Rory Hearne
Dublin North-West · Social Democrats · Ireland
“I thank you, a Leas Cheann-Comhairle, for your work and support during the year and thank all the staff here. I wish my colleagues in government the best of luck over the summer and respite from our robust engagement. We look forward to going at it again in the autumn.”
“The Dublin public will be very upset when they realise their fire fighters and emergency response service are at risk of being split and downgraded.”
“I thank the Labour Party for bringing forward this motion. It is important to have a discussion about the context of education costs and back-to-school costs. Of course, the context is massive inequality in this country.”
“However, what it is actually doing is throwing families into even more stress on top of not being able to pay the basic bills. In my constituency to respond and support families struggling with back-to-school costs, the Finglas voluntary food and family support service, Feed Our Homeless, last year organised help for families with a pop-u…”
“A second tier of child benefit would lift 55,000 children out of poverty but the Government will not do it. It costs the same as what it has given in tax breaks to developers, investor funds and large fast-food giants. Childhoods pass quickly. No child should have their future limited by poverty.”
“The Government is ramming through planning legislation this week that will exempt sheds out the back without proper scrutiny. It is satisfied with handing our young people to vulture landlords. The Government is now offering a future of renting a shed out the back with no rights whatsoever.”
The complete record
Every one of 986 lines we hold for Rory Hearne, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 1 of 20.
“The Dublin public will be very upset when they realise their fire fighters and emergency response service are at risk of being split and downgraded. Two systems are going to be introduced which will fragment the system and undermine the existing incident command structures and place elements of the Dublin Fire Brigade emergency response outside the current single operating system, which is a gold standard emergency response system. Will the Minister for housing meet the Dublin Fire Brigade in his local government capacity and also get Dublin City Council management to engage and ensure the current excellent Dublin emergency response service continues to exist?”
“I thank you, a Leas Cheann-Comhairle, for your work and support during the year and thank all the staff here. I wish my colleagues in government the best of luck over the summer and respite from our robust engagement. We look forward to going at it again in the autumn. I want to raise an issue related to Dublin Fire Brigade and the emergency response framework that exists. I have been very concerned by the ongoing threat to that service. I have met fire brigade staff. I ask the Tánaiste to engage with the Minister for housing and for the Government to engage on this issue. Dublin Fire Brigade staff and SIPTU have expressed their deep concern that this excellent service is now in the process of being downgraded and split across two services.”
“A second tier of child benefit would lift 55,000 children out of poverty but the Government will not do it. It costs the same as what it has given in tax breaks to developers, investor funds and large fast-food giants. Childhoods pass quickly. No child should have their future limited by poverty. Every child deserves a fair start in life and a chance to thrive. Child poverty is not inevitable. It is a policy choice. It results from decades of policy choices that have not prioritised child poverty. We need to end child poverty in this country and we can. Part of it is ensuring education is free and school costs are provided for. Ultimately, it is about ensuring families can cover the basics.”
“However, what it is actually doing is throwing families into even more stress on top of not being able to pay the basic bills. In my constituency to respond and support families struggling with back-to-school costs, the Finglas voluntary food and family support service, Feed Our Homeless, last year organised help for families with a pop-up shop for school uniforms and shoes. This year families are struggling so much they are reporting they are already dealing with being cut off from electricity and gas. Families and services are asking for support again. Families are finding it extremely challenging. One in five children in this country lives in a family below the poverty line after housing costs. Children and families cannot cover the basics.”
“I thank the Labour Party for bringing forward this motion. It is important to have a discussion about the context of education costs and back-to-school costs. Of course, the context is massive inequality in this country. The gap between the haves and the have nots is worsening year after year while we have 11 billionaires in this country who have a combined wealth equal to that of 3.5 million people or two thirds of the population. The top 10% in this country have 50% of all the wealth while half the population own just 10% of the wealth. We see the reality of that on a daily basis. In Ballymun, Finglas and across this country families are struggling to pay for the very basics and one of those is back-to-school costs, the cost of education. Education should be free. It is a human right.”
“The Government is ramming through planning legislation this week that will exempt sheds out the back without proper scrutiny. It is satisfied with handing our young people to vulture landlords. The Government is now offering a future of renting a shed out the back with no rights whatsoever. Threshold has requested that the legislation be paused. It is seriously concerned that the Government will create a new class of renters, insecure without proper regulations. Will the Government pause this legislation, not bring it forward, and give time for proper scrutiny, or is it afraid of real scrutiny and captured by lobbyists?”
