Amendments Nos. 29, 30 and 31 are related to amendment No. 28 and all may be taken together.
SECTION 19.
I move amendment No. 28:
In page 11, subsection (1)(a), lines 4 and 5, to delete "or a person who has failed to vacate a house or termination of a tenancy".
Section 19 gives extra powers to local authorities to evict squatters, who are the scourge of local authorities and the antithesis of estate management. While I support the Minister of State in providing such additional powers, the provisions here lend squatters respectability, provided they are quiet. Powers are only directed against squatters involved in anti-social behaviour. This sends the wrong message and flies in the face of estate management. We should not make squatters respectable. In this I exclude those who are slow to vacate their houses following the termination of a tenancy.
The normal powers available to local authorities to deal with squatting will continue. The provision of summary eviction of squatters is an exceptional power and is justified in the context of the serious problem of drug dealing and associated anti-social behaviour. We must recognise that there are situations where these exceptional powers are necessary, where there are serious problems of drug dealing and where squatters are availing of opportunities to undertake such anti-social practices. While these powers will deal swiftly with this aspect of squatting, they do not negate the powers already available to local authorities to deal with it.
The message this provision sends is what is important. Hitherto, squatting was dealt with under certain powers. By differentiating between one form of squatting and another, the Minister of State is sending a signal that squatting is not that bad, provided squatters do not wreck their surroundings.
The message the Bill sends is that drug dealing, regardless of whether it involves squatters, will not be tolerated and that swift and effective action will be taken against it.
Presumably against other anti-social behaviour too.
In addition to associated anti-social behaviour.
However, estate management underpins the process. What we are proposing here on squatting is dangerous. We should go the whole way and apply the powers to all cases of squatting.
This Bill deals with a very serious crisis where drug dealing is occurring and people are using property for this purpose.
I accept that, but much of life is about availing of opportunities as they present themselves. We are dealing with legislation that need not be strictly pigeonholed as dealing with anti-social behaviour if an opportunity presents. Legislation cannot be brought in every day of the week. We know the problems we are dealing with and I cannot understand why the Minister will not close obvious loopholes. This will introduce a new interpretation of squatting and will give a message that some squatting is not that bad, despite the good messages the Bill sends.
I do not accept that.
Amendment put and declared lost.
Amendments Nos. 29 to 31, inclusive, not moved.
Section 19 agreed to.
Sections 20 to 23, inclusive, agreed to.
Title agreed to.