Forty-first Amendment of the Constitution (Right to Housing) Bill 2026: Second Stage [Private Members]

Deputy Rory Hearne

Tairgim: "Go léifear an Bille an Dara hUair anois."

I move: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time."

The starting point of this Bill is that the housing crisis is a complete and utter catastrophe, and we need something to radically change. Over two years ago, the Housing Commission, an official body set up by the Government, recommended that a right to housing should be inserted in the Constitution. Since then, the coalition of Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael has let that recommendation gather dust on the shelf, all the while ramming through rental reforms that benefit large investor landlords. Today, I move my Bill, which sets out the Housing Commission's proposal for a referendum on a right to housing that would insert a new Article 40A into the Constitution, which would state:

1. The State recognises that having a home is of fundamental importance to quality of life and that access to adequate housing, by facilitating the development of family, social and community relationships, promotes the common good.

2. The State therefore guarantees to every citizen a right of access to adequate housing and pledges, as far as practicable, by its laws to protect and vindicate that right.

When we look at what the Housing Commission has proposed, it is very clear that it sets out a number of very practical ways that this constitutional right would help the housing situation. When we look at what has happened, we have an entire generation stuck in their childhood bedrooms or forced to emigrate. The recent National Youth Council of Ireland survey showed that seven out of ten people are considering leaving the country. What we see is record house prices and record rents. We have the highest levels of eviction since the Great Famine. In 2024, 16,500 households were issued with eviction notices, in 2025, it was 20,000, and in the first six months of this year, it was 11,000. That is a 25% increase on the first six months of 2024. The scale of this tsunami of evictions is overwhelming when we consider that 47,000 households have been given notices to quit in just two and a half years. That amounts to over 130,000 people, including tens of thousands of children, going through the trauma of losing their home, uprooting their lives and all the stresses that come with that.

This is a very significant reason behind the record levels of homelessness. Of course, the monthly homeless figures that we see do not include the thousands of people in hidden homelessness who are couch surfing, in domestic violence refuges or sleeping rough in cars and tents.

The Irish State, unfortunately, has forgotten the lessons of the past, when it used to build council housing on a massive scale. Nowadays, we have outsourced housing to the market to meet the profit needs of investor funds, developers and banks. Housing is not treated as a home or a human right. It is treated as a commodity and an investment asset. This is the fundamental problem. We have housing policy being dictated by what the market is seeking, and we saw this in March of last year, with the change to rents for the corporate investor funds.

There is not one mention of a right to housing in any housing policy in this country. No wonder we are going around in circles, repeating the same failed policies and expecting a different outcome. The housing catastrophe has been deepening for well over a decade, and in some ways, we could argue we have been in a housing crisis since the 1990s. There is something fundamentally wrong with our housing system, the housing market, the way we treat housing and the way we understand housing.

Other countries, such as Spain and Finland, have a right to housing in their constitutions. Their starting point in the creation of housing policy and their treatment of housing is that it is a human right. Without this, in Ireland, we see confusion. Is housing an investment commodity? Is it something about the public good? Is it a social need? That is why the Housing Commission, which Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael set up, was very clear in its recommendation that there should be a referendum to insert a right to housing in the Constitution, which would then guide all Government policy decisions going forward.

The Housing Commission was clear that this would place a clear legal responsibility on the entire Irish State, from local authorities all the way to the Minister for housing, to ensure that every citizen in this country has access to adequate housing. I do not believe that the scale of evictions and homelessness we currently see would be tolerated or exist if a right to housing was enshrined in our Constitution. Legal obligations would be put in place to prevent evictions and homelessness.

It is not just us saying this. The Home for Good coalition, which includes trade unions and NGOs like Threshold, and the Irish Congress of Trade Unions believe that this is necessary. The Irish Congress of Trade Unions has said very clearly that the trade union movement in Ireland sees a constitutional referendum as a key priority for housing. ICTU believes that Ireland should follow the example of other countries that have created the legally protected right to housing to balance constitutional protections on private property and ensure that no constitutional barriers prevent the Government from providing access to decent and affordable housing for all.

The issue here, and I will call it out, is that unlike Fine Gael, which has made its opposition to the right to housing public and clear, Fianna Fáil has actually backed a right to housing before.

The Oireachtas housing committee, which a number of Fianna Fáil TDs, including Deputy McAuliffe, were part of, supported holding a referendum on a right to housing in 2020. In the Seanad, a Fianna Fáil Senator introduced a motion calling on the Government to hold a referendum on a right to housing. Current Fianna Fáil Ministers of State, Deputies Ardagh and Dooley, voted in favour of having a referendum on a right to housing. What has happened? Why does Fianna Fáil no longer believe that housing is a human right? Why is it breaking its promise to hold a referendum to put a right to housing into the Constitution? Fianna Fáil is now opposing this Bill, despite it having the clear recommendation of the Housing Commission that the Minister set up. What is happening is that the institutional investors have said to the Minister that they do not want a right to housing. I do not understand it, and there is no other reason why the Minister would not promote it. No one is saying that a right to housing and having a referendum to include a right to housing in the Constitution will make the situation worse.

The Minister and the Government have put on record that they will use every lever possible to address the housing crisis. The Housing Commission, which is the body that the Minister set up, has made a very clear majority recommendation that a right to housing will make practical changes to the housing situation but the Minister is ignoring that and saying that he is not going to do it. Why? What are the reasons? I look forward to hearing why the Minister is not progressing it, given that it is something that Fianna Fáil has committed to in the past. This is something Fianna Fáil claims to believe in but that it will not put into practice, even when the expert body that it set up recommends that it does so.

It is worth noting that the Housing Commission report is substantial. I am not sure whether the Minister has read the specific report from the commission on the proposed amendment to Bunreacht na hÉireann and the wording thereof. It is worth noting that it asks what practical impact the introduction of a constitutional right to housing would carry. It says that a constitutional right has several practical implications. First, it influences the law-making process, including at the pre-legislative stage. Every law passed by the Oireachtas carries a presumption of constitutionality and lawmakers are obliged to consider and take account of the State's obligations with respect to protecting constitutional rights through its laws. Certain policies or proposed legislation may be considered or rejected at preliminary stage on the basis that they would undermine constitutional rights. A constitutional right may also be directly enforceable by an individual or individuals in court and an individual may initiate proceedings on that basis. The commission goes on to give other reasons as to why a constitutional right would have practical effect. It says that a constitutional right can shape outcomes outside the realm of the courtroom or the Oireachtas. It can be raised and cited in formal interactions such as legal correspondence or informal interactions with State bodies, including local authorities or State agencies.

A constitutional right may carry significant symbolic or rhetorical weight. It is a recognition that a particular interest is considered to be of exceptional importance and deserving of special protection in the higher law. The commission goes on to state that a right to housing, as per the wording I have put forward, would make a change. It would put a greater obligation on the State than that which currently exists to address the issue and ensure that everyone has access to an affordable and secure home. Is the Minister refusing to do this because he does not want to have to meet the obligations that would be set out by a constitutional right to housing? Is he not doing it because he knows that currently he would already be in breach of that right to housing? What is it that he is afraid of? Why is he not willing to do this?

It is very clear to me, as is set out by the Housing Commission, that there is no negative reason for pursuing a referendum on the right to housing. If it is lost, it is lost. If it is passed, that would be great. The commission has set out very clearly that it would strengthen the State's obligation to ensure that people have access to housing. Of course, it would not mean, as I am sure the Minister will not argue, that everyone would get a house if we put a right to a home into the Constitution. It is also not going to mean that lots of people will be running to the courts. The commission report makes it very clear, by means of the opinion of constitutional and legal experts, that if such a right was put in place, it would not lead to a significant number of cases in the courts because the courts do not react like that. The experience in other jurisdictions is that a constitutional right to housing essentially, where it does go to court, is used as a way to assess a government's actions as to whether they are in breach of the constitution. It is not likely that this would open up a massive load of cases.