“One way the State can support women leaving situations of domestic violence is enabling them to move with a social housing passport. It should be applied to the housing assistance payment and RAS. I assume - I hope - that that will be done as soon as possible because it is absolutely wrong that the State is leaving people in that situation. In particular, I hope the Minister of State intervenes in the case Deputy O'Reilly has brought up. In addition, as Deputy Devine said, this situation is unacceptable to us as a society, so we need to do everything we can. I thank the Deputies for the work done on the Bill. I support it and I hope the Government is genuine in terms of engaging with it.”
“People on HAP, as I am sure the Minister of State is well aware, are evicted and are at high risk in terms of housing poverty and housing insecurity. HAP is a precarious form of housing, and the idea that their housing needs are met is just completely flawed. Looking at domestic violence, Deputy O'Reilly set out a case which is really heartbreaking, and it is wrong that someone is left in that situation. We are seeing an epidemic of domestic violence by men, and the housing crisis is absolutely worsening it, with women not having the freedom to leave and being stuck in situations. That is absolutely wrong. It puts their lives in jeopardy and, ultimately, in some situations, is inevitably leading to them being murdered or losing their lives in their own homes because they cannot find a safe place. Refuges are full.”
“As I said, it is not a free-for-all but has very clear grounds set out around it. I want to talk a bit about the issue of the housing assistance payment and RAS because there is a real issue, as the Minister of State knows, with HAP in that people in receipt of it, once they get it, are taken off the housing waiting list and are asked if they want to go on a transfer list. Some people fill out that form; others do not or are not aware of it. We therefore have these 56,000 households that are not on the housing waiting list. I am really shocked that the new measure the Government has brought in for victims of domestic abuse and people fleeing domestic violence and domestic abuse does not apply to HAP or RAS. I am absolutely astounded by that. It is completely wrong.”
“In particular, Fine Gael is a party, it says, about employment, enterprise and enabling people and helping them lift themselves up. Surely the ability to move for employment would be a key thing that would enable people to do that. We all believe social housing, receipt of social housing and receipt of social welfare should not stop people advancing in terms of employment, education or social mobility. They should be able to go along with them in order that they facilitate and support them, but this is actually stopping that because there are inevitably people turning down employment and education because they would lose their time on social housing waiting lists. Creating a modern public housing system that supports people to develop in their lives and progress should include this measure.”
“We want to make social housing and public housing what it is in other countries, which is a tenure that people really want to live in and aspire to live in, but one that is not stigmatised, which, unfortunately, is what 40 years of Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael housing policy has done. It has undermined and stigmatised it. I have written a lot about this, about how it was stated many times that social housing estates were failed, that it was a failed tenure, that it just created ghettos. This was a whole shift away from social housing. It is fundamentally why we are in this crisis, but part of it is that kind of overly bureaucratic approach to the delivery of social housing. Social housing should be a tenure that enables people to live the lives they want to live.”
“I think of someone who falls ill, someone who acquires a severe injury and who wants to try to move back close to family, adults who have children and whose parents may be living elsewhere or have moved elsewhere and who want to try to get support from them because childcare is so expensive. There are many reasons we could see situations - and we know of them - in which people would be able to move and bring their time spent on a housing list with them. As I said, the Bill sets out very clearly that the Minister can and should put forward regulations that would stipulate what the grounds are. Of course, the councils could find ways in which it is not about even equivalence of time to a person living locally but is about being able to transfer the time and the need.”
“I think there is an acceptance that in previous Government commitments there has been an acceptance that there is a need for a social housing passport. It makes sense. What is clear when you read the Bill, as put forward, is that it is not a generalised free-for-all whereby people can go wherever they want. It very clearly sets out that it is on exceptional grounds and based on need. A number of them are outlined, such as domestic violence, situations of education, employment, medical treatment and compassionate grounds. We can think of many circumstances where there might be a situation. Ireland is a small country. It is not some massive place where people do not have connections. People have family connections across this country.”
“I commend Deputies Ó Broin, Ward and O'Reilly on bringing forward this Bill. I support it completely, and the Social Democrats will support it as well. We think it is very straightforward and sensible legislation that should be pursued and implemented as quickly as possible. It is disappointing that the Minister of State has tabled the timed amendment. I understand that he says that it is to engage with the Bill. I genuinely hope he means that and this is not just a delay tactic. I would have thought that the Government would have just allowed it to go forward to committee and we could engage with it and progress it. That is not to say this is not complex. It is complex, absolutely, and I acknowledge that, but there is clearly a need for it as well. We have heard cases put forward today.”
