Fintan Warfield (Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

I will not rehash what Senator Ruane has articulated as we are largely coming from the same position, although with a different timeframe.

I am not sure what the Minister is saying about families. Of course one would seek to put one's extended family in need into that home, but not if it meant evicting another family. That home is still an asset one has and a source of income one could use to address the situation facing the extended family. I am not sure what problem the Minister has there.

I also do not see this as a constitutional issue when talking about retail or commercial properties. We see all the time that the tenant is not affected when retail units are for sale, so what is the difference between residential and commercial sales? Why can we not apply this to residential properties? I do not think there is a legal impediment on that front if it already exists in the sale of commercial properties and the existing tenant is not affected.

I will move amendment No. 15 largely due to what has been outlined by Senator Ruane. We hear time and again that we should keep people in their homes when they have them. The Dublin Region Homeless Executive's reported figures show that, of the 162 families that provided information on the reasons they vacated their homes, 87 were told it was because the landlord intended to sell, and Focus Ireland sees more than 20 families each month become homeless because their buy-to-let landlord has been forced to sell up.

I will move amendments Nos. 15, 16, and 19. Will I speak to amendment No. 16?