Teresa Costello (Fianna Fail)

I thank the Minister of State for being here and taking this matter. This issue concerns the need for the Department of housing to set out what mechanisms are available to local authorities and approved housing bodies, AHBs, when dealing with repeated breaches of tenancy, particularly concerning antisocial behaviour that affects neighbouring tenants. Across the State, but noticeably in areas that I represent, tenants are reporting ongoing issues of antisocial behaviour. These are not isolated instances but repeated patterns that undermine community safety and the right of residents to live in peace. The tools to deal with antisocial behaviour exist in legislation. Under the Housing (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2014, local authorities and AHBs can issue tenancy warnings, seek possession orders where breaches continue and apply for excluding orders that can remove offenders. While these are significant powers, it is not clear how consistently they are used, how effective they are and what oversight is in place across both local authorities and AHBs.

In my constituency, South Dublin County Council operates a detailed antisocial behaviour strategy. It sets out prevention, mediation and enforcement. The council has systems for complaints, timelines for investigation, multiagency co-operation and the option to apply for excluding orders. Yet, the volume of complaints remains high. In the past three years, South Dublin County Council has received almost 2,000 complaints related to council-owned properties. While some cases progress to warnings and termination, the reality on the ground is that many tenants live beside persistent antisocial behaviour for prolonged periods.

Approved housing bodies now house thousands of families across the country and are subject to the AHB regulatory authority. They also have the power to seek excluding orders and to enforce tenancy conditions. However, there is little transparency around how often these powers are used, how complaints are handled and what level of consistency exists between AHBs. Tenants housed through an AHB should not have weaker protections, nor should AHBs be operating without proper scrutiny when dealing with recurring breaches. Tenants are doing everything right yet are living with the consequences of repeated antisocial behaviour from others. They are reporting it and engaging with the process. What they see in return is a system that is slow, inconsistent and often unclear. For many, the process feels endless while their day-to-day quality of life deteriorates.

I ask the Minister of State to outline the mechanisms that are available to local authorities and AHBs and crucially, how the Department monitors the use of those mechanisms. What guidance or direction is issued to AHBs to ensure that their approaches are aligned with local authorities and the expectations of the Department? It is not enough to have legal powers on paper; we need data. How many tenancy warnings are issued? How many lead to excluding orders? How many lead to full repossession? I call on the Department to commit to publishing annual disaggregated data on antisocial behaviour inventions by local authorities and AHBs, and to review whether the strongest powers like excluding orders are being used to protect communities. Every tenant deserves to feel safe in their home. The law provides tools to protect them. What we need now is clarity, consistency and oversight so that these tools are used when tenancy breaches become a pattern that harms others.