Danny Healy-Rae (Kerry, Independent)

It is very clear to me that these people have been doing this for many years and they should not have to apply for planning. That is my contention and their contention, and this will be tested in whatever court it takes to decide the matter because they feel they are being hard done by. Their contribution to the local economy is massive. Consider how for a time in Kerry 36% of beds in hotels were taken up by refugees and asylum seekers. A lot of them are still used in that vein, although not the same amount, I will admit.

We will seriously damage our tourism product in the county of Kerry, especially around Killarney. At the same time, we will be affecting the Ring of Kerry and all the tourism spots if we do not have the footfall that emanates from these Airbnbs and so forth. Publicans, restaurants, boatmen, ponymen and jarveys, the whole lot, will all be impacted adversely. I am seriously concerned about this. I suppose the witnesses are not the ones to ask about this but the Government should seriously consider the implications this will have all around the county of Kerry.

It was said that they cannot have planning by default. I and anyone who is in politics for a long time know that if you are at something for more than seven years you cannot be touched. You cannot be taken to court or you cannot be made do anything. I ask the witnesses to seriously consider what I am saying.

The witnesses are talking about enforcement and the local authorities, and that they will manage this. The local authorities are stretched to their limit to do what they are doing and I do not think there will be any more officers delegated to them. If there were to be extra personnel, I would rather see them building more houses. I have been asking for that for the past number of days. Let the local authorities build more houses. There are so many empty houses around the place. Would the Government or the Department look at these as an option to secure long-term leases?

Do the witnesses think that putting these people out of business will get them to rent long-term to other tenants when they would not be able to get them out when they want to get them out and maybe not get paid when they should be, and all the other adverse things? If the witnesses think that is going to happen and they are going to achieve houses for long-term lease I think they need to look at that again. Would they have any comment to make about that?