Conor Sheehan
Limerick City · Labour Party · Ireland
“If a student does not have access to one of these devices or access to one at home, there is often no alternative and that could leave them excluded. Many families are forced to pay hundreds and thousands, particularly with the rising cost of microchips, for these devices.”
“I thank the Minister for her considered response. We need to get rid of voluntary contributions and move to generic school uniforms. This is something that has been done in the UK.”
“This digital divide is resulting in a severe and growing level of inequality where so many communities, students and families are unable to purchase the devices they desperately need for their children's education.”
“I raise the issue of the community access support team, CAST, in Limerick, which has prevented 133 detentions under section 12 of the Mental Health Act and reduced the number emergency department presentations. It has responded to over 1,000 incidents.”
“Do not worry. We need to have a debate this week before the House rises about the imminent report on Aughinish Alumina. There are up to 2,000 direct and indirect jobs at stake in Limerick. We cannot have a situation where the State is inadvertently complicit in the export of alumina to Russia. Where there is a will, there is a way.”
“It is absolutely reprehensible that planning permission has been granted for apartments on the site of the former mother and baby home at Bessborough. We have 19 mothers and 859 infants associated with Bessborough still missing. Now 140 apartments are going to be built on a mass grave. We need statements on this next week.”
The complete record
Every one of 808 lines we hold for Conor Sheehan, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 8 of 17.
“The pouch was literally put on the counter of the shop and offered to me. I want to make a number of points in relation to some potential loopholes that may appear. We know that single-use vapes have been banned in the UK. We know that the legislation there has had some success, but at the same time there have been issues with so-called fake reusable vapes. We are already beginning to see this here. Consider the Elf Bar vape that I have here. One can buy this Elf Bar vape right now in any given shop or petrol station with a little charging port and a part that comes off, like the lid comes off the body of it. That is, essentially, the same product as the pre-existing disposable vapes. There have been issues in the UK in this regard.”
“There was one stage when I went through four and five of those in any given week. I agree with what the Taoiseach said when he spoke about vaping being the "revenge of the tobacco industry". The fact is that the tobacco industry is so inventive it will find any way it can to get past whatever level of regulation comes in. We are seeing this right now with nicotine pouches. If vaping is the revenge of the tobacco industry then nicotine pouches are the revenge of the vaping industry. I have been shocked by this. I know, and I hope, that the Minister of State will be dealing with this soon with a separate piece of legislation. I was shocked when I went into a local shop near my house a couple of months ago and was offered a nicotine pouch. I was asked did I want to sample a nicotine pouch for nothing. I could not believe it.”
“It is very strange that the majority of us here seem to be from Carlow and Kilkenny. The Labour Party and I welcome the general thrust of what the Minister of State is trying to do with this Bill. I stand here as someone who has struggled an awful lot with nicotine addiction. It is something that personally I have found very hard to overcome for a number of years. I have been on again and off again. I have been smoking cigarettes and have been off cigarettes, I have been smoking cigarettes and I have been off cigarettes, and I have been vaping. I have found that of all of the different methods of nicotine consumption, vaping is the worst of them, and especially in relation to single-use vapes. Here in my pocket I have an old Elf Bar vape which I found in the drawer in my office.”
“For a number of weeks, it was not possible to log on to the X app without being confronted by extremely disturbing sexualised imagery. Grok has created thousands of these images with a significant number being child sexual abuse imagery. This is not an online phenomenon. Online abuse is a gateway to offline abuse and exploitation. X's European headquarters are less than a kilometre from this Chamber and the fact that company benefits from our favourable taxation arrangements for tech companies means the State has skin the game and could be inadvertently somehow complicit in this abusive, illegal action. It is clear from the creation of Grok that X cannot regulate itself. We need to ensure there is a Garda investigation into what has happened. Coimisiún na Meán must be given adequate powers and resources to regulate that.”
“While the intention of this measure might not be to grow the private rental market, many of these units will invariably end up rented out without proper planning and a safety framework with tenant protections. I would like that noted. Broadly, however, I have no issue with these measures.”
“We cannot afford to address our housing and infrastructure needs at the expense of public safety, environmental resilience or compliance with EU and national law. This brings me on to a brief point before I conclude about the upcoming exempted development guidelines for residential development. I have a slight concern there about the potential unintended consequences of the proposed changes around, essentially, substandard sheds being rented out on the private rental market without appropriate inspections and protections. I know that is not the intention but I am worried that this could become the unintended consequence without a proper regulatory framework to protect tenants and to protect the quality of our housing stock.”
