Five of Ireland’s Independent Law Centres have expressed their serious concerns about Report Stage amendments to the Housing and Residential Tenancies (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill 2026 which will overhaul Ireland’s homelessness legislation.The 2026 Bill is scheduled to undergo Report and Final Stages in the Dáil on Wednesday, 8 July at 7:15pm.

The Government’s Report Stage amendments would be the first changes to Irish homelessness law in almost 40 years. They propose to create legal and habitual residence conditions for access to emergency homelessness accommodation. This alters the current position where a local authority may provide emergency accommodation to any person who meets the statutory definition of a ‘homeless person’.

The introduction of the amendments at Report Stage severely limits opportunity for debate and scrutiny of the changes, and leaves no opportunity for consultation.

FLAC, Community Law and Mediation, Mercy Law Resource Centre, the Immigrant Council of Ireland and the Irish Refugee Council work directly with the communities who are likely to be adversely impacted by the 2026 Bill and their analysis of it is drawn from their significant experience of advocating for those communities and their rights.

FLAC Chief Executive, Eilis Barry, commented today:

“The proposed amendments constitute an overhaul of Irish homelessness law. Their effect would be to shrink the social safety net and to reduce the protections from homelessness and destitution which have been provided for in Irish law for almost four decades. It is impossible to square the proposals with the Government’s stated aim of eradicating homelessness. They run directly counter to the recommendations of the previous Oireachtas Housing Committee which followed from consultation and which were evidence-based.

The practical consequences of the proposed changes may be to remove the safety-net of emergency accommodation for communities already most at risk of homelessness and, in turn, lead to a rise in the number of people and families ‘rough-sleeping’ and at risk of destitution. They will also create additional administrative barriers which may delay or prevent people and families experiencing homelessness from accessing emergency accommodation. FLAC has significant concerns about the Bill’s compliance with EU law and about how it could give rise to interference with people’s rights under the Constitution. There has been no clear statement of the rationale for those changes, nor is there any evidence that the Department has carried out a human rights or equality impact assessment of the changes.”

Aoife Kelly-Desmond, CEO of Community Law and Mediation, commented:

“The insertion of residency requirements for access to homeless supports will have a disproportionate and devastating impact on groups who already experience disadvantage, discrimination and marginalisation (including victim-survivors of domestic violence, trafficked people, members of the Traveller and Roma communities and those experiencing extreme poverty).

The requirement for all members of the household to meet the residency requirements and the lack of discretion in this regard is inhumane. For example, it appears that this will result in the denial of access to emergency accommodation for children, including Irish citizens, where one parent doesn’t meet the habitual residence test. Given the complexity of assessing residency status and the lack of a statutory time period for the assessment, this could leave people who are fully entitled to services without shelter for an unspecified period while the assessment is carried out.”

Paul Dornan, Managing Solicitor of Mercy Law Resource Centre, commented:

“It is concerning that such potentially significant changes to the operation of homelessness law in Ireland were not shared key stakeholders and elected representative in good time to allow for genuine consultation, scrutiny and understanding. Introducing these proposals as an amendment to an already complex Bill is inappropriate.

Mercy Law have brought the Minister’s attention to a number of examples where our clients would have been unable to satisfy the new provisions contained in these amendments and where they may, as a result, have been forced into rough sleeping or other precarious or unsafe arrangements.”