Ms Rosemary Hennigan:

One of the common arguments against socioeconomic rights is that they involve judges and the Judiciary overstepping the mark when it comes to the separation of powers and taking over from the Oireachtas what is ultimately a decision for the democratic organs of government with the benefit of all of the institutional knowledge the Government has, which is the expenditure of public funds. The reason we included the availability of resources was more to safeguard the role of the Oireachtas within it. It is also to draw out the reality that a court will not overstep these bounds. It is not usually what our courts do. We have made this explicit within the clause but, in any event, it is not something the courts generally do as I am sure the Senator is aware. A constitutional amendment can only do so much. It can lead and create a political culture, and this is what we hope to do, but it very much will depend on the political will in the Oireachtas to act on it. When it comes to budgetary decisions and how allocations are made the Constitution is not the best place to do it.

All it can do is set out a value, a principle and a framework for what we, the people, think should be done. We then hand over those decisions to the Oireachtas. I understand what the Senator means about it positioning the right in terms of individuals' access to courts. We see it as doing both. It both empowers the Oireachtas to better legislate in this area and, in the extreme cases which Ms Keatinge mentioned, it gives an individual the ability to step forward and declare that he or she has fallen through the gaps and has a right to housing that has not been vindicated.