ONE of the great policy ironies of SA’s first decade of democracy is that the more houses government dispensed, the more the housing backlog grew.
The backlog stood at 1,2-million in 1994. Government has since provided more than 1,6-million subsidised houses for the poor. Now Gauteng alone is short of 600000 houses, the province reported recently.
Housing delivery in recent years has fallen far short of what’s needed to meet demand. But the backlog has grown in part precisely because government has delivered some houses to the poor. And it reflects far-reaching changes in how and where low income South Africans live and work.
One of the most striking changes is that the size of the average South African household has fallen significantly, with the number of households growing much faster than the population…
Take housing policy. There are lots of good aspects to the strategy minister Lindiwe Sisulu launched a couple of years ago. But the central objective of government policy, as she frequently emphasises, is “that we eradicate informal settlements by 2014”. Eradicate, not upgrade. The policy is, in fact, more ambiguous.
But the rhetoric certainly suggests the aim is to abolish SA’s squatter camps in coming years. Not only is this unrealistic, but one wonders why there is an obsession with it — rather than, say, simply with ensuring people have a suitable roof over their head…
The minister’s own figures show there are 2,4-million households in informal settlements. More importantly, we have plenty of anecdotal evidence that people choose shacks even when they have access to formal houses. An office worker who can afford to rent in town might instead live in a squatter camp and spend her money on good schools for her children. And a huge number of lower income people have multiple households. One reason is high transport costs, so working adults may live in shacks close to work while other family members occupy the awkwardly situated RDP house, or rent it out. New migrants to the cities will often find temporary accommodation in township backyards or informal settlements.
So the expansion of informal settlements reflects household and migration patterns, and helps to solve the problems those patterns create. Not that informal settlements should be idealised. They are often unsanitary and unsafe. But even if SA builds a lot more houses, as it must, shacks are likely to continue to provide homes for the poor for a long time to come. So could the minister please stop threatening to eradicate them?
Business Day - News Worthing Knowing
The backlog stood at 1,2-million in 1994. Government has since provided more than 1,6-million subsidised houses for the poor. Now Gauteng alone is short of 600000 houses, the province reported recently.
Housing delivery in recent years has fallen far short of what’s needed to meet demand. But the backlog has grown in part precisely because government has delivered some houses to the poor. And it reflects far-reaching changes in how and where low income South Africans live and work.
One of the most striking changes is that the size of the average South African household has fallen significantly, with the number of households growing much faster than the population…
Take housing policy. There are lots of good aspects to the strategy minister Lindiwe Sisulu launched a couple of years ago. But the central objective of government policy, as she frequently emphasises, is “that we eradicate informal settlements by 2014”. Eradicate, not upgrade. The policy is, in fact, more ambiguous.
But the rhetoric certainly suggests the aim is to abolish SA’s squatter camps in coming years. Not only is this unrealistic, but one wonders why there is an obsession with it — rather than, say, simply with ensuring people have a suitable roof over their head…
The minister’s own figures show there are 2,4-million households in informal settlements. More importantly, we have plenty of anecdotal evidence that people choose shacks even when they have access to formal houses. An office worker who can afford to rent in town might instead live in a squatter camp and spend her money on good schools for her children. And a huge number of lower income people have multiple households. One reason is high transport costs, so working adults may live in shacks close to work while other family members occupy the awkwardly situated RDP house, or rent it out. New migrants to the cities will often find temporary accommodation in township backyards or informal settlements.
So the expansion of informal settlements reflects household and migration patterns, and helps to solve the problems those patterns create. Not that informal settlements should be idealised. They are often unsanitary and unsafe. But even if SA builds a lot more houses, as it must, shacks are likely to continue to provide homes for the poor for a long time to come. So could the minister please stop threatening to eradicate them?
Business Day - News Worthing Knowing
No comments:
Post a Comment