It is particularly important to point out that we have one of a few social and economic rights, the right to primary education, in our Constitution. That has an impact on the Department of education and on how education is provided. One will hear people say here that they have a constitutional right to education, particularly parents of children with additional needs. That puts an extra obligation on the State. Why be afraid of that? That would be a positive thing. The State is forced, even more, to ensure that it is meeting its obligations. I remember the former UN Special Rapporteur on the right to adequate housing, Leilani Farha, asking that question as to what government would not want to deliver the right to housing. What government wants to say that it is unwilling to deliver the right to housing or wants to be in breach? Why would governments not actually stand up and say that they are willing to be held to account, to set standards that they want to meet?

Let us put a right to housing in our Constitution. Let the people have the discussion. Even if one is opposed to it, in terms of what it might actually do, why not give the people their say? That is what this is about. It is about giving them their say. Let us have the debate and discussion and let us deliver something. The opinion polls show that a majority of people are very clearly in favour of this. It comes back to the question of why the Government is not willing to do this. Why has Fianna Fáil made a U-turn on a referendum to insert a right to housing into the Constitution? Is it about what the institutional funds are saying? They do not want a right to housing. They do not want what it would mean. It is very clear who is benefiting from the housing system at the moment, . We have just seen it again with reports of IRES REIT tripling its profits due to the new rent rules. There is the potential of it being sold to a US investor for close to €1 billion, with its shareholders pocketing hundreds of millions from the Government's rental changes that have squeezed and will continue to squeeze ordinary renters and young people out of the possibility of ever having homes of their own.

The Minister should support and implement what is proposed. Otherwise, what he is saying is that he and the Government do not believe in the right to housing and are so captured by vested property interests that they are unwilling to do something that would put greater supports in place for people in the context of a right to housing and ensure, once and for all, that we solve this crisis and ensure that people have affordable, secure and decent housing. As the Minister knows, the amendment is not about a right to a home; it is about a right to access adequate housing. There are different views about its limitations, but it does not set out that the State has to provide a house for everybody. What it says is that the State has an obligation to ensure that every citizen has access to a decent, affordable and secure home. I do not understand why the Minister would not want to progress a referendum that would put that in our Constitution. Let us join other countries and make the change. Over time, it would lead, as the Housing Commission has set out, to positive change in housing. I do not understand why the Minister would oppose that.

Minister for Housing, Local Government and Heritage (Deputy James Browne)

I will start by thanking Deputy Hearne for bringing forward this Bill to amend the Constitution to include a right to housing. While the Government cannot support the Bill at this time, I welcome the opportunity to set out the Government’s position on this important issue.

Our housing plan, Delivering Homes, Building Communities, 2025-2030, sets out that housing is a basic human right. The Deputy will be aware that almost one third of all our National Development Plan, NDP, funding is going towards housing and water infrastructure. It is important to remember that kind of funding is unequalled by any other country in the western world. We also have to fund other projects such as healthcare facilities, schools, roads, footpaths, community centres and so on. In that context, the level of funding that this Government is providing for housing is extraordinary.

It needs to be extraordinary but I think the level needs to be understood compared to other countries as well.

As the Deputy will be aware, the Housing Commission was established in December 2021 to consider housing policy post-2030 and make proposals as appropriate. It was also tasked with advising Government on the critical factors to be considered regarding a referendum on housing and, if appropriate, to recommend wording for a constitutional change.

The commission submitted its overall report on housing and a stand-alone report on a referendum which included proposed wording for an amendment to Bunreacht na hÉireann to the then Minister on 8 May 2024. A minority report was also submitted by a small number of commission members recommending a statutory strategic plan-based approach rather than a constitutional amendment. An additional alternative proposal was submitted by another commission member accepting that a referendum should be progressed but supporting an alternative wording and an alternative placement of the new provision in the Constitution in Article 45.

What is clear to see is that there were differing views within the commission on the right to housing and no full consensus on what is a complex issue. The wording of the majority report is what is proposed in the Bill or as near as. It is of note that the commission was also of the view that a constitutional amendment to provide for a right to housing was not necessary in order to permit substantial and far-reaching legislative reform in relation to housing and, significantly, that the current constitutional position in and of itself does not pose a barrier to measures designed to tackle the housing crisis. That is reflected in the significant measures we have been taking.

While I do not reject outright the general concept of a right to housing by way of a constitutional amendment, it is very complex. We should all be in agreement that any such proposal should be taken at the right time, with the appropriate level of scrutiny and consultation. Let me be clear: the State cannot directly provide all the housing the country needs and to insert a right to housing into the Constitution without considering the ramifications would create false expectations that it can and will likely redirect State resources to lengthy legal complications for years to come. It is also a democratic need for any government to balance all the necessary needs and demands in any society. It is not just housing but it is healthcare and other social supports as well that people need.

Given that the Bill proposed has mirrored wording provided in the majority report of the commission, the Attorney General has previously provided Government with preliminary advice on that wording and has signalled serious issues arising from it that would be irresponsible for us to ignore. Holding a referendum at this time is a distraction from the delivery of real housing on the ground in an already challenged housing market. We built the largest number of social houses in the history of the State last year, so it is not holding us back.

The Deputy referenced Spain, which has this right in its constitution and which has a housing crisis. That country is blowing up over the housing crisis there at the moment. A constitutional right to housing does not really aid anything unless we want to make it strong to make sure that it does but, in that case, it is prioritising issues in terms of government expenditure that may be needed elsewhere and may exclude, for example, healthcare and other social protections and supports.

It is complex in terms of what the expenditure is but also the legal complexities. We have a very strong Constitution in this country. It gives people a strong right of access, as it should, to the courts and to exercise their right to have constitutional rights upheld.

As I said, holding a referendum at this time would be a distraction. As is well recognised, a referendum on housing is not going to resolve the housing supply problem and may have unwanted or unintended consequences. The immediate focus and priority continues to be on the delivery of homes as set out in the programme for Government. It is important to highlight, however, that we are making real progress. Between July 2020 and the end of June 2026, we delivered nearly 178,000 new build homes. In 2025 alone, there were 36,284 new dwelling completions, an increase of 20% on 2024.

This delivery is backed up by record levels of Government funding for housing. Over €9 billion of capital funding will be provided through the Exchequer in 2026, including funding by the LDA and the Housing Finance Agency. As a result, we are now seeing an unprecedented level of delivery of new-build social homes, with 2025 representing the largest number of new build social homes constructed since the foundation of the State.

Some 17,700 starter home supports were delivered last year - an increase of 21% on 2024 and the highest annual total recorded. These supports were delivered across the starter homes purchase scheme, the cost-rental scheme, the first home scheme, the vacant property refurbishment grant and the help to buy scheme. These figures demonstrate the impact of sustained State investment and this Government’s commitment to expanding housing options for people across the country. They represent serious momentum. They reflect the scaling up of local authority building programmes, increased output from approved housing bodies and the acceleration of construction activity across the country.

While 2025 was a record year, we are driving on. The focus now is on sustaining and expanding this delivery, scaling further and ensuring that more people benefit from access to high-quality and secure homes. We are making home ownership more accessible and affordable, and we are getting people into long-term, high-quality and affordable rental homes. We are also supporting the regeneration of old and previously vacant and derelict properties into new homes. I am confident that this trajectory will continue throughout 2026.

In addition, the pipeline for new homes is strong. Recent planning permission figures show permission was granted for 39,354 new homes in the 12 months to the end of quarter 2 of 2026 - up 26% year on year. In recent months, commencement figures have increased significantly with 22,854 homes - up 162% on the same period last year, and we are going to continue to build on this momentum.

