|
EDITORIAL: The public
housing shambles
Last week, as many people were paying attention to the government¡¦s reaction to
a controversial urban renewal project in Taipei City¡¦s Shilin District (¤hªL), few
people noticed that another housing issue was in the making, albeit involving
less confrontation, as the government was considering changes to its public
housing policy, prompting many to ask whether it was capable of implementing an
effective and feasible public housing policy.
On Thursday, Minister of the Interior Lee Hong-yuan (§õÂE·½) told the legislature¡¦s
Internal Administration Committee that the nation¡¦s overall demand for social
housing ¡X about 190,000 households ¡X was more than the government could afford.
Because the government lacks the funds and the land for public housing projects
in urban areas, amid a high nationwide rate of unoccupied apartment units, Lee
told lawmakers the government would have to adjust its housing policies.
Based on Lee¡¦s remarks, a new policy was announced encouraging lower-income
people to ¡§rent¡¨ suitable housing rather than ¡§buy¡¨ low-cost units subsidized by
the government. The government would prioritize the use of empty houses instead
of the construction of new ones, while it would stop building public housing,
including projects under the categories of ¡§social housing,¡¨ ¡§quality housing¡¨
and ¡§modern housing.¡¨
In short, the government will no longer provide public housing to balance the
market¡¦s supply and demand, but will continue to give incentives to the private
sector to build low-cost units. In the future, the government will simply play
the role of ¡§matchmaker¡¨ to help low-income households find suitable housing,
Lee said.
Since 2010, the government has launched several public housing projects in urban
areas and introduced a luxury tax, aiming to curb real-estate speculation and
help low-income families deal with skyrocketing real-estate prices. However, no
matter what the government¡¦s housing programs are called and how they are built
and sold, Lee¡¦s remarks indicated that the government¡¦s public housing
initiative did not achieve its goals. It also raised suspicions that all policy
initiatives regarding public housing over the past two years were nothing but
government-led election campaign tools.
The public has many doubts and negative perceptions about public housing ¡X which
tend to focus on inferior construction and poor public safety. People living
near public housing units or buildings also strenuously object to the policy.
Therefore, if the government no longer plans to build public housing, its policy
focus should be shifted to improving public infrastructure to provide faster and
more convenient services to people living in suburban areas as well as expanding
the scope of housing subsidies to low-income households.
Furthermore, the government should recognize that promoting balanced development
between suburban and urban areas, as well as between southern and northern
Taiwan, would be an effective way to discourage people from moving to urban
areas, especially Taipei. The government needs to build a better public
transportation network and promote local economic sectors to improve regional
employment.
The government should use this opportunity to review the management mechanism
for the nation¡¦s public housing, because it currently lacks a centralized body
to take overall responsibility for public housing.
For instance, both the ¡§quality housing¡¨ and the ¡§social housing¡¨ programs are
under the management of the Ministry of the Interior, while the ¡§modern housing¡¨
program is organized by the Council for Economic Planning and Development.
Meanwhile, the Public Construction Commission is responsible for the youth
housing program, and the Taipei City Government has its own public housing
program. Without a centralized agency, the government will find it difficult to
either integrate public resources or establish a comprehensive and effective
strategy on public housing management.
|
