Right to Housing Referendum

SwimClub

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120067050#Comment_120067050

Article 40.3.2: “The state shall, in particular, by its laws protect as best it may be from unjust attack

and in the case of injustice done, vindicate the life, person, good name, and property rights of every

citizen”

Article 43:

1.1 The State acknowledges that man, in virtue of his rational being, has the natural right,

antecedent to positive law, to the private ownership of external goods.

2 The State accordingly guarantees to pass no law attempting to abolish the right of private

ownership or the general right to transfer, bequeath or inherit property.

2.1 The State recognises, however, that the exercise of the rights mentioned in the foregoing

provisions of this Article ought, in civil society, to be regulated by the principles of social justice.

2 The State, accordingly, may as occasion requires delimit by law the exercise of the said rights

with a view to reconciling their exercise with the exigencies of the common good.

--------------------

The current state of affairs is that the state is interfering with the right to transfer property as per the current eviction ban that blocks vacant sale of property.

Proposed changes to the constitution would give them the right to do this permanently, i.e. to stop someone selling their property or giving it to a family member that needs somewhere to live, or move back in themselves if returning from working abroad or in a separation situation etc.

I can't see any other reason for this proposed referendum, it's to enable the compulsory seizure of private property to provide housing, albeit in return for a rent controlled rent.

But the law of unintended consequences means that the changes could open the door to all sorts of infringements on property rights in general.

SwimClub

The result of this will be an even bigger flood of small private landlords selling up before it is enacted and a reduction in the number of tenancies, the number of registered tenancies already reduced by 20,000 between 2020 and 2021. I expect the drop was even higher last year, it's insane at a time of massive increasing demand to be actually losing units from the rental market. The government response has been to scare more small landlords out at an even higher rate with this populist bullshot that will make things even worse, it's a grand political gesture that they obviously hope might win them some votes from Sinn Fein.

touts

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120067130#Comment_120067130

So basically they are proposing to remove constitutional protection of property rights roughly a year before we are likely to get a left SF government propped up by a hard-line Trotskyist party (PBP) who would love to nationalise all property and allocate things like houses based on need rather than wealth.

This has ZERO chance of passing. And what's more Fianna Fail know that. They are only proposing it because they think the focus in the debate will be on what SF/PBP might do if in power.

Donald Trump

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120067130#Comment_120067130

The eviction ban does nothing to block vacant sale of property. If you have a vacant property, you can sell it tomorrow if you wish.

If you have non-vacant property, you can also sell it tomorrow should you wish to do so. What you need is a willing seller and a willing buyer and a price that is agreeable to both. Same as any sale.

Donald Trump

You also have the Constitutional right to earn a living (It is an unenumerated right). But that doesn't mean you have a right to any job you want any time you want it.

The right to housing does not mean a right to be given a house anymore than the right to earn a living means the right whatever job you want.

dennis72

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120067369#Comment_120067369

A non vacant property that is open to more regulation is worth less and may only appeal to a smaller market

Voting no here govt/local councillors can't be trusted with removal rights to privately owned property as we see already with treatment of ll could happen to owners and continuous planning obstruction.

We also have an open border includes all who enter illegally or not.

Donald Trump

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120067484#Comment_120067484

You might get less for it than otherwise. But it is overly dramatic to say that nobody would buy it, or to try to say that the law prohibits someone from selling.

The Spider

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120067274#Comment_120067274

Part of me thinks the reason FFG are bringing this up now and putting it to a referendum is to neutralise Sinn Fein, if this goes to the vote and loses, then that’s it put away for a generation and Sinn Fein can’t use it for leverage in the run up to the election, every time they bring it up it’ll be knocked back and told we had a vote on it, of course this would be a calculated risk on FFG’s behalf because if it passes we’re in a world of sh***e, and this is exactly what happened with Brexit.

The other part of me thinks, they’re not that smart and they’re just following what they percieve to be the populist thing to do, because there’s a few people shouting loudly, the silent majority are who you have to think about.

Yurt2

Some juicy 1950s hysteria in here. For instance, the Netherlands has a right to housing provision in their constitution. Last time I checked it was a well functioning market economy with vindicated property rights.

But carry on with the dire warnings of Stalinist property seizures regardless.

cruizer101

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120067853#Comment_120067853

You're probably right but that still raises the question, Why?

Whats the point in changing the constitution, what extra powers will it give them that they don't have now that will enable them to solve the housing crisis?

If it won't give them extra powers then why are we wasting time have a referendum, the resources put into it would be better spent on actual housing.

I realise without seeing any proposed wording any argument is somewhat moot, but again why not at least make clear what they are hoping to achieve with it.

SwimClub

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120067957#Comment_120067957

There has been a massive drop in tenancies over the last 5 years, 7% drop in 20/21, the RTB stopped publishing the figures they are so bad so there are none available for last year but it's surely worse as twice as many small landlords exited last year as the year before. Once this eviction ban lifts there is going to be carnage, many small landlords who had no intention of leaving are getting out now because of these extreme interventions and the ineptitude of the RTB (3 years to evict non paying tenants).

The only policy response to all of this is to do something that will make the situation worse and encourage even more to sell up.

You're asking why, the answer is to win votes off of Sinn Fein or to take one of their cards off them before the next election.

Same as usual with politicians!

I suppose a lot will depend on how its written and its early days yet.

The Dutch it would appear focused on the governments responsibilities in providing low cost/social housing and gave the government more powers to control rents.

In Ireland we have a state that has no interest in direct involvement in providing low cost/social housing they only want provide subsidies in the form of first time buyer grants and HAP. There is a possibility I'm being cynical but I don't see the a referendum benefitting the working class or spurring the government on to do more about the accommodation crisis. At best it might reduce all the red tape involved in delivering housing projects and allow the government to eliminate evictions, at worst it might create another sinkhole for public funds and create more uncertainty for small landlords.

