It was good to hear housing being debated in Parliament on Wednesday with such a large degree of consensus. Both sides have a clear view of the challenges. Both sides are agreeing on the good things, which are already being done, both sides seem to acknowledge the enormity of the task and, most important of all, both sides are not spouting political soundbites that are easy to say but well nigh impossible to deliver.

On the ownership front, the current polices of shared ownership, the even more fledgling equity sharing and the subsidy on interest rates all mean there has never been so much help on offer to aspiring homeowners called first time buyers, except of course in the days when plots were given out practically for free, a policy which whether you agree with it or not is clearly unsustainable now. And, very importantly, both sides appear to agree on these ownership policies.

The big challenge, and the costliest one now is how to provide decent housing for those who cannot afford even shared ownership, in other words for those who either cannot work or whose income is so basic that they actually cannot pay for housing costs at all, aka all those on the minimum wage who won’t move up much as they grow older, and those who have to live off State benefits and really need to.

This is the real gap in the supply market. For the rest there is supply, although some young couples don’t want to buy in certain areas or buy a one bedroom flat, or to, as they see it, waste money on rent.

A couple working in Malta though can afford to rent. They just don’t want to, or aspire to what they see as better. And both sides seem to agree on wanting to help as many become homeowners if that is their tenure of choice.

So those who can buy have a supply even if not the ideal one. All banks and leading estate agents have confirmed this. The problem is really about those who can’t afford to buy.

Solving this problem will require substantial

investment, as well as policies that ensure this kind of free housing only goes to those who really need it and not to the many thousands in Malta and Gozo who work the system to live off the State in one way or another.

And when I talk of people living unfairly off the State, I’m excluding those families that have illness or disability. I am excluding those who are genuinely looking for work; I am excluding those victims of domestic violence or children leaving institutes or those whose educational attainment means they can only ever earn a minimum wage.

The new form of free, which we sometimes call rented housing, should be only for the above. So policy makers will now not only have to devise new ways to fund free housing for the genuine cases I have just outlined (there are more social cases than these obviously but what I am trying to say is that the term single parent should not automatically denote poverty or need of itself, or be a fast track to free housing). Let’s not forget the many single parents in Mata who work hard for a living and are being given bad press by those who are just working the system!

So when we talk about these needs (where no more than a few thousand are needed) we also talk about vacant housing as leading MPs did in Parliament on Wednesday.

Is it realistic though to link our vacant housing supply to those who are in a position to pay nothing at all, aka those who want to rent? After all, this was done in the past.

Housing was taken from private owners and given to the sometimes poor and vulnerable. This created huge injustices which many are still suffering today. The Housing Authority has tried to rent or buy from owners but they clearly, at least not yet, have no need to dispose of their properties. Almost none have come forward, and especially not to give them to the government to rent out.

And how many of you reading this, MPs even, would hand over their properties to the Housing Authority to rent out to those in need? I think an honest answer to that encapsulates the heart of our housing challenges, don’t you?

I think it would perhaps be more realistic and fairer to link the vacant housing challenge cum issue to those looking to buy at affordable prices. We should incentivise people to sell (via tax breaks for owners who sell and so on) to those on a waiting list to buy because at least these are clients who can pay a fairly substantial sum, at least in comparison to those who genuinely need housing for rent.

So housing will be big news again in the coming years. In terms of free housing which is needed, it is now clear that the government programme of built housing needs to be reserved for this client group, the genuinely low income earners who are going to remain so and not just low income because they are young and just starting (though with much more stringent checking) and that the ownership programme should be purchased from the private sector, possibly from our vacant units or even via agreements with developers. This is going to cost though. There is no such thing as a free lunch, let alone a free home!

The challenges are enormous but the potential results well worthwhile. For Malta and Gozo to continue to enjoy some of the best housing standards in Europe despite the obvious huge hiccup that this vacuum of so much vacant housing is causing, not only on the economic front but also on the visual and environmental front, which are going up the ladder of political importance as I write.

[email protected]