“Anything we do must remain strictly consistent with Ireland's obligations under EU and national environmental law, including the habitats, birds, water framework and nature restoration directives. Flexibility is important but it must also not undermine our environmental obligations. We need to make sure that what we are doing here is sustainable and that it does not increase intensification, and that slurry storage is subject to strict citing and separation standards. I am glad that an SEA and appropriate assessment of the proposal for the amended exemptions was conducted because I do not, as other speakers have outlined, think it was appropriate to have tried to do this without having done that.”
“We have had issues whereby people have bastardised buildings in Limerick without facing anything really in the realm of consequences from the local authority. We really need to resource our planning departments around enforcement. Otherwise, we will end up with more poor quality housing, which is definitely not what we need. We need to conserve our architectural heritage because we have lost many shopfronts and features in our Georgian cores, particularly in Limerick, due to people having benefited from this and having not done what they were supposed to do with the building. Regarding the exemptions for animal housing and stand-alone slurry storage, I have a number of environmental concerns.”
“Gabhaim buíochas leis an Aire. In the spirit of Christmas, I too have no particular issue with what is being proposed here. Broadly speaking, I support anything, within reason, that helps somebody to turn a vacant commercial property into a permanent home. I also support measures that would make it easier for people to increase the provision of animal housing and exemptions for stand-alone slurry storage, within reason. I caution this by saying we have had a number of issues in Limerick in recent times in relation to Georgian buildings, the owners of which have benefited from the exempted development guidelines. In some cases, they have been fantastic. In other cases, they have been less than fantastic.”
“When will the standing committee established in the Department of justice to examine this issue conclude its work? When will a new model for the service be agreed and implemented?”
“I wish the Ceann Comhairle, all her staff and everyone across the House a very happy Christmas. There is a chronic shortage of pathologists to carry out post-mortem examinations in Ireland and pathologists are withdrawing from the post-mortem service as they are not contractually obliged to provide post-mortems. The Minister for justice will be aware of this due to an internal briefing paper. This Christmas in Limerick, unfortunately, we will have no pathology cover between 23 December and 29 December. Anybody who dies in that period where an autopsy is required will not be able to be buried until the autopsy is complete. This will cause unnecessary additional grief and upset for families. It could delay a funeral by up to ten or 12 days.”
“The Minister needs to give a commitment to the people of the mid-west that there will be a Cabinet decision to deliver a new hospital for Limerick, Tipperary and Clare.”
“I thank the Minister for his response. I am glad he acknowledged options A and B were happening anyway because we did not need the HIQA report for them. We need the Government to commit in the longer term, beyond the next five years, to option C because we need a new stand-alone hospital in the mid-west. The Minister referenced staff burnout, which I am very concerned about, as well as staff leaving. I am concerned that the opening of the new Bon Secours Hospital in Towlerton will cause more staff to leave UHL. In fact, we are already seeing it. The Minister represents the region at Cabinet and this is also about him and his legacy. The fact of the matter is, as he rightly pointed out, we were sold a pup with the Hanly review and reconfiguration. We were screwed in the mid-west and are all paying the price for that short-termism.”
“We know the enhanced flu vaccine outperforms the standard vaccine, particularly with older people, and this is madness, given the data we have from Australia. As a TD for Limerick and a Cabinet Minister, will Deputy O'Donovan ensure that the health memo at Cabinet next week commits to a new stand-alone hospital in the mid-west, so option C as well as A and B? Will he account for why the Government did not roll out the enhanced flu vaccine and will he commit to a public awareness campaign to make the flu vaccine universal?”
“The low uptake of the flu vaccine is frightening, and this is something Government has failed to address through an information and awareness campaign to urge people to get the vaccine. The vaccine should be free and it should be universal. We have been saying this for ten years. I cannot understand why we have not been listened to. This is a proven way to take pressure off emergency departments as thousands are going to be hospitalised this year due to flu. It is also incredibly concerning to hear reports that the enhanced flu vaccine was not obtained for cost reasons. As my colleague Deputy Sherlock said, this is appalling penny pinching and it will have serious costs for older people and for scheduled care in our hospitals.”