“We are concerned about the EU Presidency and the reduction in Garda resources as a result. Disadvantaged areas like Finglas and Ballymun should not be paying the price for that.”
“A key aspect the Lynch family asked for is pursuit training for gardaí. The GRA representative was on the radio saying they have no pursuit training. Gardaí are in the situation where they want to pursue and there is a law which says they should stop the use but they do not actually have the training to do it. That is a minimal, basic thing the Government could do now - roll out training of gardaí so they can pursue safely and not be followed up. We are seeing a ridiculous situation where gardaí are being arrested for pursuing, which is completely illogical. Gardaí need to be resourced properly. We want our communities to be safe. It is not fair or right that our most disadvantaged communities are most exposed to this lack of safety and the gardaí do not having the resources to do policing.”
“They are calling for real action to prevent any other family from having to go through what they went through. I also want to highlight that John Joe O'Connell, the vice president of the GRA, said on Radio One this week that its members are tasked to intervene and stop the illegal use of scramblers and e-scooters but they just do not have the training, resources or protection to do that. That is the Garda Representative Association saying they do not have the resources. They need to be given the resources and training.”
“This is particularly nerve-wracking when this person has their two young children with them. The issue is not confined to the roads and footpaths. Scramblers are used to transport and deal drugs in the local park, in the Tolka Valley Park, and cause fear and intimidation. Last week, I also attended a vigil to mark Grace Lynch's birthday in Finglas. I spoke to her parents, Martin and Siobhán, who are still grieving Grace. Martin told me that when they campaigned for Grace’s law, they did not expect that they would then have to campaign for its enforcement. It is to the Government’s shame and a failure of this State that parents grieving their daughter killed by a scrambler now have to campaign for the enforcement of this law. Today, Martin told me that nobody really understands the pain until it knocks on their door.”
“Go raibh míle maith agat. I appreciate having this time. The scourge of scramblers in Dublin North-West has not, unfortunately, let up. The number of scrambler and e-scooter-related accidents is on the rise again. A young garda was injured last week when stopping an e-scooter in Finglas, just a short distance from where poor Grace Lynch lost her life in January after being struck by a scrambler at a pedestrian crossing. Despite Grace’s law, scramblers are still scourging communities in my constituency such as Finglas and Ballymun and in other parts of the city. A resident of Finglas to whom I spoke earlier this week said that when they leave their house, it is completely normal to encounter multiple scramblers travelling at speed, often on one wheel, while weaving between traffic.”
“Of course they are saying it is great and it is working because they are getting all they want and what they are asking for. The Government is giving them everything. There is a real issue here, for me anyway. Housing is about delivering decent homes that people can live in that are affordable. These guys are not interested in that. What they want to deliver is what they can make the most money from. Unfortunately, the Minister of State is reducing the standards that people in my constituency are going to live in, because that is where apartments are being built. They are more expensive and with lower standards. That is what people will have to live in. It is not right.”
“We need to build affordable homes and not just roofs, because it is not just about shelter. I want to come back to the issue of profitability. There is an issue in relation to the profits being made. In some ways, the Government is being taken for a fool. I have great respect for Deputy Carrigy as Chair of the housing committee but, seriously, what else are they going to say? They are private developers. They are investor funds. Of course they are going to say that. Michael Stanley who appeared the committee had €8.5 million in remuneration last year, and we are pumping public money into these guys and just taking everything they say as fact. They absolutely have us over a barrel. We are completely and utterly dependent on them and there is no transparency around how much they are making.”
“The Government is just doing what they are asking for and it is deeply disappointing. One of the examples, which the Minister of State did not come back on, is the issue of windows. It is reducing the number of windows people can have. Is the Minister of State seriously standing over that? There will be fewer windows available to people as a result of these measures. Windows are fundamental in Ireland for two reasons. One, we have major problems with mould and damp. It happens even in new developments because of the wet climate we have. Two, with climate change, as Lorcan Sirr pointed out in The Irish Times and as we see today, we will have a problem with heat because our buildings are not designed to deal with it. I guarantee these buildings are not designed to deal with the major issues of heat that are ahead of us.”
“I will return to the Minister of State's comment on Vienna. There is a very different mix of floor sizes available in Vienna. There are larger units available for families, in particular. This legislation is reducing the number of units within developments that will be available for families of a size. Fundamentally, they will not even be affordable to families. What is happening as a result of this is a reduction in the availability of two-bedroom and three-bedroom apartments. It is shifting, not creating, sustainable communities within the developments and creating soulless places where people cannot live and cannot have families. That is a fundamental issue. The Government is being driven by the investors. They have the Government over a barrel in terms of being completely dependent on them.”
