Alas! We were finally told that we could expect those who have paid the minimum deposit on their mortgages for Government housing at Lancaster, St James, to move in within a few days. I marked the date (May 28) on my calendar, but having heard no further word over three weeks later, I can only assume that Government’s days have more than 24 hours. But what about all the other housing developments?
The present administration has undoubtedly produced more houses than we’ve seen for years. But the continuing worry is that very few are occupied, yet we’re hearing of using scarce resources to build more. Some have become dilapidated even before they’ve been lived in and those not completed are already deteriorating.
I haven’t yet heard any good reason for this situation coming from the politicians. During a recent debate, a Government MP noted that selling houses was not like selling fishcakes. I agree. There are procedures to be followed, but if property sales were as difficult as is being made out by Government, all the realtors in Barbados would have gone bankrupt by now. Why does everything involving Government have to be so cumbersome? And why are landowners still owed $157 million by Government? Thankfully, the minister says that a private sector approach will now be adopted. We’ll wait and see.
It’s not to say there aren’t staff or resources to carry out these functions. There are housing planning staff, a coordination unit, staff dealing with acquisition, a legal unit, property management staff and so on. But, of course, it was recognised as far back as 1986 in a University of the West Indies report that “the NHC [National Housing Corporation] can’t be regarded as efficient in its provision and management of the Government’s housing stock”. I don’t think anything has changed since and I wonder why we even need the NHC. Shouldn’t the Ministry of Housing, if efficiently run, be enough?
Some refer to the recent Government houses as “concrete boxes” and “matchboxes”. The small size is being given as the reason why there’s so little interest in them. I don’t agree since they are a great improvement on what many people are presently living in. In fact, it’s embarrassing that some people are still having to use pit toilets in the year 2014 and some families are living in cellars.
The new, brightly coloured houses are attractive and tropical looking, and if occupied and landscaped with both flowering and food plants, they would be very pleasing to the eye. Could it be that they are just too expensive for what they are? Furthermore, could this excessive cost be caused by inefficiency? As was reportedly stated by a contractor in the 1980s, “it is more important to get the house to fit the pocket, than a pocket to fit the house”.
With regard to the middle income housing, wouldn’t it be better to supply basic structures and either let potential owners choose accessories and internal finishes or maybe even add these gradually when they can afford it? That would reduce the cost and perhaps increase sales.
It seems too, that there needs to be better research done before houses are built, as to the need for rent to purchase units, units needed by people on social welfare and those for sale to low and middle income people, rather than building houses and hoping to sell. Also the location of the houses is important. One might say that if you’re being subsidised, you have to “take what you get”, but, as was noted in a 1980s report, only four out of 18 lots in Checker Hall were taken up because of relative inaccessibility, lack of essential services and low residential desirability.
Then there is the matter of the definition of a starter home. To most Barbadians, this means a house that can be (legally) added to in a modular fashion as one’s financial position improves, similar to what was done with chattel houses, rather than a house which one sells and moves on to a larger and more expensive one. Bearing in mind the close proximity of many houses in Government projects, especially those at the Villages at Coverley, additions or modifications would be difficult if not impossible.
Let’s stop procrastinating and get these houses occupied!
• Dr Frances Chandler is a former independent senator. Email: [email protected].
