THE EDITOR, Sir:
THE GOVERNMENT'S recently announced tax measures have been widely criticised for being oppressive on an already overtaxed population, and on the business and productive sectors. But, while calls for government to reduce its costs and inefficiency go unheeded, their ministries and agencies continue their unabated spending on numerous ill-conceived construction projects and programmes.
One of the agencies leading the charge is the NHT. Not content with pursuing a totally unnecessary New Town, they are hurriedly advancing their grand plans to spend some $6 billion on the construction of 4-storey apartment blocks copied from Malaysia, as their panacea to the problem of slum housing in the urban centres across Jamaica.
NECESSARY CAUSE
It is not that the pursuit of "cost effective" and "affordable" housing in our urban centres is not a worthwhile and necessary cause, but the manner in which this project is being carried out runs totally contrary to the Sustainable Development practices and participatory approach to planning that the government has been giving enormous lip service. Some of the issues of concern include:
The Malaysian model. This is nothing more than a series of large and poorly planned 4-storey walk-up apartment structures, with 2 single loaded corridors facing each other across a narrow open space. These types of units have been used in Jamaica since the 1960s, with mixed results, and did not have to be bought and imported from Malaysia. So, why the hype?
Aside from the numerous design flaws in the plans used for bidding, and the question of appropriateness of the large scale and type of structures being used, there is no way that a particular building type or model on which the government expects to spend some $6 billion of taxpayers' money, and which will have a permanent impact, for good or bad, on our cities and towns, and on the lives of thousands of people, should have been decided on by the narrow dictates of one man or one agency.
A backward approach to Urban Renewal. Any serious attempt at addressing the housing needs of our urban centres would require as a first step, that a broad consultative approach be employed in arriving at detailed recommendations for future land use, desired economic mix and densities of housing types in specific communities, and other planning considerations. This consultative process would flow from planning decisions into the completion of detailed designs for housing units and specific site plans, before sending out to contractors to bid.
Instead of this, the NHT have unilaterally decided on a building design criteria, gone out for construction tender, and are only now hurriedly looking for suitable sites and profiling in some communities where they have just now started doing social surveys and demographic studies, as well as taking steps to identify the areas in greatest need to get a first hand view of what is happening and also to identify areas which offer the potential for immediate activities in terms of housing.
What is the purpose of rushing to award construction contracts for buildings whose designs have not been justified, and for which sites have not even been identified? This is playing "Russian roulette" with the social, economic and environmental development of our urban centres. The only certainty is that the selected contractor(s) will have locked in contracts for work, years into the future, and will be assured of being able to charge for variations and cost escalations.
Unnecessary bias to a select few large construction companies. In cities around the world, including other Caribbean countries, urban housing solutions have taken many forms, including 1-storey, 2-storey and 3-storey structures. By mandating particular 4-storey structures, and by stipulating that interested contractors must "demonstrate by past performance, the capability to design and construct medium-rise housing schemes valued at least Four Hundred Million Dollars per year", the NHT has effectively ensured that the contract or contracts will be taken up by a select few large contractors/joint ventures.
LOST AN OPPORTUNITY
With this approach, we will have lost an opportunity in the use of these funds, to do developments in smaller packages, with properly designed buildings and sites of different scales and sizes, which would allow for the participation of, and benefits accruing to, a wider cross section of construction companies, design and planning professionals, and tradesmen and labourers across the entire island.
The myth of "low cost" and "affordable" housing. The NHT would like the public to believe that the management skills of their organisation, along with the functionality of the "Malaysian model", and the efficiency of some contractors' building system, are going to produce these "low cost" apartment units. The reality is that any benefits to the end users will be courtesy of the beleaguered taxpayers of this country.
It is the taxpayers who have to pay for the ever expanding bureaucracy of the NHT to manage the construction projects, as well as the numerous concessions and subsidies for the contractors, including possible tax concessions for the importation of cement that the NHT will be trying to obtain. In addition, the Chairman of NHT has proclaimed that they will absorb all of the costs of providing building sites, as well as all of the costs related to developing them, including the provision of infrastructure and utilities, and also the costs of all off-site security.
After all of these concessions and subsidies, when the urban poor can't find the million plus dollars to buy these "affordable" units that really cost twice as much to build, the NHT plans to lease them for as little as $250.00 per month. It doesn't stop there however. The NHT has also announced that they will be responsible for the management and maintenance of the completed buildings (taxpayers to subsidise from beginning to never ending)!
From the foregoing, it would suggest that in this period of a severe and worsening economic crisis, and a chronic shortage of funds to carry out even the most basic services essential to the country, the NHT's Urban Housing Programme (as well as the housing policies of the government) needs to be critically reviewed and publicly discussed. The fact is, any fool with an unlimited supply of someone else's money can build houses, give them away, and pay for their upkeep. This may be politically expedient and financially beneficial to a few, but it is not sustainable. It takes enlightened leadership to create an economic and social environment that will lead to more opportunities for people to get an education, acquire skills, find employment, and to be able to help themselves to obtain and maintain a home.
REDUCE THE PRESSURE
It is therefore arguable that in Jamaica, a reduction and/or re-allocation of some of the funds allotted to the NHT, the NHDC and some of the myriad of agencies that are involved with carrying out housing and other construction programmes, would go a long way in reducing waste, the need for more taxes, and the incurring of more debt. This in turn would help to reduce the pressure on interest rates, encourage the productive sector, stimulate true private sector investments in housing and other developments, and allow for more resources to be put into other areas of national importance, such as education, health, planning, law enforcement and the justice system.
It will also go a long way in encouraging self-reliance, while reducing the stranglehold of political patronage, and the opportunities for rampant corruption that are destroying the country and its economy.
I am, etc.,
CLIFTON YAP
cya@kasnet.com
Past President of the Jamaican
Institute of Architects, former
Chairman of the Construction
Industry Council
Via Go-Jamaica
