Richard Boyd Barrett (Dún Laoghaire, People Before Profit Alliance) | Oireachtas source

Like the other Opposition parties, we have a series of amendments, which seek to extend considerably further the protections this Bill proposes to extend only until July. We have gone the furthest in saying they should be extended until April 2021 and I will explain why we think that is right. We also support all the other amendments that go considerably further than the Government. We also have amendments that oppose section 2 for the reasons that have been set out and explained by Threshold, namely, that this Bill in effect strips a cohort of people who enjoyed some protection of the protections they had under Covid. People Before Profit has tabled another amendment, which I believe is unique to us, to extend the protections to other cohorts of tenants whom we do not believe should be evicted in the midst of a pandemic on grounds of sale, refurbishment or any other grounds. That is the key.

Others have called the Minister's defences "Orwellian". I have called it a deception and a fraud but we are all trying to get at the same thing. It is a deception and a fraud because the Government is presenting this Bill as if it protects tenants in the midst of Covid.

In truth, it only extends protections to a tiny group for a few months. It is the Government's policy decision that as of 5 April, the green light has been given for the rest of those tenants to be evicted in the midst of a pandemic because it has not protected them in this Bill. That is the truth of what the Government is doing.

I have tried to give the Minister the benefit of moving beyond politicking, abstract discussions to give real tangible examples. This debate really only means anything when one applies it to real tangible examples and, of course, that is the reason the Minister does not respond. Real people in St. Helen's Court in Dún Laoghaire have notices which say they will be evicted ten days after the 5 km rule is lifted, which is likely to happen on 5 April. All those families and individuals have never engaged in antisocial behaviour, always paid their rent and are working people such as shop workers, carers, restaurant workers, pensioners and taxi drivers. They are people I know personally now because I have been fighting alongside them for four years against four successive attempts by ruthless, vicious vulture funds that are trying to drive them out of their apartment complex in central Dún Laoghaire. The Minister is not protecting them. That is the truth. They are out, and as a result, they are already engaging with homeless services, and because no council houses are available and approximately 4,000 families are on the housing list, they will be sent to emergency homeless accommodation unless they can get housing assistance payment, HAP. Rents in Dún Laoghaire, however, are now running at €2,000 to €2,200 and €2,400 for two and three bedroom apartments. Their current rents are approximately €1,000. How will they pay such rent? They cannot, so they will be homeless. What is the Minister going to do about it? The answer in this Bill is "Nothing". They will be knocking on the doors of homeless services. Some of them will be sent with their children into hostels in town in conditions that will make the transmission of Covid-19 more likely, which is precisely what the Minister said this Bill is designed to prevent. Therefore, even on public health grounds, never mind the need to protect tenants from ruthless operations such as Mill Street Projects Limited and Apollo Global Management, or whatever these wealth asset management speculators - these vicious, inhumane people - are called, the Minister is going to allow the green light for these people to be evicted. That is why it is a deception and fraud.

We are asking, therefore, effectively to reimpose the blanket ban on evictions during a pandemic. In the meantime, we can discuss all the nuances for which the Minister is arguing. We can sort them out. He says it is more complicated and I agree; in some areas it is more complicated. Let us reimpose the blanket ban that actually protected people in the midst of a pandemic and then use that intervening period to do the more nuanced stuff, which the Minister said needs to be done. That is our argument. If the Minister wants to protect tenants in the midst of a pandemic - people who have done nothing wrong, are not antisocial, have not generated arrears through any fault of their own or have done nothing wrong as tenants - and that is his genuine intention, he will accept the amendments put forward by the Opposition. If he does not accept those amendments, he is, in fact, deceiving the public and this Bill is a fraud in terms of its claim to protect tenants during the pandemic.

See this speech in context