“At this stage the people of Limerick are living with a hospital in a permanent state of crisis. If we are to address the root cause of the problem in the mid-west, which is a lack of capacity and only one emergency department for the entire region, then next week the people of Limerick, Clare and Tipperary need the Minister to commit to a new model 3 hospital in the mid-west that will deliver a second emergency department. Squeezing more people into UHL simply will not work. Politics and politicians have failed the healthcare needs of the mid-west. As the crisis in our emergency department rages, we have a bad flu season this year. It is a flu season we knew was coming because of the data available since the summer from Australia.”
“Today I again raise the issue of overcrowding in our emergency departments. Last week, we saw 14 ambulances queued up for up to eight hours outside Wexford hospital. As a local representative for Limerick, this healthcare crisis is something I know the Minister is also familiar with. In our city of Limerick on 3 December, UHL management once again urged the public to avoid the emergency department as 350 people attended in one day. Last month the Minister for Health opened another 96-bed unit at UHL, which has done little to mitigate the overcrowding caused by decades of underinvestment. This week we saw again 103 people on trolleys on Tuesday. We need a vision for healthcare in the mid-west beyond the next five years, and not just more short termism.”
“They did what the Government asked them to do, which was to apply for the scheme and to get in early. This is cruel and is really creating division where there is not division.”
“I support the amendment from Deputy Ward. I too tabled an amendment about the arbitrary deadline of 29 March. I understand why the amendments were ruled out of order, because they place a charge on the Exchequer but the Minister needs to look at this again because the deadline is arbitrary. It is bad enough that the Government took a year to come up with what is simple legislation to lift the cap. Why did the Minister come up with the date of 29 March? Was it to coincide with the SCSI report? Surely the report would have looked at costings into 2023? This is about money, pure and simple. I ask the Minister to come back when he can bring in amendments in the Seanad and not to exclude dozens of families who desperately need that money because he is penalising people who applied early.”
“I want to go back to something Deputy Ó Broin said earlier. It goes to the point I am trying to make. I am dealing with a constituent at the moment who is in a semi-detached house. She has met the damage threshold but the house next door has not. If she can be included in the scheme and the house next door has been told it does not meet the damage threshold, by what mechanism under what is proposed tonight can they access the scheme?”
“Even the idea around the "certain circumstances", in particular, concerns me because we are still going to have many people who will remain excluded from this.”
“It is not at all clear to me what this amendment will do because this is something that I have dealt with in my constituency with one of my constituents whose property is a semi-detached house and the house next door does not meet the damage threshold. I do not even know how the Minister will realistically get builders to do this work. It is incredibly complex. It involves essentially splitting something that in essence cannot be properly split because what is in one block has to be in the adjoining block and the deterioration is going to spread from one to another. It seems with this amendment that the Minister is inching, if I can be generous, in the right direction but it goes nowhere near far enough.”
“That is why, even if the Minister is pressing on with this, he must take on board the amendment and come back to us with a comprehensive piece of work in the next couple of months. Let us look at this in detail and in sincerity. As others have said, an end-to-end scheme would save the State money in the long run. We are going to be back here again, God help us, at some stage, tweaking this again because we will find uptake is low and the gap in costs widening. Construction inflation is growing and everything is going up in cost. Whatever headway is made from lifting the cap, it will be lost again and we will be back here again.”
“Even the time it took to get Fingal onto the scheme - the bones of four years - shows it is crazy to continue along those lines. A constituent came to see me. Her house is affected by defective concrete. She lives in the heart of Limerick. She is a single mother in her late 40s. She is a significant part of the way through her mortgage. She realised her home was defective when she went to get the walls pumped as part of the SEAI grant, which exposed all the cracks. The issue now for this is woman is that she is €125,000 to €130,000 short. She has no way of coming up with that financing. She is dependent on one income and she has a mortgage to pay which is not insignificant. She is essentially stuck. We need industry accountability, retrospective payments and mandatory foundation testing.”
“To go back to a point others made earlier, this is being done to save the State money. That is why we have had this botched scheme, the revised scheme and now we have this Bill before us regarding the cap. We must also see legislative provision to hold to account those responsible for this. At the moment, every single one of us is paying for this because we all pay the concrete levy. Another important part of this amendment is extending the scheme to the rest of the country. Looking at the heat map, obviously there is a high concentration in Donegal, a concentration in Mayo and to a lesser degree in Limerick and Clare. The scale is completely under-reported. Many homeowners are extremely reluctant to come forward.”
