Senator Gerard Craughwell - speech from 26 Mar 2021

Minister, you're welcome to the House. Minister, I want to tell you now that I want to commend you and the Government for the response they have had for so many citizens in this country since the pandemic started. The speed and the compassion that has been shown, you're to be commended for that. And I think that extends to every member of this House. I would not set anybody apart. Nobody has, as my previous colleague said, Senator Baltimore, we're all in this working together for a common cause. And I think that's the way we've got to take things forward. Certainly, the bill you're bringing forward today will provide a huge amount of confidence and support to those who are in the Department of Social Welfare's COVID payments. But I do think that the cut-off date of the 12th of July is too soon. I'm rather sorry that it's not open-ended and that we would not be trusted in both houses to close it off as soon as it would be the right time to do it. Because what the people of this country need right now is certainty. And are we going to be back here on the 1st of July with another amendment to this bill to extend it for another three months and see where it goes? The section 2 of the bill, Minister, my colleague, Senator McDougall, and members of the government parties have pointed out that section 2 of this bill is flawed. The 5km rule places these golden handcuffs, if you want, on the bill. And the fear, the fear, I think if you want to speak, speak through the chair, though, the, the, the, the, sure, point of order, yes, yes, yes, yes. In the last comment you made, yes, we didn't say that the bill was flawed and what I said actually was I would seek clarification on the basis of what Senator McDougall and Senator Martin said. So just in case that you're referring to me, Senator, I didn't say the bill was flawed. I wouldn't dream of it. I said the bill was, I said the bill, I didn't say the bill was flawed, I said seek clarification. I'm not sure that this is a point of order, this is, thank you. I hope the clock stopped while that went on. Okay, so the bottom line on it is the various housing charities such as Threshold, such as Simon, have all pointed out that there's a flaw in this bill and that it is section 2 of the bill. So, bottom line on it is we've had an eminent lawyer say it has a deficiency in it and we have also pointed, we've also pointed out by housing charities that it has a flaw in it. So from that point of view, I'll accept Senator Murphy did not say it, so that's fine. Look, the 5k restriction, I don't know if you can do anything at this stage about that, Minister, if you can, I'd appreciate that you would look at that. I want to support this bill, I want to support you as you bring this bill forward, I will not be voting for the hell of it, I will not be pushing anything to a vote on this. What's most important right now is that we protect our citizens. On the wider housing issue, Minister, what has gone wrong in this state? In the 1950s, when we had not a red cent in this country, we built the finest social housing in the country. I remember my father telling me that if a piece of timber would have not arrived in it where they were built in social houses, they would have to take that piece of timber away. It simply would not have been acceptable. So from that point of view, I'm really concerned that we are devolving the social housing to housing agencies. In this country, we have about 500 housing agencies, each with its own chief executive officer, its own chief financial officer. I admit that these organisations are trying to provide housing for needy people, but do we need 500 of them? You know, is it time that we stepped back and looked at the state's responsibility to provide social housing for those that are in need? It really causes me great concern when we see the Human Rights Committee of the Council of Europe, who said there's no legal framework for the right to housing for families in Ireland, and there is no statistics on the condition of local authority houses. Now, I understand one of my colleagues made the point that we should have the right to a home in the Constitution. I don't believe we can put it into the Constitution until such a time as we're in a position to provide homes for the needy in this country. We're not in that position right now. So I fully support what the Senator said about putting it into the Constitution, but we've got to find the wherewithal to do it, and we must have the resources to put it in place. Look, I could go on and on, but Lesko here, look, you've been rather kind to leave me go on. I do apologise to my colleague, Senator Murphy. I was not indicating that he saw a flaw in the bill, or indeed anybody else, but members of the government parties have said there's a flaw in the bill. Let those who said it step forward. Those who didn't, that's fine. Thank you. Thank you, Senator. I call Senator Lachlan. You have five minutes. Okay.