Bríd Smith challenges ending of no-fault eviction ban
Bríd Smith spoke on 21 March 2023 about the eviction ban, arguing that no-fault evictions must be maintained and that tenants need fixity of tenure. She rejected proposals to end the eviction ban and warned against retrospectively changing property law to the detriment of buyers and renters.
Main argument
Smith challenged claims that the eviction ban must end, saying a no-fault eviction ban is not the norm in Europe and that people need fixity of tenure — an "aged-old demand of the Land League" that has not been achieved after successive governments.
Acceptable grounds for eviction
She said evictions are appropriate when tenants wreck the property, do not pay their rent or cause antisocial problems, but insisted that where there is no fault eviction should not occur.
Homelessness and tenant protections
Smith argued that giving people a few extra months to find alternatives is insufficient and that those who have not found housing should be allowed to stay rather than be driven onto the streets. She pledged backing and solidarity and said she will keep arguing in the House for legal change to protect tenants.
Retrospective law concerns
She warned against changing the law retrospectively, saying it would be unfair to people who bought properties expecting to regain possession if they returned from abroad and that retrospective change would almost certainly be unconstitutional.
Political disagreement in the debate
Smith acknowledged differing views in the chamber, noting that government parties, Sinn Féin and Labour accept an end date for the ban, and that People for Profit hold a different view from parts of the left. She also referenced comments from Lorcan Sayre and exchanges with other deputies in the debate.
We publish thousands of recordings to make Irish politics transparent and resistant to manipulation. Spotted an error? Report it — together we are building a reliable archive of Irish politics.
I have to challenge a number of things you have said here today on the eviction ban. First of all, you said earlier on to Deputy Batchik that one thing we can all agree on is that the eviction ban will have to end some time. No, we do not. We do not agree with that. Because a no-fault eviction ban is not the norm in Europe. And you often throw Europe back to us when we try to change legislation and normal practices in this country. But this is not the norm in Europe. Lorcan Sayre said so on the radio this morning. And we have repeatedly argued this in this House. People need fixity of tenure. And that is an aged-old demand of the Land League. And we still haven't achieved it after 100 years of Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael ruling this state. So you need to look at that legislation. And we need to see that no-fault evictions are maintained. If people wreck the gaff, don't pay their rent or cause antisocial problems, yes, there should be evictions. But where there's no fault, it should not happen. End of story. And so therefore, when you argue that you gave people a few more months to find an alternative, and they haven't found an alternative, where do they go? Well, we say they need to stay where they are. Rather than go on the streets, they need to stay where they are. We will give them as much backing and solidarity as we can. And we will keep arguing in this House that the law has to change to protect tenants. Thanks, Debbie. I just want to acknowledge that you and your party do have a different view on this. But it is a different view from all the government parties, Sinn Féin and Labour, who all acknowledge that the eviction ban has to end at a certain point. I appreciate that People for Profit has a different view from even the rest of the left on this. And it is true that there are different laws in different European countries. And there's a wide variation in different laws in different European countries. But where permanent no fault eviction bans exist in other European countries, people would have bought a property on that basis and would have known that. What you are essentially saying to somebody is that we should change our law retrospectively in Ireland. So if somebody bought a property, thinking that they can move back into it when they come back home from Australia or Britain in a year or two, that that would be taken away from them. I do not think in those countries they ever passed a law that retrospectively changed the rules. It would be one thing to say that if somebody is going to buy a house now, that they have to rent it out and can never regain possession of it, even if they want to move back in. That is one thing. But to change the law retrospectively, that would almost certainly be constitutional and would be unfair, I think.
Thank you for downloading 🙏
If you publish this material on social media, we would be very grateful if you tagged VideoParliament. It helps us reach more people and keep building a transparent archive of Irish politics.