“It is essentially about incentivising and enabling institutional investors to get more profit. It will also add to land speculation and land prices. It will push that up and lead to further speculation and the use of planning to do that. It is not a measure that will provide decent homes for people. On that basis, I oppose it.”
“As the Minister of State said, if this builds one more apartment, that is great and he will be happy about that. That is what this is about. However, it is not an apartment that it is building, it is a unit. It is not a home. Regarding who is going to be living in these, they will not be able to afford them. I have also heard that it is about trying to get more social housing units in. It is creating lower quality and standards of social housing. Again, this is adding to stigma. It is not actually building. We can say that we built a unit, but we need to be building affordable homes for people. This will not achieve that. It will build units. It will add to the numbers that are being built. It will give a roof over someone's head but is it building an actual home on a permanent basis? It is not going to be achieving that.”
“It means reducing cost, increasing the number of units that we can get on a site and reducing the quality of what has been delivered in terms of space, balconies, windows, etc. Of course, the biggest critique of apartments that were built during the Celtic tiger - and people spoke about them - was that they were shoeboxes. After the Celtic tiger crash, we had the introduction of better guidelines that were about creating improved apartments that people would want to live in. However, what the Government is now doing is going back on that. We will back in the same situation, creating shoebox apartments that people do not want to live in long term and cannot live in long term. We are trying to support people to have families and go through different life stages. What these guidelines are going to do is make that more even difficult.”
“It is. There is a key concern that I outlined last week and we have outlined a number of times before. I wish to make a number of points on it. The first point is that this change is a result of intense lobbying by institutional investors and developers about this whole idea of viability. Viability is about profitability. Were the guidelines that existed prior to this good planning or bad planning? Were they guidelines that were about ensuring that people had liveable spaces and apartments were of decent design standard and liveable? Clearly, they were. The reason that the Government is making these changes is not to improve liveability of apartments. As the Minister of State said very clearly, it is actually about viability. What does viability mean?”
“I support this amendment and I add that there is a real issue in terms of us understanding what is getting planning permission, what is the nature of the tenure, and who is developing it. Particularly in the area of apartments, there is concern in my own constituency and in Dublin generally regarding the proliferation of the build-to-rent model, how many apartments are being developed and who is developing them. I have asked the Department through parliamentary questions a number of times whether we gather data on how many build-to-rent developments are being planned or developed and there is no information. That is really important. For good planning we need to understand what is being developed in different areas and whether there is an excessive number of build-to-rent complexes versus, for example, what is for sale.”
“I support this amendment. Given the nature of the way these changes have being put forward, it is important that there be a process and a clear setting out of an assessment as to the impact the changes will have, particularly in view of the need to have accountability in respect of decisions. That is very important. I support the amendment on that basis.”
“I move amendment No. 20: In page 13, to delete lines 30 to 35 and substitute the following: “(10) An appeals officer shall be a qualified and suitable person appointed by the Housing Agency to undertake appeals with an appropriate knowledge, in order to ensure quality and consistency of decisions made over time.”.”
“I move amendment No. 17: In page 13, to delete lines 12 to 16 and substitute the following: “(6) A social housing appeal shall be made to an independent appeals office located within the Housing Agency within 28 days of the notification by the housing authority to the household concerned of the making of a determination in respect of the application or reassessment for social housing support concerned under section 20.”.”
“Someone in their 50s or 60s may build a modular home in their back garden and have a family living in it. What happens when that person retires and decides they want to sell their home? The family would be evicted and have no protections whatsoever. This will lead to more homelessness and hidden exploitation. As Threshold highlighted, it will be students, elderly people and vulnerable groups who will be most exposed to this exploitation. On that basis, we will oppose the amendment.”
“This will create modern day tenements in back gardens. It will be completely unregulated. People will be hidden. We know this is already happening. You can see on daft.ie sheds in back gardens available for rent. There is one in Walkinstown for €1,100 per month. Such dwellings will be completely unmonitored. Of course an exemption in respect of standards will have to be provided when they are built, but who is ensuring that there is hot water and tenants have access to decent facilities? Who will ensure that people who are renting these are living in proper, suitable standards? It will be a recipe for disaster. As the Taoiseach said, it is about incentivising people to provide this rental accommodation. The Bill will create another layer of accidental so-called landlords who are not professional landlords.”