“It disproportionately benefits people who have access to at least some financing and it disproportionately discriminates against the poorest people, the most vulnerable people, people who are in receipt of social welfare payments, people who are on low incomes and people who struggle day to day. It would be sensible for the Minister to come back in relation to amendment No. 5 and lay a report before the House of the Oireachtas on transitioning this scheme to an end-to-end scheme that provides 100% redress. There are issues that need to be addressed around mandatory foundation testing, eligibility criteria and retrospective payments. Some of my amendments were ruled out of order, in particular in relation to the arbitrary date of 29 March which makes absolutely no sense except from a cost saving point of view.”
“I support these amendments. They are sensible amendments and they lay out what is wrong with this scheme. Although this is legislation to lift the cap and the cap needs to be lifted, the fact is that lifting the cap alone, in combination with what the Minister is proposing here, is not enough. We know what works and we know what does not work. The end-to-end Fingal pyrite scheme has worked really well. It has been effective. It does not get talked about very much. Pyrite does not get talked about much any more here because when people access the scheme, the scheme is well managed by the Housing Agency, it is end-to-end and it does not place the responsibility on homeowners. What the Minister is proposing here, however, is exactly in line with what he is proposing in relation to defective apartments, and it will not and cannot work.”
“In principle, the Minister is effectively guillotining this legislation and he is effectively guillotining our ability to have a meaningful impact on it and go through the actual cause and effect of what the Government is proposing. The Minister really needs to rethink this.”
“I urge the Government to withdraw these amendments and come back in the new year with a stand-alone piece of legislation so we can actually tease these issues out properly. We really need to discuss this at committee level. We need to hear from relevant building control witnesses because this is too serious to get wrong. We have been here before regarding shoddy building standards and we are all paying the price for it. When we talk on the original premise of the Bill in relation to defective concrete, notwithstanding the huge emotional, psychological and physical effect it is having on the people affected, I am very conscious that it is all of us who are paying for those mistakes through that culture of non-compliance and through the levy on concrete.”
“While I understand why the Department is keen to take action on this, and I support the call for stronger building control, I cannot support this Bill this evening because I have not had sight of even a summary of any of the legal advice or any of the advice received from the Attorney General on this. While some of the measures are technical, there are more substantial changes to other sections of the Bill. It was a bad decision by Government to progress this in the manner it has. I do not have an issue in principle with the premise of stronger building regulation, but I have a huge issue with the rushed manner in which the Government is doing this. We know rushed legislation makes for bad legislation.”
“I do not have sufficient clarity from what I have seen so far that this regularisation process is not going to be open to abuse from a minority, even though that is not the intention or practically how it will function. I was a bit concerned when we had the briefing earlier on and I found out that local authorities have not been consulted yet on this because we know local authorities have huge issues when it comes to staffing and resources which impacts in some cases their ability to carry out this work. We have issues which stem originally from the 1990 Act which places the primary responsibility on the builders and designers, and we have a culture there of non-compliance. We have had very few convictions under this and we have widespread issues. We are going through it in detail at the moment in relation to the defective apartments.”
“We need to completely break the link between developers and the inspection process because the inspection process is not robust enough. This Bill was originally supposed to be about defective concrete, and that is what its primary function relates to. We have a motion to instruct tonight because we have a Bill that has literally been morphed into something entirely different. We should have had a revised explanatory memorandum for the entire Bill because these amendments are way outside the scope of the original Bill, which deals with defective concrete. We know we need to move on this, but this is not the correct way to go about it.”
“This is a fairly significant issue because we know where and how defective construction has got us into serious trouble in this country, both during the Celtic tiger and going way back as far as the seventies and the eighties. It is always the taxpayer who has to foot the bill for that. It is the taxpayer who will have to pay billions to remedy the apartment defects. We know the Minister is doing this because he essentially has to do it arising from the legal issues and the impending and existing court decisions. This should have been done as stand-alone legislation. That was the intention, as far as I had understood and as far as the Whips, certainly my party's Whip, had been informed. We are being asked tonight to sign off on something when we have not had detailed consideration of what has been proposed.”
“I have only been a Member of Dáil Éireann since December of last year. In the short time that I have been here, I have witnessed the Minister and his Department do things like this at the last minute, railroad them through without giving us, as Oireachtas Members, enough time to properly consider what the implications of these changes are. This is an entirely inappropriate way of doing what the Minister is trying to do. We had a briefing this afternoon. I am very grateful to the departmental officials for giving us that briefing at 3 p.m. because before 3 o'clock today, I was tearing my hair out on this. Tonight, Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael TDs will come in here, sit at their seats and push the button to vote for this, but they will not have a foggy notion what they are voting on.”