Measures to tackle homelessness, increase housing supply and affordability and to ensure that a suitable range of housing across tenure types is available to all are an absolute concern of mine. The new housing plan, Delivering Homes, Building Communities, builds on the foundations laid under Housing for All to enable the delivery of a minimum of 300,000 new homes, while activating supply, the first pillar of our new plan, will support increased housing delivery. It commits to ensuring a strong pipeline of zoned and serviced land, and it aims to create the conditions needed to attract the required levels of investment into the sector so that new delivery is not solely reliant on State funding.

There is a dedicated suite of actions to increase skills and support the adoption of modern methods of construction in the construction sector. It also focuses on addressing vacancy and dereliction so that we can best use the homes that we already have. All of this will help us achieve the radical step change in delivery that is now needed.

We are reforming and streamlining the planning process, which is already reducing delays in housing and strategic infrastructure projects. The Planning and Development Act 2024 is a major reform that will speed up housing delivery. Local authorities are updating their development plans to ensure that sufficient and suitable land is zoned. Progress is being made in this regard but has to continue. We have also established a housing activation office which is now backed by a new multi-annual €1 billion Housing Infrastructure Investment Fund to get more housing built by removing infrastructure delays.

In budget 2026, we reduced the VAT rate on apartments from 13.5% to 9% to improve the viability of apartment building, and we introduced a corporation tax exemption for cost-rental income to support delivery and increase viability of cost rental units.

We are continuing to make real and tangible progress with the croí cónaithe cities scheme. The scheme is integral to improving the viability of apartments for private sale within our cities and towns and it is currently expected to deliver 2,317 new owner-occupier homes that would not otherwise have been built. There is a great opportunity to activate further supply in addressing vacancy and dereliction. New targeted measures have been introduced aimed at unlocking unused spaces in cities, towns and villages by converting vacant and derelict buildings and unused above the shop areas into residential homes. All of these measures are designed to bring more of these buildings back into productive use and provide much-needed homes for people to live in their own communities.

We will continue to act as a Government to ensure we remain fully focused on those measures which will continue to increase the supply of new homes, bringing about a significant scale up in the delivery of housing over the coming years, addressing the needs of the most vulnerable in our communities and making buying and renting homes more affordable as well as supporting the development of villages, towns and cities across the country.

This practical and real focus on housing supply is my priority right now rather than holding a referendum which will not result in the delivery of a single new home. In short, we are making significant changes and investment that I would happily compare to any other country in the western world. The record delivery of social housing last year is a prime example of our commitment to solving this housing crisis and doing it in a manner that supports vulnerable people in our society.

Deputy Thomas Gould

The First Dáil declared that it was the first duty of the Government of Ireland to ensure that no child suffered from a lack of clothing, food or shelter. This Government is failing in that duty. There are currently 17,885 people homeless. That was the August figure. It is actually higher now. Some 5,830 of those are children. I asked the Minister's predecessor how many children must become homeless before Fianna Fáil, Fine Gael and this Government admit they are wrong and admit the crisis is at a stage where they have failed and where we need urgent action.

How many children must become homeless? Must it be 6,000 or 7,000? Will the Minister give us an answer to that or is he just going to go on with the big lists that he gave? Regarding the lists that the Minister gave, none of them give a constitutional right to housing to people who should be entitled to it.

The Minister is his failing in his duty because right now in Cork and Kerry there are 276 children in homeless accommodation. Many of these children left school in June for the summer not knowing where they were going to be living when school started back in September. These children are listening to their classmates looking forward to Hallowe'en, trick or treating and Christmas. Can the Minister imagine being a homeless child or teenager not knowing where he is going to be for Hallowe'en or Christmas? The shame and embarrassment they and their parents feel is not their fault. They should be ashamed to be homeless. It is the Minister who should be ashamed that there are so many children who are homeless. It is the Minister and this Government who should be ashamed of all the families and people who are homeless.

Deputy Hearne is being forward a Bill. It is not going to guarantee people a right to a home but it is going to force this Government to do everything in its power to ensure that people have a home and it will be their constitutional right. How wrong is that?

The Minister talked about how he is going to get on with doing the things he is going to do. Commitments were made before the previous election. Typical Fianna Fáil promised that there would be a referendum. I was on the previous housing committee where Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael members spoke about having a constitutional right to housing and to a family having a home. Now, they break their promises. Do not shake your head at me, Minister. That was promised. Fianna Fáil said it would support it. They are running for the hills now. Is the Minister saying they will never support a constitutional right to housing?

I am talking to families, and it is heartbreaking. They are walking down streets and living in communities with boarded up council houses. There are thousands of them. I have asked the Minister repeatedly if he will give funding to local authorities to get all these houses back into use. To be fair to the Minister, he was straight and said "No". He said he would not provide all the funding required to get these back into use. Imagine the child and the teenager who are homeless and the trauma that is being caused by the homeless crisis. What we are bringing forward in and of itself will not solve the homeless crisis but it is will give people hope and an opportunity to know that they have rights. The Minister, however, is denying their rights by not supporting this.

We have people who are facing eviction. I have a clinic every week. It is out the door with families looking for houses. We have people who are overstaying. The Government slashed the tenant in situ scheme. We have families now who are overstaying. Local authorities are telling them to overstay. Where are they going to go? Where are their rights? We have people who are on the waiting lists for years and years. How long is long enough to be waiting on the list? How long must people wait on the list? Is it five, seven, ten or 15 years? When does a person have a right? When does a family have a right to a home?

There are two more important elements I want to talk about. There is action and there is policy, or there is action and there is principle. We may disagree on the actions the Government has taken but we believe that ordinary workers and families should come before speculators and developers. That a disagreement that we have. That is what we believe - people first. We want people to have an ability access affordable housing - truly affordable housing not the affordable housing the Government is talking about - and for no child or adult to be forced into homelessness. I hope we can agree on that.

Terence MacSwiney, a member of the First Dáil and former Ardmhéara Chorcaí once famously said, " ... in matters of principle there can be no tactics, there is one straight forward course to follow and that course must be found and followed without swerving to the end." Deputy Hearne is not in here talking about tactics, and neither am I or others in the Opposition. We are trying to make a genuine change. Terence MacSwiney said this 100 years ago. The First Dáil said that children should have access to a roof over their heads. When we talk about people having a roof over their heads, it is not four walls and a roof. It is about a home. It does not matter if there are ten in the house or one in the house, everyone should have that right.

We have children growing up without homes. It is the duty of this Government to stop that from happening. Every child should be able to grow up with a home. This work needs to be done and we should honour the legacy of the first Parliament and the Government should go ahead and deliver that.

We talk about cherishing all the children of the nation but how can we do so when thousands of them are in emergency accommodation and there are tens of thousands of them in overcrowded accommodation, sharing homes and in boxrooms?

It is a symbolic move to put this into the Constitution. However, it more than just symbolic in that it means something. The importance of a home cannot be ignored. My home is where my wife and I raised our two kids. We had some unbelievable days in that home and we had some really hard times over the years where we would come together and hug and cry but we had a home. So many people are in hotel rooms crying. So many parents are heartbroken because they are looking at their kids and wondering what their future is going to be. A home could be rented or private. We are not saying to give everyone a house. Deputy Hearne said a while ago that is not what we are saying. We are saying that everyone should have a constitutional right to be able to access housing. That would mean no local authority houses would be allowed to be boarded up for years. Regarding the number of vacancies, there are over 100,00 houses. Some people reckon that 160,000 houses are vacant right now.

I have asked the Minister and his predecessor to walk the streets of Dublin or Cork with me. I will show him house after house that is empty. At the same time, we have families in crowded emergency accommodation. It is so disappointing that promises and commitments were made to people. That is one of the reasons people have lost faith in politicians because when they make a promise, they do not stand over it. We will not agree on a lot of policy or actions but at least if the Government makes a commitment, it should stand over that.

