Mick Barry (Cork North Central, Solidarity) | Oireachtas source

We are debating the reintroduction of the eviction ban for a period of six weeks and ten days. I welcome the reintroduction of the ban on evictions but the ban does not go nearly far enough with regard to how long it is proposed to last. The ban is proposed to last for six weeks and ten days. This means it will expire exactly two weeks before Christmas. What is going to happen then? It is a recipe for many tenants around the State receiving notices to quit in the run-up to Christmas and over the Christmas holidays, and for a sharp spike in evictions in the new year. Evictions always spike in the new year, but next year it will be more pronounced than previously. This eviction ban does not last long enough. It should be for a minimum of six months. An amendment tonight proposes to extend it for six months. We will vote for that important amendment. There is a strong argument to say it should be longer than six months, and that until the public health emergency is definitively finished an eviction ban will remain.

This ban is linked to level 5. When the 5 km travel restriction is in place, the eviction ban will kick in and can kick in again. It is linked to level 5, not to level 4. Why is it not linked to level 4? Level 4 is a serious lockdown with serious restrictions on people. One cannot have a friend around for a cup of tea in level 4. Is the Government saying that in level 4, a person cannot have a friend around for a cup of tea but a landlord can give notice to quit and evict that person? What kind of double standard is that?

I would like a Government spokesperson to comment in detail on my next point. In July, when the blanket eviction ban was being dismantled, we were told that the Government would like to have kept it in place because the Government was the tenant's friend and the worker's friend and so on, but it could not keep it in place because it had been given legal advice by the Attorney General that it was not possible to keep it in place as the economy and society was being opened up. Has the Attorney General said there is a legal problem with having an eviction ban when level 4 is in place? I would like to know the answer to that question. If the Attorney General did advise this I would put a serious question mark over that advice. There are many very qualified legal people in the country who would challenge that in a serious way. I would, however, like an answer to my question about whether that was advised.

When the eviction ban was first introduced two things went together: a ban on evictions and a ban on rent increases. It has now been decoupled and this is a ban on evictions only, and for a very limited period of time. There is no ban on rent increases. Why not? There should be a ban on rent increases when the country is in lockdown.

I wish to return to the idea of the double standard. We had a debate earlier about extending very serious emergency powers to the State to restrict people's travel and to restrict who people are allowed to meet up with and how many people they can meet. There are rules now that affect people's jobs and livelihood. For how long are we being asked to extend those powers? I will have to check my notes. I believe it is until June 2021, which is the start of next summer. Yet, we are talking about extending a ban on evictions for six weeks and ten days, to expire two weeks before Christmas, which will allow notices to quit to be handed out in the run-up to Christmas, over Christmas and will allow a really sharp spike in evictions at the start of the new year. I will vote in favour of the ban on evictions, but I will also vote in favour of the amendment to make it last for six months. I will do so to register the point very strongly in this debate that this ban does not go nearly far enough.

See this speech in context