“We have discussed this. We in the Social Democrats have serious concerns about the change being introduced. We are concerned in particular about the lack of rental rights that will apply to those residing in back garden sheds or structures. Why will the Minister not apply the Residential Tenancies Act to these dwellings? Obviously, I do not agree they should be rented, but what the Minister is doing is even worse in terms of allowing them to be licensees. Threshold, the renters' charity that does excellent work and which the Minister has engaged with, has expressed severe concern about the failure to protect people who will live in sheds at the back of people's dwellings. It is another piece of legislation that is being rushed through and the consequences are not being seriously considered.”
“I raised all the issues earlier that I wanted to talk about but I just want to ask the Minister something again. I appeal to him at this late stage to change the 8 a.m. to 8 p.m. closure provision. I think it will lead to unintended, or intended, consequences that will be potentially severe this winter. I urge him to come up with some other form of wording, or just remove the provision. I just do not see why he does not remove it at this point. It is not necessary. I would ask him to do that on a humanitarian basis. Will the Minister also add an exception for victims of domestic violence and trafficking? I am just asking for those two concessions.”
“He could have added in those exceptions to ensure that there were humanitarian grounds on which our most vulnerable people who are coming into this country or who are in this country already could be provided with emergency accommodation. It is deeply disappointing. I really hope what these organisations have outlined does not come to pass. If it does, it is the Minister's decision and his responsibility to take for that.”
“It said the one-hour briefing between Department officials and the NGOs on 17 June did not constitute meaningful consultation. The Government is in breach of the Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission's policies and ethics in relation to public sector bodies and their equality and human rights obligations. Community Law & Mediation set out that the unavoidable conclusion is that vulnerable people, including children and those with disabilities, will be at direct risk of on-street homelessness. The Minister never answered the question as to what will happen to victims of trafficking and domestic violence. That he has not made an exception for those groups is disappointing and disgraceful.”
“There is deep frustration over what he described as "a clear disregard by the Government to the concerns aired by those working at the front line of this homelessness crisis." Clarity and joined-up thinking are what we need, he said. He said, "This Bill creates a new range of uncertainties about access to emergency accommodation and how vulnerable people will be treated." It is "regressive" and "will have profound effects on the most vulnerable people in our society". Free Legal Advice Centres, FLAC, similarly outlined some very serious concerns with it. It states that removing "the safety-net of emergency accommodation for communities already most at risk of homelessness" is, in turn, likely to "lead to a rise in the number of people and families rough-sleeping". FLAC also described the meeting the Minister had with it.”
“Focus Ireland stated: What the Government is calling a 'safety net' is really a return to the sort of cruel approach favoured in the Workhouse and the County Home, where people are only provided shelter for a few hours and given no security for the following night. Any Government in the last 40 years would have been ashamed to introduce legislation which is so poorly drafted, unclear and punitive. Those are not my words; they are the words of Focus Ireland. I do believe that it is nasty, cruel legislation. It is unnecessary. No justification for it has been given. The CEO of Depaul has said that Depaul is alarmed and dismayed at the process, which has been rushed through.”
“We are saying this to the most vulnerable people. What is going to happen? Is someone of colour going to present to a local authority, with an accent from a different country, and the local authority is going to ask them to prove they are habitually resident? Are we going to see racism rise and are we going to see discrimination cases? How are local authorities going to judge and what is the time they are going to give? Are they going to ask people to bring back the paperwork? When are they to come back with the paperwork? There are serious issues here. This will put on local authorities a more complicated system and make their provision of emergency accommodation more complex, which is inevitably going to lead to more destitution and homelessness.”
“He is actually going to make the homelessness crisis worse with these measures. Dublin Simon Community states that "the lack of stability this would create would significantly impact these individuals' ability to meaningfully engage with support across housing, health and social care services." It further states: Additionally, the proposed requirement for all members of a household to meet residency requirements could result in families being refused emergency accommodation. This is especially worrying as we may see more children facing the prospect of sleeping rough. Focus Ireland has outlined that the habitual residence condition will require people to present detailed paperwork, which they are unlikely to have on them if they are fleeing domestic violence, have just been evicted or are going through a mental health crisis.”
