Ms Rebecca Keatinge:

I take the point but that is what the wording is designed to do, where it refers to the State using legislative and other measures. In other forums, such as the Finnish example, there is similar phrasing but it has led to legislation being examined in a broader way and not just in respect of the individual rights. For example, in our report on Finland, the constitutional committee that Ms Hennigan mentioned considered legislation that would give subsidy to entities providing social housing and whether they could sell the properties. It was ultimately decided that would not be consistent with the constitutional protection to the right to housing because it would reduce the stock. That is looking at the broader, more systemic impact it could have. Professor Whyte will speak to the broader constitutional architecture. It is fitting that within the architecture, it is phrased as "all persons", and that it states that all policies and legislative measures will have an impact on persons.

On the Deputy's query about judicial activism, we at Mercy Law Resource Centre have been working very much at the sharp end of the housing crisis. We work with homeless families, many of whom are constituents whom members will have met. The 1988 Act is a discretionary provision. At the moment, we rely on rights around the edges, such as the rights to fair procedure and to family life, but this measure would enable us to tell local authorities they need to act in a manner compatible with the Constitution, which protects access to adequate housing. It would recast how that assessment would be done. As Professor Whyte has highlighted, we do not foresee matters coming before the courts. This is not designed to create legal cases. It will only be in egregious and serious infringements that such cases get to the courts. That is an example from our practice.