Seanad debates
Wednesday, 3 December 2008
Housing (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill 2008: Committee Stage (Resumed)
12:00 pm
David Norris (Independent)
The Minister's response was inadequate and evasive because he relies on sections further on in the Bill, on general and vague phrasing and on ministerial regulations. I have been long enough in this House to know about ministerial regulations. The Minister's hands are not tied in this matter. There is no requirement in this legislation that these things should be included. We rely on the Minister's goodwill. I believe the Minister as I have worked with him in this House for many years, but who knows what the future holds? He might not be there, decent man and all as he is. Since, as Senator Bacik has said, there is no conflict or difficulty in putting it in and reassuring the House, it will not cause any further problems. The only way in which it could cause a problem would be if the Minister did not intend to include this in regulations and strategy and all the other things he mentioned. This is a matter of policy that could appropriately be included at this point.
In light of the Minister's refusal to take on board the previous amendment about appropriate housing, despite the fact that I put on the record what I thought was a very clear case history in which the absence of this kind of provision militated against a citizen of this country, it is all the more pressing that he should accept this amendment. Even supposing it was redundant, it is not doing any damage. The planet will not collapse because of a couple of extra words in ink on a piece of paper — about a quarter of an inch of text. There are no strong, persuasive arguments against accepting it. I will say one thing in which I hope I am not being indiscreet. Both Senator Bacik and I have been extensively briefed by a coalition of groups who work at the coalface. They probably have a fairly good idea of the practical realities on the ground and the need for the inclusion of provisions such as these. They are not inventing amendments just for the hell of it. The Minister did not even take up my hint on the last amendment that he might say he was considering it, even if his tongue was licking his tonsils as he said it. He just ruled it out. That is a little disappointing.
No comments