Victor Boyhan (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I welcome all the representatives from the Home for Good Alliance. It is a very positive movement and I am very familiar with it. I do not need to be convinced because this is critically important. I thank the representatives for their papers and the documents they have submitted, which we have all had an opportunity to read. I want to share some of my observations and comments on this. I have only one question, which I will ask at the end.

All citizens should have a constitutional right to adequate, secure and affordable housing. We know that 80% of the participants in the Convention on the Constitution on this issue said as much and that the right should be enshrined in our Constitution. That is fact and it is worth every member of this committee taking time out to look at the recommendations and the findings. Some 80% of the people who sat on Convention on the Constitution came out strongly in favour of this referendum. Providing for the constitutional right to a home will be challenging. As people identified earlier, it will oblige the State to make reasonable provision to vindicate that right through its policies and its actions. That is reasonable and fair and would be a natural follow-on from if there were a successful outcome in such a referendum.

As has been alluded to, more than 80 countries around the world provide a right to housing in their constitutions. Home for Good identified and considered the issue of providing a constitutional right to housing. Having read some documentation, we acknowledge that this would not be an instant solution and would not provide homes for everyone. However, it lays down a marker and it is a good aspiration. The United Nations special rapporteur on the issue also spoke in favour of it.

We are in the middle of an unprecedented housing and homelessness crisis. That sentence has been rolled out often but it is true. In recent weeks, a number of people who were homeless died. I am not saying they died because they were homeless but they were homeless when they died. There are a number of questions around that and we need to ask them of ourselves.

Thousands of low and middle income families which would once have been able to secure local authority or social and affordable homes are now languishing on never-ending lists. As someone who spent many years in local government and who was involved with the housing sector generally, I know that we have thousands of people with no hope of a home. I am not talking about owning a home. I am not in the business of owning a home. I do not really care who builds a home, be it public, private, social or in a partnership. I am talking about having a place to call home in which people feel safe and secure.

Behind all the homelessness figures, there are lives and real people. For many years now, this committee has spent most of its time discussing housing and homelessness. Too many children have nowhere to sleep at night. A few years ago, the then Government stated that no person would be in a hotel within six months. That never happened. People are in emergency accommodation and bed and breakfast and other inappropriate accommodation. People slept under hedges last night. That is the reality and the crisis we have.

We can bring this crisis under control. We need to believe in ourselves as members of this committee, politicians and advocates for housing. We need to believe we can bring about and effect real change. It can be done. We have land banks of public and private land. I do not want to get hung up on public versus private because I believe the way forward lies in having synergy and co-operation between the private and public sectors to address this issue. We have the capacity to build homes. We have the vision and the land. We need collaboration and we need to change the direction of policy. The most important phrase I am hearing today is that housing is a "human right". It is a human right that people have a place to call home.

On the formulation of the wording, Ms Keatinge indicated there are two aspects to the recommendation, namely, the recognition of directly enforceable rights because that is important and the separate statement about the State's obligation to realise that right within available resources. The latter could be used as a bit of a get-out but that is the reality. How did the witnesses arrive at the formula of words they are recommending? Will they tease that out for me?

To be clear, I fundamentally support citizens having a constitutional right to adequate and reasonable housing. For far too long, we have talked about this crisis across all parties and none. We can now do something about it. I am highly impressed when people such as the witnesses, with their strong credentials in housing and advocacy, come to the table. I thank them for sticking with this issue, pursuing it and, more important, making it simple for people to grasp because that is the real key. I ask Ms Keatinge to respond on the wording.