Could it be that our current concept of housing the poor is faulty? This could be why the National Housing Authority has been a total failure all these years. So much money was wasted on corruption as well.
A former finance secretary commented in our Viber group: “Squatter relocation/free housing attempts have been among the biggest, least successful political rackets in our economic history.”
An urban planner once described the nature of our response to the housing problem:
“Current housing backlog is 6.5 million units (and increasing); low-cost estimate of socialized housing unit is P500,000/unit (on cheap land away from employment centers, excluding access roads and external utilities; 36 sqm lot and 22 sqm floor area), total cost is P3.25 trillion.
“Current budget of housing agencies: P4 billion. Annual housing production is 100,000 to 200,000 units (target).”
That goes to show our government isn’t serious about making a dent on the problem.
My friend Peter Angliongto, a businessman who has property development exposure, made this comment in response to my column last Monday.
“Our housing policy is focused towards numbers of homes when the reality is quality is extremely important like livability, sustainability, resilience, spatial equality. These are things we need to make our cities smart and more importantly competitive.
“Here is one simple test: how long is the average commute time, to anything (work, school, healthcare etc). Because if you add that up, that is basically the lost productivity the smart city hopes to avoid.
“Currently, we have about five million to six million people from Laguna, Cavite, Bulacan commuting an average of two hours each way everyday. If we prorate the minimum wage of P500 for the four hour commute, the average person loses about P60,000 per year on commute time… or for the six million people, roughly P360 billion.
“That’s the rough estimate of the cost of the commute. It’s not only traffic, it’s how to make cities (and yes, it can be done here and now in Metro Manila) so that we can commute by walking, biking, and public transport in a much shorter time.”
One other thing is the point raised by Gerry Choa regarding my column last Monday.
“I think the housing model should be viewed principally as poverty alleviation to work. Home ownership is not the need of the poor urban settlers, just as land ownership in agrarian reform simply makes the poor even poorer.”
The mismatch of their income earning capability to their expenditure is the issue of poverty, Gerry explains.
“We are testing a public rental housing model in Cavite where we hope to reduce the cost of living through community services, primary healthcare, and coordinated public school activities. We are hoping to reduce the cost of living by 25 percent. It should be operational by next year.
“The rental housing allows us to intervene on both ends of the equation. We can provide better income generating opportunities while reducing the cost of living.
“The rental housing model also provides daycare facilities so adults can have more time to earn a living. Keeps kids out of drugs too.”
Another member of my group commented: “There are so many studies that show once these urban informal settlers are relocated very far from where they were living, the government basically condemns them to a life of poverty. That is why they just abandon their government housing and go back to the slums of the city.
“If the government wants to keep poor rural people in the provinces, then it should create the opportunities there. This was accomplished by ecozones in my province of Cavite.”
We need innovative thinking. Hopefully, Junior also picks a capable professional with fresh ideas to head the Department of Housing. We need to change our strategy. We also need the profitable property sector to step up to perform their social responsibility by helping massively as well.
Work from home
My column last week on WFH elicited some comments. One friend sent me this Viber message:
“Boo, I read your article today. The BIR is harassing BPOs. My company is a victim. BIR went to the office and demanded to see our books, attendance sheets, and reports to PEZA.
“They were threatening to fine us because we didn’t meet the 90/10 hybrid arrangement from Sept 2021 to March 2022. We told them we did meet the 90/10 based on the monthly reports we were submitting to PEZA, but they insisted that the report had to be daily.
“The BIR was also trying to levy a fine of P1 million when as far as I know, the only penalty is loss of PEZA incentives, which we are prepared to lose.
“My company is only an MSME and a 100 percent export earner. We are still losing money because the yen has depreciated so much and we are still recovering from our pandemic losses, so this BIR harassment is very unwelcome.
“It’s very hard to recruit now because prized recruits, especially from the IT field, want to work from home. They say they save a lot of commuting time (as much as three hours) and can even relocate back to their home provinces where they have a support system.”
Another friend who runs a BPO for a foreign company said they too were “raided” by the BIR and fined P2.5 million for violating the DOF orders on WFH. She said they were forced to pay right away, but her foreign principals are now reconsidering their presence here.
Here is a reader who regularly writes to me: “My son works in Gen Trias, Cavite, about 50 km from our place in Marikina. During the lockdowns the office observed WFH set up. It was fine, productive, convenient, cheaper, more comfortable, and therefore more preferable.
“Now he’s required to get back to the office. He needs to rent an apartment and come home on weekends. This set up costs money that could have been saved under the WFH set up, not to mention the hustle of wasted time and traffic. How can we respect these government officials with short circuited views?”
Boo Chanco’s email address is bchanco@gmail.com. Follow him on Twitter @boochanco