Like other speakers, I think the Minister is making a major mistake. I was just talking to my party colleague Deputy Ó Broin. A lady contacted me today. She has been in recovery for eight months and is four months pregnant. She is homeless and on the streets. Tonight she is in the maternity hospital at Cork University Hospital, CUH, because there was nowhere else for her to go. If she goes into emergency accommodation where there is open addiction and open drug taking, her fear is that she may fall back into addiction. She is trying to protect herself and her unborn child. When she comes out of CUH tomorrow, she is going to the streets. What does the Minister's legislation mean for her? Does it mean she has no right to appeal? This is forcing people into unsuitable accommodation - especially people who are in recovery and are trying to keep their lives together. This woman is four months pregnant and she has been in and out of emergency accommodation for the last two years. She is 20 years old. As an adult, all she has experienced is emergency accommodation. Is she going to be denied the right to appeal? What happens to her under this legislation? Will the Minister explain that to me please?

Sentiment score: -0.06

There is no need for that comment.

Sentiment score: -0.30

Yes, there was no need for that.

Sentiment score: 0.13

Can I just ask one question of the Minister? That lady refuses to go into the emergency accommodation because she is in recovery and the accommodation presents a risk of her relapsing. This applies not just to that lady but to anyone in a similar position. They have no right to appeal and they then have to reapply to go on the housing list, which in Cork city takes five months on average. Where should they live for the five months? I do not need to go into the whole lot of it, but if the legislation the Minister is bringing forward is passed, if a person refuses to enter emergency accommodation either because of addiction or because she is a vulnerable woman who does not want to go to a mixed congregated setting with people in the throes of addiction, then that person will end up on the streets.

Sentiment score: -0.27

I will not repeat what my colleagues have said but the fact is we are denying tenants their fundamental protections and rights under the RTB. That is wrong. Tenants who are paying their rent every week, including where there is antisocial behaviour, are entitled to their rights. We are creating a two-tier system, with renters who are covered by the RTB on the one hand and then, on the other, people living in these beds in sheds. We are talking about independent accommodation in people's back gardens. It is not like renting a room in a house. These are stand-alone dwellings and the tenants living there are not sharing the homeowner's bathroom, front room or kitchen. People paying rent on a stand-alone residence should be entitled to the same protection as other renters. I ask the Minister, as others have asked him, to consider that. Why would he not provide people with the protections and rights to which they are entitled?

Sentiment score: -0.01