“This decline is not sudden; it is the cumulative result of years of neglect. In the time I have available to me, I want to talk about the fantastic work being done in my constituency by Film in Limerick, which is an initiative of Innovate Limerick that provides valuable local supports and acts as a point of information and contact for film in the region. We had a film lab that launched in Limerick last July, bringing 18 producers from Ireland, Canada and Scotland together. We really need to see a return of the regional uplift for film in Ireland.”
“The abrupt nature of this closure is yet another stark reminder of how Dublin is steadily losing its cultural heartbeat. It is a consequence of unchecked commercial pressure, a lack of meaningful Government intervention and ongoing silence when it comes to the urgent need for nightlife and cultural space reform. As the Labour Party has consistently highlighted, since 2000 more than 522 cultural and arts venues have closed nationwide. In Dublin today, we are left with only 23 late-night venues in operation.”
“By supporting this Bill, we are not simply adjusting a funding cap; we are reaffirming our commitment to Ireland's creative future, to our actors, musicians, screenwriters, designers, animators and cinematographers and to all those whose artistry enriches our lives. Let us ensure they have the funding, protections and respect they deserve. Let us keep building the conditions in which Irish creativity can thrive safely, fairly and proudly. I would like to draw the Minister of State's attention to another pressing matter. While going slightly off topic, I want to address the sudden and deeply concerning closure of The Complex in Smithfield, a cultural and artistic space that has served as a vital hub for creativity, community and expression in our capital city.”
“Section 481 offers a tax credit of 32% for qualifying productions, capped at €70 million with requirements for cultural value, employment standards and skills development. These are not abstract policy measures; they are the engine of an industry that now produces acclaimed works such as "Small Things Like These", "The Wonder", "The Apprentice", "Normal People" and "An Cailín Ciúin" among many others. The arts are not a luxury; they are a necessity. They shape who we are, how we see ourselves and how the world sees Ireland. They sustain jobs, drive regional development and help to build a society that values expression, diversity and creativity.”
“Let us remember the substance behind this Bill. Screen Ireland operates under the Department of culture and is tasked with supporting and encouraging the making of films, developing the industry and promoting Irish culture on screen. It participates in international collaborations, supports skills development across film, TV, animation and games and promotes inward investment. Under section 10 of the film board Act, Screen Ireland's total investment is capped. As of December 2023, €430 million of the €500 million limit had been reached. There were five previous increases to this cap, reflecting the sustained growth of the industry. Budget 2026 increased Screen Ireland's budget by €2.1 million, bringing it to almost €43 million, a 5% rise.”
“I want to highlight the vibrant ecosystem that surrounds filmmaking - the festivals, community cinemas and local arts organisations that create space for Irish talent to be celebrated. I make this speech today on behalf of my colleague, Deputy Robert O'Donoghue, who unfortunately cannot be here. He asked me to give his constituency of Dublin Fingal West a twist. It has remarkable film festivals that bring people together, showcase Irish and international work, support local creatives and foster the next generation of filmmakers. These events are part of the cultural fabric of our communities. They educate, inspire and connect us. Supporting the screen sector means supporting them too. Most recently in Dublin Fingal West, they had the beautiful film "Sunphlowers" set in Rush in conjunction with the local theatre, Millbank Theatre.”
“Above all, we must insist that our film and creative industries, which are built on imagination, innovation and collaboration, are places where workers are treated fairly, safely and with respect. Too often, we have heard stories of unfair work practices and of people, particularly younger people and women, being made to feel unsafe or exploited. If public money is supporting production, public values should underpin the conditions of that support. The Labour Party has long argued that access to section 481 relief should be conditional on offering secure, safe, high-quality employment with terms and conditions equivalent to those in other leading film nations. Workers' rights must be upheld not as an aspiration but as a requirement. I urge the Minister of State to take that commitment seriously.”
“Section 481, the backbone of our internationally competitive film industry, has served Ireland well. The industry is changing rapidly across the world, however, and we need to ensure our tax relief remains fully competitive, agile and strategically aligned with the future needs of the sector. We should ask at this stage whether similar models of support should be extended to musicians. Far too many artists and performers are struggling in an era dominated by global streaming platforms where revenue models have shifted dramatically. If a version of section 481 could help to support film, why should we not consider whether it could also help to sustain Ireland's extraordinary music talent? Films and music go hand in hand as most films have a soundtrack that can often do just as well if not better than the film itself.”