I left the Chamber ten minutes ago to talk to a person in Cork City Council's homeless section about getting accommodation for a girl and her child who become homeless on Tuesday night. I know dozens of families, lone parents and individuals who are in homeless accommodation and who are crying out for help. I will give Cork City Council credit. A total of 33% of its allocations went to people in homeless accommodation but still the numbers go up and the homeless figures go up. I ask the Minister to reconsider and to support this Bill.

Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett

I thank Deputy Hearne for bringing forward this Bill, which we are very happy to support. It will be interesting to see because the indications are that the Government is not going to support it. Deputy Ó Broin had similar Bills in the previous Dáil. I had a Bill on the right to housing in 2021 that amazingly passed.

I think that was a mistake - the Government forgot to call a vote, so we got the right to housing referendum Bill passed. Of course, nothing was done about it and the housing situation has continued to get worse. The number of people in homeless and emergency accommodation has worsened steadily. At that stage when the Bill was passed, it was probably below 10,000 and since then, it has gone up to 17,000.

The number of people on housing lists - if you include everybody who is on a housing list, both those on the social housing list and those on HAP lists - is about the same; it is roughly 110,000 households. There are of course, and I will go into this in a second, people who do not even qualify for lists. The failure of the Government is spectacular and despite listing off all the things it says it is doing, the situation has continued to get worse.

I have one human example of why we need a right to housing. Caoimhe is now homeless for the second time, because of two subsequent evictions. She has three children and last Christmas, I read out a letter from one of her children who said in her letter to Santa that the only thing the child wanted was a home. They are still in emergency accommodation. It is ten months later and for the second time in their lives, they have been evicted through no fault of their own.

Caoimhe is a childcare worker and because the Government has not raised the social housing income thresholds - because, in my opinion, it wants to deny people eligibility for social housing - she is homeless. However, she has now been taken off the housing list because as a childcare worker, she has gone over the eligibility limit. For a single person, that is now €43,930 and she earns €44, 272. Here is someone, to use Government phraseology, who gets up early in the morning and has three children to look after who are writing to Santa saying they just want a home and who are now homeless for a second time through no fault of their own. They were evicted because the Government allows landlords to evict families like hers. She is now trapped as not only can she not get social housing, she is not eligible for HAP either.

It is this crazy situation where if you are in a HAP tenancy, it does not matter if your earnings go up. If she had been in a social house which she should be in - if the Government had not failed her - it would not have made any difference if her income went up, she would just pay a higher rent. However, she is now homeless and in the worst possible position. She is eligible for nothing because her pay has gone over the housing limit that the Government will not raise, despite us appealing to it for the past two years. People are being knocked off the lists all the time and are being punished for working and getting up early in the morning. There is also of course, the hopelessness of those who are actually on the lists, particularly families. Much of the social housing the Government boasts about delivering is outsourced to the private sector, which does not want to build family homes. They can get more one- and two-bedroom units on a site than building three- or four-bedroom units.

That is why family homelessness in particular has gone up. The Government is relying on people who want to make money from every site rather than deliver for the housing need. This is something that has been pointed out repeatedly to the Government but it continues to outsource it. Even worse, it then sells off public land. It grieves me every single time I go out the N11 to pass by the RTÉ campus and I look at the most profitable house builder in the country now building 500 apartments on part of the old campus. Why is a private builder whose profits last year rose to €168 million and which are increasing every year, going to profit from and decide what proportion of the houses on what was public land will be three or two bedrooms? Of course, a very small proportion will be three bedrooms and there will be no four bedrooms for the bigger families that need them, because it is not profitable. The Government gave this builder the site. The State allowed that to happen, instead of the LDA taking it.

In Cherrywood in my area, which has the biggest residential development in the country, DLR Properties is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown County Council but the elected councillors have no control over what it does with the property. However, there are Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael councillors on the board - not anybody on the Left of course - who have decided to sell it. They have decided o sell public land, which could deliver 1,200 houses in order that some other profiteer can make money, can decide whether there will be any family housing and that will get all the profits made from the land. The Government is now rezoning land everywhere, instantly increasing its value, which is all in private hands, so that more people can profit from the housing misery of people like Caoimhe.

A right to housing would be helpful in this regard. If there was a constitutional right, there would be legal backing and an imperative to ensure people like Caoimhe were not made homeless. There would be a prioritisation of State resources to provide housing for people like Caoimhe, and most importantly, for her children. By the way, Caoimhe is from Ballybrack-Loughlinstown. Andy is another person who is 25 and who is now being threatened with eviction from the council house he has lived in all his life. His mother died recently and while it is tragic enough to lose your parent, as a consequence of the technicality of him not being the primary tenant even though he has never lived anywhere else, he is now being told to get out and is not being offered anywhere else. That is unbelievable. Why, against a background of record levels of homelessness, would the State allow someone to be thrown out? He will then be down in emergency accommodation. Why would the Government do that? This is the sort of madness we have because we do not have a right to housing.

I have to be honest. We need to start getting radical over this. We need to start doing what they do in Spain, because the young and older people - an 87-year-old woman was evicted - are out on the streets saying, "We have had enough of this shit." I have been arguing this stuff for a long time, as have other people in this House, and to be honest, we need to get angry and do something about it because these sorts of situations are unacceptable. You can multiply those cases by thousands. People are trapped in this situation where they have done nothing wrong, and there are people profiteering from it. Cairn Homes and Glenveagh Homes have their profits going up. The O'Flynn and Ballymore Groups and so on do not even publish their profits but we know they have gone up. IRES REIT profits have also gone up.

People are profiteering off this stuff. They are hoarding land, speculating, charging record house prices and rents and ordinary working people are being left in these dire circumstances. The majority of young people are now saying they are going to leave the country because they do not think they will ever afford to live here but not to worry, the lads are making profits so it does not matter. That is why the Government will not do it, because it will infringe on the profits of these people. It is worried we might actually control prices and rents and that we might take the land bank back off them. What got Die Linke, the left-wing party in Berlin, elected was proposing to expropriate the landlords. That is what the Government is worried about. It is worried that the right to housing might lead to that but it is what needs to happen. By the way, this was more or less said back in the early 1970s in the Kenny report, that is, taking the zoned land bank off these people to deliver housing for need. That is what needs to happen.

There are greedy speculators controlling the price of land, the available property and what is built. The consequence is housing misery and a housing crisis that just goes on and on. We have to stop this for the sake of Caoimhe and her children, for Andy and for people like them. Even if the Minister is not going to do that, will he raise the thresholds and start telling local authorities to not make people homeless? Will Government stop selling off public land to people who are just profiteering?

I thank Deputy Hearne but to be honest, we need to be out on the streets in the way they are in Spain and Germany, as well as putting Bills forward in here.

Deputy Eoin Ó Broin

I thank Deputy Hearne for introducing this important legislation and giving us an opportunity to debate it this evening, although I have to say that there is a terrible sense of déjà vu. For 12 years, the Oireachtas and the wider public have been debating the need for a constitutionalised right to housing. In fact, so exercised was the then Government about the matter that, in 2013, it asked the then Convention on the Constitution to deliberate on a number of economic and social rights. The report was published in 2014. Having listened to all of the arguments and carefully considered the pros and cons of the proposition, an astounding 84% of people in that convention voted to urge the Government to enshrine that right in the Constitution, much higher than almost any of the other rights that they considered at that weekend.

It is important to think about the time that this was published. In early 2014, there were officially fewer than 3,000 adults in what was then the Department of environment-funded emergency accommodation. Child homelessness was virtually unheard of. In the 12 years since, not only have we seen the most dramatic increase in adult and child homelessness in the modern history of the State, but rents and house prices have reached levels that are so unaffordable that even people on very good incomes have no reasonable prospect of affording a home. Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael's record, despite what the Minister says, in delivering social and affordable housing has been, and continues to be, abysmal. Gross social housing need continues to rise. Local authority council waiting lists continue to grow ever longer. Therefore, if people thought that enshrining the right to housing in the Constitution was necessary in 2014, it is even more necessary 12 years on.

