Marie Sherlock (Labour) | Oireachtas source

I am delighted members of the St. Luke's bridge club are joining us.

I welcome the eviction ban that was announced earlier, which comes after many months of our being told that it would not be possible. We were told about the possible constitutional challenges and the unseen legal advice and given warnings landlords would exit the sector. Landlords are already exiting the sector. The ban is being introduced now simply because there is no emergency accommodation left in this city or, indeed, in other parts of the country. Why is the ban being delayed until November instead of being implemented now? I ask that when the legislation is introduced, the ban be applied retrospectively.

I raise this issue because I am dealing with a family - I am sure all Senators are dealing with similar situations - made up of a mother and her four children aged seven, six and twins aged three. They were due to be evicted at the end of September but were given an extra month to the end of October. Their landlord died a number of months ago and the relatives want to sell the property. This family will not benefit from the eviction that is being introduced in November because they must be gone by the end of this month.

We have asked Dublin City Council about availing of the tenant in situscheme for the family. There are all sorts of regulations and red tape associated with it. Unfortunately, the council is of the view it cannot buy the house in question because it deems it substandard. This means a mother and four children will, in effect, be homeless at the end of this month, notwithstanding that the eviction ban will start the following day. My sincere plea is that the ban be brought forward. It is long overdue and its introduction by the Minister is very welcome. We need to see it brought into force without delay.

Some weeks ago, I raised the issue of security workers. This was supposed to be a good news story, whereby 16,000 of them had negotiated a pay deal with the vast majority of employers in the sector and the Minister had signalled his willingness to sign off on the wage agreement. However, an injunction was taken out on 24 August. All these weeks later, the State has failed to enter any defence against that injunction.We know a separate court matter is being taken in November regarding the constitutionality of the security employment regulation order. When that goes to court, however, it will be put off for another six months or more. All the while, we have very low-paid security workers in this country who are only getting a tiny pay increase and who the State is not standing up for. There is a very serious issue involved.

We have been told by the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment and by the relevant Minister that confidential conversations are going on in the background. For these security workers, nothing is happening. Like everybody else, they are in a cost-of-living crisis. For anybody talking about how we need to support low-paid workers, the State is not standing behind the pay deal on which it almost signed off. We need to see some action from the Minister.