Mr. Adam Boyle:

Home for Good would like to extend our thanks to the committee for the invitation to attend and give some thoughts on the Housing Commission's proposed wording for an amendment enshrining a right to a home in the Constitution. As the committee is aware, Home for Good is a coalition of organisations and individuals who believe that constitutional change is needed as an essential underpinning for any programme to tackle our housing and homelessness crisis.

In preparation for these comments, we reviewed previous submissions made to this committee in addition to important points on the issue of a right to housing. I was struck by some very telling statistics. The Simon Community reports that, at the end of 2014, 3,738 people were reported as officially homeless in Ireland. As of June this year, that number stands at 14,303. In ten years, these has been an increase of more than 10,000 people residing in emergency homeless accommodation, to say nothing of the number of people experiencing hidden homelessness.

There are numerous factors contributing to this fundamental failure but one factor that is clear is that our Constitution is often perceived as imbalanced towards private property rights without any equivalent right to housing being recognised. It is clear throughout the Housing Commission's report that this perceived imbalance is restricting the capacity of the State to implement the types of policies we need to tackle the housing crisis.

Clarifying the constitutional question is only one of the important reasons for us to insert a right to housing into the Constitution. More importantly, it presents an opportunity for us, as a people, to clearly and boldly enunciate our values and a national moral position that every person is entitled to access to adequate housing. As Professor Colm O’Cinneide has previously advised this committee, it also presents the opportunity for an amendment that could act as a catalyst for political and legal change. Furthermore, it could present an opportunity to create an enforceable right not only encouraging the State to adopt policies to vindicate a person’s right to a home but providing that, where people or families are fundamentally failed in this regard, they have the means to enforce their rights against the State.

In November 2020, Home for Good provided our proposed language for an amendment to this committee, seeking to insert a right that is directly enforceable and which includes a separate statement of the State’s obligation to realise that right within available resources. That appears on page 27 of the Housing Commission’s report. The Housing Commission has recommended instead to insert a new Article 40A, spread over two subsections.

The proposed wording from the Housing Commission is quite similar in a number of ways to the language we had recommended. If inserted into the Constitution, the legal subcommittee of Home for Good is confident that it should create a directly enforceable stand-alone right. The drafting also contains a number of strengths. The proposed Article 40A.1, which paints a picture as to why we must respect a right to housing, may well provide welcome clarity to the Oireachtas and Judiciary in interpreting the scope of the right. In addition, any legislation or plans undertaken by the Oireachtas to vindicate such a right should also be informed by the expansive body of guidance on the legal meaning of "adequate housing" in international law, in particular under the International Covenant on Economic and Social Rights. While we cannot guarantee the manner in which the courts will interpret the Constitution, it appears that the word “therefore” in Article 40A.2 may require the court to have regard to the importance of adequate housing when interpreting the justiciable right. The standard set in using the language “as far as practicable” reflects other sections of the Constitution, including Article 42A, which is related to the rights of children, and Article 40.3, which is related to personal rights. The word “pledge” appears in Article 41.3, which is related to the institution of marriage. The point I am making is that this is all language that should not be unfamiliar to Members of the Oireachtas, legislative drafters, practitioners or the Judiciary. That provides welcome clarity that may be lacking if different language was suggested.

In the Housing Commission’s report, the responses to its public consultation are discussed. The commission indications that it received substantial numbers of submissions from the public. It noted that many of these submissions voice personal distress at the consequences of housing precarity, in addition to anger and frustration at the intractability of the housing crisis in Ireland. These are the voices that inform the work of the members of Home for Good. These are the voices that should be considered when seeking to amend our Constitution, making a statement of our values as a people. In so doing, we can clarify the legal and constitutional position, express publicly the importance of a right to a home and place an enforceable obligation on the State to take measures to protect this right.