Select a region
Two initiatives aimed at alleviating the current housing crisis have been tweaked by the States, and could be adopted as part of the wider Budget proposals, being debated today.
The amendments concerned the 'rent-a-room' scheme, and the proposed development of a temporary village for construction workers.
In short the 'soft price-cap' has been removed from the 'rent-a-room' initiative, while people at risk of homelessness and those sofa surfing could be allowed to live in the proposed 'construction village', should the Budget itself get approved.
That’s a huge oversimplification though, so let’s break it down:
Deputy Sam Haskins opened debate on his amendment by declaring an interest, as he owns a home with a spare room and could benefit from the proposed 'rent-a-room' initiative, amended or otherwise.
He voiced his concerns about the proposed earnings limit of £10,000 a year for those with a room to rent. It would mean the price of a room could be at most £833 per calendar month, if the owner would want to benefit from a 'tax-free' incentive. Deputy Haskins saw this as going against the market.
“...the average two bedroom flat has an average monthly rental of over 2000 pounds a month, or £1000 pounds per month, per room. £1000, not £833,” he said.
Pictured: Deputy Sam Haskins outside the States Chamber at the start of the Budget Debate.
His proposal would remove that “cliff edge” as he described it, with anything over £10,000 annually being taxable.
Debate began with a flurry of calls against the amendment.
Deputy Yvonne Burford questioned the comparison of a rented room to a rented property.
“You're not going to have sole use of your kitchen and living space and bathroom, so I really don't think that counts," she said. "This current scheme in the budget is not stopping anyone from charging more than £10,000, it just means that they don't get the tax benefit.
“He also said this is a form of 'soft rent control', and actually, given the state of our rental market, I'm not sure I'm against that.”
Deputy Gollop echoed these points.
“This doesn't necessarily tick the box of restraining rents to an affordable level, which I think is contained within the budget proposal and Deputy Soulsby’s vision,” he added, while deputies Sash Kazantseva-Miller and Neil Inder both raised concerns over potential manipulation of the scheme by those looking to take advantage of loopholes.
Deputy de Sausmarez cited the un-affordability of Guernsey’s housing market as a reason to reject the amendment.
“...anything more than £833 for one room, in a house that you are sharing, with the person who owns it, is an awful lot of money," she said. "I think it risks incentivising people to put up rents, which is one of the key pressures that our housing market is experiencing, in the affordability aspect.”
The amendment also had it’s supporters though, with Deputy Aidan Matthews saying he doesn’t “like the idea of 'cliff edges' in tax policy”, while Deputy Carl Meerveld echoed his dislike of potential “government intervention in markets”. Deputies Ferbrache and Dyke both threw their support behind the amendment too, which ultimately won 27-11.
You can find the full voting record for this amendment HERE.
The 2025 Budget includes a proposal to create a construction village, as well as temporary key worker housing, and to make sure they are added to the list of major projects in the States portfolio.
This amendment - originally lodged by Deputies Andy Taylor and Aidan Mathews - wanted to change who could live in these potential properties.
The debate needed the rules pausing, because Deputy Taylor was absent due to the birth of his second child.
Deputy Matthews stepped up from 'secondor' to 'proposer' with Deputy Peter Ferbrache stepping in to formally second the amendment on the day.
Deputy Matthews began by establishing that he and Deputy Taylor both support the original proposal to create the temporary construction workers village, but they felt opening it up to other residents was necessary.
“Why limit this to workers from outside the island? We know we have a housing crisis on the island," said Deputy Matthews.
"The idea of temporary housing to help alleviate that crisis by housing construction workers, to help build homes and key workers, who might otherwise be housed in accommodation that locals could make use of, is a good one.
“I think that limiting it to off Island workers seems overly restrictive. It does seem unfair to have a housing proposal that would exclude locals. We know that one of the areas in which the housing crisis has felt most sharply is in the private rental market. Rents have increased enormously in recent years, coupled with shortages in availability.”
According to the States latest figures, released earlier this week, rental prices are 47.5% higher than five years ago. It also states the current average is 4.2% higher than the previous quarter, and 7.6% higher than the same period as a year ago.
Pictured: Deputy Andy Taylor was absent from the vote on his amendment, as his second child was being brought home for the first time.
Deputy Matthews urged his colleagues to throw their support behind the amendment.
“To my mind, it would be unacceptable for the states to be providing temporary accommodation to off Island workers and excluding locals who might need the same provision," he said. "Of course, this is no replacement for building enough housing. The Island desperately needs more housing, but we know that housing development does not happen overnight.”
Deputy Aldwell was the first to speak against the amendment.
“Are we going to end up with something like a ghetto because we've allowed everyone to move in and we can't move them out? Because we haven't got housing?” she asked.
Deputy Peter Roffey put a similar query it in a slightly more appropriate way.
“I just need to understand, is it going to be a temporary planning permission? Because if it is, I don't see a problem with that. With construction workers, because their project is over, they can be moved out. That's fine. But if it's filled up with local people, and suddenly these units have to be removed because the two year temporary planning permission has come to an end, then we're actually creating homelessness.”
Deputy Heidi Soulsby, the Vice President of P&R, threw her committees support behind the amendment, and it’s potential to help Guernsey’s homeless.
“The Policy and Resources Committee are supportive of this amendment and sympathetic to what the proposed and secondary are trying to do," she said. "We think on balance, we should be supporting this amendment.
“We know a lot of people are sofa surfing. The problem is only getting worse, and as we've seen in parts of the UK, Cornwall has had a successful plan to bring in some really good temporary accommodation. We know we’ve got a real housing crisis at the moment, I think any opportunity to make things better, we should be grabbing.”
In the end it was voted in favour. 33 for, 2 against, 3 abstained and 2 absent.
You can find the full voting record for this amendment HERE.
Both these amendment proposals will be debated as part of the wider budget debate happening today. Follow our live blog here:
Comments
Comments on this story express the views of the commentator only, not Bailiwick Publishing. We are unable to guarantee the accuracy of any of those comments.