Nicole Ryan (Sinn Fein)

Having spoken on this a while back, I acknowledge and commend all the people who offered their homes and their generosity when people were fleeing from war in Ukraine. The solidarity was, and continues to be to this day, an expression of the very best of Irish hospitality and kindness. However, good intentions cannot hide the policy failures that have emerged. The Government is now seeking to reduce the ARP from €800 to €600 and claims this move is to mitigate any unintended impact on the private rental sector. This comes after months of denying there was such an impact and despite Sinn Féin's repeatedly raised concerns and the presentation of evidence, particularly from the Border, west and north-west regions, where rental costs are traditionally lower. What we are seeing is that some landlords in the private rental market are availing of tax-free payments because it is more financially attractive than renting homes to Irish citizens. There is an extraordinary incentive for landlords with no requirement to enter formal tenancy agreements, no security for the tenants and no transparency.

We in Sinn Féin have tabled a responsible and clear-eyed amendment to the motion. This is not to oppose support for those who need it but to ensure the scheme is no longer used as a back door to the rental market without the rights and protections that formal tenants should have. Our amendment calls for three things. The first is means testing. The beneficiaries of temporary protection should be subject to means testing in the same way as others who apply for other housing supports, such as the housing assistance payment, which has always been means tested. The second proposal is a primary residence requirement so new applicants must be hosting in their own homes, not in investment properties. The ARP should not be a substitute for tenancy and it should not reward landlords who are using it as an alternative to renting to lower-income Irish tenants. The final point is to ban top-ups. The payment must be in full and must be the only contribution from the beneficiary. Anything else can open the door to exploitation and skew the rental market even further.

We are not calling for a cliff edge. No one should be at risk of homelessness. What we are calling for is fairness, a rebalancing of the housing support system and an end to unfair practice that allows for some and not for others. We need a system that distinguishes between people opening their homes to those who are fleeing war and looking for refuge, which we commend and support, and landlords trying to capitalise on the scheme. If we want to retain public confidence in our housing system, we need transparency, consistency and fairness, and the amendment provides that. If the Government refuses to accept the amendment, it will be a missed opportunity to fix the broken system and remove an inequitable part of our housing response.