Gap must be bridged between building homes for profit and building for necessity

THE government’s Budget 2019 allocation of €2.4 billion (a 25 per cent increase on 2018’s housing budget) is to be channelled towards addressing the ongoing housing crisis. The government say the social housing needs of 27,400 households will be met in 2019, while 10,000 new Council houses will be built as a result of extra funding. Moreover, it promises that 5,000 adults will be supported out of homelessness, and family hubs are to be expanded.

On paper this shot of extra funding looks impressive, as does the specific target areas. But there is also a sense that we’ve been here before. From a practical level it’s the speed of change that will ultimately determine the effectiveness of planned spending beyond 2019. So far this has not been fast enough.

You don’t need to be an expert to know that demand has been overlapping supply for the past few years. On top of that, rising rents and a lack of affordable accommodation has meant the capacity to house people is in a perilous situation, which show little sign of abating anytime soon. And therein lies the core worry for people – the willingness for change is there, but the ability to implement rapid change is stunted.

This is due to a number of reasons, and chief among them is the problem of bridging the gap between building houses for necessity, and building hous- es as a profit making source. So long as the latter remains the priority we can expect little in the way of swift change anytime soon. In most cases the drive and desire to build houses is predicated on whether or not it is financially viable to do so. ‘Will purchasing land and building houses be worth my while, financially?’ is the question the will keep arising so long as building social housing remains the responsibility of the private sector. That’s the bottom line. It’s a simple and straight forward problem that is seldom factored into talks about finding a solution.

The same is also true of rents where the primary factor involved is again base profit. Landlords can effectively name their price as accommodation is at a premium. No one begrudges a person intent on making a profit when the time is right. But when it comes to housing vulnerable people, and people looking to raise families in a home of their own, it’s no longer good enough. Some people may claim that it’s not the fault of landlords that the government can’t solve the issue of housing. However, the fact that up to 80 per cent of landlords in Ireland own on average one or two properties needs addressing as it’s producing a disjointed and ‘free market’ style scenario for people looking to put a roof over their heads.

So far, too many housing projects are built incrementally and are too sporadic in nature to take a sufficient slice off housing lists. Building 20 houses here and 10 there is welcome. But is it really a viable, long-term option for meeting a demand that is now in the thousands?

Speaking at IT Tralee back in March, Fr Peter McVerry said the government needed to show greater willingness to deal with the issue. He said there is currently 12,000 hectares of publicly owned land in Ireland that could accommodate upwards of 40,000 social houses. He also wants to see a Housing Executive created that would serve as a centralsied body.

Relying solely on the private sector to build social housing is simply no longer plausible as it’s invariably linked to profit. The State should not allow this to be the motivating factor when building social housing. Period.

A situation where houses are built only because it is financially viable to do so is no longer acceptable. During the early decades of the State thousands of houses were built with far less financial clout. This begs the question why can’t we build stocks of houses in the same fashion. Why the government doesn’t implement a strategy whereby 80, 90 or a 100 three-bedroom houses are built in a specific area (at the same time) makes little sense in the depths of a crisis. Such a development would be ideal for young families starting out in life, and for older people looking to downsize. This is the direction we need to go.

People who can afford it will never have difficulty in hiring a private contractor to build a home. However, it’s the ever growing cohort of people for whom this is not an option that needs fixing fast. The government seems to have all the dots in place. But it needs to join them together, properly. The bottom line is unless we can bridge the obvious gap between building houses with a base profit as the goal - and building for necessity - this crisis is going nowhere fast.