“It is not only film; we have become a powerhouse across television, documentary, animation and games. Irish directors, writers, actors and craftspeople consistently punch far above their weight for our small but mighty country - long may that continue. Most recently, "The Traitors" was a huge success. It even prompted a Labour Party WhatsApp group to keep everyone informed. If this Bill were to be delayed, the essential funding pipeline for upcoming productions would also be delayed. That would put unnecessary pressure on producers, on employment and on Ireland's international reputation as a reliable partner for production so we are very pleased to support the legislation. At the same time, it is important that we use this moment to reflect honestly on where our domestic screen landscape can and must improve.”
“They turned Ireland into a leading international filming destination attracting major productions from "Saving Private Ryan" to "Braveheart" while nurturing our own creative talent and storytelling traditions. Most recently, the Netflix series "Wednesday" was filmed in various locations around Ireland. We are proud that our Labour Party vision helped to reshape Irish film and remains something we are very proud of. For that reason I welcome this Bill, which raises the cap on the supports that may be provided by Screen Ireland. Increased investment is essential to ensure high-quality indigenous productions continue to thrive. We want to see more extraordinary films like "An Cailín Ciúin" and "Kneecap", works that captured global attention and showcased the artistic brilliance emerging from Ireland.”
“I congratulate the Minister of State on her uplift to higher office. I welcome this Bill. I am pleased to have the opportunity to speak on it and more broadly in support of the arts, one of the most powerful forces shaping our culture, society and reputation around the world. The success of the Irish film industry is something we in the Labour Party are very proud of. It was Michael D. Higgins, as Minister for Arts, Culture and the Gaeltacht, who established the Irish Film Board way back in 1993. He had the foresight and vision to put in place the building blocks of what has become a really remarkable Irish success story, with tax incentives, training initiatives and direct supports that laid the foundations for a thriving, world-renowned screen sector. These State supports were transformative.”
“It seems the Minister wants to modify not the original wording of the 2000 Act, to which, arguably, the enabling section 4(6) was intended to be confined, but to use secondary legislation to modify later wording inserted into the Act of 2025. It seems to be a bit of a stretch to argue that an uncommenced provision can be amended by legislation and then the legislation, as amended, can be overridden.”
“Section 81 provided for the continuation in force of local area plans made under the 2000 Act for their stated period. Sections 69 and 81 were both deleted and replaced by provisions in the 2025 Act, which largely consisted of technical amendments. The two substitute provisions both refer to the continuing effectiveness of things done before the repeal of Part 2 of the 2000 Act. I am trying to work this out in my own head. Perhaps it has occurred to the Minister that Part 2 should not be repealed all at once, and he wants to replace a reference to things done before the repeal of Part 2 with a reference to things done before the repeal of a particular section of this Part.”
“As far as I understand it, the position at the moment is that the 2000 Act is still partly in force and the 2024 Act is only partially commenced. My understanding of this is that section 4(6) of the 2024 Act allows the Minister, by regulation, to modify any provision of the Act if there is a difficulty with bringing it into operation. Such regulations cannot be made more than three years after the relevant provision has come into operation. The unspoken assumption is that problems can only be identified in the process of bedding down a new law. Sections 69 and 81 are both transitional provisions as far as I understand it. Section 69 states that if notice were given of the preparation of a development plan before Part 2 of the 2000 Act was repealed then that Part would continue to apply.”
“We need real protections for renters, protections that keep people in their homes. People deserve stable leases, predictable rents and clear, coherent procedures that can be easily understood and enforced. In relation to the RTB (amendment) Bill, I am concerned we will be back again in two, three or four years' time when rents continue to rise and whatever government is in power at the time comes under undue political pressure. While the intention here is good, I do not think this plan will deliver the radical reset in housing policy we need.”
“The plan recognises this because it states single adults account for around two thirds of households on social housing waiting lists, but there is no real, tangible detail on dealing with the issue. We need to increase the stock of one-bed housing units. That is an important first step but we also need a specific plan for dealing with single people in homelessness. On the rental market, the plan refers to stability but what is proposed in terms of the RTB (amendment) Bill is nothing short of a horlicks. It is unenforceable, confusing, incoherent and seeking to satiate two competing interests at the same time. Rents will, unfortunately, continue to rise and so will the rate of terminations. I am more concerned by the lack of an updated definition of "rent" or of a long-term coherent vision for renting in Ireland.”