There is no question that the Philippines has a serious, maybe even critical, housing problem: a huge backlog estimated at more than five million to six million units – and with demand continuing to outpace production, the problem will only get worse if not addressed immediately.
The response, if it is to be effective, should be appropriate with the magnitude and urgency of the problem. Unfortunately, the problem has not received the right solution and attention it needs.
The takeover of idle housing projects in Bulacan that were intended for soldiers and policemen by members of a militant group last month is an example of how serious our housing problem has become.
Last March 8, an estimated 5,000 people, including members of the Kalipunan ng Damayang Mahihirap (Kadamay) occupied about 4,000 houses in five government housing projects in the town of Pandi and in San Jose del Monte City, claiming they were tired of being neglected by the government.
Several days later, other members of Kadamay reportedly tried to occupy vacant units in Barangay Bonga Mayor in Bustos town and in Bocaue, both also in Bulacan, and in Rodriguez, Rizal. They were stopped by police and military personnel.
It is a tragedy that the need for shelter, one of the basic human needs, is driving people to disregard the rule of law.
I’m not justifying such act, but I think it should jolt and wake up government officials, especially those who are completely ignoring the implications and consequences (one of which was the militant group’s action) of having a huge housing backlog.
What happened in Pandi and in other towns should be a warning that the social volcano on housing is about to erupt, unless we act decisively.
But decisive action is something we still have to see. On the contrary, the private sector-led housing industry, which is leading the construction of homes to catch up with growing demand, is being threatened with the loss of incentives and other policy actions, including restrictions on land development. Published reports placed annual production of more than 200,000 units against demand of as high as 800,000 units.
The threats include the delisting from the Investment Priorities Plan (IPP), under which housing developers enjoy tax holidays, tax credits and other non-fiscal incentives. These incentives enable developers to keep housing units affordable.
Negative policy action, on the other hand, includes restrictions on land development, such as the proposed ban on the conversion of unproductive and unutilized agricultural land into residential and other non-agricultural purposes like the development of industrial zones, which are needed in the industrialization program.
Promoting agriculture and developing the housing industry need not be in conflict with each other; it is not an either-or situation.
As I wrote in previous columns, what the agriculture sector needs to increase productivity is technology and not necessarily more planting area. For example, developed countries are now into hydroponics, which does not need soil to cultivate crops. With a more controlled environment, the hydroponics system produces more crops with higher quality.
The policy threats targeting the housing industry are not only affecting the housing problem, but are also discouraging the private sector from putting in more money into housing. Don’t we need more investments for housing?
These are clearly the opposite of what should be done to address the housing problem. Luckily, the more economically-minded officials of the administration appreciate the need to develop all sectors of the economy.
I don’t see any reason why we cannot push both agriculture and housing at the same time – it is a more balanced approach to development, and will benefit the whole country.
(For comments/feedback e-mail to: mbv.secretariat@gmail.com or visit www.mannyvillar.com.ph