Council Recommendation on Fighting Housing Exclusion – an (imperfect) welcome tool
On 6 May, together with the long-awaited Anti-Poverty Strategy and other documents, the European Commission published its proposal for a Council Recommendation on fighting housing exclusion. This initiative should ensure the full implementation of Principle 19 of the European Pillar of Social Rights.
SOLIDAR had contributed to the call for evidence opened by the Commission presenting recommendations to promote housing inclusion.
Below is our assessment of the text in light of our main priorities.
Discrimination of marginalised groups as an obstacle to the right to housing
The text highlights that marginalised groups, including people with a migrant and Roma background, are more at risk of housing exclusion, in the introductory part and in the recitals. In the list of recommendations, the following is included: “measures to prevent and address stigmatisation and discriminatory practices in access to housing such as transparent criteria for social housing waiting lists, anti-bias training for housing professionals and support services for tenants facing discrimination”. This is a positive element, but more emphasis should be put on the need to enforce such measures, and the Commission should carefully monitor developments through the European Semester and beyond.
The gathering of data on housing exclusion in line with the Lisbon Declaration on the European Platform on Combating Homelessness is acknowledged as an important part of the solution. The call for “comparable and disaggregated statistics on housing exclusion and homelessness at national and local levels” aligns with SOLIDAR’s asks.
Support the work of non-for-profit, limited profit and social and solidarity economy housing providers
This is a very positive note, which recognises the work of social economy actors in offering housing solutions that help reduce housing exclusion, including by offering other services that foster social inclusion, as well as limit the financial speculation in the housing market. The Recommendation calls on Member States to support project development and technical assistance for social economy organisations and limited or non-profit housing providers and to involve and coordinate with such actors throughout the policymaking cycle.
Nevertheless, a clearer call for financial support of such actors, including through public procurement, would have made this support more concrete and credible.
Ensuring housing affordability
The connection between the lack of affordable housing and homelessness is acknowledged, but the solutions proposed include mainly rent assistance and rent arrears mediation. While these are useful instruments in the short-term, this is a missed opportunity to highlight how the regulation of the housing market is necessary to ensure housing affordability.
The text recommends “discouraging speculative behaviours in the housing market, including by designing effective taxation policies and improving market transparency”. SOLIDAR welcomes this but regrets the missing reference to the need for incisive regulation of the private housing market, including by introducing rent caps.
The role of the community and no reference to criminalisation
Community-based services and the importance of including the community aspect in devising housing solutions is present in the Recommendation. However, the leading role that communities should have in defining such solutions is less marked. Strengthening the participation of communities is crucial and would also offer creative solutions to the phenomenon of housing occupation, like in the case of Porto Fluviale REC House project in Rome.
The thorny issue of squatting and its criminalisation – which has been dangerously exploited in the European Parliament’s report on the housing crisis – is unfortunately completely sidestepped in the proposed Council Recommendation.
Increasing the social housing stock prioritising the existing one
The call for more social and affordable housing stock, giving priority to renovation and repurposing of existing unoccupied or underoccupied buildings, is clear in the document and is coupled with an invite to step up “investments to support the construction and renovation of affordable and social housing.” While this is welcome, it is important that specific objectives, measures and resources are allocated for social housing specifically in the light of the need to protect marginalised groups, those most at risk, from housing exclusion. Moreover, when private investment is encouraged, ambitious social and environmental conditionalities should always be introduced. This aspect is lacking in the Recommendation.
Overall, the Recommendation portrays a positive approach to combatting housing exclusion which revolves around elements like person-centred, housing-led and integrated policies, holistic solutions that span across different services, evidence-based measures and data collection, and a focus on prevention.
The call for assessing “the adequacy of income support, including housing-related allowances, minimum income and child benefits, in relation to housing costs” is also particularly positive, as it aligns with the identification of adequate minimum income schemes as key instruments to fight against poverty and social exclusion by SOLIDAR and many other social organisations. A Directive on Adequate Minimum Income Schemes would be crucial in this direction.
Some weaknesses of the text are highlighted in the analysis above and should be addressed through an ambitious implementation of the Recommendation and the European Affordable Housing Plan, that the European Commission should more clearly push for, including through the European Semester cycle.
