an amendment that would effectively annul it – it doesn’t seem honest to me and doesn’t put States Members in a good light.”

Deputy Bailiff Robert Macrae, presiding, spoke to address concerns expressed by several Members, including Deputy Curtis and Constable Andy Jehan, about whether Deputy Bailhache’s amendment should have been accepted.

Mr Macrae said that four senior officials had considered the matter independently and then ruled in a meeting that an amendment would only be disallowed if it “wholly negated” a proposition.

Deputy Mézec said that while he appreciated Deputy Bailhache’s candour in admitting that he was attempting to take “a second bite at the cherry”, the amendment would leave “nothing meaningful” of the original proposition.

“We would be left with a framework that was completely inoperable,” he said. “It would be more helpful to throw the whole thing out rather than foist a Frankenstein Law on me.”

Summing up, Deputy Bailhache back-tracked on his earlier “wrecking” admission, saying his proposals were “substantial” and adding: “I should not have used the other word.”

“We mess with the market at our peril,” he said. “These are monumental changes [by Deputy Mézec], they are not balanced and they are tilted against landlord’s because of the minister’s ideological fixation that the law is tilted against tenants.”

The representative for St Clement said Members would be “playing with fire” if they did not accept his amendment.

Although the vote was taken in three parts, Deputy Bailhache was defeated by an identical margin of 24 votes to 21 on each heading.

The debate then moved onto further amendments, and is set to continue today.

The state of play

DURING the opening phase of the debate on Tuesday evening, lasting almost three-and-a-half hours, Deputy Mézec successfully gained the backing of the Assembly for the principles of his changes, ahead of subsequent debates on the details, including multiple amendments.

Deputy Mézec introduced his proposition by expressing incredulity that a pro-landlord lobbying group had described the measures as “rushed”, when in fact they had been in preparation for over five years.

Longer notice periods, limits on frequency of rent increases and a cap on how much landlords could increase bills are central parts of the legislation.

Some Members wanted to scupper Deputy Mézec’s proposition at the first opportunity, but others felt this would stifle debate.

Deputy Barbara Ward said the move would result in bringing in numerous “hoops and bureaucracy” for landlords wanting to regain control of their property after a tenancy, risking “long-term pain” for “short-sighted gain”.

But Deputy Jonathan Renouf said that not passing the principles would represent “a huge kick in the teeth” for those who had called for change, a sentiment echoed by Constable David Johnson, who said such a vote would be “a black mark for the Assembly and show a lack of respect for the electorate”.

In the final act of the Tuesday afternoon session, Members voted by 29-19 to support the principles as proposed by the Housing Minister before moving on to debate the amendments yesterday.

Six members of the Council of Ministers voted against Deputy Mézec yesterday: Deputies Ian Gorst (External Relations Minister), Mary Le Hegarat (Home Affairs Minister), Carolyn Labey (International Development Minister), Steve Luce (Environment Minister), Kirsten Morel (Economic Development Minister) and Tom Binet (Health Minister).