The Spider

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120068481#Comment_120068481

Or at some future date it may allow the government confiscate your property for the common good, I don’t know, but insofar as Im concerned there’s no debate on this, constitution has been fine since the foundation of the state, and no matter what they come back with even if it seems reasonable, Im voting no, laws of unintended consequences and all that, so where down the line the government will be taking something off someone based on these changes.

thinkabouit

Dont trust them so I’ll be voting no.

Subzero3

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120064981#Comment_120064981

To late for that im afraid. We share an open air bridge with Ukriane via Ryanair.

SwimClub

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120068696#Comment_120068696

That's the other aspect to this, it's fine if people want to offer accommodation to help, but if anyone arriving in the country has a constitutional right to accommodation where does that leave us.

The comparison to Brexit is a good one, weak politicians trying to gain support by signaling to a group of voters and opening up a whole pandora's box. I don't even think it's unintended consequences, it's more a case of not giving a f**k about the repercussions once they get to stay in power.

growleaves

'However, I wouldn't pay too much attention to anything the self-styled "Irish Council for Human Rights" says. It's a small, right-wing and anti-vax pressure group with an impressive but misleading name, founded by a single barrister. You can even see this confirmed in their (admittedly extensive) article on the history of this that you link to.'

You may be right but there has been a consolidation of power with media, institutions and government presenting as a unified political bloc on several issues, going at least as far as back as the referendum on the Nice Treaty.

So it can happen that opinionated individuals offer the only real opposition in a world where people look to 'official' institutions to decide everything. A democracy is meant to have adversarial politics but in practice one 'side' is always out-matched, overwhelmed and delegitimised by a put-together 'consensus'.

I would think long and hard before trusting this state with greater powers of expropriation of private property. I think we could end up with nationalisation of apartments and an expansion of social housing. This particular government has subordinated housing as a secondary issue to construction lockdowns and huge inward migrations, so despite what they say housing is not a priority for them its an afterthought.

And before anyone says it, yes I do realise that the Gov can already expropriate under some circumstances.

Subzero3

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120068741#Comment_120068741

Once a house for all is in the constitution it will be a right of anyone residing here from any EU country. The EU commission, as it has done with Ukriane, can simple give temporary rights to any country. That can be extended to infinity. Irish politicians then pass the buck to the EU.

SwimClub

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120068791#Comment_120068791

Politicians in this country also seem to have a very amenable relationship with the EU as a potential future employer, we definitely need to be aware of the risk of politicians feathering their own future nest by implementing what goes down well in Brussels.

Yurt2

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120068748#Comment_120068748

This post is heavily laced with conspiratorial thinking. It's hard to know where to start with it, so I won't.

Yurt2

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120068696#Comment_120068696

There hasn't been a commercial flight in or out of Ukraine since the war started. It's airspace is uninsurable while there's a major land war going on.

P.S, you spelled Ukraine wrong.

Economics101

This referendum could lead to housing policy being significantly decided in the courts. Housing policy should be the responsibility of politicians, not unelected judges.

SwimClub

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120070286#Comment_120070286

I think it may be time to admit that politicians cannot be trusted with housing policy either.

They are not good at decisions that cause short term pain for long term benefit, which is exactly why we have central bankers for monetary policy separate to elected government. Politicians tend to make short term populist decisions to keep the electorate happy so they keep their jobs.

Seth Brundle

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120070406#Comment_120070406

I think it may be time to admit that politicians cannot be trusted with housing policy either.

Politicians have had ample opportunities to improve the supply of development land but ignored the likes of the 1973 Kenny report. Now people are commuting long distances, generally via unsustainable means, because this allowed the property model used to date. Politicians as individual party entities should not be allowed to decide long term policy because our politicians generally don't make long term decisions. We need long term decisions to be made outside of the short-medium term life of politics

growleaves

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120070228#Comment_120070228

I never said there was any "conspiracy", I'm just criticising consensus politics. Different institutions in Irish public life align with one another quite easily and are often connected and this is normal in a small country anyway. (It's different in larger countries like Britain and Spain.)

However that shouldn't be taken to mean that any issue is 'settled' unless you can find some 'official' prestigious institution to back an opposing view. So I'm happy to listen to individual objectors ("a single barrister") even if many people are not.

As for the amendment itself, why seek greater powers to expropriate private property unless you intend to use them at some point?

growleaves

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120070239#Comment_120070239

You're not meant to razz posters over typos. We could all do that, what does it prove?

whisky_galore

A distraction. Propose a referendum fated to fail just to be seen to do something. Instead of like, building anything.

Yurt2

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120070467#Comment_120070467

Well, said user is a prolific poster on all matters pertaining to that country, usually in an entirely negative fashion. If he's spelling it wrong time and time again, it's going to get picked up.

Yurt2

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120070461#Comment_120070461

Expropriation of property is conspiratorial. It's bunkum, there is no suggestion or circumstance where property expropriation can or will take place with such a constitutional provision. Nor does it take place at present despite your contention that it does (save for unique circumstances like CAB seizure of criminally acquired assets).

The dictionary definition of expropriation:

"the act of taking away money or property, especially for public use without payment to the owner, or for personal use illegally"

You're peddling conspiracy. And that's on that point only. Haven't even got stuck in to your conspiracy about the media.

Topgear on Dave

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120070489#Comment_120070489

Bang on.

It'll take the heat off to help avoid doing the hard stuff of actually building and attempting to sort out the tangled beuracratic mess that the rental market has become.

It'll also give Paul Murphy / RBB types loads of airtime too so that's a win for them.