Deputy Boyd Barrett rightly pointed out the fact that this was actually the fourth or fifth debate on a constitutional referendum Bill in the decade that I have been here. He had one, I think Gerry Adams had one, I had one, and others as well. What is really interesting is, separate to these exchanges, we have had very considered deliberation in successive hearings of the Oireachtas housing committee on this matter, where we have not just exchanged political opinions, but we have listened to expert testimony. We have listened to people who have studied what has happened in other jurisdictions, particularly European jurisdictions, when a legal or a constitutional right to housing was introduced, including some people who, as they told our committee, started off their journeys on this matter as sceptics but, having studied the evidence, became absolutely convinced of the need for this.

We know that the 2020 programme for Government had that elusive promise of a referendum on housing. Nobody ever knew what that meant and the Government never clarified it for us, but when Darragh O'Brien, under pressure, eventually published the Housing Commission's report - it was actually given to him in September 2023 and he sat on it for a year, so uncomfortable was he - a Fianna Fáil Senator tabled a motion in the Seanad using exactly the same wording as in this Bill and the Seanad, by a majority - not including Fine Gael, I have to say - voted for it. Only weeks afterwards, our Oireachtas housing committee met and discussed these matters and for the very first time, Fianna Fáil, which had never fully declared a position on this matter, supported those of us among the Opposition on the committee and our committee agreed to write to the Minister, urging him to proceed with the referendum. Yet here we are. with a programme for Government almost two years old, with no commitment on the right and the current Minister giving the same lame, uninformed justifications for not acting.

Let me just for the record tell the Minister why this is a good idea, as that is what this debate is ultimately about. The first reason we should do this is because, under our system of referendum, we know from our experience that we have really valued, profound, statewide public conversations about matters of crucial importance. What more important matter could we discuss as a state and as a population than the role of home in our society? That in itself would be enormously valuable and empowering, but all of the international evidence shows that where that debate then leads to a change in law or, in our case, an enshrinement in the Constitution, it creates a huge expectation among the public for real policy change, policy change that would have a profound impact on people's lives. In turn, that would act as a catalyst for governments to do things above and beyond what they otherwise would do. All of the evidence we have heard in repeated sessions of the Oireachtas housing committee on this matter show that the real value is that catalyst for change that delivers meaningful and tangible results in the quality of people's access to secure, adequate and affordable housing.

There are also a number of other changes. It would remove a set of barriers. The Department of public expenditure and reform and its line Minister are an obstacle to many of the things that the Minister, Deputy Browne, his officials and his predecessors have been trying to do in housing. Anyone who reads Eoghan Murphy's autobiography knows that one of his biggest challenges was his Cabinet colleagues in finance and public expenditure and those Departments. A constitutional right to housing would remove that barrier and would ensure that Departments had to act.

It would also clarify the law, because one of the things that the Government is very good at, and the Minister has done it again today, is hiding behind the Constitution and the unavailable advice of the Attorney General not to do something. We all remember when Alan Kelly - poor old Alan Kelly - was trying to do something good as Minister for housing. He wanted to link rents to the consumer price index, CPI, and Michael Noonan railed against the proposal, saying it was not constitutional. Balderdash. Every single constitutional expert in the country knew that that was not true. How do we know it was balderdash? Only a couple of years later, a Fine Gael Minister, Simon Coveney, introduced an arguably far more draconian form of rent regulation - rent pressure zones - and there were no constitutional problems from the Attorney General at the time. Removing that red herring through clarifying the law would be enormously important.

Crucially, it would also place an obligation on the State to progressively realise people's right to have affordable, secure and adequate housing. While a lot of the debate often focuses on whether it will lead to increased litigation or not - the evidence suggests not so - it would give those people who are most egregiously denied the right to adequate, secure and affordable accommodation some recourse in the courts if the Government simply refused to listen.

If these are all the reasons to do it, you have to ask why this Government is so implacably opposed. I have a slightly different read of it than Deputy Hearne, although not from any significant difference on the legislation. I think that the Government is scared of this because if it became a part of our Constitution, it would have to do things that it was politically not willing to do to address this crisis.

We have always said that this is not a silver bullet and will not resolve the housing crisis overnight, but in order to tackle the ever-deepening housing crisis in our society, we need every single tool in the toolbox. This is one of them. It is not a waste of time, it is not a distraction. It is a valuable tool, one among many others. Of course, the Minister is right, in that enshrining something in the Constitution does not build a single home, but if that was the case, we would not have a Constitution at all. Constitutions have an entirely different function, and that is why this proposition is to be supported.

I know that, unlike his predecessor, the Minister is a considered person. He actually thinks about things, unlike the Deputy from Fingal. I would urge him to just go and read the testimony that the eminent professor of constitutional law from the University College London, Professor Colm O'Cinneide, gave to our committee. As somebody who has been in this debate for a very long time, it was one of the most profound experiences I had. Professor O’Cinneide is the individual who said that when he started researching this, he was a sceptic. He did not believe that this was a necessary or valuable tool in addressing housing need. However, having studied every single country that has legalised or constitutionalised housing, he is now a strong advocate for many of the reasons that I have set out. At some point, the Minister has to start basing policy not on the limited lobby interests that the lobby register discloses have a revolving door to the Custom House and Government Buildings next door, but on people who actually have real experience, people who have real expertise, and Professor O’Cinneide is one of those.

I have no doubt, having been part of this discussion for over a decade, that this is an important, positive and absolutely necessary proposal. That is why I am enthusiastically supporting this Bill and will support any other Bill that seeks to do the same thing. The fact that the Minister is not willing to support it shows once again that he is not serious about tackling the housing crisis despite what he said. He is not willing to do everything that is necessary to ensure people's needs for social, affordable or privately owned homes are met. That is the real reason he is opposing this today.

The Minister is not willing to do everything that is necessary to ensure people's needs for social, affordable or privately owned homes are met. That is the real reason he is opposing this today. It is not because of any flaw in the legislation but because it would expose the flaws in the Government's policy, its failure on housing and the tragic impact that is having on tens of thousands of people across the State.

Deputy Conor Sheehan

I am here to speak in support of this Bill. At the outset in his speech, the Minister mentioned Spain and the housing crisis that is raging across Spain at the moment. It is important to note for context that there is such a terrible housing crisis in Spain because when Spain transitioned from Francoism to democracy, the social housing stock in Spain was between 1% and about 3%. There was a Francoist system of housing which transitioned into democracy. There were the 1990s and 2000s, an awful lot of property speculation and a property boom. Even though this constitutional right to housing, which I support, is not a silver bullet, it is certainly not worsening the situation in Spain.

I cannot understand why Government is opposing this Bill because it grabs the text from the Housing Commission report and it goes more to my constant refrain and criticism of Government treating the Housing Commission report almost like a buffet from which you can pick bits and bobs while ignoring other parts of it. It is important to note that because the Minister's predecessor did not even launch the Housing Commission report. There was no proper launch. He did not want it to get the level of traction that it got because it sets out starkly in many ways how the State is going wrong.

I also support this Bill because I believe a constitutional right to housing would make the Minister's job easier. It is plain for those of us in opposition to see that many of the issues in relation to housing, particularly the delivery of public housing, come with how the Minister's Department interacts with the Department of public expenditure. It is clear that the tenant in situ cuts that were carried out last year, the changes to that scheme and the narrowing of the focus were as a result of the Department of public expenditure essentially coming in with big scissors. The problem is that in our Constitution we have a right to private property. We do not have an explicit right to housing. Therefore, it is almost, ipso facto, by way of our basic law, that housing is essentially treated as a commodity and not as a public good. Different Oireachtas housing committees have looked at this over the years. They have heard from many expert witnesses, most of whom who have drawn the same conclusion. This is not a silver bullet but it is about rebalancing the scales and putting a constitutional duty on the State to ensure that every citizen has access to secure, affordable and dignified accommodation. It is a rebalance away from treating housing as a commodity towards treating housing as a common and public good.

