Does `vacant` equal `social`?

One way to measure housing need in this country is to look at the number of people on the housing waiting list, around 3,000. One way to look at a solution is to look at the number of vacant dwellings. According to the 1995 Census, 22, 756 were vacant in 1995.

The fact that some claim there is a connection, or a solution in the connection, needs to be looked into a little further. The aspirations of people on the housing list are part of the reason for the problem of vacant housing too. A survey had shown that 90 per cent of those on the housing waiting list want to rent, and not buy and want to pay a rent of around Lm100 per year!

Those who campaign for these units to become part of social housing provision need to be a little clearer. We already have a high number of vacant units precisely because, over the years, rents have remained fixed and people do not want to pay, say around 20 per cent of their take-home income on rent, as you have to do if there is to be sufficient income to maintain a property in the long-term.

It is different with those who intend to purchase. Young engaged couples are prepared to do four jobs between them and whatever else it takes to own their property. Paying a reasonable rent is perceived to be a waste of money.

Essentially this is a very unEuropean attitude and one we have inherited directly from the British. The British too aspire to be home owners and are prepared to even pay up to 50 per cent of their take-home income on their house loan, but not if they are renting.

Property in Malta is vacant for a variety of reasons and we need to target solutions or ease problems according to the reasons they are vacant and not introduce some sledge-hammer draconian approach which would create more harm than good. Bad policies in the old Labour years have created enough problems already!

Landlords in Malta are still reluctant to rent to Maltese although the rent law changes post-1995 have given them more protection. However liberal we feel we are or want to be, it is the confidence of landlords and potential landlords that has to be restored in order to get the housing market for rent moving again.

That, coupled with realistic rent levels, which cover the landlord`s investment and give him or her a return! Anything else is fine and empty talk to win votes but little else.

Some landowners and property owners in Malta had to suffer the great financial loss of having their property requisitioned. There were over 40,000 of these. Sensibly and slowly as they become vacant these are being returned to the landlords and the number is dwindling to around 12,000. Others are today being occupied by people who are far more well-off than their landlords! Sometimes their children now live in them while the landlords have no property to give their own children!

A survey of landlords carried out by the Planning Authority showed that fear of the reintroduction of the requisition order was the main reason landlords would not consider renting to Maltese again.

The last thing we should be considering is taking housing again from landlords to give them to those who want them for free (or almost), for life and then for their children too!

The Labour Party could help restore confidence in this area. Perhaps the leader of the opposition should publicly declare that the MLP will never reintroduce those dreaded requisition laws. Perhaps this could be enshrined in the Constitution to make it binding.

The government would then have the backing and the moral standing to start with some targeted solutions.

The real problem is not the fact that there are 22,000 vacant units but that 8,792 of them, almost half, are dilapidated or in need of maintenance. The Housing Authority currently offers landlords up to Lm1,800 for repairs if they are prepared to rent to Maltese people for 10 years (or a loan of Lm5,000 where the interest rate is subsidised).

If the tenant finds an empty property, we give him Lm2,500 for repairs. We currently means-test the income of the applicant but in order to try and give a boost to trying to bringing vacant housing into use, we are proposing not to means-test the tenant as strictly as we currently do.

However, all this is a drop in the ocean while the dread and threat of requisition hangs over us. So, that is the challenge to the opposition. If you are serious about solutions, the leader of the opposition needs to publicly declare Labour will never bring requisition orders back.

Then, both the government and the opposition must enshrine it in the Constitution.

Then, and only then, can the various players in housing start to, slowly but surely, bring property which is currently empty and dilapidated into better use.

There will be no solution unless we restore confidence in the private sector in general and with private landlords in particular.