Ban on housing trade by corporations not ‘reasonable’

Selling social housing is an effective way for housing associations to raise their finances. But with the long waiting lists for social housing, cities are increasingly restricting sales.

So Amsterdam and Utrecht make sales more difficult. But according to corporations, sales bans are counterproductive.

Every year, housing associations sell over three thousand social rental properties that have become vacant. Together, this amounts to hundreds of millions of euros. The corporations use that money for new construction and the maintenance of their homes. They also want homeowners in vulnerable areas to add lots of social housing to improve their quality of life.

But there has been much opposition to the practice, despite the fact that fewer social rented houses have been sold in recent years than in the past. According to residents, people with low incomes are being run out of the neighborhood.

This activist group in Amsterdam has been protesting every weekend for four years against the sale of social housing:

There is a growing belief among municipalities that social housing should remain within the corporations. In Amsterdam, the sale of social housing has stopped in some neighborhoods since last year. Utrecht goes a step further: the ban applies throughout the city.

Councilor Dennis de Vries says it is a matter of principle. “At this time, when there is such a shortage of social housing, you should not be selling rental properties.”

Utrecht company Woonin says it only agreed to the strict rules under political pressure. The group calls it “not a rational and emotion-based policy that could lead to fewer social rental houses being built in the long term.” “

Because of that, the group says, 1.5 to two new rental homes can be built with the money from one rental home sold. According to consultant De Vries, that calculation is wrong. “That has been said in the past as well, but we have not seen it again. That has not been achieved and that is why we are so strict on this.”

Other housing associations do not want to answer questions from News hour. They say they don’t “want to stir things up.”

Emeritus professor in the housing market Johan Conijn does not necessarily call the accusations against housing associations reasonable. “I don’t deny the downsides of selling, and I understand the frustration, but you also have to look at how you can make sure that the stock increases despite the sale and demolition. Sales do not have to prevent the housing stock from increasing, because that money is used for new construction.

In Utrecht, housing associations say they will lose out on more than 10 million euros this year because of the measures. They are now borrowing that money, but according to Conijn that is not a sustainable solution. “The ministry’s forecasts show that this option will dry up in several years. Many corporations are asked: new construction, sustainability, home improvements. They have to borrow money for that and there is a limit there. And then you can’t build anymore.”