Paul Murphy (Dublin South West, Anti-Austerity Alliance) | Oireachtas source

The housing crisis is not a result of the system breaking down but of the system working as intended. That is, unfortunately, precisely what is happening in this country. It is as described by Mr. Peter Marcuse, the author of In Defense of Housing: The Politics of Crisis. It is a global phenomenon whereby housing has become commodified and faceless vultures are able to comb the globe in search of so-called yield and profit maximisation. Their right to profit takes precedence over the right of workers to homes. That is the essence of all of the various facets of the housing crisis that we face. It is encapsulated in the Government's argument that under the Constitution - without asking whether the Constitution should be changed - one landlord's or vulture's right to maximise profit takes precedence over the right of nine families. That is the Government's position in black and white. Beyond that, if landlords or vulture funds are able to show that they would make more than 20% extra by selling with vacant provision, even that provision goes out the window and their right to a profit takes precedence over the right of ten, 15, 20 or 100 families to a home.

This is a worldwide phenomenon. New York, for example, is experiencing its greatest housing crisis since the Great Depression. In no US state today can a full-time worker on the minimum wage afford to rent a one-bedroom apartment. It is exactly the same as the situation in this city right now. Globally, over 1 billion people cannot afford homes. There is no greater indictment of capitalism as a system, where eight people have more wealth than the bottom half of humanity and the system cannot afford to give over 1 billion people a home. The answer to the housing crisis is to turn all of that on its head and say that peoples' rights come before those of companies, banks, landlords and others to profit, that they should not be evicted as a result of the pursuit of profit maximisation by vulture funds, landlords or banks, that they should have a right to homes and that good-quality, public housing should be provided.

That is the key significance of the occupation of Apollo House. It was a public intervention in housing by housing campaigners, people faced with homelessness, trade unionists, artists and others. Those involved were pointing out, in real terms, that the State has the resources - in the form of NAMA, for example, as well as land and finances - to deal with the housing crisis. It was an unapologetic act of civil disobedience which said that it is better to break the law than to break the homeless. It was a broadly popular act, with 4,000 people volunteering to help and €160,000 donated by the public. The occupation spoke to the feelings of people across the country that there must be something better that can be done about housing, that the resources exist in our society to resolve and eliminate the housing crisis now. It was an act that not only spoke against the Government's approach but against the whole neoliberal orthodoxy, the trickle-down theory of housing supply that the Government promotes. It was, therefore, a highly subversive act.

When faced with a subversive act, the establishment responds and, generally, there are two types of response. The first is to try to neuter it, to pretend to take it on board and to treat it as an act of charity. This was summed up by the approach of the Minister of State, Deputy Dara Murphy, who said that people were right to take action like that in Apollo House but that the Government was already aware of the homelessness crisis and was making efforts to tackle it. In that case, the question must be put to the Minister for Housing, Planning, Community and Local Government as to when he is going to follow through on the seven commitments made to the Home Sweet Home campaign which it says have not been met yet.

The second response is to demonise, to attempt to discredit the campaign, to show that there is only hypocrisy all round and that nothing positive can be done about the housing issue. In that vein, we had theIrishIndependent attack a leading activist on the spurious basis of the job that her mother happens to do. The Mail on Sundayjoined in this weekend with a front-page story attacking Apollo House and Home Sweet Home. Far worse, however, far lower and far more disingenuous was the attack unleashed by our supposed public service broadcaster, RTE, yesterday. That attack was aimed at the Unite trade union, first and foremost, but also at all of those who would say that there is an alternative way to provide housing so that people can be guaranteed the right to a home. The story was that Unite sought a social housing exemption for its former headquarters on Merrion Square. The underlying message was very clear and unmistakable - the Unite leaders were hypocrites for protesting on one hand, for participating in the occupation of Apollo House while, on the other, seeking a social housing exemption. If one wants to talk about fake news, here we go. This was fake news peddled by RTE. The truth is that the key point of the occupation of Apollo House is that we own the building. It is owned, effectively, by NAMA and is a public building. The point of the campaign is to argue that public resources like NAMA should be used to provide housing. The truth is that Unite, it seems, had no legal option but to seek a social housing exemption. What is most embarrassing for RTE, totally discrediting its approach, is the fact that it has now emerged that Unite had approached Focus Ireland and other housing NGOs and offered the building for the provision of homeless services, but it was not suitable.

It was a non-story. There was nothing to it whatsoever. If RTE had waited one day, it would, for example, have had that last piece of information on offering the property for homeless services, but the purpose was to try to damage the campaign, undo the positive image of Home Sweet Home and Apollo House and the message being sent that something could be done and that collective action could be taken to tackle the housing crisis. Collective action, including mass civil disobedience, mass protests and the organisation of a massive campaign throughout the country, as we saw happen in Spain on the question of evictions, is what can make a difference. That is what can stop evictions from happening in this country. It is what can force the use of public resources such as NAMA and the Ireland Strategic Investment Fund to provide public housing and win for people the right to a home.

See this speech in context