Looking at how we have delivered housing over the best part of three or four decades, it is very clear from the pickle we find ourselves in at the moment that it is not working. It is not working because we have 18,000 people homeless. It is not working because rents and house prices are so high. Even though the Minister constantly talks about the need to deliver more supply, while we do need to deliver more supply, the supply that is being incentivised at the moment, certainly in Dublin and Cork and the major cities, is not affordable. It is high-end luxury, build-to-rent apartments, at €2,000 or €3,000 a month to rent. This Bill would ensure that if we had a constitutional right to housing, there would be a situation where if an individual or a family entered homelessness or was at risk of entering homelessness, their right to safe and secure shelter would be the primary policy consideration.

I cannot understand why the Minister is outright opposing it. I do not understand why he talks about the Housing Commission and post-2030 in his speech, and why Government could not even have considered a timed amendment on this, for us to maybe come back to it at some point in the not-too-distant future. As was mentioned by other speakers, the Minister's own colleague, Senator Mary Fitzpatrick, introduced a Private Members' motion in the Seanad in 2021, seeking to amend Article 43 of the Constitution. We are at a stage now where the time for tinkering around the edges of a system that is fundamentally broken is over. Many of the societal problems, not just here but in other countries around the so-called western world, which we have at the moment are caused by decades of neoliberalism and a vision of a Thatcherite or a Reaganite state in how public services and housing are delivered. It is not working.

We need proper State accountability. We need to see the right to housing inserted into the Constitution because it affects other things. For example, the Kenny report has been sitting on a shelf somewhere gathering mould since the 1970s. We have huge issues with land speculation in this country. It is one of the primary drivers of our housing crisis. The access to adequate, secure and affordable shelter should be explicitly recognised as a fundamental human right. I support this because we need to rebalance and re-tilt the scales. We need to legally obligate the State to prioritise public housing above and beyond all other forms of housing and to actually tackle homelessness.

I am disappointed because the Bill is so narrow and so specific. It uses the wording the Housing Commission spent the bones of two years deliberating over but the Minister has come in and delivered a speech prepared by his Department that we have all heard many times before. He constantly says the State is building record amounts of social housing but the housing deficit continues to grow year on year. It is going to be at around 300,000. This crisis and the numbers entering homelessness are unfortunately continuing to rise. That is why I really believe this Bill, as something that is genuinely radical, merits a more serious treatment than it is getting here tonight.

Deputy Sinéad Gibney

I thank the Minister for being here for the debate and for attending for as long as he did. I thank Deputy Hearne for bringing forward the Bill. We are proud to put it forward as a party and of all the work Deputy Hearne put into it. The first thing I want to speak to is the constitutional element of this because for me the Constitution is where law meets the population.

The Constitution should reflect the values of the population. It is not just an instrument of law. It is an expression of who we are as a society, where we are as a society and where our priorities are as a society. For me, the idea that we do not have housing enshrined in our Constitution as a fundamental right is a problem because we can see all around us on a daily basis in our constituency offices and among all of the different groups we work with that this is a crisis and an emergency.

I want to speak to some of the fundamentals of that crisis. Essentially, every generation that is younger than me has been locked out of home ownership. We are seeing spiralling figures of homelessness, with 5,830 children now in homelessness and 17,885 people in total. Some of those children are experiencing multiple years in homelessness. If we ever want to see a dictionary definition of storing up problems, then it is child homelessness. Those children will grow up having experienced the difficulties sown in these fundamental years that they are experiencing as children, and we as a society will be paying for this crisis for generations to come.

The reality of the Minister's speech is a million miles away. That for me is one of the biggest issues when we come to debate these topics. The phrases that are in there - "the largest number of new build social homes", "the highest annual total recorded" of starter homes supports, "These figures demonstrate the impact", "They represent serious momentum", "They reflect the scaling up", "While 2025 was a record year, we are driving on", "We are making home ownership more accessible", and "I am confident that this trajectory will continue throughout 2026" - do not match with what we can all see clearly with our eyes, which is that this is a housing emergency that has dominated our society for decades now and is affecting every single person in our country. It is not only about the people who are locked out of home ownership in the generations younger than I am. It is about their families who have to support them, it is the many houses that I knock on in my constituency where 30-year-old and 40-year-old people are living in their box rooms still, now seeking the best they can look forward to, which might be a bed in a shed. This is what we are dealing with. This reality that is being put forward by the Minister just does not tally.

The Minister commented that this Bill was a distraction. Saying that to progress a right to housing being enshrined in the Constitution is a distraction is just so disingenuous. Honestly, not to gender stereotype, but can we not multitask in the Government? Can we not pursue the right to housing while we address the supply issue?

That brings me to the other matter, which is that the Minister says this will not resolve the issue. We know it will not. We understand the complexity and do not need to be talked down to on that. All of the other bodies that have backed this know that too. What it will do is force a better response from the Government and from the State, including all of the arms of the State that need to be involved in our response to the housing emergency that we are all living through. It will better balance the emphasis that the Government places on the private sector solutions. When we say this, we get thrown right back at us that we do not see or recognise that the private sector has a role to play. That is not true. We absolutely see that there is a role for the private sector to play, but what we have is a better balance between what the private sector can do and what the State must do. What this Bill and the enshrined recognition in our Constitution of a right to housing would do is support the Minister and local authorities in developing that policy. All of the arms of the State would be better equipped if we had that recognised right to housing.

In the remaining half of my time, I would like to talk about what this can do. The right to housing, as something enshrined in our Constitution, would be an expression of our values. It would be a statement of values that we can all look to. My colleague Deputy Hearne spoke about the fact that people talked about the right to education. They talk about it here in the House, but they also talk in society about how we have the right to an appropriate education for our children and that that right needs to be realised. I am not saying it is realised in every way, but it nonetheless is something that people can get their heads around and can actually be something in respect of which there is a common understanding that it is a right.

The other thing about housing as a fundamental right - I am speaking now about my own experience in this area in the rights and equality space - is that it is a fundamental right. This means that without the right to housing, it is virtually impossible to realise the other rights that we all should enjoy in society such as the right to employment, the right to privacy and the right to health. These are all compromised when people cannot find appropriate shelter to live in. That is why it is a fundamental right and that is why it deserves to be introduced into our Constitution.

Another concept I want to speak to today is adequate housing. When I was working in my previous organisation, the Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission, we did a lot of work on this to try to create a legal benchmark of what adequate housing was and what we meant when we talked about adequate housing. The work we commissioned on that defined adequate housing as having: security of tenure; affordability; habitability, that is, quality housing you can actually live in; availability of services, given that there is no point in having a house if you do not have access to water and sanitation; accessibility for those people who need particular design or logistical features in their homes; location so that you can do the things you want to do such as go to school, go to work and take part in community activities; and cultural adequacy.

That last one is interesting because it brings me to my next point, which is really the reason that I do not think the Government is interested in this. It is the people who are most at risk who would actually be assisted by the right to housing being enshrined in our Constitution. For example, we heard from a spokesperson of the Before We Die campaign at a briefing today. I do not think I saw any Government representatives attending the briefing. We heard from experts from legal groups, disability groups and so on. The Before We Die spokesperson spoke about how his daughter would simply be seen as a commodity once her parents died. They are scrambling hard at the moment, but once they die, she does not have a right to housing. She will probably be removed from the location she is in. When her parents die, she will lose her home and probably be shifted to somewhere else in the country, meaning that she also cannot access the services, community and activities that she currently enjoys as an adult with an intellectual disability.