“There is an irony in including a reference to the best interests of the child when it is not the best interests of the child in terms of eligibility and access to emergency accommodation. The most vulnerable people in our society, to a certain extent, are being scapegoated. I do not understand why the Minister has rushed this through and why he did not give us and the organisations working on the front line time to go through it. Dublin Simon Community states that "inserting an 8 p.m. to 8 a.m. window for emergency accommodation placement into the legislation is particularly unworkable for person-led service providers like Dublin Simon." The Minister is introducing a measure that those who, right now, are providing emergency accommodation to thousands of people who are homeless say is making it unworkable.”
“He stated that the Bill "is the first change in homelessness legislation since 1988, but instead of using the opportunity to bring the homeless system up to date [for which I am sure Focus Ireland has had lots of suggestions], the Government is slipping through a range of measures which bring it back to the Victorian past." It is really shocking. With this 8 p.m to 8 a.m. provision, what happens to children? Are they going to be kicked out at eight in the morning? Are they only going to be let in at 8 p.m. in the winter? Has the Minister thought through what this actually means and is going to mean? This winter, on the streets of our towns, villages and cities, we will have families, including children, and probably migrant families who are here, turned away to sleep rough.”
“The Dublin Simon Community stated: "This bill has the potential to see more people turned away with nowhere left to go other than the streets." It says access to emergency accommodation "should always be led by need not entitlement." Of particular concern for it are the amendments which require individuals who do not meet the residency criteria to re-present nightly for emergency accommodation, inserting the 8 p.m. to 8 a.m. window for emergency accommodation placement. Mike Allen of Focus Ireland was very critical of that move.”
“I highlight in particular the lack of time given to debate this. It is being rushed through. We got the amendments this week and there has been a failure to genuinely engage with the homeless organisations. Maybe they will feel a response to their criticism in their funding - I hope not. The homeless organisations have been as critical of any Minister for housing introducing legislation as I have seen. The Simon Communities set out that there are very real risks associated with this legislation.”
“The circular existed. The Minister did not need to do this. It is also very surprising to me, as somebody who has worked in this area for a long time, to read statements from the Simon Communities, Focus Ireland and Depaul - the front-line homeless providers - outlining their concern and making very clear that the Minister is not listening to them and has not listened to them. He has not listened in the sense of acting upon what they have put forward. The other aspect of this, along with the dog whistle to anti-immigrant sentiment, is that it is about reducing homeless numbers. I believe that is what this is about. It is very disappointing. We know that rough sleepers are not captured or counted in monthly homeless figures. This feels to me, in my reading, like a cynical move to somehow reduce homeless numbers.”
“It is deeply disappointing that the Minister has rushed through this legislation. I have been working in the area of homelessness for over a decade as an academic and researcher, but also campaigning with people directly in homelessness and working with homeless organisations. The homeless providers have never once asked for this legislation. It was never put forward as a solution to homelessness. The question is why the Minister is doing it. I have not yet been given a rationale that justifies rushing this through. The only conclusion I can draw is that it is part of a trend in this Government of what I would describe as performative cruelty. Let us show that we are being hard on migrants and immigrants and make some minor changes so we can say we are clamping down on access to things like social housing and now emergency accommodation.”
“It showed me the great services it provides but it has a waiting list of 55 individuals. Eight are 66 years of age or over, 22 are aged between 46 and 65, and ten are aged between 18 and 30. Forty of these individuals are classified as high-risk, highlighting the urgent need for placements and increased resources to provide care for them, but St. Michael's House has had to pause the waiting list. We do not know how many more people need it. This is a failure. The position has to change now.”
“They have brought the issue to light. They are saying that they are not accepting it, and that is the difference between now and other times in the history of this country. Disabled people and their families are saying they will not accept this any more. We in the Social Democrats stand with them and say that we are not accepting it either. This is not okay. I will connect this issue to the issue of housing. Some 1,600 households with someone with an identified intellectual disability are on the waiting list, which is an 18% increase since 2023. These are people who you know about, but, of course, the Government has privatised social housing and has not delivered social housing sufficiently in its broadest context, with support services as well. In my constituency, I visited St. Michael's House on the Ballymun Road.”
“It is an absolute failure, and it is failure because the Government knew about this. Disabled people have been denied their basic rights. This is why I have brought forward a Bill to put the right to housing in the Constitution. We are very clear that disabled people do not have that right. It is important because a right to housing is not just about a roof over your head. It is about adequate and appropriate housing so you are supported for your needs. One of the most shameful aspects of this is that the Government has been aware of this problem and has let it grow. It is a failure of the HSE and the Department of housing, but ultimately it is a failure of the taoisigh and tánaistí who have failed to prioritise the issue. I highlight the Before We Die campaign for the work its representatives have done.”