Ms Rose Wall:

I thank the Senator for the questions and I hope I have them all. I will address a few and my colleague, Ms Heavey, can speak to some of the case studies we worked on in the area.

Disproportionality underlines the need for consultation with a broad range of groups. As we have said, CLM works in the areas of housing and homelessness but it does not focus its work on the area of, for example, international protection or migration, as other groups might. Other organisations, such as IHREC, FLAC, the Mercy Law Resource Centre and others, have worked in this area and can illustrate some of the negative side effects of the circular we mentioned. There are certainly possibilities for the lawful residence, reckonable residence and habitual residence conditions to disproportionately impact certain groups, particularly migrant and minority groups.

The Senator also mentioned the issue of introducing a complex decision-making system into local authorities and the difficulties for housing officials in navigating that system. Like anywhere, we see in our work that incorrect decisions are made on a daily basis by housing officials. Because there is no appeals mechanism, and I will talk about that in a moment, individuals and families must avail of the likes of our services and those of our colleagues to challenge those decisions. Sometimes that means going to court, which is totally unnecessary, and nobody, including State bodies, wants that. There is a question there about training and providing support to housing bodies in respect of complex areas, as well as providing an independent appeals mechanism.

My colleague will be able to speak a bit more to the Senator's question about EU law. I flag that there are concerns about the failure to distinguish between EU workers and EU non-workers. Does the legislation properly and inclusively cover all those who have a right to reside? There are various European directives and Court of Justice of the European Union, CJEU, decisions on this point.

Then there is also a question of proportionality on the issue of household members. If other household members are refused access to social housing support because they do not satisfy the criteria, there is a proportionality assessment there around infringement of the rights of that family under the various EU and human rights frameworks.

In terms of the right of appeal the Senator mentioned, which was also mentioned by Senator Cummins in his final remarks, I disagree that having an appeal system bogs things down. Appeal systems are absolutely critical to ensuring principles of natural justice and fair procedures are complied with. They are an essential element to any decision-making process and the only mechanism for people to challenge unfair, illegal and discriminatory decisions or practices without having to go to the High Court, which nobody wants and which, frankly, most people are not able to do. I will pass over to my colleague for specific examples.