We are also talking about lone parents who, like the case Deputy Boyd Barrett mentioned, are already existing in a Byzantine reality of supports from the State. They are pushed out of housing lists and pushed out of this and that because they adjust their circumstances ever so slightly. I raised my daughter alone and I know a lot about how lone parents are challenged in this society. While I was lucky enough to come from a background that meant my housing was never compromised, I did have to move back into my own family home. I slept in my old bed in my old bedroom with my daughter for the first four years of her life before I was able to move into an annexe at my family home and eventually be able to afford to move when my daughter was nine years old. For lone parents trying to manage all of this in the middle of a housing crisis, this is what they are looking at. These are the people who experience discrimination most but who are so under pressure that they cannot pursue the discrimination through the legal access to justice they are owed. If a person is denied a housing assistant payment, HAP, application or a rental application essentially because they are a single parent, even though that might not be explicitly said, they are not going to go to the Workplace Relations Commission, WRC, and lodge a case. They just have to put a roof over their child's head. Migrants are most likely to live in inadequate housing in terms of overcrowding and actual availability of services and standards. These are the groups that are going to be helped most by the recognition of housing as a right. The Minister of State's party supported it - that is the most heartbreaking part of it - but like neutrality, it seems to have left that in the dust and joined with its Fine Gael colleagues to say it is going to go with this ideology instead now. I ask the Minister of State to please support this and make it easier for his own Minister for housing to actually provide a right to housing in our Constitution.

Deputy Pádraig Rice

I, too, would like to congratulate my colleague Deputy Hearne on tabling this proposal. It is an important one and an important debate.

I am disappointed that the Minister did not stay to respond to the debate. We have had a good discussion. Time and again, Ministers do not engage with the substance of the debate in the House and do not stay to respond to the points made by the Opposition. Far too often, it feels like we are shouting into a void and they are not listening or responding to the key issues we put before them. It was remarkable to hear the Minister talk down public investment in housing the week before a budget. He talked about the State not being able to provide all the housing the country needs. We need the Minister to talk up investment in public housing and try to deliver more public housing for people.

Last week, a woman came to my clinic. She is living in her car. I got a flashback to 15 years ago when I was the welfare officer in the students' union of UCC and knew a student who was living in their car. It reminded me that nothing is changing. It is just getting worse, day after day, month after month and year after year. We need a radical change of direction and a change in policy. We fundamentally need a right to housing in the Constitution.

I was concerned when the Minister described this as a distraction. At least he is not talking about turning a corner because the Government turned so many corners, it was going around in circles. It is good that we have this new description of it as a distraction instead.

It has to be said that there is much that could be done to change things. There are simple things that could be done to provide housing. I did an event for students in UCC on Monday. Walking down College Road, within a stone's throw of the college, I saw a boarded-up house. That is one of the areas of Cork city where there is the most demand for housing. There is a boarded-op house on College Road. There is a house in Ballyphehane, just down the road from my house, that is boarded up. It was boarded up two years ago. I look at it every day when I go for a walk. The same council house is still boarded up two years later. It says to me and the people living in my community that the Government does not care. It does not give a damn about the people in that community, including the woman living in her car. They could have access to housing and a fundamental right to housing.

We know that a constitutional right to housing would provide a clear floor of protection in respect of access to basic, adequate housing and would provide recognition that a home is central to the dignity of each person. It would provide a legal mechanism for citizens to vindicate their right to housing before the courts. It would oblige the State to reasonably protect and fulfil the right in the spirit of the obligations under the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, and provide a ready-made legal framework by which they could progressively realise the right to housing and by which it could be pursued. It would provide a safeguard against which all State housing policy and decision-making could be measured and challenged.

It is fundamentally important that we reframe our housing policy to put a rights-based focus on it and provide people with that basic right to adequate housing because it is crucial to the dignity of every individual in the State. What kind of Republic is this? Why kind of Republic does the Minister of State want? I know I want a Republic of equals, where everybody is treated equally, with dignity and respect. Core to that is providing access to basic services, supports and housing. We must build a social floor below which nobody is allowed to fall.

We have repeatedly heard that over a ten-year period, 13 Bills were proposed by the Government on the basis of concerns around property rights, according to research by the Oireachtas. Time and again, the property rights in the Constitution trump people's right to housing. A right to housing would provide some balance in the Constitution to those private property rights. As was referenced earlier, in 2014, the Convention on the Constitution recommended that the Constitution be amended to include economic, social and cultural rights, including a right to housing. The people are on side, as was very evident in those discussions at the Convention on the Constitution. If you put this proposal to a referendum, an overwhelming majority of people would vote in favour of it, and that is what the Government is afraid of.

We have seen this right around the world. Over 80 countries have a right to housing in the constitution, including Belgium, Finland, Greece, the Netherlands, Portugal, Spain and Sweden. Many countries already do this and we should do it too. We know that a right to housing would not mean a key to a home for everybody the day after the referendum. However, it would require the State in its policies and decisions to ask reasonably to ensure people have access to housing.

It is not just the Convention on the Constitution that has called for the right. The Ombudsman for Children has called on the Government to bring forward a referendum to put a right to housing in the Constitution and to address the homelessness crisis that is a matter of urgency. Far too many children in this State are growing up in homelessness and growing up in hotel rooms and bed and breakfast accommodation. We know that is damaging their development. We all know that. We know it is going to have a lifelong impact on these children who are growing up in poverty. We know we have that situation because of decisions taken by Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael over decades. Clear policy choices were made to reduce the number of social houses in the 1980s and 1990s. We decided to rely on the private market and the social housing stock collapsed. The peak for social housing was in the 1970s. The Minister says we are now building more, but it is not comparable when we consider the percentage of our population in need. We must get back to investing far more in social and affordable housing. Other countries do this. They provide people with adequate housing and we can do that too.

One of the interesting things about this debate is the unity on the left in this Parliament on this issue. All of the parties have talked about their support for the right to housing. It is just the members of the Government, those in Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael and the Independents who support this Government, who are opposing that right and who do not want to see that fundamental change to deliver housing for our people, to build a social floor beneath which no one is allowed to fall and to ensure no child grows up in homelessness. We have a different vision for this country. We want to see a more equal, fairer and better Ireland. I urge the Government to rethink its approach. I urge Fianna Fáil, in particular, to go back to its roots and go back to where it was not too long ago in terms of prioritising social housing and the basic services that should be delivered for people in this country. As Deputy Gibney said, Fianna Fáil is being lurched to the right by Fine Gael and needs to change tack.

Crucially, I ask the Government not to be afraid of the people. Put this referendum to the people and we will get the result we need. When we get that referendum and the right to housing, we can start to change this country for the better.

Minister of State at the Department of Education and Youth (Deputy Michael Moynihan)

I thank Deputy Hearne and all the Deputies who spoke so genuinely and eloquently about housing and the challenges that are facing us. I reaffirm the Government's commitment to tackling the housing crisis. We know that these challenges are having a real impact on people's lives and we remain focused on increasing delivery. Enshrining a right to housing in the Constitution is not necessary to solve this crisis. To hold a referendum on this now would simply create a distraction from the real work of scaling up the supply of new housing. It is simply unrealistic to suggest we can deliver a home for everybody. We cannot create unrealistic expectations.

The Government has shown a clear commitment to tackling the housing crisis in a real and practical way through introducing measures that support the increased delivery of housing. In this regard, supply has increased significantly over recent years. In the five years to the end of June of 2026, more than 156,000 new homes have been delivered. This compares to 87,819 in the previous five-year period and just 29,855 in the five years before that. However, there is still a considerable amount of work to do. Increasing the supply of new homes is critical to alleviating the pressures in the housing market, helping to moderate price growth and ease affordability challenges across the country. We must ensure everybody has a range of housing options available to them, whether they want to buy or rent a house or are in need of social housing.

Delivering Homes, Building Communities seeks to significantly accelerate delivery of new homes by focusing on activating land and creating the optimal environment to encourage housing activity, including regulatory reform, tax incentives and the largest ever capital investment in the history of the State. Some €275 billion has been earmarked for investment in infrastructure over the next ten years through the delivery of the national development plan. The unprecedented level of investment the Government has committed to bringing about will include a significant scaling up in the delivery of housing over the coming years, which will address the needs of the most vulnerable in our communities, make buying and renting homes more affordable and support the development of villages, towns and cities across the country.

