Guernsey Press

'Inflated' housing targets will have a knock-on effect

THE September 2015 Billet contains the following request from the Housing Department: 'The department is recommending that the strategic housing target remains at 300 new dwellings per annum'. That recommendation is supported by a voluminous 'opinion' survey carried out in 2011 which the department itself acknowledges to be out of date and inflated. The target of 300 has taken no account of falling population or post-recessionary economic conditions since 2011.

Published

In the survey, 'needs' are defined as: 'housing need' arises when a household faces at least one 'housing issue' (i.e. a problem which relates directly or indirectly to accommodation, e.g. lack of facilities, overcrowding, condensation, leaking gutters etc.) but cannot access more suitable accommodation without financial assistance.

In the survey Guernsey's 'housing demand' arises when a household is not facing a 'housing issue' and there is nothing inherently unsuitable about these households' current housing but they want to move into new accommodation and while the household can afford to move.

So why does it matter if Housing has inflated strategic housing targets? Well to be precise, the Housing Department, in the September Billet, says the strategic housing target is key to the Strategic Land Use Plan and the Corporate Housing Programme.

If this inflated target of 300 homes is pursued throughout the 10-year lifetime of the new Island Plan that totals some 3,000 new households.

That is like adding a new parish to the island the size of St Andrew's. We are already hearing complaints from those people who live near to the housing target areas that the scale and density of what is being proposed by Environment and the attendant traffic consequences are going to ruin their neighbourhoods.

By adopting inflated targets the island will, through the SLUP and CHP, start to set aside land and States resources to build these 3,000 homes working two years in advance to ensure that 300 dwellings a year can be built. This, in the case of the GHA and the Housing Department, is not a benign matter. States land such as at the former Boys' and Girls' Grammar schools was transferred to the GHA for nominal considerations. Next the GHA will be asking to be gifted 43 acres of land at the Castel Hospital for £1.

To compound this muddle we have the Housing minister talking about changing the definitions of those who qualify for GHA housing by 'collapsing the lists' to 'removing some of the eligibility criteria and allowing anyone who has trouble accessing affordable housing to come onto our joint waiting lists', i.e. greatly expanding the social housing sector to include 'demand' or 'affordable' applicants. No other local authority in Britain does this and this has massive cost implications for the exchequer in Guernsey.

If Health asked the States for more wards or operating theatres based on inflated patient figures, they would quickly be told to go away and if Education asked for new schools based on exaggerated pupil numbers they would be denied, so why can Housing ask for inflated housebuilding targets to be nodded through the States? How big do we want the social housing sector in Guernsey to grow?

By setting inflated strategic housing targets, these then feed through into other policy initiatives such as planning covenants.

This will result in damaging stealth taxes on landowners, developers and home owners in the private sector. Guernsey's residential building sector is already struggling with a serious recession and it is not a fat cash cow for the Housing and Environment departments to exploit.

So please, States deputies, ask yourselves why has the Housing Needs Survey planned for 2016 been recommended to be postponed just when we need more clarity? Please think about why you would want to reaffirm an old target when the last survey that was carried out was predicting a growing population and was prepared in a wholly different economic climate. Why, when Guernsey's 'need' waiting list is presently the lowest in Britain, are we being asked to adopt a non-standard definition of 'need' housing to inflate the numbers on the housing waiting lists?

Do the right thing and direct the Housing Department to go back to the drawing board and sort out its muddle of what constitutes proper 'needs' housing. We all support helping the 'needs' sector but it is entirely different to start muddling up 'need' and 'demand' at the taxpayer's expense.

P. NOBES,

Director,

Infinity Group.

Sorry, we are not accepting comments on this article.