Paul Murphy: Opposes rent for people in direct provision
Paul Murphy criticised the minister's suggestion that people granted refugee status who remain in direct provision should pay rent and urged that nobody in direct provision or emergency homeless accommodation be charged. He described cramped living conditions, tents in Tralee, and alleged profiteering by corporate contractors, and demanded a pledge that residents not be forced to pay.
Conditions in direct provision
Paul Murphy highlighted the cramped shared rooms, limited and often horrifying food supply, and very difficult living conditions faced by people in direct provision. He contrasted these conditions with the idea of charging rent and said these are not luxury or standard rental accommodations.
Tents and immediate homelessness risk
He reported that around 40 people have been living for over 10 weeks in a tent in Tralee with the wind shaking the tent as they try to sleep, and that around 300 people in direct provision are living in tents as he spoke. He warned that charging for these conditions would threaten people with homelessness during a cost of living and housing crisis.
Allegations of corporate profiteering
Paul Murphy accused large corporations running direct provision centres - citing Aramark - of squeezing profit from people seeking asylum. He said it would be monstrous for the government to imitate those companies by seeking to extract payments from residents who have nowhere left to turn.
Response from the minister and discussion of contributions
He pressed the minister for a pledge that nobody in direct provision or emergency homeless accommodation should have to pay to live in those conditions. The minister replied that any proposal would consider equity and the conditions people live in, and suggested some people in employment who could leave but choose not to might be expected to make a contribution; he also said proposals have not yet come before government and noted substantial numbers who could have left direct provision over two years ago, possibly up to a thousand.
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.
Teachach, Eireann Ryan yesterday said that people granted refugee status that are still living in direct provision accommodation should have to pay rent. I'm sure, Teachach, you have visited direct provision centres. I'm sure you'll agree that we're not talking here about luxury penthouse suites or detached houses or nice apartments or anything like that. You're talking about cramped shared rooms with limited, often horrifying food supply, very, very difficult living conditions for people. There's around 40 people who've been living for over 10 weeks in a tent in Tralee with the wind shaking the tent around them as they try to sleep and with around 300 people total in direct provision living in tents as we speak. We regularly hear the horror stories of direct provision centres run by large corporations like Aramark squeezing all the profit they can out of people seeking asylum. It seems utterly monstrous that the government would now try to imitate those companies and squeeze people who have nowhere left to turn during this cost of living and housing crisis, threatening them with homelessness if they don't cough up the money. Will you please pledge that nobody in direct provision or any emergency homeless accommodation should have to pay to live in such deplorable conditions? Deputy Murphy raised direct provision centres and the comments by Minister Ian and Ryan yesterday. Where someone is fully employed and are in a position, you know, they are now citizens of the state, they're in positions maybe for two years or three years to have left direct provision but have chosen not to and are in good salaries and so on like that. Or, you know, like anyone in social housing or like anybody in any rental situation, that's some contribution. It doesn't have to be a mark of rent and no one suggesting that, but a contribution, given the enormity of the challenges that the state is now facing, is not unreasonable. But those proposals have not come before government yet and there will be further meetings in respect of all of these issues so that we'd have equity across the board in terms of the treatment of people in different contexts and in different situations. And any contribution would have to take into account the conditions that people are living in. But, you know, there are very substantial numbers now in direct provision who have been in a position to leave direct provision for quite some time now, but have chosen not to leave direct provision. This is even before the current crisis and it would have been prior to the last year, there would have been up to a thousand, I think it's probably higher now, over two years ago, who would have been in direct provision, who could have left, but decided to stay in direct provision and, you know, a lot more people in employment now in particular. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.
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.