Introducing a right to housing in the Constitution will not result in the delivery of a single additional house. Rather, it could create unwanted and unintended consequences that delay the delivery of housing by creating uncertainty in the market and redirecting State resources to addressing lengthy legal challenges for years to come. That is why the Government will not be supporting the Bill.

The Government’s immediate focus and priority continue to be on the delivery of homes as set out in the programme for Government and the Delivering Homes, Building Communities plan. I assure Deputies that I have taken on board the comments raised in the debate. Delivering homes is of huge importance to the Government and we are working and investing huge amounts of time and effort across government to achieve that.

Deputy Rory Hearne

I thank those who spoke in favour of the Bill, including Sinn Féin, the Labour Party, People Before Profit and my colleagues in the Social Democrats. They all spoke clearly and eloquently and made the case that was needed to be made as to the importance and significance of this Bill. I express my deep disappointment that the Government is opposing this. I am trying to figure out its reason for doing so. I do not think the Minister of State believes these arguments about distraction and that it might “delay delivery ... by creating uncertainty in the market”. The idea that a right to housing would create uncertainty in the market is nonsense. Did the Government ask the institutional investors for their response to this Bill and this is what they said? This is not serious. As Deputy Gibney said, it is disingenuous. It is not a serious engagement with this Bill, the work the Housing Commission put in, the work of the original convention in 2014, as Deputy Ó Broin pointed out, or with the work put in by all Opposition parties on numerous similar Bills.

To go back to the Housing Commission, this did not need to be a partisan Bill. It did not need to be seen through the lens of the Opposition versus the Government. The Government asked its own Housing Commission what it should do with this wording, and it came forward with this proposal. After listening to the debate and the Minister of State’s rationale, my conclusion, like that of Deputies Rice and Ó Broin, is that the Government is afraid of the people. It does not want to see resounding majority support for this referendum because that would mandate Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael, this Government, to do things that they are clearly unwilling to do, nor does the market want to put in place that floor of protection. That is what the Government’s position shows.

I will specifically call out Fianna Fáil in this regard because it made a commitment previously, including its TDs who are now Ministers, to support a right to housing in a referendum. It is now actively denying people their fundamental right. This is a clear Bill that would give citizens in this country a fundamental right to housing, which so many are being denied. That is what the Bill sets out. The Government could do it, but it is saying “No.”. It is saying it is going to refuse to give citizens in this Republic a human right to housing. It is saying it is going to leave citizens without that right. We will see thousands of people continue to languish in homelessness, with the lives of both children and parents destroyed. There will be tens of thousands in hidden homelessness who are not even allowed to enter social housing lists or be eligible for emergency accommodation. Instead, they will be sleeping on the streets or in cars. A generation will continue to be stuck in their childhood bedrooms or forced to emigrate. The Government is actively denying people the right to housing, which is incredible. It is an incredible position for Fianna Fáil to take. It is saying it is not going to implement a right to housing or hold a referendum, despite previously committing to do so.

All the arguments have been made. This is not going to be a distraction. The Housing Commission said it would enhance the Government's obligations and requirements to deliver housing. Is that not a good thing? No one is saying the State is going to have an obligation to build or deliver a house for everyone. No one is saying that. Again, that is completely disingenuous. This would ensure that everyone has the right to access an adequate, affordable and secure home of a decent standard. It is about that need being met for everyone. That comes in many forms, including both State and private sector supply. Ultimately, it means the Government is responsible to ensure that our housing system delivers that. Currently, it is not doing so. It is failing so many people. The Government is afraid of a constitutional right to housing. It is unwilling to take it on because it does not have the courage of its convictions to solve this crisis fundamentally. That is why it is not bringing this legislation through.

I wish to highlight two particular groups. The first is our Gaeltacht communities and the housing issue they face in the Gaeltacht. There is a fundamental issue that their right to housing has not been delivered. It is fundamental. Is pobail mhionlaigh iad na pobail Ghaeltachta atá againn. Is iad a bhfuil fágtha againn de na pobail mhóra Gaeilge a bhí sa Stát seo 100 bliain ó shín. Tá easpa soláthair thithíochta ag lagú struchtúr na bpobal Gaeltachta agus ag cur thodhchaí na gceantar Gaeltachta i mbaol san fhadtréimhse. Ar an mbealach sin, tá cearta cultúrtha agus teanga na bpobal á séanadh ag an Státchóras sa tír seo i mbealach náireach gan aird ar an dochar atá á dhéanamh. Our Gaeltacht communities are minority communities. They are all that remains of the large Irish-speaking population that existed in this State a century ago. A lack of housing provision is undermining the structure of Gaeltacht communities and jeopardising the long-term future of these areas. A right to housing in our Constitution would support our Gaeltacht communities to have access to culturally appropriate housing that meets their needs. BÁNU, the group that has been working on this issue, has asked that the Minister for housing set up a commission to undertake an independent professional assessment and a linguistic impact assessment on the new national planning statement. I ask for that to be carried out because there is a real danger that the national planning statement will do the opposite of what it says with regard to supporting Gaeltacht communities. I ask the Minister of State to take that back to the Minister.

The second group I wish to highlight is disabled people. We heard Deputy Gibney talk about the Before We Die campaign, disabled people and their families. Joan Carthy from the Irish Wheelchair Association spoke in the audiovisual room this morning. I was struck by what she said. She said:

From a disability perspective, housing is about having the freedom to decide where you live, about being able to leave your parents' home and build a life of your own. It is about participating in your community, accessing education and employment, maintaining relationships and living with dignity. For people with disabilities, housing is not simply a roof over your head. It is independence, inclusion, equality and, more importantly, equity. Many people live with ageing parents because there is nowhere suitable to move to. Others are trapped in homes that no longer meet their needs. Others remain on waiting lists for years. Independent living cannot happen without housing. Community inclusion cannot happen without housing. Choice cannot happen without housing. A person cannot fully participate in society if there is nowhere suitable for them to live. That is why the right to housing and the right to independent living are inseparable. You cannot have one without the other because housing is not just about buildings; it is about belonging, opportunity and dignity. It is about whether every person in this country is afforded the same chance to live a full and equal life. So, yes, let us recognise housing as a constitutional right.

Those are the words of Joan Carthy from the Irish Wheelchair Association. They sum up why we need to put a right to housing in our Constitution. We need to do it for all those groups who are currently excluded and left behind because the system does not meet their needs and is not obliged to do so.

That is the fundamental problem. We still do not see or treat housing as a human right and that means so many groups are excluded.

The Minister has said he is going to oppose the Bill, which is deeply disappointing. The Social Democrats and the other parties here will continue to push for this. If the Minister votes against the Bill next week, which he said he is going to do, we will highlight that, we will show the public what position he has taken on this and we will continue to push for it because it is absolutely essential. I ask people who support this to contact their local TD to ask them to support it and to change their mind. There is time between now and next week in terms of people deciding.

I ask Fianna Fáil TDs, in particular, to look into their conscience, to look at what is going on in this country and to look at their previous commitments to see if this is actually the decision they are going to make. They are going to vote against giving people the right to access adequate housing, which they committed to in the past. That will be a shame if it happens.

Cuireadh an cheist.

Question put.

Cuireadh an Dáil ar athló ar 6.22 p.m. go dtí 1 p.m., Dé Máirt, an 6 Deireadh Fómhair 2026.

The Dáil adjourned at 6.22 p.m. until 1 p.m. on Tuesday, 6 October 2026.

Dáil Éireann díospóireacht - Thursday, 1 Oct 2026

Forty-first Amendment of the Constitution (Right to Housing) Bill 2026: Second Stage [Private Members]

Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Thursday, 1 Oct 2026