States has shot itself in the foot over affordable housing
I READ the press report on the States meeting concerning the planning requete, headlined Natural justice achieved, with a smile as I find it quite entertaining to read of the reports and antics of our States members, who seem out of touch with important matters such as the affordable housing issue, as apparently only four members saw the light on this one.
I believe the present law passed by the States at the last planning review means that the larger developers have to compulsorily give/donate/be taxed up to 30 percent of their site plots to the Guernsey Housing Association for them to build affordable housing, so the only developers on the island already building sheltered and affordable homes for the over-60s and at £300k or less now cannot do so because they only have 70 percent of their site left to make a profit, and that after being reduced by Environment to the minimum units acceptable to the public after taking in their collective views.
Deputy Marc Leadbeater was reported to have said that developers have to only ‘reserve’ up to 30 percent of their plots for affordable housing, which I believe is incorrect. Deputy Peter Roffey, of course, ruined the whole original proposal by the Environment Department by his successful amendment at that time to only include developers building 20 units or more, so those building less can carry on building units at £550k or more, with no contribution to affordable housing and not within the price range of first-time buyers or social housing (rentals). He claims he took advice from builders, well I can believe that. Builders are, of course, not affected by these affordable housing laws as they are given acceptable square metre build prices by the Housing Association, and of course why not?
So in my opinion the States have once again shot themselves in the foot as the States members appear to not fully understand the issue before them. Some members seem keen to get public attention by slagging good companies like the Co-op, who include affordable housing in their plans, for not wanting to get involved after facing having part of their land confiscated. To be positive, which is important in any debate, why on earth did the States not pass a law which raised duty of say one or two percent on all housing sold above £350k to be earmarked to hand over to the Housing Association, a cheap-to-administrate, clean, simple, fair way of achieving a good result.
NAME AND ADDRESS WITHHELD.