ERP and ERS: the role of the public sector in increasing the housing supply

Today, more than ever, housing has returned to the centre of the political debate. Not just in Italy. This may be due to the impetus coming from Europe, with the European Parliament’s HOUS Special Committee and the European Commissioner for Energy and Housing, Dan Jørgensen. It may also be due to the tensions affecting many European cities, right up to the recent protests in Spain. What is certain is that housing, having remained on the fringes of the public agenda for far too long, has once again become a political issue. Italy, too, finally has a Housing Plan. It has room for improvement, and its initial budget will inevitably need to increase, but it exists. And that is already a significant development, because for far too many years our country has lacked a structured national housing policy. Let’s start with a figure: around 600,000 households are waiting for a home. This figure alone illustrates just how wide the gap between supply and demand really is.

But just as housing has come back into fashion, we must avoid any misunderstanding. In the European debate, there is increasing talk of ‘affordable housing’, a broad term which, when translated into Italian, risks lumping together profoundly different realities. Public housing – the ERP managed by the ‘Aziende Casa’, whatever they may be called in the various regions – is not the same thing as social housing. In Italy, social housing and Ers have developed mainly through rent-controlled accommodation, initiatives by foundations and specialist operators, student halls of residence and projects aimed at specific social groups. Erp fulfils a different function. It is the last line of defence in terms of housing for the most economically vulnerable groups and cannot be sustained solely by the rent paid by tenants.

To think that it could be financially self-sufficient is to misunderstand its social function. Without structural intervention by the state, including tax relief, that housing stock cannot be adequately maintained and regenerated. It is precisely on this point that Federcasa has insisted during discussions on the Housing Plan, securing the inclusion of a non-repayable grant scheme to refurbish the more than 60,000 social housing units currently standing empty due to a lack of maintenance. With the first implementation procedure, we will finally begin to make some of these units available to families again. It is a first step, and we are confident that the necessary resources will be made available to refurbish them all. Before building new social housing, it would be difficult to explain why we are leaving the homes we already own empty.

But the most interesting battle of the coming years will be fought elsewhere: in the so-called ‘grey area’. Workers, young people, families and separated parents whose income is too high to qualify for social housing but too low to afford private market prices, particularly in areas with the greatest housing shortages. It is here that the public and private sectors, the state, regions, local authorities, housing organisations, foundations and investors must set aside old rivalries and work towards a common goal: rapidly increasing the supply of affordable social housing. And not just in Milan, Rome, Florence, Bologna or other major cities. A genuine housing policy must also address small and medium-sized towns. Revitalising smaller towns, repurposing unused public properties, and creating services and transport links will help alleviate the pressure on housing in major urban areas.

Italy possesses a vast amount of disused public assets: before using up more land, we must be able to transform these assets into a resource. It is with this in mind that Federcasa has just signed a memorandum of understanding with Invimit to develop a programme for public assets that could potentially be utilised under the ‘Piano Casa’ scheme, drawing on individual regional funds. The aim is to promote new social housing initiatives, including through the use of regional resources. The challenge is to build a new public housing stock: affordable rental homes, a housing stock that remains available to communities over the long term, and management entrusted to public bodies that understand the local areas, families and their needs.

There is no single housing crisis and, therefore, there cannot be a single solution. The ERP must continue to protect those who cannot afford the private market. The ERS, on the other hand, must become the major social infrastructure for that section of the Italian population who are not poor enough to qualify for social housing, but who risk being too poor to afford a home. If we manage to keep these two worlds distinct and, at the same time, make them work together, perhaps the new European and Italian focus on housing will not merely be a political fad. It may finally become a genuine housing policy.